|
1-4 of 4 messages
|
Page 1 of 1
|
|
Regulations and Bans
|
Reply
|
|
by Matt_H on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I just finished reading the article posted by Al (Phobos). Notice the last line of the article.
"Must Pennsylvania suffer a death from an exotic reptile before the Legislature finally joins the ranks of states that recognize the danger they pose?"
Yet another group with their panties in a bunch over something they neither understand, nor desire to.
Has anyone else picked up on this or is it just me. Ever since the popularity began to grow about reptile shows on Animal Planet and the Discovery Channel; show's like Maimi-Dade Venom 1, the Crocodile Hunter, Corwin's Quest, Oshea's Adventures, and the like; the frequency of people protesting the ownership and keeping of these animals has also grown. I can recall at least a dozen or more cities, counties or states that have introduced new laws or complete bans on private ownership of many types of reptiles within only the last few years.
If things continue as they are, i'm afraid it won't be long before total bans on private ownership of venomous reptiles and other types of herps are placed into law across the country. For instance, the state I live, Illinois, has a total ban on private ownership of venomous species and any constricting snake over 8' long. Chicago is in the process of furthering those bans by adding to the list many other types of reptiles and mammals. Fortunately, our local herp society stepped in just in time to dispute the proposal before it was passed into law. The Chicago Herp Society organized a group consisting of herpetologists, scientists, doctors, herpetoculturists and hobbyists to develop and present an informed arguement against the proposed bill. This has resulted in the original proposed bill being denied, and an order for the political committee, the Chicago Herp Society, and their group of professionals to work together to deveop a new bill that would be acceptable to both parties.
I've been thinking about this for quite some time and may have an idea that would help save this fascinating hobby. I would like to know what each of you think about this.
Maybe regulation is the key to saving this hobby. Although, not regulation brought on by protestors who point out only the negative aspects. Rather a regulation brought on by a legitimate source that would stress the role private ownership plays in the study of these fascinating animals, as well as, its contribution to the scientific community. Much has been learned about behaviors and systematics through private collectors, and still is today.
My thoughts are, if we were to get a group of highly experienced professionals, some of who belong to this community, and deveop a proposal for the regulation of private collectors of venomous species, along with a valid arguement of why it should be allowed either through permit or some other type of regulation, we would automatically have an advantage. The advantage would be being the first to present a proposal on the subject, but presenting it with the positive aspects of private collecting, as opposed to the negative aspects brought on by protestors. First impressions tend to make a difference. If the first thing a politician hears about a subject is negative, it's most likely going to be very difficult to change their views. On the other hand, if the first thing they hear is positive, they may be more inclined to work on proper regulation as opposed to a total ban. Remember, most of these politicians know nothing about these animals other than what they hear.
A proposal of this sort could begin by saying something like
"We understand the growing numbers of venomous snake keepers may have the potential for injury due to the availablility of these species to untrained, and uneducated individuals. Not everyone is going to want to keep a venomous snake, and not everyone is going to keep them for the right reasons; but there is a community of private keepers that are experienced, trained and have been woring with and keeping venomous snakes for many years. Some of these individuals are responsible for important contributions to the scientific community, and continue to be to this day. For this reason, we feel it would be necessary to incorporate some form of regulation, for the safety of the community, and for the continuing of private collection by qualified individuals. This proposed regulation would allow the keeping of venomous species, in secure enclosures and safe room, to qualified individuals, on a permit type basis."
This could be a general proposal that each state can present to their state officials. If your state already has a ban in place this probably isn't going to change things, but for the states that do not have regulations, or are in danger of having bans adopted, it may just be the difference between regulation and total ban.
Here are a couple of interesting links on the statistics of dog bites and fatalities. These are considered safe pets.
http://www.nafacares.org/Dog%20Stuff/dog_bite_statistics.htm
http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html
What are your views on this?
Matt
|
| |
|
RE: Regulations and Bans
|
Reply
|
|
by MoccasinMan on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Matt that is a very interesting proposal that you have put forward. Here in NC we are doing something very similar to what you are describing. We have formed the NC Association of Reptile Keepers (NCARK). We put together a group of the top experts from around the state. We have been appointed by the president of the NC senate to advise on any animal legislation that may go forward. We have been able to defeat two attempts at a ban here in NC. But what we are really working towards is positioning ourselves to self regulate the keeping of reptiles. We are working with NC DENR & NC WRC. We have created a code of ethics, caging & husbandry standards, and strict safety protocals. Our philosophy is that personal responsibility is the key to the survival of this hobby. Personal responsibility cannot be legislated, but it can be encouraged through education and mentoring. It can even be rewarded through the survival of this hobby. We believe that over the long run this may be the only way... short of submitting to all out bans. We also believe our success can work as a precident and model for other states. We must turn the tide or suffer the consequences. Anyone who wants to know more feel free to e-mail me.
Andrew
|
| |
|
RE: Regulations and Bans
|
Reply
|
|
by MoccasinMan on January 12, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
If you want to see our position statement with the state, contact me. It is 1600 words. A lttle to large for this venue. I may publish it in the articles section.
Also it is necessary to create a non-profit to be your vehicle and raise money to pay for everything. Another must is a website to act as a platform for everything from fund raising, membership and education...etc. Ours is www.ncark.org. It will be up and running in the next couple of days. We've been working on it for 9 months.
Andrew
|
| |
|
RE: Regulations and Bans
|
Reply
|
|
by earthguy on January 13, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I, for one, am in favor of regulation over a ban. I would like to see the NC draft, so I can pass it along to my senator here in SC. I feel that an all-out ban would serve to create prohibition-like symtoms of the 1920's. Legitimate keepers will abandon their conservation and research, while thugs will continue to keep hots, totally unregulated. That isn't good for society or for the herps.
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Manager.
|
