nrich
Member
A few months ago, our HOA tried to ban all herps in our 14 unit townhome complex. Since I am the proud owner of close to a dozen different reptiles, I had something to say about that! Here was my polite response to their proposal. What do you guys think?
* I did flub on the amount of animals that I personally own just in case they decided to pass the ban despite my negative vote. They are going to pry these critters from my cold, dead hands......
"Current Board Members:
I am so sorry to keep bringing this issue up, but it still leaves me very concerned. There are hundreds of thousands of varieties of reptiles and a majority of the types that are kept as pets are not destructive and cannot eat somebody's baby or dog. There is a big difference between a 15 foot boa constrictor and a five inch gecko (or a two foot garter snake for that matter).
If you cut out reptiles all together, you are basically telling people who are allergic to pet dander that they are not allowed to have pets. You are telling people who prefer alternative pets that their only options besides cats and dogs are rodents (if you want to talk about animals that are both destructive and can be dangerous then try to catch an angry hamster sometime). If you are more selective and just say no lizards and snakes, you are telling owners that if they wish to keep a reptile their only choice are chelonians (tortoises and turtles) which can live up to 50 + years and some of which can grow to weigh over a hundred lbs. as apposed to a small lizard or snake which may only live 3-7 years and happily spend its entire life in a 10 gallon cage under a heat lamp. Which next leads me to point out that reptiles are clean, don't chew the furniture or the drywall, don't pee on the rug, and don't bark incessantly, which in my opinion, makes them a great pet overall.
Whats more, I would like to know how this rule will be policed? How are we supposed to know what type of creature is in a person's dwelling? In a tank? In their bedroom where nobody can see it? Are we going to have to put in another rule stating that we are all going to be subject to random searches so we can tell whether that person has a turtle or a snake or a fish? Otherwise, we will never know what someone has until they take their iguana for a walk around the block.
Furthermore, while I can understand the fear that some people hold for larger reptiles, I would like to point out that a majority of reptile owners are completely responsible and competent people and just because a snake is large and an iguana is long, that doesn't automatically make it a danger to anyone. They are not monsters. There are very few cases of large snakes getting loose and hurting people (there have only ten recorded deaths caused by large constrictor snakes in the US since 1990), however in many of those cases, the owner of the animal was not the type of person who would follow association rules anyways. I don't understand why we would punish a whole group of animal lovers (perhaps only me in this situation) for a hypothetical and unlikely occurrence when we really have no precedent on which to base our decisions. One of us is more likely to get mauled by a dog than attacked by a large snake.
I really do care about the safety and happiness of the people who live in our 14 units. I know a majority of the people who live there are not animal lovers and that is fine. They can choose what type of animals, if any, they keep in their own house and they can decline applicants who own reptiles from renting their house, but it is not right to limit a person's choice of what pet they wish to have in their own home, which they own, just because they do not like or understand a certain type of animal.Besides my current turtle, over the years (almost 15 except for a 4 year gap when I was away at college!) I have had several types of perfectly safe and docile reptiles (including a beautiful 5 foot kingsnake) that not only would not have hurt anybody, but were actually incapable of doing so had they escaped (which they never did because I am a responsible and caring pet owner). I'm sure that there will be others like me some time in the future.
In conclusion, if this new rule is added to the bill regarding the outlawing reptiles (any reptiles), unit 337 will not be voting for it. I hope you all will consider my point of veiw when the new CCandRs are being sent for their final draft.
-Nicole"
* I did flub on the amount of animals that I personally own just in case they decided to pass the ban despite my negative vote. They are going to pry these critters from my cold, dead hands......
"Current Board Members:
I am so sorry to keep bringing this issue up, but it still leaves me very concerned. There are hundreds of thousands of varieties of reptiles and a majority of the types that are kept as pets are not destructive and cannot eat somebody's baby or dog. There is a big difference between a 15 foot boa constrictor and a five inch gecko (or a two foot garter snake for that matter).
If you cut out reptiles all together, you are basically telling people who are allergic to pet dander that they are not allowed to have pets. You are telling people who prefer alternative pets that their only options besides cats and dogs are rodents (if you want to talk about animals that are both destructive and can be dangerous then try to catch an angry hamster sometime). If you are more selective and just say no lizards and snakes, you are telling owners that if they wish to keep a reptile their only choice are chelonians (tortoises and turtles) which can live up to 50 + years and some of which can grow to weigh over a hundred lbs. as apposed to a small lizard or snake which may only live 3-7 years and happily spend its entire life in a 10 gallon cage under a heat lamp. Which next leads me to point out that reptiles are clean, don't chew the furniture or the drywall, don't pee on the rug, and don't bark incessantly, which in my opinion, makes them a great pet overall.
Whats more, I would like to know how this rule will be policed? How are we supposed to know what type of creature is in a person's dwelling? In a tank? In their bedroom where nobody can see it? Are we going to have to put in another rule stating that we are all going to be subject to random searches so we can tell whether that person has a turtle or a snake or a fish? Otherwise, we will never know what someone has until they take their iguana for a walk around the block.
Furthermore, while I can understand the fear that some people hold for larger reptiles, I would like to point out that a majority of reptile owners are completely responsible and competent people and just because a snake is large and an iguana is long, that doesn't automatically make it a danger to anyone. They are not monsters. There are very few cases of large snakes getting loose and hurting people (there have only ten recorded deaths caused by large constrictor snakes in the US since 1990), however in many of those cases, the owner of the animal was not the type of person who would follow association rules anyways. I don't understand why we would punish a whole group of animal lovers (perhaps only me in this situation) for a hypothetical and unlikely occurrence when we really have no precedent on which to base our decisions. One of us is more likely to get mauled by a dog than attacked by a large snake.
I really do care about the safety and happiness of the people who live in our 14 units. I know a majority of the people who live there are not animal lovers and that is fine. They can choose what type of animals, if any, they keep in their own house and they can decline applicants who own reptiles from renting their house, but it is not right to limit a person's choice of what pet they wish to have in their own home, which they own, just because they do not like or understand a certain type of animal.Besides my current turtle, over the years (almost 15 except for a 4 year gap when I was away at college!) I have had several types of perfectly safe and docile reptiles (including a beautiful 5 foot kingsnake) that not only would not have hurt anybody, but were actually incapable of doing so had they escaped (which they never did because I am a responsible and caring pet owner). I'm sure that there will be others like me some time in the future.
In conclusion, if this new rule is added to the bill regarding the outlawing reptiles (any reptiles), unit 337 will not be voting for it. I hope you all will consider my point of veiw when the new CCandRs are being sent for their final draft.
-Nicole"
