Permit systems for large constrictors debate V1.0

[natas]

Big Thanks go out to VoodooChile for the idea!

This is version 1 of the debate "Permit systems for large constrictors". What this thread is not is a place to come and insult, mock, degrade or put down members for their views. Engage the debate in the spirit in which it is meant to be debated.

In this thread we will talk about the following:

* Are permit systems for large constrictors helpful or a hindrance?
* Anything else to do with permit systems on large constrictors.

Special rules for this thread:
1) As always, please stay on topic. Off topic replies, will be removed.
2) Limit small replies like "that was awesome", or "Your wrong". Instead of replying like this, use rep or the "thank you" button.
3) Try your best to back your statement up with scientific fact, studies you have read or done.
4) DO NOT plagiarize. If you quote someones findings, please give credit by providing the name, or a direct link.
5) Before posting, please read the rules of this forum.
6) 10 day bans for personal attacks on persons or companies.

Your opinion on the matters above are important.
Enjoy, and have fun!

[amercnwmn]

Thanks Shane!

My own thoughts on permits are something if I HAVE to get one to keep the animals I want, I will do so, and I will abide by the laws.
I have a real problem forking out money to the government, though when it is not going back into helping the animals somehow; or keeping the animals from abuse/neglect/improper care.

Most of the permit systems that are being introduced as legislation do NOT require anything more than an application and a fee. No specific training, or education, or investigation of the housing are required, like those for venomous permits.

Many people say "its just like for dogs and cats, you have to get them licensed".
Yes, and we see how well THAT has worked to protect the animals from improper care, and housing.
How many people still keep dogs/cats that are NOT licensed? You don't hear of people panicking because a Lhasa Apso was found without proper licensing on the news. You WILL however hear about the illegally kept large snake that is capable of killing kids, animals, etc..
Also, shelters, rescues, federal funding and officials exist to help dogs and cats (ferrets, etc) and provide them with new homes, or assistance.
Such accomodations are not provided for reptiles, and many places are not capable of housing an adult large constrictor, much less feeding it.

So what happens to the illegally kept animals when they are seized?? There aren't enough shelters for reptiles, and the animal shelters usually can't handle the animals.

I think it would be a good system IF the money were placed BACK into caring for animals that were illegally/improperly kept and education as well as providing officers to investigate and follow up on the animals. Of course, that would drive the permit price WAY up.

It appears the permits are currently just another way for the government to make money, in my opinion, and of course, up for debate

[natas]

Florida is another great example of why it maybe a great idea to enforce permits on large constrictors.

Florida has burms, retics and boas roaming the area. They also have "flocks" of iggys in certain areas.

Personally I think you must be at least 18 years or older to buy a large constrictor or parent permission.

[RevMojo]

I wouldn't be uncomfortable with a reasonable system of permitting on potentially dangerous reptiles (i know..what's potentially dangerous, except fodder for a new debate, perhaps v1.1?) as long as it dealt evenly with both buyers and sellers.

[Bluzmn59]

Potential problems with any permit system, IMHO, include how to define what needs a permit and what steps are taken to enforce the system.

The title of this thread includes the term "large" constrictors. That, to me, is a sliding scale. To me, Burms, Retics, African Rocks, Anacondas, etc. are large constrictors. But I guarantee you that my mother thinks my 6' RTB is HUGE! Some of the truly uninitiated may see a 4' BP as a large constrictor. Do you then use a definition of "dangerous?" What, then, is dangerous? Personally, I do not consider the boids to be "dangerous" when handled correctly, yet I would consider venomous snakes to be dangerous for me with my lack of experience and knowledge. Someone skilled in handling hots probably does not consider them "dangerous." It is all relative, yet it will have to be defined in black and white by some legislative body.

The second issue involves enforcement. I have 4 snakes and a tortoise in my house and I would bet that nobody knows it if they do not know me. How do you force me to adhere to the rules requiring that I obtain permits? With internet sales and unregulated reptile shows, it is virtually impossible to prevent someone from obtaining almost anything they want without permits. So sanctions or penalties could only be assessed when someone is found to be in possession of non-permitted animals. Do we require that veterinarians only treat permitted animals? Is there mandatory reporting? Wouldn't that lead to reptiles not getting treatment when needed or are we assuming that all responsible herpers would get the necessary permits? What penalties are assessed? Fines? Seizures? And as outlined earlier, what happens to the money? What happens to the seized collections?

One of the problems with being a lawyer by training is that the questions just keep coming. Personally, I see a lot of problems with a permit system. If the alternative is outright banishment, however.............

[amercnwmn]

All Great points.
I will try to clarify on what I understand "Large constrictor" to mean in terms of the laws that are being proposed:
I believe most legislation existing refers to "large" as anything 6ft or with the potential to reach over 6ft.
According to Central Pets.com, the American Federation of Herpetoculturists (AFH) lists 8ft as the size in consideration to a large constrictor.
Also, here is an example of the law from New York, I know it's specified what size (or species) classifies a snake as LARGE, but I didn't have a chance to look it up. Scales & Tails Link to NY laws
In February, Baltimore sought to ban snakes over 5ft in length.
I hope that clears up the size issue.. carry on..
I'd love to hear how it would affect people who breed boas and larger snake species? To get both sides of the issue. How do people like Ben Renick and Tom McCarthy, who both breed larger species of snakes, feel about this?

[SoberGuy]

Would such legislation encourage constrictors to be underfed, to try and keep them below, say, an 8 foot threshold?

[deadliestformula]

Originally Posted by natas

Florida is another great example of why it maybe a great idea to enforce permits on large constrictors.

Florida has burms, retics and boas roaming the area. They also have "flocks" of iggys in certain areas.

Personally I think you must be at least 18 years or older to buy a large constrictor or parent permission.

Perhaps something along the way of 'microchipping' all large boids could be considered in addition to a permit system. Then if a problem arose due to releasing the snake in the Everglades or whereever, the owner could be fined and/or jailed.

I know that the only way to make it a program that EVERYONE uses, is to make it an issue for selling or breeding the animals. If before transferring a snake to a new owner, the breeder or petshop had to file paperwork in a database of somesort otherwise be fined, it would help eliminate the whole 'don't tell and nobody will know what I have until there's a problem'. Sellers (such as pet shops) have much more to lose by failure to report a transfer or sale of a reptile than an individual would. (I am thinking of a fining system similiar to selling alcohol to minors. The clerk and the store takes a monetary fine or loses the liscence to sell it while the minor in possesion gets at best a slap on the wrist)

Just my thoughts on how a permit system would need to be worked. As far as what would be required to get a permit, and what animals a permit would be required for, I will leave that up to the rest of you.

[New_BP_Guy]

well before I was saying that my limit for a constrictor is 12' I was actually misinformed:

Toronto Prohibited herps: Snakes over 3 m in length; lizards over 2 m in length; venomous reptiles; crocodilians.

is I am actually not allowed to have anything more the 9'....

[amercnwmn]

Eek, almost rules out Red Tail Boas..Does it cite particular species?

From my understanding Florida is about to redo the permit systems and require MANDATORY microchipping (not sure if that was venomous sp. or large constrictors..DANG! Guess I'll have to find that again..)
In any case, that would be quite pricey for those who breed, and apparently you have to have a vet do the microchipping, and have a G&F official on hand to acknowledge the legitmacy of the chip insertion.

[Rex322]

Originally Posted by SoberGuy

Would such legislation encourage constrictors to be underfed, to try and keep them below, say, an 8 foot threshold?

it would be, thats why it would have to include certain species names, dwarf versions and all would still need the permit. it would be very easy to lie and tell someone, i dont need a permit, its a dwarf burm, it will only get 6'. i do think people would underfeed it, it would incourage it more, i mean, alot of people already underfeed giants to keep them small, more than we know of

[New_BP_Guy]

Originally Posted by VoodooChile

Eek, almost rules out Red Tail Boas..Does it cite particular species?

From my understanding Florida is about to redo the permit systems and require MANDATORY microchipping (not sure if that was venomous sp. or large constrictors..DANG! Guess I'll have to find that again..)
In any case, that would be quite pricey for those who breed, and apparently you have to have a vet do the microchipping, and have a G&F official on hand to acknowledge the legitmacy of the chip insertion.

from what I have read on that topic so far is that Florida already has a permit system for venomous and they might pass the bill this month for registering Burmese, African rock, reticulated and amethystine pythons, green anacondas and monitor lizards and exhibitors will have to pay a $10,000 bond for each reptile listed....

I haven't read the entire by-law yet as it covers all pets but I will see if I can find it...

[New_BP_Guy]

it just says:

Crocodylia (such as alligators, crocodiles, gavials)
All snakes which reach an adult length larger than 3 metres
All lizards which reach an adult length larger than 2 metres.

[CraigC]

Here is the proposed Florida system as taken from the FWC website, some of the statutes pertain to both venomous and reptiles of concern. Also, There is a definition applicable to venomous, that clearly states venomous are considered venomous, whether or not they have been altered by surgery (I didn't include it as it isn't applicable to this discussion). Anyway:

Rule Summary
68A-6.007 - Establishes a list of reptiles of concern which will include five (5) large constrictors and the Nile monitor. As an alternative to the one-thousand (1,000) hours of experience required for possessing venomous reptiles, the rule will require a successful completion of an examination
plus five hundred (500) hours of experience. For reptiles of concern, the successful completion of a questionnaire will be required. Out building and cage marking or identification will be required if used for housing venomous reptiles. Bite or exposure protocols and disaster/critical incident plans will be
required as well.

This rule establishes a list of “reptiles of concern” and applicable permit requirements necessary for their possession. The list includes the Indian or Burmese python, Reticulated python, African rock python, Amethystine or Scrub python, Green anaconda and the Nile monitor. Requirements for possession include obtaining a permit by completing an application, a qualifying questionnaire, specify the facility location, and provide caging that meets the same requirements for the housing of venomous reptiles.

Venomous reptile permit applicants will have the option of providing one-thousand (1,000) hours of experience in the care, feeding, handling and husbandry of the species or qualify by providing five-hundred hours of experience along with successfully passing a written exam administered by the Commission’s Division of Law Enforcement.

Venomous reptile possessors will be required to have a “bite or exposure protocol” consisting of emergency contact information, antivenin required for treatment and a plan of action to be taken in the event of a bite or exposure. All venomous reptiles be clearly identified in their enclosures with a card or sign stating “Danger-Venomous Reptile” and indicating the common and scientific name. This will alert public safety personnel to their presence when responding to an emergency situation.

6
FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
COMMISSION
Rule Summary
68A-6.0071 - Requires possessors of venomous reptiles and
reptiles of concern to maintain records of births, deaths,
acquisitions, sales and transfers. Establishes an Inventory
Report form and time periods for its submission.

68A-6.0072 – Requires non-native venomous reptiles and reptiles of concern to be permanently marked or identified and any escapes to be reported to the Commission immediately upon discovery.

68A-6.0071 requires record-keeping and reporting to the Commission of births,
deaths, acquisitions, sales and transfers of venomous reptiles and reptiles of concern.

68A-6.0072 - In order to enhance the accountability of those who possess non-native venomous reptiles or reptiles of concern, staff recommends that these species be permanently identified. Live non-native venomous reptiles shall be permanently identified by photographs or PIT tags (microchips). Live reptiles of concern shall be identified by PIT tags in specimens which are two (2) inches or greater in diameter.
Persons authorized to possess any venomous reptile not indigenous to Florida or reptile of concern must report any escape of these specimens to the Commission immediately upon discovery.

Permanent identification requirements shall not take effect until July 1, 2008, for any live venomous reptiles not indigenous to Florida or any reptile of concern possessed prior to January 1, 2008.

Craig

[X-Factor]

Just a license and a fee for a permit makes it NO better than say, a rottweiler or pit-bull (aka "those killer dogs"). Yes they may be licensed but that won't change public perception no matter how wrong it is. Now, if you institue required training along with the licensing then it works a little better along with defining "large constrictor" and "dangerous" as has been above to some degree. As it is now, it seems its just a money maker for the government.

[CraigC]

Originally Posted by X-Factor

Just a license and a fee for a permit makes it NO better than say, a rottweiler or pit-bull (aka "those killer dogs"). Yes they may be licensed but that won't change public perception no matter how wrong it is. Now, if you institue required training along with the licensing then it works a little better along with defining "large constrictor" and "dangerous" as has been above to some degree. As it is now, it seems its just a money maker for the government.

Money maker? Rotties and other dogs haven't established breeding populations in the Everglades nor are they a threat to native wildlife. Personally, I would rather see the money it is costing to clean up the mess come from a source other than Joe Taxpayer at large.

It will be interesting to see if those pet stores and the breeders who support them, are willing to go through the rquirements. The way I look at it, is this will change nothing as far as those folks who are truely passonate about these animals, but no pet store will be able to give misinformation nor send a walkin out the door with one of these species anymore. This should effectively stop the dumping of unwanted animals.

Craig

[X-Factor]

Originally Posted by CraigC

Money maker? Rotties and other dogs haven't established breeding populations in the Everglades nor are they a threat to native wildlife. Personally, I would rather see the money it is costing to clean up the mess come from a source other than Joe Taxpayer at large.

It will be interesting to see if those pet stores and the breeders who support them, are willing to go through the rquirements. The way I look at it, is this will change nothing as far as those folks who are truely passonate about these animals, but no pet store will be able to give misinformation nor send a walkin out the door with one of these species anymore. This should effectively stop the dumping of unwanted animals.

Craig

Well in Florida I would certainly agree with you, but with more northern states and those that are not condusive to natural living for larger boids it would appear to be a government money maker.

[CraigC]

Ah, I think we are looking at this from different aspects. Personally, I believe Florida is more concerned from an environmental standpoint than a safety standpoint or concern over public image. Most folks "on the street" probably could care less about what goes on with the glades or whether someone is keeping reptiles. Even the water restrictions we are under right now don't phase most people enough to concern themselves with the Everglades (our water supply).

I think this legislation will "kill two birds...", even though it is really meant to stop the dumping and make those who do accountable. Folks who are truely into these large constrictors and nile monitors will follow the rules and those that think it just too much of a hassel, well they really weren't interested in the first place. Yes, everyone should and does have the right to do what they want, but sometimes the other part of that equation is lost out of sight and mind, "as long as it does not harm or infringe on someone elses rights". In a manner of speaking, wild, breeding populations of exotic animals do infringe on others rights.

Craig

[amercnwmn]

Incidentally Craig, since many arboreals reach pretty good lengths, a constrictor ban for snakes of 6ft and more would affect you guys, wouldn't it?? I hadn't thought of arboreals in that equation.