Reptile & Amphibian Forums

The recent poll regarding starting a venomoid forum was not taken to determine whether we would exclude venomoid keepers from using this site, it was to determine whether there was an interest in having a seperate forum for venomoids. Were we to run a sitewide poll the majority of the users of our community would say that they do not support people keeping venomous reptiles. Should we at that point exclude the venomous community?

Had we listened to all the complaints about the sales of venomous animals on our site, the venomous community would have been excluded from our site years ago and we could all sit around talking about iguanas geckos and pythons.

kingsnake.com supports the rights of people to buy, sell,or keep reptiles, regardless of whether the reptiles are venomous, non-venomous, or venomoid, as long as they are bought, kept, or sold within the limits of the laws of the jurisdiction to which they are subject, and as long as they are kept, bred, shipped, or altered humanely. It is not our business nor is it in our interest to exclude anyone wanting information on the care of reptiles from using or accessing the resources of this web site.

While kingsnake.com supports the rights of individuals or businesses to agree or disagree with our position, and to express their opinion, kingsnake.com will consider any attempts to harass individuals or businesses, including our own, that have taken either side, as violations of our Terms of Service and subject to the actions it outlines. If you find that you cannot particpate in this web site without harassing others because their opinions or beliefs are different than your own, then perhaps you need to go elsewhere.

Edited on March 1, 2004 at 18:34:22 by jeffb.

Since you have stated that you are concerned with both legal and humane issues, I ask that you do not permit your site to be used to sell animals that have been altered illegally and inhumanely. Many of the animals I have seen advertised in your classifieds are not the work of licensed veterinarians.

I can understand and respect the position of kingsnake.com supporting everyone's right to buy and sell legally produced animals - but a lot of venomoids are not legally produced animals. Allowing your site to be used to sell these animals is the legal and moral equivalent of permitting someone to advertise a batch of fresh wild caught Gila monsters. Somebody somewhere is obviously breaking the law to get these animals for sale, and if you allow them to conduct their business on your site then you are involved in the crime.

Please consider enforcing the standards that you yourself have set forth. By these standards venomoids produced by a licensed veterinarian would be acceptable, but kingsnake.com would not be supporting backyard snake butchers who are operating illegally. The existing laws against practicing veterinary medicine without a license and against animal cruelty are not often enforced in regards to venomous reptiles. This does not make the acts any less illegal.

How about a vet certificate stateing the altering was done humanely.
That would cut down on the non humane alterations.
-----
Bud

On the surface that seems like a good idea, but from a business standpoint I do not see how it would work. What would even constitute a legitimate 'certificate' anyway? Are folks going to lobby every state vet association/organization and have them adopt some type of 'official certificate' stating that a vet has for a particular service provided (ie venomoid surgery)? Certificates can be forged and who is going to spend the sheer amount of time wasted trying to track down supposed vets and confirming the paper work on every single animal for which said surgery was performed on (assuming they did indeed sign off on a particular surgery) is legitimate before allowing someone to advertise on the site?

What happens if the animal is sold to multiple owners down the road? If an animal is certified and later sold and the certificate is lost or never passed along... what then? where's the proof now? is some person gonna get blind sided by other folks simply because he's trying to sell an animal he had purchased earlier from someone else who may have gotten it from yet another person?

kingsnake provides a classified service to people. People who advertise on the site have entered into an agreement with a kingsnake. They are governed by a specific set of rules outlining how they may use their classified accounts. I see nothing where it says kingsnake is under any obligation what so ever to take on the responsiblities of any person (consumer) who chooses to enter into an agreement with someone that is selling an animal. IF that person wants to buy something from someone then it is their responsiblity to check out that person's credentials - not kingsnake. IF a person does not want to make the effort to check out a sale and references and whatever PRIOR to going through with it and then gets ripped on the quality of the venomoid they wind up with they essentially brought it on themselves for not bothering to live up to their responsibility as a consumer.

The only responsiblity kingsnake has over folks getting ripped through the classifieds is what they state on their complaint/rip off page:

http://market.kingsnake.com/complaint.php

I cannot honestly see how people can think that kingsnake should be responsible for making sure that every animal sold (doesn't matter what king of animal) by every individual on the classified site is done in accordance with the laws of each and every state those people (selling or buying) might happen to live in respectively. Every state has different rules. What is legal here is not always legal there. It is the responsibility of the person entering into an agreement with the advertiser to check out their credentials and make sure everything is above board to the best of their ability. IF the deal doesn't appear legit from your end then why go through with it? That is just asking for trouble. IF someone knows that someone else is doing something illegal such as practicing medicine without a lic. (i.e. hack jobs to create venomoids rather than done by a lic. vet) and it can be proven as such it's not kingsnake's responsibility to go after those folks and arrest them for cruelty to animals. Report it to the proper law enforcement authorities where applicable and let them deal with it. Then as outlined in the complaint/rip off page file a proper complaint with kingsnake against the vendor.

I think it all boils down to one phrase: CAVEAT EMPTOR. It's the buyer's responsibility to verify the validity of an animal, no matter what the circumstance. If you're going to purchase an animal that is "proven het for X weird trait", then you're gonna want PROOF before you shell out for P0 over market of a "normal" animal. You wouldn't even buy a spayed dog unless you had proof that she was spayed - nobody wants to end up with a surprise litter of puppies.

Kingsnake is a for-profit business. They can't afford to cut out a part of their income. They facilitate the meeting of buyers and sellers, for a fee. That's the extent of their involvement. I agree with others who say that it's an individual responsibility. If you want the light to be shone on illegal venomoiders, then you need to draw the Law's attention to them yourself. You can't expect the company to do it.

Whoa. tj, I agree with the general idea but that is no way to ask anyone to do anything that you actually want to get done.

If Mr. Barringer agrees to ask venomoid dealers to provide him (not necessarily anyone else) with verification from a licensed veterinarian that the surgeries were performed legally and humanely, that would be in accordance with his own stated policies. It seems a fairly simple thing to do, and it would go a long way towards quieting the current debate and improving the reputation of kingsnake.com as promoting only legally and humanely produced animals for sale. So why wouldn't he do it? I expect that he probably will.

If he doesn't, then there will be more hard questions asked. But there is no need to be insulting about it; that doesn't accomplish anything but muddying the issue and probably delaying a response.