Florida Banning Comercial Breeding Reptiles?

[Motherlode Chameleon]

Howdy Everybody

I just got this email today from my brother Chris and he sent me this link. The article in the link is not to clear however appears to say that commercial sales and breeding of 16 species of reptiles is going to be banned in Florida over the next couple years. They did not list what species. Keeping these species is a priveldge of accomplished wildlife/natural conservation.

This is a link to the article.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/clim...c0db4a-8769-11eb-bfdf-4d36dab83a6d_story.html

Best Regards
Jeremy A. Rich

 

[Persnickety Parson's]

Ironic they won't ban cats though, a species far more destructive to local wildlife.

Either way the FWC needs defunding, if they have that much time to worry about what pets people are keeping rather than actually protect fish and game resources then they have far too much money laying around.

 

[Klyde O'Scope]

I think it's important to make a distinction between feral cats and Mr. Fluffy.
Either way, I don't recall house—or feral—cats being responsible for:

• 87.5% bobcat decline
• 94.1% white-tailed deer decline
• 98.9% opossum decline
• 99.3% raccoon decline
• 100% rabbit decline
• 100% fox decline

The 2003 to 2011 surveys compare mammal sightings to data from surveys conducted in 1996 and 1997 – before the python was breeding in the wild.
https://iep.berkeley.edu/content/burmese-pythons-everglades

...though I'm willing to keep an open mind.

 

[Motherlode Chameleon]

You have got to (really should) take care of your native ecosystems first before you can consider bringing in exotics. The native ecosystems in Florida are out of control at this time. I have got my digits crossed that the situation is remedied.

Best Regards
Jeremy A. Rich

 

[JacksJill]

Dumping a pet should carry higher penalties for one. If you buy something exotic in an impacted area then you should be mandated to prove it was sold, re-homed or expired in your care. A permit system with a fees to cover the red tape would do the job. Why use a sledge hammer when a tack hammer can do the job.
The Caribbean is now plagued by Lion Fish that were released by salt water aquarium owners who dumped them when they got too big or ate everything else in the tank. I saw several in the Bahamas a few years ago. They are eating their way through the native species. Breeders are not the issue it's the end user that's the problem in these cases.

 

[Klyde O'Scope]

Dumping a pet should carry higher penalties for one. If you buy something exotic in an impacted area then you should be mandated to prove it was sold, re-homed or expired in your care. A permit system with a fees to cover the red tape would do the job.

That's been the theory with rabies vaccinations & dog licenses; a vaccination is required to get a license, and fees are higher for non-neutered dogs.

Nevertheless, there are still too many cheap barstads who may be willing to pay the $10 for a license (or not), but not the cost of a vet visit & vaccination, or the $35 or more for a non-neutered animal. The vets I know keep getting unlicensed, unvaccinated (and often injured) animals dumped on their doorsteps way too often.

I'm in agreement in theory, but how do you keep tabs on who's got the exotics and how are they getting them in the first place? (I'm also thinking about the gun show loophole—but with certain exotics.)

Then there's this: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ed-in-net-of-drug-trade-idUSTRE5154PM20090206

In the study I cited above, it only took ~10 years for those Everglades species to be virtually wiped out (it's even worse now), and not from thousands of BPs being released. It was probably a very small number, but between the perfect environment, no natural predators, and clutches of 50-100 eggs per year (according to FWC) there was no stopping them. How big a fee/fine should those firsties have been charged compared to the damage done to the environment? ICBW, but I believe the situation was similar with the lionfish.

I'm with you—I really am, but I am also—by nature—somewhat skeptable [sic].

 

[JacksJill]

I was thinking something more substantial than a dog licencing fee, 200$ possibly and proof of death or sale to end additional yearly fees. I just don't think limiting the number of breeders is going to make a difference. They aren't the ones releasing them. It is the end user mostly. This strategy reeks of someone trying to corner a market using an in with in the bureaucracy. I'm not usually a conspiracy theorist but I do believe in following the money.

As for the drug and animal smugglers I'm at a loss for ideas unless you just kill them all and let the deities sort it out. Just kidding kinda.

 

[Klyde O'Scope]

The higher the licensing fee, the more likely to drive unscrupulous keepers underground, especially if they're keeping numbers.

 

[Madmango]

The new rules would, eliminate commercial breeding and pet ownership of 16 high-risk reptiles; put the high-risk reptiles on the state's prohibited species list, and limiting possession to permitted facilities engaged in educational exhibition, research or eradication or control activities.

The 16 reptiles include Burmese pythons; reticulated pythons; scrub pythons; Northern African pythons; Southern African Pythons; amethystine pythons; green anacondas; Nile monitor lizards; tegus (all species) and green iguanas.

see original story here:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.floridatoday.com/amp/4553754001

 

[Motherlode Chameleon]

The new rules would, eliminate commercial breeding and pet ownership of 16 high-risk reptiles; put the high-risk reptiles on the state's prohibited species list, and limiting possession to permitted facilities engaged in educational exhibition, research or eradication or control activities.

The 16 reptiles include Burmese pythons; reticulated pythons; scrub pythons; Northern African pythons; Southern African Pythons; amethystine pythons; green anacondas; Nile monitor lizards; tegus (all species) and green iguanas.

see original story here:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.floridatoday.com/amp/4553754001

Thanks for posting the species.

Best Regards
Jeremy A. Rich

 

[Klyde O'Scope]

The new rules would .... limit[] possession to permitted facilities engaged in educational exhibition, research or eradication or control activities.

This policy doesn't sound that much different than many states regarding indigenous wild animals.

 

[jamest0o0]

I was thinking something more substantial than a dog licencing fee, 200$ possibly and proof of death or sale to end additional yearly fees. I just don't think limiting the number of breeders is going to make a difference. They aren't the ones releasing them. It is the end user mostly. This strategy reeks of someone trying to corner a market using an in with in the bureaucracy. I'm not usually a conspiracy theorist but I do believe in following the money.

As for the drug and animal smugglers I'm at a loss for ideas unless you just kill them all and let the deities sort it out. Just kidding kinda.

Pretty extreme views for someone who always plays the neutral and understanding game on these forums

(Speaking of killing everyone... not the fees and such)

 

[jamest0o0]

IMO ban them all, and not for the ecosystem, but because I think everyone in FL is having too much fun. Oh boo hoo you can't have an anaconda and a dubia roach... Try scraping ice off of your car at 5 am so you can drive an hour to work only a mile away while the temperature is below freezing for most of the trip(takes time for cars to heat up in the winter). All of the sudden not being able to own a reptile and a bug doesn't seem so bad.

Just messing of course. I've been enjoying reading your guy's conversations. Great points brought up.

 

[MissSkittles]

I think the problem with requiring licensing is that only the responsible keepers will license their animals, as in those who are less likely to release their unwanted animal in the wild. Granted, it would produce revenue which could then be used in public education about responsible reptile keeping, but would that really be done? Even if it were, would that really have much impact on the type of people who decide they’re tired of an animal and just set it loose?

 

[Motherlode Chameleon]

This problem of invasive species having an affect on native ecosystems has been a big problem here in California. There were many game species of fish introduced to California waterways and native ecosystems and species have suffer because somebody though native game species were not enough. There were plenty of species that went extinct including 4 species of Salmon in central California (plus others) due to invasive species plus other conditions (dams being built). A lot of these aquatic plant and fish species that remain, such as the Sacramento Perch, California's only native sunfish species, are having a tough time hanging on to existence. The Sacramento Perch is now considered extinct in its native habitat. However the species is not endangered in aquaculture. The species has been attempted to be reintroduced into the species natural habitat without any positive results because most probably of invasive species. Conservationist and Fish and Game officials appear to have somewhat of a handle on things here in California now. Digits crossed something similar can happen with the native ecosystems of Florida.

Best Regards
Jeremy A. Rich

 

[jamest0o0]

I think the problem with requiring licensing is that only the responsible keepers will license their animals, as in those who are less likely to release their unwanted animal in the wild. Granted, it would produce revenue which could then be used in public education about responsible reptile keeping, but would that really be done? Even if it were, would that really have much impact on the type of people who decide they’re tired of an animal and just set it loose?

In florida... the revenue would likely go to some corrupt politician.

I think some sort of license may make it harder to obtain them though. So even if someone is going out of their way to get something illegally, they would probably be more likely to keep it. TBH the main people who are problematic with letting things go aren't scary sociopaths with no regard for life, they're clueless kids and parents who purchase something as an impulse and then let it go when they get sick of it for whatever reason.

 

[Klyde O'Scope]

Whether impulse purchase or sociopath is irrelevant. It's about what's "cool."

Among pet snakes and lizards, the biggest-selling species are also the most likely to be released by their owners – and to potentially become invasive species, according to a Rutgers study published today in the Journal of Applied Ecology.
https://www.newswise.com/articles/f...e-also-most-likely-to-be-released-in-the-wild

The study itself is linked above.

Species that are both prevalent in the pet trade and large‐bodied or long‐lived have the highest probability of being released.
Ibid.

Releasing pets into the wild is illegal.

Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Section 14 prohibits releasing or allowing to escape into the wild all non-native animals.
http://www.thehouseofanimals.com/2016/11/08/why-you-shouldnt-release-pets-into-the-wild/

Someone going out of their way to get something illegally has already shown a willingness to break the law, and is likely willing to break the law again.

 

[Motherlode Chameleon]

I am for a permit system. That kind of system commands a less sloppy "I shall release my animals type mentality". I am applying for permits right now to keep and breed colonies of a couple of insect species. Species of insects that normally are not allow in California.

Best Regards
Jeremy A. Rich

 

[Madmango]

I agree that a permit for keeping exotic animals would be a great step. But it’s only as good as the enforcement of such a law.
Here in Denver Co we can’t even enforces a simple Leash law for dogs.

 

[Motherlode Chameleon]

I agree that a permit for keeping exotic animals would be a great step. But it’s only as good as the enforcement of such a law.
Here in Denver Co we can’t even enforces a simple Leash law for dogs.

You have got to start somewhere. Depends on the people to make it happen. If the topic is a legitimate issue something is going to happen. However if the issue is not important to people. People are going to claim ignorance. Some people love to fall back on the ignorance is bliss out.

Best Regards
Jeremy A. Rich