I don't think keeping venomous snakes as pets is a good idea and this latest incident says why.
The owner of a Gaboon viper was bit on his index finger in his home in Florida. After driving himself to the hospital and discussing the situation with an investigator from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Jamie DePriest was slapped with eight second-degree misdemeanor charges relating to owning the viper.
He apparently didn't have a permit to own the snake plus lived with his wife and two children which raises other safety concerns.
He could have lost his life, children, and still be fined thousands of dollars and face prison time. Was it really worth it?
Comments
Jamie should have known better, to even keep a venomous snake in the first place. He was not worried about his wife, or kids, he didn’t even think how venomous the snake really is. People need to be aware about not keeping venomous snakes as pets, because they can kill you whith there venomous bite. Jamie start thinking about what you are doing before you think about keeping any pets in your house, whith your wife or kids.
Domestic dogs can kill you also. Should we outlaw all ownership of dogs?
No, I don’t think we shouldn’t outlaw the ownership of dogs, nor do I think we should outlaw most reptiles. But what is the reason for keeping a poisonous snake in a house with children? You want to keep a poisonous reptile? That’s fine with me, but don’t put innocent bystander’s lives in danger by doing so. Again, is the fact that these animals are cool, beautiful, or whatever worth it if they bite you or someone you love? It’s not worth the risk to me, and I think there is a plethora of uneducated people who don’t think about the risks involved before bringing these pets into their homes. Own whatever snake you want, but one that can kill you with a single bite? Why? I think we agree on the whole banning snakes issue Eric, but I think poisonous reptiles should not be allowed. Thanks for the comments Eric and Laurie.
Part 1-
Why keep venomous animals? Well, for many keepers and herpetoculturists, venomous snakes, and even venomous animals in general are animals that elicit a great amount of interest and fascination in terms of their biology, natural history, and even outright beauty/magnificance. Venomous animals are also the subject of many unique biological and evolutionary complexities. As a result, The private venomous keeping sector has contributed significantly to much of the knowledge that is available to us today, especially regarding the behavior and propagation of the various taxa.
Oftentimes, this fascination for keeping them evolves into a more formal and sophisticated study in the herpetological field, which may often result in keeping such animals for ground breaking venom research which can benefit us in innumerable ways, as well as a means of studying captive behavior, husbandry, and/or propagation. Thus, there is really no fundamental difference for qualified keepers wanting to keep a venomous animal than there is for wanting to keep or maintain any other reptile, often for the same reasons irrelevant of whether it possesses venom.
Part 2-
Indeed, if venomous animals were to be outlawed, there would undoubedtly be those “unitended consequences” that arise again (which I have raised in a previous post). Let us briefly examine other prohibition laws, for example. How effective have these been in curtailing the issue or problem in which they sought to address? As a matter of fact, this very “illegality factor” inherent in prohibition laws has been shown to only increase the appeal in keeping these animals by Un-qualified individuals and for the wrong reasons while adversely affecting the ability of qualified keepers to keep, propagate, and thus broaden our knowledge of these animals.
Below is a very good article I recommend reading with further information called “The Legalities and Philosophies of Venomous Herpetoculture”
http://www.venomousreptiles.org/articles/100
United the reptile hobby stands, divided it falls. Keep that in mind.
Thanks for that Eric. Interesting article. It would be great to be able to implement the sort of structure in government permit regulation that would allow only the “proven to be educated on venomous snakes” to keep venomous snakes in their private homes. I don’t think keeping a venomous snake in a household with children is responsible, though. Unless the snake is locked up safely, and out of reach from the children – much like a gun should be treated. But how great of an existence does that snake have if he is locked away from the world for the majority of his life?
“But how great of an existence does that snake have if he is locked away from the world for the majority of his life?”
That to me sounds like a statement PETA would say. Keep in mind however, that most, if not all snakes in general are primarily solitary animals both in nature and in captivity throughout most of their lives aside from perhaps copulation with a mate. And even then, most, aside from perhaps the King cobra, are not monogamous species. As such, snakes really do not possess any real drive or desire to socially interact with their own or other species on any regular basis. Therefore, we must avoid attributing anthropomorphic qualities to animals that are more than likely not capable of comprehending them.
Solitary, yes, but they do have more than a glass aquarium to move around in in the wild. The fact that snakes are not social with other snakes in the wild doesn’t mean they don’t have more room and mental stimulation out in the wild then they do locked away from the world. Yes, it’s a snake, and no, I am not a PETA fan, but it’s still a living, breathing creature with a nervous system that could have better than a tank in a room, never being handled, nor even able to see people moving around because of the possibility of escaping from the enclosure and having a child in the household pick it up or step on it.
You make a great point and you’ve definitely made me think about this. Thanks Eric.
That is true. However, most snakes more often than not, move about out of necessity rather than for pleasure, whether that necessity be for food, a mate, seeking appropriate refuge/habitat, or thermal gradients. In captivity, all of these needs can be met by the keeper on a regular basis. Plus a snake in captivity need not contend with predation, starvation, diseases, parasites or other factors prevalent in a harsh and unforgiving “wild”. Life in the wild is far from being perfect and harmonious, and we must examine the reality of it rather than the fantasies.
It must also be kept in mind that many species of snakes are naturally secretive and fossorial animals that inhabit tight and enclosed spaces in the wild such as rock crevices, burrows, tree cavities, etc. Oftentimes, these such spaces are far smaller than what we provide them in captivity. Speaking from firsthand experience, I will tell you that I have kept and seen many snakes that, when placed into too large of an enclosure, were stressed and often were poorer feeders. Many of these same snakes, when moved into my rack systems or other forms of smaller housing, fed on a remarkably more consistent basis and with a noticeable change in demeanor.
Apparently he didn’t learn or didn’t hear about Anita finch in 1999, or he would have thought twice. To the individual who left the not-well-thought-out statement about outlawing dogs….that was just a stupid comment. Dogs are not venomous! Duh!
Eric, you sure know a lot about snake behavior! Thanks! I’ll keep that in mind.
Terri- It makes no difference whether dogs are venomous or not. Read up on dog bite statistics:
http://www.dogsbite.org/bite-study-deaths-maimings.htm
Dog bites send nearly 368,000 victims to hospital emergency departments per year (1,008 per day).
DogBiteLaw:
http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html