Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Our recent local show was held in White Plains a few months ago. I have to say that I never saw so many sick animals anywhere! Probably 30 - 40% of the geckos had regenerated tails. One table in front of the curtains had geckos obviously malnourished and sick. Skinny tails, lethargic in their Chinesse-soup bowls.

Contacting some "Fauna Top Sites" and so-and-so's "Good Guy" certified I am disappointed to find breeders beating around the bush when asked to declare animals free of parasites, etc. Many give advice on the boards!

Then I realize that some of the loudest critics of recent legislation are also being caught selling illegal animals.

For Pete's sake, realize that some people love and care for animals! We do not want them to be suffering in any way. Whether they are dogs and cats, or dums and geckos! Some with the "colonies" are doing everyone harm being insensitive, and irresponsible! Don't blame it on the government, but on your own lack of scruples!

Those that are responsible, I praise and respect. Thank you for being among the few that save the dignity of breeders of exotic animals. Thank you for not keeping and selling sick animals, for not overbreeding and stressing them. Thank you for being an asset to our society.

But sadly, too many people want to make a buck and the animals are getting hurt! To those doing harm, all I can say is: I hope you're next. I am sure I'll read about you being the next "nice guy that got caught." As long as you abuse these innocent animals, I hope they throw the book at you without mercy.

Bash if you like, I don't care. But learn to respect life, even if it costs you a few more bucks providing their needs.

I am just sick of hearing complaints about this law and that regulation by the same ones that brought them upon themselves.

There.
-----
Email me

You should be a little more specific in what kinds of legislation you support. Most likely no one who participates in these forums likes to see sick and abused animals. Legislation to prevent sick and abused animals would probably gain much more support. The problem is, most legislation does not stop at sick and abused animals. Most legislation is aimed at eliminating all animals (or all members of a certain group) regardless of health or husbandry. You never see legislation to the effect that sick constrictors over 8 feet are banned. The ban applys to all 8 foot constrictors. You rarely see legislation aimed at banning only imports or WC animals. These bans generally include healthy well cared for CBB animals as well. This is what worries most people about the rash of new legislation. Would a law preventing all WC animals from being sold benefit me? Probably, I sell 95% CBB stock and I rarely even have the green anoles and green tree frogs anymore anyway. Would I support such legislation? no way? because if you get that law in it makes it easier to take that next step and suddenlly I am out of business all together. What would be nice would be consistency in enforcing the laws already on the books. What would be nice would be promoters of shows taking a more active role in helping to eliminate those vendors that do things like pick up boxes of reptiles at the airport on the way to the show, unpack the deli cups and put them straight on their table without even looking at them. Unfortunately, self policing does not work without the majority of people being on the complying end. As with most hobbies/businesses there will always be unscrupulous people. No amount of legislation short of an all out ban will prevent these people from doing their deeds (even that doesn't work sometimes) As long as the majority of people turn a blind eye to the sick animals and the abused animals the hobby will not change from within and our legislators will see fit to take it upon themselves to try to clean it up for us.

As far as those dealing in illegal activities, what can I say. They are already breaking the law. Will more laws stop it. I doubt it. I do agree that anyone caught knowingly breaking the law deserves what they get. I have no sympathy for them no matter how stupid I think the law may be.

Steve Schindler

True, Unscrupulous people are taking in animals every day and breeding at leisure.

I support law enforcement prohibiting animals from being taken captive and even keeping animals in husbandry conditions that are deplorable. A breeder might think it is too much of a hassle to maintain the animals in roomy tanks, with enrichment activities when it is much easier to fill in shoeboxes and stack them up. Often the animals are sold sick, as I described in my first post, having never been checked by a specialist or even had a fecal confirm its health.

I am for supporting ANY action that will guarantee these animals are treated humanely. And unfortunately, most breeders define their own humane conditions, so we need higher authority to "cklear the point" with them. I don't think I need to pick and choose here. ANY law that needs to be brought on to keep animals from being abandoned when they get too large or the novelty wears off is game too. Plain and simple
-----
Email me

"I support law enforcement prohibiting animals from being taken captive"

OK, so you are against wild caught animals. I somewhat agree but I do not think all out prohibition of all wild caught is practical or even necessary.

"and even keeping animals in husbandry conditions that are deplorable."

I agree but as I will point out later, whose definition of deplorable are we going to use.

"A breeder might think it is too much of a hassle to maintain the animals in roomy tanks, with enrichment activities when it is much easier to fill in shoeboxes and stack them up."

What evidence do you have that keeping animals in shoe boxes has any detrimental effects on them. I love seeing animals in large naturalistic enclosures but for large scale breeding efforts, the kind it takes to reduce or eliminate the need for the WC animals to which you so opposed, it is impractical. you can't have it both ways. If you want to force people to keep their animals in large natural enclosures that means fewer and fewer people will be breeding them and this will put added pressure on the WC animals.

"Often the animals are sold sick, as I described in my first post, having never been checked by a specialist or even had a fecal confirm its health."

Most breeders will take care that the animals they produce are not sick, and if they are not sick why should they be seen by a specialist. Are you proposing that all animals be examined by a vet before they are sold. Again, highly impractical and will lead to less CB animals and more pressure on WCs

"I am for supporting ANY action that will guarantee these animals are treated humanely."

Again, whose definition of humane. Is a 6'x6'x3' enclosure large enough for an adult iguana? Just how much space does a 3' mountain kingsnake need to thrive?

"And unfortunately, most breeders define their own humane conditions,"

as opposed to say, YOU, who knows what conditions are humane for all animals

"so we need higher authority to "cklear the point" with them."

And this higher authority will be who? A congressman who has never seen a live snake other than the one who crawled across his patio three summers ago. Who will set the standards?

"I don't think I need to pick and choose here. ANY law that needs to be brought on to keep animals from being abandoned when they get too large or the novelty wears off is game too. Plain and simple"

Why don't you just come out and say it. You do not think that people should keep animals as pets. Plain and simple. I guess I should have paid a little more attention to the forum before I allowed myself to be suckered into a troll post like yours.

Respond if you like but I will not reply.

Steve Schindler

"Why don't you just come out and say it. You do not think that people should keep animals as pets. Plain and simple."
I've had pets all my life, dear. I do not oppose owning pets.

"I guess I should have paid a little more attention to the forum before I allowed myself to be suckered into a troll post like yours. "
Yep... That's the attitude. They gather in another board to bash legislation and demand their rights to keep breeding at leisure, without regulations.

"Respond if you like but I will not reply. "
Don't care, as long as I keep exercising my right to vote and support legislation that prohibits abuse and neglect. You may not answer to me, but soon you may have to answer to conservation officers.

Any questions? Read my previous two posts. I have not changed my mind and would merely keep posting the same facts over and over again.
-----
Email me

Unfortunately, you didn't or weren't able to, actually answer the questions that were brought up. (Of course, that could be because you were told you wouldn't get a reply...)

Just who does define what is "humane" enclosure conditions for a reptile - especially snakes....... I personally don't like rack systems, but then I am not a breeder, and part of the pleasure I get from keeping them is to be able to see them in their cages.

However, lets consider conditions within the average rack system for a responsible breeder or owner.

Is the space too small? Well, for most species of snakes that are commonly bred, they are lie-in-wait predators that don't really move when they aren't hunting, going for water, or mating.

Hmm, food is served on a silver platter - er, silver snake tongs on a regular basis, so as not to cause anorexia or obesity....

fresh water is routinely supplied, and changed as needed.......

Even mates are provided free of charge........

A hide box, often even as many as 3 hides (warm, cool, and moist) are provided to hide in, as well as possible substrate to burrow in, and changed as it gets soiled.......

Even newspaper substrate is replaced as it gets soiled......

Racks often have some sort of heat worked into the system........

Lighting would only be necessary for diurnal species, and UVB is questionable at best even for diurnal snakes..........

So after all of that, snakes really don't "need" to move much, given the ideal conditions found within a responsible breeders rack system....

Now - do snakes get bored in racks? Technically, I don't know of any scientific work that states that snakes can get bored. That's just anthropomorphizing our pets. Perhaps snakes and other herps can get bored - we just don't know.

But either way, life in a rack system belonging to a responsible breeder sounds pretty good to me.

The important thing here is responsibility! Irresponsible owners, breeders, dealers, etc. that have malnourished, sick, parasitized animals have animal welfare, and humane treatment laws that they are breaking, as well as the "herp community" to answer to - in other words, deal with abuse, neglect, and welfare issues, and most certainly do not purchase animals that look sick, underweight or otherwise unhealthy. You may think you are "saving" them, but unfortunately that just encourages the irresponsible husbandry practices.........

I'll deal with some of the other things in another post. BTW, do you have a name? You don't sign your posts, and while debating issues, it always helps to be able to address the person you're talking to, "puts a name to the post" lol. Much appreciated.

Lisa
Living Earth Environmental Education
@__/ __/ __ / __==< :>--

There's really nothing to debate. There really is nothing to prove to you either. I have seen with my own eyes and experienced the harm that irresponsible breeders do. I am a registered voter, and will select based on my experience. I do support legislation that limits what anyone does to an animal. Whether it is buying cute iggys and slitherings that will grow too big to maintain, or breeding them inhumanely.

"The important thing here is responsibility! Irresponsible owners, breeders, dealers, etc. that have malnourished, sick, parasitized animals have animal welfare, and humane treatment laws that they are breaking, as well as the "herp community" to answer to - in other words, deal with abuse, neglect, and welfare issues, and most certainly do not purchase animals that look sick, underweight or otherwise unhealthy."

That was the whole point since the beginning. It is those unscrupulous people the same ones that often bash legislation to prohibit their activities.

"You may think you are "saving" them, but unfortunately that just encourages the irresponsible husbandry practices"

Better to do something than ignore them because they'll throw a fit. With legislation, they'll have a back to watch or else. Throwing a temper tantrum or not.

You can call me Lizzette
-----
Email me

>There's really nothing to debate.

Hi Lizzette,

There's always something to debate - and it's actually a good thing, because that's how we can learn, and see other points of view, etc.....

>There really is nothing to prove to you either.

Sure there is - we need to be dealing in facts here, not just opinions, and feelings. There's probably thing's that I would have to prove to you, too.

But if you want to agree to disagree, that's fine too!

>I have seen with my own eyes and experienced the harm that >irresponsible breeders do. I am a registered voter, and will >select based on my experience.

I am sure most herpers have seen things that made us shake our heads, at best, and made us cringe, at worst. Question is, what do we do about it - how do we respond to it?

Voting your conscience is all *anyone* could ever ask for - and I don't think anyone was trying to prevent you from doing that!

>I do support legislation that limits what anyone does to an >animal. Whether it is buying cute iggys and slitherings that >will grow too big to maintain, or breeding them inhumanely.

It is how a person *defines* limiting "what anyone does to an animal" and "breeding them inhumanely" that is the bone of contention here. Obviously this definition can vary widely between individuals, or people would not have participated in these threads. But we have to come to a majority rules, general concensus, correct? Not a blanket ruling made by a legislator not in the know, based on opinion and feelings....

>>"The important thing here is responsibility! Irresponsible >>owners, breeders, dealers, etc. that have malnourished, sick, >>parasitized animals have animal welfare, and humane treatment >>laws that they are breaking, as well as the "herp community" to >>answer to - in other words, deal with abuse, neglect, and >>welfare issues, and most certainly do not purchase animals that >>look sick, underweight or otherwise unhealthy."

>That was the whole point since the beginning. It is those >unscrupulous people the same ones that often bash legislation to >prohibit their activities.

Actually that's not necessarily the case - often the irresponsible, unscrupulous types are so apathetic, that they are unaware of legislation, pending or enacted, and often do nothing at all.

Usually the most vocal are in order:

1) the AR crowd who want to separate people from animals - whether herps, exotics, or domestic dogs or cats - that is their agenda. They are for legislation of this type regardless - even if it results in the euthanasia of animals.

2) people, perhaps like yourself (admittedly guessing ?) who are very much concerned with animal *WELFARE* and knowingly or not, play into the AR agenda by supporting their goals.... Not perhaps knowing that the AR agenda would also affect *their* ability to keep animals too. Some of them will support any legislation - sometimes blindly, but others are discerning enough to look and see the total ramifications of legislation and will oppose legislation they deem negative or ineffective. (my apologies in advance if I made an assumption, I shouldn't have)

3) responsible animal owners, who are aware of the existing laws that govern them and their animals *AND* abide by them. They are often only too aware of the negative impacts of proposed legislation on responsible owners, as well as any possible benefits. Often these people will attempt to work with legislators to keep the good parts of legislation, and drop or change the bad parts. Most importantly though - often these people are against legislation that is "extra" legislation on top of legislation already in place to cover the issue. They would reject "extra" legislation in favor of simply *properly enforcing* the existing legislation, or improve it if necessary.

>>"You may think you are "saving" them, but unfortunately that >>just encourages the irresponsible husbandry practices"

>Better to do something than ignore them because they'll throw a >fit. With legislation, they'll have a back to watch or else. >Throwing a temper tantrum or not.

Not sure what you mean here.... The idea is to not buy sick, unhealthy animals from unscrupulous, irresponsible breeders/dealers so that they either: a) go out of business and stop selling sick, unhealthy animals, or b) improve their captive husbandry conditions due to "market pressure"....

Are you saying that the irresponsible dealers would raise a fit because someone refused to buy their sick animals? That's just a "free market economy" and they would have to get used to it, lol. Throwing a temper tantrum won't make people buy from them. Is that what you meant?

But again - legislation is already in place, like *everywhere* that already covers humane treatment, abuse, and neglect of animals. More legislation is not needed! Enforcing existing legislation, and reporting legitimate neglect, poor husbandry, etc. is all that is needed to deal with unscrupulous, irresponsible owners, breeders, and dealers!

>You can call me Lizzette
-----

Nice to meet you, and I welcome this discussion.

Lisa
Living Earth Environmental Education
@__/ __/ __ / __==< :>--

Well, your point of view is interesting but I'd rather "err" (according to your vision) on the side of animal welfare. If that implies that tougher legislation controls what is done to them, then I am all for it.

I know you feel tough legislation fools animal rights activists. Not when the animals are seized, rockheads are fined and businesses are monitored.

I won't land on the side that allows anyone ane everyone to own and breed whatever they want, demanding the right to define their own humane conditions, sorry. Especially when I read in posts all over the Internet about Joes and Janes whose only experience is breeding calling reptilian specialists diagnosis and recommendations wrong! And you ask *me* to preserve their rights to own and breed animals??? Too many blinds are leading blinds.
-----
Email me

n/p

>Well, your point of view is interesting but I'd rather "err" >(according to your vision) on the side of animal welfare. If >that implies that tougher legislation controls what is done to >them, then I am all for it.

Well it seems that you are for more legislation regardless of whether it is necessary or not - like I said - legislation is already in place in most jurisdictions regarding animal welfare, and responsible breeding. So if there are problems with both in an area, it is most likely that the existing laws aren't being enforced properly. So adding more legislation will accomplish NOTHING if they don't ENFORCE legislation they ALREADY HAVE!

>I know you feel tough legislation fools animal rights activists. >Not when the animals are seized, rockheads are fined and >businesses are monitored.

I have absolutely no idea what you mean here - and I said no such thing. "Tough legislation fools animal rights activists?" I don't even know what that means.

If animals are being mistreated, then absolutely seize the animals, fine the rockheads and monitor the businesses. Again, that goes back to ENFORCEMENT.

But you indicated that housing snakes in a rack system is mistreatment. And it is not. While it may not be as luxurious as a 40 breeder tank for a 12" snake, there is nothing inherently wrong with a properly maintained rack system for a lie-in-wait ambush nocturnal serpent.

>I won't land on the side that allows anyone ane everyone to own >and breed whatever they want, demanding the right to define >their own humane conditions, sorry.

No one said defining their own humane conditions - BUT - who DOES determine that - the AR nutcases? The police or animal control who have no experience? Game and Fish, who only know wild species, not captive husbandry - at least the Dept. of Agriculture (either state or federa) have an idea of captive husbandry methods! Dog and cat rescues who have no experience with reptiles and amphibians? Even herp vets are often few and far between, and sometimes don't actually keep any herps themselves.

The only ones who know what is best for their animals are the ones who have healthy, happy animals. Responsible keepers and breeders.

>I won't land on the side that allows anyone ane everyone to own >and breed whatever they want

Why the hell not? Just who do you think YOU are to decide for everyone else, what THEY can own and breed. What makes you so special that you get to decide for everyone else. That we can't decide for ourselves - or YOU for example.... AS LONG AS the animals are happy and healthy, and care and breeding is RESPONSIBLE - what right do you have to tell people what to do - any more than the rights of everyone else?!

>Especially when I read in posts all over the Internet about Joes >and Janes whose only experience is breeding calling reptilian >specialists diagnosis and recommendations wrong! And you ask >*me* to preserve their rights to own and breed animals??? Too >many blinds are leading blinds.

Actually, I can name many many instances of people who keep and/or breed animals very meticulously, who know MUCH MORE than ANY vet!

Think of it this way - human doctors only treat one species - people, and even *they* have to specialize into particular areas of human health.

Now look at veterinarians, even small animal vets, treat cats, dogs, all birds, all rodents, rabbits, ferrets, etc. etc. Often they will say whether they do treat exotics. And exotics often mean large parrots, ferrets, hedgehogs, all herps, etc. Some even specialize as far as being "herp vets" but there are so many species, they *can't* know it all. They can easily tell people the wrong things - human doctors do as well! For example, - how many herp vets still reccommend feeding goldfish to gartersnakes and crocodilians, etc. even though that is the exact wrong thing to feed, and will most often lead to illness and death? They simply don't know about the relationship between thiamine, and thiaminase-bearing fish, and the potentially fatal thiamine deficiency that can result.

Yes there are the few blowhards, usually young kids - or "know it alls" who won't take advice they didn't come up with themselves, but you CANNOT judge ALL animal owners by the actions of the MINORITY!!!!

I don't think that anything I have said has made you think about this over-legislating thing you've got going, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. I guess I can only hope that maybe some others have learned something from our discussion.

Lisa
Living Earth Environmental Education
@__/ __/ __ / __==< :>--

Lisa,

You're alright with me - you have far more patience than I would in dealing with this not-very-bright individual!

Tim