Last Chance to stop the Python and Boa Ban!

[Stefan-A]

about 10 non-profit reptile rescues in Portland. All of them up to their eyeballs in Boa constrictors, ball pythons, and corn snakes. And yet people are still buying "shiny new" babies from the pet stores. These aren't cut flowers people!

I agree. Most people probably don't even know it's an option.

[ConcinusMan]

All very good points. I would also support restrictions instead of out-right banning.

Perhaps a permit. One that requires inspection of the animals accomodations and a significant yearly fee. Some of that money should be used to fund non-profit reptile rescues.

If breeders are making so much money, they shouldn't have a problem with that.

[ConcinusMan]

I agree. Most people probably don't even know it's an option.

Petco has been instrumental in making sure their customers are aware of it. They adopt out far more snakes than they sell.

http://www.google.com/search?q=petco...ient=firefox-a

[Stefan-A]

All very good points. I would also support restrictions instead of out-right banning.

Perhaps a permit. One that requires inspection of the animals accomodations and a significant yearly fee. Some of that money should be used to fund non-profit reptile rescues.

Not possible to organize and fund and the extra expenses for the owner would have much the same effect as an outright ban.

The most practical way to deal with it, in my opinion, is to promote responsible ownership. This is something that should be done anyway within the community. It won't actually solve any problems, but it would make the situation slightly more tolerable.

[jere000]

about 10 non-profit reptile rescues in Portland. All of them up to their eyeballs in Boa constrictors, ball pythons, and corn snakes. And yet people are still buying "shiny new" babies from the pet stores. These aren't cut flowers people!

Whatever ban they impose, let's just hope it is well-written. Oregon has better laws than WA. Better for snake enthusiasts I mean, but still, you can have a 9 foot egyptian cobra. Perfectly legal. But you can't have a tame rattlesnake. Go figure. Now which one do you think poses the greater threat to the public? But anyway, their laws have a loophole that applies to anery concinnus or native garter snakes in general. Native wildlife, yes. But if it is out the norm such as an anery, or an albino, etc. it's legal.

Yeah i doubt they have the high end animals such as moonglow snows and such.

[ConcinusMan]

Not possible to organize and fund and the extra expenses for the owner would have much the same effect as an outright ban.

The most practical way to deal with it, in my opinion, is to promote responsible ownership. This is something that should be done anyway within the community. It won't actually solve any problems, but it would make the situation slightly more tolerable.

What I suggested has already been applied in one form or another, to venomous reptiles. Sure, it has pretty much the same negative effects of a ban, but would allow for captive breeding of rare or endangered snakes so at least they wouldn't have to perish. Oh wait. The 9 species on the list are anything but endangered. Nevermind.

[Stefan-A]

What I suggested has already been applied in one form or another, to venomous reptiles. Sure, it has pretty much the same negative effects of a ban, but would allow for captive breeding of rare or endangered snakes so at least they wouldn't have to perish. Oh wait. The 9 species on the list are anything but endangered. Nevermind.

We used to have a dog tax. That didn't work, either. Every time you add something to the list that have to be inspected, you increase the work load of people who are usually already under-staffed and insufficiently funded.



To think that captive breeding somehow prevents species from perishing, is to completely fail to understand that there is an underlying cause for them being endangered. But yeah, this is not about endangered species.

[ConcinusMan]

We still do have a "dog tax". Every few years, I must license my 4 dogs. It's discounted (much cheaper) if they are spayed or neutered.

Dogs that come in to the shelters which are not tagged/licensed are unfortunately given very little time before they get the gas chamber. IF an owner comes to claim one of them, they are slapped with a fine, mandatory spay/neutering bill, AND have to pay for tags on top of that.

Seems to be working just fine here.

About the captive breeding comment, I was only suggesting that it's better to have the species exist only in captivity, than to not exist at all.

[Stefan-A]

We still do have a "dog tax". Every few years, I must license my 4 dogs. It's discounted (much cheaper) if they are spayed or neutered.

How much is it, if you don't pay at all?

Dogs that come in to the shelters which are not tagged/licensed are unfortunately given very little time before they get the gas chamber. IF an owner comes to claim one of them, they are slapped with a fine, mandatory spay/neutering bill, AND have to pay for tags on top of that.

Seems to be working just fine here.

I beg to differ. It seems pretty damned messed up, considering that the dog is your property and very likely a beloved family member.

About the captive breeding comment, I was only suggesting that it's better to have the species exist only in captivity, than to not exist at all.

Marginally and even then only if something can be done with that captive population.

[WingedWolfPsion]

Unwanted ball pythons and corn snakes is a local issue. Where I am here, you simply do not see them. If they turn up in shelters, they're adopted out fairly quickly.
I have also never had a problem selling my normal male baby ball pythons. There's a high demand here.

I think one of the issues some rescues ignore is the fact that if their adoption fee is higher than the cost of buying an animal from a breeder or pet store, people are not very likely to adopt it. Yes, the rescue has to pay for its activities, but they also need to be realistic, and all too often...they aren't. I saw a rescue recently offering to adopt out a pair of green anoles for a $30 adoption fee. Seriously?

Boas may be more difficult to adopt out, because some subspecies grow larger. I haven't seen any of those in shelters here, either, though.

It's incredibly naive to believe that banning species that are currently popular will stop people from giving animals to shelters and rescues. The species you see most often in the rescues will change, that's all. In the meantime, people are losing their livelihoods, and nothing is being gained from it at all.

Do you know what will happen if this passes? Your rescues will be FLOODED with giant snakes that have been rendered worthless overnight.

I think the idea that a species is better off extinct than in captivity is just reprehensible and selfish, frankly. The notion that captivity is a terrible place for animals to be derives directly from the animal rights movement, and it is anthropomorphic in the extreme. Animals that are healthy and engage in normal breeding and feeding behaviors must be assumed to be reasonably happy. The fact that WE wouldn't be happy in a cage is totally irrelevant. The idea that 'wild animals are only happy in the wild' is just that--an idea, an assumption, and not one that has any REAL justification. It's a completely made-up notion.