# Your rights as a pet owner are being stripped away...



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

And there's nothing you can do about it.

I work in the reptile industry. I know there is a stigma associated with it but please, for the purpose of this conversation try to keep your fears and assumptions at bay and please read what I have to say. 

I want to bring up a topic that affects each and every one of you. Whether or not you like reptiles, whether or not you even own any pets at all. 

Your government (with quite a bit of encouragement and millions in funding from the horrible people at The Humane Society of The United States) has started turning responsible, caring pet owners into felons. After years of fighting, thousands of letters and protests from desperate pet owners and thousands of dollars spent fighting them, they have gained a foothold in an underhanded and dishonest way. They are making laws based on bogus science and flat out lies. Fear being perpetuated by the media and the HSUS only fuels the fire.

What they are trying to do will cost thousands of jobs and cause thousands of businesses, both large and small to close their doors forever. The worst part is that the lawmakers have been met with so much resistance from the reptile community that they have found a way to put laws into effect without due process, valid science or good reason. They found a loophole that allows them to circumvent congress and with the flick of a pen they are destroying a flourishing American industry. They are taking away our pets, our rights and our voices and this is NOT OK.

What happened?

Originally they wanted to ban 9 species of snakes. Besides being kept as pets by people who adore them, many of these snakes in captivity have rare genetic color and pattern mutations that many people have been working very hard on cultivating and combining over the past several decades. Mostly ball pythons and reticulated pythons. Quite a few of these animals are extremely valuable with individual animals fetching tens of thousands of dollars each on a regular basis. 

On January 17, 2012, the Department of the Interior announced a nationwide, federal ban on 4 species of snakes. The ban prohibits importation and interstate transport of these snakes including the Burmese python. Off the top of my head, the most expensive Burmese python that's been sold was a leucistic animal that sold for $150,000. Yup, you heard me. That was for a single animal. That's what it sold for, not a value that was placed on it. Can you see why some people might be upset about this law?

With this law in place it would be impossible for a snake owner to move out of state and keep their pets unless they want to smuggle it which would be a federal offense and they could end up in prison. It would be impossible for a hobbyist or breeder to acquire potentially valuable genetic mutations for their breeding program if that involves importing it or getting it out of state. The majority of sales of these snake requires them to be shipped cross country or exported to other countries which often involves traveling out of state to an international airport. This law will cripple this industry. 

The logic behind the ban was to help prevent any further damage to the Florida Everglades which has an existing population of these pythons because the climate is favorable for these animals and they are able to reproduce there. They did this despite the fact that Florida already has laws in place controlling the ownership of these animals entirely. The problem is that this will do absolutely nothing to reduce the population in the Everglades. Making it a felony to bring one into Alaska hardly solves the problem in Florida.

These animals were slipped onto the Lacey Act. This Act is in place to prevent the transport of illegally collected game. The reason that they banned only 4 of the 9 snakes proposed originally is because there is a loophole, as long as the economic damage that doing this will cause falls under a certain amount of money they can add these animals to the list without having it voted on in congress. They will now be able to slip the others onto the list one by one until they have achieved their goal. This is not democracy. This is not fair. This is a misuse of the Lacey Act.

The worst part of all of this is that the bastards at the HSUS and PETA are taking in massive donations. Billions of dollars from animal lovers with good intentions and none of it goes to helping animals in need, despite the persuasive imagery in their commercials, I assure you, the money donated goes into the pockets of politicians who are trying to do something spectacular to get “put on the map” and to funding legislation like this.

Why?

These people are extremists. They are terrorists. Their mission is to abolish animal ownership. ALL ANIMALS. They start with the easy ones that most people don’t like or are afraid of - like these snakes - but once they have conquered the reptile industry they will move on to horses, cows, chickens, aquarium fish, birds, rats, hamsters, even cats and dogs. You name it. Pit bulls are already on the chopping block as it is. They will not stop until ALL DOMESTIC ANIMALS ARE EXTINCT. They don't want you to have pets. They fight for animal rights, not animal welfare. There's a difference. A BIG difference. They don't think there should be any animals in captivity. Period.

If you value your rights and your freedom as an American you should be OUTRAGED. If you want to have animals in your life, in your children's and grandchildren's lives you should be HORRIFIED. 

So now what?

USARK, The United States Association of Reptile Keepers, is currently formulating a plan. A federal lawsuit is a likely possibility in the very near future. But everyone that is aware of this injustice needs to speak up! This is a grassroots campaign to preserve our rights! We are a small community and we need help! Even if you loathe snakes, even if you think they are gross and slimy and dangerous please agree that it's not ok for the government to dictate what we can and can not do, to take away our rights without just cause or due process! Just because you don't want to keep these animals yourself doesn't mean it should be illegal! Look at the FACTS! Horses and dogs are responsible for way more human deaths and injuries than pet snakes. Cats are way more destructive to the ecosystem than snakes could ever be, and believe me, they will be using that as ammunition in the foreseeable future. Please don't turn your back on this because you don't like snakes, that what these people are counting on! Turning a blind eye to this kind of behavior is nothing more than prejudice. Open your eyes, look at the facts! Please help us keep our pets and our jobs!

What can you do?

Currently there is a petition on the white house website. Please sign it and urge everyone you know to do the same. https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petition/overturn-python-ban/4wGFbc4Y 

Spread the word, the more people that know whats going on the better! 
Watch these videos and SHARE them!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oss_2ToN6_0&feature=player_embedded (I'm in this one  wee! )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CKXA3N5GAQ 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrTPiQUftSg&feature=related 

Join or make a donation to USARK.org or PIJAC.org. http://usark.org/donate.php https://www.pijac.org/membership/forms/index.asp 

Don't wait until it's too late and the government wants to take away something that’s important to you. We need to nip this in the bud! There is strength in numbers. We are David and they are Goliath. Every single penny and signature helps and is greatly appreciated!

And please, whatever you do, don't donate a penny to the HSUS or PETA! If you would like more information about them visit http://humanewatch.org/


----------



## Jim Engel (Nov 14, 2007)

I am not saying who is right and who is wrong, but my
understanding is the pythons which have been set lose
in the Everglades are a very serious problem.

Introducing rabbits into Australia, Asian carp into the 
Mississippi basin, lampreys and muscles into the great
lakes have had serious economic and ecological impact.

Dutch Elm disease, the Chestnut blight, the list goes on.

Government has the obligation to protect our common
assets and natural resources from the introduction of
deleterious foreign species.


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

I don't deny that there is an issue in the Everglades, due to the tropical climate, there is an outrageous number of non-native animals that have taken root there, the most problematic? The domestic cat (not including the destruction caused by human encroachment).

The issue with this law, beside the fact that the people responsible should be put in prison for the way it was handled, is that it does absolutely, positively nothing to help solve that problem. Zero. *And Florida already has state laws in place regarding the ownership of these animals.* That makes sense. Placing a nationwide ban is unwarranted and ridiculous. These animals *can not* survive in the majority of the United States.

If someone could explain to me how making it a felony to bring a pet python from Wisconsin to Minnesota could possibly help solve the problem with non-native species reproducing in the Everglades, I'm all ears.


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

That last link apparently got messed up... oops :lol:

It's http://humanewatch.org/


----------



## Jim Engel (Nov 14, 2007)

There are no borders or check points between Minnesota and Florida,
allowing imports to any part of the United States is allowing imports to
all of the United States.


----------



## Jessica Kromer (Nov 12, 2009)

ummm... I don't think that she is talking about imports, but multiple generations of domestically born and raised animals. Like not being able to sell a GSD born in IL to NY, or even being able to take your own pet with you when you move.


----------



## Steve Estrada (Mar 6, 2011)

I think I have to agree with Jim & when younger I had all kinds of snakes. 16ft Burmese that lived in the house roamed freely, to give you a time frame his name was Guido Sarducci. Finding a solution is a better way to go, common ground. I know those jerks are about money not animals. It's a tough call & I'm an animal guy even had raptors, they are now regulated. More gov't it's overwhelming in many areas. jMHO


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

*I would like to clarify again that Florida already has state laws concerning these animals*



> Florida Governor Charlie Crist signed Senate Bill 318, effectively banning the keeping of reptiles of concern in Florida. The new regulations go into effect July 1, 2010, and affect the* keeping, breeding, selling and importation of the following species:*
> 
> Burmese or Indian python (Python molurus)
> Reticulated python (Python reticulatus)
> ...


The point here is that Florida's problems should stay in Florida. They already know that the majority of the population of these snakes in the Everglades came from a breeding facility that was wiped out by hurricane Andrew years ago because Florida was too lax about their laws back then.
Again, this is not a federal concern.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

re: "Quite a few of these animals are extremely valuable with individual animals fetching tens of thousands of dollars each on a regular basis." 
- is that the reason for breeding them ? i sure hope not !!

re: "animal that sold for $150,000. Yup, you heard me. That was for a single animal. That's what it sold for, not a value that was placed on it. Can you see why some people might be upset about this law?"
- for sure, and it looks like you just answered my question :-( ...... as in kachiiiing :-(((((

re: "This law will cripple this industry."
- than that sounds like a good law to me ! 

re "Making it a felony to bring one into Alaska hardly solves the problem in Florida."
- correct, but it might help Alaska ! granted, the everglades might be a lost cause, but that doesn't mean it's right to try and prevent the same disaster from happening somewhere else

re : "This is a misuse of the Lacey Act."
- maybe it is ... send me a copy and i'll read it and decide for myself

re "These people are extremists. They are terrorists."
- really ?? i thought they were people who wanted to kill innocents to get media attention to further their cause

re "Quite a few of these animals are extremely valuable with individual animals fetching tens of thousands of dollars each on a regular basis."
- you are repeating yourself again, and i still feel the same way ... if you are breeding to make a more expensive snake to build an industry to line your pockets with, i wish it was venomous and get a chance nail you !!

re: " Horses and dogs are responsible for way more human deaths and injuries than pet snakes."
- maybe true, but you forgot to mention the biggest killer of humans .... other people 
.....glad we made it illegal to own em 

re: "Cats are way more destructive to the ecosystem than snakes could ever be"
- sure about that ? based on what comparative study ? (go visit Guam for starters)

anyway.....will never be able to legislate responsible pet ownership or the right to own a pet...but i think this thread has little to do with that


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Steve Estrada said:


> I think I have to agree with Jim & when younger I had all kinds of snakes. 16ft Burmese that lived in the house roamed freely, to give you a time frame his name was Guido Sarducci. Finding a solution is a better way to go, common ground. I know those jerks are about money not animals. It's a tough call & I'm an animal guy even had raptors, they are now regulated. More gov't it's overwhelming in many areas. jMHO


16? big girl... I had a 14 footer, had his own room...eventually donated her to a "zoo" of sorts...

I will admit when I was into snakes, many of mine were illegal to own where I lived..

It was illegal to own any "python"....lameass ball python or otherwise.

It was legal to own a constrictors, and boas, UNDER 6 feet...

for a long time I had largish pythons, a retic, and burmeses.. and balls as well.

also had a boa constrictor I got when I was 8 yrs old, and was about over 10 feet when I sold her...and a nice female green anaconda...

I did not have a Herp. permit, for most of the ownership period, but did get one eventually...

To have a law that says you can own a constrictor, but only under 6 ft, is really counterproductive to the problem I think..what do they expect you to do with it once it outgrows the legal limit..

Hell I even had a black rat snake that was illegal, she was over 6 ft...

not really into it anymore...so not sure how I feel about it, but looking back, my ownership of most of the snakes was illegal until I got my permit.

does this regulation apply to people that have permits as well? is it not still possible for a person who has the proper licenses/permits to ship a snake to another state to a person who also has the herp/zoological licenses/permits?

If a person is moving, can they still not get the paperwork in order at the destination and move the animals?

I guess what I am asking is this, is it flat out illegal, or just more hoops to jump through?


----------



## Brian Anderson (Dec 2, 2010)

Pet owners rights are the least of my concern with the current gov. in the USA...politicians always take the path of least resistence and most reward. Instead of holding people accountable for their actions its easier to "ban" this or "ban" that...incrementalism is a dangerous thing.


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

Ok, Troll... Just for fun...




rick smith said:


> re: "Quite a few of these animals are extremely valuable with individual animals fetching tens of thousands of dollars each on a regular basis."
> - is that the reason for breeding them ? i sure hope not !!
> 
> re: "animal that sold for $150,000. Yup, you heard me. That was for a single animal. That's what it sold for, not a value that was placed on it. Can you see why some people might be upset about this law?"
> - for sure, and it looks like you just answered my question :-( ...... as in kachiiiing :-(((((


The reason I say this is because this law will have a negative impact on the economy. Most people don't realize that. Beside the fact that so many people will have their pets taken away, many more will have their livelihoods taken away as well. Lots of people have taken out second mortgages on their houses to buy investment quality animals. What happens to those people? This is something the government needs to take into consideration before throwing laws around. "Boo-hoo, the meany-face government is being mean to me and I'm sad" doesn't seem to have as much of an impact on their decision making process or the opinion of the general public.
Its frustrating to try to defend keeping reptiles. People say that they aren't like dogs or cats, you can't take them for a walk, etc etc. But those same people can at least see the value in dollar bills.



> re: "This law will cripple this industry."
> - than that sounds like a good law to me !


You are ignorant and I don't know why I'm bothering to respond to this.



> re "Making it a felony to bring one into Alaska hardly solves the problem in Florida."
> - correct, but it might help Alaska ! granted, the everglades might be a lost cause, but that doesn't mean it's right to try and prevent the same disaster from happening somewhere else


Again, you are ignorant. Amazingly ignorant. If i were to release one of these animals in alaska in mid summer it would be dead in a day. These are tropical animals that need to be kept in tropical conditions.




> re "Quite a few of these animals are extremely valuable with individual animals fetching tens of thousands of dollars each on a regular basis."
> - you are repeating yourself again, and i still feel the same way ... if you are breeding to make a more expensive snake to build an industry to line your pockets with,* i wish it was venomous and get a chance nail you !!*


Did you really just say that?




> re: "Cats are way more destructive to the ecosystem than snakes could ever be"
> - sure about that ? based on what comparative study ? (go visit Guam for starters)


Yes, I am sure about that.



> anyway.....will never be able to legislate responsible pet ownership or the right to own a pet...but i think this thread has little to do with that


I'm not sure what this says. But just to be clear, they are taking away people's right to own pets.


----------



## Tyree Johnson (Jun 21, 2010)

Joby Becker said:


> ...lameass ball python.


Lame? no way ....

if more ball people would pay attention and not have the "well i don't keep those snakes" and voted, maybe this would be different ....


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Joby Becker said:


> does this regulation apply to people that have permits as well? is it not still possible for a person who has the proper licenses/permits to ship a snake to another state to a person who also has the herp/zoological licenses/permits?
> 
> If a person is moving, can they still not get the paperwork in order at the destination and move the animals?
> 
> I guess what I am asking is this, is it flat out illegal, or just more hoops to jump through?


Good questions. Look forward to reading the response.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Tyree Johnson said:


> Lame? no way ....
> 
> if more ball people would pay attention and not have the "well i don't keep those snakes" and voted, maybe this would be different ....


just a preference 

I have owned a few of them, and have friends currently that do..

I just like a larger, more powerful, more active and aggressive (eater) type animal..as opposed to a paperweight or table centerpiece  (kidding, sort of ) LOL....

best trade i made was 2 balls, for a beautiful 9 ft albino burmese female. dude said the burmese was too aggressive for him..I got bit once, but I never had any major issues with her.....


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

Joby Becker said:


> does this regulation apply to people that have permits as well? is it not still possible for a person who has the proper licenses/permits to ship a snake to another state to a person who also has the herp/zoological licenses/permits?
> 
> If a person is moving, can they still not get the paperwork in order at the destination and move the animals?
> 
> I guess what I am asking is this, is it flat out illegal, or just more hoops to jump through?


The permits you are talking about are for state or local regulations. 
For example, I'm in NH. They banned alligators here unless you have a permit. If I had one illegally, I would get a slap on the wrist, a fine and they may take my animal. Same with a cobra or rattlesnake.

Under this new law, If I am caught "smuggling" a Burmese python across state lines it would be a FEDERAL OFFENSE, as in I would be a felon for the rest of my life, I could go to jail for 10 years and pay a $10,000 fine.

I don't think there will be any permits. The Lacey Act was designed to make it illegal to smuggle poached game across state borders, they just added these snake to that list because it was quick and easy. No senators to vote on it, no chance of having the law not go through. This is a horrible misuse of this law.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

susan tuck said:


> Good questions. Look forward to reading the response.


not that I agree with hoops either, mind you..just tryin to get the facts..

it is illegal to own piranha here...but you can get a permit..


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Also you stated that HSUS was behind this but the articles I have read attribute South Florida Water Management District as the agency who petitioned the federal government for greater restrictions.


----------



## Gerald Dunn (Sep 24, 2011)

and just try an take a hang gun with you form Kentucky to New York city, your screwed


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

susan tuck said:


> Also you stated that HSUS was behind this but the articles I have read attribute South Florida Water Management District as the agency who petitioned the federal government for greater restrictions.


http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...rd-despite-questionable-science-78949462.html

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2811/money

This article makes me want to vomit...
http://www.humanesociety.org/news/press_releases/2012/01/the_hsus_recognizes_a_step_1172012.html


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

An unrelated article (sort of)
http://humanewatch.org/index.php/site/comments/here_come_the_guppy_police/



> But HSUS hasn’t been totally silent on the issue of prohibiting people from purchasing the pets of their choice.
> 
> HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle was actually lukewarm to last year’s proposal, but not because he thought banning pet sales was a bad idea. As Pacelle told the Los Angeles Times, he understands that an incremental approach might be more practical than a broad move:
> 
> ...





> Pacelle told the Sacramento Bee this month that HSUS’s role is distinct from PETA’s in that HSUS uses a “different tactical approach.” Specifically, as he put it, “PETA tries to be provocative and influence the culture, while we deliberately try to be mainstream in view, but not in action.”
> 
> We agree with Pacelle’s words — probably because we’re reading between the lines. As New Yorker writer Michael Specter put it in his profile of PETA co-founder Ingrid Newkirk:
> 
> ...


----------



## Tyree Johnson (Jun 21, 2010)

Gerald Dunn said:


> and just try an take a hang gun with you form Kentucky to New York city, your screwed



http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/pistol_whipped_at_wtc_1x32hgT52UNhxkP36ZYAgJ


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Tammy it's a difficult subject for me, because I don't think it's a good idea in general for private citizens to be able to own wildlife. There's "no room at the inn" anymore when it comes to predators and primates, the "sanctuaries" (and I use that term loosely because more often than not, it's still a pretty piss pour warehoused life) are full, there's no where for them to go when their owners finally figure out they aren't able to keep them properly, and no life at all for those owned by so many who think it's so cool to keep a wild animal. So I can't help but think the same is probably true of many of those who keep certain reptile species as evidenced by how many seem to end up irresponsibly dumped by their owners when they are no longer manageable.


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

susan tuck said:


> Tammy it's a difficult subject for me, because I don't think it's a good idea in general for private citizens to be able to own wildlife. There's "no room at the inn" anymore when it comes to predators and primates, the "sanctuaries" (and I use that term loosely because more often than not, it's still a pretty piss pour warehoused life) are full, there's no where for them to go when their owners finally figure out they aren't able to keep them properly, and no life at all for those owned by so many who think it's so cool to keep a wild animal. So I can't help but think the same is probably true of many of those who keep certain reptile species as evidenced by how many seem to end up irresponsibly dumped by their owners when they are no longer manageable.


I agree that large constrictors are certainly not the pet for everyone. No doubt about that. But the same could be said about just about everything. How many dogs and cats end up in shelters and euthanized? How many horses are sent to auctions for slaughter or left to starve? Irresponsible ownership and dumping is not a problem unique to reptiles or exotics. 

Should they ban dogs, cats and horses? Well, I believe that is the ultimate goal of the special interest groups, they are just starting with the easy ones- the big, bad man-eating monster snakes. The ones most people can't relate to and are afraid of.

As far as them being difficult to manage, when it comes to responsible, educated owners, I have to disagree. As a dog owner, a horse owner and a large snake owner I can tell you that the risk of serious injury is far greater with a horse. Horses and dogs are way more expensive to feed, demand a significant amount of space and time. Snakes? Feed them once a week, even every other week, once every three weeks is even acceptable. they don't make noise. Even a 20' snake is not very demanding in terms of space or time. Ask anyone who has owned these animals. Whats easier to take care of? A Burmese python or a malinois...

What it boils down to is that this ban will do nothing to solve the problem they created it for. Issues like the one you just mentioned will be magnified. When people don't have anywhere to bring their snakes and they can't ship them, what do they do if they can't keep them? Kill them? Bringing them with you if you move is a felony. How does that make sense? If the welfare of these animals is the concern, this ban does absolutely nothing to promote responsible ownership and will, in fact, turn responsible owners who don't want to dump their animals into criminals.

Another thing that needs to really be considered is that this law went into effect behind closed doors with no due process and no valid facts to back it up. After it was thrown out of congress they just decided to go about it a different way by breaking it up into bite sized chunks. Lawmakers should not be permitted to do this. take the snakes out of the equation for a minute and just examine the facts.

The ultimate question is very simple- Should responsible snake owners go to prison for bringing their pets with them across state lines? Yes or no?


----------



## maggie fraser (May 30, 2008)

It's all sounding a bot ott at this end. Snakes are not a domesticated species like horses, cats and dogs.

I actually used to own a royal python many years ago, (as well as owning horses, dogs, and cats)....there is no comparison,,, I got rid of the snake....just seemed so wrong to keep one as a _pet_ or curio.


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

maggie fraser said:


> I got rid of the snake....just seemed so wrong to keep one as a _pet_ or curio.


To each his own. 
I happen to enjoy keeping snakes. I think my snakes are perfectly happy, healthy and content.
I think it seems wrong to keep a horse locked up in a stall. That's why my horse has the ability to come and go 24/7, but I respect the right of other horse owners to keep their horses as they see fit.
Many people think it's wrong to put a dog in a crate. 
Again, to each his own.... That is until the government decides to step in.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Tammy I'm sorry but your argument does not hold water with me. Horses, dogs, cats are domesticated animals, and therefore the situation is completely different, in my opinion. The AVERAGE person is in no way prepared to meet the basic needs of most exotics, including snakes.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

It is good to post the petition, and to get the information out there, dont get me wrong here...

I can see your outrage in this scenario, but I would say you are barking up the wrong tree, on going tit for tat about it...most people on here already despise the HSUS. I am one..

I would also bet that most people on here think our government is a mess, and that they pass laws that dont make sense, laws that have unintended consequences, and ones that could be abused by selective prosecution. 

I am just saying your efforts will most likely be better spent spreading the word more, to get more people that are interested, to take up your cause, than to go round and round with people that are not interested..that is all...


----------



## maggie fraser (May 30, 2008)

Tammy Cohen said:


> To each his own.
> I happen to enjoy keeping snakes. I think my snakes are perfectly happy, healthy and content.
> I think it seems wrong to keep a horse locked up in a stall. That's why my horse has the ability to come and go 24/7, but I respect the right of other horse owners to keep their horses as they see fit.
> Many people think it's wrong to put a dog in a crate.
> Again, to each his own.... That is until the government decides to step in.


I think it's wrong to keep a horse locked up in a stall,,,,,never did it myself.
I think it's wrong to keep a dog in a crate,,,,,never did it myself.
I think it wrong to keep a snake locked up in a tank,,,,,,did it for a wee while.

Take the Q...


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

susan tuck said:


> Tammy I'm sorry but your argument does not hold water with me. Horses, dogs, cats are domesticated animals, and therefore the situation is completely different, in my opinion. The AVERAGE person is in no way prepared to meet the basic needs of most exotics, including snakes.


I didn't say they were. I said they aren't for everyone. I was agreeing with you.

I was just mentioning that it's not hard to meet the basic requirements of a pet snake in general, they are very low maintenance as far as animals go. The building I work in is home to literally thousands and thousands of snakes. It's a topic I happen to have quite a bit of experience with. They are not for everyone, but it isn't difficult to care for them properly either.

But either way, when it comes to neglect and abuse, trust me "domestics" aren't safe from falling victim to irresponsible, uncaring owners.


----------



## maggie fraser (May 30, 2008)

Tammy Cohen said:


> I didn't say they were. I said they aren't for everyone. I was agreeing with you.
> 
> I was just mentioning that it's not hard to meet the basic requirements of a pet snake in general, they are very low maintenance as far as animals go. The building I work in is home to literally thousands and thousands of snakes. It's a topic I happen to have quite a bit of experience with. They are not for everyone, but it isn't difficult to care for them properly either.
> 
> But either way, when it comes to neglect and abuse, trust me "domestics" aren't safe from falling victim to irresponsible, uncaring owners.


Wtf is caring for them properly Tammy if they are so low maintenance ? Snakes don't belong in buildings !


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

we got a hamster, an iguana, and a tree frog currently. plus the 2 dogs..

keeping a snake is about the same to me as having any kind of small animal..no more no less..

like a rabbit, a gerbil, a rat, a turtle, a bird, a fish, a ferret....whatever...


----------



## maggie fraser (May 30, 2008)

Joby Becker said:


> we got a hamster, an iguana, and a tree frog currently. plus the 2 dogs..
> 
> keeping a snake is about the same to me as having any kind of small animal..no more no less..
> 
> like a rabbit, a gerbil, a rat, a turtle, a bird, a fish, a ferret....whatever...


Are you arguing Tammy's case....or just arguing !


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

maggie fraser said:


> Wtf is caring for them properly Tammy if they are so low maintenance ? Snakes don't belong in buildings !


Low maintenance, when compared to other pets= they eat infrequently, they poop infrequently and they don't particularly care if you take them out on walks, in fact, they would probably prefer that you didn't. They don't need baths, you don't have to comb them or brush their teeth or cut their nails. You can't train them to do tricks. They don't shed on the furniture, they don't require vaccinations, they don't bark and disturb your neighbors... should I continue?


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

maggie fraser said:


> Are you arguing Tammy's case....or just arguing !


neither...just talking pets..the way these snakes are bred and kept, they are hardly wild animals in my mind, they are just like having a lop-earred rabbit as a pet...

on a side note Mags, Pete says hi! forgot to tell ya..


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

At least Betty White likes snakes...


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

one more thing Tammy..

you start off the thread by saying:

*Your rights as a pet owner are being stripped away...*

and follow it immediately with:

*And there's nothing you can do about it.*

this statement almost leads a person to believe that effort to resist is futile...

food for thought...


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Tammy Cohen said:


> At least Betty White likes snakes...


HAHA...dont get distracted from your mission, you are certainly not going to get people that DONT like snakes, to like them...


----------



## Tanya Beka (Aug 12, 2008)

Tammy Cohen said:


> Ok, Troll... Just for fun...
> 
> 
> 
> The reason I say this is because this law will have a negative impact on the economy. Most people don't realize that. Beside the fact that so many people will have their pets taken away, many more will have their livelihoods taken away as well. Lots of people have taken out second mortgages on their houses to buy investment quality animals. What happens to those people? This is something the government needs to take into consideration before throwing laws around. Its frustrating to try to defend keeping reptiles. People say that they aren't like dogs or cats, you can't take them for a walk, etc etc. But those same people can at least see the value in dollar bills.


I don't think anyone should make a living of breeding and selling any kind of animal for pure profit. That is wrong on so many levels. Animals are not "products" like cars and should not be part of a marketing system.

Breeding dogs for certain purposes, for the good of the breed, for working or pet homes, when done properly is fine. But just like a puppy mill or back yard dog breeder who is in it for the money and pumps out dozens or hundreds of animals a year, it doesn't matter if it is a reptile, dog, cat, horse or whatever. It is wrong. All of it needs to stop. 

If Joe Blow if breeding rare reptiles that fetch thousands of dollars and he is using that as a living, but is not taking responsibility for any of those reptiles for the rest of their lives, then he shouldn't do it. Hence all our animal shelters full of chihuahuas (fad bred for $), pitbulls (fad bred for $), now the numbers of homeless reptiles is just as high. It's not right. I agree with lots of this legislation/new animals laws. I think it needs to be done at a breeder level to weed out the idiots who make a living on selling live animals but don't take responsibility for them. I don't think banning is right in the long run, but something has to start somewhere....


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Tanya Beka said:


> I don't think anyone should make a living of breeding and selling any kind of animal for pure profit. That is wrong on so many levels. Animals are not "products" like cars and should not be part of a marketing system.
> 
> Breeding dogs for certain purposes, for the good of the breed, for working or pet homes, when done properly is fine. But just like a puppy mill or back yard dog breeder who is in it for the money and pumps out dozens or hundreds of animals a year, it doesn't matter if it is a reptile, dog, cat, horse or whatever. It is wrong. All of it needs to stop.
> 
> If Joe Blow if breeding rare reptiles that fetch thousands of dollars and he is using that as a living, but is not taking responsibility for any of those reptiles for the rest of their lives, then he shouldn't do it. Hence all our animal shelters full of chihuahuas (fad bred for $), pitbulls (fad bred for $), now the numbers of homeless reptiles is just as high. It's not right. I agree with lots of this legislation/new animals laws. I think it needs to be done at a breeder level to weed out the idiots who make a living on selling live animals but don't take responsibility for them. I don't think banning is right in the long run, but something has to start somewhere....


animals including dogs are property..in the eyes of the law

who takes repsonsibility for animals that are being sold to someone else, for the rest of their lives?
all of it needs to stop? how would you go about stopping it?


----------



## maggie fraser (May 30, 2008)

Tammy Cohen said:


> Low maintenance, when compared to other pets= they eat infrequently, they poop infrequently and they don't particularly care if you take them out on walks, in fact, they would probably prefer that you didn't. They don't need baths, you don't have to comb them or brush their teeth or cut their nails. You can't train them to do tricks. They don't shed on the furniture, they don't require vaccinations, they don't bark and disturb your neighbors... should I continue?


Are you on drugs ?


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

maggie fraser said:


> Are you on drugs ?


No, are you?


----------



## maggie fraser (May 30, 2008)

Tammy Cohen said:


> No, are you?


No, but I wish I was reading this crap. How about you ?


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

maggie fraser said:


> No, but I wish I was reading this crap. How about you ?


I suppose I could go for a glass of wine right about now.


----------



## maggie fraser (May 30, 2008)

Tammy Cohen said:


> I suppose I could go for a glass of wine right about now.


That's the spirit, have a few :grin:, you'll feel better in the morning!


----------



## Christopher Jones (Feb 17, 2009)

Here in Australia we are free to keep reptiles so long as they are local Australian varieties. We cant have "exotics" which means from other countries. We cant have the risk of introducing another species of animals wich would destory our native species. The cane toad is a good example of this here.
But yes, snakes are easy to keep compared with dogs or cats. I have about 12 myself. 
And dont listen to Maggie, she has a track record of taking big quanties of codiene and alcohol before she posts on this forum. She once famously claimed that the Proclaimers were a geat band.......


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

You know what's funny, Tammy? I now see your point exactly but not from what you said - from what some of those with opposing views have said! 

I have no problem with dogs being kenneled or crated, my dogs are kenneled in outdoor runs except when they are in the house, as a matter of fact I have pups in crates indoors right now!! I have no problem with someone breeding animals for money, I don't think it's immoral, and I sure as hell don't think the person who breeds is responsible for that animal for the rest of it's life - when I buy a dog it's mine, I own it, not the breeder. If I want to kennel or crate it I will, if I want to breed it to make money I will, and once I sell a pup it becomes 100% the responsibility of the new owner - not mine. 

So where does it end? Next thing you know someone will try and tell me I can't kennel my dogs or breed them because they dont' think my motives are "pure" enough?????? **** that shit, where's your petition I want to sign that puppy on the dotted line right now.


----------



## Isaiah Chestnut (Nov 9, 2009)

susan tuck said:


> You know what's funny, Tammy? I now see your point exactly but not from what you said - from what some of those with opposing views have said!
> 
> I have no problem with dogs being kenneled or crated, my dogs are kenneled in outdoor runs except when they are in the house, as a matter of fact I have pups in crates indoors right now!! I have no problem with someone breeding animals for money, I don't think it's immoral, and I sure as hell don't think the person who breeds is responsible for that animal for the rest of it's life - when I buy a dog it's mine, I own it, not the breeder. If I want to kennel or crate it I will, if I want to breed it to make money I will, and once I sell a pup it becomes 100% the responsibility of the new owner - not mine.
> 
> So where does it end? Next thing you know someone will try and tell me I can't kennel my dogs or breed them because they dont' think my motives are "pure" enough?????? **** that shit, where's your petition I want to sign that puppy on the dotted line right now.


 
Amen to that Susan!


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

No offense to those with opposing views, but I have to figure if I don't think it's right for others to tell me how to raise and keep my dogs, I can't very well go around telling others how to keep their animals. That would be hypocritical.

I guess all I can do is say I myself wouldn't keep exotics and leave it at that.
:smile:


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

susan tuck said:


> So where does it end? Next thing you know someone will try and tell me I can't kennel my dogs or breed them because they dont' think my motives are "pure" enough?????? **** that shit, where's your petition I want to sign that puppy on the dotted line right now.


That's just the thing. It won't end here. There's all kinds of animal related legislation flying around all the time. Some of it makes sense, some of it doesn't. Everyone who wants to maintain their rights needs to speak up. They want to divide and conquer. People are turning their backs because this python ban doesn't affect them, or they don't own a pit bull, or they don't keep birds etc. But one day this kind of unfair, intrusive lawmaking WILL affect you. That's why the animal owning public needs to stick together and squash all of it. There is power in numbers.
Here's a list of animal related legislation that's going on all across the country right now.
http://www.pijac.org/petinformation/breakingnews.asp


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

As I mentioned on my Facebook like two days ago, I had a call on Thursday asking for vet advice for their alligator because it wasn't eating. "Someone" had told them to keep the alligator at 65 F and feed it only goldfish and chicken breast. I asked them what their previous reptile experience was before obtaining the alligator. The gal who called said her boyfriend previously owned a snake (didn't specify which kind) and she owned a gecko. So that obviously qualified these people to own a large and dangerous reptile. :roll: These people don't have the good sense to realize 65 F is too cold for a native Florida species and only goldfish and boneless white meat chicken is completely inappropriate. There seems to be an inverse relationship in IQ and desiring these species. 

And I say this having a pretty good amount of reptile experience myself (I current own a jungle carpet python and bearded dragon and I used to own a Brazilian rainbow boa and anerythristic boa constrictor imperator). I don't have a good answer to how to prevent the release of the burms or green iguanas into Florida while still respecting those herp keepers that are responsible.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I was never into the exotics but always had snakes. I just preferred the natives and always caught my own. Mostly kings, Rat snakes and Milk snakes.
I hatched out a batch of Prairie Kings and we kept one for 16 yrs when my girls were growing up.


----------



## Christopher Jones (Feb 17, 2009)

Bob Scott said:


> I was never into the exotics but always had snakes. I just preferred the natives and always caught my own. Mostly kings, Rat snakes and Milk snakes.
> I hatched out a batch of Prairie Kings and we kept one for 16 yrs when my girls were growing up.


 So as far as native non ven snakes, what can you keep over there?


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Christopher Jones said:


> So as far as native non ven snakes, what can you keep over there?



In Missouri, actually none without a permit but I've never seen or heard of anyone getting in trouble for it. 
It's been a few yrs since I've had any and things may have changed because of all the snake publicity in Florida. 
There was one fella near that killed a "copperhead" in his yard then called the Conservation Dept. Turned out he killed an Eastern Milk snake (one of the prettiest IMO). How the hell they could be confused for a Copperhead is beyond me. He got fined pretty heavily I believe.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Bob Scott said:


> In Missouri, actually none without a permit but I've never seen or heard of anyone getting in trouble for it.
> It's been a few yrs since I've had any and things may have changed because of all the snake publicity in Florida.
> There was one fella near that killed a "copperhead" in his yard then called the Conservation Dept. Turned out he killed an Eastern Milk snake (one of the prettiest IMO). How the hell they could be confused for a Copperhead is beyond me. He got fined pretty heavily I believe.


I rescued and relocated an entire breeding nest of fox snakes, that was under a large propane tank pad at a truckstop...

the truckers were killing them, thought they were rattlesnakes..The owner of the place was going to have them exterminated, and did fill in the holes with concrete...the whole place is leveled now for a frontage road..

thing about Fox snakes is they go back to the same place every season to hatch their eggs...for generations and generations....hopefully they found somewhere else...


----------



## Tanya Beka (Aug 12, 2008)

Joby Becker said:


> animals including dogs are property..in the eyes of the law
> 
> who takes repsonsibility for animals that are being sold to someone else, for the rest of their lives?
> all of it needs to stop? how would you go about stopping it?



A good breeder will take back a dog that they have sold for whatever reason because they have a responsibility to the breed they love and the dogs they have bred. Yes, most pets are considered property according to the law, but here are also anti-cruelty laws for said "property" and we don't have that on our cars and lawnmowers, so obviously pets are in a different category. 

We need to change how we categorize pets/livestock so that they aren't just property anymore - they certainly don't need rights like humans, but they aren't objects and we as humans need to recognize that. Once we change the category of laws that applies to pets/livestock, then we can start to regulate the industry and stop the breeding for cash that goes on. I know a breeder who breeds hundreds of dogs per month in "rare" colors that sell for upwards of $20,000. They don't do health testing, they just breed what sells and that's it. So some unsuspecting person buys this rare dog and then it ends up dying from health problems and the breeder is rich and the animal has suffered. 

How is that right? As the top species on this planet we have a responsibility to other species. Using them for profit is not the way to go. It makes us much less human than we are capable of being...


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Tanya Beka said:


> A good breeder will take back a dog that they have sold for whatever reason because they have a responsibility to the breed they love and the dogs they have bred. Yes, most pets are considered property according to the law, but here are also anti-cruelty laws for said "property" and we don't have that on our cars and lawnmowers, so obviously pets are in a different category.
> 
> *Taking a dog back if the owner is no longer able to take care of it, or it is not a good fit for them is a far cry from taking responsibility for the life of the animal, in my opinion...that is the owners job, You said basically all animals..not just dogs. How is a breeder of snakes or dogs, or other animals supposed to be responsible for them? I can see if the owners contact the breeder and want to return the animal to them, or cannot care for them, or the breeder finds about about some neglect or abuse.. sure...there are anti-cruelty laws because pets are a living thing.*
> 
> ...


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Joby Becker said:


> I rescued and relocated an entire breeding nest of fox snakes, that was under a large propane tank pad at a truckstop...
> 
> the truckers were killing them, thought they were rattlesnakes..The owner of the place was going to have them exterminated, and did fill in the holes with concrete...the whole place is leveled now for a frontage road..
> 
> thing about Fox snakes is they go back to the same place every season to hatch their eggs...for generations and generations....hopefully they found somewhere else...



At my buddies farm he's had Black Rat snakes hatch out in his compost piles for a number of year.


----------



## Lisa Brazeau (May 6, 2010)

Bob Scott said:


> In Missouri, actually none without a permit but I've never seen or heard of anyone getting in trouble for it.
> 
> 
> > This is the problem, to me! It seems like 9 out of 10 times, we already have laws on the books that would adequately 'deal' with the issue! Why don't we just ENFORCE the laws we have, instead of paying these @ssh0l3s to arbitrarily make up new laws that won't be enforced....](*,)


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

Joby Becker said:


> where do you draw the line? what about the meat industries??


Good point about the meat industry. 

It amazes me how hypocritical many non-vegan people can be. They climb up on their soapboxes preaching about animal welfare while wearing their leather shoes, drinking milk, eating a McChicken sandwich.

Animals being sold as pets are far more fortunate than those born for the meat/dairy/egg industries, yet these people speak out against one while paying $$ to support the other never giving it a second thought. 

They care about animals... but only up to the point that it inconveniences them...


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

I disagree with this. Some food animals are treated very well (and I tend to buy my meat, dairy, eggs, and honey from these producers), while many animals raised for pets (exotic and otherwise) are kept worse than livestock. Just depends on who is doing the raising.


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

Maren Bell Jones said:


> I disagree with this. Some food animals are treated very well (and I tend to buy my meat, dairy, eggs, and honey from these producers), while many animals raised for pets (exotic and otherwise) are kept worse than livestock. Just depends on who is doing the raising.


We'll just have to agree to disagree then.

I'm talking about the big commercial meat producers. I'm talking about the animals that die by the billions... Not the few and far between little mom and pop organic farmers.

Regardless of how the animals are raised, in my opinion, anyone who kills animals, chops them up into little pieces and eats them is less than a great example of an animal advocate and hardly in the position of looking down their nose at anyone because they breed animals. It's just something I can't overlook.

Are you familiar with cornish X rock chickens?


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

So you are vegan then? If that's so, we might as well stop right now, as I doubt we'll agree on much. If I wasn't eating them, they wouldn't likely exist in the first place. And as I said, I do take care to buy my meat and eggs from local producers. I have killed, butchered, and eaten chicken before. Yes, I know what a Cornish cross is. I may raise some dual purpose birds this spring (buff Orpingtons probably).


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Tanya Beka said:


> We need to change how we categorize pets/livestock so that they aren't just property anymore - they certainly don't need rights like humans, but they aren't objects and we as humans need to recognize that. Once we change the category of laws that applies to pets/livestock, then we can start to regulate the industry and stop the breeding for cash that goes on........Using them for profit is not the way to go.


Tanya ALL meat/dairy livestock is raised for PROFIT. What do you think ranchers are doing it for - FUN????? There's not a thing in the world wrong with raising/breeding any animal for profit. In fact it's a damn good motivator to breed a better product.



Tanya Beka said:


> I know a breeder who breeds hundreds of dogs per month in "rare" colors that sell for upwards of $20,000. They don't do health testing, they just breed what sells and that's it. So some unsuspecting person buys this rare dog and then it ends up dying from health problems and the breeder is rich and the animal has suffered.


 
Seriously? I find it hard to believe anyone is selling hundreds of pups per month for upwards of $20,000.. Please provide the kennel name and link so we can see this for ourselves.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

deleted duplicate, sorry mods!


----------



## Tanya Beka (Aug 12, 2008)

Maren Bell Jones said:


> I disagree with this. Some food animals are treated very well (and I tend to buy my meat, dairy, eggs, and honey from these producers), while many animals raised for pets (exotic and otherwise) are kept worse than livestock. Just depends on who is doing the raising.


Agreed! 

Livestock serve a purpose - meat is raised for profit as well as FOOD to sustain human life. There are some pretty horrible livestock producers out there, yes, but that animal is born for a completely different purpose.

Companion animals are bred for human amusement and profit and nothing more. There is no logical reason to breed a micro teacup chihuahua in some rare color except for the purposes of the breeder making money off of the person who covets objects to fulfill some internal egotistical need.

I absolutely see a difference.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Tanya Beka said:


> Agreed!
> 
> There is no logical reason to breed a micro teacup chihuahua in some rare color except for the purposes of the breeder making money off of the person who covets objects to fulfill some internal egotistical need.


do you feel breeding dogs for appearance should be illegal then? or just selling them for large amounts of money?


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Tanya Beka said:


> Agreed!
> 
> Livestock serve a purpose - meat is raised for profit as well as FOOD to sustain human life. There are some pretty horrible livestock producers out there, yes, but that animal is born for a completely different purpose.
> 
> ...


No, because man does not need any animal product to sustain life - ask a vegan. So using your logic, meat/dairy production would not be a legitimate "for profit" business either, since the purpose is simply because people happen to like to eat meat and use dairy products. See you don't get to determine what is or is not a legitimate purpose for breeding animals. That's in the eye of the end user.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

people can and will do whatever they want whether it's legal or not.....
- maybe one of these days someone will breed and title a white mal and the price for em will go thru the roof and another "white shepherd" war will fire up...who cares ... and won't change how i feel about responsible breeding and responsible killing of any animal

in regards to snakes, i won't believe someone would mortgage their home to buy one until i see the contract, 
.... and i LIKE snakes...had a lot as pets, killed a lot and ate a few...last "exotic" i handled was a VERY large and very wild python who had been eating dependent's dogs (including a pit) in Navy housing at Subic Bay ... we were trying to sell it but the Negritos ate it before we could find a buyer :-(

but i think it is a huge stretch to think this law is the beginning of the end of pet ownership and needs a call to arms ..... and i am also a "libertarian type" who is VERY sensitive to my rights being stepped on or messed with in any way
...off the soapbox


----------



## Tammy Cohen (Dec 21, 2008)

rick smith said:


> in regards to snakes, i won't believe someone would mortgage their home to buy one until i see the contract


Believe it! Although you can get a normal ball python for as little as $20, some of the most popular morphs are probably in the $1,000-$2,000 range there are others that go for $15,000- $20,000+ pretty regularly. Every once in a while there'll be one for $75,000- $100,000 or more... And people do buy them.
Browse these ads and look at some of the price tags. http://market.kingsnake.com/index.php?cat=32&page=1
It's a very popular hobby.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Sort of like show dogs. Bred for looks and useless for anything else. :-o :-# :-$ 8-[


----------

