News: 2 die in rock python attack

[treeboa]

This statement does not say only cardiac arrest so that does not rule out the snakes as the culprit here. Thus far, on this site, it has been an interesting view of confirmation bias in action. The most likely scenario at this point is the unfortunate and untimely death of the two boys by the snake due to an irresponsible keeper. If there is evidence that contradicts that then I am waiting to hear it.

Something to think about, though. Why was there no mention of other evidence of the snakes being responsible i.e. broken ribs, bruising, bite marks? If the autopsy conclusively proved the snake did it, why are the Mounties still looking into it and not already filing charges against the store owner? The store owner is probably responsible for this in some way whether it's negligence or murder. From what I've seen so far and what I know of large constrictors I'm far from convinced the snake did it. I should mention that someone on Facebook brought up another possible scenario. The ventilation was damaged. Is it possible the boys were killed by CO2? I know it does no good to speculate really, but with all the general public jumping on the bloodthirsty snake bandwagon it's hard not to get defensive.

[eatgoodfood]

The problem with this story is that the source is an employee/friend of his. There are several holes here. If the government gave him the animals, why did they not, also, give him the permits needed to keep them? If there was no place to take the animals seized back then, why are they having no trouble finding a place now that they were seized from him? Lastly, from the pictures I've seen, his shop looks pretty small. How did he ever have room to properly house all these large animals? I don't like the fact that snakes are taking an undeserved beating in all this, but if this guy was breaking the law, he deserves what he gets.

Yea, former employee, but I did not see where it said friend, maybe I missed that, anyway. I do not recall reading anywhere that he was for sure holding anything illegally, if that was the case, where are the charges against him for that? The snake in question, from what I have read, was legal, was in his care prior to the current laws and was grandfathered in, or something of the sort. The article said the croc was given to him in 2002, was it not much later, 2009 or something that the new exotics laws were in place? Or did I miss something, I might have, if so can someone please point me to it?

[treeboa]

Yea, former employee, but I did not see where it said friend, maybe I missed that, anyway. I do not recall reading anywhere that he was for sure holding anything illegally, if that was the case, where are the charges against him for that? The snake in question, from what I have read, was legal, was in his care prior to the current laws and was grandfathered in, or something of the sort. The article said the croc was given to him in 2002, was it not much later, 2009 or something that the new exotics laws were in place? Or did I miss something, I might have, if so can someone please point me to it?

Didn't say friend was just my assumption. The article that reported authorities confiscating his animals mentioned they were being confiscated because he did not have the proper permits to keep them. So obviously they were being kept illegally. I don't know about Canada, but in the US when regulations are passed they almost never grandfather in anyone. They just give you a time frame to give up your banned animal. In this case, I imagine that if they came up with a permit system they would not have grandfathered in anything.

[eatgoodfood]

Didn't say friend was just my assumption. The article that reported authorities confiscating his animals mentioned they were being confiscated because he did not have the proper permits to keep them. So obviously they were being kept illegally. I don't know about Canada, but in the US when regulations are passed they almost never grandfather in anyone. They just give you a time frame to give up your banned animal. In this case, I imagine that if they came up with a permit system they would not have grandfathered in anything.

Good point, hadn't thought about that. Which then really brings to question if the government was bringing animals, why, if it was illegal for him to have them. Or was it prior to these laws, and he just never registered them, applied for permits or whatever he was supposed to do once the new regulations were in place.

[treeboa]

Here's a link. Actually it says the animals are going to be confiscated. Apparently at one time he had permits as a zoo but wasn't eligible for them after changing his operation to a retail shop.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/dnr-set-exe...151349461.html

[eatgoodfood]

Here's a link. Actually it says the animals are going to be confiscated. Apparently at one time he had permits as a zoo but wasn't eligible for them after changing his operation to a retail shop.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/dnr-set-exe...151349461.html

OK, that article makes more sense, thanks for linking that.

[Pythonfriend]

Something to think about, though. Why was there no mention of other evidence of the snakes being responsible i.e. broken ribs, bruising, bite marks? If the autopsy conclusively proved the snake did it, why are the Mounties still looking into it and not already filing charges against the store owner? The store owner is probably responsible for this in some way whether it's negligence or murder. From what I've seen so far and what I know of large constrictors I'm far from convinced the snake did it. I should mention that someone on Facebook brought up another possible scenario. The ventilation was damaged. Is it possible the boys were killed by CO2? I know it does no good to speculate really, but with all the general public jumping on the bloodthirsty snake bandwagon it's hard not to get defensive.

The thing is, we DO NOT yet have the autopsy reports yet.

Two things leaked from the autopsy:

- Presence of bite marks consistent with the snake
- Likely cause of death, preliminary: Asphyxiation.

We do not have full autopsy reports, these two bits of information leaked early, it is likely that the full autopsy reports, when they go public, confirm this. Anything else, like bruises, strangle marks, broken bones, toxicology report, would all be covered in the full autopsy reports which we do not have yet. Only the two bits i mentioned leaked early.


Where i live our local reptile shelter is headed by a professor of veterinary medicine specialized on reptiles and teaching at a really prestigious university. And among the staff and volunteers there are no less than 4 professional veterinarians. The facility is also used to teach senior vet students and veterinarians on how to handle venomous or otherwise potentially dangerous reptiles, and some students make their PH.D. in veterinary medicine there. People volunteer to help the animals, but people also volunteer because it is an excellent place to get in-depth and up-to-date knowledge about reptiles, and reptile husbandry, and reptile handling, and reptile diseases.


one guy that used to have some licenses doesnt make a reptile sanctuary. Caring for the animals, expertise, and education, and law-enforcement should come together, then you have a good sanctuary.

[treeboa]

It's true they haven't made the report public. They may not even have it ready. They maybe waiting for toxicology reports, etc. Do you have a link to the leak about bite marks? All the reports I've seen only talk about the cause of death as asphyxiatiion.

[Willie76]

It's far easier for politicians to introduce blanket legislation in the time of a tragedy so they are seen as doing "something" about the "problem". This is purely for votes, and not because they seek to understand the issue. Instead of holding individuals accountable, they attack the object or the animal because if they look at the unbiased, real CDC statistics...20+ people are killed every year by dogs (mostly kids and the elderly), 200+ people are killed by domesticated farm animals, 80000+ people are killed in alcohol related incidents, and you're 10 times more likely to be killed by your toaster (or other small electrical appliance)...they'll see it as it truly is: a simple, horrific tragedy that is extremely rare in our hobby. Only one other person has been killed in the U.S. by an African Rock python in the last 15-20 years. Let's not forget the USFWS has even proved that constricting snakes cannot live anywhere north of Florida in their own study.

All this information is fine and dandy, but the politicians don't look at it. And with the introduction of legislation that would allow the USFWS to add ANY species to Lacey without due process, we can probably kiss our hobby goodbye as we know it. The only way we can attempt to overcome these hurdles is by action. Talking about it in these forums is great, but no one hears us. We need to take our views to our Congressional Representative and support organizations like USARK that do speak for us. Moreover, we need to educate.

So if you're wondering what you can do, head over to the USARK website and follow the steps to oppose Categorical Exclusion AND the recent push to add Boas, Reticulated Pythons, and others to Lacey. Without the sum of our individual efforts, we'll be shot down:

http://usark.org/action-alert/usfws-...l-exclusion-2/

http://usark.org/press-releases/acti...-as-injurious/

[GreyFeather]

Some more sheer idiocy:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...es-hungry.html

The best rated comments, heck the comments in general on this article (and the article itself) really bother me. Why people can't employ common sense and realise that not all snakes are big enough/of the temperament to be any real threat to people, and that NO snakes are evil monsters out to prey on people any chance they get is beyond me.

Hopefully some of you might post on this article like I did so there are at least some comments that aren't of the 'BAN ALL SNAKES IMMEDIATELY - SAVE OUR CHILDREN!!!!' variety.