11-19 of 19 messages
|
Previous
Page 2 of 2
|
RE: NC SENATE BILL 1032
|
Reply
|
by MsRhinoviper on March 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I would like to help. This is the same bill that was passed in Davidson County last year. It is word for word. I have alot of facts on all this if anyone would like them. It is bull that they are doing this. It is all over the big cats that keep getting out and killing people. Why not just ban them? You hardly ever hear of a snake bite. The only thing I am for in this bill is being 18 to own a venomous reptile. I hope we can keep this from passing. Everyone needs to get involved.
|
|
RE: NC SENATE BILL 1032
|
Reply
|
by Matt_H on March 29, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Below I've listed some links to animal bite and fatality statistics. I think it's a good idea to include some statistics on this but try not to make this a battle of snakes vs. other animals as pets. I think more importantly we need to inform the officials of the importance of private keepers to herpetoculture and education. Some topics you may want to touch on are the contributions private keepers make to the better understanding of captive care, husbandry and conservation of certain species, knowledge of bahvioral patterns and feeding habits, the sharing of information between private keepers and professional herpetologists or biologists, and anything else you can think of that shows a logical reason to allow the keeping of these animals.
Here is a link to a page on the National Safety Council website that has a chart listing recorded fatalities from various causes and your odds of dying from each cause annually as well as over your lifetime. The list is from recorded deaths in 2001 and states there were 25 deaths caused by dog attacks, 65 from other mammals, and only 7 from venomous snakes. The statistics may not be 100 percent accurate, but since it is from the NSC it should hold some weight with the politicians. Here's the link
http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm
Here's a link to some information on snakebite statistics by Dr. Sean Bush. Look at the "Frequency and Motality/Morbidity" sections.
http://www.emedicine.com/emerg/topic540.htm
Another good link from emedicine on animal bite statistics.
http://www.emedicine.com/ped/topic107.htm
Link for animal related death fatalities. This is a news article from CNN.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/06/19/other.attacks/
Another place you can look for info is the Journal of Americal Medicine (JAMA). Here's the link:
http://jama.ama-assn.org/
You can also find information on these statistics at your local library. You can look up Vital Statistics, animnal related fatalities, etc.
Hope this helps.
Matt Heuser
|
|
RE: NC SENATE BILL 1032
|
Reply
|
by Mustangrde1 on March 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I did not read over all the replys on this thread but this is a BAN no doubt in my mind if you read these parts of the Bill.
[quote]SECTION 2. This act becomes effective January 1, 2006, and applies to inherently dangerous animals existing in this State on or after that date. A person who meets the legal requirements for possessing an inherently dangerous animal set forth in Article 6 of Chapter 19A of the General Statutes, as enacted in this act, is not required to obtain a personal possession permit by that date, but shall obtain that permit by March 31, 2006. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources shall implement and administer the provisions of Article 6 of Chapter 19A of the General Statutes, and shall establish the fee authorized by that Article and the personal possession permit program necessary to implement the provisions of that Article no later than January 1, 2006.[/quote/
The above is a grandfather clause for those already in possesion.
Further down in the BILL you will see this
[quote]( Persons who meet the requirements of subsection (a) of this section shall annually obtain a personal possession permit. From and after January 1, 2006, no new inherently dangerous animal shall be brought into possession under authority of a personal possession permit.[/quote]
In otherwords even those grandfathered in prior to CAN NOT get any other species and I seriously doubt permits will be issued for anyone else. so in all reality it is a BAN. Just worded to not look like one.
|
|
RE: NC SENATE BILL 1032
|
Reply
|
by NC_geckos on March 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm not sure if this will help but the bill is in this commitee,so I think these are the people we should concentrate on at the moment.
Judiciary II
Meets Tuesdays, Thursdays at 10:00 AM in 1124 LB
Chairman: Sen. Fletcher L. Hartsell, Jr.
Vice Chairman: Sen. Austin M. Allran
Vice Chairman: Sen. Scott Thomas
Ranking Minority Member: Sen. Hugh Webster
Members: Sen. Tom Apodaca, Sen. Bob Atwater, Sen. Doug Berger, Sen. Stan Bingham, Sen. Walter H. Dalton, Sen. Charlie S. Dannelly, Sen. Katie G. Dorsett, Sen. James Forrester, Sen. W. Edward (Eddie) Goodall, Sen. Malcolm Graham, Sen. Robert Lee Holloman, Sen. Jim Jacumin, Sen. John H. Kerr III, Sen. Eleanor Kinnaird, Sen. John Snow, Sen. A. B Swindell
|
|
RE: NC SENATE BILL 1032
|
Reply
|
by Rmitchell on March 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I sent an email to sen. Garwood last week, & this is the reply i got today.
(I appreciate your e-mail. Senate Bill 1032 is still under development.
I am working with the appropriate state agencies to ensure it meets the
needs of animal owners and protects public safety. The bill currently
contains provisions to allow owners of animals regulated by the bill to
obtain permits. The final version will also have such language.
Your concerns will be taken into consideration. Thank you for your
interest and comments.
Senator John Garwood)
|
|
RE: NC SENATE BILL 1032
|
Reply
|
by MoccasinMan on March 31, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Here is the letter I sent:
Senator Marc Basnight
Dear Senator Basnight,
Subject: Senate Bill 1032
I am writing you because I voted for you, and I know that you are a fair-minded man that is concerned with the issues that affect your constituents. I hope you will give this issue your full consideration.
Senator Garwood has sponsored a broad ranging bill to ban what he considers to be “Inherently Dangerous Animals”. I am sure that it is a well-intentioned piece of proposed legislation that was authored in an effort to satisfy some segment of his constituency. Unfortunately parts of it seem to be arbitrary and misinformed. If enacted into law it will result in the financial destruction of many, the promotion of false stereotypes, the halt of educational opportunities, and loss of considerable contributions to science and our community well being. In my humble opinion parts of this bill are an over reaching, unnecessary and unwanted intrusion into the lives and rights of law abiding citizens.
I am referring to the section of the bill that bans many species of reptiles due to their proposed “Inherently Dangerous” status. It portends to be in the best interest of the animals and questions the voracity and safety of the so-called “average owner”.
I have been keeping and breeding snakes for over 30 years. I currently keep and breed members of the Boidae Family (Python reticulatus, Python molurus bivittatus, Boa constrictor imperator) as a business and hobby. I have collected from the field and kept members of the Viperidae Family (Agkistrodon piscivorous) as educational props. I always used the utmost care and have never been bitten by a venomous snake. I usually have at least one large very tame boid that I use to educate and entertain the public. I am an expert and advocate for wildlife and its conservation in NE North Carolina. I am active in Falconry and wildlife rehabilitation. I have written articles for ‘Wildlife in North Carolina’ magazine. The captive bred specimens I keep are the product of exacting husbandry, diet and handling, resulting in specimens that are extremely healthy, beautiful and tame. In 30yrs. I have never experienced an overtly dangerous encounter with a boid.
I resent the implications of being classified as the “average owner”…If there is such a thing. I have thousands of dollars and years of work invested in these magnificent creatures. My very livelihood is closely tied to these animals. It is in my best interest to make sure my snakes have the best of care to protect my sizable investment. If this ban (it is a ban) goes through I will face financial ruin or have to move from the state. If Sen. Garwood’s’ idea of the average owner is an uneducated redneck with a giant snake in his basement to impress his friends and scare his neighbors he is very wrong. Antiquated stereotypes can be very dangerous when people’s lives hang in the balance.
As far as the premise that these are “extremely unpredictable and dangerous creatures”; that is simply not true. A study of the natural history, feeding response and breeding cycles will give a keeper a good base of knowledge in what can be expected from these animals. Tempered with vigilance and respect, there is no reason that someone who puts in the time and educates themselves can’t have a positive and safe experience with these wonderful animals. Although specialized, once familiar with the care of snakes one finds their husbandry needs are quite basic. They require less intensive care than domestic dogs and cats.
Private keepers and breeders have contributed enormously to science, education and the public good. Jim Harrison of Tennessee is one of the largest providers of venom for the production of antivenin. Bob Clark of Oklahoma is the largest breeder of pythons in the world contributing to knowledge of husbandry and breeding. He has bred truly domesticated morphs of Python reticulatus and Python molurus bivittatus. Never before achieved and reducing the trade in wild caught specimens so that these species might survive for future generations.
According to the National Safety Council (http://nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm) domestic horses, dogs and cats are all far more dangerous to the public than snakes are (including venomous). In 2001 25 people were killed by dogs, 65 by other domestic mammals, 7 by wild venomous snakes (0 by captive venomous), and 0 from being crushed or bitten by other reptiles (boids and others). I am not advocating the ban of dogs and cats. I am trying to make a point. Car accidents killed 14,946 people, drowning 1054, lightning 44 and 303 from alcohol. I don’t see any legislation to ban cars, the beach or booze. There are many other matters of great importance that the General Assembly could be spending their time and our tax dollars on.
Howard Andrew Wyatt
|
|
|
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.
|