Law against live feeding? V 1.0

[faroutinmt]

This is version 1 of the debate "Law against live feeding??". This is not a place to insult, mock, degrade or put down members for their views. Engage the debate in the spirit in which it is meant to be debated.

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 "You're 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, or studies you have read or done.
4) DO NOT plagiarize. If you quote someone's findings, please give credit by providing the name, or a link.
5) Before posting, please read the rules of this forum. Debate Forum Rules. EVERYONE READ

Most folks who keep Australian reptiles are aware that the feeding of live prey to captive reptiles in Australia is illegal. I was just wondering if such a law might be useful here in the US.

Would such a law prove useful for protecting herps and discouraging keepers from putting their pets in potentially dangerous situations? Would it be useful for increasing the businesses of full time prey breeders? Would it be useful for encouraging and promoting reptile keeping in general as a humane hobby? (There are organizations which seek to promote it as inhumane)

Any thoughts?

[mpgt]

It wouldn't bother me to see such a law here, but I doubt they would be able to effectively enforce it.

[faroutinmt]

Well, I don't know that they really enforce it over there. But, it does seem to discourage many from doing it and promoting it. I was just wondering if, perhaps, simply passing the law might be a deterrent...at least in some measure.

[RioBravoReptiles]

... as was just mentioned.. such a ban may curtail many of the yahoos and idiots from tearing down our hobby through their home movies of their 'dumb-and-dumberer', 'watch-this' stunts.
.
Ultimately, however, the concept that such a law would be needed is in itself an attack on the hobby and industry. It would focus more unfair scrutiny on the details of the husbandry of reptiles.. by people who have little or no context or experience to make proper judgements.
.
Wanna stop the live-feeding yee-haw cowboys? Ignore them and put them down whenever they get in your face. And always educate people about the animals and our interests in them and the truth about the non-problem of captive reptiles... The whole hysteria-mania-pop-star environment would simply go away if everytime somebody jumps on a big snake in Venezuela on TV or hams-up wrassling a 'glades' burm for the kids (of all ages) .. that people would just change the channel or whatever.. No more problems for anybody.
.
That's some of my opinion on that.

[WHO????]

How about the 6' Russian Rat Snake I owned he would not eat anything else but live? 8 months fighting with him, every trick in the book, he ended up so skinny that it was heartbreaking to walk into my bedroom and see him on the shelves with the other snakes. But I stuck to my guns, did everything everyone on here said.

It got to the place where he was so larthergic that an otherwise active snake could be poked and part way lifted up before he responded to you being in the cage. I know without a doubt that had I not went with live, he would have died. I am not a promoter of live feeding, actually quite the opposite, but there are times when it is necessary.

I don't need a law telling me that I should let a reptile in my care starve to death.

[RioBravoReptiles]

Originally Posted by HARTSOCK

How about the 6' Russian Rat Snake I owned he would not eat anything else but live? 8 months fighting with him, every trick in the book, he ended up so skinny that it was heartbreaking to walk into my bedroom and see him on the shelves with the other snakes. But I stuck to my guns, did everything everyone on here said.
It got to the place where he was so larthergic that an otherwise active snake could be poked and part way lifted up before he responded to you being in the cage. I know without a doubt that had I not went with live, he would have died. I am not a promoter of live feeding, actually quite the opposite, but there are times when it is necessary.
I don't need a law telling me that I should let a reptile in my care starve to death.

.
Sure, you do what you have to do, and it's none of anybody's business. You feeding live to a snake that would otherwise starve is one thing.. people who promote live feeding, even as a sport! .. and more stupid stuff are all-together a different species.
.
Be safe.

[faroutinmt]

Originally Posted by RioBravoReptiles

... as was just mentioned.. such a ban may curtail many of the yahoos and idiots from tearing down our hobby through their home movies of their 'dumb-and-dumberer', 'watch-this' stunts.
.
Ultimately, however, the concept that such a law would be needed is in itself an attack on the hobby and industry. It would focus more unfair scrutiny on the details of the husbandry of reptiles.. by people who have little or no context or experience to make proper judgements.
.
Wanna stop the live-feeding yee-haw cowboys? Ignore them and put them down whenever they get in your face. And always educate people about the animals and our interests in them and the truth about the non-problem of captive reptiles... The whole hysteria-mania-pop-star environment would simply go away if everytime somebody jumps on a big snake in Venezuela on TV or hams-up wrassling a 'glades' burm for the kids (of all ages) .. that people would just change the channel or whatever.. No more problems for anybody.
.
That's some of my opinion on that.

Well, I guess I was thinking more of what it might do to promote a positive image of the majority of reptile keepers as being humane folks who care about their animals. And, that it might help the frozen feeders businesses too.

The decline of the superstar live feeding showmen would just be a nice side effect.

[WHO????]

Originally Posted by RioBravoReptiles

.
Sure, you do what you have to do, and it's none of anybody's business. You feeding live to a snake that would otherwise starve is one thing.. people who promote live feeding, even as a sport! .. and more stupid stuff are all-together a different species.
.
Be safe.

True and I do wish that all the stupid live feeding crap out there would go away, BUT what would it look like for the hobby if the law passed and someone goes on feeding their snake live because it is a necessity, keeping it private and whatnot, and somehow word gets out. Think of the press' field day with that one. And think of the repercussions. I would assume that it would fall under animal cruelity and there would be the loss of your herps as one of the punishments. A law just doesn't seem to be the way to go. I think it would draw more attention for the idiots who do it as a fun thing to do. After all, what is a way to make something popular? Tell someone they can't do it.

[Lucille]

1) The first and most obvious problem with such a law would be enforcement. Like the laws purporting to prohibit certain kinds of sex, in order to enforce you have to generally go inside people's homes which requires a warrant and probable cause, and actually catch them in the act.
In this day and age of abuse and murder, I just do not see many judges signing warrants to send law enforcement officers into a citizen's home to catch them feeding live rodents to snakes. Most judges will not give a rats behind about such matters faced with all they have to do.

Even if you do happen to get an arrest, a conviction will cost tens of thousands of dollars for each conviction. A good attorney will impeach the officer's eyewitness testimony by showing that when a snake eats a dead rodents there is some rodent movement just because the snake moves the prey around while eating, and will demand that the officer prove that the prey was in fact live when eaten, and not just prove it, but prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. This is not so easy to do and if it cannot be done, there cannot be a convicition.

Most feedings take place fairly fast. If there is a live rat uneaten with a snake in an enclosure, it is not 'fed' according to the way the statute might be written because it is obviously not eaten. Once a snake strikes, it eats the prey up quickly, even with a warrant what are the chances that the officer will catch the live rat, in the jaws of the snake, and be able prove all of this beyond a reasonable doubt? It could be done but again, at the cost of tens of thousands of dollars of prosecutor, officer and expert time.

There are those that tape and publish their snakes eating live for entertainment. There are all kinds of proof problems involved: linking the publisher with the act is one. It would not necessarily be illegal to tape such a display, it would be illegal to feed and so the actual act of feeding ie putting the rodent in the enclosure would also have to be taped along with proof of identity of the person feeding, not the person publishing. I have seen a few of these distasteful types of displays but have not ever seen one that accurately shows the face of the feeder along with, in the same tape, the act of feeding to make the publication proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and then there would be problems authenticating such a record in order to have it admitted as evidence.


2) The next problem is that legislators considering such a law will focus on how rodents, etc. are killed prior to feeding. The commercial rodent houses have their mass production methods, but when the ordinary man on the street hears that private rodent breeders sometimes kill by slamming the rodent against a hard surface, he is naturally going to wonder whether such a law is in fact worthwhile.

3) Not only the commercial rodent houses but also the chicken/beef industry may pour a couple million in to see that such a proposed law quietly goes away unpassed. They all kill live and at least the commercial chicken/beef industry has come under fire and expensive litigation for their killing methods. They do not want any kind of focus on how animals are killed for commerce and I would think they would spend a lot to make such efforts go away. Not all the time, but many times, money wins.

[razeraze]

I agree completely with HARTSOCK. I had a boa that would only take live and have talked to a few venomous keepers who have had the same problem. A law like that would end up giving picky stubborn snakes a death sentence.
There needs to be a law against idiots keeping animals, until then stupid people will continue to abuse, neglect and exploit animals.

[faroutinmt]

Originally Posted by HARTSOCK

True and I do wish that all the stupid live feeding crap out there would go away, BUT what would it look like for the hobby if the law passed and someone goes on feeding their snake live because it is a necessity, keeping it private and whatnot, and somehow word gets out. Think of the press' field day with that one. And think of the repercussions. I would assume that it would fall under animal cruelity and there would be the loss of your herps as one of the punishments. A law just doesn't seem to be the way to go.

True. There are always extremists on both sides. Laws are good when they defend the rights of others, not when they take them away from those who do others no wrong.

[faroutinmt]

Originally Posted by Lucille

1) The first and most obvious problem with such a law would be enforcement. Like the laws purporting to prohibit certain kinds of sex, in order to enforce you have to generally go inside people's homes which requires a warrant and probable cause, and actually catch them in the act.
In this day and age of abuse and murder, I just do not see many judges signing warrants to send law enforcement officers into a citizen's home to catch them feeding live rodents to snakes. Most judges will not give a rats behind about such matters faced with all they have to do.
Even if you do happen to get an arrest, a conviction will cost tens of thousands of dollars for each conviction. A good attorney will impeach the officer's eyewitness testimony by showing that when a snake eats a dead rodents there is some rodent movement just because the snake moves the prey around while eating, and will demand that the officer prove that the prey was in fact live when eaten, and not just prove it, but prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. This is not so easy to do and if it cannot be done, there cannot be a convicition.
Most feedings take place fairly fast. If there is a live rat uneaten with a snake in an enclosure, it is not 'fed' according to the way the statute might be written because it is obviously not eaten. Once a snake strikes, it eats the prey up quickly, even with a warrant what are the chances that the officer will catch the live rat, in the jaws of the snake, and be able prove all of this beyond a reasonable doubt? It could be done but again, at the cost of tens of thousands of dollars of prosecutor, officer and expert time.
There are those that tape and publish their snakes eating live for entertainment. There are all kinds of proof problems involved: linking the publisher with the act is one. It would not necessarily be illegal to tape such a display, it would be illegal to feed and so the actual act of feeding ie putting the rodent in the enclosure would also have to be taped along with proof of identity of the person feeding, not the person publishing. I have seen a few of these distasteful types of displays but have not ever seen one that accurately shows the face of the feeder along with, in the same tape, the act of feeding to make the publication proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and then there would be problems authenticating such a record in order to have it admitted as evidence.
2) The next problem is that legislators considering such a law will focus on how rodents, etc. are killed prior to feeding. The commercial rodent houses have their mass production methods, but when the ordinary man on the street hears that private rodent breeders sometimes kill by slamming the rodent against a hard surface, he is naturally going to wonder whether such a law is in fact worthwhile.
3) Not only the commercial rodent houses but also the chicken/beef industry may pour a couple million in to see that such a proposed law quietly goes away unpassed. They all kill live and at least the commercial chicken/beef industry has come under fire and expensive litigation for their killing methods. They do not want any kind of focus on how animals are killed for commerce and I would think they would spend a lot to make such efforts go away. Not all the time, but many times, money wins.

Excellent points.

[angrybananapeel]

I'm against it (law against live feeding). I don't feed live food to my snakes, but I have had to in the past. My saharan sand boa went 10 months off feed til I gave him live (after a few months of feeding frozen - which we did from the start, it was odd). I also will not demonize or attack people who do feed live. Sure, they think it's cool and we think they are immature, or foolish because of it... but, hey, it is sorta cool, so how can I really judge them for thinking so. How can I say it isn't? Isn't it cool to see a bird dive down and grab a live fish out of water? Isn't it kinda cool to see the lion bring down the gazelle? Hard to keep a bird diving fish in your bedroom, and hard to keep a lion in your backyard while you drag the gazelle from the feeding pen. Best you can do is hope to educate people about the positives of f/t p/k and negs of live. Hopefully they will do what is best for their snake. But hey, some people feed their dogs "Ol' Roy" dog food too. I could make a case for outlawing that crap.
I don't like government. They have more important stuff to worry about, like whether or not Roger Clemens used steroids. There is virtually no way to regulate it anyway. You can raise your own rats/mice and feed live without worrying about a pet store giving you crap if you really want to. People did it long before youtube existed, and they will continue, as long as snakes continue eating live in the wild.


How long til we outlaw feeding live crickets/worms? not furry enough? Not big enough? They do have "can o' crickets' you know. My leos like those things. I need to get some more.

[owen.richards]

If i didnt have access to live food, Chomper would be dead, If we didnt have access to live food, hundreds of thousands of snakes would be dead. I think a law like that would be rediculous.

[CraigC]

Discretion is a very key thing in this debate. We try to start our neos on f/t, but I'm not going to pass up that all important first meal to appease the nay sayers. The parents might be well conditioned to taking f/t, but that certainly isn't instilled in the neos. They have to be conditioned from scratch so to speak.

Craig

[DannyBoy]

Originally Posted by CraigC

Discretion is a very key thing in this debate. We try to start our neos on f/t, but I'm not going to pass up that all important first meal to appease the nay sayers. The parents might be well conditioned to taking f/t, but that certainly isn't instilled in the neos. They have to be conditioned from scratch so to speak.
Craig

I wholeheartily agree. Discretion is what it comes down to. F/T is the goal, but in a realistic world we make judgement calls after weighing all the factors of each situation.

[project_evolution]

Exactly what the reptile community does not need is government interference. Bureaucracies generally try to do the right thing and end up screwing everything up. For instance the law passes, but its attached in a way that puts it under some departments jurisdiction. A year later said department decides all reptiles must be housed in X type container, and Z type bedding must be used, a nominal fee of 10.00 per year for licensing is imposed. A year after that comes the bans on any reptile over 6', there go your burms/redtails/monitors/iguanas/etc. Now the license doubles every year for the next couple years until its way out of control. Soon you will need federal transport permits to take your animals to the vet (if you dont think thatll happen check the laws concerning transport of pure bred eurasion boars), making it unfeasable to even care for your pet.
Bottom line is Ive seen how lumping too much power over what we are free to do/own can be a very bad thing. Government regulation is never the answer imo and usually only serves to limit or destroy liberty. I own several hundred animals and they are all doing just fine without the govenment coming onto my place trying to push me around.

[Rachel SS]

Originally Posted by owen.richards

If i didnt have access to live food, Chomper would be dead, If we didnt have access to live food, hundreds of thousands of snakes would be dead. I think a law like that would be rediculous.

How would they be dead? If you think about it, most boas and pythons are opportunistic feeders. If they come across a dead rodent, bird, or some other animal in the wild, they'll eat it. Takes a lot more energy to hunt, strike, constrict, and eat then it does to eat some big dead thing that still feels warm to them.

It took me about 6 months to switch my male ball python from live to f/t or pk, but he did it. They'll eat when they're hungry.

[majkill]

Originally Posted by missraywoj

How would they be dead? If you think about it, most boas and pythons are opportunistic feeders. If they come across a dead rodent, bird, or some other animal in the wild, they'll eat it. Takes a lot more energy to hunt, strike, constrict, and eat then it does to eat some big dead thing that still feels warm to them.
It took me about 6 months to switch my male ball python from live to f/t or pk, but he did it. They'll eat when they're hungry.

I don't wanna sound arrogant or like im pickin on you (cos i'm not) but...

Originally Posted by missraywoj

that still feels warm to them

This can only be if the snake comes across the dead animal within a few hours of its demise. Also any longer then that and the animal would have started to decompose, something i also think a snake would stay away from. Yes snakes may be opportunistic, but i don't think its to the extent that they will readily go for dead prey. Although i'm not denying that its entirely possibly this can happen

[WHO????]

Originally Posted by missraywoj

How would they be dead? If you think about it, most boas and pythons are opportunistic feeders. If they come across a dead rodent, bird, or some other animal in the wild, they'll eat it. Takes a lot more energy to hunt, strike, constrict, and eat then it does to eat some big dead thing that still feels warm to them.
It took me about 6 months to switch my male ball python from live to f/t or pk, but he did it. They'll eat when they're hungry.

at the risk of being ignored by old Missraywoj here, I will post this anyway because of the general misinformation that is in her statement. They are opportunistic feeders, but they won't always eat something that is dead. Some won't eat when they are hungry, some will get weaker and weaker and die. Some will also get to the point where even if they do final take it, the damage to their kidneys and other organs cannot easily be fixed. NOT ALL SNAKES WILL TAKE F/T OR PREKILLED. Not all can be switched. I would say most can, and will, if you are willing to put the time in and work with them, but not all will.

Plus, I know Owen on here well enough to know that he gives excellent care to his snakes and does everything for them. If he says his snake won't eat f/t, then I believe him one hundred precent.

Is f/t better and safer? YES, 100 percent yes and I would encourage everyone to feed in that manner. No sense taking the risk otherwise, except for those stubborn ones who won't take f/t. Ask my Saharan Sand Boas, who none would take f/t; all three went 10 months before I gave in and give them live. Two ate the live right away, the other was so weak that it couldn't do it. It died the next day. Not all snakes will take f/t.