OK..So What Alternatives Can WE Propose?

[grim reaper in NY]

I spoke with our Senator today via telephone for about an hour about this proposed legislation. He spent most of this week investigating everything so he had a better idea of what the bill was all about.
Here's the bottom line people. Like it or not, there have been some reptile owners who have done an incredible disservice to all of us for their poor judgement and lack of responsibility regarding the care, or lack thereof of the pets they committed themselves to own. Even today we've had another story relating how an owner abandoned several reptiles in their home as if they didn't even exist. When this happens we play right into the politicians' hands that want these pets banned.
So, while my senator agrees the law seems a bit "extreme", he posed a VERY valid question that will undoubtedly be asked when this bill is challenged next week. What do we, as current reptile owners, propose to Congress to curb the continued abuse and utter blatant neglect and abandonment of these animals? What can we do to promise these politicians that we can help curb the problems that have stemmed from the improper care and behavior of a minority of reptile owners?
It's easy for us to sit here and write e-mails, send form letters and make post after post about this bill. But what we REALLY need to do is come up with alternatives to the problems we are seeing in our hobby. It's not enough to just sit here and forward form letters and so forth without coming up with legitimate options to put an end to the problems we see on a daily basis. While it is true there is a misguided perception that our pets are dangerous and potentially lethal, it still doesn't help to continually have stories such as the one currently on MSNBC exposing the people who neglect these animals.
So, when asked by my senator what I proposed to help eliminate this problem, I brought up the possibility of applying for a permit to keep these animals. By doing so, people might think twice before making a spur-of-the-moment purchase of a snake, bearded dragon, or whatever. Yes, we would have to pay a fee, however it would be a one-time fee and we would be recorded in a database so if anything did happen and a registered owner neglected his reptile or released it illegally, it would be possible for that person to be held accountable for his irresponsibility. I also suggested "tagging" the animals so if they did show up in the wild they could be traced to their owner and they would have to answer for their actions that way.
The bottom line is, we not only need to continue to bombard our representatives to fight this proposed legislation, we need to come up with viable options so we have answers for the renegades who want to ban our pets entirely.
Just some extra food for thought people. Let's hear your ideas!!!

[mainbutter]

I think that they need to consider there are bigger problems with dogs and cats and farm animals that need to be addressed first.

[catawhat75]

Great question and one I have asked myself and other people I know.

It has always bothered me that giants/venomous are so easy to obtain for anyone. I don't think stores/breeders should sell them to just anyone who happens to have the money and walks in off the street. I think if the stores/breeders would have been more responsible in the past, we wouldn't face quite the issue we have now or need the government to decide to step in.

In fact, I have had this discussion with the owner of the local reptile shop many many times. He still maintains that he won't sell to someone who he doesn't think can care for them but I know he does. So what should we do at this point? Unless we can rewind time and make people be more responsible, I am not sure.

*really people buying should be more responsible but we know how that goes*

[PrioBull]

I agree with you but as somebody said, there is bigger problems with cats, dogs and other livestocks than just reptiles. I really think we should get some kind of permit to keep those reptiles and filter out some bad owners. It will definitely reduce the abuse and neglect. Just my 2 cents.

[grim reaper in NY]

I think that they need to consider there are bigger problems with dogs and cats and farm animals that need to be addressed first.

Nobody's going to dispute that, at least not here. BUT, it's not the cats and dogs under attack right now, it's OUR pets. Personally, and nothing against the cat or dog owners, but I couldn't care less right now about them. What I DO care about is our reptilian friends we cherish so much. It's not going to do any good to sit and point fingers at other pet owners trying to deflect blame. We need to come up with answers for OUR problem. Let the cat and dog owners worry about their issues.

[AaronP]

Let the state's handle it at their level.

[vgibbens]

Let the state's handle it at their level.

Exactly.

From what I've read, this bill isn't about animal neglect, it's about allowing non-native species being imported, sold, bred and transported in this country. That senator needs to be asking what can be done about abandoning cats and dogs, which are on the approved list. The rules on keeping possible invasive species should be left to individual states to regulate. If the states feel we need permitting, micro-chips, etc. I'm all for it, just don't tell me I can't have a BP because some schmuck let a Burmese go in Florida. I live in AZ and I'm pretty sure no ball python can live here in the wild during our summers and winters. However, I do believe there needs to be better control of sales on larger snakes such as Burmese or Retics.

[kc261]

The fact is, the time has come when it is almost a 100% guarantee that some sort of legislation will be passed affecting our hobby. So it is definitely in our best interests to be the ones that propose well thought out legislation that is based on scientific facts rather than irrational fears, that will hurt our hobby as little as possible.

However, from the sounds of your post, your senator is expecting to hold the reptile industry to a higher standard than dog and cat owners. That is ridiculously unfair, although with the bias against reptiles it may happen. And it also sounds like you may be beginning to cave in to the pressure. Permits for bearded dragons? Tagging every animal? IMHO, that is going too far.

There are also dog and cat owners who have had poor judgement and done such things as letting animals lose into the wild (both intentionally and accidentally), abandoning houses full of pets, neglecting pets, etc. When you look at the nation as a whole, dogs and cats do an incredible amount of damage to wildlife, property, and even humans.

It is important to remember when talking to people that HR 669 is not anti-reptile legislation. Yes, it will hurt our hobby a lot. But it would actually eliminate a much higher percentage of the species of tropical fish commonly kept in aquariums than it would species of reptiles. When I am talking to people about HR 669, I avoid mentioning that I own reptiles. If people ask me why I'm concerned about it, I throw the word "snakes" in a long list of animals that I own, have owned, or would like to own someday that would be all affected.

I think I'm rambling a little and getting off-point. What I would suggest is state or even local legislation that targets specific problem species in the areas where they are a problem. It is just ridiculous to outlaw burmese pythons in Alaska because they are invasive in Florida. To be honest, most of these laws are already in effect. Florida has relatively new laws, and there are laws that I understand to be very strict about importing animals into places such as Hawaii and Guam. It is a waste of the legislature's time and the tax-payer's money to put in place new laws that won't do anything more than the current laws already do. For example, if we make a nationwide law regarding burmese pythons...so what? They are only a problem in south Florida, and the people there that are willing to break the existing Florida laws probably aren't going to be deterred by a Federal law.

Also, in most cases, outright bans would not be necessary. A strictly enforced permit system should be adequate. And permits should not be the type where you just fill out a form, pay your fee, and automatically get one. It should require proof of adequate knowledge and ability to care for the species in question.

[Freakie_frog]

I don't think we have a solution to that question yet. However our industry will never find alternative answers to this if we are spending all our time and resources defending its very existence. I think there is a solution out there but I don't think we have been given the chance to find that solution.

Every industry when presented with a problem like the one we face is given the opportunity, time, funding and support of our government to keep the industry alive while seeking a solution. The auto industry causes more harm to environment in one hour than non-native wildlife has caused in 30 years and yet they are given millions in grants to find alternative fuel sources while still operating as normal, Oil tanker spills have cause more devastation to native wildlife on US coast lines that any non-native wildlife and yet they are aloud to still keep business going while trying to develop better and safer methods of transport, The U.S. Government has released dozens of non-native plant and animals species on U.S soil for the purpose of draining the Everglades, or even releasing species of non-native giant rodent with the intent of controlling species another plant species of plant that they also introduce and that continue to cause problems for native flora and fauna. More so than any species the pet industry could ever remotely be attributed to. The mortgage industry is given bailout money to help find a solution to the housing market crash they they helped cause. More people die every year in DUI accidents than any other auto related death and yet the makers of alcoholic beverages aren't held responsible for the actions of those enjoy their products, Why are we? Car makers aren't held responsible or threatened with total lose of industry due to the thousands of auto deaths every year.
I can tell you the actual damage and harm that the non-native wildlife introduce by the same government to native flora and fauna far out weighs the "Threat" of what "might" happen if us exotic keepers are aloud to continue to keep our industry alive.

When is our industry going to be given the same amount of Governmental courtesy as these far more risky industry's? These are the questions law makers need to be presented with.

[wolfy-hound]

People abandon and abuse and neglect dogs and cats all the time, and no one is proposeing that we ban dogs and cats. Why are they suggesting banning reptiles? I would have asked that, in order to see WHY people perceive that reptile owners should be punished for the actions of a extreme few.
Anyone with a brain knows that people who own burms are not driving all the way down to the everglades at the tip of florida to release their pet! It's no cooincidance that Miami is the hotbed for importing.. and hurricanes destroyed breeding facilities down in south florida.. and burms are in south florida. That's NOT the fault of PET OWNERS.
Outlawing all pets just because a handful(relatively speaking) have mistreated their pets is not a fair answer. It's the animal rights folks using it as an excuse to outlaw ALL pet ownership.