Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Kasich barks; panel acts, will propose exotic-animal ban

A stern call from Gov. John Kasich prodded a committee to reach consensus yesterday on a proposed statewide ban on new private ownership of big cats, bears, monkeys and other exotic animals.

Meeting in private at the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium, the committee of representatives from government and animal interest groups got a high-test jolt from Kasich in a midafternoon conference call.

Laura Jones, spokeswoman for the state Department of Natural Resources, later said the purpose of the governor's call was to "encourage them to wrap up quickly, to stay on track and get this wrapped up."

But a source described Kasich's call somewhat differently, saying the governor "read the riot act" to the committee.

Kasich is unhappy that Ohio has been placed in the national spotlight in a negative way in the two weeks since dozens of wild, exotic animals were shot and killed after they were released by owner Terry W. Thompson of Zanesville. Thompson then committed suicide.

Kasich told the committee that he wanted it to stop "nit-picking" and to quickly finalize a recommendation for the strongest law in the nation, the source said.

Though there was no actual vote, the consensus of the committee at the conclusion of the five-hour meeting was to ban new private ownership of big cats, bears, wolves, primates and venomous snakes.

Current owners, however, would be allowed to keep their animals.

The measure eventually is expected to be introduced in the General Assembly, perhaps by state Sen. Troy Balderson, R-Zanesville, among others.

A previous draft of the proposal would require owners of exotic animals to carry at least $250,000 in liability insurance and to implant electronic devices under the animals' skin so they could be tracked if they escape.
www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2011/11/01/kasich-barks-panel-acts.html

....in this process of the rule-making.......I notice that the proposed ban mentions wolves. Perhaps someone should point out to these geniuses the technically speaking the domestic dog is a subspecies of the wolf (currently classified as Canis lupus familiaris.) unless they make some sort of clarification to differentiate the domestic subspecies from wild subspecies of wolves they could inadvertently ban domestic dogs from ownership (something I have suspected of peta and hsus in the drafting of their "cookie cutter" exotic animal bans they push around the country.).
As critical as I have been in the past and still am of Florida's roc regs, the states regulation of exotic animals is quite fair and much better than a total ban as it restricts ownership of different classes of animals and has requirements for caging and experience with working with the animals. they are not perfect but are much more reasonable than a total ban.
Furthermore they differentiate between domestic dogs, wolfdogs (which can open an even larger can of worms) and pure wolves. A permit is required for wolfdogs with a content of 75% or higher and for pure wolves. wolf dogs with lower content are considered domestic dogs under this statute. A lot of actual domestic dogs that have no actual recent wild wolf heritage in their genetics are are sometimes accused of being wolves and needlessly killed under some of these draconian regulations. It is a similar situation to the whole constrictor issue with the snakes.

Doubtful that a blanket ban on Canids would even be drafted, any more than a ban on Felids would, without exempting (domesticated) dogs and cats.

You can doubt it all you want I have personally looked at several such bans and as they are written they do in fact ban dogs. BTW steph I am not referring to a blanket ban of canids, that would include many species of animals over several genera. I was referring SPECIFICALLY to the species Canis lupus to which the domestic dog is in fact a subspecies. Considering some of these blanket bans are drafted by two certain groups whose ultimate agenda is to ban ALL pet ownership, I suspect there may be an underhanded motive in that. These same groups pursue it from the breed specific legislation on dogs as well. People need to wake up. Animal rights groups are not just after lions and tigers and large snakes.

I can't help but think that you cede too much power to the groups that you think wish to end the practice of pet ownership.

It's not a matter of "ceding" power to anyone it is a matter of pointing out some facts that people of Ohio might need to be made aware of.

"I can't help but think that you cede too much power to the groups that you think wish to end the practice of pet ownership."

See the latest thread here for one of many rebuttals to your don't worry... be happy theory.