Ontario - Bill 125 - amendment to the Exotic Wildlife in Captivity Act

[Laura]

From CAOAC http://www.caoac.ca/news.html

IMPORTANT – YOUR ACTION IS REQUIRED IN RESPONSE TO BILL 125. Please check out the information and link to Bill 125. Exotic Wildlife in Captivity Act, 2010  For anyone in Ontario, this legislation represents a threat to many of our pets even though it does not cover fish at the moment it could with a very minor amendment and it certainly does cover any small mammal, amphibian, reptile or bird that we might want to keep.

Form letter below for info - you can download a copy from the link above.

Your Name and Address


Date



Dear (Local MPP, Premier, etc.)

Re: Bill 125 Exotic Wildlife in Captivity Act, 2010

I (We) am (are) writing to oppose the passage of Bill 125 in its current form. 

Mr. Levac indicates in his press release:

"This Bill is not aimed at responsible pet owners who have a snake, for example," said Levac, "It is aimed at those who abuse and exploit their animals, and at animals that pose a threat to public safety should they escape. The Bill gives the Ministry the power to make a list of animals that would be subject to these provisions, and I am sure the Ministry will engage in wide public consultations when determining which animals should be included."

The proposed Act defines Exotic Wildlife as follows:

47.1   (1)  Exotic wildlife means an animal of a species or type, other than game wildlife or specially protected wildlife, that is not native to Ontario and that in its natural habitat is usually found wild by nature and includes a species prescribed by the regulations.

Despite Mr. Levac's stated intention, the proposed definition actually covers all snakes and indeed all reptiles and amphibians (except ones found in Ontario), most small mammals and all birds currently kept as pets in the Province of Ontario.  Not to mention that in its current form it would also include many domestic agricultural animals such as goats, pigs and certainly most forms of fowl.

Mr. Levac is proposing to create a list of acceptable animals that might be kept as pets, I (we) believe that it would be far simpler to create a list of animals that are not acceptable as pets, ie big cats or poisonous snakes that pose a risk if they escape. 

I (we) do not oppose the intent of this legislation, it is the overreaching of the definition of  "exotic wildlife" that we find objectionable.  Legislation that on its face would require licensing for budgies, gerbils and newts is absurd and without substantial amendment should be defeated.

Sincerely,

[Nerine]

wow

[sas]

Thanks for posting this Laura, I've been procrastinating on this
letter for a few months now but I'll be writing one up today.
Just hoping we will be able to get this Bill changed.

The government already makes me pay a fee just to move my goats
off the farm, whether it's to slaughter or to sell. Never mind that I can't even
slaughter my own animals for my own use! Sheesh
Starting to rant here, sorry.

[mseguin]

Stupid government. That is all.

[FocusFin]

Stupid government

Redundant.

[Roland]

 I hate to say it but I can understand the government's intentions. That doesn't mean the bill will be a good one. They obviously need help in drafting the law. To do nothing or write angry letters won't get that job done. They will listen to hobby clubs and associations when a rational case can be made. They need the votes. Think of it, a person gets killed by his pet tiger or a lady gets her face ripped off by a chimp. How is the voting public to react? If the government doesn't have the information they WILL make a badly written law that no one in the hobby/business likes.

From what I understand of the issue is it's about the creation of a licensing system. Granted this won't change the way people behave and is more of an exercise in optics. This isn't unusual in the creation of any law by any political party. Perhaps a licensing system may actually protect owners from the crabby neighbour who doesn't like the way you cut your grass or grow your hair from turning you in to the law and using your herpetological hobby as an excuse.

As for releasing non indigenous species in the nearest lake I'm sure we can all agree that just bad news all around.

I'm very active in the Ottawa Amphibian and Reptile Association and will make getting a voice in Bill 125 a priority. I'll be first to admit we are slow off the mark on his one. OARA is a CAOAC member. The club has a fraction of the membership of OVAS but we manage to meet and get our newsletter out every month. We'll have a booth at Wildlife week at Billings Bridge in April.



 

[mseguin]

The way I see it, if you're dumb enough to try and own a tiger or chimp and get mauled, well that's just natural selection at work. Why should the rest of us pay to prvenet someone else's idiocy? If the goal was to actually protect the animals in question, then there would be some merit, but this is the usual knne-jerk reaction with no thought actually put into it.

[Darth]

The way I see it, if you're dumb enough to try and own a tiger or chimp and get mauled, .

some would say this about breeds of dogs as well, I understand your point, but the government at this point could put a by-law on anything, on hermit crabs because they pinch kids, lizards because they bite the list is endless, yes we need to be educated on the livestock we keep and should be held responsible for harm to ourselves or others, but there needs to be a more defined definition

[Roland]

At first glance this story has nothing to do with reptiles or fish. It does show how truly powerless the authority's are. If the police can't go into the house of a crazy naked guy, they can't go in you house to get your snakes. Any lawyer will tell you to never let authority in your house without a warrant, and no judge in this county will issue a warrant for reptiles. This helps me sleep at night, hope it does the same for you.


http://www.ottawacitizen.com/mobile/iphone/news/latest-updates/Lawyer+seekpublication+caseof+mentally+patient/3999596/story.html

Modified to fix the link

[Darth]

they can't go in you house to get your snakes. Any lawyer will tell you to never let authority in your house without a warrant, and no judge in this county will issue a warrant for reptiles. This helps me sleep at night, hope it does the same for you.

it's not about then coming into your house, or issuing a warrant, it's about not being able to get these pets, or have "import" tax making them too expensive to aquire. They bylaw pitbulls so what's to stop them from bylawing goldfish

[Roland]

I fixed the link.

I hear what your saying Darth. Doing nothing is not an option. As we are witnessing it's a drag when the law trains it's eye on what we see as a normal activity.

Since the inception of the Ottawa Amphibian and Reptile Association 30+ years ago herpetoculture has grown exponentially. Who would have thought?
We have been involved in by law legislation in the past and we will do it again. As with any community group it depends on the members and motivation of the group as to how intensely we take on these tasks. That changes from year to year.

For sure we aren't into protesting outside the palace walls and prefer to be at the table offering a constructive policy that will enable lawmakers, when they decide to, enact legislation that is in line with both public safety, perception, environment etc, and law that doesn't stifle responsible animal owners and business interest in the pet industry.

With Bill 125 I get the sense the government has no malicious intent but is not well educated in the field of animal keeping. Self serving yes. They want the votes so if they can get votes by "protecting" potential voters from a fictional boogie man, in this case boa constrictors, they will do it. One of the reasons our club does mall shows is to promote responsible pet keeping.  Along with public interest and education there is the possibility we might reach that one person who just has to keep a cobra in his apartment. That one dolt who will make life hard for everyone. It's in no ones interest to have people injured by their animals.

As for the proverbial gold fish, if the electorate could be persuaded by a political party that gold fish where a threat to public safety, the party who has vested interest in gaining voters, will say "We will take a hard line against the gold fish threat and create a Get Tough on Gold Fish Action Plan with a Get Tough on Gold Fish Act." You can bet dollars for donuts you would see a nation wide crack down, perhaps even a suspension of your charter rights to have the task force enter your dwelling without a warrant, by a zero tolerance Gold Fish Task Force on those nefarious individuals who keep and harbour gold fish. Darth, This could be you!  Yes. This is my effort at humour.

There is more information here http://www.reptilescanada.com/forums/showthread.php?t=48818 on Bill 125. The author of the thread is the coordinator of the annual National Reptile Breeders Expo and has met personally with David Levac.

[Darth]

I am glad I do not keep goldfish

[Snakesrus]

Hello

I would like to shed some light on how the legislative process works. After the second reading, the bill would go to committee, where input is collected from involved parties, including hobbyists. The committee will put together a list of what would be prohibited.

The important point here is the wording that is in red:

Exotic wildlife means an animal of a species or type, other than game wildlife or specially protected wildlife, that is not native to Ontario and that in its natural habitat is usually found wild by nature and includes a species prescribed by the regulations.

In other words, a species  is only defined as exotic if it's on the list IN ADDITION TO being wild and non-native.

To suggest that they are going to put goldfish, or any other typical aquarium fish on the list is entirely laughable.

The only ones likely to be on the list are already illegal in Ontario, specifically snakeheads and Asian carp.

Paranoia aside, I think guppies and gerbils are pretty safe. Seriously.

As for stuff that is likely to make the list, I personally would not want my neighbours to own venomous snakes, anacondas or other huge and dangerous constrictors, crocodilia, or big cats. Those are the things that are going to end up on the list.

I really, seriously, wouldn't worry about your aquarium species! It's just not going to happen.

Ontario is the ONLY province that has not regulated dangerous exotics. Up until a year or two ago, BC hadn't either. That changed after a woman was killed by her boyfriend's tiger.  Some critters are just NOT safe to have as pets. And with big cats and huge snakes, their needs are not being met. What's going to happen to a 20' anaconda? Or a 15' alligator? It's going to spend all or most of its life in a cage half its length. That's just not not humane, by any criteria.