Central Florida counties seek stricter snake ownership laws

You'd never know that inside Brian Radenberg's house on Snow Drive are the things of nightmares.

[Urban Vigilante]

What's wrong with having just a dog or a cat for crying out loud ! What a complete idiot...Why would you want venomous snakes as pets? To tell your friends and to look 'cool'? Wait...I know...chicks dig guys who breed snakes??....

Yeah, I'd be a little pissed knowing the guy across my street was raising cobras. What the hell do you do with them when they get to big for the cage? I thought the author made some good points. What if the house catches on fire and the poor fireman goes in and see's cobras slithering all over his bedroom floor?

If these rejecks want to do this, make it difficult as possible to do so, or impose some sort of heafty tax or license fee.

[TheRunningNurse]

I hate snakes. I am terrified of snakes and have often said, "the only good snake is a dead snake".
However, it seems that those who DO have licenses have jumped through enough hoops and know how to properly care for their pets. I do agree that they should notify fire & rescue and let them know what is in their house.
It is not like we have seen innocent neighbors getting bitten or their children being mauled by a pet snake.
I would much rather see a ban or a permit system for people who own pit bulls.

[ray]

mauled by a snake?? Well if the house catches fire. Then he can have BBQ snake.

[Bud]

Time is long overdue for officials to totally ban "exotic pets" unless they are to be put in a zoo. Pythons have practically over run the southwestern corner of the everglades, apparently released by former owners for various reasons and several neighborhoods in Southwest Florida have been plagued by Monitor Lizzards, that were apparently released by former owners, so let's ban all the exotics and confine them to zoos.

[mohammed speaks]

this guy has the right to have whatever he wants in his own house,however 54 snakes!!! In that case he needs to live somewhere else its a matter of safety of his neighbors. one two even 3 fine i see no problem but 54! If he wants to keep them so bad he does not need to live in a residential area..

[Mike]

Before a bunch of "concerned citizens" who have myopic and ill-founded concerns about snakes comment, I just want to say I know a lot of people who keep reptiles and all of them are caring and informed keepers of these animals. These people are as concerned or moreso than anyone else about the welfare of their animals. Even the tagline for this story was meant to inspire fear, calling snakes "things of nightmares". If we ever want our kids to get beyond age-old fears of snakes and to appreciate nature more, we need to encourage people to look beyond myths and at the reality of these situations: as long as those who keep dangerous animals have the proper state-level authority to do so, I don't see it as a problem. I am glad there are people who love and are facinated by all types of animals.

[Rush]

Pit bulls are much more dangerous than snakes, and you don't need a permit to have a pit bull -- Just an IQ below 50, a trailer, and a damaged fence so they can get out and kill your neighbor's children.

[LIBERALS HATE facts]

Sounds like another excuse for the state/county/ or a city to just be NOSEY!

His only obligation should be to notify the local cops or fire department.....or post a noticable sign of warning, just in case they had to make entry into his residence.

[Square Egg]

Mike wrote:

Before a bunch of "concerned citizens" who have myopic and ill-founded concerns about snakes comment, I just want to say I know a lot of people who keep reptiles and all of them are caring and informed keepers of these animals. These people are as concerned or moreso than anyone else about the welfare of their animals. Even the tagline for this story was meant to inspire fear, calling snakes "things of nightmares". If we ever want our kids to get beyond age-old fears of snakes and to appreciate nature more, we need to encourage people to look beyond myths and at the reality of these situations: as long as those who keep dangerous animals have the proper state-level authority to do so, I don't see it as a problem. I am glad there are people who love and are facinated by all types of animals.

----------
Are you "Mike" a snake owner?

[FLATTEX]

Kudos to Dale Baker for trying to keep Floridians safe from these fifty-some-odd venomous snakes!! Um, Dale, you live in Florida, which is home to at least four different species of venomous snakes, plus the 'gators. Watch your step.

[Mike]

Square Egg wrote:

<quoted text>
----------
Are you "Mike" a snake owner?

No, I am not. I have considered keeping snakes but right now lack the facilities or time to do so. I have the education in animal science and experience to hold a permit for exotics should I wish to, but it's not something I desire right now. My goal in my comment was to implore others to be more understanding of snakes, their owners, and also to encourage our current system of oversight to continue: people who have the background to own possibly dangerous animals should be the only ones to own them and such ownerships is rightly placed at a state-level jurisdiction.

[mohammed speaks]

Mike wrote:

Before a bunch of "concerned citizens" who have myopic and ill-founded concerns about snakes comment, I just want to say I know a lot of people who keep reptiles and all of them are caring and informed keepers of these animals. These people are as concerned or moreso than anyone else about the welfare of their animals. Even the tagline for this story was meant to inspire fear, calling snakes "things of nightmares". If we ever want our kids to get beyond age-old fears of snakes and to appreciate nature more, we need to encourage people to look beyond myths and at the reality of these situations: as long as those who keep dangerous animals have the proper state-level authority to do so, I don't see it as a problem. I am glad there are people who love and are facinated by all types of animals.

Ok you are right i see your point the articles here are always like that and most incomplete also.
But 54 come on thats a lot you must see what i'm getting at and in one way it Is a just one more reason for goverment interference.
But 54??????

[mohammed speaks]

LIBERALS HATE facts wrote:

Sounds like another excuse for the state/county/ or a city to just be NOSEY!
His only obligation should be to notify the local cops or fire department.....or post a noticable sign of warning, just in case they had to make entry into his residence.

thats a good point..

[Marsha]

Venomous snakes have no place in our neighborhoods and I know this from experience. I lived in the nice quaint neighborhood of College Park when my neighbors Mike & Vallerie Kennedy left for vacation during hurricane Charlie. The shed in their backyard we later found out was housing MANY of their venomous snakes and was damaged. After a few months and no repair to the shed, one of their Albino Rattlesnakes escaped. As I was in the backyard one afternoon, my Golden Retriever started barking frantically by the fence. When I walked over to check things out, the snake struck out at me only being stopped by the chain link fence between us. This complete disregard for human life never phased them as they continued to house these deadly creatures only until it was brought public by the bad publicity they received from the news. Not good advertising when your a real estate broker and represent this kind of mentality. Venomous snakes do not belong anywhere around families with children and pets one accident is all it takes and its only a matter of time if these laws are not changed immediately

[noah]

nothing goo dhas ever come ouy of snakes! They are the devil in disquise

[BUDDY do you care]

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ORLANDO POLITICIANS HERE.

[Mo Lubee]

The key here is requiring registration with appropriate fee, inspection and compulsory insurance.

Of course we all know these venomous snake keepers are neurotic mental cases, so no use discussing that.

Anyone in possession of a venomous snake should be required to register their reptile(s) with the State or County.

Requirements for that Registration should include State or County inspection of cage(s) and facilities, the snake owner providing a Certificate of Insurance guaranteeing coverage up to and including typical settlement amounts for wrongful death lawsuits. The State or County should also be required by law to notify the snake owner's homeowner or renter's insurance carrrier of the venomous snake situation in the home to assure the underwriter was willing to cover said risk.

Most companies writing Homeowners Policies would cancel in a heartbeat if they knew their insured was harboring poisonous snakes as pets in the home.

The key here is to recognize there is an inherent risk, and to require the snake owner to provide financial protection to underwrite the possible repercussions of the risk he creates. It's legal, it's effective, and it would work.

[Rocky]

I have an anaconda in my pants; will I need to license it?

[Tess]

It does seem like the number is a bit obessive....what would we say if someone had 54 dogs or cats. Would we call them a hoarder and mentally unbalanced? I think they should be licensed and posted, but I think the numbers should be limited too, but keep in mind that lots of people don't pay attention to common sense and rules.

[Mo Lubee]

mohammed speaks wrote:

<quoted text> thats a good point..

No, it's not a good point. You have a right to do whatever you want or your property up to the point where what you do creates a disturbance or danger impacting your neighbors, that is accepted point of law and is the basis for Zoning Regulations.

The transgression here is the creation of a clear, present and ongoing danger to the neighborhood and community.

The community is empowered through local or State Government to eliminate or ameliorate the danger.

Requiring registration, cage inspection and insurance specific would do exactly that.