Utah board upholds ban on rattlesnakes as pets

[ER]

http://www.localnews8.com/Global/story.asp?S=12086554

 
Utah board upholds ban on rattlesnakes as pets

Associated Press - March 4, 2010 6:15 PM ET

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) - Utah will remain 1 of 12 states in the nation that doesn't allow residents to keep venomous snakes.

The Utah Wildlife Board on Thursday unanimously voted down a proposal that would have allowed people to collect and keep up to 34 Great Basin rattlesnakes.

The proposal - sought by several snake enthusiasts - was panned by government officials and members of the public.

The Division of Wildlife Resources' native aquatic species coordinator, Krissy Wilson, says the proposed rule included provisions intended to keep the public safe.

At the same time she says she understands why some members of the public would have been nervous about legalizing venomous snakes as pets.

Under the proposal, residents would have been limited to nine adult rattlers and up to 25 young snakes.

[VansRV8]

A few thoughts on this type of thing.  First off, does anyone else have a problem with the term "pets".  I don't think we consider our venomous reptiles "pets".  We aren't playing with them, like you would a normal pet.  I'd say its more of a collection, or we study them.  Pythons and Boas are pets, not rattlesnakes.  They are for observation and study.  Secondly, I'm all about keeping these animals, but there has to be some kind of regulation.  Perhaps an age limit, a fee, a permit, some type of required experience, or something.  It has to be something fairly straight forward for legit people, but a little complicated for those who are just fooling around.  Just my thoughts on it. 

[JohnZ]

Also, the nine adult rattlers and up to 25 young snakes seems excessive, if they were all to be Great Basin Rattlesnakes.

Only folks breeding them to make money would want or need that many, and that sort of defeats the purpose of calling them pets.

The reptile enthusiasts who asked for the law might have had better luck if they had kept it to say 4 adults and a much smaller number of young.

It is all about perception. Once the news papers pick up "34 rattlesnakes," that is going to scare a lot of non snake folks. 

[Jamison]

I was one of only 3 supporters at the board meeting on Thursday. The Utah Division of Wildlife Resources came up with this proposal on their own. It was there idea, and when presented at the preemptive RAC meetings state wide, the propasal passed (unanimously is most areas) without any trouble. Once the proposal was presented to the board, it took them all of 3 minutes to shoot it down unanimously. We were allowed to provide input while the proposal was being written and during the RAC meetings, but ultimately, the Division decided how the proposal would be written. None of my suggestions were adopted. It was clear from the get-go, that the state had no desire to support this ammendment.

Jamison

[JohnZ]

Unfortunate, however, credit to those of you who tried.

The next step would be to get a herper from an obscure part of the state elected to the state legislature.

Then they would have to get on the board, where they could have influence.

Then you might have a chance of getting the bill through.

That is how a ambitious fellow who wanted a alligator farm in Georgia went about it.

And, now, we have a number of alligator farms, and legislation to support it.

Sort of round - a - bout, but, it might work.