Animal legality

[bfhslilred93]

Ok all this HR669 BS has me thinking and ive got an idea here. I know no congress will ever even hear this but IMO any animal should be legal to own with a permit. Fish and game should sit down with representatives from the pet trade and experts in a given field (ie herps, fish, birds, ect) and come up with a class system for every species of animal depending on the rarity of the animal, availability, affect on the native population if released in the state where the animal will be housed, and possible endangerment to nearby humans.

From there there will be six classes.
Class1: native species that are not threatening to humans and nonnative species: no permit required examples: mollies, parakeet, hamster

class 2: nonnative species and native species that could harm the enviornment: permit required after taking a test on the animal's classification (herp care, bird care, etc) examples: snakehead, ball python, piranha

class 3: native and nonnative species that are a rarity in the wild and require special knowledge: permit required after taking test on the animal's classification and a home inspection examples: macaws, any kind of monkey, asian arowana

class 4: any native and nonnative species that is a threat to nearby humans: permit required after taking a course on safety and proper care and a test must be passed examples: venemous snakes, large predatory mamals, crocodilians

class 5: any nonnative or native species which is a direct threat to human safety and the local enviornment: Crocodilians in florida, piranha in florida

class 6: extremely rare native and nonnative species that is a direct threat to the local enviornment and humans: permit required after completing a course on safety, a course about the animal, a home inspection, and a test examples: exotic cat in the south, a large exotic snake in the south

Now i some of you may say im just some stupid teenager who has no idea what he's talking about but it seems to me that it would...
1. employ people (course teachers, home inspectors, etc.)
2. create a greater knowledge of the animal to the buyer
3. keep stupid people from buying an animal they can't handle
4. allow us to be happy and keep our pets

say what you want but i think this would greatly reduce the number of animals released in non native areas and keep the public safe.

[cassharper]

Don't be so hard on yourself. I'm a proponent of letting experts in the field help regulate these things. Not people from the industry, but people from academia. The only problem with this is that it makes too much sense, so it could never pass into law.

[bfhslilred93]

this just seems like such a no brainer to me it makes me wanna cry.

[bfhslilred93]

bump

[rgonzales]

personally i agree with your idea but i agree it does make too much sense and therefor will not pass

[Allan01230]

Great idea and you never know somebody might actually listen to you. You say your a teenager? Ever think about going into political science in college? When need young people like you/ very badly!

[terd ferguson]

Permits are simply another way for the government to levy unconstitutional taxes. Why one would want not only the fees associated with the permits, but also the higher taxes from the government jobs created to hand out and keep records of these permits, is beyond me.

Everyone should be prepared to go as far as they can to defeat this bill. If you accept government intrusion into our hobby, it will never stop. It will only incrementally get worse. Ask gun owners.:screwy:

[ewurm]

That's a well thought out idea. I think it needs to include regional considerations to be fair. The bill needs to incorporate ideas like this.

[Finalfire9]

Thats a way better way of mapping it

[kog]

did you even watch the hearing video? they do want to assess each animals ecology relative to the receiving habitat eg. quantify its invasive capabilities.

Do you know how much it has already cost to attempt to eradite populations of invasive species? Youre suggesting that people be able to keep potentially highly invasive species, which I cant agree with. The rejection of such species seems like such a no brainer it makes me want to cry.

[Pittbull]

Your heart is in the right direction and i wish it could be that simple but even abiding people have mistakes as well and a cobra in the wrong hands or not could end the life of a precious child or human.. Look what happened to the woman with the monkey that ripped her face off.. also the kid who had a retic python that killed him in Indiana.. yeah so i am on board with animals that can kill you in a blink of an eye being extremely restricted.. but permits is just a piece of paper and usually get in the wrong hands and i don't care how many enforcement agents you hire to do inspections they all cant be in the right place at the right time.. plus like was mentioned above permits are a governments way of intrusion and making more money to employ unnecessary issues, they get enough taxes in that situation..

I am always open for new ways to reformulate our government and it very well may come down to it with the pet trade but don't just wipe it all away..

Good job kiddo keep that momentum going and you will exceed to higher expectations..

[bfhslilred93]

i just think hr669 is a little too extreme. there should be regulations as to who can own what especially if it is dangerous and hard to keep. i kind of agree with the whole permit thing but i think that knowing who owns what and by inspecting/testing the owners on the animal will reduce the jackasses that decide oneday they want to buy a caiman and keep it in their bathtub

[MonsterMinis]

I think a proposition leaning more in such a direction would be better well received.. but I have to comment on the monkey,retic, dangeroud species keeping... We don't require someone to get a special license to own high end muscle cars. And alot more people die yearly to reckless driveing then the rare and random attacks of exotic pets. Irresponsible owners being killed by their pets is quite frankly apart of nature as far as I'm concerned =P harsh maybe. But the boy's parents shouldn't have allowed him such a large aggresive pet to begin with, It's not the snakes fault. It's the parents. The woman who got her face mutilated, Monkey's are not babies to be coddled and docile and always "friendly" . She made the mistake of personifying it. If it's the occurence you speak of.. and She paid the price! Hobbiest have a Responsibility to not only care for their pets but to also let that animal be an animal! We are not god, We can not "Guarantee" our animals to act or be a certain way.

It really ticks me off when people blame the animals, For Human stupidity. Nature is kill or be killed. Humans are apart of nature we are not excluded. We are prey, we are deffinately predetor. We kill far more other species in minutes then they kill of us in a year...

You wanna protect people?

The answer is pretty simple... Don't breed stupid.

Stupidity should not be rewarded, 'nore pitied. Sure I feel bad about the lady and the kid. But I'm not gonna blame the animals for acting like animals.

Thats like hitting your dog, for tripping over it.

If the only option is to regulate with permits, which they are already doing... So it's kinda funny. there will be permits who do get into the wrong hands, see my rant above. But then you can also hold these people accountable for thehir stupidity when someing horrible happens.

I've personally worked with some of the most aggresive and large species of reptiles, and imo the monitor's down in FL are alot more of a concern to me then the burm's ever will be. Snakeheads have been in the US water ways for many many years. and our own Gov't intentionally introduced non-native species into the great lakes to try and "fix" things so now these species are causeing alot more problems then they thought would occur. These animals are here, So lets ban everything... allow only natives to be kept. Which btw if you live in Wisconsin... pretty much means you can own a dog or a cat now.. Oh and goldfish. Since most wisconsin natives are Illegal to own.

Ever seen a Hamster attack someone? I have! drew blood so bad stitches where needed.

Education
Education
Education

I think the wind has died in my sails. and For a kid your very perceptive and intelligent.

[EVAN YUNCK]

do we realy need every wack job out there having preditory mammals? there are reasons why certain animals are banned, look in to it befor you suggest all these animals be leagal to own!

[MonsterMinis]

predetory mammals? Hrmm.. Do you own a dog? or a cat?..That is technically a predetory mammal. I think the key words are "wack job" and I'm assumeing your refering to the less domestic breeds of predetory mammals and likely the larger ones such and lions and tigers and bears? I've seen personally privately owned species of predetory mammals that where in far greater care then zoo kept ones. And I've seen pictures of ill kept ones.. Mainly due to the fact is it is a majority of these animals are imported Illegally by our current laws. So tightening up the laws instead of enforceing the ones we already have and tweeeking whats already there would just be stupid?

A majority of people only see the bad, because in news. negativity sells. You don't see articles written about private owners who are dedicated to the care of their pets, or the species preservation. :headbang2

And technically my horse is a large mammal, don't think he's carnivorous.. but you never know! And he could kill me just as surely as any lion or tiger could. And not any tom dick or harry knows enough to care for a horse either.

So where is the line drawn?

The young man stated a very viable and imo better plan then to just BAN everything.

I'de be interested in seeing a list of endangered species that where bred in captivity by private owners and later used to re-introduce/add genetics to wild populations, expand zooalogical collections. I know of a few, But that would be interesting to toss on the table.

Banning something is never the answer, and as our gun advocate stated.. Once the goverment gets control. There will be no control. I personally never owned a gun, and have no interest in owning one. But I DO belive it is a persons right to able to own one if they are appropriately ceritfied,registed, ect, ect .. And I feel the same way about any animal ownership.

Fluffy and fido are just as capable of killing someone as the neibors pet lion. And chances are his owner knows a whole lot more about what he owns then fluffy or fido's owners do. Not always, hence permits.

And quite simply with habitats decreasing at an alarming rate where should all of these animals go? If we ban ownership of carnivorous mammals. Where should we put all of these animals? Deforestation does more damage then the pet-trade collection, Black market "parts" do more damage to these animals then the pet-trade. How much money has gone into preserving our reefs so they can be harvested for the pet-trade? How much funds have been raised by private owners wanting to preserve their pets natural habitats? How many people who collect these animals for the trade feed and care for their familys on what they make? And want to preserve their habitats for not only thier children but their livelyhood?

I wonder if some people even stop and think about these things before getting out their torches and pitchforks.

Unfortunately there isn't some magical land where all the animals can go and be free in nature. The reality is most of these species have no viable option then to either be soaked into the pet-trade or become extinct. We can't control humna reproduction, and encroachment on natural lands. But we as hobbyists can give these animals a home.

Just because an animals does as nature intended it to do which is to survive,reproduce, and play it's part in nature. Does not give our Gov the right to Ban it's husbandry. I've seen Zoo animals in such conditions I've wanted to toss my cookies, and private ones as well.. and the extreme opposite of both. But I've also seen children kept in such horrible conditions as well, and the xtreme opposite of that.

I vote we Ban children!

[bfhslilred93]

do we realy need every wack job out there having preditory mammals? there are reasons why certain animals are banned, look in to it befor you suggest all these animals be leagal to own!
thats what im saying!!! half the people that have them are responsible and know what theyre doing and half dont. this would eliminate that half

[Pittbull]

That's why its great to be an American everyone is entitled to their opinions and should be.. I am a firm believer in rights.. With that said i am a Sgt Task force and i have regulated a lot of permits, for the most part they work but only for the abiding recipients but i have witness a lot that do not work and i have to go back and enforce the situation..

So for me i am not on board with this Bill HR669 but i will stand behind my word with some of the more dangerous exotics. There are some good resources out there look at rehabs they work and i will support their issue.. Some i refuse to..

With human dignity i will leap to say one child lost to an animal attack is one too many even if the parents knew the recourse of their actions.. And i do blame the parents and will hold them responsible..

I have seen fatal dog attacks and most places in the U.S. have had placed extreme regulations into their ordinances with permits again some work and some don't ..

Great debate my friends..

[bfhslilred93]

oh and when i say dangerous animals as pets i mean it more as like for a sanctuary not really for a private collection