Posted by:
krz
at Thu Jun 9 08:14:12 2005 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by krz ]
For those of you who would like to know our position- here is what we sent to fish and wildlife. It's public record, so you can get your own copy if you'd like. This letter was written in response to several conversations we had with Jim Lane regarding the new KY laws. For your information:
1. only dangerous exotics are banned, including venomous snakes, crocs, big cats, primates, bears, etc.
2. Native venomous are not covered by this law.
3. All animals currently in the state are grandfathered. all you need is documentation (ie sales receipt) showing that the animal was obtained before the law went into effect.
4. Most large cities in KY already have laws banning either all exotics, or also including constrictors and native venomous. We felt that supporting a less restricitve law was better than fighting for no law at all. Something was going to be passed no matter what.
This letter will make many of you angry because we do state that venomous snakes are dangerous and can effect people negatively. When you are awakened at 2 or 3 in the morning for a snakebite then you can have your own opinion of how you feel about it. We can back up everything we said in the letter.
Remember that production of venom for antivenom and disease research is important and serves a humanitarian use. Most of our animals are either bred here or come from another zoo. We have purchased animals from some animal dealers, but due to disease problems we rarely do this. There are private keepers out there who do a great job and are responsible (ie have antisera.) However, there are too many people keeping animals irresponsibly and bad things (ie deaths) have occurred. Laws are the inevitable result. We couldn't stop this law so we decided to support a reasonable law- banning venomous is not so bad when they could have banned all exotics.
Also, we did state at the public hearing (where were you at that Joliff if you're so concerned?) that we would be willing to assist the department if they decided to implement a permit system. We have stated to Jim Lane that we would provide free training and also assist with writing the rules if they were interested. The state does not have the time or resources to implement such a permit system. We can't make them do it.
The letter follows.
-Jim Harrison and Kristen Wiley
KY Reptile Zoo
This letter is in response to your inquiry about our opinion of 301 KAR 2:082, regarding importation and transportation of exotic dangerous wildlife.
Kentucky Reptile Zoo’s position is that venomous reptiles and crocodilians can pose a danger to the general public, emergency responders, and fish and wildlife agents when kept as pets. Kentucky Reptile Zoo believes that these animals can be kept responsibly, however this is not often the case. Responsible ownership of dangerous reptiles includes keeping proper antisera for venomous species, sturdy and secure caging, appropriate signage indicating venomous animals are present, and proper insurance to cover any accidents. We realize that to establish and enforce a permit system that would regulate ownership of these animals and create proper standards for their maintenance would be cost prohibitive to the state. In the absence of such a restrictive permit system, Kentucky Reptile Zoo supports a ban on the keeping of venomous reptiles. We also support the exemption policy as currently worded.
Two recent snakebite deaths in Ohio underscore the need for this type of legislation. Both of these cases involved private individuals who kept exotic snakes as pets. One main argument made by private owners is that they are the only ones who are put at risk by these animals, and that they have the right to take that risk if they so choose. It is our position that a private bite can and does affect many more people than just the individual owner. Please allow me to present an example scenario of snakebite to a private keeper. Initially, the keeper is bitten by an exotic snake for which he has no antivenom. The keeper is then at risk of death or permanent disfigurement due to the bite. Most snakebites are surviviable if proper antivenom can be located, however antivenom does not affect necrosis or death of tissue that can be caused by the venom. Therefore even if the victim survives there may be permanent loss of use of a limb, which could result in the person not being able to work. If the victim retains consciousness and rational thought, the snake may be replaced in its cage after the bite. However, if the person loses consciousness or simply panics, the snake may be loose in the house. Emergency personnel will then be at risk themselves when responding to the scene. It goes without saying that most paramedics and other first responders are generally not trained to handle a venomous snake safely. Additionally, the unnecessary use of such personnel for this reason precludes their being able to respond to any other potential needs during that time period.
Once the victim arrives at the hospital, the treating doctors must generally attempt to locate the proper antivenom for the snake species that caused the bite. Generally, many private owners do not know what antivenom must be used, and we have even encountered cases where the person did not even know what species of snake they were bitten by. Usually the doctor calls the nearest zoos in an effort to locate antivenom. Zoo personnel then either supply the antivenom if they have it (and they only keep antivenom for the snakes they have, not all venomous snake species,) or call around to other zoos who will then supply the antivenom to the hospital. This process can take hours from the initial bite to the antivenom actually arriving at the hospital. Delay of treatment can result in reduced efficacy of the antivenom and more serious effects of the venom.
Many private keepers tend to forget that zoos do not base their antivenom supply on how many private keepers have venomous snakes. Once a zoo supplies the antivenom to a private individual, their stock is seriously depleted or gone. This means that the zoos are then faced with a choice of either allowing their keepers to work the snakes with no antivenom, or simply neglecting the snakes until more antivenom can be acquired. Both of these choices violate the code of ethics that most zoos follow, as they strive for both top quality care of the animals in their collection and the utmost in safety for the keepers who work for them. This problem is compounded by the fact that most foreign antivenoms take at least six months to replace, as importation requires federal (USDA and FDA) permits, correspondence with overseas manufacturers, and shipping time.
Due to patient confidentiality concerns, we are not able to provide information on exotic bites that have occurred in the area other than what has appeared in the media. We would be happy to help locate such articles if you would like. Tennessee and Indiana currently have restrictive laws governing the ownership of dangerous animals. In light of the recent deaths in Ohio it seems plausible the state may pass laws as well. Overall 29 states currently have some type of dangerous animal legislation. It is our concern that if Kentucky does not follow suit then our state may become a dumping ground for these animals.
If you have any other questions please don’t hesitate to contact us.
Best regards,
Jim Harrison, Director Kristen Wiley, Curator
[ Hide Replies ]
 The entire KY letter - krz, Thu Jun 9 08:14:12 2005
|
