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 for Dragon Serpents

Aftermath of NY BAN.....problems....

-ryan- Mar 14, 2005 05:32 AM

It's been a while since the ban has taken affect, and all ready the ny government has pretty much forgotten about ever passing it. I went into a local reptile shop yesterday and was surprised to notice they were still selling large monitors and constrictors that are now technically illegal. I asked the owner about it and he said that no one has stopped selling them. The government doesn't inforce the law, and they didn't even tell people where to send the money to get permits for the animals you already have. He said that he's been getting tons of people coming in that don't know where to go to get the permits (the window for registering them has passed by now though), and he doesn't know either. So basically they've just continued on like nothing ever happened.

The problem? Well, there may not be any trouble in owning the illegal reptiles, but once you try to take them to the vet for one reason or another, they will turn you in.

I really dislike how they made this law.

Replies (10)

AlteredMind99 Mar 14, 2005 09:20 AM

What makes you say the vets will turn you in?

I only ask because for the most part, i was under the impression that vets did not work this way. In the past i have owned animals that were illegal for my state and have had them seen by a vet without any trouble. Most vets will treat any animal if it needs to be treated.

If you are right about the vets behavior in NY then i am appaulled at them!
-----
0.1 Bearded dragon
0.1 mexican kingsnake
1.0.2 Leopard Gecko's
0.0.1 Rose Hair Tarantula
1.0 BTS
0.0.1 Reverse Okeetee Corn
0.1 Bullmastiff
4.1 Cats

bloodbat Mar 14, 2005 05:01 PM

I would disagree with your perception on vets. I am sure there are some vets who will turn people in to the authorities, but I suspect those vets are in the minority. A vet who turns in a client for owning an illegal animal is obviously going to lose that client. Furthermore, that vet will gain a reputation for doing such things and quickly lose other clients. Losing clients is bad for business, particularly for vets who specialize in more exotic animals. I imagine that most vets will simply treat the animal and let it go at that. For a vet to turn in a client for owning a particular animal, I imagine it would take more than just owning the animal. The vet would either need to believe the person was abusing it or doing something incredibly dangerous with it.
-----
^x^ Bloodbat ^x^
Monitors, monitors everywhere
and all the food they ate.
Monitors, monitors everywhere,
their parents loved to mate.

-ryan- Mar 14, 2005 07:30 PM

I discussed it with him a while ago when my uro was sick (a bad combination of pinworms and liver trouble...it's almost all fixed). He said that because of the new ban, he now wouldn't be able to treat the animals unless the owner had a permit for it. I myself think that's ridiculous. What does he stand to lose? They can't arrest him for helping an animal, even if it is illegal to own them. Not treating them at all is much worse than treating them and notifying the authorities.

I'm sure there are vets out there that would do it. This is the best reptile vet in the area though.

reddragon01 Mar 14, 2005 08:29 PM

I mean no disrespect, but if that's your vet's attitude, I'd consider getting another one. Vet's basically take the same oath as MD's do, (in so many words), they swear to treat the sick and relieve the suffering of animals if at all possible. Refusing to treat a sick animal would be a betrayal of their ethos (unless it was, of course, a venomous or dangerous animal beyond their expertise). Just my two cents.

SHvar Mar 14, 2005 10:00 PM

For not turning you in. Of course if he lists it as a legal species on paper, then he can somewhat cover himself. If they enter the property and its there, hes busted for harboring and treating it.

-ryan- Mar 15, 2005 05:40 AM

Ah, I see. I think if I were a vet I'd still work with people with the illegal species, but just label them as legal species or something in case a scenario like you outlined did occur. I mean, who in the government is likely to know the difference between a burm and a boa constrictor (still legal), or a BT and a sav (also still legal). That's probably what I'd do if I did end up getting one of the species that are now illegal. I don't think I would get one now though, because I like to do things by the book so to say.

drn4 Mar 15, 2005 12:01 AM

Sorry to go completely off the subject, but I thought I'd just say I'm sorry you good people in NY have to live with such BS laws. I don't live there but I'm curious if NY state voted on this to pass or if Hillary and her buddies just stood to make money on it. Hate to be negative, it just seems rediculous.

lwcamp Mar 15, 2005 08:20 AM

>>Sorry to go completely off the subject, but I thought I'd just
>>say I'm sorry you good people in NY have to live with such BS
>>laws.

Thanks, me too! I'm doing what I can to fight it, but my assemblyman seems to ignore my letters.

>>I don't live there but I'm curious if NY state voted on this to
>>pass or if Hillary and her buddies just stood to make money on
>>it.

Our Senator Clinton has nothing to do with this law. She represents our state in the national government, and thus is responsible for national, not state, laws. No one is going to make money off this ban, it seems more of an attempt by special interest groups (read PETA and HSUS) to shove their ideology down our throats. It never would have gotten far if irresponsible owners had not been discovered in shocking and highly publicized cases (like the man living with a tiger and an alligator loose in his small apartment in New York City).

Luke

reptilefreak101 Mar 15, 2005 03:51 PM

im only 15 but i live in ny and want to become a exotic vet when i get older, and now we barly be able to see big monitors and snakes in ny, i think that what they should do is like have meeting 2-3 a months and get people to go who wana own these species, and take a test on how they will care for them, and if people pass them then can get the animals and make sure places liie petco and petland arnt selling babys albino burms to a 11 yr old kid and his mom and telling them if you keep it in a small tank it cant grow, then the relizes it still will just put alot of stress and make a big vet bill for treatment bc of a broken backbone,

the law stinks in a like 15 yr you probly will not be able to keep a ball python bc if you have little kids around it could go around the neck(nock on wood this never happens to anybody ever).

thanks

Sonya Mar 15, 2005 06:14 PM

A neighboring town to mine has decided on an inane ordinance that any snake over 4 ft (counting BPs)or any exotic that as an adult can 'harm' a human (yes that is almost the exact wording) must be permited (at $25-50 ea animal). Go figure that one out. I have fostered Iguana several times....thinking there will be way more abandoned animals this coming year.
What idiots.
-----
Sonya

Haven't we warned you about tampering with the structure of a chaotic system?
Mrs. Neutron

Site Tools