CNN video about python ban

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/17/us/flo...html?hpt=hp_t3

I've lost all respect for Jack Hana. :mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KingObeat

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/17/us/flo...html?hpt=hp_t3

I've lost all respect for Jack Hana. :mad:

---

"When a python bites they cannot let go. Their Jaw muscles freeze. And when they freeze, you have to wait about 30 minutes before they let go. Thats how they make the kill."

Glad to see it has the experts stamp of approval..

Correct me if I am wrong but he spends the entire time contradicting himself.

Reporter: People are making money off of them, importing them. Why are they are buying them, why are they importing them?

"expert": Most people, a lot of people are afraid of snakes. But some with young kids who wanna you know, raise an animal and see a cute little snake in the shop...

hhhuhhh? :rolleye2: :rolleyes:

way to not answer a question..


All I heard was, "I support the ban.. The ban is not warranted for anywhere but Florida.. People shouldn't be allowed to have pythons.. But I should be allowed."

He completely vilifies these animals as toothy, vice grip biters over footage of snakes FREAKING OUT because some uniformed ignoramus is pouncing on their necks. !?!?!? I HATE that! Yeah, if I was one of those people who knows nothing about snakes, that footage would terrify me and I would think they were awful, vicious animals. But there is not a snake on this planet that doesn't completely PANIC if you do that, and who could blame the poor things!? It is just manipulative journalism and I HATE it and I hate that it has gotten us into this mess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KingObeat

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/17/us/flo...html?hpt=hp_t3

I've lost all respect for Jack Hana. :mad:

---

You had respect for him?

Why? What has that boob ever done that would elicit respect from anyone? He has been acting like a stupid clown for years..........have you not noticed?

As for everyone getting their panties in a knot about mainstream news stories:

Get over it. It comes with the hobby. Get used to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skiploder

You had respect for him?

Why? What has that boob ever done that would elicit respect from anyone? He has been acting like a stupid clown for years..........have you not noticed?

As for everyone getting their panties in a knot about mainstream news stories:

Get over it. It comes with the hobby. Get used to it.

---

Panties.. God I hate that word!

Lol!

That's even worse then this one..

http://youtu.be/Zom3GGxQ82g

Greg is trying to defend the hobby, but he's censored and then it pans off. They know what they've done, they're just trying to censor everyone who says the ban is bad... It's pathetic.

As a whole, society is irresponsible.

A ban on large constrictors to the general population is a good thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tzeentch

As a whole, society is irresponsible.

A ban on large constrictors to the general population is a good thing.

---

ARE YOU SERIOUS? Let's take away motorcycles, anything that's got a sharp edge. You can't take away people's rights because there are a few idiots abroad.
What about the responsible, educated keepers? Where does it end? :mad:

Jack hannah sold out along time ago. He is a tool, a pawn. Just like he said florida has a problem, your not going to see a python in the mountains of montana. If florida has a problem then ok work with the responsible python owners and breeders in florida but a country wide ban is just stupid. Greg grazianni is no better then jack hannah. Gregs show python hunters focused on pythons in florida and spearheaded the fears uneducated peoe have of snakes. He also put the spin that these pythons are there because of peiple releasing them instead of the facts about hurricane andrew blowin thousands of snakes from breeding operations. Ok i get it thete are pythons in the glades. Then hunt em get rid of em whatever cause evasive species are bad and need to be taken care of but banning them and taking millions of dollars out of the us economy is not the answer

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/...orting-ban.cnn
If, the new's is going to do a report? At least properly ID the correct species of snakes your displaying in your video's. Near the begginning of this video they named the constrictor a burmese python. When actually it was a reticulated python.
I've watched alot of the animal planet show's on large constrictors. Watched alot of the show's about burmese python's in florida. Not saying there is no footage? But, I've never seen a show or even a small clip within a show? About, any kind of anacondas at all? Let alone a yellow anaconda. The only thing I've seen about anacondas was the "queen of the serpents green anaconda". And, this show was about better understanding of this constrictor in there natural environment. Never, portrayed them as a Monster! The common subject in all of these show's on animal planet was about ONE particular species of a large constrictor? And, that is the burmese python not the AFRP or any Annies! I have nothing against burmese python's. I was going to buy some hypo burm's recently myself.
What they should do is give us hobbiest a place or service that will take our unwanted pet's and properly care for them for the rest of there day's (I know only in a perfect world).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCfive

ARE YOU SERIOUS? Let's take away motorcycles, anything that's got a sharp edge. You can't take away people's rights because there are a few idiots abroad.
What about the resposible, educated keepers? Where does it end? :mad:

---

Hold on a sec......

As a responsible keeper, I would have no problem applying for a permit and having my snakes chipped if need be.

As a responsible keeper, I also realize I cannot compare a snake to a motorcycle. My irresponsibility with a motorcycle will not result in the suffering of an animal. It could result in my death and the risk of injury to someone else, but that's an ethical argument of a different type.

I do not believe that any Tom, Richard or Harry should be able to buy a rock python. If Tom, Richard or Harry gets killed by his rock python, I could care less.

However Tom, Richard or Harry's inability to properly care for his giant snake will result in a couple of other things - (1) pain, suffering and potentially death to the snake and (2) an assault on my ability to keep my snakes.

No one can argue that giant constrictors should be kept by only keepers with sufficient knowledge and means to properly care for them - so why do we so quickly defend the right of ownership for any idiot who can afford the price of entry?

After breeding snakes for a number of years and after seeing how often those animals ended up forgotten and mistreated, I do NOT support the right for any moron who can afford an animal to keep one.

I fully support the right for responsible keepers to keep whatever they want.

The hobby has put itself in this situation. While it's all fine and dandy to blame the burmese issue on a Hurricane and make a half-a$$ed attempt to remove human responsibility from the equation, it does not begin to explain the countless other invasive species in south Florida that have ended up there as a result of irresponsible idiots in the exotic pet trade.

Do I support bans? No. I do support responsible pet ownership. Sadly, this hobby has proven time and time again that responsibility is not our strong suit.

The Federal Government has just shown that they CAN take away your "rights" with regards to giant constrictors because of a hobby rife with idiots. Continue to shovel your money towards groups that are taking credit for doing something they did not.

In the meantime I predict those efforts will get us nowhere. In fact, I predict things will get a lot worse before they get better. This is a stepping stone to more restrictions and legislation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zeion97

That's even worse then this one..

http://youtu.be/Zom3GGxQ82g

Greg is trying to defend the hobby, but he's censored and then it pans off. They know what they've done, they're just trying to censor everyone who says the ban is bad... It's pathetic.

---

Okay we're bashing Him but he's saying exactly what everyone has been saying for 10+ years. This is a Florida issue, not a National issue. He was saying they shouldn't have made it a national issue.

It sound to me like hes focusing purely on the people who over the years made this a problem without knowing what they are doing. But they arent the ones affected by this. Its the passionate ones who lose a chance at something great. He was right about lil kids but thats not the big picture. He even says its not gonna happen out of florida so why ban them everywhere? Congress is just doing wonders right now

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skiploder

Hold on a sec......

As a responsible keeper, I would have no problem applying for a permit and having my snakes chipped if need be.

No one can argue that giant constrictors should be kept by only keepers with sufficient knowledge and means to properly care for them -

---

This is what they should ahve done and for the reasoning you stated. I have always said as a way to protect the animals require a permit for large constrictors, but not to take them away completely for those that do the right thing.

Jack Hanna has always stumbled over his words and contradicted himself since he's been in front of the camera for decades,.. so why would that change now. He doesn't always get it right but he still makes some good points. Unfortunately those good points can and will be over shadowed. Since some people can't and don't take you seriously when you have difficulty articulating those points.

He frustrated the :rolleyes: hell out of me when I was younger and I stopped watching him way back then. Steve Irwin is no longer with us so unfortunately they chose Hanna by default.

But seriously I'm on the fence about the whole thing, we need more restrictions but at the same time you can't force people to be responsible and do the right thing. If it was that easy we wouldn't have so many issues in the first place. There's always going to be somebody trying to get over and cut corners ban or not, which eventually screws the people doing the right thing.

It's true,.. it's not a Nation wide issue but it can be with different species. With or with out a ban or restrictions something needs to be done.

I don't think that I should have to jump through 50 government hoops to own a dog or a horse or a burmese python.

It's okay to block people from owning burms... because why? Because SOME people get them and neglect them or get hurt by them?

So ONE person every TWO years is way too many folks killed for you? Giants are so dangerous that only .5 people have been killed per year... and that's a reason to ban ownership?
So a few people neglect their burms while most take decent care of them.

So you're saying the government should force anyone who wants to buy a dog, cat, horse or any other pet to jump through 50 hoops and pay fees in order to own a pet?

That's ONE step away from "No one owns pets."

Go join Peta. You're almost there when you say it's okay for "most" people to not be able to own exotics/pythons/insert animal here. Because you are labeling the general public as incapable of owning a pet, while saying you yourself are okay to own one... so the general public should be blocked from owning pets. Guess what? You are the general public. Everyone on BP.net here "are" the general public. If you don't own a acreditted zoo, you are just a member of the public, just like all the schmos out there who think giant snakes will live in Canada next year.

In 20 years, no one in the "general public" will be able to own even a dog. Enjoy your pets now, your grandkids won't be able to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skiploder

Hold on a sec......

As a responsible keeper, I would have no problem applying for a permit and having my snakes chipped if need be.

As a responsible keeper, I also realize I cannot compare a snake to a motorcycle. My irresponsibility with a motorcycle will not result in the suffering of an animal. It could result in my death and the risk of injury to someone else, but that's an ethical argument of a different type.

I do not believe that any Tom, Richard or Harry should be able to buy a rock python. If Tom, Richard or Harry gets killed by his rock python, I could care less.

However Tom, Richard or Harry's inability to properly care for his giant snake will result in a couple of other things - (1) pain, suffering and potentially death to the snake and (2) an assault on my ability to keep my snakes.

No one can argue that giant constrictors should be kept by only keepers with sufficient knowledge and means to properly care for them - so why do we so quickly defend the right of ownership for any idiot who can afford the price of entry?

After breeding snakes for a number of years and after seeing how often those animals ended up forgotten and mistreated, I do NOT support the right for any moron who can afford an animal to keep one.

I fully support the right for responsible keepers to keep whatever they want.

The hobby has put itself in this situation. While it's all fine and dandy to blame the burmese issue on a Hurricane and make a half-a$$ed attempt to remove human responsibility from the equation, it does not begin to explain the countless other invasive species in south Florida that have ended up there as a result of irresponsible idiots in the exotic pet trade.

Do I support bans? No. I do support responsible pet ownership. Sadly, this hobby has proven time and time again that responsibility is not our strong suit.

The Federal Government has just shown that they CAN take away your "rights" with regards to giant constrictors because of a hobby rife with idiots. Continue to shovel your money towards groups that are taking credit for doing something they did not.

In the meantime I predict those efforts will get us nowhere. In fact, I predict things will get a lot worse before they get better. This is a stepping stone to more restrictions and legislation.

---

I agree not everyone should, but my point is everyone should have the right. Permits don't weed out idiots. There are plenty of people who own guns that shouldn't. As far as my point goes about the motorcycle, what I'm saying is you can't take away rights of people to make their own choices based on the fact that a minority of people might make bad choices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bubblz

Jack Hanna has always stumbled over his words and contradicted himself since he's been in front of the camera for decades,.. so why would that change now. He doesn't always get it right but he still makes some good points. Unfortunately those good points can and will be over shadowed. Since some people can't and don't take you seriously when you have difficulty articulating those points.

He frustrated the :rolleyes: hell out of me when I was younger and I stopped watching him way back then. Steve Irwin is no longer with us so unfortunately they chose Hanna by default.

But seriously I'm on the fence about the whole thing, we need more restrictions but at the same time you can't force people to be responsible and do the right thing. If it was that easy we wouldn't have so many issues in the first place. There's always going to be somebody trying to get over and cut corners ban or not, which eventually screws the people doing the right thing.

It's true,.. it's not a Nation wide issue but it can be with different species. With or with out a ban or restrictions something needs to be done.

---

More along the lines of what I was thinking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfy-hound

I don't think that I should have to jump through 50 government hoops to own a dog or a horse or a burmese python.

It's okay to block people from owning burms... because why? Because SOME people get them and neglect them or get hurt by them?

So ONE person every TWO years is way too many folks killed for you? Giants are so dangerous that only .5 people have been killed per year... and that's a reason to ban ownership?
So a few people neglect their burms while most take decent care of them.

So you're saying the government should force anyone who wants to buy a dog, cat, horse or any other pet to jump through 50 hoops and pay fees in order to own a pet?

That's ONE step away from "No one owns pets."

Go join Peta. You're almost there when you say it's okay for "most" people to not be able to own exotics/pythons/insert animal here. Because you are labeling the general public as incapable of owning a pet, while saying you yourself are okay to own one... so the general public should be blocked from owning pets. Guess what? You are the general public. Everyone on BP.net here "are" the general public. If you don't own a acreditted zoo, you are just a member of the public, just like all the schmos out there who think giant snakes will live in Canada next year.

In 20 years, no one in the "general public" will be able to own even a dog. Enjoy your pets now, your grandkids won't be able to.

---

x2 Thank you:salute:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zeion97

That's even worse then this one..

http://youtu.be/Zom3GGxQ82g

Greg is trying to defend the hobby, but he's censored and then it pans off. They know what they've done, they're just trying to censor everyone who says the ban is bad... It's pathetic.

---

Did they really say sine burms are 26 feet long? Am I mistaken in thinking a retic holds the world record at 24 ft?

morally speaking no, not everyone should have a giant python for the reasons relating to the animals welfare. I agree with you guys there, but that is not what this ban is about. People buy domestic animals and abuse them, not everyone should have a dog, or a cat, or even a goldfish for that matter.. They are not addressing an issue of animal cruelty. The Ban is based on their attempt to solve the invasive python population.. It's based on false information and they are using the media to spread ignorance in order to gain support.

I cannot see how the hobby has done this to itself.

As much as there is an issue with people in the reptile community who cannot properly care for their animals; this ban has little to do with that. Joe Blow is not importing a wild caught Indian Rock python from over seas for his 4 year old daughter.. These animals are already here in every state. IMO it's promoting additional releases into the ecosystem, and adding to a problem while pissing off a lot your citizens.

Thats just my $.02

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfy-hound

I don't think that I should have to jump through 50 government hoops to own a dog or a horse or a burmese python.

It's okay to block people from owning burms... because why? Because SOME people get them and neglect them or get hurt by them?

So ONE person every TWO years is way too many folks killed for you? Giants are so dangerous that only .5 people have been killed per year... and that's a reason to ban ownership?
So a few people neglect their burms while most take decent care of them.

So you're saying the government should force anyone who wants to buy a dog, cat, horse or any other pet to jump through 50 hoops and pay fees in order to own a pet?

That's ONE step away from "No one owns pets."

Go join Peta. You're almost there when you say it's okay for "most" people to not be able to own exotics/pythons/insert animal here. Because you are labeling the general public as incapable of owning a pet, while saying you yourself are okay to own one... so the general public should be blocked from owning pets. Guess what? You are the general public. Everyone on BP.net here "are" the general public. If you don't own a acreditted zoo, you are just a member of the public, just like all the schmos out there who think giant snakes will live in Canada next year.

In 20 years, no one in the "general public" will be able to own even a dog. Enjoy your pets now, your grandkids won't be able to.

---

Theresa, I could care less if 1000 idiots a year kill themselves with giant constrictors. This isn't about protecting the public from giant snakes - at least for me it isn't and it never will be.

As I stated before - I support responsible pet ownership - no more, no less. There is nothing hidden in that statement, no secret allegiance to PETA or HSUS and no hidden agenda to take away your right to own anything. I live in a state with bans on some snakes (a few of which I keep or have kept) and have been required to apply for permits and have my snake house inspected on several occasions in order to legally keep some of my animals.

Do I mind? In the beginning I did, I don't anymore. I've seen way too much irresponsibility with these animals to be able to look anyone straight in the face and say that these animals deserve the fate they often end up getting. I have stated this before on this forum, that when I was heavy into breeding I was seeing over half my animals coming back to me within the first three years.

Why? Because I used to sell with right of first refusal contracts. The incidence rate of poor and abusive care in this hobby is higher than anyone here will ever admit.

Hell, Theresa, most of the people you see getting all frothed up over this amendment will post here like mad for a year or two and then quietly fade out and sell there collections when the novelty of owning a snake wears off. We see it all the time on these forums. Aren't we always seeing waves of new people coming in, then going out just as quickly? What happens to those animals?

Well, as a breeder who made it a cornerstone of my business to take those animals back - I know what happens to them.

I am not an advocate of bans and I am not an advocate of permits or fees. What I have always been is an advocate of responsible ownership and for self governance and control.

While the ongoing bans and legislative attempts have nothing to do with the real issues in this hobby, they ran concurrent and parallel long enough that both PIJAC and USARK began supporting model legislation that set the guidelines for restrictions and permits in order to keep venomous, giants and species of potential environmental concern.

There were minds there that understood that the only way to combat this bad press in our hobby was to head it off at the pass and make an attempt to show that we could regulate ourselves - to deal with the issues, both imagined, hyped and real.

Well, you don't have to go far to see USARK being ripped apart in some quarters for this model legislation. Mark my words, without it, the states will fall - one by one - and within 5 years, more animals will be added to the Lacey Act.

What people don't get is that there is not enough financial or political firepower in the "Reptile Nation" to fight the animal rights and environmental lobbies. The latter is more financially and politically viable than we will ever be. USARK gets it and hence the path towards self "inflicted" legislation. You may not like it, but it is our future.

In the meantime, while USARK - despite their penchant for taking credit where credit is NOT due - understands that petitions and hand wringing isn't going to fix this. This Amendment to Federal Law must be dealt with in court. This is a pointed lesson in why we are always on the defensive..........

We talk a lot about fighting for our rights for a period and think signing petitions and running our mouths is the answer. Well, let's see where that gets us.

In the meantime, I will continue to help people be more responsible owners in my own way. I will continue to track legislation that affects me and do actual research as to who sits on what committees and work from there.

When it becomes harder and harder to obtain these animals without permits, I will do what I need to do to be able to own them - as Theresa I ASSume you will too. Then perhaps we can look back at the last couple of years in honest retrospect and discuss the politics of absolutism and where it ended up getting the Reptile Nation.

From USARK's website:


It is the position of USARK that only experienced and serious keepers should work with these animals. However, it is important to consider that there is no evidence to suggest that these risks are any greater than those associated with working with other traditional types of livestock or pets - indeed, the measurable risk is significantly less. USARK has developed model legislation that can be enacted at the state level to ensure that keepers working with potentially dangerous reptiles adhere to strict caging standards, safety protocols, escape prevention plans, registration and micro-chipping.

No member of the public, no emergency responder, no innocent bystander has ever been seriously injured or killed by a captive reptile in the United States.

Support - Legislation for responsible regulation of large snake species, venomous reptiles and crocodilians as outlined by USARK.

Oppose - Legislation designating any reptiles as Dangerous or Inherently Dangerous; or banning the private ownership and trade in any reptiles based on unsubstantiated and false claims of public safety risk.




The age of self regulation is already here folks. When the defenders of your rights are advocating legislation for caging standards, safety protocols, micro-chipping and the right of entry to inspect same............................need I say more?

This probably needs to be dealt with on a case by case basis. Spay and neuter the ones in the Everglades to keep them from reproducing, and make stiffer penalties for dumping these snakes.

There's no way the government can control every scenario anyway, so there has to be a better alternative instead of bans or sweeping "big brother" type regulation.

What individual citizens can do preventatively is to educate people on the care of these animals, and maybe come up with a back-up plan for where they can go if some owners can no longer keep them at some point so that they don't dump them in the wild.

In fact there really should be some breeders on channels like Animal Planet doing educational TV shows about snakes. Instead of the fear-mongering shows painting them as bloodthirsty creatures just waiting to squeeze the life out of you, these shows could show snakes that are tame and show people what each species needs to be well cared for. That would go a long way towards a real, long-term solution.

This probably needs to be dealt with on a case by case basis. Spay and neuter the ones in the Everglades to keep them from reproducing, and make stiffer penalties for dumping these snakes.

The issue didn't originate with people dumping their animals in the Everglades. The issue started with a breeding facility that was destroyed in the early 90's by hurricane Andrew. That is why they are shutting down the import of animals because it seriously cripples the breeding industry.

There's no way the government can control every scenario anyway, so there has to be a better alternative instead of bans or sweeping "big brother" type regulation.

I agree. The problem already exists in the Everglades. They will not be able to eradicate the population of constrictors in Florida, So this ban is useless. Considering this is essentially the only place that they are able to thrive in, there is no reason to make a country wide ban. However, the issue falls under the federal jurisdiction and therefor everyone is suffering. On a state level Florida had given select experts permits to catch and euthanize the snakes found in the everglades - this ban is the Federal governments response.. I can understand that they have to do SOMETHING to play to the general population. Licencing and permits will create revenue. Issues like these are very profitable for certain government divisions.

What individual citizens can do preventatively is to educate people on the care of these animals, and maybe come up with a back-up plan for where they can go if some owners can no longer keep them at some point so that they don't dump them in the wild.

These exist, but again - the issue doesn't stem from dumping pets.. The issues in the populated areas come from irresponsible owners, but DNA tests done on the snakes in the Everglades, shows that most of the pythons are closely related to each other, and come from the breeding facility that was wiped out.

In fact there really should be some breeders on channels like Animal Planet doing educational TV shows about snakes. Instead of the fear-mongering shows painting them as bloodthirsty creatures just waiting to squeeze the life out of you, these shows could show snakes that are tame and show people what each species needs to be well cared for. That would go a long way towards a real, long-term solution.


Its the news outlets that are painting them as monsters. The educational programs, for the most part are trying to spread awareness. Python Hunters is a good one that solely deals with the issues in Florida.

The ban will not solve any issues. All it will do is effect the lively hood of many people in the reptile community. What the government doesn't necessarily realize is how quickly and steadily the reptile economy is growing. My prediction is that there is going to be a noticeable drop in taxable income. That's just my $.02

I actually thought Jack was trying to help but just did a crappy job of saying it.

As for some of the other conversation here...

You have to have a license to drive. You have to have licenses to own dogs and cats in most places. So I don't see why not for big snakes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by decensored

Its the news outlets that are painting them as monsters. The educational programs, for the most part are trying to spread awareness. Python Hunters is a good one that solely deals with the issues in Florida.

---

Python Hunters is a great show for helping people understand the issue. However, I had animal planet on a couple weeks ago and a show was on (can't remember the name of it) that was basically talking about how snakes are out of control in the US. Stories of people finding Red Tail Boas in their gardens and barely surviving...someone's cat came across a Ball Python...all with dramatic reenactments. After watching this show, its amazing people can go near snakes without being eaten immediately. They literally made them out to be evil creatures out to destroy us, as if they were invading the everglades on purpose.

Animal Planet can be awesome, but it also caters to what people want....which involves a lot of sensationalizing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Giftbearer

This probably needs to be dealt with on a case by case basis. Spay and neuter the ones in the Everglades to keep them from reproducing, and make stiffer penalties for dumping these snakes.

---

There is a reason you don't hear a whole lot about spaying/neutering snakes...they aren't puppies or kitties and you're talking major league surgery and major league skills needed to do it when you get into such surgery on snakes. It simply isn't practical.