Throw burms under the bus?

[BWSmith]

With all of the current legislation both on state and federal levels, is it better to "throw burms under the bus" and push for burm only legislation or fight all legislation on regulation of any reptile?
Points to ponder:
- Burmese Pythons are the basis of most new regulations and/or bans
- Other large constrictors are lumped together with Burms because of size similarities
- Burmese Pythons constitute a large percentage of rescues and are difficult to place
- Burmese Pythons have a high mortality rate due to resp infections and poor husbandry
- Burmese Pythons are generally the most docile of giant snakes and the best captive
- Burmese Pythons are generally inexpensive and often a large part of many dealers' base income
- Burmese Pythons have many morphs that contribute to private breeders
- Burmese Pythons would become commercially nearly worthless overnight, but other species such as Boas, Retics, Anacondas, Ball Pythons, etc MAY be spared

[RayRay]

I voted for the second choice.
I think picking one species opens the door for them to start adding others.

[BWSmith]

I should have added that almost all the bad press ecological problems are because of Burmse Pythons. "Everglades Invasion", released Burms, the 2 year old that got killed, etc etc.

But you are right, it is definately opening the door to other species and genus. But by the same token, exotic venomous dont have any federal regs, but many states do and are adding new ones. It seems that Large Constrictors are at a greater risk than venomous.

If there was an easy answer, it wouldn't be in the debate section

[RayRay]

Originally Posted by BWSmith

I should have added that almost all the bad press ecological problems are because of Burmse Pythons. "Everglades Invasion", released Burms, the 2 year old that got killed, etc etc.
But you are right, it is definately opening the door to other species and genus. But by the same token, exotic venomous dont have any federal regs, but many states do and are adding new ones. It seems that Large Constrictors are at a greater risk than venomous.
If there was an easy answer, it wouldn't be in the debate section

No there is not.
I have never before been involved with legislation on snakes or other reptiles deemed dangerous by the federal and local government, but I have done extensive research on dog breeds and even attended hearings in my city
(and others) regarding laws on restricting/banning their ownership.

The same formula applies to Burmese pythons as it does to Pit Bulls. They are big, powerful, and popular! They take out the most popular choice, and soon they begin taking other breeds out, too. The ordinance proposed in my city a few years ago suggested banning pit bulls... along with about 10 other large-breed dogs known to make headlines.

In addition to irresponsible owners, I equally hate the media, because they certainly don't do anyone any favors. I won't even watch the news any more!

[LdyDrgn]

My thoughts are the same as Rachels.

[amercnwmn]

I think it's a BIG mistake when we allow our government to tell us what we can and can't have.
As already stated, it opens the door for more species to be added to that list.
The only reason cats haven't been banned is they're so cute and fluffy. Add fur to the Burms and no one would be complaining.

[TalismanK9]

Give them an inch and they think their a ruler. I just can't get over the "big brothers watching you" attitude. While many laws make for good common sense they all just open the door for more invasive regulations in my book. As a for instance...first it was seat belts, then it led to no smoking in the car with minors, no cell phones..... while good and righteous its still chipping away at our hard earned rights.

[John_White]

At this point, I don't think that voluntary giving-up a single species will satisfy the thirst of our opponents.

[toker]

Originally Posted by John_White

At this point, I don't think that voluntary giving-up a single species will satisfy the thirst of our opponents.

I agree. Besides where does it end? If they get it in their head that they were right all along, whats next?

Just walking down the road here...

A kid gets killed by whatever snake. Caging requirements are imposed with mandatory insurance imposed on owners.

A kid gets killed. Permit system put in place. This requires in home inspections of all enclosures.

Now the fun part: They realize that they are making some major money from permits, cost increases every year to fund 'political pet projects'

Think all this is far fetched? This situation has played out the same with the Automobiles. Mandatory Insurance, Mandatory license, Mandatory registration, and at least in Memphis, Mandatory inspections.

Also, anyone see how much getting a license plate has gone up over the past 10 years??

DO NOT LET THEM IN!!!

[TalismanK9]

Originally Posted by toker

I agree. Besides where does it end? If they get it in their head that they were right all along, whats next?
Just walking down the road here...
A kid gets killed by whatever snake. Caging requirements are imposed with mandatory insurance imposed on owners.
A kid gets killed. Permit system put in place. This requires in home inspections of all enclosures.
Now the fun part: They realize that they are making some major money from permits, cost increases every year to fund 'political pet projects'
Think all this is far fetched? This situation has played out the same with the Automobiles. Mandatory Insurance, Mandatory license, Mandatory registration, and at least in Memphis, Mandatory inspections.
Also, anyone see how much getting a license plate has gone up over the past 10 years??
DO NOT LET THEM IN!!!

Same place I was trying to go with my post just much more well said.

[BWSmith]

Originally Posted by John_White

At this point, I don't think that voluntary giving-up a single species will satisfy the thirst of our opponents.

You are absolutely right. In retrospect, as soon as wild populations of Burmese Pythons started to get established, it should have been the reptile community that demanded action. If we had been policing ourselves over the years, much of this could have been avoided.

The Burm population in the everglades and the press associated with it, the 2 year old in FL getting killed, and the "scientific" papers on possible migration have been huge catalysts to our adversaries. They have seen too much federal legislation get further than it ever has in the past and they are drooling over it. The political waters are chummed to strip our rights away and we are sinking. We should, and do, try everything to stay afloat with all of our passengers. But my feeling is that if keeping Burms on board makes the whole boat sink and tossing them over saves the thousands of other species, then I am willing to make that sacrifice for the greater good.

Now we SHOUDN'T have to make that decision, but I think it will come to that eventually. We fight for all or nothing as hard as we can and it will work for a while. But eventually politics almost always comes down to compromise. Luckily, we all have USARK on our side and alternative proposals to bans and cost prohibitive permit systems such amending the law to simply say that you have to keep certain species a certain way or you are criminally liable (very short version).

After giving testimony last week on such legislation at the state level, I was just curious if all those people that are a hard lined "no" would be willing to give up their personal collections to fight for one species rather than concede one and save the others (for now).

[BWSmith]

Originally Posted by toker

I agree. Besides where does it end? If they get it in their head that they were right all along, whats next?

Just walking down the road here...

A kid gets killed by whatever snake. Caging requirements are imposed with mandatory insurance imposed on owners.

A kid gets killed. Permit system put in place. This requires in home inspections of all enclosures.

Now the fun part: They realize that they are making some major money from permits, cost increases every year to fund 'political pet projects'

Think all this is far fetched? This situation has played out the same with the Automobiles. Mandatory Insurance, Mandatory license, Mandatory registration, and at least in Memphis, Mandatory inspections.

Also, anyone see how much getting a license plate has gone up over the past 10 years??

DO NOT LET THEM IN!!!

Not far fetched at all. In fact, that is pretty close to the progression of the legislation they are trying to pass in GA. But I don't see an argument there, just a prediction

[morti]

I think that the federal government is going to pass something. The senators and representatives have it in their heads that they have to be seen to be doing something.

If it comes down to it, I'd rather see them only ban burms or even burms and afrocks than all 9 species.

Obviously I don't WANT burms to be banned, but if I had to pick personaly as an either/or choice between burms and boas, the burms are going down.

[Samhain]

Live Free Or Die!!!!!!!!!!!

[Samhain]

Originally Posted by John_White

At this point, I don't think that voluntary giving-up a single species will satisfy the thirst of our opponents.

+1

[LooseAFur]

I chose 3, Florida is the only state that NEEDS state regulations. There is still no scientific information supporting the theory that these reptiles could survive in any U.S. environment north of Florida.

[BWSmith]

Originally Posted by Samhain

Live Free Or Die!!!!!!!!!!!

Short and to the point. I like it.

I truly believe that our right to keep large constrictors will be significantly reduced or eliminated in the next 10 years (probably sooner). The only question is to what degree.

Sam, you have retics. Would you rather give up burms, or all giants?

Personally, I think Burms are great snakes IF they are cared for properly. And I hate to say it, but the majority of people that buy Burms are not capable of caring for them into adulthood. It is not the minority that we see online, but rather the masses of inexperienced owners that buy them as babies at the local pet shop. Given the number of Burms that are bred every year, there are comparatively low numbers of large adults because of mortality from improper husbandry.

[BWSmith]

Originally Posted by SC_INK

I chose 3, Florida is the only state that NEEDS state regulations. There is still no scientific information supporting the theory that these reptiles could survive in any U.S. environment north of Florida.

I agree. But remember, this is not about how life SHOULD be, it is about when it comes down to it, is it worth it. In a perfect world, we shouldn't even have to have discussions like this, the government would just leave us alone. Unfortunatley, the government tends to decide what is and isn't their business and feels it is their duty to protect us from free will.

[BWSmith]

i should have reworded the second choice to be "Don't concede, if they ban burms, they can have my boas and retics too"

[BWSmith]

If federal regs are passes banning everything from Ball Pythons to Boas, I wonder how many people at that point would give up Burms to get all the other species back. That will be another poll that I hope we never have to post.