ok, I'm intrigued by the comments Mike has thrown in the mix with regards to providing emails related to the original post/incident. Sounds interesting....BUT, I'm a little confused.... why would it be time consuming to cut & paste then post it here? Does Mike even need MS Word to post his emails here? Mike, what type of PC (computer do you have)? Maybe if you email them to one person, they can post the emails for you; for all to see??? Just suggestions.
Also, as Shanell pointed out, the article stated:
"Peters was given the option of donating the snake to a zoo, giving it up for research or having it destroyed. He chose the latter, according to Fish and Game Capt. Dennis DeAnda."
Who knows how accurate the information is in this article?!?! I no absolutely nothing about venomous snakes BUT what I do know is that if a Zoo or research facility did NOT have anti-venom, its likely they wouldn't accept the animal since they probably wouldn't be able to work with it, right? Correct me if I'm wrong but putting the animal down was probably the safest thing to do from a liability standpoint. Why should a zoo keeper or research personnel have to work with an unfamilar animal that could injure or kill them. I'm surprised that they even gave Peters an option at all. Why? especially if he claimed it was the 'wrong' snake sent. I thought the authorities would make the call in odd situations related to venomous animals. Although, an incident like this may be less common, therefore maybe no one knew what to do?!?!? Who knows! I should have never read that first post b/c now I'm subscribed to this thread and can't stop reading the new posts. LOL.
Well, its always interesting to lurk around these posts, especially when people on here come forward or dig up good info or play detective.
~Jason
Also, as Shanell pointed out, the article stated:
"Peters was given the option of donating the snake to a zoo, giving it up for research or having it destroyed. He chose the latter, according to Fish and Game Capt. Dennis DeAnda."
Who knows how accurate the information is in this article?!?! I no absolutely nothing about venomous snakes BUT what I do know is that if a Zoo or research facility did NOT have anti-venom, its likely they wouldn't accept the animal since they probably wouldn't be able to work with it, right? Correct me if I'm wrong but putting the animal down was probably the safest thing to do from a liability standpoint. Why should a zoo keeper or research personnel have to work with an unfamilar animal that could injure or kill them. I'm surprised that they even gave Peters an option at all. Why? especially if he claimed it was the 'wrong' snake sent. I thought the authorities would make the call in odd situations related to venomous animals. Although, an incident like this may be less common, therefore maybe no one knew what to do?!?!? Who knows! I should have never read that first post b/c now I'm subscribed to this thread and can't stop reading the new posts. LOL.
~Jason
That was not my intention. I'm glad CRE's name came up but I just didn't want this thread to turn into a 35+ page thread on that topic, when there is already one with lots of info. In fact, I just inquired about any updates on that thread since no one's posted there in a while. Its interesting b/c when I read this thread's original post, I immediately thought of the possible connection b/c of the location too. However, no one had provided any real proof or facts, so it kinda got annoying to read others argue about it
...but I'm over it now. 
