Has this ever happened to you,,?

[Stardust]

The information I am sure is quite easy to obtain, I for one only moved from Denver area a few short years ago, went to college there, lived there for over 10 years, know a lot of people. Would I? Naw. The reason why? Because although Seamus has been rude and crude at times he (as it seems to me) love his animals, he keeps a relatively low profile and I do not believe is hindering the community as a whole. Meaning he doesn't brag, boast, sell (that I know of) or is cruel (at least not to snakes LOL) I would not purposely stir up trouble that way.
I think Seamus needs to admit that he was harsh on you, and he was, but to try to go the path you are trying go..... well, I wouldn't do it, its just not right.

Seamus, I wish it were that easy. Unfortunately it is not. PETA wants some of the same things too, they just go way over the edge and do not even want us to OWN reptile, exotics. Shame.
Unfortunately PETA will not bend, not even a little, which does put the herp society on edge. We do not know who is safe and who is not. As good as the BOI is at helping it can not do it all. One may get a good buy, post then wham......... they are selling bad. Sometimes we have to do something risky, something that may imply PETA yet is not. Example: Marcia owns reptiles, the very thing that PETA wants to ban people from owning. Marcia did something within the limits of the law that already existed, now is she a bad PETA fan, or a good, caring herper? See, it works both sides, it needs to be looked at from ALL sides. There can be good herpers out there who can make a change and not be a PETA fan nor do they even support PETA.
I again am not saying what she did is good or bad, I am saying that even with all you have said these last few posts, and a lot made sense, unfortunately there has to be other risks as well.
Since I have found the BOI my eyes and knowledge has expanded greatly. I see the good and the bad. And I try to look at everything, without looking at all sides you can be gotten.

 

[KelliH]

I agree with Seamus 100%...

as far as what he said here:

"Internal control.

Stop giving money to bad breeders.

Start giving money to good breeders.

Make unhealthy animals unprofitable.

Tell new keepers the good people to deal with and the people to shy away from.

Use the BOI and other similar forums.

Explain that long term financial success can only come from a repeat customer base which only arises through having quality animals and good customer service to anyone who seems to be slipping.

When unhealthy animals are no longer profitable, they are no longer produced."

In fact that may be one of the most intelligent statements ever posted here on the BOI. Just my opinion (of course!).

 

[Missymonkey]

There's a line between wanting to help an animal and wanting to punish the animal's owner

-Seamus

I could not agree with this quote more, and this is probably one of the roots of the heated debate/argument we are having.

I do not think that this will affect the herp industry as much as many think it will. There is a great interest in owning and collecting various herps. I would like to compair it to the "puppy industry" (I know this is a bad comparison but it's the best I can think of), at first puppies were sold as objects, by puppy plantations who only wanted to produce as many as possible for as cheap as possible. Everyone wants a puppy. People started to find out about the deplorable conditions of puppy mills/plantations. Rules, regulations and laws were enacted to protect the saftey and health of puppies and their parents. People still wanted puppies, so they bought them, even though prices went up. I believe that this is compairable to the leo market. I do educational shows at the local schools in my area, and everytime I bring out the leos all the kids sigh and oogle at them. I almost always have one or two kids ask me how they can get one. With the demand as it is, the market will remain.

As for venemous and other rare and more difficult to take care of animals. Why shouldn't we want some regulations on owning them? I don't want a six year old kid owning an anaconda, or a crocodile. These high-demand animals need qualified owners who are commited to keeping them. I am against banning the ownership of animals (unless its affecting the natural population). But not everyone should be able to own one, and not everybody should be able to sell them either. If Petco, and thier supplier, can't take care of their animals, then why should they be allowed to continue to sell them? We need stores that will provide quality animals, and be good role models and resources for prospective owners. Petco doesn't sell rare or dangerous (persay, I know that any animal can be dangerous if provocked and given the upperhand) animals, I, personally, don't see this issue bleeding over into the rare, exotic legal arena. This issue is centered on the care of the animals, not the ownership of them. Petco can continue to sell these animals if they improve the standards at which they are kept. (I am no lawyer, but I don't see why they would be shut down or told to discontinue selling reptiles if they comply with the regulations given to them, they are a largish part in the economy and with the days as they are, we need all the jobs we can get)

Missy
(ps realise that I am stating this from a reasonably educated perspective, but I am not a marketing or lawyer person, simply a well educated teacher who has a very open and logical mind)

 

[Seamus Haley]

As for venemous and other rare and more difficult to take care of animals. Why shouldn't we want some regulations on owning them?

Because it's a silly and unenforceable law, no matter how it would seem to start.

The ownership of anything being regulated only affects the honest people, the ones who would be keeping the animal in the conditions it should be kept in anyway.

I equate it to gun control. The people who use guns illegally also obtain guns illegally and laws that make it harder to own a gun only punish the people who should be allowed to have them to start.

Massachusetts has some odd herp laws. The New England Herp Society has a copy of them on their website http://www.neherp.com (I think) that you can peruse...

Rare animals require permits... rare animals like green tree pythons, emerald tree boas and chameleons. My personal conjecture, knowing the tendencies of the state's legislators is that these animals "Looked rare" and probably allowed the people supporting the restriction of their ownership to claim they were helping the environment and saving the rainforest or something. They are also species that are slightly more delicate, but no more so than a number of animals that are perfectly legal and unregulated and not to the point where they should require a permit to own one.

Loads of people own them anyway and simply ignore the permit, driving to New Hampshire or Rhode Island in order to obtain the animals, I do not know of a single instance where anyone has been caught or fined or had the animals removed except a few pet stores, but even then it was just "Send them out of state and get them off the sales floor."

It's designed to protect "rare" species but all it does is charge the people who own them legitimatly money without having any effect.

"Dangerous" species are regulated too... like 'condas, 'tics and african rocks... But not burms. Someone explain that one to me please... because I just don't see the point.

All varanids require a permit because of the danger of owning one, what with all those ackies eating entire day cares full of children... but iguanas and tegus are legal.

The point is... regulation for the most part is pretty useless... it only impedes the people most likely to be doing what they should be doing to start without stopping the problem in the least. I do believe hot species (front fanged anyway) should require a permit, but that's something of a separate issue.

Animal welfare laws are already in place, animal protection laws to prevent cruelty... But they are punitive, not preventative. They don't actually stop anyone from kicking their dog, they just punish them after the fact IF they get caught. The laws are also pretty subjective, the application will change based on the knowledge of the individual animal control officer. Heck, there's one who frequents another MB system who thinks rack systems are cruel to use for any reptile. Do you want that person to be wandering around your home, making idiot comments "Lookie here, we gots ourselves some geicos in boxes, y'all're goin' t'jail mister."

As to the issue being centered around the care rather than the ownership of the animals... it's only a step away. Petco is actually having their ability to sell the animals attacked, their ability to have animals in the store... Petco owns those animals until they are sold. A big chain store is a step away from a small store is a step away from a breeder is a step away from a hobbiest.

Fact is... the reptile industry operates under a constant threat from PETA and HSUS types... from people who think snakes, any snakes are dangerous or "icky" and from local governing bodies that don't know better. Inviting legislation only punishes the good people and doesn't hurt the bad guys in the least.

Internal regulation, the power of the dollar, education and industry pressure towards quality are what will keep the industry safe and what will keep the animals healthy. Everything else is just punishment.

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

All I know is, that if this thread continues... PeTA will come and get us ALL for beating a dead horse!

 

[Dragondad]

The industry

PETA and thats ethical treatment of animals not People Eat Tasty Animals....

The premise is that the conditions of how exotics are raised, shipped, bred, or even smuggled is against what they call ethical treatment. And yes we all know that there are entities out there that raise and breed herps that fit into this catagory. PETA simply believes that if owning them is illegal then the breeders, shippers, smuglers wouldnt be able to make a profit therefore no bad treatment. The comparison to making guns illegal means only criminals would have guns comes to mind.

The fastest and surest way to avoid a PETA style interference is to have the industry and hobby take the steps to "police" itself. Some of the things that Seamus has said are valid. And PETA and Seamus seem to agree "take the profit out of the mistreated animals" then only the ethical breeders are used (the last is Seamus not PETA). Are you sure your not a secret PETA member Seamus?? LOL Joking hope someone is laughing!

We need to be sure animals are treated well, we need to promote the purchases from reputable breeders, and retailers. Petco may not be one. And above all we need to educate both the prospective buyer as well as the retailers who cut too close to the grey area.

 

[Seamus Haley]

We need to be sure animals are treated well, we need to promote the purchases from reputable breeders, and retailers. Petco may not be one.

There's a difference between encouraging people to buy from a better source and supporting legal action against a company.

 

[Dragondad]

There's a difference between encouraging people to buy from a better source and supporting legal action against a company.

Agreed, but I would not rule out legal action against a company.

Sometimes the brick wall needs to come to the head not the other way around.

 

[meretseger]

There are several rearfanged species that are more dangerous than several frontfanged species of venomous snakes, which once again points out how hard it is to make a fair regulatory law to protect the public from itself. The thing is that I don't think there are any less bites from pet hots in states that do require hot permits than there are in states that don't, but that would have to be adjusted for the actual populations of captive hots.

Erin B.

 

[Seamus Haley]

There are several rearfanged species that are more dangerous than several frontfanged species of venomous snakes, which once again points out how hard it is to make a fair regulatory law to protect the public from itself

An excellent point, I was generalizing in my statements to some degree...

I don't believe all colubridine hots should be permit free across the boards, but the ones that are dangerous enough to be a problem are few and far between, so can usually be covered by laws regulating the individual species and/or genus.

The difficulty lies in two major concerns;

The first is... Where is the line drawn for what is and is not an acceptable rear fang. Most people will agree that Boomslangs are dangerous and Lyre snakes are not... but the toxicity and yeild ranges through everything in between.

The second is that... Most people responsible for making laws... not suggesting or supporting or rallying for or against, but the people actually responsible for the yes or no and specific words...

[I[Usually[/I] don't know their ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to reptiles.

Laws regulating animals "Over six feet" or "Anything venomous" or "Constrictors" are all made by well intentioned but seriously brainless individuals. A six foot pine snake isn't a danger to anything other than maybe a smallish rat. An asian vine snake is totally harmless (in practical terms anyway). Corn snakes are technically consitrictors (the term only indicates constricting behavior and is often mistakenly used as being synonymous with Boidea, but even that's absurd, has anyone ever been seriously injured by a sand boa?).

The pressure to introduce laws is dangerous because laws are easily changed once they exist... and they set dangerous precidents for other communities, all without ever once actually correcting the "problem" they were implimented to solve.

I was in the chat for a few minutes earlier, talking to someone who lived in New York City who isn't allowed to keep BALL PYTHONS.

But there's no danger of our ability to own animals being damaged, that's just some paranoid delusion of mine.

 

[Dragondad]

As it seems there are laws in place that restrict ownership of animals. They are community based, most probably as a result of some specific incident within the community.

I havent heard of any new ones....have you.

Nor have I heard of anything pertaining to PETA getting anything on any agenda or ballot for upcoming elections.

So I would rather enjoy my animals than to degrade someone I disagree with. I would rather feed the dragons than worry if I am going to be able to own one tomorrow. And lord knows the snake needs attention too.

But as they say to each his own

 

[Dragondad]

Besides

Were they not allowed to keep the Ball because of building or tenant restrictions or a city ordinance???

 

[Seamus Haley]

I havent heard of any new ones....have you.

The CA care sheets.

The proposed alteration from "Animal Owner" to "Animal Guardian."

Were they not allowed to keep the Ball because of building or tenant restrictions or a city ordinance

NYC essentially outlawed "Exotics" as I understand it.

I haven't got the exact wording right here but I have been given the impression that this covers ALL herps, exotic birds, arachnids, mammals other than dogs and cats and even tropical fish to some degree.

If anyone in NY cares to discuss the specific application or the effect it has had on them, I'd appreciate it...

If not, when I get a few minutes later, I'll find the exact wording, it's got to be someplace online.

Not everything has to be PETA backed in order to fall under something that PETA encourages. Take Marcia's actions... she doesn't believe she did anything bad because she probably was never in direct contact with PETA or the HSUS... but the websites for both organizations had action alerts about the issues and they supported her anti-pet actions because they were compliant with their own agenda.

 

[Dragondad]

Please Clarify

You state the following

The CA care sheets.

in response to new laws, didnt know that a care sheet restricted my ownership of animals. But hey I didnt specify then again the context of the post was pertaining to ownership.

The proposed alteration from "Animal Owner" to "Animal Guardian."

I am serious here please provide more information on this proposed legislation. The fed, state, or local bill number when its up for vote or consideration. Would love to look into this??

And lastly I still do not find anything that Marcia did as

and they supported her anti-pet actions because they were compliant with their own agenda

anti pet. You need to realize that being proanimal does not make us automatically anti pet. Why in the world would a woman who raises Geckos (for sale would be my guess)....be anti pet?

Stardust has made the point and it should be examined again. Don't categorize everyone into a group because you interpret the actions as being part of that group.

 

[Seamus Haley]

didnt know that a care sheet restricted my ownership of animals

If an animal can't be sold without a care sheet...

And there isn't an acceptable care sheet that can be easily obtained...

The animal can't be sold.

You can't own it.

It seems like a fairly small thing, but with the profit margin being as fine as it is, needing to print up (And often write) caresheets for a reptile specialty shop could start getting pricey considering the number of species involved. Those animals with a fairly small markup might stop showing up in stores. This affects ownership.

Incidentally, the degree of the impact doesn't have to be signifigant for the action to be both detrimental and important. Once there's precident, new laws or alterations to the wording of existing laws are much easier for the bad guys to get passed.

I am serious here please provide more information on this proposed legislation. The fed, state, or local bill number when its up for vote or consideration. Would love to look into this??

Casual News Article http://www.idausa.org/news/newsarchives/news_hollywood.html

It's slightly outdated, I know that at least San Francisco, the rest of LA and someplace in Texas or Arkansas have adopted this in addition to Boulder... I have heard the list is up to around seven or eight cities.

I've emailed the appropriate source in Boulder to get the speciifc wording on the law adopted down there, I assume each area would be slightly different. The action was supported by the HSUS and a few other similar organizations and the general gist of it is that "Animals are not property" and by making people "Animal Guardians" they can be prosecuted under laws that were written about child abuse. It raises a host of interesting questions since... living thing or not, animals most certainly ARE property, the second they end up with human rights, the real looneys will be claiming that captivity is slavery and illegal... and also because normal guardian laws prevent things like surgical steralization so under the wording... you can't have your animals spayed or neutered... putting them to sleep is also in theory illegal. It's a fairly new law, I think Boulder was the first to adopt it and they only picked it up in 2002 so there's still a lot of questions up in the air about how it will be applied.

Still a pretty stupid law.

Incidentally, it wasn't adopted in California until after the probverbial Ingrid Newkirk's brains hit the fan on the petco issue, which suggests that the increased media attention certainly helped it go through and likely initiated a lot of support.

You need to realize that being proanimal does not make us automatically anti pet.

Being pro animal also does not mean taking actions that promote legislation that impedes the pet industry. Being pro animal would mean taking the path most likely to cause the situation where animal health is questionable to correct itself... Marcia did not do that even when given the oppurtunity. She took the other route and aligned herself with what can only be described as antipet, antianimal antihuman activists.

Why in the world would a woman who raises Geckos (for sale would be my guess)....be anti pet?

Why would a woman who writes and makes money off of care information be anti pet? Why would a severe diabetic be against the captivity of horses used to manufacture insulin?

Maybe they're just insane... Maybe they're using their falsified position as an insider to pervert the thoughts of new keepers.

Maybe... she just didn't realize she was doing it but now refuses to admit her mistakes and apologize, feeling a need to justify her negative actions.

Don't categorize everyone into a group because you interpret the actions as being part of that group

Do a search for the care sheet law online... or the change to guardianship and most of all the Petco Lawsuit.

When you locate the sources that aren't supposed to be impartial (not CNN.com) and are acting to support the action... take a look at what the sites are...

PETA
HSUS
Kaplan
"Kind Planet"
Petno
Animal Protection Institute
and PETA en espanol

That's the list that came up on the first three pages of a google search for "San Francisco Petco", most of them with multiple pages each.

If that's the load of... people... that are supporting the action... you had better believe that I think anyone else involved is aligned with them. It's such an overwhelming support from the nut cases that any arguments about "I didn't know they were pushing for it too" are, to put it simply, a load of crap. Unless Marcia does not own a TV or radio, never goes online and never reads a newspaper or magazine, there's no way that she could have been naive of the involvement of these organizations... since she continued and continues to support the action with that knowledge, one can only logically conclude that she sympathizes.

Said it before and I'll say it again... Marcia is a closet PETA member, wheather it was intentional to start or not, her refusal to change her stance makes it voluntary at this point. She may as well just start giving them money, Ingrid needs a new formula one racing car.

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

Seamus has decided to tone down

Boy, that didn't last long! LOL!

Being pro animal also does not mean taking actions that promote legislation that impedes the pet industry.

Exactly what actions did I take to "promote legislation that impedes the pet industry"

She took the other route and aligned herself with what can only be described as antipet, antianimal antihuman activists

How have I aligned myself with anti-pet, anti-animal, and anti-human activists? Get real!

Maybe... she just didn't realize she was doing it but now refuses to admit her mistakes and apologize, feeling a need to justify her negative actions.

I no longer feel a need to justify my actions to Seamus. I think the fact that I even exist infuriates him! He is right on one thing... I refuse to admit I made a mistake because no mistake was made, and I have absolutely NO intention of aplologizing for my actions. Especially to Seamus!

Marcia is a closet PETA member, wheather it was intentional to start or not, her refusal to change her stance makes it voluntary at this point.

The likelihood of me changing my stance is about the same as Seamus becoming a democrat!

... Seamus is smart

Just because someone is educated or has a large vocabulary doesn't necessarily mean they are smart. Smart people know when to back off when they have gone too far.


I don't give a rat's a$$ (isn't that how he says it?) about what Seamus thinks, his opinions, or what he does or don't do. Likewise, I could care less about his obvious personal obsession with 'trashing' me, and it's getting pretty predictable and boring now. I realize he is only hiding behind the safety of his computer (banging his head on it) so he can belittle others in order to make himself seem important. How sad...

There are some some pretty good 'anger management' programs available nowdays, and effective drugs people with OCD. Perhaps one of Seamus' 'friends' should mention that to him.

 

[Dragondad]

Interesting

Actually Boulder picked it up in July of 2000 so its close to three years old there. And frankly if you have ever been to Boulder this sounds just like them. The only place that can get you a multitude of responses to the guestion "Where are you at"?


Will look into this further. And respond later

As far as the care sheet I am sorry but I still think its a stretch to believe that will restrict any ownership. Heck go to a web site print a copy of someone elses page of care sheet and run to the copier. Instant care sheet for an animal for sale. Or if I am a prospective owner and I really want that ball but cant get it from store "a" because he doesnt have a care sheet you can bet I will get a ball from someone. A store not having a care sheet doesnt prevent me from owning the animal it prevents the store from selling. Now I can see you saying that that is bad as well. But a little computer time and a sheet of paper isnt a significant addition to the cost factor of a sale.

 

[Seamus Haley]

Heck go to a web site print a copy of someone elses page of care sheet and run to the copier

Yeah... copyrights and intellectual property rights be damned!

Or if I am a prospective owner and I really want that ball but cant get it from store "a" because he doesnt have a care sheet you can bet I will get a ball from someone.

There are more to herps than ball pythons, leopard geckos and bearded dragons. Not every species is that easy to find readily avaliable basic information on. In fact, the majority of species, the information is a bit harder to locate...

If you want to restrict your potential animals to a half dozen species, that's your personal choice... forcing other people to do the same is inappropriate.

 

[Dragondad]

Time Line

Looking back I want to establish the following time line.

First Boulder, CO installs the word "guardian " in its city ordinance.
July 2000
Second West Hollywood, CA does the same
Feb 2001
Marcia first approaches Petco March 2001.

So it is safe to say that Marcia had nothing to do with this issue as you have stated Seamus. Again keeping mind just because you believe it doesn't make it true. Or do you believe that at the secret PETA meeting (the one with all the secret handshakes so all the closet members will recognize each other) they got together and planned this out that way. I know they did it just to feed your paranoid beliefs. Oh and by the way the above time line came from your link you provided on this thread Seamus.

http://www.idausa.org/news/newsarch..._hollywood.html
So your factual statement:

Incidentally, it wasn't adopted in California until after the probverbial Ingrid Newkirk's brains hit the fan on the petco issue, which suggests that the increased media attention certainly helped it go through and likely initiated a lot of support.

IS TOTALLY WRONG

Now touching on the issue of care sheets. Keep in mind that a "care sheet" is just that, not a book by Melissa Kaplan. Hey maybe she can provide them to the stores.

All breeders who read this please answer a simple question. Marcia you jump in and Webslave you too if you have time. How long would it take you to type up a "care sheet" for the species you raise?

Now I took a challenge you issued

Do a search for the care sheet law online... or the change to guardianship and most of all the Petco Lawsuit.

I typed Care sheet law, California Care sheet Law, And California Animal Care sheet law.
"California Turtle and Tortoise Club's Desert Tortoise Care Sheet" came up under the first two searchs nothing else pertaining to animals or animal rights in the first three pages.

under the third search I found a very nice article from the Sacramento Bee, an advisory from the PIJAC that under their publication list provides free care sheets and this site
www.petstorecaresheets.com Again free.
Again in the first three pages of this search found one link to HSUS only one link in three searches. Guess they dont find it that important do they.

Now since we are on this subject lets look at the actual wording of the law. It is known as the "Vincent Bill" and requires that written materials must include..."general written recommendations for the generally accepted care of the class of animal being sold.

So Mr Haley I have just provided you with two free sources that meet the requirments of the law. So much for the cost, and also proved again that you dont know the facts since the issue of species isnt in the law just in your head.

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

How long would it take you to type up a "care sheet" for the species you raise?

Ten minutes or so? Or I could always hit the 'print' button from my website's care sheet.. or anyone else's for that matter. http://www.thelizardlady.net/caresheet.html

Since I started breeding and selling Leopard Geckos in 1995, and long before there were any laws of this sort, I have ALWAYS provided a care sheet along with any Leo that was purchased from me. Why? Because I am a responsible breeder who happens to care about the animals I raise... NOT because some ridiculous law says I have to!

Personally, I think the Care Sheet Law is a joke! According to the California law, we are to provide "general written recommendations for the generally accepted care of the class of animal being sold." Define "general" and it could be as simple as 'KEEP 'EM WARM, FEED & WATER 'EM." I just laugh and shake my head every time I go into a petstore to buy pinkies or feeder goldfish and get a care sheet for them!

Maybe I should come out of the closet and go make some waves up in Oregon for cutting down trees that make the wasted paper the caresheets are printed on.. after all, the Spotted Owls have no place to live because of it!