|
1-6 of 6 messages
|
Page 1 of 1
|
|
House debates exotic pet ban-HSUS crap
|
Reply
|
|
by tigers9 on April 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
<<"I think the Burmese python may be the poster child for this bill," said Beth Preiss, director of the exotic pets campaign for the Humane Society of the United States.>>
We will have a poster reply to this idiotic comment soon, I am sick of these AR groups misdirection and hysterical misinformation
Z
http://jconline.com/article/20090427/NEWS02/904270321
April 27, 2009
House debates exotic pet ban
By CURT SLYDER
cslyder@jconline.com
A proposed federal ban on nonnative wildlife species has people in the pet trade industry fighting mad.
The proposed "Nonnative Wildlife Invasion Prevention Act," now being debated in a U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee, would ban "nonnative wildlife species that will cause or are likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to other animal species' health or human health" from entering the country.
It would also prohibit the buying, selling and breeding of such animals already here.
The idea, according to national and local wildlife experts, is to prevent such animals from becoming a problem in the wild.
"I think the Burmese python may be the poster child for this bill," said Beth Preiss, director of the exotic pets campaign for the Humane Society of the United States.
Burmese pythons are constrictor snakes that lack natural predators. Once considered trendy pets, many were released by their owners into the wild and now infest the Florida Everglades. They also are an increasing problem in the Florida Keys, where they're eating their way through the area's endangered animals.
But some people, particularly people in the pet trade industry, think the bill goes too far.
"If this passes, we'd have to close," said KoriLynn Perdue, manager of Pets 4 U on County Road 350 South in Lafayette.
The pet store specializes in exotic animals.
Most of the problems arise when customers buy exotic animals that later become too big and too hard to handle, Perdue said.
"We don't sell things that get that big," she said.
Perdue and others think that the bill, as written, would also ban such innocuous pets as hamsters, guinea pigs and various small fish.
"There's no wild guinea pig population," she said.
Lafayette resident Brian Moore has several snakes, including at least one python. He wants to become a breeder.
While the bill would allow people who currently own such pets to keep them, Moore worries the bill "would stop my dream."
Moore thinks a better alternative would be to require people who wish to buy exotic pets such as pythons to take classes on their care.
Perdue agreed with that idea, adding the issue should be handled by individual states.
"Anything over 6 feet should require a permit," she said.
Perdue added that the Indiana Department of Natural Resources should be required to check out prospective buyers, ensuring they have the proper facilities and education to deal with such animals before buying them.
To Indiana wildlife officials, the federal bill is "one of interest at this point," said Chris Smith, legislative liaison for the Indiana Department of Natural Resources.
In Indiana, there are no significant problems with pet owners introducing nonnative animals into the wild, Smith said.
Though he said the idea behind the bill has merit, "it's still being discussed," Smith said.
During a hearing on the bill Thursday, several lawmakers on a House Natural Resources subcommittee said they've received hundreds of calls, e-mails and letters about the bill.
Rep. Lois Capps, a California Democrat, tried to tamp down the hype.
"Does this legislation take away pets that people currently own?" she asked Gary Frazer of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
He said it would not.
"Will this legislation target only those species that are nonnative and invasive?" she asked.
"Yes," said Frazer.
He said the bill probably would exempt nearly every animal now sold or traded.
The panel's chairwoman and bill's primary sponsor, Guam Delegate Madeleine Bordallo, stressed repeatedly that her bill is a work in progress.
"We recognize it is by no means perfect," she said, promising to make changes. "This hearing should be seen as a starting point for a very important discussion."
Contributing: Gannett News Service
|
| |
|
RE: House debates exotic pet ban-HSUS crap
|
Reply
|
|
by reptoligy on April 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
saying AR groups is kindof unfair really
I work for pca and animals rights and we have nothing to do with taking pets (exotics aswell) away from pet "parents"
only pushing towards prop care and housing
and stoping neglect and abuse
|
| |
|
RE: House debates exotic pet ban-HSUS crap
|
Reply
|
|
by tigers9 on April 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
If PCA stands for prevention of cruelty to animals, than that is animal welfare,NOT animal rights issue.
AR means animls have rights, aka, they can not be eaten, kept us pets, owned, etc... AR, animal rights, means no animal use, not pets or food, AW, animal welfare means improving the living conditions of captive animals, so I stand behind my statement.
Z
|
| |
|
RE: House debates exotic pet ban-HSUS crap
|
Reply
|
|
by pitbulllady on April 27, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Reptoligy, you are obviously confusing "animal WELFARE" with "animal RIGHTS". These are two very, very different things altogether! Animal welfare proponents seek to do just what you described-see to that all animals are properly cared for and treated as humanely as possible. Animal RIGHTS supporters, on the other hand, hold the line that animals have the same rights as humans, including the "right" not to be owned, as property, by humans, since this is equated with slavery. Their basic principal is that we should not own, sell, buy, trade, capture, captive-breed/propogate, eat or otherwise use animals for any purpose whatsoever, and is largely based NOT on a love or understanding of animals, but on a deep-rooted hatred for Homo sapiens. Giving "rights" to animals essentially means stripping Constitutional rights from US. One of the ways, though, that the AR movement/cult is chipping away at those very rights is by altering the way that the public views animal ownership, and one of the ways they are doing-quite successfully, I might add-that is to infiltrate our daily language with their AR terminology. For example, we are no longer pet or animal owners, but "pet PARENTS" or "guardians". This instills in the public's collective mind that the animals are not our property, and therefore WE have no right to claim them, and the government is therefore within their rights to take our animals anytime they see fit, for whatever reasons. You cannot legally protect and hold onto something that is not yours in the first place, so the same search and seizure laws that require evidence of a crime before they can take our cars or other property do not apply, nor does any government owe you compensation for an animal, if the animal was not your personal property. I am a pet OWNER. I bought many of the animals I OWN with cash, or traded something of equal value for them, and I feel absolutely no shame whatsoever in admitting that, nor should anyone else on this site. I don't even consider some of the animals I own to be "pets"; anyone who starts to think of a Rattlesnake or a Monocle Cobra as a "pet" is a disaster waiting to happen, not just for themselves, but for everyone who keeps venomous snakes, and reptiles in general.
|
| |
|
RE: House debates exotic pet ban-HSUS crap
|
Reply
|
|
by reptoligy on April 29, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
pca, is pet cancer awareness,
and I copy and pasted this from PETA
"Many animal-rights groups believe that humans owning animals is equivalent to human slavery,"
the start of this says'MANY ' not ALL or even MOST,
I know and hear what you are saying
but I simply would not work with PCA (they are very close and work together with our local AR groups in WA)
if that was what they belived. 98% of all the people I work with have a pet of some kind, 20% have what are seen as exotics and that would be crazzy for them to be aginst having pets when they themself do.
As far as the word "owner" being replaced with "Parent" lol that has nothing to do with them having the right to take them from your home, if they have "reasons" they can take your own child from you and nomatter if your an owner or a pet parent that makes no diffrents lol, pet parent is just there so people DO see that they have rights that we are parents to our pets in the since of responsibility and need to treat them like part of our family
and as to the person who is teaching me about AR and animal WELFARE lol animal welfare is apart of there rights!
An AR group has manyyy departments, in a since, and the welfare of the animals is just one, they normally work on the abuse videos you see on youtube ext
|
| |
|
RE: House debates exotic pet ban-HSUS crap
|
Reply
|
|
by pitbulllady on April 30, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Do NOT believe ANYTHING you read from PETA, since this, along with the HSUS, is one of the leading AR groups that IS working towards an animal-free society, no matter what bald-faced lies they will tell you! There is nothing innocent about changing the terminology, either; it is a calculated part of changing people's persception of animals to give them equal status to humans. AR does, with no exceptions, mean "NO ANIMALS", since the very nature of assigning "rights" to something that cannot comprehend them, cannot act responsibly within those rights, and will never be held accountable for any choices/actions is an oxymoron in an of itself.
I'm not a "pet parent". I cannot give birth to a snake. I didn't, and have never, "adopted" an animal. Even animals I got from shelters or rescues cost me money, therefore I bought them. They're important to me, but they're not my "children". If I had to choose between saving any of my animals, or my father or other family member, I'm going to save the human.
|
| |
|
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.
|
