• 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....

Should any types of reptiles be banned???

Well, I guess I'm straddling the fence here, too.  I wouldn't want any type of actual 'ban' on any reptile - venemous, endangered, or just plain large.  I wouldn't want to give up my boas any more than I'd want another herper to give up their hots or crocodilians.  What I do think would be appropriate is some type of self-regulation by the herping community - be that licensing or just providing the most information to a prospective buyer that you can.  

Given things I've witnessed at different herp shows around here, not all breeders/dealers are scrupulous in regards to what they sell or whom they sell it to.  I've seen a number of dealers sell to minors with no parent present.  Require an ID for anyone who looks under age and a parent present for those who are under age.  It doesn't really matter if it's venemous or not, the point is parents should be aware of what the child is buying and the care it requires.  I don't see a problem at all with requiring a parent to sign a consent form prior to little Johnny or baby Sue buying that false cobra, rock python or even the house gecko (in the case of young children).  <img src="http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt='???'>   Yeah, maybe it's excessive to say that.  Unfortunately, even though most of society recognizes that parents are responsible for their child's actions, not all of the parents recognize this.  

Our first responsibility should be for the animals.  Talk to the customer, find out how much they already know about care and requirements for the animal they're about to buy, provide them with the rest in a simple care sheet for the species in question. I'm no big time breeder, I dabble at it.  I've only produced one litter of Bci so far and possibly have my second on the way, not a great feat compared to many of you.  What I do try to do when I sell to individuals is to make sure when I sell to them that they know the animal's requirements and what to expect in regards to size, etc.  Perhaps a bit of preventative medicine on our part will curb some, though not all unfortunately, of the people in the shallow end of the gene pool affecting our hobby by ignorant mistakes and irresponsible behavior.

There's no absolute solution, but by working together I think the herping community could do far more good than not.  We could head off groups that want to regulate our hobby by legal restrictions/laws by doing it ourselves voluntarily.

Just my .02 worth.

Dianne
 
I actually agree somewhat with Diane's post.  Here's the thing.  Here in PA, we've had several incidents concerning large constrictors in the past couple of years.  By several I mean about 2, but the way the media focuses on the incedents, you'd think it happens every day.  We've just recently, in my area, had a child get himself bit by a northern copperhead.  NOT ONE hospital in the area knew how to treat a venomous snake bite.  The first thing Childrens Hospital did was cut the wound to relieve swelling....(that's usually the first thing NOT to do)  Anyway, due to this incident, peole have questioned whether others should keep venomous species or other dangerous snakes.  Ladies and Gentlemen.....THIS WAS A WILD COPPERHEAD, not a captive.  So are they now going to try to regulate WILD venomous snakes?

Anyway, I had come up with the novel idea of playing martyr.  That is, I would be willing to TAKE regulations of my hots to enable others to be out of the spotlight.  Put it this way, people like comparing snakes to weapons, well, if snakes are guns, then a burmese python is like your grandfathers old WWII rifle.  Big, bulky, but still might have the (extremely remote) chance of killing you)  Now, my Trim trig (Sri Lankan palm viper) is like the fuly automatic laser sited machine gun that only a responsible person should be able to own, due to it's potential hazard.  Now, My proposal was that I would push for a tighter (anything would be) venomous regulation to spare the people with the WWII rifles.  That way, it would show that the industry is taking responsibility for itself.  So, in closing, I'm basically trying to say that I was willing to take the regulations that NOBODY wants to take, for the sake of those that shouldn't logically HAVE regulations.  The poroblem comes in when if people don't agree that I should keep hots AT ALL, even though I sacrificed my freedom FOR your's, I get a lbad taste in my mouth.  If we want to protect our ability to keep whatever we want then there is no way we should argue over who's snake can kill who.  

Anyway,
Thanks,
 
In regard to the issue of banning certain herps, I don't think that it is neccessarily the animal, but the experience and accountability of the person owning it.  I know plenty of people who have large pythons or venomous snakes who have absolutely no business whatsoever having these animals. There are other people who are extremely responsible owners and never take those freaky chances that you hear so much aboout in the media. I personally don't care for venomous animals, but that's just because I don't have enough time or experience handling them. Having worked for an animal control agency, I came across alot of interesing things, and found myself unconsoled by the fact that any venomous animals that we came across in raids with the cops, DEA or whatever were destroyed because of unsuitability for adoption. I see that maybe it was best for those particular animals to be destroyed rather than spending the rest of their days in inadequate habitats because of the lack of education in their care or political/departmental stagnation. Again, the poll should not be which animals to ban, but which people to ban from private ownership of these types of animals.
 
Hi all, I am new to this site but find that it it a pretty good one with good people. I would like to just post my 2 cents as well.

There are so many good opinions on this subject and I tend to lean toward what Dianne and Todd had to say.
Personally I don't feel that there should be a "Ban" on anything (unless it's illegal, then it is already basically banned).

Regulation is a good idea for some things, and laws protecting people from the local idiots are good as well, But freedom will prevail in most cases. Just look at cigarettes, they aren't banned but your not to sell to minors anymore, and guns as well, you are supposed to be checked out first and no selling to minors, etc, etc,. Just think of all the things that people have tried to ban over the years, certain books, certain animals, certain guns, etc. In 1975 there was a  supposed ban on turtles. But I don't recall hearing about any one thing that has been banned on a national level (besides maybe an endangered species), only in certain areas. They have rules against something or laws pertaining to it, and that comes about because of unexpected injuries or deaths that make the public feel that a law against it needs to be made.

We just need to find a way to keep the irresposible people from wreaking havic and causing incidents that bring "banning " issues up. Then educate educate educate.

P.S. sorry if it sounds like I'm rambling...Just a bit tired this evening.
 
I like all reptiles but think endangered species should be left alone in the wild. That way they can breed freely and produce more numbers of their species,since 80% of wild caught animals rarely survie in captivity and are immpossible to breed.TODD, do you keep venomous species of reptiles?One thing i dont like about venomous reps are the idea that a venomous snakes like a COTTON MOUTH or a highly venomous cobra can bite you and severly cause infection.Usually death is followed,i have kept venomous reps in the past but i dont like to keep them anymore.Right now iam deciding my opinion,should venomous be banned or not? <img src="http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt='???'>
 
The general population should not be allowed to keep and endangered species in my opinion.  Only those w/ legitmate reasons and a permit should be allowed to keep and breed.

Chip
 
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The general population should not be allowed to keep and endangered species in my opinion.  Only those w/ legitmate reasons and a permit should be allowed to keep and breed.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

I'll agree situationally.

There is a signifigant problem in determining what is actually endangered. The CITES regulations as well as many states simply place an accorss the boards number, below which the species is considered endangered... And this does not always make it valid. Komodos for instance... large apex predator in a very limited environment. There were never high numbers. Not as we would understand it and not in anything approaching "modern time". Or most species of sea  turtle... any idea how much and what an adult sea turtle eats in a given day, ever day for how many years? They can cause considerebally more damage than most people realize...

Related but not identical is simply the people they have looking to determine what the numbers are. Rubber boas in California for instance... The numbers from any number of independant studies are far greater than what the state believes them to be... because the state biologists go and look for them during the summer when they're aevesting, burrowed down in leaf litter and rodent holes. Just because we can't find them doesn't mean they aren't there OR that they should be.

However truley endangered or even signifigantly threatened species I can see the uses of regulation for non-zoo bred stock and control to a lesser degree of captive produces specimens.
 
I have not looked here for a while but am happy I came back. Todd talked about what he feels is a logical method to keep regulations off of the herper who keeps non-venomous snakes - but allowing people like himself to accept regulation of venomous species. In doing so, He makes an analogy of snakes to guns. This is a great analogy and exactly why you should, in my opinion, not want to allow regulation of which species you can keep. Many years ago, anti-gun groups headed by politicians in an election time were calling for the  banning of certain types of handguns federally. They said it would only apply to very certain types of pistols. They swore it would never apply to any type of rifle. (I am always amazed that the NRA does not dig up the TV commercial from this group to help the NRA cause by showing the certain politicians to be out and out lying turds.) Over the years the call for bans, and the regulations and laws enacted led to the banning of some of these handguns; BUT it did not stop there. Next came other handguns, calls for federal licensing, the actual passing of checks with the NCIC system (or NICS checks), banning of certain ammunition, banning of body armor in certain areas, and yes a ban on many types of rifles under an assault weapons bill. The antigun side usually does not act logically. Using logic and a study of our forefather's writings one would realize that they wanted people to actually have firearms, among toher things, in order to be able to overthrow the federal government if that government ever became oppressive as England had done. In fact they made sure to add the part about the militia. Think about that - why did they ever use a militia before - only for one thing to overthrow the government. So that is the logiocal argument albeit maybe not as valid now as then but maybe just as valid; that is another debate. With firearms, though, this cancer spread so far as to try to reinterpret "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms..." as being the collective right of the people (meaning a right of the US Government) as opposed to an individual's right. This is a documented court case brought in federal court in Texas where the US Attorney was trying to reinterpret the US Constitution and Bill of Rights in just that manner. Now think if they would have won that one - would that mean that "the right of the people...." under any other would also be seen as not to be a right of the individual but a right of the state? What about our right to be secure in our homes from unwarranted searches, or from self incrimination, or to a jury trial and so forth.

Well I think this same type of emotional "anti anything" madness will eventually spread to herp keeping if it has not already. While a bit of regulation regarding truly endangered species may be warranted, regulation as to the type of herp you can keep other than endangered will endanger our hobby. I believe, there really is not much difference between a truly radical anti-gun nut and a rabid animal rights person from the groups which advocate taking away most if not all pets from keepers. In my opinion, there is certainly as little logic used by them as by the ultra anti gun nuts. I think they play on emotions as sure a sh-- flows downhill (I have actually seen this happen in Haiti). One thing I believe they love is for their enemy to admit (and in this case that would be us  (we are the enemy of the ultra animal rights activists because we keep animals and do not allow them what the rights groups say is their right to live free) that they are in some way wrong and that yes the animal rights people do have a good idea in wanting to regulate some species or types of herps. That may not be what you are doing here in asking for regulation - but that is, in my opinion, how animal rights groups will llikely use it against you.

All of the above is prettyy much my opinion except for what happened with gun control, those are easily documented facts for the most part. Let's not let those same kind of facts be easily documented regarding herp control!

I have seen things like this happen with freedom of speech, with gun control, with dog breeds, with tropical fish and now with herps. Be careful what you ask for, you just may get it.
 
The Only Reptiles i have a problem with are Green iguanas,
I think they shouldn't be sold in Petshops  to Any idiot with 5 Bucks. Other than that i think people should be able to keep anything they want, as long as the Animal is being cared for correctly.
Just My 2 cents

Thanks
 
Green Iguanas and Wild caught Ball Pythons

2 animals that come in raggedy and sick and in large numbers.
More captivebreeding needs to take place. I dont think a ban on ownership, but perhaps proof that the baby balls and iguanas are captive bred IN CAPTIVITY.

Both are so dirt chea that they often fall into the hands of people at PETCO stores, fklea markets, swapmeets and since no money is spent really, the requirements of these reptiles isnt met(Especially the iguana) and they suffer needlessly as their owners pride themselves in the fact that they "saved money" on the setup by not buying that broad spectrum bulb that costs so much or saved money by not providing belly heat for the ball python(The house gets up to 72 in the winter...thats cold enough for the ball"


Banned , no,      
Only captive bred ones ...YES
so what if the price goes up


Fred
(Aztec Reptiles)
 
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Banned , no,      
Only captive bred ones ...YES
</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

Fred Sir.
On a personal side I agree with your analysis of the two species in question but from a more objective standpoint I have to ask... If you do that, where  does it stop?

In addition to those being either Wild Caught or "Farm Raised" what about; Plated Lizards, many agamas, Savanah Monitors, loads of gecko species, pretty much anything that's even slightly "rarer" and any number of other common species... Heck, Anoles even.

It's very easy for the wording of a law to be changed to start to encompass more and more species.

And relying on only captive populations will result in signifigant problems with the captive stock after a number of successive generations with no no influx. (Not that anyone should be breeding iguanas anyway... except perhaps for food, chicken of the tree and all) Look at bearded dragons in the United States... Even "German Giants" are up to a foot smaller than Vitticeps loose in Australia, they are far more prone to genetic disorders, they have a weaker immune system and live about 1/3 the possible life span of those fresh from Oz. Even all those magnificent colors that don't occur over there are the result of massive inbreeding. Different species will have different reactrions at different times depending on just HOW jumbled together their genetics become... and ectotherms don't show those "inbreeding signs"  as quickly as mammals or birds... But they certainly do show them.

So I completely agree that "farm raised" green iguanas and ball pythons in general (I don't care for the species and the morphs that have been produced just make it worse) shouldn't be in the pet trade the way they are... But regulating it may cause more problems than good.
 
Just one thought I might add[sarcastically]
Imagine if our wonderful ,kind,un-biased,never interfearing,and endearing humane society got ahold of this thread and tried to misconstrue all of our words
Hmmmmm
 
OH MY! I really don't think that there is "a simple" answer to what your asking here at all IMO.
Whereas I do not keep hots myself [ Don't have the experience and/or know how on 'em] I do not see why a properly trained person who has the knowledge and the "drive" as well as capability to keep them should not be allowed to at all. Did I mention responsible yet also ? With my "lack" of knowledge in the area of hots I also do not think I am one to even answer whether or not they should be banned either.

Now as for the other types of reptiles that I do have knowledge and experience with...

LARGE Constrictors... Who are any of us to say that they should be banned or not ? Other than some of the people that have the most experience with them in this free world possibly. Applying any type of ban on them is going to be done by people who probably have never even been within 2' of a Large Constrictor , let alone have any fundamental knowledge of them even. We all know where that would go.. already has in some areas even of the country.
I for one do NOT want to give up any of my rights to own these lovely creatures that I do. So I of course would not support any type of ban on them.

Iguanas...UGH. LOL. Depends on what day I am asked this one even. If it is a day when I have taken in even so many as just 1 of them that some "uneducated moron" bought for $14 at a pet shop and can no longer take care of it at all..AND.. the poor iggy has got major malnutrtion, a tail fracture that'
s not completely broken off and has major infection going on as a result of such, and has major retained shed from lack of humidity..OH.. and let's not forget that it comes with a nice ole 20L and the poor iggy is only like 4 1/2' in length bUT has also NEVER seen the outside of the tank for like a year cuz the owner is "scared/intimidated" or what have you of the Iguana..etc.. etc.. then HELL YEAH!! I'd like to see a ban on them. BUT I also realize that the origin of the problem is actually the pet store that sold the cute lil iglet to a customer for $14 along with absolutely no education on the reptile nor the husbandry or what exactly is involved with keeping an IG or their potential size for that matter even.
IF I hear one more dang pet store worker tell some person looking at an IG that they don't have teeth and can be housed in a 10 gallon tank....arghhhhhh Think ya get where I am coming from on this one hehe..

Bottom line.. I do NOT believe that bans are going to be the answer really. I believe that EDUCATION is the answer that is needed here. Quite a few of you have already said this and I agree 100% with you. We as herpers need to
EDUCATE in regards to reptiles as much as we possibly can. Without EDUCATION, we're fighting a losing battle from whatever viewpoint we look at the whole situation in regards to the reptiles which we keep, or others keep.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> from Lioness :
Again, the poll should not be which animals to ban, but which people to ban from private ownership of these types of animals</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

I agree with you to a point. BUT "WHO" is going to decide who are the ones to ban from keeping then? Someone who can not tell the difference between a corn snake and a copperhead?? AGAIN.. EDUCATION is the key !

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> From ara-dee :
We just need to find a way to keep the irresposible people from wreaking havic and causing incidents that bring "banning " issues up. Then educate educate educate.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

Soo Where do we start then ??

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> From NYchris :
The Only Reptiles i have a problem with are Green iguanas,
I think they shouldn't be sold in Petshops  to Any idiot with 5 Bucks</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>

There are MANY of us who do rescue with reptiles that feel the same way ! YEt again.. goes back to EDUCATION

Speaking of rescue.. BURMS and IGs are the TOP ones that we usually see coming into rescue. WHY?? 'Cause the people who buy them are NOT EDUCATED and/or knowledgable enough to know what they are getting into at all when they obtain them. By the time a rescuer gets called in to help with them they are usually really bad off, not all but most are, due to non-feeding, no-handling, improper husbandry, lack of proper care which results in health issues..and on and on... Soo How do we look to make positive changes in the world of reptiles at this point, rather than just looking to ban reptiles ?
I gotta go pick up yet another one of these HUGE Comstrictors in the a.m. that someone hadn't a clue on how to properly take care of , yet again..OR I could go on even more on this topic ...
 
I voted that no reptile should be banned from ownership...This is because there are already laws in place protecting people from harm. If you keep dangerous pets, venomous or capable of strangling or whatever, then it's up to you to protect yourself and your loved ones from getting harmed. Many people have gotten sued because their pet attacked somebody, though sadly it's usually the fault of a person behaving the wrong way around the animal and said pet is destroyed....sad....That's why I have signs under any of my animals that could somehow hurt anybody, "Careful, he bites!!"
As far as endangered species, they already have laws in place to protect them, so I don't see how a ban would change anything.
As far as the iguana/burm issue... Maybe a ban only for pet stores, not general breeders and keepers, could apply here. (Hear me out before you start writing up your comments&#33<img src="http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=';)'> In theory, it could work. Unfortunately, in the real world things like this set precedents, and that's why some cities already have laws in place banning certain animals. (Many ban snakes over 3'. What the heck?! How in the world could a three-foot cornsnake hurt anybody??) But besides all that...the issue is that pets, to the general public, are often just fads--iguanas, ferrets, and whatever type of animal is the star in the newest movie...you get the idea. After the Bud commercials, for example, the numbers of iguanas and chameleons bought from pet stores [and surrendered to rescuers] went up enormously. People tend to buy a new pet because it's a cute, cheap baby and then get bored of it or don't actaully know how to take care of it. And though education is the key, most people don't actually listen. They think you're being too paranoid, that it's really not so hard to keep a little iguana or whatever. And even if you try to explain to these people as you're selling them the animal that he needs all of these different things, they don't listen.."I don't need a $40 UV bulb, I'll just buy a regular flourescent bulb for five" kind of thing.
Soooo...Perhaps banning pet stores from carrying certain animals is the answer...maybe lizards that get over 3 ft. and snakes that get over 6 feet...or something. Now I know you all are thinking, "That's a horrible idea; it just opens doors for more bans and eventually all our pets will be taken away!" and I think that's an issue too. That's why I said in the beginning, "IN THEORY". I wish things didn't work the way they do, but if that was the case things would be done a LOT differently!! <img src="http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':p'>
So there's no easy way...maybe just upping the price (but Petco would hate that&#33<img src="http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=';)'> Most people that don't know a thing about reptiles don't go out and buy an $80 chameleon from the pet store because the average person has the theory: "the higher the cost, the more work it takes" and, conversely, "the lower the cost, the easier it is". That's why "any idiot with 5 bucks" will buy an iguana. And worse, some people just buy a pet with the idea that they'll give it away when it gets too big. (Just look in the classifieds section of your newspaper.)
Well I don't really have much of a point, here, just that you'd think people who don't know how to care for animals wouldn't buy them, but why *does* someone get a pet and then completely neglect it? Like I knew this kid who had a pet box turtle and he kept it in a cardboard box and fed it only lettuce and only evey few days or when he remembered because he didn't like it anymore and wanted it to just die off....and yet he wouldn't give it to me.
Some people just shouldn't have pets.
 
That's weird that this thing puts a  <img src="http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=';)'>  guy in place of an exclamation point followed by a ) ...heh heh.
 
Back
Top