The one and ONLY python BAN thread (HR511) - Page 15

red ink · 01-19-12, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by millertime89

I wish I could answer those questions, but I simply can't. I do know that USARK has had their back against the wall since day one, I don't know if they've been able to propose a compromise. I don't know if you know much about the HSUS or PETA, but they aren't exactly ones to compromise. They're still clamoring for every exotic species (birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish, and insects) to be banned completely.

Fair enough mate... But we do have those fanatics here as well and our laws in regards to wildlife are a lot stricter than over there.

Quote:

its easy to sell them and give them away when they're little. But try and get someone to take a large snake from someone that you probably just met that you don't know the temperament or the conditions in which it was kept. Not so easy I would imagine.

Kinda... should be a first thought when buying them would'nt it... Unfortunately they don't, hence the government stepping is as Aaron says they could'nt police themselves....

Same reason I don't have a coastal or a scrubby in my collection (or even a bredli for that matter)

**Aaron_S** · 01-19-12, 10:13 PM

Red Ink quoted it but I would have to agree. Why wouldn't people think more clearly when breeding these snakes then Kyle? Seriously? Why? People see dollar signs and see money leaking out of their pockets trying to feed 30+ babies from ONE pairing each year so they sold them to anybody willing to pay.

Again, the giant keepers, the irresponsible ones, failed. Time to pay the piper.

stephanbakir · 01-19-12, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

Red Ink quoted it but I would have to agree. Why wouldn't people think more clearly when breeding these snakes then Kyle? Seriously? Why? People see dollar signs and see money leaking out of their pockets trying to feed 30+ babies from ONE pairing each year so they sold them to anybody willing to pay.

Again, the giant keepers, the irresponsible ones, failed. Time to pay the piper.

Some people truly are passionate about specific species, the joy comes from seeing heads poking out of the eggs and either finding something new, something unexpected, something you have been striving for. Even normals are cherished because they really do just love the species.

Why should EVERYONE pay for the mistakes of a few idiots? Why not create a system that allows people to own them, via permits (WITH sub dermal tags) so that those idiots get hit back for doing something stupid with their animals, and the rest of us can still own the animals we love.

red ink · 01-19-12, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephanbakir

Some people truly are passionate about specific species, the joy comes from seeing heads poking out of the eggs and either finding something new, something unexpected, something you have been striving for. Even normals are cherished because they really do just love the species.

Why should EVERYONE pay for the mistakes of a few idiots? Why not create a system that allows people to own them, via permits (WITH sub dermal tags) so that those idiots get hit back for doing something stupid with their animals, and the rest of us can still own the animals we love.

You might know mate... I asked the same question to Kyle, was a compromise ever proposed or just petitions to stop the ban by USARK?

**millertime89** · 01-19-12, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

Kyle are you seriously telling me that without some time those dwarfs couldn't be considered sub species in their own right?

I certainly hope so, but I'm not a biologist, just an enthusiast.

Ask Red Ink said. A compromise must happen. It seems like they won't give up going after this bill so giant keepers are going to have to give something up.

I would agree a compromise is needed, but at this point it seems neither side is willing to do so. Which leaves us in the current predicament. Limbo with neither side happy, or even close to satisfied.

These statements were posted on another forum and I'm going to repost them here.

You may not like it but there is only one group to blame - Irresponsible Reptile Hobbyists.

You'll get no argument from me. Although a close second belongs on sensationalist media types and the crazy animal rights activists (for the ban part anyways)

If hobbyists can't responsibly keep herps then maybe there should be a ban.

Why punish the many for the faults of the few?

The government isn't doing this to be dicks (if they were they'd ban all reptiles).

They're doing what they feel is best, despite the majority opinion, through backhanded tactics? Sounds like that's what they're trying to be.

Keeping pet reptiles is a privilege not a right, if you can't do it responsibly then you risk the chance of ruining it for everybody.

This is unfortunately what seems to have happened. And the many are fighting back to show that the responsible keepers are deserving of the privilege.

**Aaron_S** · 01-20-12, 01:22 AM

You know stephan, I almost believed you when you said it's truely just for the passion of those species. If that was so, then they wouldn't breed them knowing how many are unwanted as adults and are either dead or do die at a very young age for these species. I for one used to wish to keep/breed retics and burms very much but I decided I shouldn't. Who the hell would buy these animals and care for them well enough for me to reproduce them? Not enough people, that's who. I for one actually thought of the animals ahead of time. I don't just keep ball pythons because they rock on their own but because they are the best that I can have. I get to keep snakes and that's what is most important to me. I get to see these cool animals all the time. I went this route as it was best for the animals involved. Best care I can deliver with my time/space and resources and within city by-laws. Most of all though, I cared to think about how many babies I would/could produce and the difficulty of finding proper homes for them all.

The question, why punish the few who deserve it? Simply because we were allowed to police ourselves for 20 years! (That's about the time the albino burm made giants really popular). We failed as a hobby as a whole. Nobody to blame but ourselves. We didn't do it right and now we lose that privilege.

dshin963 · 01-20-12, 02:26 AM

I dont mean to sound cheeky or ruffle feathers but the word domesticated was being thrown around a lot a few pages back in regards to cats and dogs.... Reptiles of any kind are not domesticated.... Sure your ball python or corn snake may not bite you but does that mean its domesticated.... I think not. Cats and dogs have been slowly domesticated for many millennia... Snakes have been kept as a hobby for less than a century... And thats being generous... Also Aaron about gun and Toronto.. You can legally obtain one but the restrictions on them are massive... Like the only place you can have a hand gun is in a locked carrying case with ammo in a seperate location and you can only transport it from your home to a firing range in the most direct route... And thats after you get your restricted firearms licence...

Again not trying to be cheeky just putting it out there...

alessia55 · 01-20-12, 07:48 AM

This is a somewhat long but really worthwhile article: This what it has come to… « Student of the Reptile

Preciouspythons · 01-20-12, 09:57 AM

I signed the potition...that is on facebook and I have many posts letting people know about this ban and how wrong it is!!!

exwizard · 01-20-12, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

Exwizard, I have said again and again a size amendment would be most ideal. I am for that which would change Iowa's laws as well as keep your snakes safe.

Ok I'd like to adress that...

First off, where would you draw the line? 8'? 9'? 12'? Would that make Black Betty illegal even though she's a Dum? She is 9 1/2 long as I stated earlier. Bottom line is no matter what the feds to, Iowa still has these laws banning Anacondas, Retics (even the SDs) and Rock Pythons. That will not change since its already in the books. This debate is endless and nobody is going to change anyone else's mind so its all pointless to continue with this.

I did some research in this and there are four species that will be prohibited from crossing state lines. Burmese Pythons, Yellow Anacondas, Northern and Southern African Rock Pythons. Reticulated Pythons, Green Anacondas, Indian Rock Pythons and Amethistines will still be allowed to do so. I repeat, the only thing that this ban does is prohibit any of these four species from crossing state lines. IMO this debate needs to stop because all its doing is working people up to a frenzy. Im done.

MoreliAddict · 01-20-12, 02:38 PM

wait the ban affects yellow anacondas but not greens?

exwizard · 01-20-12, 04:00 PM

yes, weird huh?

**Aaron_S** · 01-20-12, 09:46 PM

You seem to think Exwizard that bills can't change. I don't know about down there but a bunch of municipalities here in Ontario have changed their bylaws from excluding ANY boid to size restrictions. That tells me that no matter what the "feds" do that Iowa can STILL change.

I would put the size restriction probably at 3 metres just to answer your question. I'm sorry if you ever lost your pet to that kind of bill but in reality the giant keepers will have to give something up.

**millertime89** · 01-21-12, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

You seem to think Exwizard that bills can't change. I don't know about down there but a bunch of municipalities here in Ontario have changed their bylaws from excluding ANY boid to size restrictions. That tells me that no matter what the "feds" do that Iowa can STILL change.

I would put the size restriction probably at 3 metres just to answer your question. I'm sorry if you ever lost your pet to that kind of bill but in reality the giant keepers will have to give something up.

The 10th Amendment of the US constitution reads "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
This SHOULD be something left to the states, but no state is going to challenge this in the supreme court.
That said, if the national law is more restrictive than a state law, its the national law you go by, regardless of what your state says.

infernalis · 01-21-12, 03:42 AM

I have intentionally kept my distance.. But here is some logic to chew over.

The media (including but not limited to Animal Planet A.K.A. Discovery Networks) has already painted the picture with many stories and weekly specials about Florida and even a few stories of big boas in central park N.Y.

Salazar presented his case using a giant python pelt as a "stage prop" to scare the congressional members into voting for the ban.

all the petitions, all the voices are now simply being viewed as "the problem" speaking out.

They have already painted us as irresponsible, terrible people.

The "industry" that is getting crushed here is the very industry that brought these animals to US shores in the first place.

so (an exaggeration here) if one million people sign a petition stating that we do not feel the ban is fair, they will simply say "look how big the PROBLEM really is, we have a million people here who want this, a million morons who will just keep on bringing these animals into the US so they can escape or get released...

See what I am trying to say? it does not matter how "educated" we are, it does not matter what promises we make, we are no different to them than a million pot heads begging for legalization of dope.