[ColinWeaver]

Fellow pet owner,

My name is Colin Weaver. I am 37 years old. I am probably a lot like you in that I have had a dog and/or a cat as part of my family for all but a tiny handful of years in my life. My current dog, a 4-year old Weimaraner named Seven, is not just a pet; she is a member of my family. Taking care of her and protecting her is no less a responsibility than taking care of my 3-year old daughter.

In addition to being a dog lover I am also an enthusiastic reptile fan. In particular I have an affinity for pythons. This fact, I suspect, will immediately distance some of you. Pythons are not conventional pets and because pythons are enigmatic they are often feared. Despite their fast-growing popularity, they are on the edge of mainstream pet ownership. It is true that reptiles do not show the same affection toward their owners that dogs and cats do. The opposite, however, is not true. The way you feel about your dog or cat is the way that many feel about their reptiles. For the moment I ask that you not judge the particular animal that some choose to make a part of their lives. For now, just focus on the way you feel about your pets and give credit to reptile owners for feeling the same way about their companions.

In the United States dog ownership is under constant attack. The source of this attack is most commonly the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). Volumes have been written on the Internet about their deceptive ways but they continue to be successful in launching attacks against pet owners (and breeders) around the country. I know your frustration regarding this because I feel it, too. Dogs are only one of several targets of the HSUS. Reptile keepers are also struggling with the HSUS' powerful lobbying skills. At this moment there is a bill in Congress called HR2811 which seeks a nationwide ban on many of the most popular reptiles in the pet community (the Senate version of the bill is called S373). At a recent hearing in the House a team of more than 25 HSUS members were present to forward their efforts to get this bill made into law.

The reasons proposed for this ban are false. They are being sensationalized by the HSUS and this is being compounded by the media. South Florida does have a problem with a population of pythons having established themselves in the Everglades. This problem, which is isolated to extreme South Florida is being used as a point of leverage to ban the ownership of pythons and boas throughout the entire United States. There are two primary points of the HSUS argument:

1.The HSUS and USGS feel that the python might be able to spread north from Florida and establish itself in the lower 1/3 of the United States.

* Because pythons cannot control their own body temperature this is simply not possible. Highly experienced reptile veterinarians with detailed understanding of reptile physiology have testified to this fact. The ecosystem of South Florida is largely unique in the United States. Their ability to spread north from the Everglades is false and being driven by nothing more than the average person's fear of snakes. Pythons have been kept as pet for not less than 50 years in this country. If they had the ability to establish themselves in other parts of the country, they would likely have done so by now. One of the USGS' selling points on this matter is that global warming over the next 100 years could allow the snakes to survive further north. Is that what we're going to do now? Legislate the pet trade on what might happen in the decades to come? Really? Remember the movie Minority Report starring Tom Cruise? In that movie people were arrested and put in prison for crimes they were going to commit in the future. Banning the ownership of snakes because the temperature might change in the future is just as preposterous. That movie sought to teach us a subtle lesson; it appears that it was not learned.

2.Pythons are a public safety issue.

* The HSUS states that pythons kill people and are a risk to public health. This is both fear-driven and false. Of the pets that people choose to keep pythons are one of the least likely to be a danger. Severe injury or death because of a python is incredibly rare. It is estimated that more than 5 million Americans own a reptile, several hundred thousand of which are large pythons and boas. Over the past 30 years there have been a total of 12 deaths attributed to large pythons. While nobody should ever discount the value of a life we have to admit that so few deaths in that many years is hardly justification for pythons being a public safety issue. It is worthy to note that none of those 12 deaths was from a python or boa escaping into the wild and attacking someone. Each of those incidents occurred in the home and each was the result of poor caging and/or improper handling. The simple fact of the matter is that responsible ownership of pythons and boas is not a public health concern.

The pythons in the Everglades is a decidedly Florida problem. Florida Fish and Wildlife has jumped on the bandwagon of this ban because federal legislation means federal dollars. The prospect of getting the entire country to fund Everglades restoration is a compelling motivator. In order to generate support for their desired end-result they have begun actively searching for pythons and when found they parade them about on the evening news. The media, and their love of all things sensational, is glad to feature them.

One of the most recent efforts of the HSUS has been to call for a ban on the Boa Constrictor in addition to several python species (they initially tried to ban all pythons). Suggesting a ban on 'boa constrictor' is the same thing as suggesting a ban on all terrier breeds because you feel that pit bulls are a problem. It it absolutely ridiculous. If one of the 15 species of terriers (that's how many my research showed there to be) was a member of your family how would you feel if they were banned because of a HSUS/media-driven view of pit bulls? I hope you would be as frustrated and angry as the reptile community is right now. Similar to the diversity of terriers, there are literally dozens of different types of boa constrictors and most of them are very small as adults. We are in danger of seeing a huge portion of the pet trade eliminated by this proposed legislation. We are scared. We are angry. And we are frustrated.

Now, here is the point of my letter: The reptile community is not large enough to indefinitely withstand the assault being launched by the HSUS and our current political representation is too new and inexperienced to avoid being blindsided by the clever lobbying skills long-since perfected by the HSUS. The passage of this bill is a very real possibility. Because of this I am asking you to help me and the rest of the reptile community. I need your help. Part of my livelihood and my right to responsibly own the pet of my choosing is in danger of being taken away from me. I need you to defend pet ownership in this country by contacting both your delegate in the House of Representatives and your Senator and tell them you oppose HR2811 (the House bill) and S373 (the Senate version of the bill). I need this help because I believe with all my heart that the only way that pet owners in this country are ever going to be safe against the efforts of organizations like the HSUS is for all of us to work together to protect the rights of all pet owners, regardless of what type of pet it is.

Do this for me. Please. I need your help. Make the call to your House delegate and your Senator and I, in return, make myself available to you when you need help in your fight for your right to have the pet of your choosing. It is past time for the pet owners of this country to come together, to form a collective and work as a unit to oppose the HSUS' attacks on responsible pet ownership.

To find out who represents you in the House of Representatives, follow this link: https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

To find out who represents you in the Senate, follow this link: U.S. Senate: Senators Home

HR2811 is currently in committee in the House. Here is a list of the committee members: U.S. Congress House Committee on the Judiciary - GovTrack.us

Thank you,

Colin Weaver
cmweaver@gmail.com

[roxymum]

I am sorry but I don't see the point of keeping reptiles as a pet. How cruel to keep an animal in a confined space for the selfish enjoyment of people? What exactly does a reptile bring into your life?
People are fascinatred by exotic animals but more often than not haven't got the space or resources to look after them. so they end up in glass jar or the bath.
Keeping a reptile prisoner in a cage in akin to keeping a dog on a chain. Unchain your dog organisation are doing a marvellous job in freeing those poor animals. You should think of preserving the reptiles and not chaining them.
In my opinion people should not be allowed to keep other pets than cats or dogs. Monkeys, reptiles, gheckos and so on have the right to be free animals.

[Lara's mom]

I doubt this would ever have become a problem if irresponsible people had not decided that the Everglades was convenient place to dump snakes that they no longer wanted. These reptiles are not native to the area and tend to wreak havoc on those creatures who are native to the area.

Frankly, I do not believe in the right of people being able to own any animal of their choosing. There is a world of difference between domesticated and wild animals. Not too far from Toronto, there is a large cat sanctuary. It exists because selfish and uninformed people thought it would be somehow trendy to own a large wild cat. These animals were probably not a problem as babies but, as they got older they began to do what wild cats do. These cats live in captivity because the owners declawed or had their teeth removed (sometimes both) making it impossible for them to ever return to the wild and live out their lives naturally. Despite mutilating these creatures, in the end the owners found that they were unable to keep them anyway. There is legislation banning the importing of wild cats but, somehow people manage to import them illegally.

There is a similar problem with monkeys. A chimpanzee is very cute as a baby. When it grows up, weighs over 100 pounds and is stronger than the average human male - not so much. When the owners can no longer control them, they either end up being euthanized or living out the remainder of their lives in a sanctuary. In one sad case last year, an adult male chimp attacked and nearly killed a woman and ended up being shot by Animal Control.

The fact that these large snakes are being released into the Everglades presents compelling evidence that there comes a time when these reptiles simply become too big and strong to be manageable. When these snakes are dumped into an ecosystem that they are not meant to be in, they breed and multiply and severely damage the surrounding ecosystem.

Wild animals are not and should not be pets. Those who are endangered need to be part of captive breeding programs run by knowledgeable people in situations where the animals have a decent standard of living in the hope that they can be returned to the wild. Those who are not endangered should be left in the wild where they belong. To do otherwise is shortsighted, cruel and in many places illegal.

[Yogi]

I think the discrepancy here lies in that man created dog for man where reptiles were not, and are therefore wild animals. In this context, referring to a reptile as a pet like we would a dog really makes no sense.
Man has a moral obligation to dogs where in the case of reptiles, nature is responsible. But on that note, could we not say the same thing about birds?

[Lara's mom]

You make a very good point.

[CorkyMax]

I agree totally with this quote from Lara's Mom:
Wild animals are not and should not be pets. Those who are endangered need to be part of captive breeding programs run by knowledgeable people in situations where the animals have a decent standard of living in the hope that they can be returned to the wild. Those who are not endangered should be left in the wild where they belong. To do otherwise is shortsighted, cruel and in many places illegal.

[cherylmartin]

I agree with the ideas of keeping a 'wild animal/endangered species' as pets. They are few known exceptions of full transistions to 'society' as we know it. The 'wild' instinct is every present.

[roxymum]

Originally Posted by Yogi

I think the discrepancy here lies in that man created dog for man where reptiles were not, and are therefore wild animals. In this context, referring to a reptile as a pet like we would a dog really makes no sense.
Man has a moral obligation to dogs where in the case of reptiles, nature is responsible. But on that note, could we not say the same thing about birds?

We should say the same about birds. I'd like to see a ban on the sale of birds.
What pleasure is derived from keeping a bird in a cage? Can you imagine being confined in a small space day in day out with no hope of remission for good behaviour? how cruel.