I just read the whole thing according to the link you provided. This was very interesting reading. From what I can see the governing body of this town has a lot of time on their hands to worry about irrelevant issues and lack the knowledge to actually draft relevant legislation.

I have already pointed out the whole insect/arachnid thing and they do not go further into this within the text of the ordinance with the exception of bees which you pointed out. The other obvious issue is that from a taxonomic perspective this ordinance effectively outlaws domestic dogs being that it specifically forbids the keeping of Canis lupus with no distinction made for either separate subspecies of C. lupus or by specifically exempting domestic dogs. Interestingly enough they list the red wolf in their ordinance and list it as Canis niger which is incorrect this animal is known properly as Canis rufus (with some debate to the possibility of it being a C. lupus subspecies C. lupus rufus.) it really doesn't matter anyway because it would be virtually impossible for a private citizen to actually obtain red wolves for private use but one does have to ask that given this impossiblity what is the point of including this in this piece of legislation.

That leads me to one of my final questions of this legislation. What is the thing with banning sea turtles and why only 3 species instead of all species of sea turtles? Once again these are animals that are all but impossible for a private citizen to own given the federal laws protecting them and yet for some reason this town sees a need to prohibit someone from owning 3 species of them(and only 3) which defies any logic I can think of. I'll be scratching my head about that one for a while.

[ Show Entire Thread ]