# Massive Pet Bans! Including COCKATIELS!



## RowdyTiel (Jan 24, 2013)

I think everyone needs to be aware of whats happening right now. Anti pet organizations and whatnot are currently pushing for a ton of bans across the United States, and pet people need to unite to stop this. 
It has started with interstate transport on a few large snake species being banned (which is currently being fought, look up USARK) and now is turning into individual states quietly banning basically everything. Right now West Virginia is trying to ban everything deemed an "exotic pet".
Keep in mind that this includes not only the large exotic animals and reptiles, but also makes it illegal for anyone to own anything from a parakeet to a ferret to a leopard gecko.
Ohio also is currently passing massive awful laws that are literally dooming thousands of exotic animals people have kept there for a long time.

This is horrible! If the bill passes, what will happen to the animals? Do they expect to just set them loose and expect them to survive and be happy in the wild? Or will they be euthanized? It's an outrage!

If this passes, I have no doubt it will soon begin happening rapidly across the States, and then they'll probably start banning livestock and more domesticated animals such as cats and dogs as pets.








I just felt an urgent need to share this with all of you here.


----------



## Mezza (Feb 19, 2013)

What the... is this for real? 

How can they do that??


----------



## SaraRose726 (Jan 13, 2014)

Is this a joke?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CaliTiels (Oct 18, 2012)

There is not one holy force in this world that will make me give up my birds, snake and crabs. Someone tries to come home and take my animals they're going home with their teeth in a jar. But that doesn't sound like it's right to me...


----------



## RowdyTiel (Jan 24, 2013)

Mezza said:


> What the... is this for real?
> 
> How can they do that??





SaraRose726 said:


> Is this a joke?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It's true and it's happening. 
Here's another link: http://usherp.org/2014/01/17/west-virginia-seeks-to-prohibit-all-exotic-animals/


----------



## Darkel777 (Jun 7, 2013)

At least we still have our god and guns. /sarcasm
Politicians drape themselves with that battle cry while legislating behind the scenes crap like this. I am not surprised.

Sent from my SCH-S738C using Tapatalk


----------



## Peetenomax (Nov 23, 2013)

I would like to see a reliable list of "exotics" that would be covered by any such ban. Sorry but the 1st picture is of a flyer that someone made up. Where did they get that list of animals? I'd like the source.
As far as WV goes, if that web site has the actual wording of the bill, I see a "loophole" under the definition of domestic animals that would exclude most of our domestically bred birds. * has been bred to a degree which has resulted in genetic changes affecting the temperament, color, conformation or other attributes of the species to an extent that makes them unique and distinguishable from wild individuals of their species. *

(4) “Domestic animal,” or the plural, means an animal which, through extremely long association with humans, predominately as companions and pets, has been bred to a degree which has resulted in genetic changes affecting the temperament, color, conformation or other attributes of the species to an extent that makes them unique and distinguishable from wild individuals of their species. A comprehensive list of “domestic animals” shall be set forth by the division, in consultation with the department and the bureau, pursuant to the rulemaking authority of this article or the current legislative authority of the division.


----------



## Darkel777 (Jun 7, 2013)

I wouldn't count on that, we are legal laymen. The intent of the bill is pretty clear and the public does view birds as carriers of disease.

Edit: I just looked up Ohio's law it appears to be aimed at large dangerous animals, not birds as cockatiels are still sold in Ohio:

http://melissaasmith.hubpages.com/hub/ohiopetban
Sent from my SCH-S738C using Tapatalk


----------



## Amz (Apr 10, 2013)

Well. Just great. I'm _so_ proud of my home state right about now. -__-

I would expect this from West Virginia - I live right on the border and I know what a ridiculous place it can be - but Ohio?! Ridiculous.


[edit] A ban in Ohio was actually passed and became effective on January 1st. No birds are on the list, but here it is in case you're wondering:

http://melissaasmith.hubpages.com/hub/ohiopetban


----------



## littletiel (May 15, 2011)

OMG!!!! Unbelievable!!!!!!!!
And cockatiels "wild animals"? They are the cuddliest pets on the planet!


----------



## moonchild (Jul 29, 2012)

everything i want to say contains so many expletives that i just...won't.


----------



## Peetenomax (Nov 23, 2013)

More time to bond with the pet rock I got in the 70's
kidding


----------



## moonchild (Jul 29, 2012)

Let's make everything other than cats and dogs illegal...because that will REALLY help save all the endangered species!


----------



## RowdyTiel (Jan 24, 2013)

moonchild said:


> Let's make everything other than cats and dogs illegal...because that will REALLY help save all the endangered species!


Exactly! What about all of the endangered or at risk species that are actually doing well and gaining numbers in captivity? Some species are doing well in the pet trade, like the critically endangered Gooty sapphire ornamental tree spider, which is extremely rare in the wild. The pet trade is keeping some species alive as far as I know, and responsible pet owners shouldn't be punished for having animals that they love. Completely against this bill.

Honestly, with these anti pet groups, they'll probably be after dogs and cats after this.


----------



## RowdyTiel (Jan 24, 2013)

moonchild said:


> everything i want to say contains so many expletives that i just...won't.


I feel you. There's just so much I want to say but am not going to.


----------



## caterpillar (Oct 14, 2013)

Hey everyone... coming from an animal rescue and environmental policy background here...

TL;DR version: Your tiels are safe.

Long version...

There may be a lot of misinformation in this situation. I googled West Virginia Senate Bill 371 and every single result that came up is in reference to a Bill 371 that is related to prison overcrowding. Then there was a Change.org petition from several days ago concerning ANOTHER Bill 371 that I think is the one being referred to: http://www.change.org/petitions/sta...1-prohibiting-the-ownership-of-exotic-animals

I'm inherently a bit suspicious that there have apparently been two Bill 371s in the West Virginia State Senate, since technically they should not use the same number twice. But anyway. Assuming that this Bill 371 about exotic animals is the real thing, here's my interpretation of it.

NOWHERE in the alleged Bill 371 does it say that it is specifically proposing to make cockatiel ownership illegal, nor does it cite any individual species. I think that the list of animals above is a hypothetical one that an opponent to the bill came up with specifically to rally people around opposition to it.

Here's how it defines wild animals: *“Wild and exotic animal,” “animal” or the plural mean any animals other than those defined as domestic and livestock, including mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians and fresh water fish that are either native wildlife or exotic, including hybrids thereof, which, due to their inherent nature, may be considered dangerous to humans, other animals or the environment.*

I don't think cockatiels fit the description of "dangerous to humans, other animals or the environment." I don't think parakeets, gerbils, or sugar gliders do either.

Exotic pet laws make sense for a large number of reasons.

A lot of places in the US, particularly in the South where temperatures are warmer and tropical animals can survive, have severe problems with non-native animals or with native wild animals that people have tried to domesticate. Escaped pythons have wreaked havoc on the Everglades and destroyed entire populations of local species. Attempts to domesticate local wildlife (alligators, raccoons, bears) can also make them dependent on humans in a way that causes them to be badly out of whack with their wild nature and potentially serious threats to their own populations as well as to humans. This kind of bill exists to prevent people from having menageries of abused, mistreated animals that come from species that should NEVER be kept in captivity. There's also an extensive problem in many parts of the US with animals being trafficked so that they can be bred and killed for their parts (skin, fur, etc.).

There are many exotic animal ownership laws in the US that make a lot of sense (e.g. laws regarding cat ownership in Hawaii are VERY strict because of what outdoor cats could do to threatened tropical bird populations) and many that don't make sense (gerbils are illegal in California, something I've never understood). From what I can see from this bill, it is no stricter than what most of the 50 United States have in place already, and I do not think it will criminalize cockatiel ownership at all. 

If you're concerned, _absolutely_ write to the state government and tell them how much you love your little feathered friends! It can't hurt. But right now, West Virginia has NO LAWS governing the ownership of exotic animals (you have to pay $2 to keep a native wild species as a pet, but that's it: http://www.bornfreeusa.org/b4a2_exotic_animals_state.php?s=wv). Like it's perfectly legal to have an untame pet tiger running around your backyard at the possible risk of eating your neighbor's kids, to have a predatory bird that may completely decimate local bird populations, etc.

This bill (assuming it's real) is only bringing West Virginia to the same level of exotic animal legislation as most other states in the U.S.

That's all folks...everyone please give your tiels a hug for me


----------



## Darkel777 (Jun 7, 2013)

I believe bill numbers reset after every session of most legislatures. May be why there is more than one bill 371. I'm sure West Virginia has much more than 400 bills proposed in its history lol. But at least we now know it doesn't apply to birds.

Sent from my SCH-S738C using Tapatalk


----------



## moonchild (Jul 29, 2012)

RowdyTiel said:


> Exactly! What about all of the endangered or at risk species that are actually doing well and gaining numbers in captivity? Some species are doing well in the pet trade, like the critically endangered Gooty sapphire ornamental tree spider, which is extremely rare in the wild. The pet trade is keeping some species alive as far as I know, and responsible pet owners shouldn't be punished for having animals that they love. Completely against this bill.
> 
> Honestly, with these anti pet groups, they'll probably be after dogs and cats after this.


I don't personally see what captive populations have to do with wild ones, AT ALL. Nobody in the US is taking these animals from the wild, if they are being bred for the pet trade -- and nobody is releasing them back into the wild, either. Tarantula hobbyists have actually tried to organize a release of captive-bred _P. metallica_ (gooty sapphire ornamentals) back into the wild, but the Indian government apparently wouldn't take them seriously.

I just don't see what the fact that an animal is "exotic" or even endangered has to do with anything, if we are talking about captive populations.


----------



## Darkel777 (Jun 7, 2013)

A lot of state governments are outlawing the sale and trade of large animals like bears or cheetahs to private citizens. That I agree with, many buyers pet and play with them thinking they're tame now only to wind up dead or accidentally setting the animal free making them a danger to everybody else.

Sent from my SCH-S738C using Tapatalk


----------



## caterpillar (Oct 14, 2013)

moonchild said:


> I don't personally see what captive populations have to do with wild ones, AT ALL. Nobody in the US is taking these animals from the wild, if they are being bred for the pet trade -- and nobody is releasing them back into the wild, either. Tarantula hobbyists have actually tried to organize a release of captive-bred _P. metallica_ (gooty sapphire ornamentals) back into the wild, but the Indian government apparently wouldn't take them seriously.
> 
> I just don't see what the fact that an animal is "exotic" or even endangered has to do with anything, if we are talking about captive populations.


There are some animals that people -- and not necessarily just animal rights activists (I have some activist friends who want to ban zoos, which I don't agree with at all!) -- have started to agree should not be kept in captivity, at all, and that having any kind of captive trade for them will sustain a demand for their being taken from the wild, even if it's on the black market (e.g. it's illegal to take the animal from the wild but it's legal in another place to keep it as a pet). This can threaten the wild species, especially since it's very very hard to breed them for a pet trade, as some animals will refuse to mate or breed in captivity.

Take chimpanzees, for example, which are currently totally unregulated as pets in West Virginia. All moral arguments aside about whether it's "right" right to keep a species that shares 98% of our DNA as a pet (I do not think it is), chimpanzees (and other primate species) in captivity start out cute and cuddly but frequently become aggressive and can also suffer from mental illness problems when kept in captivity. They can be VERY DANGEROUS, and they are smart, and they can escape and put other people at risk. Yet if there is a demand for them, there will be people tragically snatching baby chimpanzees away from their parents in the wild and selling them to people who want to keep them as pets.

The fact that there are common colors and mutations of cockatiels in captivity that do not exist in the wild likely exempts them from the proposed law (if it goes through) in the first place. Exotic animal laws are generally targeting either endangered animals whose wild populations are threatened by people capturing them to keep them as pets, or large and dangerous animals that are risks to both their owners and the people around them.

This bill, as another commenter indicated above, is basically trying to make sure your neighbor is not allowed to have a pet grizzly bear that might escape and eat you


----------



## caterpillar (Oct 14, 2013)

Darkel777 said:


> I believe bill numbers reset after every session of most legislatures. May be why there is more than one bill 371. I'm sure West Virginia has much more than 400 bills proposed in its history lol. But at least we now know it doesn't apply to birds.
> 
> Sent from my SCH-S738C using Tapatalk


LOL in some parts of the states we just assume our elected officials don't actually do anything anyway


----------



## caterpillar (Oct 14, 2013)

Hey sorry to bombard this thread but here is some more info (granted, keep in mind that Born Free is an advocacy group that does not think parrots should be kept as pets): http://www.bornfreeusa.org/legislation.php?p=4038&more=1

-- As a reminder, West Virginia has NO restrictions on exotic animal ownership, and is one of only 8 states in the U.S. that does not
-- A similar version of this bill was proposed two years ago and failed.

Basically, just to reiterate, your tiels are not going to be taken away from you.


----------



## RowdyTiel (Jan 24, 2013)

caterpillar said:


> Hey everyone... coming from an animal rescue and environmental policy background here...
> 
> TL;DR version: Your tiels are safe.
> 
> ...


Thanks so much for sharing this, caterpillar! I may not live in WV but it was making me very upset and angry the thought of tiels being taken away. 

I have some friends in the herpetoculture community and they said the herpetoculture community and trade have really been hit hard by it.


----------



## caterpillar (Oct 14, 2013)

RowdyTiel said:


> Thanks so much for sharing this, caterpillar! I may not live in WV but it was making me very upset and angry the thought of tiels being taken away.
> 
> I have some friends in the herpetoculture community and they said the herpetoculture community and trade have really been hit hard by it.


Feel free to call on your friendly neighborhood zoological policy nerd any time!

I am not surprised that the herpetoculture community is concerned, mostly because a few bad seeds are making all of them look dangerous (e.g. wildly irresponsible python owners in Florida, a recent rash of alligators getting loose on Long Island, NY) and I fear that they will suffer disproportionately. But even in states with a lot of restrictions on pets, like California, it's legal to have pet reptiles. When I lived in Cali I once saw a guy out walking his iguana on a leash.

My hunch is that in the bird community, the only people who are potentially at risk *if* this bill passes are people who own potentially dangerous bird-of-prey species, or those who own large and rare parrots whose wild populations may be threatened and which are major animal trafficking targets. Cockatiels are neither  

And it's unlikely that these birds would be taken away from their owners unless they actually have an individual track record of dangerous behavior (like they attacked a kid or something). More likely, their owners would need to apply for a permit to continue owning them and may be subject to some restrictions (household may not have children in it, animal may not be bred, animal must be housed in a cage or may not go outside). This is so that the state knows what kind of non-native and potentially dangerous animals are living in what locations. That way, if someone calls the cops and says they think they saw an emu walking around the highway late at night, knowing that there's a guy who has a pet emu nearby would convince the cops that the caller wasn't a prank caller and that maybe they should get their emu lassos (do you lasso emus?) and go find it.


----------



## Gracelyn (Jan 4, 2014)

The fact that there are common colors and mutations of cockatiels in captivity that do not exist in the wild likely exempts them from the proposed law (if it goes through) in the first place. Exotic animal laws are generally targeting either endangered animals whose wild populations are threatened by people capturing them to keep them as pets, or large and dangerous animals that are risks to both their owners and the people around them.


Then what is the difference between cockatiels and lager pythons being banned? I know many people think they are "DANGEROUS" animals, I work with big pythons and with the right work they are all puppy dog tame. I just don't understand half of the bands.  Can anyone explain the difference? 


Edit: I have no clue why its not quoting who I got the top part from.


----------



## WendyBeoBuddy (Dec 12, 2011)

no! I the only non-exotic pets i have are my two cats ;-;
5 ferrets four birds and two rabbits.. I can't live without them


----------



## caterpillar (Oct 14, 2013)

Gracelyn said:


> Then what is the difference between cockatiels and lager pythons being banned? I know many people think they are "DANGEROUS" animals, I work with big pythons and with the right work they are all puppy dog tame. I just don't understand half of the bands.  Can anyone explain the difference?


Huge, huge difference.

If a cockatiel escapes or is abandoned by its owner, no matter how well or not-so-well it has been tamed, it's unlikely to be anything more than a wacky little parrot flying around and making funny noises. (There is an escaped pet parrot population in San Francisco that has become quite the local novelty, and seems to be very nondestructive.)

If a Burmese python escapes or is abandoned by its owner (and keep in mind that many, many pythons in captivity are NOT well trained) it can slither away and start eating people's pets or livestock, or native wild species. If two pythons escape (which, yep, happens in Florida) they can start breeding like gangbusters and start destroying local species. Here's a radio report about it: http://www.npr.org/2013/01/14/169343960/floridas-python-problem-snakes-reshape-the-everglades


----------



## Gracelyn (Jan 4, 2014)

caterpillar said:


> Huge, huge difference.
> 
> If a cockatiel escapes or is abandoned by its owner, no matter how well or not-so-well it has been tamed, it's unlikely to be anything more than a wacky little parrot flying around and making funny noises. (There is an escaped pet parrot population in San Francisco that has become quite the local novelty, and seems to be very nondestructive.)
> 
> If a Burmese python escapes or is abandoned by its owner (and keep in mind that many, many pythons in captivity are NOT well trained) it can slither away and start eating people's pets or livestock, or native wild species. If two pythons escape (which, yep, happens in Florida) they can start breeding like gangbusters and start destroying local species. Here's a radio report about it: http://www.npr.org/2013/01/14/169343960/floridas-python-problem-snakes-reshape-the-everglades


The python problem in Florida is not from people letting them out into their back yard, its from when a hurricane ruined a huge breeders location. And ANY animal that is not native to a area will effect it hugely its not just a " little parrot flying around making noise" I'm not saying that somebody hasn't let their snake go, because I no people are dumb enough to do so.....well any way thanks for the not so great answer because imo there is no difference. It just really sucks because people who really truly care and love those animals cant have them. And that's due to people like you.


----------



## Darkel777 (Jun 7, 2013)

Gracelyn said:


> The python problem in Florida is not from people letting them out into their back yard, its from when a hurricane ruined a huge breeders location. And ANY animal that is not native to a area will effect it hugely its not just a " little parrot flying around making noise" I'm not saying that somebody hasn't let their snake go, because I no people are dumb enough to do so.....well any way thanks for the not so great answer because imo there is no difference. It just really sucks because people who really truly care and love those animals cant have them. And that's due to people like you.


Some animals pose a public health risk. Cockatiels are not one of those animals and pythons are. No amount of bravado on your part can change that.

Think of it like the coal chemical spill in West Virginia; Freedom Industries has a responsibility to keep the water the residents in that area drink safe from chemicals they harbor.

In the same way, private citizens are failing that keeping other residents safe from dangerous animals they are breeding. In that case, the freedom and security of everybody else trumps yours and the animal gets banned or is required some type of licensing. There is the freedom to do whatever you want, as long as it doesn't involve endangering everybody else (the only exception is the drug war for some reason).

When a resident loses a cockatiel it does not pose a public threat, try to twist the logic all you want it will not bend in that way. Lost cockatiels usually die when winter weather hits posing no risk at all. And in places where it doesn't get particularly cold, they fall to the elements as a single cockatiel cannot procreate.


----------



## Gracelyn (Jan 4, 2014)

Well like you said it doesn't matter what I say so I am done posting on this thread. I just cant get over the fact that so many people call my babies "MONSTERS" and "DANGROES" when they really are just as much as a sweet pet as my cockatiel. One day people will understand......


----------



## caterpillar (Oct 14, 2013)

Darkel777 said:


> Some animals pose a public health risk. Cockatiels are not one of those animals and pythons are. No amount of bravado on your part can change that.


Bingo. Couldn't have said it better myself. And I am someone who loves snakes and thinks that they are beautiful and wildly misunderstood animals.

Most of these laws exist not to ban or criminalize the animals, but to ensure that all animals that may pose a public health risk are adequately accounted for. Here in New Jersey, it is legal to own a python but you must obtain a permit for it. This is so that the local police and animal control officials know there's a python living in the neighborhood and are adequately prepared to help capture it safely and return it to its home if it escapes. It's like requiring a license plate for a car, basically, or a license for the driver of that car. 

Pythons here aren't classified as dangerous species, mostly because we have cold winters that would prevent them from thriving and becoming an invasive species. In warmer states where they would instantly become a top predator, stricter protections are required for the sake of the environment. We have those stricter permits in our state laws as well -- you need to prove not only that you have an extensive background in caring for the species but also that its housing is adequate, humane, and safeguards against escape. These stricter ownership permits are required for animals that would be clearly very dangerous even if they escaped for only a few minutes (alligators, poisonous snakes, bears) or those that could wreak environmental havoc and threaten native species (prairie dogs, ground squirrels). 

Interestingly, NJ considered banning pet ferrets because they are at high risk of carrying rabies and at the time no rabies vaccine existed. There's now a vaccine for them, so all that's required now is a permit.

And oddly enough...no permit is required for a boa constrictor here. Now THAT I think is an oversight.


----------



## roxy culver (May 27, 2010)

> Well like you said it doesn't matter what I say so I am done posting on this thread. I just cant get over the fact that so many people call my babies "MONSTERS" and "DANGROES" when they really are just as much as a sweet pet as my cockatiel. One day people will understand......


No one here is saying your babies are monsters. Your's are well trained, that does not mean that other people who own them have put that much work into them. Pythons are a predator, if loose, they could wreck a whole ecosystem, which is everyone's worry. Has nothing to do with them being misunderstood.

As for tiels not being a threat, I'd disagree with that. If a large population of tiels took hold in, say for instance, San Diego, they could wipe out another birds food source just by being there, which in that case could cause that bird species to become extinct. It has happened, I don't remember what city, but an exotic bird species took hold and got rid of the local species. Its like with cats...house cats are some of the worst offenders when it comes to the animal population. And feral cats have become a huge problem. So yes, while cockatiels are technically not a danger, they could mess up the ecosystem if there was a large enough group of them. Honestly, I think any animal should require a license before you can get them. It would force people to learn about the animal. Then we might not end up with 6 month old puppies and kittens in shelters because they were "too much to handle."


----------



## caterpillar (Oct 14, 2013)

roxy culver said:


> No one here is saying your babies are monsters. Your's are well trained, that does not mean that other people who own them have put that much work into them. Pythons are a predator, if loose, they could wreck a whole ecosystem, which is everyone's worry. Has nothing to do with them being misunderstood.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Darkel777 (Jun 7, 2013)

caterpillar said:


> A single escaped gator or poisonous snake, on the other hand, IS a pretty clear threat.


I should clear something up, pythons are not poisonous, but they have been known to strangle people to death.


----------



## caterpillar (Oct 14, 2013)

Darkel777 said:


> I should clear something up, pythons are not poisonous, but they have been known to strangle people to death.


Correct. Wasn't referring to pythons there, I know my snake species  Smaller species of pythons are quite benign (I have a former co-worker who used to bring one to the office, and it was a sweetheart) and in most regions are not a problem if one of them happens to slither away. It wouldn't be any more destructive than, say, an escaped cat. But animal control authorities need to know that these pets are kept in a given area so that they know how to deal with one in the event that it escapes.

The huge pythons that some people in Florida seem to want to have are much more dangerous than the sweet little 3-foot-long pythons that like to cuddle around their owners' necks. Those, yes, can strangle people to death.

And even if you had a few escaped 3-foot-long pythons, or one who happened to be preggers, they'd instantly become invasive top predators. Snakes lay A LOT of eggs.


----------



## M'éanín's Mommy (Jan 20, 2014)

Hmm...all I know is that when I go to one of my patient's homes I don't worry if they have a bird, I did however freak out a little bit about the one who had a 15 ft python in his living room that was as thick as my upper thigh. 

When i asked why the snake was banging against the glass (very aggressively) he causally remarked it was "feeding time". I'm sorry, I know there are responsible and irresponsible pet owners of all species, but I don't believe that a snake that size should be in a private residential area. That is a zoo sized critter, if it were to get lose it could most certainly cause a problem, especially if it hadn't been fed in quite some time as the day I saw it. 

I have a little red eared slider turtle, kids found him as a hatching probably a month or less after he hatched. Brought him home and hid him for over a week before I knew about it. They aren't allowed in some areas because they are an invasive species and there are bans stating they must be 4 inches to sell. There are reasons for those rules, no different than any other. Does it mean I would get rid of my pets if a ban hit my area? No, absolutely not! I would however work with the local law to ensure I met all the requirements to keep them though.


----------

