Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Welcome to kingsnake.com's message board system. Here you may share and discuss information with others about your favorite reptile and amphibian related topics such as care and feeding, caging requirements, permits and licenses, and more. Launched in 1997, the kingsnake.com message board system is one of the oldest and largest systems on the internet.

Click here to visit Classifieds
Click for ZooMed
Click here to visit Classifieds

Here's a short but fair newspaper article on the proposed Chicago ban

jfmoore Aug 09, 2003 01:36 PM

CHICAGO SUN-TIMES (Illinois) 09 August 03 Leapin’ Lizards! (Stephanie Zimmermann)

A proposal to ban exotic pets in Chicago is drawing the wrath of reptile owners, who worry their pet iguanas, monitor lizards and snakes will get swept up in the public's concern over monkeypox.

Prairie dogs and Gambian rats, two exotic pets blamed for the monkeypox outbreak earlier this summer that sickened dozens of people across the Midwest, are the main targets of a city ordinance proposed by Ald. Edward Burke (14th) and co-sponsored by Ald. Shirley Coleman (16th).

But the proposed ordinance also seeks to ban a wide range of reptiles that can't spread monkeypox. Pet reptiles who'd be shown the door in Chicago include garter snakes, iguanas, ball pythons and boa constrictors--presumably because of the risk of salmonella bacteria.

PROHIBITED PETS?

Some of the exotic pets that would be banned in Chicago under a proposed ordinance:Iguanas
Ball pythons
Boa constrictors
Snakes with Duvernoy glands, including garter snakes
Monitor lizards
Tarantulas
Scorpions
Ducks
Sugar gliders
Hedgehogs
Monkeys
Ferrets
Prairie dogs

Ferrets, monkeys and tarantulas also would be banned, as would a wide range of wild animals rarely thought of as pets, including grizzly bears and, believe it or not, hippopotamuses.

The proposal doesn't provide for existing pets to be "grandfathered" in.

"If they enact this, what happens to all these animals, these thousands of animals that are out here?" asked Mike Dloogatch, a Northwest Side resident who owns several harmless pet snakes. "This ordinance is just, 'Let's ban everything, and we'll look good.' "

Critics of the proposed ordinance say dangerous animals, such as the wolves, lions and venomous snakes mentioned in the proposed city ordinance, already are banned by the Illinois Dangerous Animals Act.

Reptile fans say the risk of salmonella poisoning is easily eliminated by washing one's hands thoroughly after handling the animal.

If the ordinance passes, educational programs run by members of the Chicago Herpetological Society at schools and area museums would come to a halt, said Lori King, the society's president and owner of seven reptiles that would be banned, including a pair of rock iguanas named Windsor and Astor.

"We're literally known globally for our education," King said of the society. "They're doing this blanket thing, but they don't realize they're shutting down quality children's education by doing this sort of thing.

"We want the rest of the world to know they're as fascinating as we think they are," King said.

Burke and Coleman could not be reached for comment Friday.

The proposed ordinance was patterned after a new law passed in New York City, which has less restrictive state laws, said Dr. Byron De la Navarre, a veterinarian and owner of Animal House of Chicago.

"The state of Illinois is one of the most restrictive states," De la Navarre said. "We already regulate what we really thought needed to be regulated."

Sun-Times article

Replies (2)

Samcin Aug 09, 2003 03:59 PM

Great article! Now someone close to the area needs to write a letter about non-committed pet owners in NYC who let their reptiles go in the city and those who are still afraid to take their's outside. AND, the fact the that they aren't enforcing this, so you aren't allowed to own an iguana in NYC, but you can win one at the local carnival.

Cindy

redmom Aug 29, 2003 11:05 AM

I admit that I'm pretty new to the herp world, but from what I have read so far, if disease is the true concern of these people, then why not ban only wild caught exotics? Captive bred exotics have as much chance of spreading any disease as a captive bred dog (acutally captive, or rather domestic, dogs still have a chance to spread rabies!). Plus, enforcement of bans on wild caught animals would help to eliminate poaching world wide as well as cut back (maybe) on less than caring dealers and carnival prizes (as mentioned). It is ashame that nobody making and/or proposing these laws seems to consider that captive animals already owned would be consfigated and then what? They'd be killed! Any animal rights advocate would have to oppose that (at least in my mind). How can you say that every captive, domestic animal, exotic or not, is lethal and just kill it, claiming that you are protecting animals?!?

Okay, now I'm rambling. Sorry! :D

Site Tools