|
1-3 of 3 messages
|
Page 1 of 1
|
|
Here's your chance to fight a "Ban"
|
Reply
|
|
Anonymous post on June 15, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
For all the folks that are unhappy with the way things are going with the hobby, here's your chance to steer it in a way you like. Lets see who's up for a fight! Seems like some of the loud mouths on this forum may not have the stomach for anything other than pissing and whining.
The NC ban bill has been changed into a study.
SENATE BILL 1032
Judiciary II Committee Substitute Adopted 5/18/05
Short Title: Study Inherently Dangerous Animals.
(Public)
Sponsors:
Referred to:
March 24, 2005
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT directing the department of environment and natural resources to determine the best means of Protecting the public against the health and safety risks posed by Inherently Dangerous Animals.
The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:
SECTION 1. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources, in consultation with the North Carolina Zoological Park and the Wildlife Resources Commission, shall study the need to protect the public against the health and safety risks posed by inherently dangerous animals and propose a means of best providing that protection to the public while protecting the welfare of inherently dangerous animals as well. In developing recommendations, the Department shall consult with the following entities or groups, or appropriate representatives of those entities or groups:
(1) The North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services;
(2) The North Carolina School of Veterinary Medicine;
(3) The State Animal Response Team;
(4) Local law enforcement officials;
(5) Local animal control officials;
(6) Wild animal breeders;
(7) Exotic pet hobbyists;
(8) Commercial pet retailers;
(9) Small zoo owners;
(10) Humane organizations; and
(11) Any other entities or groups whose interests may be affected by proposed regulations.
The Department shall report its findings to the General Assembly no later than the convening of the 2006 Regular Session of the 2005 General Assembly. Any legislation recommended in the report may be considered during the 2006 Regular Session of the 2005 General Assembly.
SECTION 2. The report made by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources pursuant to this act shall include:
(1) A list of the types of animals that possess such inherently dangerous characteristics that they should not be owned or possessed by persons who do not have special expertise or training, and a determination as to whether these animals should be grouped into classes for differential treatment based upon the nature and extent of the threat they pose to the public. This list should also include information about the nature of the dangers posed by each type of animal.
(2) A suggested means for regulating ownership of certain animals, including a means of enforcing any proposed restrictions on the ownership or possession of those animals. This portion of the report may include an evaluation of regulations in place in other jurisdictions that have proven to be effective in protecting the public from inherently dangerous animals.
(3) A plan for addressing inherently dangerous animals that are indigenous species within the jurisdiction of the Wildlife Resources Commission under Article 22 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes and a consideration as to whether any potential legislation should broadly address the keeping of any wildlife as pets, whether indigenous or not and whether inherently dangerous or not. This portion of the report should result from extensive consultation with the Wildlife Resources Commission.
(4) A recommendation as to whether persons owning or possessing animals covered by any proposed restrictions should be grandfathered in under a regulatory scheme and the appropriate means of grandfathering those persons in, including consideration of whether certain animals are so threatening to the public safety that the grandfathering of untrained owners or possessors should not be allowed under any circumstances.
(5) A recommended list, as comprehensive as possible, of persons and entities that should be exempted from the proposed restrictions on ownership or possession of the animals covered by any proposed restrictions, such as zoos, veterinary hospitals, wildlife sanctuaries, research institutions, and the like.
SECTION 3. This act is effective when it becomes law.
According to the bill’s status page (http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2005&BillID=S1032), it was last sent to the Environment and Natural resources committee in the House. Go here and scroll down to the Environment and Natural resources committee. http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/committee_lists/committee_lists.pl?chamber=House
|
| |
|
RE: Here's your chance to fight a "Ban"
|
Reply
|
|
by SPalmer on June 17, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'd love to get involved and fight all bans, but right now I'm fighting myself NOT to get banned!
I strongly feel that the venomous community needs to take a more proactive stance regarding their "right to keep". These things take a tremendous amount of time and also money. My overall impression that discussing these matters only here is useless. Representatives of the community need to go see these people. This is just the way it is. It's also important to remember that laws can be changed.
Sean Palmer
seanpalmer78597@yahoo.com
(this is the only way to reach me)
|
| |
|
RE: Here's your chance to fight a "Ban"
|
Reply
|
|
by MoccasinMan on June 18, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
For any of y'all that are not up to speed on what is going on in NC concerning Senate bill 1032 we have not been whining about anything! We have been busy building a PAC called the NC Association of Reptile Keepers (NCARK). I have put together a group of the top breeders, herpetologists, vets, rehabilitators and hobbiests from around the state. People like Dean Ripa, Roark Ferguson, Dan Johnson and many others. We promote responsible ownership and conservation through captive breeding projects. We have countless signatures on petitions (still growing). We have a lobbiest suplying us with info. We have exposed the source of the legislation as API and PETA. We have made inroads with several key Senators and have succeeded in having the bill dropped from the current legislative agenda. It has been resubmitted as a study bill and I have been appointed to the panel advising the senate committee as to the scope and direction of future legislation. If you have any questions or would like to join us, e-mail me.
Andrew
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Manager.
|
