Reptile Ethics, When do we say thats enough

Scott, would I stop? No, venomoids do not offend me that much. I can see why people might want an animal like that. I would probably never own one myself, but I have no real problem with others doing so.

I do make efforts to avoid retailers whose policies I don't agree with. Walmart and Blockbuster RARELY see any of my money. But sometimes I do find myself with no other viable choice, and then I reluctantly do shop there.

Originally posted by bpc
I doubt that all vets who perform this surgery use pain meds. And if they do its probably a one time dose.

The only licensed veterinarian I am personally aware of who performs a significant number of these surgeries does certainly consider post operative pain meds to be appropriate protocol. One to three doses of the longer lasting stuff is considered acceptable in snakes for post op pain relief, depending on the situation.

It is sadly true that in the "bad old days" veterinarians did not use any analgesic drugs on reptiles because the pain mechanism in reptiles is poorly understood. Surgery was routinely performed on immobilized but still fully sensible animals. Unfortunately a lot of vets seem to still be living in the "bad old days" and do not always consider pain relief appropriate for reptile patients. They are wrong, and they need to keep up with current research and publications to understand how wrong they are.

We are still working on better understanding how pain perception and reaction works in reptiles, but the current movement in the veterinary community is definitely towards using humane pain relief protocols to the same degree of consideration that is given dog and cat patients. A number of recent publications have done a good job of documenting clinical signs of pain in postoperative reptile patients and how they are improved by appropriate medication.

A person has a good working relationship w/ thier vet. Much the same way a rancher doing thier own procedures would. The person has a good knowledge of reptiles and is well trained in doing this procedure. Maybe even more qualified than the vet. I know I would have a hard time finding a vet that has performed this procedure anywhere near me. The vet is prescribing all the needed drugs and giving this person the info needed to use them properly. Much the same way our vets allow us to keep antibiotics on hand now. The person has all the needed equipment to do the procedure. And, just for the sake of this argument, the person has painkillers and antibiotics on hand for after the surgery. Should this person be forced to have this procedure performed by the vet?

No one is ever "forced" to turn a venomous snake into a crippled, mutilated play-toy. If the situation you are talking about applies to a patient in need of veterinary care to preserve its life or its health, then I agree. If you are talking about a backyard hack who chops up snakes to sell for profit, there are many other legal and ethical issues that come into the picture.

A very experienced and qualified layperson under the direct supervision of a veterinarian who prescribes the appropriate drugs can legally and ethically perform procedures up to and including minor surgery. These procedures may be performed on their own animals, on charity rescue cases or on wild animals in a rehabilitation/release program on a not for profit basis. That would accurately describe what I do. That would not describe what is being done by the amateur venomoiders.

Now back to the legal side. Rattlesnake round-ups are still legal in many states. I won't even go into the horror stories which occur there. There is no great public (general public) outcry to stop them. The general public, the people sitting on the jury for the trial of the alleged animal abuser, are terrified of snakes in general.

That is certainly a very serious problem in our society. Snakes do not elicit the same protective responses as puppies and kittens from the general public when they are cruelly abused. This lack of feeling for cold blooded animals allows abuses like the rattlesnake roundups to continue.

IF (and it's a BIG if), someone can prove that Kevin (or whomever) is actually harming snakes, THEN we should let all the venomous dealers and the venomoid buying public know what is up. But, just because he is not a vet, doesn't mean that he is not capable of doing the procedure as well as someone who is. That is the point I am trying to make.

A garage hack mutilating snakes for profit with inadequate equipment and illegal drugs does not inspire any great confidence in his veterinary skill or his ability to care humanely for these animals. I have personally seen too many badly hacked snakes to be able to agree with your assessment.

Is it theoretically possible for a non veterinarian to learn how to spay and neuter his own dogs at home, given (illegal) access to surgical drugs and equipment? Possibly. Is it a good idea? I really don't think so. It becomes especially not a good idea, and especially illegal, when it is being done by unlicensed people for profit. This is not just my personal opinion here. This is the law.

Do I think that you, personally, Brian, would do reasonably well treating your own snake collection with antibiotics and antiparasiticals at home? Certainly, with a little help from your vet to get the right medications and to learn how to use them. This is called "herd management" and is well accepted in the veterinary profession.

Humane health care for the snake's benefit by experienced herp keepers is generally a good thing. But that is in a whole different ballpark from performing unlicensed surgery with less than adequate drugs on live animals for profit.

Originally posted by Mustangrde1 With venomoids becoming ever so readily available it is only a matter of time before more and more bites occur and some turn out to be hot. At that point is when more restrictive laws WILL be imposed.

Already happened. Ask the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine about cases in the UK.

PS Tanith if your interested I have some W/C Green iguanas from Miami that did not make it after a rescue Ray Goushaw and I were involved in. You are welcome to them if you want.

Thanks for the offer. However I don't work with iguanas; my study interest is limited to the special veterinary needs of venomous species. Herbivorous lizard organs are arranged very differently and suture practice on their skin wouldn't be quite the same as with snake skin. So no thank you on those particular specimens. But the thought is appreciated.

The only licensed veterinarian I am personally aware of who performs a significant number of these surgeries

A very experienced and qualified layperson under the direct supervision of a veterinarian who prescribes the appropriate drugs can legally and ethically perform procedures up to and including minor surgery.

No one is ever "forced" to turn a venomous snake into a crippled, mutilated play-toy.

Quote one shows that this is an accepted practice. If it were not then that vet would be in danger of losing his license.

Quote two shows that you agree that a layperson can and should be able to handle things such as this by themselves IF properly equipped and properly trained.

Quote three shows that you personally have a HUGE problem with this procedure. That's ok, I don't think anyone will hold that against you. BUT, your feelings about this particular procedure could be keeping you from thinking about it in an objective manner. There are many people who feel "fixing" mammals is inhumane, but that doesn't make it illegal. As I posted before, Marshall Farms fixes thousands of ferrets every year, they are still in business and it's not a big secret. So obviously, if PETA can't get them closed down for doing that, it's going to be very difficult to get anyone to go after someone removing venom glands from thier own snake.

If you are talking about a backyard hack who chops up snakes to sell for profit, there are many other legal and ethical issues that come into the picture.

There MAY BE ethical issues, but if there were legal ones, Marshall Farms would be in trouble. Once you own or produce an animal, as long as you are not torturing or neglecting it, you can do pretty much what you want w/ it. Yes, I understand that many of you think that this procedure is torture/mutilation, but, that is not legally the case. If it were, vets would not/could not perform the procedure.

Brian

I just did a brief veiw of some of the charges against Marshall Farms and from what I can see they were charged only after sever pressure from PETA. Case in point they were cited for a gentleman having a few hairs sticking out durring surgery. Come on thats a joke and shows they managed to get an inspector in there that was at very least sympathetic to their" peta " cause.

That also is scarry that PETA can apply that type of pressure to meet their needs. Funny though I also looked at some PETA goup pictures and noticed members wearring leather shoes and Belts and one picture what looked like a fur lined leather jacket. Almost spit my coffee out on that one.

If Marshall doing things incorrect or substandard? " Possibly and most likely" Can they continue to operate if it persist? Highly doubtful. They will need to come to atleast a minumum of compliance or be out of bussiness. They have just to much pressure on them from groups that have very powerful lobbiest in Washington to ignore it.

However the issue's reguarding Surgeries and who may preform them are a matter of law. I would as I have stated have no problem with a vet preforming the operation. But I can not ever condone a layperson doing it. The head of an animal is no place for Charlie Chaplin to be playing around. Hell I can do it and probably you and for sure Tanith but it doesnt make it legal or right. Surgery needs to be done by a trained professional.

Yes if one of my animals need a surgery you can bet I would be on the phone to find a good qualified person to do it. Hell my first call would be to Tanith probably for her recommendation on who. But no way would I try surgery myself Legally it would be wrong but more so it would not be in the animals best intrest.

These people are hacking on animals for an inflated Profit. They can scream all they want about the cost etc etc etc and the right to sell their product. And that is what it is pure profit. They are not breeding venomoids as a venomoid to venomoid = venomous.What they are selling is Mutilated animals as safe to handle.They have 0 respect for the animals and see them purely as money making machines and I find that repulsive.

The arguement that they can ask any price for their animals is fine. I can sell a Florida Mudsnake for $60 bucks. If they want to use the arguement of asking any price then fine sell the snakes as TRUE UNALTERED HOTS for a higher price. Hell Hank Molt is one of the highest priced sellers out there and he makes a good living at it. If they want higher prices then spend the time to clean up the animals and get the higher price.

Scott Bice

Originally posted by bpc
Quote one shows that this is an accepted practice. If it were not then that vet would be in danger of losing his license.

Like declawing cats and debarking dogs, venomoiding is not currently an illegal practice in the United states when it is performed by a licensed veterinarian with appropriate drugs and tools.

Non patient benefit, "human convenience" surgeries like these have always been the subject of considerable ethical debate in the veterinary community. Most vets typically refuse to perform them because they cause pain, suffering and damage to animals with no health benefit to the patient. That is the definition of an unnecessary or cosmetic surgery. Let's not forget that even with the best medical attempts at pain control, postoperative pain is a basic fact of life.

Also like declawing cats and debarking dogs, venomoiding is an illegal practice when performed by amateurs for profit who have no license and no legal access to the appropriate drugs or equipment.

Quote two shows that you agree that a layperson can and should be able to handle things such as this by themselves IF properly equipped and properly trained.

You seem to have missed the quote where I stated that adenectomy is not minor surgery in the professional opinion of any veterinarian I have ever worked with or discussed this issue with.

Quote three shows that you personally have a HUGE problem with this procedure. That's ok, I don't think anyone will hold that against you. BUT, your feelings about this particular procedure could be keeping you from thinking about it in an objective manner.

Let's see. Some people want to subject snakes to major invasive surgery that involves significant pain and suffering for the animal, for no reason other than to make money off of the animal. This is questionable enough when done with proper pain relief medications in a vet clinic. On top of that, they are not licensed to practice veterinary medicine and they are doing so illegally for profit with inadequate drugs and with "surgical" tools from Home Depot. The snakes that are crippled for profit are more likely to be shipped out and sold to the highest bidder than to receive any decent postoperative care.

What, exactly, do you find ethically acceptable about this picture?

I think you're arguing for a theoretical picture that doesn't exist. If, in a perfect world, there were some hobbyists who were highly educated in reptile medicine and had access to the resources of a vet clinic, would I have a problem if they wanted to attempt surgeries on THEIR OWN ANIMALS under veterinary supervision with all the proper drugs and tools? Not a major one, no. The law wouldn't either. What it comes down to is this:

1. Does the person doing the surgery have easy legal access to the proper tools and medications to do it humanely?
2. If the surgery is being performed by a non veterinarian, is it strictly on their own personal animals?

The answer to both questions in the real world is "no" when we are talking about what actually happens to venomoid snakes on the market today.

There are many people who feel "fixing" mammals is inhumane, but that doesn't make it illegal. As I posted before, Marshall Farms fixes thousands of ferrets every year, they are still in business and it's not a big secret.

If you don't "fix" a ferret, it is at high risk of dying very early of reproductive related diseases. The standard veterinary recommendation to improve quality of life for a ferret, especially a female, is early spay. Marshall Farms is acting responsibly in having this done for companion animals. This isn't strictly an "owner benefit" situation where the patient receives no health benefit from the surgery.

So obviously, if PETA can't get them closed down for doing that, it's going to be very difficult to get anyone to go after someone removing venom glands from thier own snake.

I'm not arguing that enforcement of animal cruelty laws is difficult when snakes are involved rather than cute fuzzy animals.

There MAY BE ethical issues, but if there were legal ones, Marshall Farms would be in trouble.

They have been in trouble, several times as I recall. Not entirely sure of the details, but they claim that surgeries are done under veterinary supervision for the health benefit of the animal. Sounds reasonable to me.

Once you own or produce an animal, as long as you are not torturing or neglecting it, you can do pretty much what you want w/ it. Yes, I understand that many of you think that this procedure is torture/mutilation, but, that is not legally the case. If it were, vets would not/could not perform the procedure.

I'm afraid that statement is incorrect. Veterinarians may legally and ethically perform many highly invasive procedures using proper drugs and surgical technique. If surgery cannot be defined as torture when performed by an amateur just because it is not defined as torture when performed by a licensed medical expert, may I attempt it in my garage with drugs and tools I bought at a flea market? I'll only charge ya $20 to remove your kidney. Whaddya say, it's a bargain.