• Responding to email notices you receive.
    **************************************************
    In short, DON'T! Email notices are to ONLY alert you of a reply to your private message or your ad on this site. Replying to the email just wastes your time as it goes NOWHERE, and probably pisses off the person you thought you replied to when they think you just ignored them. So instead of complaining to me about your messages not being replied to from this site via email, please READ that email notice that plainly states what you need to do in order to reply to who you are trying to converse with.

  • IMPORTANT! PLEASE READ!! About the Google Adsense ads being displayed

    =====================
    Posted 08/15/2025
    =====================


    Yeah, I know. They are a pain in the butt. But they pay the bills to keep my server running. Just a fact of life, I am afraid.

    Want to get rid of them? Simple. Just become a Contributor level member or above and they will be gone. -> Please click HERE."

    Is that too much for me to ask of you to keep this site running? Well, sorry about that. I too wish I could get everything for free. But alas.....

    =====================
    Addendum: 01/10/2026
    =====================


    Google Adsense ad revenue for December, 2025 was just $30 over the cost of the lease for the server running this site. So, in effect, the money providing the incentive for me to continue running this site is coming SOLELY from the paid memberships and sponsorships here. Which honestly ain't much....

NY reptile ban has been signed into law!

SPJ

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 28, 2002
Messages
7,046
Reaction score
240
Points
63
Age
57
Location
Seymour, CT
Anyone know what kind of impact this is going to have on the sale of animals in NY?
Will this kill the White Plains show?

I know burms, retics, condas, and monitors are now banned but does anyone know if there are there any other animals that will end up being banned due to wording in this terrible law?

Breeding is now banned as well.
 
Is it breeding in general, or just the breeding of the banned species?
I must have overlooked that part when I read the bill.
 
Is this the one?

S T A T E O F N E W Y O R K
________________________________________________________________________

2684--F

2003-2004 Regular Sessions

I N A S S E M B L Y

January 29, 2003
___________

Introduced by M. of A. TONKO, TOKASZ, M. COHEN, GRANNIS, ENGLEBRIGHT,
CLARK -- Multi-Sponsored by -- M. of A. GALEF, A. GUNTHER, LOPEZ,
McENENY, PERRY, SIDIKMAN, WEISENBERG -- read once and referred to the
Committee on Environmental Conservation -- reported and referred to
the Committee on Codes -- committee discharged, bill amended, ordered
reprinted as amended and recommitted to said committee -- reported and
referred to the Committee on Ways and Means -- committee discharged,
bill amended, ordered reprinted as amended and recommitted to said
committee -- recommitted to the Committee on Environmental Conserva-
tion in accordance with Assembly Rule 3, sec. 2 -- reported and
referred to the Committee on Codes -- committee discharged, bill
amended, ordered reprinted as amended and recommitted to said commit-
tee -- again reported from said committee with amendments, ordered
reprinted as amended and recommitted to said committee -- again
reported from said committee with amendments, ordered reprinted as
amended and recommitted to said committee -- again reported from said
committee with amendments, ordered reprinted as amended and recommit-
ted to said committee

AN ACT to amend the environmental conservation law, in relation to
prohibiting the possession of wild animals as pets in New York state

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

1 Section 1. Legislative findings. The legislature finds that keeping
2 exotic animals as pets poses a serious threat to the health and safety
3 of New York state residents. Wild animals, including but not limited to,
4 monkeys, tigers and venomous snakes, are readily available for purchase
5 throughout New York state.
6 Across the country, children have been mauled by tigers, asphyxiated
7 by snakes, and bitten by monkeys. Wild animals kept as pets can transmit
8 serious diseases to people, including Herpes B, Salmonella and Ebola
9 virus.

EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
{ } is old law to be omitted.
LBD04272-20-4

A. 2684--F 2

1 Recapture of escaped wild animals is an expensive and perilous endeav-
2 or for municipalities. Other states already prohibit private ownership
3 of certain wild animals as pets, a position supported by the United
4 States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Centers for Disease Control
5 (CDC) and the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA). New York
6 must take similar steps to ensure the protection of the public and the
7 humane treatment of wild animals.
8 S 2. Subdivision 6 of section 11-0103 of the environmental conserva-
9 tion law is amended by adding a new paragraph e to read as follows:
10 E. "WILD ANIMAL" SHALL NOT INCLUDE "COMPANION ANIMAL" AS DEFINED IN
11 SECTION THREE HUNDRED FIFTY OF THE AGRICULTURE AND MARKETS LAW. WILD
12 ANIMAL INCLUDES, AND IS LIMITED TO, ANY OR ALL OF THE FOLLOWING ORDERS
13 AND FAMILIES:
14 (1) NONHUMAN PRIMATES AND PROSIMIANS,
15 (2) FELIDAE (WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DOMESTICATED AND FERAL CATS, WHICH
16 SHALL MEAN DOMESTICATED CATS THAT WERE FORMERLY OWNED AND THAT HAVE BEEN
17 ABANDONED AND THAT ARE NO LONGER SOCIALIZED, AS WELL AS OFFSPRING OF
18 SUCH CATS), AND HYBRIDS THEREOF,
19 (3) CANIDAE (WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DOMESTICATED DOGS),
20 (4) URSIDAE,
21 (5) ALL REPTILES THAT ARE VENOMOUS BY NATURE, PURSUANT TO DEPARTMENT
22 REGULATION, AND THE FOLLOWING SPECIES AND FAMILIES: BOIDAE FAMILY,
23 ASIATIC (WATER) MONITOR (V. SALVATOR), NILE MONITOR (V. NILOCITUS),
24 WHITE THROAT MONITOR (V. ALBIGULARUS), BLACK THROAT MONITOR (V. ALBIGU-
25 LARUS IONIDES) AND CROCODILE MONITOR (V. SALVADORI) AND ANY HYBRID THER-
26 EOF,
27 (6) CROCODILIA.
28 S 3. Section 11-0103 of the environmental conservation law is amended
29 by adding two new subdivisions 31 and 32 to read as follows:
30 31. "PET" MEANS AN ANIMAL KEPT FOR THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF COMPANION-
31 SHIP THAT IS NORMALLY MAINTAINED IN OR NEAR THE HOUSEHOLD OF THE OWNER
32 OR PERSON WHO CARES FOR SUCH DOMESTICATED ANIMAL.
33 32. "WILDLIFE SANCTUARY" MEANS AN ORGANIZATION AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION
34 170(B)(1)(A)(VI) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986, AND APPROVED BY
35 THE ASSOCIATION OF SANCTUARIES OR THE AMERICAN SANCTUARY ASSOCIATION,
36 AND THAT OPERATES A PLACE OF REFUGE WHERE ABUSED, NEGLECTED, UNWANTED,
37 IMPOUNDED, ABANDONED, ORPHANED, OR DISPLACED WILD ANIMALS ARE PROVIDED
38 CARE FOR THEIR LIFETIME OR REHABILITATED AND RELEASED BACK TO THEIR
39 NATURAL HABITAT, AND, WITH RESPECT TO ANY ANIMAL OWNED BY THE ORGANIZA-
40 TION, DOES NOT:
41 A. USE THE ANIMAL FOR ANY TYPE OF ENTERTAINMENT, RECREATIONAL OR
42 COMMERCIAL PURPOSE;
43 B. SELL, TRADE, LEND OR BARTER THE ANIMAL OR THE ANIMAL`S BODY PARTS;
44 OR
45 C. BREED THE ANIMAL.
46 S 4. Section 11-0511 of the environmental conservation law, as amended
47 by chapter 432 of the laws of 1997, is amended to read as follows:
48 S 11-0511. Possession and transportation of wildlife.
49 {No} SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11-0512 OF THIS ARTICLE, NO
50 person shall, except under a license or permit first obtained from the
51 department containing the prominent warning notice specified in subdivi-
52 sion nine of section 11-0917 of this article, possess, transport or
53 cause to be transported, imported or exported any live wolf, wolfdog,
54 coyote, coydog, fox, skunk, venomous reptile or raccoon, endangered
55 species designated pursuant to section 11-0535 {hereof} OF THIS TITLE,
56 species named in section 11-0536 OF THIS TITLE or other species of

A. 2684--F 3

1 native or non-native live wildlife or fish where the department finds
2 that possession, transportation, importation or exportation of such
3 species of wildlife or fish would present a danger to the health or
4 welfare of the people of the state, an individual resident or indigenous
5 fish or wildlife population. Environmental conservation officers, forest
6 rangers and members of the state police may seize every such animal
7 possessed without such license or permit. No action for damages shall
8 lie for such seizure, and disposition of seized animals shall be at the
9 discretion of the department.
10 S 5. The environmental conservation law is amended by adding a new
11 section 11-0512 to read as follows:
12 S 11-0512. POSSESSION, SALE, BARTER, TRANSFER, EXCHANGE AND IMPORT OF
13 WILD ANIMALS AS PETS PROHIBITED.
14 1. NO PERSON SHALL KNOWINGLY POSSESS, HARBOR, SELL, BARTER, TRANSFER,
15 EXCHANGE OR IMPORT ANY WILD ANIMAL FOR USE AS A PET IN NEW YORK STATE,
16 EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SUBDIVISION THREE OF THIS SECTION.
17 2. THIS SECTION SHALL NOT APPLY TO THE FOLLOWING PERSONS AND ENTITIES
18 WITH RESPECT TO WILD ANIMALS OWNED OR HARBORED BY THEM SOLELY FOR A
19 PURPOSE OTHER THAN FOR USE AS A PET:
20 A. ZOOLOGICAL FACILITIES LICENSED PURSUANT TO 7 USC. SEC. 2132 ET.
21 SEQ. AND ACCREDITED BY AAZPA (AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS
22 AND AQUARIUMS);
23 B. EXHIBITORS LICENSED PURSUANT TO THE ANIMAL WELFARE ACT, 7 USC.
24 SECTIONS 2132-2134 WHO HAVE DEMONSTRATED TO THE DEPARTMENT, IN ACCORD-
25 ANCE WITH REGULATIONS PROMULGATED BY THE COMMISSIONER, THAT THE SOLE
26 PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE WILD ANIMAL OR ANIMALS ARE USED IS FOR EXHIBITION
27 TO THE PUBLIC FOR PROFIT OR COMPENSATION;
28 C. RESEARCH FACILITIES AS DEFINED IN THE ANIMAL WELFARE ACT, 7 USC.
29 SECTION 2132 (E), 2 (E) WHICH ARE LICENSED BY THE UNITED STATES SECRE-
30 TARY OF AGRICULTURE AND APPROVED UNDER APPLICABLE STATE LAW;
31 D. LICENSED VETERINARIANS AND INCORPORATED HUMANE SOCIETIES, ANIMAL
32 SHELTERS, SOCIETIES FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS OR ANIMAL
33 WELFARE ORGANIZATIONS IN TEMPORARY POSSESSION OF WILD ANIMALS;
34 E. STATE UNIVERSITIES OR OTHER STATE AGENCIES WORKING WITH WILD
35 ANIMALS;
36 F. WILDLIFE REHABILITATORS LICENSED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
37 SUBDIVISION THREE OF SECTION 11-0515 OF THIS TITLE AND REGULATIONS
38 PROMULGATED THEREUNDER, WHO ARE TENDING TO SICK OR INJURED WILD ANIMALS;
39 G. A PERSON HAVING CUSTODY OF A WILD ANIMAL SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF
40 TRANSPORTING IT TO A LICENSED VETERINARIAN, WILDLIFE REHABILITATOR,
41 HUMANE SOCIETY OR OTHER ENTITY AUTHORIZED BY THIS SECTION TO HANDLE OR
42 TREAT WILD ANIMALS;
43 H. A WILDLIFE SANCTUARY AS DEFINED IN SUBDIVISION THIRTY-TWO OF
44 SECTION 11-0103 OF THIS ARTICLE;
45 I. A PERSON WITH A FALCONRY OR HAWK LICENSE PURSUANT TO SECTION
46 11-1003 OF THIS ARTICLE;
47 J. A PERSON WHO IS NOT A RESIDENT OF THIS STATE WHO IS IN THE STATE
48 ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRAVELLING BETWEEN LOCATIONS OUTSIDE THE STATE.
49 IN NO EVENT SHALL THIS TIME PERIOD EXCEED TEN DAYS;
50 K. REPTILE EXHIBITORS LICENSED PURSUANT TO SECTION 11-0516 OF THIS
51 TITLE.
52 3. ANY PERSON WHO POSSESSES OR HARBORS A WILD ANIMAL FOR USE AS A PET
53 AT THE TIME THAT THIS SECTION TAKES EFFECT MAY RETAIN POSSESSION OF SUCH
54 ANIMAL FOR THE REMAINDER OF ITS LIFE, PROVIDED THAT SUCH PERSON:
55 A. HAS NOT BEEN CONVICTED OF ANY OFFENSE RELATING TO CRUELTY TO
56 ANIMALS OR UNDER A JUDICIAL ORDER PROHIBITING POSSESSION OF ANIMALS;

A. 2684--F 4

1 B. APPLIES TO THE DEPARTMENT WITHIN SIXTY DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE
2 OF THIS SECTION, AND OBTAINS FROM THE DEPARTMENT, A PERMIT PURSUANT TO
3 SUBDIVISION FOUR OF THIS SECTION; AND
4 C. COMPLIES WITH ALL RULES AND REGULATIONS ESTABLISHED BY THE DEPART-
5 MENT AS REQUISITES FOR OWNERSHIP OF SUCH WILD ANIMAL.
6 4. THE DEPARTMENT SHALL BE REQUIRED TO ISSUE PERMITS AUTHORIZING
7 POSSESSION OF WILD ANIMALS ONLY TO THOSE PERSONS WHO COMPLY WITH THE
8 PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION THREE OF THIS SECTION AND WITH ANY REGULATIONS
9 PROMULGATED BY THE DEPARTMENT THEREUNDER. SUCH PERMITS SHALL BE VALID
10 IN ANY JURISDICTION WITHIN THE STATE WHERE POSSESSION OF A WILD ANIMAL
11 IS NOT PROHIBITED BY LOCAL LAW AND SHALL BE RENEWABLE BIENNIALLY ANNUAL-
12 LY SUBJECT TO CONTINUED COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION
13 AND WITH ANY REGULATIONS PROMULGATED THEREUNDER. THE DEPARTMENT SHALL
14 FORWARD COPIES OF SUCH PERMITS TO THE CLERK OF THE CITY, TOWN OR VILLAGE
15 IN WHICH EACH WILD ANIMAL IS HARBORED.
16 A. PERMIT APPLICATIONS SHALL INCLUDE, BUT SHALL NOT BE LIMITED TO, THE
17 FOLLOWING:
18 (1) THE NAME, ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF THE PERSON WHO OWNS,
19 POSSESSES OR HARBORS THE WILD ANIMAL OR ANIMALS, INCLUDING AN ACKNOWL-
20 EDGMENT THAT THE PERSON WHO OWNS, POSSESSES OR HARBORS THE WILD ANIMAL
21 OR ANIMALS IS TWENTY-ONE YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER.
22 (2) THE ADDRESS OF THE LOCATION WHERE THE WILD ANIMAL OR ANIMALS WILL
23 BE KEPT, IF DIFFERENT FROM THE ABOVE.
24 (3) A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EACH WILD ANIMAL OWNED, POSSESSED OR
25 HARBORED, INCLUDING SPECIES, GENDER, AGE AND ANY IDENTIFYING CHARACTER-
26 ISTICS.
27 (4) THE NAME, ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF THE VETERINARIAN, WHO
28 WILL TREAT THE WILD ANIMAL.
29 (5) AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT INDICATING THAT THE WILD ANIMAL OR ANIMALS WILL
30 NOT BE BRED.
31 (6) A DETAILED STATEMENT ESTABLISHING THAT THE LOCATION IN WHICH THE
32 WILD ANIMAL WILL BE KEPT COMPLIES WITH ALL STANDARDS OF CARE PROMULGATED
33 BY THE DEPARTMENT, BUT AT MINIMUM COMPLIES WITH THE STANDARDS FOR ANIMAL
34 CARE SET FORTH IN THE FEDERAL ANIMAL WELFARE ACT INCLUDING, BUT NOT
35 LIMITED TO HOUSING, TEMPERATURE, VENTILATION, DRAINAGE, SANITATION,
36 FOOD, WATER, EXERCISE AND VETERINARY CARE APPROPRIATE TO THE SPECIES AND
37 SUFFICIENT TO MAINTAIN THE WILD ANIMAL IN GOOD HEALTH.
38 (7) AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT THE WILD ANIMAL WILL NOT BE TIED, TETHERED,
39 OR CHAINED OUTDOORS, ALLOWED TO RUN AT LARGE AND THAT THE WILD ANIMAL
40 WILL NOT BE BROUGHT TO ANY PUBLIC PARK OR COMMERCIAL OR RETAIL ESTAB-
41 LISHMENT UNLESS IT IS BEING BROUGHT TO A VETERINARIAN OR VETERINARY
42 CLINIC.
43 (8) AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT POSSESSION, HARBORING OR OWNING SUCH WILD
44 ANIMAL DOES NOT VIOLATE ANY APPLICABLE FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL LAW.
45 B. THE DEPARTMENT SHALL SET ANNUAL PERMIT FEES FOR THE POSSESSION OF
46 WILD ANIMALS PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION THREE OF THIS SECTION IN AN AMOUNT
47 DETERMINED TO BE REASONABLE BUT NOT MORE THAN EIGHTY DOLLARS PER YEAR
48 FOR EACH WILD ANIMAL. PERMIT FEES SHALL BE USED SOLELY FOR THE ENFORCE-
49 MENT OF THIS SECTION.
50 5. PRIOR TO DENIAL OR REVOCATION OF A PERMIT ISSUED PURSUANT TO SUBDI-
51 VISION FOUR OF THIS SECTION, THE DEPARTMENT SHALL HOLD A HEARING UPON
52 DUE NOTICE TO THE PERSON WHO OWNS, HARBORS OR POSSESSES THE WILD ANIMAL,
53 AT WHICH SUCH PERSON SHALL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD. THE
54 PROVISIONS OF THE STATE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT SHALL APPLY AT
55 PROCEEDINGS HELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS SUBDIVISION. THE DECISION TO
56 DENY OR REVOKE A PERMIT UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL BE APPEALABLE.

A. 2684--F 5

1 6. ANY PERSON IN POSSESSION OF A WILD ANIMAL AS A PET THAT HAS BEEN
2 GRANTED A PERMIT PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION FOUR OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT
3 BREED, SELL, TRADE, BARTER OR EXCHANGE SUCH WILD ANIMAL.
4 7. A PERSON POSSESSING, OWNING OR HARBORING A WILD ANIMAL WHO IS
5 DENIED A PERMIT PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION FOUR OF THIS SECTION, OR WHOSE
6 PERMIT IS REVOKED, SHALL SURRENDER SUCH WILD ANIMAL TO THE DEPARTMENT OR
7 AN AUTHORIZED AGENT THEREOF OR A PEACE OFFICER OF THIS STATE OR A DULY
8 INCORPORATED SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS.
9 8. THE DEPARTMENT, ANY PEACE OFFICER OF THIS STATE OR A DULY INCORPO-
10 RATED SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS IS HEREBY AUTHOR-
11 IZED TO ENFORCE THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION AND ISSUE NOTICES OF
12 VIOLATION TO PERSONS IN VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION, AND SHALL HAVE THE
13 AUTHORITY TO SEIZE ANY WILD ANIMAL HELD IN VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION.
14 WILD ANIMALS SEIZED OR SURRENDERED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS
15 SECTION SHALL BE TRANSFERRED TO A DULY INCORPORATED WILDLIFE SANCTUARY
16 AS DEFINED IN THIS SECTION, OR A ZOOLOGICAL FACILITY ACCREDITED BY THE
17 AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS, OR SHALL BE
18 HUMANELY EUTHANIZED. THE DEPARTMENT SHALL ALSO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO
19 SEEK INJUNCTIVE RELIEF IN ANY COURT OF APPROPRIATE JURISDICTION TO
20 PREVENT CONTINUED VIOLATIONS OF THIS SECTION.
21 9. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW, ANY PERSON WHO KNOWING-
22 LY BREEDS A WILD ANIMAL OR KNOWINGLY POSSESSES, OWNS, HARBORS, SELLS,
23 BARTERS, TRANSFERS, EXCHANGES, OR IMPORTS A WILD ANIMAL FOR USE AS A PET
24 IN VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE
25 PENALTY OF NOT MORE THAN FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS FOR THE FIRST OFFENSE AND
26 NOT MORE THAN ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR A SECOND AND SUBSEQUENT OFFENSES.
27 EACH INSTANCE OF BREEDING, OWNING, HARBORING, SALE, BARTER, TRANSFER,
28 EXCHANGE, OR IMPORT OF A WILD ANIMAL IN VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION SHALL
29 CONSTITUTE A SEPARATE OFFENSE.
30 10. NOTHING CONTAINED IN THIS SECTION SHALL PREVENT ANY CITY, TOWN OR
31 COUNTY FROM ENACTING MORE RESTRICTIVE PROVISIONS GOVERNING THE
32 POSSESSION OF WILD ANIMALS FOR USE AS PETS.
33 S 6. The environmental conservation law is amended by adding a new
34 section 11-0516 to read as follows:
35 S 11-0516. LICENSES TO POSSESS REPTILES FOR EXHIBITION PURPOSES.
36 NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW TO THE CONTRARY, THE
37 DEPARTMENT MAY ISSUE TO ANY PERSON A LICENSE REVOCABLE AT ITS PLEASURE
38 TO COLLECT OR POSSESS REPTILES THAT ARE PROHIBITED UNDER THIS CHAPTER,
39 FOR EXHIBITION PURPOSES. HOWEVER, A LICENSE TO POSSESS A VENOMOUS SNAKE
40 OR SNAKE OF THE BOIDAE FAMILY PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION SHALL NOT ALLOW A
41 LICENSEE TO EXHIBIT SUCH SNAKE IN A SCHOOL HOUSING ANY GRADES PREKINDER-
42 GARTEN THROUGH TWELVE. THE DEPARTMENT SHALL ADOPT REGULATIONS CONCERN-
43 ING THE QUALIFICATIONS AND DUTIES OF REPTILE EXHIBITORS AND THE PROCE-
44 DURES FOR LICENSE ISSUANCE AND REVOCATION, INCLUDING REQUIRING A
45 LICENSEE TO ATTEND A FOUR HOUR COURSE APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT IN ONE
46 OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING AREAS OF SPECIALIZATION:
47 1. CROCODILIANS;
48 2. BOIDS;
49 3. LARGE MONITOR LIZARDS; OR
50 4. VENOMOUS SNAKES.
51 S 7. This act shall take effect January 1, 2005; provided however that
52 the department of environmental conservation shall promulgate any rules
53 and regulations necessary for the implementation of this act on or
54 before such effective date.
.SO DOC A 2684F *END* BTXT 2003
 
That's the original version. It was reworded so as not to state "Boidae family", but instead to list 5 species specifically.
As for my question on the breeding issue, based on this clause:
WILD ANIMAL INCLUDES, AND IS LIMITED TO , ANY OR ALL OF THE FOLLOWING ORDERS AND FAMILIES
It only restricts the breeding of species banned by this bill. In defining Wild Animal, the bill includes and limits the definition to only the animals listed. So when it states the following toward the end of the bill:
NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW, ANY PERSON WHO KNOWINGLY BREEDS A WILD ANIMAL OR KNOWINGLY POSSESSES, OWNS, HARBORS, SELLS,
23 BARTERS, TRANSFERS, EXCHANGES, OR IMPORTS A WILD ANIMAL FOR USE AS A PET
24 IN VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE
25 PENALTY OF NOT MORE THAN FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS FOR THE FIRST OFFENSE AND
26 NOT MORE THAN ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR A SECOND AND SUBSEQUENT OFFENSES.
It specifies wild "animal" and must use the term as defined in the bill.

At any rate, breeding ball pythons, cornsnakes, and anything else not listed as prohibited will still be allowed.
 
Yes, but what about Health Code 161.01? Does that apply only to NYC or has it been extended to the whole state?



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally featured on October 6, 2003

After hearing about the tiger and alligator discovered living in an apartment in Harlem, we thought you might like to have the full rundown of animals prohibited as pets in New York City by the Department of Health (Health Code 161.01: Wild animals prohibited).

(10) Reptiles. All Helodermatidae (gila monster and Mexican beaded lizard); all front-fanged venomous snakes, even it devenomized, including, but not limited to, all Viperidae (viper, pit viper), all Elapidae (cobra, mamba, krait, coral snake), all Atractaspididae (African burrowing asp), all Hydrophiidae (sea snake), all Laticaudidae (sea krait); all venomous, mid-or rear-fanged, Duvernoy-glanded members of the family Colubridae, even if devenomized; any member, or hybrid offspring of the family Boidae, including, but not limited to, the common or green anaconda and yellow anaconda; any member of the family Pythonidae, including but not limited to the African rock python, Indian or Burmese python, Amethystine or scrub python; any member of the family Varanidae, including the white throated monitor, Bosc's or African savannah monitor, Komodo monitor or dragon, Nile monitor, crocodile monitor, water monitor, Bornean earless monitor; any member of the family Iguanidae, including the green or common iguana; any member of the family Teiidae, including, but not limited to the golden, common, or black and white tegu; all members of the family Chelydridae, including snapping turtle and alligator snapping turtle; and all members of the order Crocodylia, including, but not limited to alligator, caiman and crocodile.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Does that mean that hogs and garter are banned?
Hogs are rear fanged and garters have Duvernoy glands.

Also ALL members of pythonidae and boidae are banned? I thought everything was now classified under boidae. They must have not wanted any loopholes for people to be able to keep rubber boas, rosy boas, ball pythons, or childrens pythons.
What a crock. :(
 
Contract Ebola from reptiles? What the heck is that line about? I'll take my chances, I guess i've never been to New York, but it sounds like a scary place with retics sneaking around and strangling children every night. I love it when politicians write bills and try to sound scientific. I'm pretty sure i'm more likely to get ebola from rats and cockroaches.
 
Here is a Question for anyone living in NY.

Apparently your constitution allows for repeal of laws! Why not get the herp societies togeather and obtain an attourney to have this law repealed?

Apparently the people who wrote this law sited the CDC about Salmonella. when in fact the CDC themselves can not say with 100% accuracy reptiles are the reason for salmonella when other factors of everyday life are taken in to account. As for constrictors I would love to see all these children that are killed yearly or statistical data on it. and the Ebola<sp> was related to prairey dogs if memory serves me correctly. So you have a law probably written by animal rights groups with a clear goal in mind.

What I see here is a law that is written based on fear and half truths and propaganda. You can either fight for your rights or just let them go with this bill!
 
Just wanted to clarify some concerns expressed:

The White Plains show will be continuing- next show is Jan. 15 & 16, back in the larger upper level. Vendor tables are already sold out despite the new law!

The law only restricts the following snake species: Anacondas, Burms, Retics, African Rock, Amethystine, and Burmese/Indian Pythons. For Lizards, it includes, Croc, water, nile, black-throat and white-thoat monitors. Crocodilians and venomous animals are also included, but they are already banned under other laws.

NY City has its own laws that are in some cases more restrictive. The two laws are not tied together.

My understanding is that permits will be available for animals already in possession. Cost and requirements are still be refined by the NY State Dept. of Encironmental Conservation. No breeding or sale of these animals will be allowed.

Hopes this helps clarify.

Bruce Lowder
 
Salmonella

ow do people catch Salmonella?

Salmonella live in the intestinal tracts of humans and other animals, including birds. Salmonella are usually transmitted to humans by eating foods contaminated with animal feces. Contaminated foods usually look and smell normal. Contaminated foods are often of animal origin, such as beef, poultry, milk, or eggs, but all foods, including vegetables may become contaminated. Many raw foods of animal origin are frequently contaminated, but fortunately, thorough cooking kills Salmonella. Food may also become contaminated by the unwashed hands of an infected food handler, who forgot to wash his or her hands with soap after using the bathroom.

Salmonella may also be found in the feces of some pets, especially those with diarrhea, and people can become infected if they do not wash their hands after contact with these feces. Reptiles are particularly likely to harbor Salmonella and people should always wash their hands immediately after handling a reptile, even if the reptile is healthy. Adults should also be careful that children wash their hands after handling a reptile.[b/]

So with all those facotrs involved there is no way that reptiles can be sited as the soul contributing factor in fact when looking at all factors they most likely are of a small possible percentage of likelyhood to transmit the illness. Human Sanitary practices and contaminated food are most likely the culprits.

Taken directly from the CDC website.
 
Snake Bites the facts

Snakebite Overview

Snakes are remarkable animals, successful on land, in the sea, in forests, in grasslands, in lakes, and in deserts. Despite their sinister reputation, snakes are almost always more scared of you than you are of them. Few snakes, with the occasional exception of king cobras (Ophiophagus hannah) or black mambas (Dendroaspis polylepis), act aggressively toward a human without provocation.

Snakes have no limbs, yet all are meat eaters. They catch prey that includes insects, birds, small mammals, and other reptiles, sometimes including other snakes. Only about 400 of 3000 snake species worldwide inject venom (a poison). Many snakes catch their prey by constriction. In constriction, a snake suffocates its prey by tightening its hold around the chest, preventing breathing or causing direct cardiac arrest. Snakes do not kill by crushing prey. Some snakes grab prey with their teeth and then swallow it whole.

Snakes are cold-blooded. Thus, they are unable to increase their body temperature and stay active when it is cold outside. They are most active at 25-32°C (77-90°F).

How snakes bite: Snakes that inject venom use modified salivary glands. Venom is a modified form of saliva and probably evolved to aid in chemical digestion. Varying degrees of toxicity also make it useful in killing prey. During envenomation (the bite that injects venom or poison), the venom passes from the venom gland through a duct into the snake's fangs, and finally into its prey. Snake venom is a combination of numerous substances with varying effects. In simple terms, these proteins can be divided into 4 categories:


Cytotoxins cause local tissue damage.


Hemotoxins cause internal bleeding.


Neurotoxins affect the nervous system.


Cardiotoxins act directly on the heart.



Who snakes bite: It has been estimated that 5 million snakebites occur worldwide each year, causing about 125,000 deaths. Snakebites are more common in tropical regions and in areas that are primarily agricultural. In these areas, large numbers of people coexist with numerous snakes.Five to ten deaths occur per year from snakebite in the United States. People provoke bites by handling or even attacking snakes in a significant number of cases in the United States. Of the estimated 45,000 snakebites per year in the United States, about 8000 are by venomous snakes.


Which snakes bite: Two major families of snakes account for most venomous snakes dangerous to humans.


The elapid family includes the cobras (Naja and other genera) of Asia and Africa; the mambas (Dendroaspis) of Africa; the kraits (Bungarus) of Asia; the coral snakes (Micrurus) of the Americas; and the Australian elapids, which include the coastal taipan (Oxyuranus scutellatus), tiger snakes (Notechis), king brown snake (Pseudechis australis), and death adders (Acanthophis). Highly venomous sea snakes are closely related to the Australian elapids.


The viper family includes the rattlesnakes (Crotalus) (Western diamondback rattlesnake and timber rattlesnake), moccasins (Agkistrodon), and lance-headed vipers (Bothrops) of the Americas; the saw-scaled vipers (Echis) of Asia and Africa; the Russell's viper (Daboia russellii) of Asia; and the puff adder (Bitis arietans) and Gaboon viper (Bitis gabonica) of Africa.


Most species of the most widely distributed and diverse snake family, the Colubrids, lack venom that is dangerous to humans. Some species, however, including the boomslang (Dispholidus typus), twig snakes (Thelotornis), the Japanese garter snake (Rhabdophis tigrinus), and brown tree snake (Boiga irregularis), can be dangerous. Other members of this family, including American garter snakes, kingsnakes, rat snakes, and racers, are harmless to humans.

Taken from E-Medicine The CDC sites the exact same numbers. So where are all these fatalties? Again more false and misinformation. Also noted is that most bites occur on small children in the wild or when alchol is a contributing factor.
 
Taken from E-Medicine The CDC sites the exact same numbers. So where are all these fatalties? Again more false and misinformation. Also noted is that most bites occur on small children in the wild or when alchol is a contributing factor.

I believe 125,000 represents worldwide fatalities, not fatalities in the United States. Many countries have snakes which are considerably more lethal than America's copperheads, water moccasins and rattlesnakes... and many of these countries lack the medical infrastructure required to deal with these bites.

If you get bitten by a krait in Sri Lanka, a mamba in Kenya, or a taipan in Papau New Guinea, you may not have ready access to the antivenin required -- or to an ICU which can keep you alive until such time as your lungs start working again. And you're far more likely to die from one of these bites than from anything you'll encounter in the wild in the U.S.

I note that from what I've seen most American snakebite fatalities come about when some bozo decides to keep a rare exotic venomous herp without having antivenin handy and without using proper handling procedures. Most people who get tagged by native American species survive the experience, although I wouldn't want to test my luck against a big Atrox...
 
Very true. that is why I highlighted 5 to 10 deaths per year in the United States.

125,000 as is written in the article says WORLD WIDE.

Also if we take into account other nations health care services it explains why the rate is so High. Looking at the United state Death is very rare in compared to the number of bites.

Like i said this law was written poorly atbest based on very little quality information and the typical propaganda. I honestly believe it could be repealed based on facts.
 
Scott makes a good point

Salmonella is a common inhabitant of the g.i. tract. It is thus fairly easy to contract if we don't wash our hands thoroughly after contact. There have been far more documented cases of food contamination with salmonella than by contact with herps. Below is a 2003 CDC report on salmonella-related cases in reptiles. One of the biggest herp-related outbreaks in children happened a few years ago in a NY Zoo Komodo dragon exhibit and is in the second quote.

December 12, 2003 / 52(49);1206-1209

Reptile-Associated Salmonellosis --- Selected States, 1998--2002

During 1998--2002, CDC received reports from state health departments regarding Salmonella infections in persons who had contact with reptiles (e.g., lizards, snakes, and turtles). Salmonella infections usually cause gastroenteritis but can result in invasive illness (e.g., septicemia and meningitis), especially in infants and immunocompromised persons. For decades, reptiles have been known as a source for salmonellosis (1); however, numerous reptile owners remain unaware that reptile contact places them and other household members, including children, at greater risk for salmonellosis (2). Increasing evidence suggests that amphibians (e.g., frogs, toads, newts, and salamanders) also can pose risks for salmonellosis in humans (3,4). This report describes cases of reptile-associated salmonellosis in six states*, offers recommendations on preventing transmission of Salmonella from reptiles and amphibians to humans (Box, and provides an update on state regulations mandating education at pet stores about salmonellosis.

Case Reports

California. During December 2001, an infant aged 3 months was taken to an emergency department (ED) after 1 day of bloody diarrhea and fever. The infant was sent home with no therapy and recovered in 2 days; a stool specimen yielded Salmonella serotype Nima. Although no reptiles lived in the home, the infant's father was a high school biology teacher who handled reptiles in the classroom, including a large snake (i.e., a boa) that he often draped over his shoulders. A stool culture from the snake grew S. Nima. When interviewed, the father indicated that he knew reptiles carry Salmonella and was careful to wash his hands after handling them or their containers. However, he did not change clothing when he came home from work before holding his child.

Connecticut. During June 2002, a child aged 21 months was admitted to a hospital with fever, abdominal cramps, and bloody diarrhea. The child received no antibiotic therapy and was discharged the next day. Blood and stool cultures yielded Salmonella serotype Poona. A sibling aged 6 years also had fever and bloody diarrhea and a stool culture that yielded S. Poona. The family had purchased an iguana approximately 1 month earlier. The children had cleaned the iguana's cage and handled the iguana 2 days before their illness onsets. A stool culture from the iguana grew S. Poona; isolates from the iguana and the two siblings were indistinguishable by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

Florida. During January 2000, an infant aged 1 month visited a clinic with fever and diarrhea; the infant was not hospitalized. A stool specimen yielded Salmonella serotype Tennessee. One week before illness onset, the infant's family moved into a household that contained a bearded dragon (i.e., Pogona vitticeps). The pet reptile's cage had been washed in the kitchen near the infant's bottle nipples. A stool culture from the bearded dragon yielded S. Tennessee. Isolates from the infant and the bearded dragon were indistinguishable by PFGE. An adult in the house reported being aware that turtles and iguanas are reservoirs for Salmonella but unaware that all reptiles can carry Salmonella. The bearded dragon was placed outside the home and later donated to a zoo.

North Dakota. During March 1998, twin infants aged 2 weeks were admitted to a hospital after 1 day of poor feeding, diarrhea, and fever. They were treated intravenously with ampicillin for 6 days. The infants' mother and a child aged 3 years in the home also had diarrhea. Stool specimens from one of the twins, the mother, and the older child yielded Salmonella with the partial serotype O group 44, 45, 47, 48, or 50, H antigen G complex. The family recently had acquired an iguana, which was not allowed out of its cage. Only the mother handled the reptile and cleaned the cage. When the family learned that the iguana was the probable source of Salmonella infections, the iguana was euthanized. Culture of intestinal contents from the iguana yielded Salmonella with the same partial serotype as the patients' isolates. The clinical isolate from the twin was sent to CDC for complete serotyping and found to be Salmonella serotype IV 48:g,z51:- (known formerly as S. Marina).

Ohio. During August--October 2000, local health departments reported seven gastrointestinal illnesses associated with iguanas or turtles acquired at county fairs. In one incident, two siblings aged 11 and 13 years with diarrhea and abdominal cramping visited an ED. No stool specimens were collected from the children. However, stool specimens from a turtle that the siblings received at a county fair yielded Salmonella serotype Sandiego. During the same period, a stool specimen from a man aged 20 years with diarrhea also yielded S. Sandiego; he recently had won a turtle at a county fair. Isolates from the children's turtle and the man were indistinguishable by PFGE.

Wisconsin. During November 2002, an infant aged 24 days was admitted to a hospital after 1 day of bloody diarrhea. The infant was hospitalized for 3 days and received intravenous fluids and supportive care. A stool culture yielded Salmonella serotype IV 44:z4z23:-. The infant was treated for 14 days with oral amoxicillin. An iguana was reported living in the home of the infant's father; however, attempts to collect stool samples from the iguana were unsuccessful.

Two weeks later, an infant aged 4 months in a neighboring county visited a hospital after 8 days of fever of 100.3° F (37.9° C) and 3 days of decreased range of motion in the left hip. Salmonella serotype IV 44:z4z23:- was isolated from both left hip aspirate and blood cultures. The infant was hospitalized for 6 days and treated intravenously with cefotaxime and gentamicin. An iguana was reported living in the infant's home, but the reptile was removed before it could be tested. Both iguanas associated with the infants were traced back by the state health department to the same distributor in Florida.

Reported by: R Reporter, MD, Los Angeles County Health Dept; B Sun, DVM, California Dept of Health Svcs. J Monopoli, MPH, East Shore Health District, Branford; Q Phan, MPH, J Hadler, MD, Connecticut Dept of Public Health. P Tiffany, Osceola County Health Dept; Z Mulla, PhD, R Baker, MS, PD Fiorella, PhD, Florida Dept of Health. K Kruger, L Shireley, MPH, D Johnson, MS, D Steinbach, North Dakota Dept of Health. K Smith, DVM, E Salehi, MPH, Ohio Dept of Health. N Joseph, J Archer, MS, J Davis, MD, Wisconsin Dept of Health and Family Svcs. N Snipes, DVM, J Ovitt, DVM, F Angulo, DVM, Div of Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases, National Center for Infectious Diseases; S Gottlieb, MD, EIS Officer, CDC.

Editorial Note:

Salmonellosis associated with reptiles is a continuing public health concern (5,6). During the 1970s, small pet turtles were a major source of Salmonella infections in the United States (1). In 1975, the Food and Drug Administration banned commercial distribution of small (i.e., <4 in. long) turtles; the majority of states prohibited the sale of such turtles. These measures prevented an estimated 100,000 cases of salmonellosis among children each year (1). However, reptiles remain popular pets in the United States; during 1991--2001, the estimated number of households with reptiles doubled from approximately 850,000 to 1.7 million (7). The increase in pet reptile popularity has been paralleled by an increase in the number of reptile-related Salmonella serotypes isolated from humans (2,6).

Reptiles are commonly colonized with Salmonella and shed the organism intermittently in their feces (6). Attempts to treat reptiles with antibiotics to eliminate Salmonella carriage have been unsuccessful and might lead to increased antibiotic resistance (5). Salmonella survives well in the environment and can be isolated for prolonged periods from surfaces contaminated by reptile feces (8). For this reason, even minimal indirect contact with reptiles can result in illness (2,5).

Increasing evidence suggests that amphibians also are a source for salmonellosis (3,4). Frogs and toads are frequent carriers of Salmonella and have been linked by epidemiologic evidence to outbreaks (3,4). In a population-based, case-control study, housing an amphibian was associated independently with Salmonella infection (3). Overall, reptile and amphibian contacts are estimated to account for 74,000 (6%) of the approximately 1.2 million sporadic Salmonella infections that occur each year in the United States (3).

Gaps remain in the public's understanding of amphibian- and reptile-associated salmonellosis. In one study, fewer than half the families with salmonellosis and known iguana exposure suspected their iguanas might have been the cause of illness (2). Pet-store owners, health-care providers, and veterinarians should provide information and prevention messages about salmonellosis to owners and potential purchasers of reptiles and amphibians. Educational materials are available from the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council, telephone 800-553-7387.

In 1999, the National Association of State Public Health Veterinarians and the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists recommended that state and local agencies adopt regulations to prohibit the sale or gift of reptiles without written point-of-sale education to consumers about the risks for and prevention of reptile-associated salmonellosis (9). In February 2003, CDC polled health departments in all 50 states and New York City (NYC) to determine whether such regulations existed. Among the 49 health departments responding, four states (Colorado, Illinois, Kansas, and Texas) required pet stores to provide information about salmonellosis to persons purchasing any reptile; five (California, Connecticut, Maryland, Michigan, and New York) required providing salmonellosis information to persons purchasing a turtle but not other reptiles. Tennessee prohibited sale of all turtles. NYC prohibited sale of certain reptiles, including iguanas, small turtles, and boas, and required posting of information about reptile-associated salmonellosis where other reptiles were sold.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of mandated point-of-sale education in reducing amphibian- and reptile-associated salmonellosis could help guide future prevention efforts. In the meantime, areas such as NYC have adopted restrictions on the sale of certain reptiles similar to those for small turtles.

References

Cohen ML, Potter M, Pollard R, Feldman RA. Turtle-associated salmonellosis in the United States: effect of public health action, 1970 to 1976. JAMA 1980;243:1247--9.
Mermin J, Hoar B, Angulo FJ. Iguanas and Salmonella Marina infection in children: a reflection of the increasing incidence of reptile-associated salmonellosis in the United States. Pediatrics 1997;99: 399--402.
Mermin J, Hutwagner L, Vugia D, et al. Reptiles, amphibians, and human Salmonella infection: a population-based, case-control study. Clin Infect Dis Suppl (in press).
Srikantiah P, Lay JC, Crump JA, et al. An outbreak of Salmonella Javiana associated with amphibian contact---Mississippi, 2001. Presented at the International Conference on Emerging Infectious Diseases, Atlanta, Georgia, 2002.
CDC. Reptile-associated salmonellosis---selected states, 1994--1995. MMWR 1995;44:347--50.
CDC. Reptile-associated salmonellosis---selected states, 1996--1998. MMWR 1999;48:1009--13.
Wise JK, Heathcott BL, Gonzalez ML. Results of the AVMA survey on companion animal ownership in U.S. pet-owning households. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;221:1572--3.
Friedman CR, Torigian C, Shillam PJ, et al. An outbreak of salmonellosis among children attending a reptile exhibit at a zoo. J Pediatr 1998; 132:802--7.
Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists. Reptile-associated salmonellosis and prevention education. CSTE position statement 1999-ID 13. Available at http://www.cste.org/ps/1999/1999-id-13.htm.
* California, Connecticut, Florida, North Dakota, Ohio, and Wisconsin. At least six other states (Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Oklahoma, Washington, and Wyoming) reported similar cases.

The Komodo dragon event:

Salmonellosis Linked To Zoo Exhibit


NEW YORK (Reuters) -- In the first recorded outbreak of salmonellosis due to exposure to the bacteria at a zoo, 65 people who fell ill contracted the infection from a wooden barrier surrounding a reptile exhibit at a Denver zoo, according to a study in The Journal of Pediatrics.

Those who attended the exhibit, but washed their hands after, were far less likely to contract Salmonella enteritidis, the study's authors wrote. The bacteria can cause bloody diarrhea and other symptoms that can lead to severe illness.

"This large outbreak demonstrates the importance of environmental contamination in the transmission of Salmonella from reptiles, and the protective value of hand washing," concluded the study's authors, university researchers, and scientists with federal and state health agencies.

Investigating the 1996 outbreak -- linked to a Komodo dragon exhibit -- the researchers tracked down 26 people who were diagnosed with salmonellosis shortly after visiting the exhibit. A total of 65 people reported falling ill after visiting the dragons. Most were children. The researchers also located 49 "controls," people who visited the exhibit but didn't fall ill.

After interviewing patients and controls, the researchers found that none of those who fell ill reported touching the dragons. But 83% said they touched the wooden barrier surrounding the animals' pen. Tests found Salmonella in the feces of one dragon, and on the barriers. Only 52% of controls reported touching the wooden barrier. Those visitors who washed their hands after attending the exhibit were less likely to fall ill, the scientists reported.

The infected dragon "stood in fecally contaminated mulch and frequently placed (its) front paws on the tops of the barriers," the researchers noted in their study. "The visitors frequently touched these same barriers and most likely became infected when they later placed their contaminated hands in their mouths or cross-contaminated something they were eating."

Based on the infection rate among exhibit visitors included in the study, the researchers estimated that another 315 children probably contracted salmonellosis after visiting the dragons, but did not report falling ill.

While the Denver salmonellosis outbreak was the first outbreak linked to reptiles at a zoo, transmission of Salmonella from reptiles to children is well documented, the researchers pointed out.

"Reptiles carry Salmonella, and even indirect contact with them may cause severe illness in young children," the researchers added, noting that, a "growing proportion of the 2 to 4 million Salmonella cases occurring each year in the United States is attributable to pet reptile exposure." Salmonella is also spread via infected food, such as eggs.

"Therefore, a greater effort should be made to encourage hand washing in homes and schools with pet reptiles and to display hand washing signs at exhibits involving visitor contact with reptiles or objects that reptiles touch," the authors concluded.

SOURCE: The Journal of Pediatrics 1998;132;802-807.

Best regards.
 
I asked a friend who is a Doctor about Salmonella in regards to this law. He is not a reptile lover but he said then if NY is so concerned about Salmonella why do they not just destroy every reptile in the state then when they are done every poultry ranch then every fast food chain. Salmonella has way to many sources that it can be aquired through.

As to snake bites and constriction he is trying to look up the death rates but so far has only found 2 reported cases of infants being killed through constriction.

Ebola virus is another story and I'll try to post some articles on it later. but from what I see that Virus was used for this purpose as a scare tactic.
 
Yeah, I was curious as to the Ebola thing, as far as I know the only Ebola that's gotten into the US was a non-human primate strain in some lab monkeys in I think Florida.
Also, another reason to be wary of Salmonella enteriditis is that it produces exotoxin. There have been many cases of dairy and precooked meat products that became contaminated with Salmonella, and the people ingesting it developed an acute intoxication. The toxin is heat-stabile, and as far as I know you can cook the crap out of your food, and the toxin stays intact. Just another reason to practice safe reptile and food handling techniques to try and eliminate Listeria, Shigella, Clostridium as food borne pathogens.
 
As a vegetarian...

... I should also point out that your chances of contracting salmonella from handling uncooked chicken are FAR higher than your chances of contracting salmonella from handling your snake or your turtle. But I don't hear any legislators screaming that we should stop grocery stores from selling uncooked chicken because it poses a major health hazard. :)
 
The Economic Research Service (USDA) has reported the following for 1999 (the bolding is mine):
ERS set the annual number of Salmonella cases at 1,412,498 . ERS based its case numbers on estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC estimate of the annual number of cases, hospitalizations, and deaths due to Salmonella is reported in Mead et al. (1999).
In 1999, the CDC estimated annual salmonellosis cases at 1,412,498 and the share of cases due to consumption of contaminated food at 95 percent, or 1,341,873 cases.

Interestingly enough, in a 2003 survey the CDC reported:

In its Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report of Dec. 12, 2003, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a new report on reptile associated Salmonellosis (infection with Salmonella bacteria). Salmonellosis is serious and potentially fatal, especially in young children or anyone with a weakened immune system. The CDC estimates that 74,000 cases of Salmonellosis per year are associated with exposure to reptiles or amphibians (directly or indirectly), which makes this a significant public health concern.

In short 74,000 reptile related out of 1,412,498 total cases is roughly 5%, which matches the 95% reported from food contamination alone.

Regards.
 
Forgive me for my wise cracks

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

1 Section 1. Legislative findings. The legislature finds that keeping
2 exotic animals as pets Fast food chains, automobiles, bus services, subways, air travel, fishing, hunting, micorwave ovens, poses a serious threat to the health and safety
3 of New York state residents. and all things listed above are readily available for purchase
5 throughout New York state.
6 Across the country, children have been mauled by tigers, asphyxiated
7 by snakes, and bitten by monkeys and killed by all the afore mentioned items in number1 . Wild animals kept as pets can transmit
8 serious diseases to people, including Herpes B, Salmonella and Ebola
9 virus as can all the Items in number 1.

A little rewording and we can ban everything based on the fact accidents happen. So when do people say enough banning and coalitions. When do you stand up and say ENOUGH i want some freedoms in whats suppose to be a free country. Or at minimum laws written by person who are qualified to speak on the issues of facts.


1 Recapture of escaped wild animals is an expensive and perilous endeav-
2 or for municipalities. Other states already prohibit private ownership
3 of certain wild animals as pets, a position supported by the United
4 States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Centers for Disease Control
5 (CDC) and the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA). New York
6 must take similar steps to ensure the protection of the public and the
7 humane treatment of wild animals.


I see many opinions written but no factual data in respect to them being the soul factor. In fact most of the agencies sited by this paragraph in fact mention numerous other contributing factors.

Bare with me on this one

8 S 2. Subdivision 6 of section 11-0103 of the environmental conserva-
9 tion law is amended by adding a new paragraph e to read as follows:
10 E. "WILD ANIMAL" SHALL NOT INCLUDE "COMPANION ANIMAL" AS DEFINED IN
11 SECTION THREE HUNDRED FIFTY OF THE AGRICULTURE AND MARKETS LAW. WILD
12 ANIMAL INCLUDES, AND IS LIMITED TO, ANY OR ALL OF THE FOLLOWING ORDERS
13 AND FAMILIES:
14 (1) NONHUMAN PRIMATES AND PROSIMIANS

So keeping of Humans would be legal under this law. Slavery? thats how the wording looks doesnt it?

One other thing im looking at in this law is the term Wild Animal. so here is an interesting question. What is the deffinition of WILD ANIMAL. If you have say a F5 is it concidered to be still wild or is it now domesticated?

There are many obvious areas of this bill that could be taken on in court.
 
Back
Top