Free the DUBUQUE 3!

Rough Scaled Sand Boa - Eryx conicus photo by Chris Harrison

Free the DUBUQUE 3!

In Dubuque Iowa the city has seized 3 sand boas as "dangerous" pets under their dangerous pet laws concerning boa constrictors. While I applaud the city for enforcing their laws when they are on the books I haved to ask myself, what are they smokin in Iowa and where can I get some.

Sand Boas, Eryx conicus and it's mates, usually grow no larger than 2 feet, weigh less than a pound, are not venomous, and the ONLY thing that actually considers them dangerous besides Dubuque are the small feeder mice they have for dinner. There has never ever been a fatality attributed to any of these small species of constrictor. These small, docile, even lethargic creatures could spend their entire lives in a shoebox, and the mere suggestion that they are dangerous to humans in any way is beyond laughable. These aren't 14 foot jungle beasts run rampant, they barely qualify to be in the Boidae family, and are probably there more as a convenience to the scientists that have to categorize everything than anything else.

I don't know who in the city of Dubuque they have running their animal control, I don't know how the city of Dubuque worded their law, I do know that this is absolutely silly and unfortunately a sign of the times.

This is a grasp at straws to justify the cities involvement in a poorly planned raid where the pre-raid intelligence was as bad as the post-raid intelligence behind the seizure. They got bad intel, raided this poor families house, then when they found there was no real violation, reached for the only straw that could even remotely be considered just so they wouldn't look stupid.

Well congrats Dubuque, you look pretty stupid from here.

I am asking that EVERY reptile person on kingsnake.com reach out to Dubuques Mayor Roy D. Buol at rdbuol@cityofdubuque.org and ask him to "pardon" the Dubuque 3, dismiss the dangerous animal charges and ask him to review the laws that would allow a seizure of these non-descript pets as "Dangerous".

Comments

[Cindy]

This is the dangerous animal laws in Dubuque IA. Technically, all snakes constrict to some extent, which is why the law is written the way it is. Several cities have laws like this with the loose loophole. So contact the mayor and have them re-examine the law!
Cindy
Small Scale Reptile Rescue

1. Dangerous Animals Prohibited. No person shall keep, shelter, or harbor for any
purpose within the City limits, a dangerous animal.
2. Definitions. A dangerous animal is:
a. Any animal which is not naturally tame or gentle, and which is of a wild
nature or disposition, and which is capable of killing, inflicting serious
injury
upon, or causing disease among human beings or domestic animals, and
having known tendencies as a species to do so.
b. The following are animals which shall be deemed to be dangerous animals
per
se:
(1) Lions, tigers, jaguars, leopards, cougars, lynx, and bobcats;
(2) Wolves, coyotes, and foxes;
(3) Badgers, wolverines, weasels, skunks and mink;
(4) Raccoons;
(5) Bears;
(6) Monkeys, chimpanzees, and apes;
(7) Alligators and crocodiles;
(8) Scorpions, Gila monsters;
(9) Snakes that are venomous or constrictors;
(10)Any crossbread of such animals, which have similar
characteristics of the animals, specified above.
c. Any animals declared to be dangerous by the City Council.
3. Dangerous Animal exceptions. The keeping of dangerous animals shall not be
Prohibited in the following circumstances:
a. The keeping of dangerous animals in a public zoo, bona fide educational
or
Medical institution, Humane society, or museum where they are kept as
live specimens for the public to view, or for the purpose of instruction,
research or study, and has obtained the written approval of the City
Council.

[Scott Knapp]

The city of Dubuque took this law word for word from the city of South Milwaukee Wisconsin. South Milwaukee had help from Alliance for Animals, an animal rights group. I know because I opposed the law in SM and brought in more than a dozen experts, Vets, Zookeepers ect. But SM still passed the law. Good luck. Keep fighting

[Kevin Lorentz]

Jeff,

You know how I feel about such foolish laws where the lawmakers know so little about our beloved herps. I think when we all write the Mayor we should offer to aid them in revamping their law.
Our group may not be able to do much ( PIJAC should be in on this )but I will issue an action alert on our Yahoo! list and every reptile group I belong to on Yahoo. There are lots of folks I know on these list that would take the time to write the Mayor.

Kevin Lorentz

President: National Amphibian and Reptile Owners Alliance

[Jim]

Are you kidding me? A rough scale sand boa dangerous?
I have two such sand boas myself and they couldn't possibly pose a threat to anyone....not even the smallest infant. Laws as far as I know are never "cut and dry". The fact that they are constrictors does not make the dangerous, they are just too small to do any harm.
I can tell this law was written by someone who is deathly afraid of anything short of a puppy, either that, or they're just trying to cover their asses from some future lawsuit.

[Andrew Gilpin]

Here's a link to a more local article.
http://www.kcrg.com/news/local/5092416.html

[Brandon]

Why do people insist that all herps besides geckos are dangerous? Dogs kill so much more people then large snakes, aligators, or venomous snakes. Why not outlaw dogs, at least there is actual proof for that.

[KoriLynn Perdue]

This is the email I sent to the mayor.

To all intelligent forms of life,

Obviously none of your animal control people know there heads from a hole in the ground, but lets try to clarify. Sand Boas are the most docile, which means gentle since you probably aren't very educated, snakes that you can have. We recommend these snake as beginner pets, which means for a first time owner because of how calm they are. Dangerous I think not. I believe it is far more dangerous to have idiots running your city and putting you in more harms way. I can honestly say I will never come to your pathetic city because obviously our third graders in Indiana are far more intelligent than your office holders in Dubuque. Sorry that it came out what dumb-asses you guys are, but thanks for the laugh. This is the stupidist thing I've ever heard and we are all very thankful that none of you run our city or state.

[Maggie]

What you have to remember is that these laws are being passed by people who are terrified of these animals, and have only heard the bad stories and false information. They are fueled even more by the general dislike of all things reptilian and compounded by the few irresponsible keepers who make the rest of us look bad. The only way to combat these laws is to educate the lawmakers and the general public, and well, good luck with that. People will never believe something that they don't want to...

[Pets Are Us Rescue]

This is amazing a harmless little snake is being held captive due to the lack of education concerning dangerous animals. You can not group all animals to a generalized crtieria. That would be like a Fila to a chihuahua. The laws need to be corrected to include length of the snakes not allowed inside the city limits. These little sand boas can not cause anyone harm, and children can not be harmed by them either. We will be starting a petition to try and save these little snakes for this kind of injustice. Please go to our website and sign this petition which will sent to the town administrators.
Thank you

[Bill Huseth (kingcobrafan)]

Jeff,
Just sent the mayor an e-mail. Thanks for the heads-up.

Bill

[Kat Parks]

I am sending this to the Dubuque mayor, along with a bit more of my information. Of course, I will spell it out instead of just giving him the link which he'd never follow.
http://www.rexano.org/SafetyFrame.htm

[TreySmall]

E Mail sent to the mayor...These overly safe anti freedom laws in this country are getting old!Its not what this country was founded on.People have forgotten that!

Sand Boas??? I about fell out of my chair!

What a Joke!

[Bridget]

I think that sending them emails calling them "dumbasses" is going to get you nowhere, or even make things worse.

The law was made for the protection of the people. I'm sure that nobody considered that there may be snakes of this kind that were of no danger, afterall, the lawmakers are not likely reptile keepers!

Give them a break, give them some education and maybe the laws can tweaked to not outlaw these non-dangerous snakes.

[Troy Vitullo]

Don't just mail the mayor. Here's a link to the city newspaper. You have to
create an account to write a letter to the editor (which sucks), but do if you
do it you'll feel better:

http://www.thonline.com/account/

[Pat Coughlin]

This is the letter I sent to the mayor... Hopefully if he gets enough in a respectful and educational bent, he'll be swayed. Can't say I'm terribly hopeful, though.

Dear sir,

This is in particular regard to the recent case of Linda Merfeld and Bill Shaffer ( http://www.kcrg.com/news/local/5092416.html ), but also applying to general dangerous animal restrictions. Reports seem to indicate these people are in trouble with the law for the possession of rough scaled sand boas. The largest rough scale I've heard of barely broke 2 feet long and one pound in weight. Given that they're also non-venomous, I'm having a very hard time seeing how they're considered dangerous to anything except rather small mice. Certainly, a chihuahua is likely to do far more damage than a snake of that size.

Further, a reading of dangerous animals ordinance of the city seems to restrict possession of ALL constrictors. This makes as little sense as restricting breeds of dogs which can be owned, instead of individual dangerous animals. With proper handling, any snake can be safely owned. This includes the giant and venomous species, though I can certainly understand a desire to limit their ownership or at the least require permits for their possession. However, it would seem the current laws do as much or more to harm and limit responsible pet owners as they do to punish irresponsible ones.

As someone who has worked with animals for a good number of years and an owner of nine snakes myself, I feel strongly enough on this subject to express my opinion despite not being a resident of your town, or even your state. I hope something constructive can come of this case, and that these people can go on with their responsible pet ownership and not suffer from an ill-conceived bit of legislation. Thanks for your time,

Patrick Coughlin
Kansas State University College of Veterinary Medicine, class of 2009

[Bobby Neal]

When sending e-mails, please keep things professional and don't make things worse than what they already are... I sent an e-mail to the mayor as follows:

Dear Mayer Buol,

I'm writing regarding the confiscation of 6 sand boas that I read about in a news article. As a field biologist myself currently working on my M.S. degree in Biology I find it strange sometimes the way things are interpreted. Many times I see situations come up that are probably a matter of misunderstanding, or sometimes the enforcement of the letter of the law instead of the spirit of the law.

I'm aware that the snakes that were confiscated are *technically* included as part of the dangerous animal legislation in your city. However, this is merely a taxonomic issue rather than a public safety issue. Sand boas are small, never attain a size great enough to cause any serious danger to anyone, and are generally docile animals. Reptiles (and especially snakes) often get lumped in all together as "dangerous" even though they can be completely safe to keep by those that know basic husbandry of animals and understand what animals are capable of. The degree of reptile husbandry required to meet the demands of a sand boa could easily be filled by anyone with even the slightest interest in reptiles, as such snakes pose no threat to humans.

The law is in place to protect the public from animals. However, the sand boas are erroneously considered as such because of their taxonomic relationship to other, larger snakes (which when kept properly pose no threat to humans, especially to anyone other than their keeper). I'm currently conducting field research on a wild population of copperheads in the Ozarks of Arkansas, I've had the privilige over the years of working with everything from small harmless snakes to working with cobras, mambas, rattlesnakes, gaboon vipers, and just about any "dangerous" snake you can think of (I say "dangerous" as the danger the animals present are negligible to anyone other than the people who work with them, and even then when done properly the risk is not as great as one might assume). I assure you that sand boas are not a public health threat, or a threat of any kind to anything other than their prey items (small mice, etc). Please reconsider the issue at hand and make sure that the snakes have a good home (even if it is outside of your city) and consider that the individuals keeping the sand boas were not harming anyone by doing so.

Thank you for your consideration,

Bobby Neal

[Mark Pollard]

I added my 2 cents...

Dear Mayor Boul,

I just read about your city's ridiculous raid where three Sand Boas (Eryx conicus) were seized as dangerous animals. Hopefully you have received a great deal of feedback about how inappropriate it is to enact and enforce laws based on misinformation or complete ignorance of the topic, in this case what is or is not a dangerous animal. Why is it city administrators and regulators succumb to the sensationalism surrounding topics such as unusual or exotic pets, enacting needless legislation when there are so many real issues that are either not being addressed, or not being addressed effectively? This situation does not cast a favorable light on your community. I think it is past time to step forward and admit to the mistake, not only in the raid, but to your persecution of people (reptile owners, for example) who do not fit the cookie-cutter model of an Ozzie and Harriet society. Reptile owners are a cross-section of your community: doctors, lawyers, educators, policemen, firefighters, and yes, less desirable elements as well. But passing legislation to ban things you don't understand, either through lack of interest, lack of effort, or complete incompetence, is a flashback to an archaic form of community leadership. What are your thoughts on witch-hunting?

Please reconsider your position on this topic, or at least make the effort to understand what it is your trying to legislate.

MARK POLLARD

[Amy F]

I have also e-mailed the major. Hopefully, they will make a change to their legislation!

[Kate Holmes]

I did write an email in support of the sand boas. I have one thought that I did not add to it, but would like to place here. As someone who has dealt with a lot of creatures, I know the animal laws in the city that I live in, and if you do not know them, you can sometimes get a nasty surprise, such as this unfortunate one. Luckily for me, my city is very lenient, so there are not many things that are illegal.

[John]

I just sent off a letter to the mayor as well. I know that most governments don't really listen to the people, especially those that do not reside in their jurisdiction. I used the fact that I am the chairman of our county animal control board hoping that maybe they would be more likely to listen. As was stated in a previous post, I have offered to help them in re-writing the ordinance and will be getting them copies of already written ordinances that are good.

[Andrew]

Where is PIJAC in all of this?

Andrew

[Heather B]

Hey Jeff - have you contacted the Iowa Herpetological Society about this? I bet they would be happy to help the city of Dubuque draft a much better law. I know we have members that have been working with the city of Des Moines helping them draft a law that is fair. Seriously, contact them!

[Pets Are Us Rescue]

We have created a petition to free the 3 sand boas and hopefully anything else that can be released. Here is the petition address===========

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/782874521

[Chad]

Any constrictor...guess that little corn snake is life threatening since it constricts its prey. Laughable language in that law. How do these people get elected?

[Linda Merfeld]

Dear reptile lovers,

We want to thank each and every one of you for all of your support and your emails and letters to our mayor. That support means a lot to us. We are responsible pet owners and our animals have always come first. For those of you who may not have heard, on January 3, 2007, our home in Dubuque, Iowa was invaded by four police officers, two animal control officials, a representative from the Dubuque River Museum, a park ranger, two housing officials, and two representatives from the health department. This was in response to someone lying to city officials and claiming that we had boa constrictors, pythons, and venomous snakes. We have a collection of more than three hundred snakes, all of which are well cared for. The officials confiscated three baby sand boas, two milk snakes (caught in Wisconsin, one by a three-year old girl), and one indigo, purchased from a reputable breeder, that we’re in the process of obtaining the permit for. Our local newspaper, the Telegraph Herald, published an article full of misinformation. Among the most glaring errors were their inclusion of a photo of a Columbian boa constrictor (which we do not own) and a false claim that officials found boa constrictors in our home. Our privacy has been shattered and our home invaded because an individual that city officials refuse to identify decided to falsely accuse us. Since this occurred, we have received a lot of media attention. Many of you have been very supportive, and in response, we just felt that we owed you a bit more of an explanation of what really happened. Thanks again for your letters and emails. We really appreciate it.

Linda Merfeld and Bill Shaffer