Trying to take a different look at proposed bans (LONG)

So I’ve spent a lot of time as of late thinking about the proposed ban on non-native species and the proposed python ban. I decided to really thoroughly think this thing thru and consider both sides of the issue. So I have spent a few days reading articles on the philosophy behind the animal rights movement and PETA and HSUS websites. To some extent I must admit that I agree with them on certain points of the issues. Being a person who owns reptiles and a parrot it would be a tragedy for me if these things were to pass. At the same time I have to admit that I have also seen things that made me strongly question whether or not we should be allowed to own exotics. Anyone who has been involved with exotics for an extended period of time will probably know what I’m talking about, especially those who have experiences with birds. The neglect and horror stories are mind blowing, but I have only recently begun to get into snakes. I have however seen some things within the reptile community that give me hope. I see reputable, honest people who love the hobby and have a genuine devotion to their pets. I personally believe that we can learn to accept and take proper care of exotics as a society. It would be such a tragedy if blanket exotic bans were put in place precluding future generations from getting to know and understand these beautiful creatures. That being said I’d like to point out a couple of things:

I don’t believe that H.R. 669 will become a law, It would (from what I’ve read) require the USFW to evaluate a giant range: (http://www.defenders.org/resources/p..._2000-2004.pdf)
Of species in a variety of hypothetical situations in 36 months. This seems to me beyond imagination. Because it’s better to err on the side of caution, the USFW would put almost all the species on the banned list. This would be a huge blow to the pet industry and the major chains would suffer for sure. I don’t think it realistic, and there would be too much money involved to ignore.

I do however think that S373 has a chance of passing. It would simply involve adding a species name to the lacey act, would cost nothing to enact, and considering the python market is relativity small compared to the whole this niche market would go down with no one really noticing. The majority of America doesn’t know or care about issues like this unless they are in their face. Otherwise this stuff would be all over the news.

Even if both these fail, this issue WILL NOT go away. If you read into the history of the animal rights movement you will find that they are very persistent and undaunted by failure. Eventually they will get their way to some extent. They are people who have their heart in the right place and truly believe what they are doing is right. The majority of them probably just want to see more regulation and protection, but there is always the fringe element that believes pet ownership in general is wrong. I believe as a whole that we are going to have to accept some things. Many exotics will eventually be banned or regulated to the point that it will no longer be practical to own them. I believe anything large and dangerous (Tigers, Bears) along with primates and most likely large and venomous snakes will at some point be banned. There is far too much sensationaliziation from the media and animal rights groups. People are afraid of these animals (usually with good cause) and it just seems like too much of a risk. I still believe that we can salvage the rest of the hobby.

I wanted to really get a feel what the message of HSUS and PETA so I read some of their articles and campaigns. I don’t think that having the attitude that they are simply out to get me and my animals, or that they are just trying to repress my rights as an American will really help with anything. I thought I would try and get a feel for them and I wanted to share some things I noticed.
http://www.hsus.org/press_and_public...es_031809.html
Notice anything from this recent press release from HSUS? Most of the incidents stated in this report are related to tigers! How about these ones?
http://www.hsus.org/pets/issues_affe...s_as_Pets.html
http://www.hsus.org/wildlife/issues_...ts_market.html
Again with the tigers, and this time disease is also used to play up fear. Also these try to appeal to America’s current acceptance of the genetic fallacy (It’s natural so it must be right). So I have a pretty good idea at the angle that HSUS approaches the public with this issue, fear and danger. This is why it is imperative that hobbyists make it clear what the distinction is between species, and not lump the exotic industry together as a whole. Here is an example of how PETA works (Graphic!!!)
http://www.petsmartcruelty.com/photo_gallery.asp
I found this collection interesting mainly because of the lack of reptiles. To me, pet smart is one of the worst offenders as far as reptiles go, but PETA chose to include few pics of reptile suffering! Why? My guess is that PETA knows people don’t normally react to a reptile suffering, but pictures of cute or beautiful animals suffering is sure to evoke emotions. The people who work for these organizations know what they are doing and know how to perpetuate situations.

So all I can do now is give my humble opinions on what people can do on an individual basis. It should be our goal as hobbyists to meet the animal rights movement half way. We need to show the good side of exotic pet ownership. I don’t want to just say that people should abandon the fight for those who own things that a little more “exotic” but a distinction needs to be made between someone with BPs and someone with a 20’ retic. I also would like to advocate some of my personal opinions that I believe would help in the long run. I don’t believe people should buy imports. One of the main arguments HSUS uses is that most exotics are WC and carry diseases and will die in transport or shortly after arrival. I also am strongly opposed to buying pets from chains, and many local shops (there are always exceptions with local shops, but most I’ve seen horrible). If you don’t believe this creates a problem, I have a personal story about one that put the nail in the coffin for me. One day my wife and I were at a pet smart when we overheard a man and his wife and his mother, or mother in law who apparently lived with them. They were talking to the employee in the bird section, they were discussing a Congo African Grey, and when the employee went to get them more info on the bird the man started talking about keeping the bird in one of those big multilevel ferret cages with all the tubes. I normally never say things to people in public about stuff like this but I had to say something. I approached him and told him I heard him talking about buying a parrot and related that I had one and grew up with them. I went on to stress how hard they could be to deal with and what kind of caging he would need and how long they live and how loud and aggressive they can become. It looked like it really hit home and he said thanks, and my wife and I left thinking we had done a good deed. We went back later that day and saw that the grey was gone. I always tell myself that someone else came in who knew what they were doing and bought it, but I know deep down the man bought it after I left (the store didn’t even have it sexed btw). Honestly, I hope that bird died soon after… if it didn’t I’m sure it’s in some rescue, or a dark corner of a room tearing out its feathers and ripping holes in its chest. How does this relate to my argument? The bird, if it lived, will at some point end up in some rescue program mutilated. This is what PETA feeds off, and how they make their point. This leads to my final point, if someone you know wants to buy an exotic: bird, lizard, snake, and they don’t know what they are doing… do everything you can to stop them! This is the primary reason there are so many rescues, and so many horrible depressing stories that give PETA and HSUS backup for their movement.

This is only my opinion, feel free to comment and criticize. Sorry if there are any mistakes, grammatical or otherwise… it’s late. Thanks for your time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorgias

I have to admit that I have also seen things that made me strongly question whether or not we should be allowed to own exotics. Anyone who has been involved with exotics for an extended period of time will probably know what I’m talking about, especially those who have experiences with birds. The neglect and horror stories are mind blowing, but I have only recently begun to get into snakes.

---

If this is a good enough reason for us to not be allowed to own exotics, then no animal ownership should be allowed by any person for any reason. Yes, I'm including farmers too. That means we'll all have to go vegan. The fact is, there are "mind blowing" cases of negliect and abuse of all kinds of animals. The cute furry are not exempt from it. But you don't see people proposing that we outlaw dog & cat ownership.

There are also places where there are established wild populations of dogs & cats, and I'm quite sure some of them do harm to threatened or endangered species. But you don't see people proposing that we outlaw dog & cat ownership.

It is really scary when even people in the hobby begin to fall for their propaganda.

Quote:

---

I don’t believe that H.R. 669 will become a law

---

If no one believes it, if no one takes action against it, then it WILL become law, or at least something very similar. You yourself pointed out:

Quote:

---

It would (from what I’ve read) require the USFW to evaluate a giant range: (http://www.defenders.org/resources/p..._2000-2004.pdf)
Of species in a variety of hypothetical situations in 36 months. This seems to me beyond imagination. Because it’s better to err on the side of caution, the USFW would put almost all the species on the banned list.

---

This is EXACTLY what the supporters of this law want! This will not stop them from passing the law. If you think it should not be passed because it is unrealistic that the USFW could possibly do a good job of evaluating all these species in only 30 months, then you should be writing to your senators and representatives and everyone else you can think of, and telling them not to pass this law for this very reason. Don't count on them to figure it out. They probably don't care one way or the other, so if the only people they hear from are the ones pushing the law, you can bet it will be passed.

Quote:

---

This would be a huge blow to the pet industry and the major chains would suffer for sure. I don’t think it realistic, and there would be too much money involved to ignore.

---

Maybe. If they realize how big of a blow it would be. That is why we all need to be writing them and making them aware.

Quote:

---

Even if both these fail, this issue WILL NOT go away. If you read into the history of the animal rights movement you will find that they are very persistent and undaunted by failure.

---

I'm glad you realize that. But does that mean we should just lie down and accept it? I hardly think so. It just means we have to get ourselves organized, and be just as persistent and undaunted as they are.

Quote:

---

I believe anything large and dangerous (Tigers, Bears) along with primates and most likely large and venomous snakes will at some point be banned.

---

Does that mean that all large and dangerous dogs will eventually be banned also? I hope not, and I doubt it, because dog owners are not going to just accept it. We shouldn't either.

Quote:

---

It should be our goal as hobbyists to meet the animal rights movement half way.

---

ABSOLUTELY NOT! As you have already pointed out, they are persistent. They won't stop just because we give them half of the cake. They will continue trying to take away the other half. Thinking this way is very dangerous.

The one thing I think MIGHT be a good idea that we can agree on with the people pushing for these laws is some sort of permit or licensing. After all, as far as I am aware, you can't legally own a dog without a license. This has been true everywhere I've lived at least. But it is still scary for many reptile owners. Because then they have a list of everyone who owns one and when they pass the next law, they know which doors to knock on to take the snakes away. It isn't so scary for dog owners, because they can be pretty certain dog ownership isn't going to become illegal any time soon. Maybe what would work is to write a law requiring a license or permit, but also guaranteeing anyone who owns a properly licensed reptile will be grandfathered in on any future legislation that would ban said ownership. That still could be overturned by future legislation, but I think lawmakers would at least think long & hard about overturning something like that.

That's about the only piece of the cake I'm willing to give up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorgias

So all I can do now is give my humble opinions on what people can do on an individual basis. It should be our goal as hobbyists to meet the animal rights movement half way. We need to show the good side of exotic pet ownership. I don’t want to just say that people should abandon the fight for those who own things that a little more “exotic” but a distinction needs to be made between someone with BPs and someone with a 20’ retic. I also would like to advocate some of my personal opinions that I believe would help in the long run. I don’t believe people should buy imports. One of the main arguments HSUS uses is that most exotics are WC and carry diseases and will die in transport or shortly after arrival. I also am strongly opposed to buying pets from chains, and many local shops (there are always exceptions with local shops, but most I’ve seen horrible). If you don’t believe this creates a problem, I have a personal story about one that put the nail in the coffin for me. One day my wife and I were at a pet smart when we overheard a man and his wife and his mother, or mother in law who apparently lived with them. They were talking to the employee in the bird section, they were discussing a Congo African Grey, and when the employee went to get them more info on the bird the man started talking about keeping the bird in one of those big multilevel ferret cages with all the tubes. I normally never say things to people in public about stuff like this but I had to say something. I approached him and told him I heard him talking about buying a parrot and related that I had one and grew up with them. I went on to stress how hard they could be to deal with and what kind of caging he would need and how long they live and how loud and aggressive they can become. It looked like it really hit home and he said thanks, and my wife and I left thinking we had done a good deed. We went back later that day and saw that the grey was gone. I always tell myself that someone else came in who knew what they were doing and bought it, but I know deep down the man bought it after I left (the store didn’t even have it sexed btw). Honestly, I hope that bird died soon after… if it didn’t I’m sure it’s in some rescue, or a dark corner of a room tearing out its feathers and ripping holes in its chest. How does this relate to my argument? The bird, if it lived, will at some point end up in some rescue program mutilated. This is what PETA feeds off, and how they make their point. This leads to my final point, if someone you know wants to buy an exotic: bird, lizard, snake, and they don’t know what they are doing… do everything you can to stop them! This is the primary reason there are so many rescues, and so many horrible depressing stories that give PETA and HSUS backup for their movement.

This is only my opinion, feel free to comment and criticize. Sorry if there are any mistakes, grammatical or otherwise… it’s late. Thanks for your time.

---

I take exception to the generalization that because a man did not know not to put a Congo African Grey in a ferret cage that said African Grey is better off dead. I'm sorry, but I got my baby Congo African Grey as a gift from my husband. I wanted a finch. Obviously, I didn't know anything about Greys, especially one without feathers, cannot even perch yet, and had to be fed with a syringe. You think my Grey is better off dead? I've had him for 9 years, have no clue what sex he is, and I can tell you, after owning my bird for a while, I am probably as knowledgeable about these things as you, if not more so. He is healthy - I got vet certs to prove it - and very well adjusted to me, although, he has certain people he just doesn't like - my husband included.

I considered my experience with my bird as the best thing that ever gave me education on the species.

At the risk of sounding insulting (which I have no intention of doing), this kind of thought process is what got PETA into my list of undesirable organizations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anatess

Obviously, I didn't know anything about Greys, especially one without feathers, cannot even perch yet, and had to be fed with a syringe. You think my Grey is better off dead? I've had him for 9 years, have no clue what sex he is, and I can tell you, after owning my bird for a while, I am probably as knowledgeable about these things as you, if not more so. He is healthy - I got vet certs to prove it - and very well adjusted to me, although, he has certain people he just doesn't like - my husband included.

---

Trust me, I'm glad your grey is doing well and that you love him/her! If I was of the opinion that all birds in captivity should be dead I wouldn't be here... Id be out campaigning for PETA. I didn't mean to insinuate that anyone who does not know the sex of their bird is irresponsible, but any breeder/ store selling a large bird should have the genetic work done. Also be grateful your husband accepts your bird for who he/she is. Its not an uncommon story for someone to dump a bird because it didn't like their mate. My amazon, well my wife's really, has a bit of dislike for me and I know that's just how they are. The reality is that while there are people out there who can and should own parrots, the majority of people who make impulse buys should not. I'll give you the point that he may have taken the grey home and taken great care of it, but the majority of birds bought this way end up in rescues.

I feel that if we don't begin to regulate ourselves, they will do it for us, and it will be far worse. Although, it is VERY hard to get people to agree.... :(


These are my ideas, I feel they are for the good of the animals... And all should be mandated at the local or state level.

I feel that a permit system for ownership of giant snakes or large/ fragile exotic animals would keep a majority of irresponsible owners out, although there will always be those people that skirt around the law. It happens with domestic animals too, but I feel that it should not be a reason to NOT have a system like that.

I would support a regulation that people selling large numbers of giants or large/ fragile exotics should be licensed by the state, much like large scale dog kennels.

Pet stores, no matter the numbers sold, should be licensed to sell each exotic species or "family" and inspected regularly for the benefit of each species/family of animal.

Small scale breeders I do not think need a permit or license system to SELL giants or large/ fragile animals unless they are already regulated.

Of course, its a numbers game when it comes to what defines "large" scale breeders.

And to compare or treat reptile breeders like someone keeping 100 dogs is not fair. Reptile keeping is not as work intensive as mammalian keeping and should be judged by its own merits.

Now, I know many of you won't agree with it, IT AINT PERFECT, but that's what I feel comfortable with at this time.

I think this way for the benefit of the animal, I am not motivated by "public" safety, but rather want to see animal abuse lowered and hopefully someday gone.

Education is key and the only way to truly provide the best for these animals which are kept in captivity. Unfortunately there is a lot of ignorance on both sides of the issue. When stuff like this comes up I always feel the loss that Steve Irwin was to our cause. He was a great spokesman for animal conservation and was an amazing representative for our cold blooded friends. Not only do we need to unify as an industry fight our own battles but we desperately need another public figure like Steve Irwin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc261

If this is a good enough reason for us to not be allowed to own exotics, then no animal ownership should be allowed by any person for any reason. Yes, I'm including farmers too. That means we'll all have to go vegan. The fact is, there are "mind blowing" cases of negliect and abuse of all kinds of animals. The cute furry are not exempt from it. But you don't see people proposing that we outlaw dog & cat ownership.

---

Actually there are! Gary Francione is a professor of law and philosophy at Rutgers, and is big in the Animal Rights movement, and is an abolitionist. Meaning he believes that only when we are no longer allowed to own animals will we stop harming them. The way I see it this one of two logical conclusions if you accept that should not suffer. The other is the Kantian view that animals are objects, but we should treat them will because doing otherwise would cause us to lose our humanity. But these are absolute ideas, and our world is a mesh of beliefs, exceptions, and contradictions. I believe we can come to a acceptable middle ground.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc261

It is really scary when even people in the hobby begin to fall for their propaganda.

---

I know it seems that way, but honestly I'm just trying to see things from an objective point of view.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc261

This is EXACTLY what the supporters of this law want! This will not stop them from passing the law. If you think it should not be passed because it is unrealistic that the USFW could possibly do a good job of evaluating all these species in only 30 months, then you should be writing to your senators and representatives and everyone else you can think of, and telling them not to pass this law for this very reason. Don't count on them to figure it out. They probably don't care one way or the other, so if the only people they hear from are the ones pushing the law, you can bet it will be passed.

---

Nothing wrong with being proactive! My point is that if all exotics were banned almost all the pet industry would go down, most of the money is made from supplies. These large chains and production companies are owned by bigger corporations who DO have influence. I agree politicians don't really care, but they are not stupid either. Everyone one of them has a staff who research these things, see how much the bill itself would cost, look at the impact of it, and weigh how the vote will affect the politician's image. They will know if it would affect a business that contribute money to them or their party. The party wont bite the hand that feeds, and most politicians will not break party lines. It would be political suicide for either party to side with activist groups, pass expensive legislation, and destroy a multi-billion dollar industry in this financial situation. That would make the news for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc261

I'm glad you realize that. But does that mean we should just lie down and accept it? I hardly think so. It just means we have to get ourselves organized, and be just as persistent and undaunted as they are.

---

Exotic owners are the minority here, with little representation (I have no idea how big or powerful PIJAC is) going against strong lobbies and organizations who have huge budgets and employ tons of legal professionals. HSUS is huge and well known. They even receive federal money I believe. They are not above spreading misinformation and hype to get their point across. They are also to some extent, a middle ground. They accept (publicly) that animal testing/slaughter/use goes on and try only to regulate it and make it humane. I know this may not be the true intentions or actions of HSUS, but its what their mission statements says, and most people do not research these things. Standing up and uniting is fine, but it needs to be accepted that just saying our rights are being violated is not enough and will not be heard. The exotic scene as a whole needs to clean the dirt from the closet and prove to America that exotics can be responsibly kept.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc261

Does that mean that all large and dangerous dogs will eventually be banned also? I hope not, and I doubt it, because dog owners are not going to just accept it. We shouldn't either.

---

Indeed they will not! The extremist wing of animal rights will never fully get their way, it would affect the majority in a significant way. Exotics are the minority and while people may not want their dogs gone, they do have animal right sympathies and will not think all to hard about this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc261

ABSOLUTELY NOT! As you have already pointed out, they are persistent. They won't stop just because we give them half of the cake. They will continue trying to take away the other half. Thinking this way is very dangerous.

---

Like I've said, the fringe will never be happy. They will also never win. If we can appeal to the majority of animal rights supporters and prove we aren't so bad we can win them over.

Glad we agree on one thing tho :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by littleindiangirl

I feel that a permit system for ownership of giant snakes or large/ fragile exotic animals would keep a majority of irresponsible owners out, although there will always be those people that skirt around the law. It happens with domestic animals too, but I feel that it should not be a reason to NOT have a system like that.

I would support a regulation that people selling large numbers of giants or large/ fragile exotics should be licensed by the state, much like large scale dog kennels.

Pet stores, no matter the numbers sold, should be licensed to sell each exotic species or "family" and inspected regularly for the benefit of each species/family of animal.

Small scale breeders I do not think need a permit or license system to SELL giants or large/ fragile animals unless they are already regulated.

---

Just out of curiosity, and i agree with you, but what do you propose after the pet store/ breeder does their job? This still leaves the gap in the system of all the impulse buys that dump their pet. Or do you think it is just impossible to control? One interesting experience I had was with a dog breeder (Tibetan Terriers) who had sold my parents dogs before. They had a littler and my wife wanted one. We called and talked to them and they asked most the questions. Some people may be put off by this approach but they wanted to be sure their dogs were going to responsible homes. In the end we can to a mutual decision that we did not have enough space at the time but they told us to contact them when we got into a bigger place. I was pretty impressed by the ethics of the whole thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorgias

I wanted to really get a feel what the message of HSUS and PETA so I read some of their articles and campaigns.

I don’t think that having the attitude that they are simply out to get me and my animals, or that they are just trying to repress my rights as an American will really help with anything.

---

Here's where people on both sides go wrong. HSUS and Peta are run by very few people. Those people make huge salaries and get most of their expenses paid by the donations the organizations receive. They don't really believe in their cause. It's the zombies that follow along and give money blindly that keep the movement alive. They're the same as the preachers and religous fanatics on TV.

If you had met and spoke with Ingrid Newkirk early on you'd know exactly what her motivation is. Don't be fooled by the propaganda. Fight them every inch of the way and never give in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnNJ

Here's where people on both sides go wrong. HSUS and Peta are run by very few people. Those people make huge salaries and get most of their expenses paid by the donations the organizations receive. They don't really believe in their cause. It's the zombies that follow along and give money blindly that keep the movement alive. They're the same as the preachers and religous fanatics on TV.

If you had met and spoke with Ingrid Newkirk early on you'd know exactly what her motivation is. Don't be fooled by the propaganda. Fight them every inch of the way and never give in.

---

Perhaps your right about them, I don't know... but would fighting them every inch of the way accomplish anything?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorgias

Perhaps your right about them, I don't know... but would fighting them every inch of the way accomplish anything?

---

It would accomplish a lot more than giving in.

Fighting them every inch of the way MIGHT slow them down enough that we have a chance to educate the followers that simply believe the propaganda!

Make NO mistake, PETA is against keeping ANY pet, and the exotics will be their stepping stone to each species of pet, right down to the cats and dogs, which will most likely be last.
They've already started with laws that would prevent anyone but a large kennel to breed dogs, banning "backyard" and "hobby" breeders of dogs. This would eliminate the lousy backyard breeders.. it's a great thing, right? No! It elimates some BYB, and all of the show breeders, the responsible breeders that might have one litter a year.. and who does it leave? The puppy mills!! Who are easy to shut down, by their usual practices, and there you suddenly have no breeders of dogs at all.
This is a example of how PETA works, they propose something that SEEMS reasonable and good.. and they show it in the best light. Once it's a done deal.. you find what a bad thing is was.. but it's now too late.

Reptiles are not cuddley.. they are not warm-blooded.. they are a 'easy target' for the first legislation. Then it will be small exotics like sugar gliders, and hedgehogs... it's a progressive thing.
Fight them every inch, or your grandchildren won't be able to keep even a goldfish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorgias

Just out of curiosity, and i agree with you, but what do you propose after the pet store/ breeder does their job? This still leaves the gap in the system of all the impulse buys that dump their pet. Or do you think it is just impossible to control? One interesting experience I had was with a dog breeder (Tibetan Terriers) who had sold my parents dogs before. They had a littler and my wife wanted one. We called and talked to them and they asked most the questions. Some people may be put off by this approach but they wanted to be sure their dogs were going to responsible homes. In the end we can to a mutual decision that we did not have enough space at the time but they told us to contact them when we got into a bigger place. I was pretty impressed by the ethics of the whole thing.

---

It isn't a perfect plan, far from it I know. But I have to agree that persistent education is really key! Just like Spaniard said, we lack a strong role model that puts the spot light on the positives when keeping exotics and reptiles.

When you think about it, even Steve Irwin was not really the role model we need. He was GREAT and did a lot of very positive things, but he was mostly about animals in the wild and somewhat about animals in zoos, so while any positive press for reptiles is a good thing, it really wasn't about the ownership of exotics as pets.

Let's face reality here for a second - legislation is imminent. It is not a question of "if" but "when" and "how bad". Anyone who thinks you can petition or whine this away needs a good hard smack in the head.

Since we know it's coming, why not focus our energies on beating the legislators to the punch and showing for once that the people in this hobby can be relied upon to police themselves? How about we agree that selling giant constrictors and hots to uneducated or unprepared people is a bad thing - mainly for the animals.

Comparing permits or licensing in our hobby to dogs, cats, farm animals, slurpees, hyundais, whatever is a waste of time. Right or wrong, we have been getting bad press because any tool with enough money can go out and buy whatever he wants - be it a rattlesnake or a large constrictor. We should have a permitting system in place that restricts ownership of species that are potentially deadly or potentially invasive.

We're moaning and whining about the B.C. ban but look at the majority of the species they targeted - what do they all have in common?

.....and for those who claim that somehow venemous reptiles, large monitors or large constrictors only kill or hurt their owners - what universe are you living in? Is it fair that a small child or neighbor is impacted by some idiot's lack of common sense or responsibility? Or is that somehow covered by Darwin?

http://www.astm.org/JOURNALS/FORENSIC/PAGES/1454.htm

How about the animals themselves? Connie brings up a point that very few people are even skirting in these discussions - has anyone who is against permitting thought about the animals themselves? How many end up improperly cared for? How they die from neglect or suffer through abysmal husbandry?

I own a lot of reptiles and I would have no problems with a permitting system. I could care less as to whether or not my exsiting collection is grandfathered in. I'm willing to register my animals and pay reasonable fees if it alleviates some of the painfully stupid crap occuring in this hobby.

What I care about is how fast we are headed towards having to deal with some ignorant representative's or senator's badly written legislation that ends up unfairly punishing those consumers and breeders who act ethically and responsibly.

The neglect and abuse is a totally seperate issue to me. People neglect dogs ALL the time, and no one is proposeing that we should ban or regulate owning dogs. How about horses? There's record numbers of horses being neglected, abandoned, or taken to shelters.. and no one is suggesting we ban or regulate horse ownership.
The issue I have is with BANS. If it is a responsible system of permitting.. then I'd be okay with that. HOWEVER.... Rhode Island has a permitting system.. and no one gets permits. They instituted a system that requires you to go get a permit to own XXX(nearly every exotic out there), but instead of regulating the ownership of exotics.. they've basically outlawed it, since they simply do not give out any permits.
I'd like to see a case where a large monitor lizard killed someone in the U.S. Looking around, I don't seem to see any news articles. Once in a great GREAT while, a giant boid will kill someone, generally the owner. And of course, on occasion, a hot will kill someone, again.. generally the owner.
How many people are killed by dogs? Where's the legislation outlawing those? Horses? No laws against horses as dangerous animals. COWS kill people every year!!
It's RIDICULOUS to say that reptiles should be banned due to their dangerous nature.. when nearly any other pet out there kills/injures hundreds more people each year than the reptiles do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorgias

Perhaps your right about them, I don't know... but would fighting them every inch of the way accomplish anything?

---

If the only thing we accomplish by fighting every step of the way is to obtain a stand off, and hold on to what we have, that is far better to me than losing this hobby an inch at a time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfy-hound

The neglect and abuse is a totally seperate issue to me. People neglect dogs ALL the time, and no one is proposeing that we should ban or regulate owning dogs. How about horses? There's record numbers of horses being neglected, abandoned, or taken to shelters.. and no one is suggesting we ban or regulate horse ownership.
The issue I have is with BANS. If it is a responsible system of permitting.. then I'd be okay with that. HOWEVER.... Rhode Island has a permitting system.. and no one gets permits. They instituted a system that requires you to go get a permit to own XXX(nearly every exotic out there), but instead of regulating the ownership of exotics.. they've basically outlawed it, since they simply do not give out any permits.
I'd like to see a case where a large monitor lizard killed someone in the U.S. Looking around, I don't seem to see any news articles. Once in a great GREAT while, a giant boid will kill someone, generally the owner. And of course, on occasion, a hot will kill someone, again.. generally the owner.
How many people are killed by dogs? Where's the legislation outlawing those? Horses? No laws against horses as dangerous animals. COWS kill people every year!!
It's RIDICULOUS to say that reptiles should be banned due to their dangerous nature.. when nearly any other pet out there kills/injures hundreds more people each year than the reptiles do.

---

Theresa:

The facts don't matter to the people enacting the laws and trying to educate a career politician as to the facts and stats is an exercise in futility.

We are a relative minority in the pet trade and we've gained a pretty bad rap with John Q. Public along the way.

This is where the argument breaks down. Making a comparison to dogs and cats holds not water - not because the argument is invalid or illogical but because there are billions of dollars behind the feeding, care and pampering of these animals. No legislator in their right mind would go much farther beyond highly publicized breed-specific bans or the currently licensing laws.

Money talks and numbers talk. We really don't have either. Some bonehead in a suit is going to dictate the future of our hobby if we don't take whatever ammo their using out of their guns.

That's why WE should be the group making an attempt at self regulating via permits within reason, formulated by intelligent people in our hobby.

What I don't understand about all this, is the "cleanup". Meaning: if the proposed bans are passed into law, then what happens to the millions of these animals currently in people's homes? Do those people all instantly become criminals unless they give up their animals? And furthermore, where are all these animals going?

I am very much in favor of setting up a FUNCTIONAL permit system for owning certain herps. Ideally, the permits would not be terribly difficult to come by, but would weed out people who have no idea what they're getting into. Kind of like our Quarantine Room... It's not hard to gain access, but look, there are still tons of people on our forums who've never seen it, and the web-surfer who happens in on our forums won't be able to just drop in there. I think permits would cut down on impulse purchases, for sure.

But like others have mentioned, the people who actually understand what reptiles need, and what makes a good reptile owner, are few and far between in politics...

I hate to keep playing devils advocate but I think regardless of our feelings towards PETA we have to accept what they are. Animal right groups are representing the wishes of a large portion of the public. People donate to animal rights groups because they believe animals are treated badly. It's true there are extremists in the groups, and frauds, and people using the system. I would like to point out that most of the really radical animal rights people really are not in PETA, but instead in direct action groups like ALF. PETA and HSUS are often criticized for not going far enough. I really think there is no danger of EVERYONE losing ALL pets. The full animals rights utopia may one day exist, but not in America and not any time soon. One thing I find kind of ironic, I didn't see to much on PETA's site about banning exotics, I did however find a fact sheet telling people that exotics are difficult to care for and need things like UV, Heat, special diets, and proper caging. HSUS however, the more powerful group with more donations, more lawyers, more accomplishments, and a better public image had many articles suggesting how dangerous exotics are. Animal rights are not making the rules, but they have a voice in the rule making. They are not an oppressive totalitarian political force trying to rule us all. They are simply a group with an agenda that they would like to see recognized, and usually there is room for negotiation with people like this. Even if it won't happen, focusing on a us and them mentality really doesn't really help the problem. And blaming politicians really isn't a good approach either. They represent the public and (in theory) do whats best for the public. In some cases it would be appropriate to direct your anger their way, this isn't one of them. Banning exotics would not be a directly hurt people, yes I acknowledge financial circumstances but this is an indirect form, remember that you want the system to allow you to do continue something. Owning pets is not guaranteed and is not a required basic need.

I'm really glad to see that other people feel that neglect and irresponsibility are part of the issue and that self regulation is key! Just out of curiosity, and I'm not trying to antagonize anyone here, for those of you who say you will fight ever inch of ground against these bans and groups.... what exactly are you planning on doing?

I also was wondering if anyone had any kind of idea as to how a effective permit system would work? If you could just pick one up for a fee what would be different than just a tax on reptiles?

Finally if it has not been addressed, I believe the bans would work as follows: If HR 669 were to pass, you would no longer be able to breed, ship, or transport animals across state lines... but you could still keep your pets you have. If S373 were to pass... I don't know, pythons would be considered a invasive species, and I'm guessing we would have to surrender them to be euthanized. I doubt they could all be put in zoos and it wouldn't make sense to ship them off for two reasons: the incredible expense, and the fact most of them were bred in captivity and don't know how to survive in the wild and would have less than effective immune systems from lack of exposure to diseases and parasites.

Here's the way Peta stays in the news.

http://perezhilton.com/2009-03-19-pe...-flavored-tofu

PETA Propose Clooney-Flavored Tofu
Filed under: Wacky, Tacky & True > George Clooney



They always have good intentions!

The wonderful wackadoodles over at PETA are never going to be taken seriously if they continue with this shiz!

What have they done now, you ask?

The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals have written George Clooney a letter pitching the idea of a Clooney-flavored tofu to the actor!!!

PETA believe the Clooney-tofu - or "CloFu" - would "raise awareness" about the importance of abstaining from meat products. The letter asked the A-list actor for permission to inject his sweat into the tofu!!

Barf!!

"Your fans would swoon at the idea of eating CloFu… CloFu will help people be healthier and more environmentally friendly and will spare animals from being killed for the table," wrote Ingrid E. Newkirk, the president of PETA.

What has she been smoking???

The good stuff apparently, because Newkirk even likened the flavor of George Clooney's perspiration to "gravy."

Sorry guys, but don't expect to see "CloFu" hitting supermarket shelves anytime soon - George isn't down with the Clooney-flavored tofu by any means!

"As a mammal, I'm offended," Clooney remarked.

But think of all the possibilties, George!

CloFu dogs, CloFutti Cuties, CloFu and broccoli… they're endless!

Thats good stuff!

PETA is goofy I know. Their campaigns are either ridiculous or incredibly offensive. There lies the genius of the whole thing. Think the people at PETA believe anyone takes them seriously? I doubt it. Part of their mission is getting all the attention they possibly can! Ever heard of other animals rights groups coming out against their campaigns? If animal rights are never in the news do people think about them? PETA knows how to market themselves and even if people don't buy into them they think about the issues. This causes an increase in donations to serious groups HSUS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorgias

Thats good stuff!

PETA is goofy I know. Their campaigns are either ridiculous or incredibly offensive. There lies the genius of the whole thing. Think the people at PETA believe anyone takes them seriously? I doubt it. Part of their mission is getting all the attention they possibly can! Ever heard of other animals rights groups coming out against their campaigns? If animal rights are never in the news do people think about them? PETA knows how to market themselves and even if people don't buy into them they think about the issues. This causes an increase in donations to serious groups HSUS

---

Below is what you posted first, which I received in my e-mail. I presume you edited it.

Quote:

---

Here is the message that has just been posted:
***************
Thats good stuff!

PETA is goofy I know. Their campaigns are either ridiculous or incredibly offensive. There lies the genius of the whole thing. Think the people at PETA believe anyone takes them seriously? I doubt it. Part of their mission is getting all the attention they possibly can! Ever heard of other animals rights groups coming out against their campaigns? If animal rights are never in the news do people think about them? PETA is awesome,,, I have been lying
***************

---

I had a strange feeling when I first read your original post. I'll leave it to the Mods to find out what your real agenda is.

The permit system has been in effect in Florida since 1/1/2008 for "reptiles of concern" and the subspecies and hybrids thereof. These are the species listed under reptile of concern:
1. Burmese python (Python molurus)
2. African rock python (Python sebae)
3. Amethystine python (Morelia amethystinus)
4. Reticulated python (Python reticulatus)
5. Green anaconda (Eunectes murinus)
6. Nile monitor (Varanus niloticus)

It works, the reptile community is okay with it, and it is a much better alternative than outright banning.

Now, Gorgias, about PETA... what exactly are you trying to say? Explain "meet them halfway". Exactly what is involved with that?

Hi,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorgias

Thats good stuff!

PETA is goofy I know. Their campaigns are either ridiculous or incredibly offensive. There lies the genius of the whole thing. Think the people at PETA believe anyone takes them seriously? I doubt it. Part of their mission is getting all the attention they possibly can! Ever heard of other animals rights groups coming out against their campaigns? If animal rights are never in the news do people think about them? PETA knows how to market themselves and even if people don't buy into them they think about the issues. This causes an increase in donations to serious groups HSUS

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnNJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorgias

Thats good stuff!

PETA is goofy I know. Their campaigns are either ridiculous or incredibly offensive. There lies the genius of the whole thing. Think the people at PETA believe anyone takes them seriously? I doubt it. Part of their mission is getting all the attention they possibly can! Ever heard of other animals rights groups coming out against their campaigns? If animal rights are never in the news do people think about them? PETA knows how to market themselves and even if people don't buy into them they think about the issues. This causes an increase in donations to serious groups HSUS

---

Below is what you posted first, which I received in my e-mail. I presume you edited it.

Quote:

---

Here is the message that has just been posted:
***************
Thats good stuff!

PETA is goofy I know. Their campaigns are either ridiculous or incredibly offensive. There lies the genius of the whole thing. Think the people at PETA believe anyone takes them seriously? I doubt it. Part of their mission is getting all the attention they possibly can! Ever heard of other animals rights groups coming out against their campaigns? If animal rights are never in the news do people think about them? PETA is awesome,,, I have been lying
***************

---

I had a strange feeling when I first read your original post. I'll leave it to the Mods to find out what your real agenda is.

---

I was under the impression that the HSUS lately had been pushing an agenda remarkably similar to that of PETA?

** Warning personal opinion alert **

My purely personal opinion is that PETA are effectively stealing money from other animal welfare groups by being totally dishonest about their agenda and longterm goals and should have been forceably disbanded when they were shown to be financially supporting people who firebomb other human beings or their property.

The real PETA advert would go something like this;

Love your dog? Have it put down rather than force it to live in captivity.

Anyone who keeps any animal, even a goldfish, and supports PETA either doesn't know what PETA really is or is guilty of serious hypocracy or stupidity - possibly both. Not to mention the question about what the planet will eat once PETA kills all the sheep, cattle, chickens and pigs etc. :rolleyes:

Sadly neither hypocracy or stupidity is illegal so there is little that can be done about PETA until someone runs an honest media campaign about them and slaps the blinkers off the fluffy bunny brigade :rage: - no offense to real fluffy bunnies who tend to recognise a fox when they see one. :P

** /Warning personal opinion alert **

Ahem. :oops:

Sorry been wanting to get that off my chest for a while now. :salute:


dr del

Just to clear something up.... The original post was a joked played on me by my wife playing a joke and it was edited right away

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorgias

Just to clear something up.... The original post was a joked played on me by my wife playing a joke and it was edited right away

---

:confuzd:

Arrggh! So sorry I'm posting on my phone.

As far as an agenda... I can't prove I'm not a troll... And if you suspect I'm from PETA... Not really sure what I'd be trying to prove by doing this. Maybe you suspect something different?

And by meeting half way I mean understanding regulation, and self regulation.

Del,

I think that Ingrid should pony up and refuse medications derived from animal testing. Such as... ooh... the insulin shots she takes daily to stay alive.

Guess those animals were rightful casualties?

Bruce

Hey, I'm pretty sure that if he was a PETA supporter, he wouldn't have editted it to fix it. It looked prankish in the one you got in your email.

That said I will ALWAYS oppose PETA. They do not believe in a halfway.
IF we could get the humane society to think, and to learn about exotics, they might not be so opposed to reptiles. There's too many in the humane society that follow, rather than think. They also are very good at presenting it as "dangerous exotics" rather than saying "your best mate's pet iguana". I think if a exotics BAN goes through, where they want to round up all the snakes etc.. then suddenly there'll be a lot of folks that go "Oh.. sorry.. I didn't think it would affect YOU."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruce Whitehead

Del,

I think that Ingrid should pony up and refuse medications derived from animal testing. Such as... ooh... the insulin shots she takes daily to stay alive.

Guess those animals were rightful casualties?

Bruce

---

warning: personal opinion:

ingred newkirk is a terrorist.

end personal opinion transmission.

That said, i think we do have to protect our hobby. Every post i've read in this thread makes me think more and more. Dogs, horses, cattle, friggin sharks (withlaserbeams) kill people every year. and no one really gets their panties in a bunch. but god help us if some silly reptile owner gets bitten/killed/otherwise pwnd by their animal, people get up in arms.

Ive read a lot of the legislation, i've signed peition after petition. what ELSE can we do? what can i as one measly college student do? Ive taken into educating those who dont know about reptiles.

Even today, i had my snake out (long story, but it was okay with the owners of the shop where i was at) and people came in who were TERRIFIED. By the end of the two hour appointment (gettin my car fixed) i had talked to about 10 people about snakes, their needs, their "personalities" and how they can be dangerous, just like any other animal, but can also be rewarding companions that are kept as pets. I think every one of those 10 people (4 of them young children) were pleased with how i was doing things.