Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
III Regulation of ownership of large constricting snakes.
As used in this Article, large constricting snakes shall mean: Reticulated
Python, Python reticulatus; Burmese Python, Python molurus; African Rock
Python, Python sebae; Amethystine Python, Morelia amethistina and Green
Anaconda, Eunectes murinus or any of their subspecies or hybrids. It shall
be unlawful for any person to own, possess, use, transport or traffic in any of
the large constricting snakes that are not housed in a sturdy and secure
enclosure. Permanent enclosures shall be designed to be escape proof and
shall have an operable lock. Each enclosure shall be labeled clearly and
visibly with the scientific name, common name, and owners identifying.
can anyone spot the problem with this part
|
I see nothing wrong with that whatsoever. It means you should have it in an enclosure with latches or locks to prevent escape. It means you can't put bricks on a screen top. My boas are not even on that list and their open fronts have two metal latches on the doors. If you are all about bricks and thick books to secure your animal; I guess I can see why it would be a 'problem'.
There is also no permits, none of the chipping you made such a fuss about and no fees or licenses that you mention to hold. How do I know all of this?
I live here in NC where USARK was formed originally as NCARK. It came about because API (now Born Free USA) decided to start an anti-exotics campaign with state zoo curators and releasing exotics. That was back in 2005. This law was the result of that battle.
The current NC law is actually better than the previous law. Hell, it's better than the current PA law or any one out there.
As far as blasting Andrew goes....
YOU. Let me see you give up most of your collection to go deal with scheisty politicians, animal rights extremists and their lobbyists/lawyers and brush off attacks on your personal facebook page by the people you are trying to help and never lose your cool.
You may carry on with
