So many of you know, I am moving back to MN for a career change. Since my collection has grown, I decided to check the city's local pet ordinances and much to my dismay, it is VERY, VERY vague and open to much interpretation. "Wild Animals Prohibited...or any animal wild in nature (ferae naturae)." State law says they're fine. As a matter of fact, there are many quality breeders in MN. Unlike many State and other city's local ordinances that list exemptions, this broad statement is used. If I look in the Legal Dictionary, "ferae naturae" is defined as, "Animals that, as a matter of common knowledge, are naturally ferocious, unpredictable, dangerous, or mischievous." In contrast, domitae animals are defined as tame or domesticated.

So, with so much left to being interpreted, do captive bred, captive raised, tame snakes apply? If they do, wouldn't the ordinance then also apply to guinea pigs, hamsters, tropical fish, hermit crabs, and the like? Or would you interpret this as "truly wild animals that were removed from their natural wild habitat to be forced into being a pet. Animals such as raccoons, lions, tigers, bears, etc?" At this point, I am in the belief that my snakes, since being captive bred for the pet trade, captive hatched, captive raised, and tame that I will be in compliance of the ordinance.

Here is the ordinance as written:

Sec. 4-3. - General restrictions on livestock; wild animals prohibited.
(a) No person shall keep any horse, cattle, sheep, goat, or animal of a wild nature (ferae naturae) in the city. No person shall
permit such an animal to be kept on premises owned, occupied, or controlled by him/her except under the conditions
prescribed by this chapter.
(b) No horse, cattle, sheep or goat shall be kept in the city except within the agricultural zone.

I am not looking for legal advice (unless you're a practicing lawyer), but wanted to open this up for discussion and if you have faced similar vague ordinances...