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 for Dragon Serpents
Click for ZooMed
Click here for Dragon Serpents

ND Press: Next time, try a dog or cat instead

Jul 09, 2004 07:38 AM

THE TRIBUNE (Bismark, N Dakota) 09 July 04 Next time, try a dog or cat instead (Frederic Smith)
What gets into some people? Last week, two young Bismarck men were arrested for keeping four deadly snakes in their apartment. "I live near the hospital, so I wasn't worried," said one. Police, more worried about their neighbors, slapped the men with a charge of reckless endangerment.
The incident recalls the Bismarck man of a few years ago whose apartment mate was an adult bobcat. Neighbors complained -- go figure -- when they discovered the cat roaming the hallways.
In the present case, some would give the men credit for having checked state law and finding no prohibition of poisonous snakes. They never thought to check for the city ordinance against "dangerous animals." But who with the sense he was born with needs a law or an ordinance? One of the men disputed the police contention that his death adder and East African green mamba were No. 10 and 11 on the most-dangerous list.
They're No. 2 and 3, he said, proudly.
People are getting into trouble all the time for ownership of inappropriate animals and too many animals. Remember the Sykeston man on whose farm officers seized three bobcat-sized African wildcats -- along with 38 hunting dogs, 47 birds, two hedgehogs, 51 Asian flying squirrels and a gecko, all suffering from neglect?
Not that people are lacking for encouragement of their peculiar tastes. Why federal law doesn't have more to say about the companies that supply these "exotic" pets -- including the baby alligators that are so popular back East -- is an enduring mystery.
The Florida company that furnished three of the deadly Bismarck snakes shipped them UPS. Does the law care about that? If not, why not? And were the various UPS employees along the line made aware of what they were handling?
It remains true that, if you're going to have a pet, a dog or cat is probably challenging enough. They are deep and remarkable companions that reward years of cultivation, and it's hard to imagine the person who has really got to the bottom of them and requires the stimulation of a poisonous snake, wildcat or alligator.
At the same time, the dog and cat weren't domesticated thousands of years ago for nothing; they've had so much practice being around people and around the house that it's in their genes.
In a word, they're appropriate, where the poisonous snake, wildcat or alligator is not. It's not a subtle or difficult distinction, but one that, alas, is still lost on some people.
Next time, try a dog or cat instead

Replies (4)

radwigs Jul 10, 2004 11:11 AM

I hope this article was in the editorial part of the paper because it is certainly not unbiased news reporting. If those men were breaking the laws of the city then yes they should be prosecuted but the opinions being voiced in this article are very judgemental. Where are the statistics stating the number of attacks by pet dogs each year compared to the number of attacks by "exotic" pets?

BGF Jul 10, 2004 05:47 PM

Write a polite letter to the editor about the fact that the snakes were imported legally but fell a-foul of an obscure local by-law. Stress that venomous snakes are safely kept by many people but with much lower personal injury rates than dog/cat keepers (who regularly end up in the hospital) and that there has never been a documented case of a venomous snake getting out and injuring a member of the public (as opposed to the daily occurance of little kids gettting their faces torn off by loose dogs).

Cheers
Bryan
-----
Dr. Bryan Grieg Fry
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Australian Venom Research Unit,
University of Melbourne
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Population and Evolutionary Genetics Unit,
Museum Victoria
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.venomdoc.com

taphillip Jul 10, 2004 09:44 PM

I agree, that last article was a bit silly.
Just making note again, the animals were in fact shipped illegaly, they do have the reciepts labeled lizards.
BGF, I also am for responsible private people to keep venomous, however I think that you as well as many seem to be missing the point that this particular individual (along with 95% of the reptile keeping populalation) didn't even know it was in fact an angusticeps!
He got caught because he took it to a professor at the University to identify it because he felt that the dealer was cheating him and sent him a green tree snake??? He also was allowing his friends to touch it completely unrestrained in a plastic sweater box. The only thing that saved these people was the temperatures!
Just thought I would update a little.
On a side note, I warmed that animal up to proper temps overnight, and when I unbagged it, and later that day caught it again for quarantine proceedures, that mamba was pretty spunky, even for a mamba......(and yes I have plenty of experience with plenty of fresh imports of all the Dendroaspis)
-----
It's what you learn AFTER you know it all that counts!

Terry Phillip
Curator of Reptiles
Black Hills Reptile Gardens

www.reptilegardens.com

steve h Jul 11, 2004 06:18 AM

Those are my thoughts exactly. This is definitely an op-ed piece. There is no "news" here...

Steve

Site Tools