Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Herps are illegal to keep in Norway and people get caught annually. Up to 1000 herps are put to sleep annually beacuse of our legislation.
The Norwegian herpetological association is attempting to lift this ban. We are concerned about annd the animals beeing but to death and people being criminalised for pursuing their hobby.

Since it is of legilatative importance I'd like to open a thread on the definitions of wome words.

What is the definition of "game"?
What is the definition of "wild animals"?
Are captive bred herps (for example crested gecko or corn snake) concidered as "game" or "wild animals"?

What is the definition of a "pet"?
What is the definition of a "domesticated animal"?

People in norway that are caught with herps in Norway are charged eigther by the law that forbids exotic animals or the "game-law".

When I was caught, I was charged by the "game-law" for keeping captive bred geckoes.

Here's a comment I got from the HerpNet forum to get you started if you wish to aprticipate in this thread.

Best regards
obeligz

-----------------------------------------

New studies in Rapid Genetic Change maybe well explaining why zoos have a
difficult time with long term reproduction of animals and limited success in
using zoo animals for restocking outside of the F1 level. The new methods of
study and research, if and when it is used may well show us that the methods we
use to keep animals including proactive efforts to maintain healthy animals
through various prophylactic methods may well change the animal rapidly, first
through DNA changes within the initial animals, even before reproduction and the
genetic change going to the offspring.

Those of us who have worked with wild herpes in monitoring studies know that
most species just picked up weighing and measuring and released even for a few
moments show movements for up to weeks that does not fit behavior before the
intrusion. If the animal is out of the habitat for some time, normal behavior
may never be shown while in others, they eventually reestablish themselves
(minority) in the wild.

These are just two examples of just how herptiles become "domesticated" quiet
rapidly.

Add this to the efforts to customize animals to the market through selective
breeding and you have indeed created domestic animals. Man has been doing
this for a long time. The longer we work at it, the more domesticated the
"species in captivity" are while the species (by biological definition) is still
wild in nature.

We are trying to find out how to have populations of herps (tortoises) in
captivity (semi) without causing the domestication factor to happen. Without
understanding how to do this, the concept that zoos (or private collections) are
conservation tools may be a great overstatement that is good for fundraising
but in reality a joke.

Domestication has done a great deed for conservation. First husbandry has
grown to be a respectable form of agriculture ( Herpetoculture) now has a seat on
the Ag Board in Florida.
The ability to provide the volumes of herps needed to feed the gigantic
interest and desire to have a herp pet has kept people out of the field searching
for herps to meet this need. Oh there are still market hunters out there but
they can be controlled through proper legislation (which does not include
disallowing species in collections that could be DOMESTICATED). Most of the time
they are out there collecting things that are not being bred in captivity and
are not easily available to the buying public. A perfect example is the Indigo
Snake. These snakes can be bred in captivity, just as ratsnakes and many boas
are today. But, because it is illegal, the black market is doing just fine.
In Florida, the FWC has not enough staff or the interest to keep up with the
people who go to the areas where this species is common to catch them not just
for the black market but for their private collections. Meanwhile this
federally "protected" snake is allowed to be destroyed right along with its habitat
as the countryside is being developed. What is wrong with this picture?

Regards, Ray Ashton

You are absolutely correct that the definition of those terms is of legislative importance. Rather than offer my opinion regarding specific definitions, I want to highlight the complexity of your question.

I don't claim to know anything about the legal system in Norway; however, as a lawyer in the United States (NC)I have a pretty good idea of how things work here.

Over the years, various U.S. courts have been forced to determine the definition of terms such as "animal" in interpreting legislation. This matter of statutory interpretation often arises in the context of cases involving poaching, animal cruelty / neglect, illegal possession, etc...when the accused claims that the "living organism" does not fall within the meaning of "animal" (or insert other appropriate term) as intended by the statute.

In the U.S., a statute will typically include a section defining terms used throughout. When a term is not defined, or is vaguely defined, significant problems can arise. Often, the court will look at the historical context in which the statute was drafted to define the term. Or, it might find an enumerated list elsewhere in the statute, and from the type of items on that list derive some definition. Some clue may be found in the legislative record.

Often, the legislators will confuse the issue by drafting numerous statutes. For example, one statute referring to the abuse of horses, and a separate one for domesticated animals, etc... Once the legislature set out specific classes of animals, courts are quick to say that something not specifically included is not covered, or that it would have been specifically mentioned. I could go on and on about this, but it gets quite complicated.

These problems of statutory interpretation have lead to bizarre results over the years, in various jurisdictions, where courts have allowed cock fighting because it determined that "cocks" were not animals within the meaning of an anti-cruelty statute. (This has since been overruled in that jurisdiction) There was another case where a court was forced to determine whether a goldfish was an animal in the context of a statute that made it illegal to offer a live animal as a prize in a contest of chance or skill (win a goldfish by throwing a ping-pong ball into a jar of water). There numerous similar cases.

The area of "animal law" is both fascinating and disturbing. A quick read of a few cases makes it clear that, historically, the courts and society have define "animal" in a manner that best serves economic and entertainment needs, with very little regard to common sense or decency.

Adios,

Prosecutor / RWK

-----
Information contained in this post is not intended as, and should not be taken as, legal advice. The use of the information provided in these pages should not be taken as establishing any contractual or other form of attorney-client relationship between the writer and the reader or user of this information.

I apologize for butchering the English language with horrible grammar, spelling, etc...in my above post. I need to type slower at 2:00 am, especially if I've been drinking; however, I need to expand on what I wrote.

The apparent ambiguity of some of these terms in criminal statutes often leads the court to find a statute unconstitutional. In the U.S., a criminal statute must be sufficiently unambiguous so that a person of ordinary intelligence can understand what the law requires or prohibits, and then conform his conduct to the law. Further, law enforcement must not have wide discretion in the application of the statute. Otherwise, the court may find that a prosecution deprives the defendant of due process and other constitutional rights.

This is not to say that one should assume the words in a statute have a "common sense" meaning. Rather, you are presumed to have knowledge (constructive knowledge) of the intended legal meaning of those terms if they appear elsewhere in the statute or case law. This is sort of a fiction. We know that most people to not pour through volumes of case law, or keep current on recent court decisions; however, that is the way it works.

Yaaaawn....adios,

Prosecutor / RWK
-----
Information contained in this post is not intended as, and should not be taken as, legal advice. The use of the information provided in these pages should not be taken as establishing any contractual or other form of attorney-client relationship between the writer and the reader or user of this information.

Mr RWK
Thank you for your input, it is much valued.
The legislative definitions of words is something that is rather new to me. I hadn't seen the potentiol importance of this until quite recently.

Right now I'm in the process of gathering info from abroad Norway in hope that I can at some point write something meaningful and back it up with the statements of people who choose to give me such.
After this I will confront my lawyer back in Norway and have him write me an official statement on the topic. After this I hope we'll able to confront our government and get their statement on these topics.

If we're able to get to some part extended definitoons on the words in question this may make a difference in what happens to people getting caught in Norway in the future.

Sir, could you direct me to a website where I can find a legislative definition of "game"/Wild animal.
Does the USA have a website that publishes your Countrys laws?
If such website does not exist, Could I ask of you to recite the paragraps in USA's laws that defines the words "game", "exotic animal/alien species" and "domestic animal"?

Best regards
obeligz

Louisiana defined animals by excluding fowl. This enables cock- fighting to be allowed without running into animal cruelty statutes. ~Bill~

domestication is a variation genetically established over several generations on a certain number of wild animals by removing them from the pressures of natural selection.

I agree with you but..

How much genetic variation is necessary to label an animals domesticated?
Does the variation have to be genetic or can it be behavioral oalso?
Perhaps a mix of both? but to what extent?
You mention several generations? How many is that?

I'm sorry that I take apart your definition but it's important for me to get more indepth understanding of this defnition.

You mention "the pressures of natural selection". I find this very interesting, Could you explain this term for me?.
I have never heard this term used in any context before and I'm not sure if I can allow myself to speculate on it's emaning.

If I can identify the factores that lead to the domestication of an animal.
Where is the bnorder drawn and when does the animal become in part domesticated?
Or to turn this around, when does the animals stop beeing a wild animal?
This is a complex question it seems.
In one extremity we have the definition where once an animal is touched by a human hand (even if nor removed from it's habitat for a long period) it should be concidered domesticated.
In the other extremity we have the definition where extensive genetic and behavioral variations have to be present, I guess we could drag this one so far out to the extremity that an animals has to develop mathematical skills or something similar to be concidered domesticated.

It's hard to make up a definition that will satisfy two disputing parts.

Jared Diamond (Nature 418: 700-707,
2002) cites 14 as the number of true domestic animal species.

I haven't been able to accuire a copy paper but judging by the heading I'd say that the threshold of criterea are quite high in this paper. Also it would be interesting to read the definition of a "true domestic animal species".

I muct admit that I haven't thought thouroughly about how many species of animals can be concidered domesticated but the number stated above still seems a bit low according to my own uneducated definition.
What do you think?

Best regards
obeligz

Does the law in Norway consider the status of the species as wild/game or the status of the individual animal as its natural state? Some species can be both wild and domesticated. Felix catus is a good example. Feral cats are wild cats, domesticated cats are pets, both belong to the same species: Felix catus. Dingos are wild dogs, but as a species belong to Canis familiaris. If you were to try to import a Dingo dog or a feral cat from Australia to your country, what would the law say about it? On a taxonomic point of view, it is the same dog as the poddle next door or the Siamese from your cousin. Should they deny your application for importing a Dingo dog or a feral cat on the basis of "wild" (not domesticated) state, they could not deny your right to keep geckos on the status that they have not been domesticated...

I'm not sure of what my government conciders as wild and domestic. I'm trying to educate myself about these things so that I can confront my government with this.

5 weeks ago I was your standard geckogeek with a cause, to legalize CB herps as pets in Norway.
little more than 4 weeks ago I was caught for keeping geckoes.
Since then I've been through hell and back again in order to sdave my animals and to be able to keep them.
But enough about that, my case is sad but it is the situation in Norway that I'm most concerned about.
The consequences of the herp ban in Norway is that up to 1000 heprs are put to death here annually.
Mostly leopard geckoes, kingsnakes and boids. For me this makes no difference, I believe it is wrong of my government to continue this practice so I'm working in hope to be able to put an end to this one day.

Your comemnt on ferral cats and dingo's is most interesting.
I hadn't looked at the subject from that point of view. Thank you for sharing. )

In theory I should be judged after the law that forbids exotic animals to be kept in Norway.

Instead my government is trying to convict me after the "game-law". This is why I'm so interested in definition of Game and wild animal.
to me it makes no sence that I'm confronted with breaking "the wrong law".
The reason is quite simple tho, that's what makes it so hard.
The law that forbids lacks a good argument for exisring.
"the government fears that such animals can not be given optimal conditions in captivity"
If I was judged after this law it would be simpler for me to defend myself.
Instead I am confronted by §48 in the "game law" whereby all game that is illegally killed or held captive falls into the property of the government.
This is because of 1 person in the norwegian government who's practice of this law is close to abuse of power.
However, I cannot permit myself to make such accusations formally nor do I have the means to prove any of this.
It's a generally accepted fact amongst the more educated persons in the herp society in Norway.

So that's why I have to find other means of saving my animals and myself.

Herps are not the only animals that are affected by the laws in this context.
Tropical birds are also concidered as exotic animals and are also the target of a certain official in my country.

back to your post.
I'm almost certain that there's not a chance in hell for me to get permission to import a Dingo to Norway but I'll check it out just for the plesure of beeing certain. Thanx for the tiop. )
The feral cat is a grey area.
We have a law in norway that forbids the keeping of wild native animals.
Hence, if a feral cat is concidered as a wild animal the it would be illegal to bring a ferral cat home.
Hmm.. an interesting topic for me to bring back to norwegian forums. Thanx again. )
I'm sure that my authorities would not procecute people who bring home ferral cats tho..

My government doen't deny me to keep geckoes because they're not domesticated but because the government is sceptical to whether private persons can provide herps with optimal conditions in captivity because of the climate in our country. Hence this is a topic of animal welfare.

This may sound unbelievable but it's true.
We still haven't been able to convince our government that the outdoor temp is not of importance as herps are kept in terariums indoors.
There's also the issue that herps are carriers of Salmonella. Of course, in my country this argument is blown out of proportion..

I'm sorry that my posts always end up beeing so long. I'm not that good in english and when it comes to topics that are hard for me to compress even in Norwegian I'm having great difficulties traduating my thoughts and compressing them.

Best regards
obeligz

all the red faces were meant to be smilies, not angries.
Sorry for that.
I'm not used to kingsnake converting my smilies to pics. *^_^*

Regards
obeligz