Rexano North Carolina state legislative Alerts exotic wild animals lions tigers snakes big cats ban

Show Your Opposition to Animal Rights Sponsored Anti Exotic Animal Legislation NOW!
In 2007, Senator Ed Jones and Representative Earl Jones introduced animal rights bills, S 1477 and HB 1614, to prohibit the private ownership of exotic animals.
At the end of the 2007 legislature, a subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee recommended that this issue be sent to a Legislative Study Committee.
Now, meetings are being held before the Committee to discuss S 1477 and HB 1614, and we need your help to be sure this legislation will be defeated.

OPPOSITION TO HB 1614 By Elizabeth Pensgard, Executive Secretary RDOWS

2007 Legislation

Latest news:

Exotic animal ban tamed August 8, 2007

Center sinks teeth into fight for wild animals August 4, 2007

Comments from Mindy Stinner of Conservator's center

News:

Animal conservationists worry about proposed bill Jul 9, 2007

Who should keep exotic animals? Jul 8, 2007

What are the odds ? Jul 8, 2007

N.C.'s exotic animal legislation goes too far Jul 8, 2007

Animals: the new terror Jul 5, 2007

Critics still wary of exotic animal rules Jul 03, 2007

Exotic animal ban vote delayed Jul 3, 2007

Backers tone down exotic animal ban June 29, 2007

Pythons, boas dropped from proposed exotic animal ban Jun. 29, 2007

Exotic animal ban one step closer in N.C. June 28, 2007

Roar greets bill to ban risky animals June 18, 2007

REXANO Opposes

House Bill 1614 (= S1477) Inherently Dangerous Animals

Sponsor: Representative Earl Jones

04/18/2007 [H] Filed
04/19/2007 [H] Passed 1st Reading
04/19/2007 [H] Ref to the Com on Environment and Natural Resources and, if favorable, to the Com on Judiciary I

Senate Bill 1477 (= H1614) Inherently Dangerous Animals
Sponsor: Senator Ed Jones

03/22/2007 [S] Filed
03/26/2007 [S] Ref To Com On Judiciary II (Criminal)

<snip>

Today the Cape Fear Serpentarium in Wilmington, North Carolina recieved a remarkably well staged phone call purporting to be a complaint about one of our anacondas getting loose and eating a pet dog. The voices involved were not those of children, and the sound effects quite realistic.

The Serpentarium has never had anacondas, and we are certainly not missing any giant snakes (or any other animals in our well secured and valuable collection).

Today’s temperatures in Wilmington ranged from 31 to 56 degrees. Absolutely none of the giant constrictors and very few reptiles in the world will voluntarily ingest food at 56 degrees, as it would be likely to result in their death. An ectotherm’s biological processes are completely temperature-dependent, and digestion simply would not take place at this temperature, leading to putrefaction in the gut and probable death for the animal. Most reptiles would not even be able to move, or could move only very slowly and weakly, while exposed to temperatures in this range. Constriction would certainly be impossible.

In New Hanover county, calls to the 911 dispatch system that involve reptile emergencies are referred to me. I am responsible for the removal and relocation of nuisance reptiles in this county. We perform this service on a volunteer basis to serve our community. I phoned the 911 dispatcher to determine whether this anaconda incident had any basis whatsoever in fact. I was not particularly surprised to learn that no actual reptile emergencies had been reported today.

In short, here they come again. There may be quite an upcoming media storm if the animal rights activists continue to follow their usual pattern of manufacturing “dangerous exotic wildlife” incidents during pending legislation.

<snip>
In 2006, under the appointment of the North Carolina General Assembly, a study committee began to debate new legislation to regulate “inherently dangerous exotic animals” in North Carolina. This committee was mandated to consult with and represent the interests of 12 groups that would be affected by the proposed legislation, including exotic animal owners, breeders, educators, small zoos and attractions. However, five of the 12 groups named seemed to have been completely left out of this process, while the “humane groups” including animal rights activists were significantly over-represented.

In addition, some rather odd shenanigans went on when the zoo and sanctuary folks who had been left out tried to find out what was going on. In violation of North Carolina’s Open Meetings Act, a “sunshine law”, we were told that the meetings were closed to the public. Legally they cannot be. What was going on that we were not supposed to know about?

This much we do know. SB1032 was originally written by API (Animal Protection Institute), an animal rights advocacy group from Sacramento, California. API’s stated goals are to ban or severely restrict not only zoos and other animal attractions, but all “human use” of animals including farming, hunting, fishing, pet keeping and meat eating. API is quite open about their ultimate agenda and about taking public credit for authoring this bill. We, the independent zoo and wildlife professionals of North Carolina, are very concerned that their activities in North Carolina may lead to the closing of local zoos and attractions statewide if they are left unchecked.

Even though API is openly anti-zoo and opposes all captive wildlife, they were invited into our state by Lorraine Smith, Curator of Mammals at the Asheboro Zoo. Our tax dollars support the Asheboro Zoo, since they do not bring in anywhere near enough revenue to be self supporting. Yet they are asking the state for a government granted coercive monopoly on the entire zoo and wildlife industry in this state, closing down all other zoos and wildlife facilities including rescue sanctuaries. And the zoo director is currently chairing the study group legislative advisory committee that will help decide whether any other zoos will be allowed to operate in the state of North Carolina.

We don’t think it would be a good idea for the director of WalMart to chair a committee that helps decide whether to pass a law that bans all stores in North Carolina that are not owned by WalMart. Unfortunately that is exactly what is happening in our legislature right now. Between animal rights extremists from California and the only zoo in the state that would benefit economically from a ban, this committee’s composition is not likely to produce a decision that fairly represents the best interests of North Carolina.

Tanith Tyrr, Curator of Reptiles at the Cape Fear Serpentarium, says “It’s a bit of a bizarre situation, as we’re the folks who actually help and rescue wild animals and advocate for their welfare, and we find ourselves on the opposite side of a very nasty war with these “animal rights” people. I’d like to see any of them pick up an injured rattlesnake and give it antibiotics and rehabilitation care before releasing it back into the wild, which is what we do. Or provide veterinary care and housing for unwanted, abandoned or abused big cats for the rest of their lives, which is what CCI does. We do what the big zoos can’t or won’t for lack of time and space. We’re the ones out there really helping and rescuing animals.

“We are the independent zoo and wildlife professionals of the state of North Carolina, and we are the evil that these so-called animal rights people are fighting against. We do not abuse animals. We help and rescue them, and we educate your children to respect animals and the environment they live in.
<snip>