On Monday’s Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) blog, the organizations leader calls for both state and federal legislation outlawing the keeping of exotic pets. In the blog post titled “There Oughta Be Laws Against Exotic Pets” the chief executive officer, speaking on behalf of the HSUS, calls the keeping of exotic pets “foolish”. I have a feeling that the 26 million plus exotic pet owning families in the United States would disagree.
Just so we’re clear, let’s take a look at what the HSUS considers an exotic pet to be. An article on the HSUS website titled “Questions and Answers about Wild and Exotic Animals as Pets” states the following:
“Should Individuals Keep Wild or Exotic Animals as Pets?
No. Wild and exotic (non-native) animals are unsuitable for home rearing and handling. … “
Obviously, the HSUS considers all non-native pets “exotic” and therefore “foolish”. So your birds, fish, turtles, geckos, and turtles are all in the sights of the HSUS and if they have their way, you’ll have to say goodbye to your beloved animals.
Of course, the focus of the article is Burmese pythons. As I’ve pointed out in past blog posts, keeping a python as a pet is no more dangerous than swimming in a swimming pool, riding a dirt bike, or jumping on a trampoline. The reality is that pythons are an easy target when you want to talk about federal bans on so-called dangerous animals. It’s common for special interest groups that are against the keeping of pets like parrots, chinchillas, tropical fish, and even frogs to constantly point to pythons and use them as a poster child for pushing legislation that will eventually end the keeping of all “non-traditional” pets. Don’t be fooled by the misdirection, it’s one of the oldest and most classic cons.
The truth is that the title of the HSUS blog post didn’t say “pythons” or “dangerous animals” it used the words “EXOTIC PETS” … and on their own website the HSUS defines “exotics” as ALL non-native species kept as pets in the United States. If you own a bird, or have a tropical or salt water fish tank in your home, or keep any number of thousands of non-native species as your pets you might want to think twice before the next time you send a donation to the Humane Society of the United States. They think that you’re a fool, and if you send them money you just might be.
Yesterday, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW) subcommittees on Water and Wildlife as well as Oversight held a joint hearing entitled “Threats to Native Wildlife species”. Senator Benjamin Cardin (the chair of the water and wildlife subcommittee) oversaw the proceedings.
Witnesses included representatives from the United States Fish and Wildlife service, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center. In the audience, there were representatives from the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC), United States Association of Reptile Keepers (USARK), and other like minded stakeholders.
Senator Cardin did an excellent job running the hearing and making sure all aspects of the threats from invasive species were covered. The Senator asked very important and insightful questions and really made an excellent effort to get to the heart of the invasive species issues confronting United States ecosystems.
The vast majority of the hearing had little to do with pets and pet owners. Much of the hearing focused on American bat populations and the threat to them from “white nose disease”, nutria, zebra muscles and ballast water, Asian beetles, and a host of other non-native plants and insects that are in the United States as a result of the shipping, transport, food, and recreational industries.
Senator Bill Nelson took the opportunity to use his opening remarks to attempt to gain support for his proposed legislation, S 373. He used a long skin from a Burmese python as a prop and very passionately described the process of a constrictor swallowing it’s prey whole. There were a couple of confusing elements of Senator Nelsons testimony. When he spoke, he claimed that there are “150,000 to 180,000” Burmese pythons currently living in the Everglades. In his written testimony submitted to the subcommittees, he states the number is just over 100,000. Both of these numbers are in stark contrast to the Humane Society of the United States claim of 25,000 and the Nature Conservancy’s claim of 10,000. That’s a pretty broad range of numbers and it would appear that no one seems to really have a handle on the issue. Senator Nelson also closed his remarks by stating that he didn’t want a ban on “all constrictors, just [Burmese pythons]”. That’s a pretty odd statement because his proposed legislation (S 373) is entitled “To amend title 18, United States Code, to include constrictor snakes of the species Python genera as an injurious animal.” .. and the genus “Python” is not a single animal, but a group of almost a dozen “constrictors” (including the Burmese python). Some of the snakes in the genus Python grow to under 4 feet in length and are about the width of a household flashlight. Other than the Burmese pythons, none of the other snakes are considered to be “invading” Floridas Everglades or are talked about as potentially invasive species. So what is Senator Nelson thinking? Was S 373 written incorrectly or is this the typical double speak that most Americans consider standard practice for our politicians?
|
