What's the deal?

[metalcopper]

What's the deal with Burms? Why are these wonderful snakes not as prevalent anymore? Forgive me, I haven't followed the pet trade on these for a while, but I have had them in the past, even successfully bred them on my first try with natural incubation about 20 years ago.
I know there are some laws now with transporting them across state lines, is this just because of what is happening in Florida? Are these same laws applying to all giant snakes like Retics as well?
In my opinion, Burms are the ultimate snake to keep, if you like the size. They have wonderful dispositions, and are very hardy. Why don't more people keep them anymore? I look at everyone's signatures on their posts, and I barely see any Burms. Or, are they just not that interesting to people anymore?

[Mikoh4792]

For me, it's because they are illegal in NY and I couldn't take care of something that big. Especially by myself.

[metalcopper]

Are Retics illegal as well?

[Mikoh4792]

Yup.

I think most snake species that get larger than 12 feet are illegal, including condas and scrub pythons

And because retics are illegal, all forms including dwarf and super dwarf retics are illegal.

But then again, it's new york. Everything here is strict.

[Aaron_S]

It's because they get so big. It's a niche within a niche and over the years legislation has made it harder to keep them.

Cool animals though.

[smy_749]

neither are illegal in CT. Burms arent prevalent because you cant transport them across statelines. Your market is limited to your state=destroyed the burm world. Retic market still going strong from what Ive seen.

[drumcrush]

I want to get one, but not until I get my own house and settle down. I hope I will still be able to get them then.

[Terranaut]

Yup. Not legal here either.

[KORBIN5895]

Most people aren't capable of properly caring for these types of snakes. That is one of the main reasons they are restricted. What happened to yours?

[Terranaut]

Most people aren't capable of properly caring for these types of snakes. That is one of the main reasons they are restricted. What happened to yours?

Yup. Words I hate to read are "I used to keep"
The first reason people seem to have for getting rid of a burm is "it got to big" . How do people ever spend their money without a little research first. Of course it got big...it's a burm.
I love burms to but even if they were legal the only way I would have one is if was my only snake and I had space for a 10'x4'x4' enclosure.

[metalcopper]

I had to give mine to a friend 11 years ago. My daughter was born, we lived in a 2 bedroom duplex, and my snake room became the baby's room. He was a 12 foot male named Mark. He was the best snake, never bit me, never flinched while walking around him on the floor.
One time, he got out of his cage, back when I still lived with my mom, and he was gone for about 2 weeks. I went into the basement looking around for him again and couldn't find him. 10 minutes later my mom goes downstairs to do some laundry and there he was, hanging half way out of the ceiling. She calmly says, "I found Mark".
It's too bad they have gotten a bad rep, awesome snakes!

[Aaron_S]

I had to give mine to a friend 11 years ago. My daughter was born, we lived in a 2 bedroom duplex, and my snake room became the baby's room. He was a 12 foot male named Mark. He was the best snake, never bit me, never flinched while walking around him on the floor.
One time, he got out of his cage, back when I still lived with my mom, and he was gone for about 2 weeks. I went into the basement looking around for him again and couldn't find him. 10 minutes later my mom goes downstairs to do some laundry and there he was, hanging half way out of the ceiling. She calmly says, "I found Mark".
It's too bad they have gotten a bad rep, awesome snakes!

I wouldn't say they have a "bad reputation" when it seems that most would agree they are inappropriate pets for 99.9% of people.

[metalcopper]

What I meant by "bad rep" is to the general public and law makers. Us, as reptile fans, know that they can be wonderful, if you want a giant python. Retics have always had a more aggressive disposition, for the most part, than Burms, but Retics, IMO, are the most beautiful of the giant snakes. I was just curious what you all thought about them and why they are not so prevalent in people's collections anymore.

[KORBIN5895]

What I meant by "bad rep" is to the general public and law makers. Us, as reptile fans, know that they can be wonderful, if you want a giant python. Retics have always had a more aggressive disposition, for the most part, than Burms, but Retics, IMO, are the most beautiful of the giant snakes. I was just curious what you all thought about them and why they are not so prevalent in people's collections anymore.

You must not have read my first post....

[Aaron_S]

What I meant by "bad rep" is to the general public and law makers....

yeah I'm sure they got that for no reason after killing some people...

[Caylan]

Because that happens all the time.... The children weren't even constricted, I could have suffocated them by falling on them and laying on them long enough....
Horses still kill more people each year then any constrictor has, probably ever. Think of how many burmese pythons are produced each year, and how many people must have them, it's pretty amazing they never actually kill anyone, given all the opportunity. They even have more reason to kill their owner then a horse would, as it would be a meal for them, rather then just in defense. Dogs have people in medical care, literally less then every minute! So yeah, the government has every reason to start changing the laws on snakes....

[Aaron_S]

Because that happens all the time.... The children weren't even constricted, I could have suffocated them by falling on them and laying on them long enough....
Horses still kill more people each year then any constrictor has, probably ever. Think of how many burmese pythons are produced each year, and how many people must have them, it's pretty amazing they never actually kill anyone, given all the opportunity. They even have more reason to kill their owner then a horse would, as it would be a meal for them, rather then just in defense. Dogs have people in medical care, literally less then every minute! So yeah, the government has every reason to start changing the laws on snakes....

Okay this is a silly argument. You can't compare the number of snakes vs dogs or horses. Of course they will have more injuries. Also, there's far more accidents because people are foolish and trust a dog and go to pet it and it bites whereas more people are afraid of snakes.

Essentially, more close encounters = more incidents.

Yes, they don't happen "all the time" but it's happened more than the most recent incident. Do some research and you'd see.

Sadly, it's the truth. It's in black and white. Giant constrictors have taken human life.

Due note, I never said they were horrible animals just that 99.9% of people shouldn't own them or even think about it. "Accidents happen" right?

Lastly, if this is the way the thread will go I will stay out of it.

[Mikoh4792]

Because that happens all the time.... The children weren't even constricted, I could have suffocated them by falling on them and laying on them long enough....
Horses still kill more people each year then any constrictor has, probably ever. Think of how many burmese pythons are produced each year, and how many people must have them, it's pretty amazing they never actually kill anyone, given all the opportunity. They even have more reason to kill their owner then a horse would, as it would be a meal for them, rather then just in defense. Dogs have people in medical care, literally less then every minute! So yeah, the government has every reason to start changing the laws on snakes....

Yes but the general public sees dogs and horses as cute and cuddly things, so they usually blame the individual dog, instead of saying all dogs are bad.

When it comes to big snakes, all big snakes are blamed and not the individual snake.

[KORBIN5895]

This is relevant. https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=399109736878262&id=100003377185565&comment_id=1896573&offset=0&total_comments=8&refid=48

[Caylan]

Okay this is a silly argument. You can't compare the number of snakes vs dogs or horses. Of course they will have more injuries. Also, there's far more accidents because people are foolish and trust a dog and go to pet it and it bites whereas more people are afraid of snakes.

Essentially, more close encounters = more incidents.

Yes, they don't happen "all the time" but it's happened more than the most recent incident. Do some research and you'd see.

Sadly, it's the truth. It's in black and white. Giant constrictors have taken human life.

Due note, I never said they were horrible animals just that 99.9% of people shouldn't own them or even think about it. "Accidents happen" right?

Lastly, if this is the way the thread will go I will stay out of it.

I'm not comparing the populations, I'm comparing the incidents per population of animal. You can't deny that there are many burmese pythons in homes all across North America. My point is, these animals are far less likely to attack a human then a dog or horse. If the government wants to choose animals to ban for safety reasons, you save 1 person a decade banning large constrictors, you save 250 people a year banning horses. It's just a waste of time and money and effort if you're going to ban one and not the other. Sorry if it came across as me comparing snakes to horses, that was not my intent.

Large constrictors take human life all the time in the wild, just watch animal planet. In the amazon, the anaconda is one of the most feared animals out there by the locals. I know that they kill more people each year then whats even documented! So I've done my research...(not just watching animal planet obviously) However, do I agree that 99.9% of the population are incapable of caring for a burmese? No, I feel 99.9% of the population are uneducated about the burmese, and with the right knowledge and methodology, anyone is capable of owning a burmese. The only problem here lies with the fact that no one actively seeks the proper knowledge on care and husbandry before acquiring a young snake, let alone any hands on experience with an adult. But this could be said for many things that people do...

My personal solution to the problem would be to create a permit system, with some sort of eductional process to go through first, similar to falconry. The hobby with birds of prey is very much regulated within itself, so much so that government interference is unnecessary. You practically need to apprentice to start up falconry, but it's still very doable. That hobby is very alive, not profitable by means, and works. If giant python keepers could band together and create something similar, and present it to the government properly, we could stand a fighting chance. But to try and get 100,000 signatures, will be impossible.

I'd hate to see giant snakes phase out of the hobby and become something you only see in zoos... I'd hate to see it start with giants, and then work it's way to the rest of the animals...

[metalcopper]

I'd hate to see giant snakes phase out of the hobby and become something you only see in zoos... I'd hate to see it start with giants, and then work it's way to the rest of the animals...

This is exactly why I asked the question, it seems like they are being phased out of the hobby. I noticed the lack of Burms and other giants on everyone's signatures on this forum; but I do see a lot of dwarfs and super dwarfs. Everyone has their own level of comfort with the size of snakes they want to work with, I just didn't realize that there are so many places that have made it illegal to own them because I kind of got away from the hobby for a while, only keeping Bearded Dragons and a Ball Python, do to lack of space in my house.

[KORBIN5895]

Actually most of the population can't afford to properly house, feed or generally maintain a burm or retic nor do they have the ability to get the help they need to be safe. How many people here rally have one or two people they can call on once or twice a week for safe and proper cage maintenance?

[Caylan]

Still cheaper and easier then a horse... Lol but seriously, housing a burm is the most expensive part, feeding them isn't that bad, rabbits are cheap, and easy to breed. As far as getting another person to help you safely, it's only a matter of educating a friend on what to do, and then act cautiously and have rubbing alcohol on hand for a worse case scenario. Anyone with a significant other is probably capable of caring for a burmese. You open the cage, transfer the animal from its cage to another secure enclosure temporarily while you clean the cage, and then return the animal back to its cage when you're done.
I'm not saying everyone should have a burmese python in their house, I'm just saying they are not the monsters they are being made out to be, and humans aren't all as ******** as the next. A blanket ban just isn't the way to go about it, you'll only criminalize a lot of perfectly legitimate hobbyists. They aren't tigers, they aren't bears, they require a small amount of rubbing alcohol held over their nose for a second and they let go faster then they latch on. Pretty sure anyone is capable of that in a worse case scenario, and while it might seem like they can kill someone quickly, its not like a fatal wound, you have time to react and with someone else available, there should never be an issue.... that said, people panic, accidents happen, and not everyone is fully prepared for it. But for the people that are, it sure sucks that everyone has jumped on board that no one is apparently capable of owning a large snake since a few people screwed up... The only reason this has become so large scale is because its snakes, if it were a more widely accepted pet, it would be completely overlooked.
I think space is the biggest issue to owning a burmese python. Not everyone has their own place that they can dedicate a room to pretty much a single animal. But if they did, the rest is fairly doable... Even at $5 a pound, a 10lb rabbit every month isn't that bad. I spend more on cat food since my cat has kidney problems. Not to mention the vet costs would have bought a cage big enough for a burm, and the time it takes to take care of a cat far outweighs that of a snake. Now i know everyone hates comparing one animal to another, but in this case its commitment and costs, not animal to animal, just to clarify.
I didn't want to join back up to argue, not by any means. I actually joined back because I felt bad for leaving and not helping to educate people again. The burmese python issue is huge for me, as they are the reason I'm into snakes, and it kills me that they are being so ostracized. I think that if you are passionate enough about the species, and take the time and effort to learn about them properly, and spend the money on their housing, you can definitely care for a large constrictor, especially a burm. But with so many laws now, you don't even have the choice any more. Next stop, blood pythons, then balls, then maybe they'll look at horses...

[Aaron_S]

Still cheaper and easier then a horse... Lol but seriously, housing a burm is the most expensive part, feeding them isn't that bad, rabbits are cheap, and easy to breed. As far as getting another person to help you safely, it's only a matter of educating a friend on what to do, and then act cautiously and have rubbing alcohol on hand for a worse case scenario. Anyone with a significant other is probably capable of caring for a burmese. You open the cage, transfer the animal from its cage to another secure enclosure temporarily while you clean the cage, and then return the animal back to its cage when you're done.
I'm not saying everyone should have a burmese python in their house, I'm just saying they are not the monsters they are being made out to be, and humans aren't all as ******** as the next. A blanket ban just isn't the way to go about it, you'll only criminalize a lot of perfectly legitimate hobbyists. They aren't tigers, they aren't bears, they require a small amount of rubbing alcohol held over their nose for a second and they let go faster then they latch on. Pretty sure anyone is capable of that in a worse case scenario, and while it might seem like they can kill someone quickly, its not like a fatal wound, you have time to react and with someone else available, there should never be an issue.... that said, people panic, accidents happen, and not everyone is fully prepared for it. But for the people that are, it sure sucks that everyone has jumped on board that no one is apparently capable of owning a large snake since a few people screwed up... The only reason this has become so large scale is because its snakes, if it were a more widely accepted pet, it would be completely overlooked.
I think space is the biggest issue to owning a burmese python. Not everyone has their own place that they can dedicate a room to pretty much a single animal. But if they did, the rest is fairly doable... Even at $5 a pound, a 10lb rabbit every month isn't that bad. I spend more on cat food since my cat has kidney problems. Not to mention the vet costs would have bought a cage big enough for a burm, and the time it takes to take care of a cat far outweighs that of a snake. Now i know everyone hates comparing one animal to another, but in this case its commitment and costs, not animal to animal, just to clarify.
I didn't want to join back up to argue, not by any means. I actually joined back because I felt bad for leaving and not helping to educate people again. The burmese python issue is huge for me, as they are the reason I'm into snakes, and it kills me that they are being so ostracized. I think that if you are passionate enough about the species, and take the time and effort to learn about them properly, and spend the money on their housing, you can definitely care for a large constrictor, especially a burm. But with so many laws now, you don't even have the choice any more. Next stop, blood pythons, then balls, then maybe they'll look at horses...

Caylan I think you and I are making up the most of this forum today.

I think the analogy of horses vs giants is just difficult to use. How many people own a horse in their backyard or basement? How many can get one for a 100 bucks by walking into a local pet store? I don't have a problem with qualified individuals owning them it's the fact they CAN be dangerous and are too easily accessible to idiots.

Don't get me wrong though I'm not a hater. I have owned burms and love them still. I know my personal limits and don't feel I need one to make me feel "manly" (yes that's a large reason a lot of people own them).

I disagree with the sentiments that the next stop is other species. Why? Cambridge literally 2 weeks ago changed their by law to NO pythons or boas to a 2meter ban. They tried for 3 but they didn't get it but it's a start.

In Toronto it's been the 3 meter rule for over a decade now and they have yet to try to make it smaller, ever. History tends to repeat itself so I'm of the argument that they won't be banning smaller species any sooner.

[Robin.M]

Comparing snakes to dogs is absolutely insane. If any reptile keeper still uses this defense, they have no right to be keeping snakes and I don't want them to be associated with the actual educated individuals in this hobby.

Stating that Burms aren't widely kept because they "can kill people" is dumb. Lots of snakes can kill a human being (including everyones precious Ball Python). Quick strike to a persons carotid artery and perhaps a bit of tearing and they're dead in a matter of minutes.

How about everyone just give it up, stop blaming the snakes for idiotic people.

Rob

[marvelfreak]

I think the reason you don't see more people with Burmese is people are wising up and learning their limitations. I could easily keep and handle one, but could i do it safely by myself ? No so why chance it.

[KORBIN5895]

Comparing snakes to dogs is absolutely insane. If any reptile keeper still uses this defense, they have no right to be keeping snakes and I don't want them to be associated with the actual educated individuals in this hobby.

Stating that Burms aren't widely kept because they "can kill people" is dumb. Lots of snakes can kill a human being (including everyones precious Ball Python). Quick strike to a persons carotid artery and perhaps a bit of tearing and they're dead in a matter of minutes.

How about everyone just give it up, stop blaming the snakes for idiotic people.

Rob

Like I said, most people aren't capable.

[Caylan]

Caylan I think you and I are making up the most of this forum today.

I think the analogy of horses vs giants is just difficult to use. How many people own a horse in their backyard or basement? How many can get one for a 100 bucks by walking into a local pet store? I don't have a problem with qualified individuals owning them it's the fact they CAN be dangerous and are too easily accessible to idiots.

Don't get me wrong though I'm not a hater. I have owned burms and love them still. I know my personal limits and don't feel I need one to make me feel "manly" (yes that's a large reason a lot of people own them).

I disagree with the sentiments that the next stop is other species. Why? Cambridge literally 2 weeks ago changed their by law to NO pythons or boas to a 2meter ban. They tried for 3 but they didn't get it but it's a start.

In Toronto it's been the 3 meter rule for over a decade now and they have yet to try to make it smaller, ever. History tends to repeat itself so I'm of the argument that they won't be banning smaller species any sooner.

I can elaborate on my horse vs. burm if you'd like, but we'd be arguing forever most likely. I'll just take it as we see things a bit different when it comes to comparing animals. The way I now look at it is, animals you can keep, and animals you can't keep. I'm not talking about capability, strictly legally.

The only reasoning's behind not being able to keep animals are safety to public and safety to the environment. Given the statistics regarding animals killing humans, it makes no sense to ban large constrictors, other then the fact that you can. The population owning them is so small, they can't fight back. All it does is make normally law abiding citizens into criminals worse then if they had drugs or guns. Not only is this stupid, but it accomplishes nothing. Sure people will stop keeping large snakes, but an idiot will still get himself killed somehow, with or without a burmese python...

As for them furthering our bans, like I said, we are far to small a population to stand up to it if they do. Plus, as likely as a burm is to kill someone else this year, they are to make another safety shpeel against reptiles to win some election, and we're back at bat again, swinging away with twigs. We are an easy scapegoat target for votes, because no one really likes us to begin with. All they have to do is say they spread salmonella too easily and boom, all reptiles are in zoo's only. Why? Because they dictate what happens, and we need a much larger community to fight back if we are to ever have a chance.

Our best bet is to find a way to self regulate the hobby. This would of course mean not everyone breeding every snake they have, year after year. This would mean pretty everyone losing money to be in this hobby, and no one actually profiting in the way that many do now. But this will never happen, so I don't know why I keep bringing it up.

The laws may never change, they may even reverse somewhat like what you said happened in cambridge. But I don't hold out much hope for that, so I'm trying to prepare in a way for what I feel may be the inevitable.

Comparing snakes to dogs is absolutely insane. If any reptile keeper still uses this defense, they have no right to be keeping snakes and I don't want them to be associated with the actual educated individuals in this hobby....

Rob

Gee thanks, sure makes me feel welcome back... Everyone's snake is "puppy dog tame" or "cuddly", but compare them to any other pet to make a point, and you've gone off the deep end... But I have no idea who you even are, so I won't take it to heart. I could care less if you wanted me in this hobby or not. Tell me that in 40-50 years if you're still around.

Until we can start showing people that our pets are less threatening then their neighbors dog, who will probably attack them just for entering the property while the actual owners aren't there, we'll never convince people to stop banning our animals. Regardless of the fact that its big, you say python and people automatically assume its huge and dangerous. Most people never even question someones dog... Even a dog with a record biting and attacking, will still have the chance to be rehabbed and adopted out. A snake doesn't even get a record... Personally I'd like to see burms treated more equal to dogs, and less like monsters...

So keep using the argument that you can't compare snakes to other animals. All you are doing is giving up on a very valid argument. They are being grouped with lions, tigers, elephants and bears, when they should be grouped with horses, bulls, and birds of prey. Everyone outside our hobby compares our pets to other dangerous animals everyday, why can't I compare it to a more reasonable animal to help set the record straight? I may be talking about snakes, dogs and horses, but as a whole its all about our right to own these animals, and their threat level to society.

I'm just comparing facts to rebut the reasoning for creating such rash laws anyway. If you are truly trying to protect the general population, banning giants helps nothing, but criminalizes many, and causes for many unnecessary animal fatalities, paid for by none other then us tax payers. Personally, I hate all that... But we're such a small community, we can't even cause a stir, let alone an uproar like you'd get if they banned the owning of horses. So they get away with it all, and it's sick.

We all say no one is capable of owning such animals, as we ourselves are unsure in our own abilities to own them. This is the way it should be, to a point. I however, don't doubt anyone's ability to learn how to properly care for, and a acquire the resources to own a large constrictor, if that's what they really wanted. But now, you or I don't even get the choice. Countless people before us have been allowed the opportunity to experience owning them without any consequences, because they knew what they were doing, and because of a few idiots, now no one can? Not cool, and again, the only reason they get away with it, is because we can't speak up enough for ourselves.

So yeah I like to compare snakes to dogs, cats, horses and bears, lions and tigers. I'm not the only one, just seem to be the only one within here. Most people I meet who don't own a snake are always asking me how it is as a pet, and what is it like compared to having a dog, bird, hamster etc... when I tell them how to care for it, you feed it, give it water, clean its cage, they realize pretty much right there it's just like any other animal. Then when it's out, they always say how they seem to act like other animals, curious like a dog, shy like a cat, active like a rodent. They need to compare it to something they know well, in order to really understand that a snake is really just an animal. Not an insect or spider, not vicious or always hunting, but more like your average everyday house pet. Because it is.

Still think I'm unworthy of being associated with "the actual(ly?) educated" hobbyists? I may have been gone a while, and I may think differently, but I don't think I deserve that...

[Aaron_S]

...As for them furthering our bans, like I said, we are far to small a population to stand up to it if they do. Plus, as likely as a burm is to kill someone else this year, they are to make another safety shpeel against reptiles to win some election, and we're back at bat again, swinging away with twigs. We are an easy scapegoat target for votes, because no one really likes us to begin with. All they have to do is say they spread salmonella too easily and boom, all reptiles are in zoo's only. Why? Because they dictate what happens, and we need a much larger community to fight back if we are to ever have a chance.

The laws may never change, they may even reverse somewhat like what you said happened in cambridge. But I don't hold out much hope for that, so I'm trying to prepare in a way for what I feel may be the inevitable...


I took out everything I didn't care to respond to. The burm vs horse we'll go around in circles so we'll just stop now.

I understand and agree it's an easy target for votes. Where I don't agree is how easy this could move through councils. All the facts point in a different direction than what you're saying.

Cambridge just got theirs changed. Durham region is in the process (I believe they may have done it already). Kitchener/Waterloo have changed in previous years. The GTA over a decade ago. It's slow but it's progressing because people don't just lay down. It doesn't take a large group...only a few to go to the meetings and make a speech.

Like I said before as well, they haven't gone after the smaller species either. I don't see it happening. The only way it happens is if there's a blanket ban of all "exotics".

Lastly, on September 30th a new site is being launched. I'm not a part of it, just a member but it's something you and anyone else in Canada should be interested in. Canherp.com

[StudentoReptile]

Its funny seeing the real numbers now as that I work as an ACO. We have an average of 3 dog bites (that are reported) a week in my county, neglect cases for horses & dogs pop up every day, and the aggressive dog calls are so numerous, we're back-logged all the time. Not to mention all the unwanted strays that get dumped on our door 24/7.

And yet giant snakes are the REAL threat to public health and safety? LOL

[Mikoh4792]

Its funny seeing the real numbers now as that I work as an ACO. We have an average of 3 dog bites (that are reported) a week in my county, neglect cases for horses & dogs pop up every day, and the aggressive dog calls are so numerous, we're back-logged all the time. Not to mention all the unwanted strays that get dumped on our door 24/7.

And yet giant snakes are the REAL threat to public health and safety? LOL

Ban all dogs and make owning a snake as a pet mandatory. Done.

[charlesc84]

Comparing snakes to dogs is absolutely insane. If any reptile keeper still uses this defense, they have no right to be keeping snakes and I don't want them to be associated with the actual educated individuals in this hobby.

Stating that Burms aren't widely kept because they "can kill people" is dumb. Lots of snakes can kill a human being (including everyones precious Ball Python). Quick strike to a persons carotid artery and perhaps a bit of tearing and they're dead in a matter of minutes.

How about everyone just give it up, stop blaming the snakes for idiotic people.

Rob

I disagree with your first paragraph, and completely agree with the second.
I think comparing snakes to dogs is a logical way to show a person with a misconception about them(snakes) that they're wrong.
For instance, when someone says a large constrictor(burm, retic, etc...) should be banned because of whatever current news story, or people who were killed or injured by them, etc... It is good counter argument to point out that more people are killed and injured by their beloved dogs( I love dogs to, but I'm making a point). Doing this points out their inconsistent and faulty logic.
Of course WE know that dogs are snakes are completely different. But we're not comparing their morphological characteristics and care requirements. The dog vs. snake comparison is strictly used to point out an inconsistency in a given persons argument for wanting to ban these animals.
With that said, I fully agree with your second paragraph, and I think people who keep smaller snakes should support responsible people who keep larger ones. I personally don't keep any of the large constrictors, but I support people who do.

[StudentoReptile]

Of course WE know that dogs are snakes are completely different. But we're not comparing their morphological characteristics and care requirements. The dog vs. snake comparison is strictly used to point out an inconsistency in a given persons argument for wanting to ban these animals.


Well said. All of the same arguments people use for snakes (Ex: irresponsible/neglectful care, escapes, potential danger) I can easily use against canines & livestock.

[metalcopper]

Choosing not to keep big snakes is one's own prerogative. Judging by what I've seen on this forum from people's pictures of their snake rooms, knowledge, experience, and number of snakes they keep, I think a lot of them are perfectly capable of keeping large snakes, and handling them by themselves. If you have raised one from a baby, then you know its personality, and know if it is a safe snake to work with by yourself, if need be. It is recommended to have more than one person there when handling them, but you know as well as I do, that it is not always feasible, or necessary.

[Aaron_S]

Choosing not to keep big snakes is one's own prerogative. Judging by what I've seen on this forum from people's pictures of their snake rooms, knowledge, experience, and number of snakes they keep, I think a lot of them are perfectly capable of keeping large snakes, and handling them by themselves. If you have raised one from a baby, then you know its personality, and know if it is a safe snake to work with by yourself, if need be. It is recommended to have more than one person there when handling them, but you know as well as I do, that it is not always feasible, or necessary.

This arrogant mentality is what causes accidents to happen. If it's not feasible to have someone to help you all the time then you aren't set up to care for them. Plain and simple.

As much as we love these animals you still can't trust them and "know" them. Most accidents, death or injury come from this type of over confidence. They can't be trained and if they want, they could have a field day with you.

[Mikoh4792]

If it's not feasible to have someone to help you all the time then you aren't set up to care for them. Plain and simple.

I think this is one of the main reasons why most people are not capable of caring for such large snakes. You can't do everything by yourself and you won't always have someone there to help you.

[KORBIN5895]

Choosing not to keep big snakes is one's own prerogative. Judging by what I've seen on this forum from people's pictures of their snake rooms, knowledge, experience, and number of snakes they keep, I think a lot of them are perfectly capable of keeping large snakes, and handling them by themselves. If you have raised one from a baby, then you know its personality, and know if it is a safe snake to work with by yourself, if need be. It is recommended to have more than one person there when handling them, but you know as well as I do, that it is not always feasible, or necessary.

You lost all credibility when you claimed it wasn't necessary to have a second person to help while handling a giant. It is that mentality that will cause this hobby the most grief.

You should ask Shaunyboy about the time he had a carpet python incapacitate him for two hours until help arrived. All large snakes have the potential to be extremely dangerous just like all guns are loaded. If you think that your pseudo knowledge of your tame and docile burm will keep you safe then by all means have a whole house full.

As for most of the members on here being able to keep them that is also false. Just because they have nice snake rooms , knowledge, experience and a certain number of snake doesn't qualify them to keep giants. Some of the biggest collections on here are owned by fools and idiots. Just because you have a snake room qualify you. A 8'x4'x2' enclosure takes up a lot of room which mean their other species are cut back. You also forgot to mention stability when coming up with your list of qualifications. If you don't have stability then you will have to rehome it eventually. I have seen many a great keeper rehome their collection because of a spouse or the place they live in being sold.

[Robin.M]

Handling the giants of the snake world without someone else present is asking for trouble. Sure, you could go on for years, and years, and years without an incident. You could feel like the coolest, most badass person in the world because you handle a 20+ foot 150 pound Retic by yourself, and you have awesome pictures of you being just pure awesome. Then, 20 years later after you are so cocky and arrogant, while holding your giant snake it slips off your shoulder and fearing for its life it grabs a hold of you so quickly and with so much force that you pass out within seconds, and continues holding on to you until you don't wake up.

My female Green Anaconda is just over 3 feet, and she is the most docile snake I've ever kept, or handled for that matter. BUTTTT, once she reaches 8 or 9 feet she will only be handled when my girlfriend or some other person who ISN'T AFRAID OF SNAKES is around. And if you think I'm a "panzy" because I would want someone there while handling only an 8 foot snake, then I'm assuming you've never handled an 8 foot Green Anaconda. Their strength is comparable to two 8 foot boas constricting you at the same time when they are that size.

Giants should be treated with respect. While handling my old 15 foot Retic, I lost grip a bit and she started falling and within a millisecond she had 3 wraps around my chest and was squeezing harder than anything I've ever felt. My brother in law came in to help get her off, and thankfully she just loosened off on her own and continued exploring around.

NEVER handle a giant by yourself.

Rob

[metalcopper]

I didn't mean to come off as arrogant. I should have specified better, a 15 foot Retic is nothing to mess with by yourself. I did work with a 14 foot Anaconda at my old job, she was far to heavy and massive to do anything with without 3 people. If somebody is the type that needs to show off by posting pictures of themselves with their massive snakes to feel cool, than they probably have a lack of self esteem and need attention. Don't get me wrong guys, I, by no means, am an expert. I have enjoyed this forum and learned a lot in the short time I've been here. I mean no disrespect.