City considers stepping up oversight ...

City considers stepping up oversight of exotic pets

There are 54 comments on the DispatchPolitics story from Apr 23, 2010, titled City considers stepping up oversight of exotic pets. In it, DispatchPolitics reports that:

Terry Wilkins, whose parents own Captive Born Reptiles stores on Morse and Refugee roads, holds an example of a not-so-typical potential house pet: a 6-month-old alligator named Izzy.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at DispatchPolitics.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Since: Oct 09

Columbus, OH

#1 Apr 23, 2010
"kept in the dark" are you kidding? The vote is not until this summer. They have not been kept in the dark.

"He has stores on Morse and Refugee roads and sells alligators, large snakes and other pets.
The pets he sells have not caused injuries or deaths, Wilkins said." So alligators and large snakes don't injury people? Get real.

If you have an exotic pet you should have to get a permit. The responsible exotic pet owner would have nothing to worry about. In fact they should welcome it because only those irresponsible owners would get in trouble. There should a ban on owning and selling all large carnivores (except dogs). They should also limit or ban other exotic animals as well. NYC has banned iguanas b/c they were negatively impacting central park b/c people would just let them go. Florida has banned (I believe) certain types of reptiles b/c people let them go and it damages the native wildlife.
AVG

Concord, CA

#2 Apr 23, 2010
I don't own any pets and I see this as just another way for the city to steal from the people.
GCHS Parent

Columbus, OH

#3 Apr 23, 2010
This is ridiculous. Doesn't the city have better things to spend the taxpayers' money on?

Forcing people to get a permit to have a pet is going to negatively impact the pet business. In this economy we should not be making laws that negatively impact ANY business.

Since: Feb 10

Columbus, OH

#4 Apr 23, 2010
I really think there needs to be stronger controls on exotic pets. As DrC mentioned, injuring humans isn't the only risk. The Burmese python has now established itself in the Everglades because irresponsible pet owners released them. Now they are wreaking havoc on the ecosystem and are beginning to work their way north.

Responsibility is the key here. Too many people acquire these pets because they think it would be cool. only to discover that they have taken on more than they bargained for.

If someone wants a dagerous or exotic pet, they should have to get a permit at least.
Gunny Sarge

Collierville, TN

#5 Apr 23, 2010
How about one of these permits for the City Council, and the Mayor? Talk about exotic and expensive!
dopes

Reynoldsburg, OH

#6 Apr 23, 2010
DrC Ohio wrote:
"kept in the dark" are you kidding? The vote is not until this summer. They have not been kept in the dark.
"He has stores on Morse and Refugee roads and sells alligators, large snakes and other pets.
The pets he sells have not caused injuries or deaths, Wilkins said." So alligators and large snakes don't injury people? Get real.
If you have an exotic pet you should have to get a permit. The responsible exotic pet owner would have nothing to worry about. In fact they should welcome it because only those irresponsible owners would get in trouble. There should a ban on owning and selling all large carnivores (except dogs). They should also limit or ban other exotic animals as well. NYC has banned iguanas b/c they were negatively impacting central park b/c people would just let them go. Florida has banned (I believe) certain types of reptiles b/c people let them go and it damages the native wildlife.
limit
ban
regulate

the mating call of the statist
CBUS

New York, NY

#7 Apr 23, 2010
This is the stupidest thing I've heard in a while:

"Department officials hope that people who already have pets that require a permit - and those who buy pets outside the city - would seek permits as well, they said."

Right or wrong, people are not going to comply with this and the result is going to be more City regulations without enforcement (or, worse yet, a vast expenditure of people and capital to try to enforce rules that are relatively unimportant to the community).

It is hard for me to imagine that all of the public health issues in Columbus of actual importance have already been resolved. This is just another classic example of local political hacks regulating something just for the sake of doing so.
TimH

Columbus, OH

#8 Apr 23, 2010
Is this a health/safety issue or a revenue enhancement issue ? The city seems to want to collect a permit fee for everything anymore. I can't even replace my front door without getting a $75 building permit.
dead rabbit society

Columbus, OH

#9 Apr 23, 2010
Dr C- appears to be another liberal that thinks the state needs yet more control over the proles...sad. And I don't even own a pet.
Bilbo

Frankfort, OH

#10 Apr 23, 2010
Guess that 1% income tax increase is giving them the funds to find more stupid laws to implement.

Since: Oct 09

Columbus, OH

#11 Apr 23, 2010
dead rabbit society wrote:
Dr C- appears to be another liberal that thinks the state needs yet more control over the proles...sad. And I don't even own a pet.
So, if I want to own a darn lion, I should be able to own a darn lion with no permit. You remember a few years ago when a male african lion got loose near Cincy and was chasing cars on the highway? The owner said it somehow got out of its enclosure. In fact Ohio has some of the weakest exotic pet laws in the country. Heck, if you want a giraffe go up to Mount Hope in Holmes county and get one. I didn't know there were so many people out there who like to stand up for the irresponsible pet owner, but all you have to do is take a look at this thread.
Garp

Columbus, OH

#12 Apr 23, 2010
Yes, let darling little Johnny have his alligator without a permit. And when it grows to be 3 feet long, maybe it will eat darling little Johnny or the neighbor's toy poodle. Then the peanut gallery can comment on where in the world the government was in failing to regulate these non-domisticated animals.
GRUNT

Chillicothe, OH

#13 Apr 23, 2010
Why own EXOTIC PETS ? Cheaper and a LOT SAFER to see them at the Zoo. Better than waking (maybe) some night and finding the "Pet" gnawing on you or your Child's Leg!
Ball Python owner

Columbus, OH

#14 Apr 23, 2010
We have a ball python that is 3 1/2 feet long, in an aquarium with a 1" thick lid. She has never bit anyone, is well taken care of, and just balls up (hence the name) when scared. We bought her 3 years ago from Captive Born Reptiles for our son, who LOVES snakes. A permit is NOT going to make people become more responsible. Unfortunately, we have seen this with Pit Bulls. If you own a Pit Bull in Ohio you must purchase liability insurance. How many people do you think purchase $100,000 in liability insurance???? Some people dont get it! Pets are a not toys that you throw away when you get bored with them.

Since: Jan 10

Hightstown, NJ

#15 Apr 23, 2010
Garp wrote:
Yes, let darling little Johnny have his alligator without a permit. And when it grows to be 3 feet long, maybe it will eat darling little Johnny or the neighbor's toy poodle. Then the peanut gallery can comment on where in the world the government was in failing to regulate these non-domisticated animals.
Explain to me how a tag with a collar and a piece of paper filed downtown with a notary stamp on it is going to keep the alligator from biting anyone in the first place.

Since: Feb 10

Columbus, OH

#16 Apr 23, 2010
Some people dont get it! Pets are a not toys that you throw away when you get bored with them.
You make some good points but unfortunately people do that all the time and not just with exotic pets. Controls have to be in place because some people believe that they should be able to do whatever they please without any consideration of the long term consequences to themselves or others.
dead rabbit society

Columbus, OH

#17 Apr 23, 2010
DrC Ohio wrote:
<quoted text>
So, if I want to own a darn lion, I should be able to own a darn lion with no permit.
If you cared to inform yourself about this issue, you would know that truly dangerous animals like lions etc already are closely monitored by both state and federal exotic animal regulations. And these current regulations impose large fines for violations that give these state and federal regulations 'teeth'.

As opposed to the proposed city permit, designed in the main to address problems with the city's budget shortfalls. It follows a proven, tired trail of past city-supported ideas: safety features' like stop light photo ticketing, and now a new higher parking meter rate plan.

The city wants to impose more 'permit' requirements, but readily admits it would be difficult/ impossible to enforce the rules. That is the recipe for every bad law, tax and rule that was ever imposed on a citizenry. Instead they 'hope' that the proles will happily report themselves and submit to the new tax. Wow. And people like you only ask 'how high' when the city tells you to jump.

The city doesn't care or expect to really have to deal with any dangerous animals by passing this new permit. Hell, the city animal control people would panic and call CBUS SWAT if they ran into a roaming lion. 99% of people who they 'hope' will "self report" will be for 12" long iguanas and 6" box turtles. It's all about the fees and fines it will generate, ya silly chimp. Now jump. Jump HIGH!
Annoyed

Lexington, KY

#18 Apr 23, 2010
This is a complete money grab. More bureaucracy. Thats exactly what we need. Noticeably absent from either list are frogs, toads, lizards, parrots, iguanas, and a plethora of other animals. Where do they fall?
SVC

United States

#19 Apr 23, 2010
Exotic pets should be controlled. Banning it completely is probably counterproductive but your average yahoo doesn't have the skills or the equipment to deal with exotic animals.

Since: Oct 09

Columbus, OH

#20 Apr 23, 2010
dead rabbit society wrote:
<quoted text>
If you cared to inform yourself about this issue, you would know that truly dangerous animals like lions etc already are closely monitored by both state and federal exotic animal regulations. And these current regulations impose large fines for violations that give these state and federal regulations 'teeth'.
As opposed to the proposed city permit, designed in the main to address problems with the city's budget shortfalls. It follows a proven, tired trail of past city-supported ideas: safety features' like stop light photo ticketing, and now a new higher parking meter rate plan.
The city wants to impose more 'permit' requirements, but readily admits it would be difficult/ impossible to enforce the rules. That is the recipe for every bad law, tax and rule that was ever imposed on a citizenry. Instead they 'hope' that the proles will happily report themselves and submit to the new tax. Wow. And people like you only ask 'how high' when the city tells you to jump.
The city doesn't care or expect to really have to deal with any dangerous animals by passing this new permit. Hell, the city animal control people would panic and call CBUS SWAT if they ran into a roaming lion. 99% of people who they 'hope' will "self report" will be for 12" long iguanas and 6" box turtles. It's all about the fees and fines it will generate, ya silly chimp. Now jump. Jump HIGH!
Oh my dear bunny. What type of box turtle? I hope it isn't an eastern box turtle since those are a species of concern in Ohio.

In the example did the owner have a permit to own a lion? If the city required it a couple things would happen. One, they would know who to investigate if a wild animal escapes. Two, depending on the fine, could result in that person not being allowed to own any exotic pet.

Here is the Ohio Admin Code on exotic animals:
http://www.bornfreeusa.org/b4a2_exotic_animal...

I do not see where a person who may bring in an exotic legally, then turns around and sells it, has to make sure the buyer is keeping up with the upkeep.

Despite your conspiracy tendencies, not every ordinance is out to screw you. So, chillax my little bunny.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gerbils Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Can 2 females breed with 1 male in the same hab... Oct 3 Anonymous 1
News Rescue groups in Ontario brace for influx of un... (Apr '17) Apr '17 Chocolate Weekend 1
News Atheism 101: Does it take more faith to be an a... (Apr '15) Apr '15 Thinking 2
News Dozens of dead animals found in infested Vt. home (Aug '08) Apr '13 mojo karma cookie 8
News Dog with a bad back? Try a chiropractor (Apr '13) Apr '13 Litter Peg 1
Fell at vet, food, medication (Feb '13) Feb '13 Haley 1
News Gerbils, hamsters, guinea pigs may be friendly ... (Sep '07) Apr '12 Anonymous 7
More from around the web