Q. What is the dumbest petition/movement you have seen against husbandry?

[xAnthemia]

As this does not explicitly relate to current or upcoming legislation, I am making this post here. The question is simple and should be fun: what is the dumbest petition or movement you have seen regarding husbandry?


Of course, I’ll too answer the question. Without a doubt, the dumbest petition I’ve ever seen (at least since this year) in my own country was the petition tied to the August 23^rd incident in England. On August 23^rd, an 18ft python escaped an enclosure and began to slither around Southampton. Eventually, it attempted to enter the petitioner’s bedroom through the window from the outside, scaring the petitioner. After calling the police, the police refused to intervene, stating that it wasn’t their job (this is correct, it is the animal rescue’s job here, not the police’s job).

Now, any average person would respond by discussing with the snake’s owner why this occurred and what can be done to prevent this. Instead, the following demands were issued to the government via change.org of all things:

1. Any owner of a large snake (a snake of at least 3ft in size), “poisonous snake,” or any other reptile of a similar threat must be registered with the local council, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) and the police. Yes, all three of them.

2. Said animals must be legally recognized as “potentially dangerous to humans and other animals.” I somewhat agree with this one, but I’m pretty sure this isn’t in the law, not because the government disagrees, but because it is stating the obvious. Yes, a “poisonous” snake would likely be harmful; no surprises there. Also, just a reminder now that even ball pythons meet the criteria mentioned in statement one.

3. The owners of animals mentioned in statement one must be physically and psychologically proven to contain such an animal within the boundaries of their abode. They must have expertise in the animal in question (so there goes the concept of beginner pets) and must be fully aware of the consequences of escapes. Owners with previous incidents of escapes, including escaped cats and dogs, are banned from owning such animals.

4. Extremely large animals (no size specified, but it includes the 18ft snake) are to bebanned from the UK unless in a zoo.

5. The following houses can not contain any animal that meets the criteria of statement one: flats, terraced houses, semi-detached houses, “basically anywhere there are neighbours behind the wall.”

6. “Neighbours with babies and children and fragile adults like elderly or invalids (also withanimals, e.g., farmers) should have the right to OBJECT and disallow those in a 50-yard radius of keeping snakes.” In other words, the people of the majority become the government against a minority husbandry community. This is arguably the most draconian statement in this long list of general ignorance.

7. Escaped animals that meet the criteria of statement one must be a police matter.

8. Escaped species must be confiscated immediately.

9. Owners must report an escaped reptile immediately.

10. There should be a minimal fine of £1000 and a maximum fine of £10,000 for allowing or not preventing a large reptile from escaping.

11. By law, houses that house large reptiles must have certain equipment, including a camera system that alerts owners of escapes, unbreakable and unremovable locks, and an“emergency button.” I should note that there is no description of what this button should do — they should just have one, I guess.

12. By law, “reptiles must be constantly locked.”

13. All reptiles must be chipped, and their exact position must always be transferred to their owner’s devices via GPS.

14. “Somepeople must be banned from owning animals by a court ruling.” Not sure why this statement is included — this already exists for anyone in the UK who live feeds, let alone lets their pet escape.

What makes this petition scary to me is the aftermath. The story of an 18ft python escaping was unique in the UK. Microsoft recommended articles discussing the story, including links to the petition, to all UK-based for a few days following the incident. The result was that this random, stupid petition jumped to just under one thousand signatures in a few days before it was eventually removed from Microsoft’s recommendations, as all old news is. This is a reminder to all owners that, in the modern internet age, a single mistake can lead to things like this, and if the story got a bit more coverage, it could’ve ended a lot worse for us here in the UK trying to do husbandry (change.org is a joke, but our MPs are jokes and they often use it for some reason).

So, with that all discussed, I leave the opening question to you all. And no, this petition was not a troll, you can read it in all of its glory here: https://www.change.org/p/ban-large-pet-snakes-in-uk

[Bogertophis]

This is exactly why we must all be safety & security conscious- it doesn't take much for those who hate or fear snakes to raise a ruckus trying to ban or otherwise restrict our pets. It helps to make sure that we present ourselves & what we do as being very responsible so that others do not jump to any of the wrong conclusions as to their safety. The better we keep ourselves "in line", the less chance that others (the "general public") will try or succeed in doing it for us. Escapes are very negative publicity.

[xAnthemia]

Hit the nail on the head with the lesson of this story. Doesn't matter what country you're in, there's always someone wanting more legislation and negative press aids them — I mean for you guys in the US organisations like PETA would be the prime example.

[bns]

As this does not explicitly relate to current or upcoming legislation, I am making this post here. The question is simple and should be fun: what is the dumbest petition or movement you have seen regarding husbandry?

Of course, I’ll too answer the question. Without a doubt, the dumbest petition I’ve ever seen (at least since this year) in my own country was the petition tied to the August 23^rd incident in England. On August 23^rd, an 18ft python escaped an enclosure and began to slither around Southampton. ...

Dumb? This petition was formed out of fear and the fear is real not just imagined.

People don't want an 18 foot python roaming around in their neighborhood, and I don't blame them... You are entitled to your opinion on if this petition is overstepping but these folks want action before someone, or something gets hurt.

Take a look at how many cities have banned certain breeds of dogs.

Dangerous animals...are being regulated, controlled and banned.

[xAnthemia]

Dumb? This petition was formed out of fear and the fear is real not just imagined.

People don't want an 18 foot python roaming around in their neighborhood, and I don't blame them... You are entitled to your opinion on if this petition is overstepping but these folks want action before someone, or something gets hurt.

Take a look at how many cities have banned certain breeds of dogs.

Dangerous animals...are being regulated, controlled and banned.

To start with the things we are in agreement of, I agree that the petition was formed out of fear and that the fear is real not just imagined. I also agree that councils and the state should have the right to ban and regulate dangerous animals. I myself, for example, am not particularly happy with the fact that, in the UK, you do not need any license whatsoever to buy a king cobra — you need a license to sell one, but not to buy one (don't feed it live though, that's illegal — go figure). The idea of some drunken idiot in the UK buying a king cobra should be an idea that upsets people.


To end with the things we disagree with.

"but these folks want action before someone, or something gets hurt." Call me a conspiracy theorist, but this is not what I believe they want. They want power, and only power. If these people geniunely cared about the health of their fellow citizens, they wouldn't have been so lazy when writing this petition. The formatting of the petition is awful: it reads like a rant, not a petition. Furthermore, there are numerous factual errors in the petition (they want venemous snakes to be banned, yet they refer to them as poisonous). When someone writes a petition to take away both my and my fellow keeper's rights, I at least expect them to be anatomically correct to the animals that they describe; this is not a friendly conversation between two mates, this is a demand to the government—be correct. Lastly, the petition is repeatedly vague ("equally dangerous reptiles" — this is equivalent to a legal et cetera; "emergency button" — no specification, usage, or installment guide of this button is provided, it just uses the word "emergency" to encite fear). A key point to my belief is that I do not believe the vagueness of this petition was an accident. There is a dangerous trend in the United Kingdom for laws to be passed with as many grey areas as possible. The online communications act and its revisions are an example of this. The goal of these people is to allow the goverment as much wiggle room as possible. Being exact to what they want would limit their power, so they make themselves intentionally vague. Furthermore, we can prove that they're nothing but power hungry individuals because the petition does as much as to confirm it in their demands. "Neighbours with babies and children or fragile adults like elderly or invalids (also with animals eg farmers) should have right to OBJECT and disallow their neighbours in radius of 50 yd from keeping large snakes." Remember, large has been defined as 3ft+ in this petition, not the 18ft banana that broke into the petitioner's bedroom. This is a demand that specifically grants regular citizens a power equivalent to the government itself; the power to regulate other citizens. This is absurd: in no way is this demand actually required for this petition, or to regulate animals: it's just there because that's they want, they want the power of the state to themselves. There are literally zero reasons for this to be implemented: if the snake owner has a license from the council, the RSPCA, and the police, as this petition itself also requires, then there is no reason whatsoever for a random citizen to have as much power as to restrict the owning individual - three organisations have already determined the owner to be safe (through the dystopian policies of the petition, might I add), the random citizen in question has no reason to interfere with this decision making, other than the fact that they seek more power. Again, rereading this, I understand that I probably sound slightly insane, but I think it's true: they just want power. In the United Kingdom, it's always been about wanting more power. It's never been about protecting the children, or the teenagers, or the adults, or the elderly, or the "invalids" as they put it, it's about power and control.

"Dangerous animals...are being regulated, controlled and banned." In the context of this petition: no, they are not. The petition in question wishes for 3ft+ snakes to be regulated, and "equally dangerous reptiles". In other words, anything that can bite you, because that's the only thing a 3.1ft snake is going to do. Yes, you could make the argument that if it can bite you it's dangerous. Sure, that's technically correct. However, this would require the state to regulate pretty much every single pet that there is. Dogs, cats, mice, rats, birds, snakes, lizards, some fish, rabbits, literally everything would be regulated by multiple licenses if the definition of "dangerous" is the one this petition provides. I understand that some people in the UK love to have a license for literally everything on the planet, but I'm not one of them.


In conclusion, you've made a good point about fear, and perhaps I'm being a bit too mean when I say "dumb" — ignorant would've likely been a better adjective. There are in fact reasonable arguments for 18 foot pythons to be banned. You could argue why someone even needs such an animal? What is the purpose of this animal in your collection? Is it business, or is it a pet? We've heard it all before and, while I do disagree with them, they aren't ignorant arguments. However, if you're going to attempt to take my rights away, I expect legitimate reasons like these and not ignorant reasons. The issue is that petition in question seems to have made it its mission to provide only ignorant arguments — arguments that are anatomically incorrect to the animals they describe, arguments that are vague, and power-grabbing arguments that are not even required for such a piece of legalisation to exist and work effectively.

As someone who does, in fact, have a phobia of dogs, I have sympathy for people who are fearful. However, I do not have sympathy for people who use their fear to take my rights away. My pet ball python, Noodle, will one day be larger than 3ft. Me and Noodle have been through a lot over the past few months. He and he alone has helped lift me out of my depression. To me, he is the greatest little snake on the planet, who himself has fully overcame a health issue that a reptile vet couldn't even diagnose. He never bites, never hisses, just chills out in his hides and occasionally uses me as a pillow. I think myself not worthy of his bliss... should the government one day pass a law that bans his existence and permits his removal, my local politicians will be in danger of their removal. Don't tread on me.

[Bogertophis]

@xAnthemia- Your concerns are totally valid & your points taken are welcome, but please remember to keep such long posts "readable"- I'm referring to your "wall of text" that will turn off many readers. Just saying- spacing really helps.

When it comes to keeping any animals that can be dangerous to others, I believe that responsible containment is job #1 of the owner, whether it's a big snake or a big dog, or even a snotty house cat that runs loose. Lapses that result in a loose animal should be fined very significantly on the first offense, IMO (enough to make people REALLY take notice), & second offenses should result in permanent removal of the animal from the irresponsible owner. Same goes if the animal causes injury to others. Excuses don't fly.

People have every right to want to feel safe in their own neighborhood, but their personal fears should not take precedent over the rights of others to enjoy their own property & pets as they see fit. I'd much prefer to see a permit system where large, venomous or other "dangerous" exotics are allowed only by permit after professional inspection of premises to ensure the safe & secure keeping of the animals in question, & to ensure that the owner has the necessary KSAs to do so. (KSA= knowledge, skills & abilities) One person's phobia should not rule the neighborhood.

The biggest problem has always been the irrational fear so many people have of snakes- we need to keep on educating them- and we need to step it up. "Dangerous" needs a far more precise definition- obviously a 3-7' non-venomous snake poses no danger whatsoever except in the minds of the irrational.

Permit systems are expensive because it takes knowledgeable personnel to inspect & enforce- as a result, they cost the owner a yearly fee. Perhaps those owners that go 5 years (for example) with no violations could have their yearly fees reduced for each subsequent year they remain in good standing- that would encourage compliance, & put the burden (& cost) on those with safety violations. I used to keep a number of venomous snakes (in another state where I used to reside) & while most were native rattlesnakes & not regulated there, I also ended up with a couple rescues that I needed special permits for. I didn't mind at all, proving my competence & very secure housing- & such permits were expensive & nearly impossible to come by, I might add. But they made total sense.

Our world is getting more crowded all the time- and we have to respect that too. I'm a snake-lover but I sure don't want to trip on someone's loose cobra in my back yard! I'm also a dog-lover (& dog owner, always have been- including big "dangerous" dogs) but I don't want to walk outside & be chased by someone's loose dog that's trying to bite me or my companion- it's unacceptable. We need to focus the issue (& remedies) only on those irresponsible animal owners.

[bns]

...


"but these folks want action before someone, or something gets hurt." Call me a conspiracy theorist, but this is not what I believe they want. They want power, and only power. power and control.

I think you are missing the boat.
They want safety...illusion or not. Ignorance be damned. Safety is way more important than you keeping a weird critter that is difficult to put in an easy category by the vast majority of the public.

"Dangerous animals...are being regulated, controlled and banned." In the context of this petition: no, they are not. The petition in question wishes for 3ft+ snakes to be regulated, and "equally dangerous reptiles".

Yes, they are, they included harmless critters, but the petition certainly takes care of the dangerous ones...

You like to type.

[xAnthemia]

I do certainly like to type! Reminds me of my old English GCSE days — the nostalgia.