Looking at the species covered and the area they are in, I understand, but I disagree with the wack job policy. I'm sure it is meant to keep people from releasing unwanted, huge, potentially agressive animals into an environment where they would thrive. Why don't they just increase funding to animal rescues that are designed to take these animals in. And fine petstores for not educating customers on the finer aspects of "This Animal Will Get Huge". And, yes, most of those species can be tamed down to handelable, but how many people that are wlling to release an animal are really going to spend the time to do so?



Policies like this only hurt those that are responsible.



If all the reptile/pet owners packed up and moved to one state, all the others would realize the impact that pet owners have on a community and a state economy.
-----
Quitters never win, winners never quit, but those who never win and never quit are idiots

[ Hide Replies ]

• Wildlife Commission Considers Tougher Re - jmartin104, Mon Jan 29 07:30:10 2007
• RE: Wildlife Commission Considers Tougher Re - jdillow, Mon Jan 29 09:53:29 2007
• RE: Wildlife Commission Considers Toughe - jmartin104, Mon Jan 29 10:07:00 2007
• RE: Wildlife Commission Considers Tougher Re - LeoLady420, Mon Jan 29 12:50:32 2007
• RE: Wildlife Commission Considers Tougher Re - j3nnay, Mon Jan 29 10:21:58 2007
• RE: Wildlife Commission Considers Tougher Re - toddbecker, Mon Jan 29 12:09:44 2007
• Couldnt the illegal dumper - zefdin, Mon Jan 29 13:38:10 2007
• RE: Couldnt the illegal dumper - jmartin104, Mon Jan 29 13:43:21 2007
• chip "surgery" - amarilrose, Mon Jan 29 14:59:33 2007
• RE: chip "surgery" - EricIvins, Mon Jan 29 17:14:30 2007
• it only takes one - jyohe, Mon Jan 29 19:04:54 2007
• RE: Looking for specific regulations - DZBReptiles, Mon Jan 29 14:02:14 2007
• RE: Wildlife Commission Considers Toughe - mpuexotics, Mon Jan 29 15:41:17 2007
• RE: Wildlife Commission Considers Toughe - toshamc, Mon Jan 29 21:30:32 2007