Concerned Parties,

I believe House Bill 1725 would be a bad law.

Here are some of the reasons why.
(Footnotes for sources below)

From 1979 – 1994 dogs in Washington State KILLED eight people and the numbers are rising. *1
The victims in these fatal attacks are most often children. *2
In the US dogs bite over 4.7 million people every year *3

I can find no records of any human fatalities caused by large snakes or lizards in Washington State
I have been talking to owners, animal control officers, zoo docents and health officials asking if they can recall any emergencies associated with large snakes or lizards. So far I have not found any evidence of any problems, ever. But I am not giving up the search.

Injuries caused by snakes or lizards are incredibly rare. Enough so that they are truly an anomaly, (and as the world press has demonstrated), they are also highly newsworthy. Surely there must be some evidence somewhere of the dangerous threat they are alleged to present to public health and safety in Washington State?

Informed opinions:

I have keep large snakes for well over ten years. I have presented my animals at educational events hundreds of times to thousands of children and adults. I have never had any problems with any animal at any time!

Reptiles by nature are shy and reclusive animals. Captive husbandry occurs indoors in private homes, so there is no threat to the general public. Reptiles are exothermic animals; large snakes and lizards are equatorial and require heat to live. Large snakes and lizards cannot survive in the wild in this state.

House bill1725 would create far more problems then it would solve.
Laws enacted in the name of “public safety” should be based on facts, hard statistics and credible evidence and should not be based on fears, misconceptions, myths, movies or even public opinion.

What would happen if HB1725 passes?
People would undoubtedly continue to keep their beloved pets rather see them killed. Honest taxpayers would be made into criminals, (Most likely without their knowledge).
Animals would suffer, as owners who were informed of this law would be reluctant to seek veterinary care or to consort with known herpetologists for fear of persecution.

Finding an insurer qualified under Title 48 RCW willing to carry policies for multiple animals that the state has defined as dangerous (in an amount of no less than 250,000.00 each) may be impossible.

All animals pose risk factors to humans, (especially other human animals). Animals deserve respect. I believe that most injuries sustained in human/animal encounters are attributable to poor human judgment.
If the Legislature could pass a bill that somehow legally mandated common sense, then there would be no need to propose bills that martyr shy, quiet and reclusive animals.

For more facts and opinions related to HB 1725, please visit my web page devoted to this topic at http://www.blarg.net/~boa/hb1725.html

I thank you for taking the time to read this and welcome your reply,

Sincerely,

Mark Silver
 
 

*1 http://www.medscape.com/govmt/CDC/MMWR/1997/may/4621/4621.2/art-mm4621.2.fig.JPEG

*2 http://www.dogbitelaw.com/pages/statistics.html#Dog bite statistics

*3 Survey by the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta ("CDC") concludes that dogs bite nearly 2% of the U.S. population -- more than 4.7 million people annually. (Sacks JJ, Kresnow M, Houston B. Dog bites: how big a problem?