The Ohio exotics ban: What it means

In an emergency order issued Thursday, exiting Ohio Governor Ted Strcikland did what the state was working on doing all year. He temporarily banned the ownership of exotic pets with support from the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). From NBC4I:

The order fulfills Strickland's end of a deal brokered by his administration with the Humane Society of the United States, other animal rights groups and Ohio's agribusiness industry. The agreement prompted the Humane Society to withdraw a ballot issue containing a litany of restrictions on pet ownership and treatment and livestock care. In a statement, he said the agreement "will keep Ohio's vital agriculture industry profitable while appropriately updating animal care standards." "This rule will help protect Ohioans from deaths and serious injuries caused by attacks from dangerous wild animals held in private ownership," he said. [....] "Dangerous wild animals do not belong in the backyards and basements of private citizens," he said. "It's bad for the animals and dangerous for people. This emergency order is good for Ohio, and we look forward to seeing it implemented in the months ahead." As an emergency measure, Strickland's order is temporary, running through March 6. However, (incoming governor) Kasich said Thursday that he supports the ban in concept. "We don't want exotic animals here where somebody's bringing something in and then some neighbor gets hurt. So we'll look at it," he said during a news conference announcing three new cabinet directors. "It sounds reasonable, but just let me take a look at it. I would be inclined to say we should continue it."

So what animals are actually at risk with the proposed law? What can or can't be done? The emergency executive order is located here.

Due to a terrible mauling death of an animal trainer by a black bear, cries for legislation have been resounding. However the scope of this bill is far greater than banning private ownership of big cats and black bears. The reptiles affected in this bill are large constricting and venomous snakes as well as crocodilians.

I have had people remark on how big my ball pythons are. There is no designation for what is considered "large" when it comes to constrictors. Venomous and crocodilians are easy to figure out, but large constricting is far too vague and open to subjective views. At eight feet my Coastal Carpets could be considered large, but in reality they are no larger in diameter than a beer can. At 4 feet, my Borneo short tail has triple the body weight of my Ball Pythons of the same size.

Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) accredited institutions, or sanctuaries accredited by Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries, may possess these animals. There are others, however, who have been deemed ok to maintain these animals by following long established criteria (which is not outlined in the motion) Circuses, mascot programs, research programs, vet hospitals and Ohio Department of Natural Resources-approved native wildlife rehabbers. There is some leeway given to rescues in that they may qualify under the temporary transporters law.

There are pending restrictions for folks currently owning these animals. What they will be is anyone's guess. The biggest concern is the vagueness of the listing.

There is still a chance to fight back. This is an executive order. The DNR still has to draft the specifics, and they have 90 days to do so. However, transfer or sale of these animals is not allowed. The hardest part is there are no specifics for what qualifies as a large constrictor. This could be the Burmese, African Rocks, Anacondas and Retics or it could reach out further to address a size limit. It could also include other species such as Boa Constrictors.

I do ponder the part in section four where it is written that this was done to protect Ohioans from animals and also to promote proper care. Promoting proper care and an all-out ban seem fairly contradictory.

The governor did this as he felt Ohioans were at danger and in a state of emergency. I understand the fact that one death at a private facility maintaining bears and big cats is a tragedy, but the reality is this is a law that has been brewing for quite some time and agreement could not be reached between the HSUS, legislators and the farm community as to what would qualify. The order even points out the bear attack and almost seems as if it is a full frontal assault on a private person with a questionable history of proper care. Although also being a American Pit Bull Terrier owner, I know when Ohio wants to ban and make ownership hard, they do. This impacts everyone.