West Virginia Proposed State Law about Dangerous Animals may affect fishkeepers

[Trillianne]

This was mentioned in another fish source and some of you may want to be aware of this, or offer feedback if you are living in West Virginia.

On March 6, 2014 the West Virginia legislature passed HB 4393 (Full Text Here) which requires the state to make a list of animals it considers dangerous for prohibition on ownership within the state. This is primarily in response to situations such as the private zoo/wildlife preserves and to help limit the release of non-native animals into the wild.

However, the recent first draft of the list of animals banned has been released and it is currently a VERY broad list, banning some animals by Order, Family, and genus, which if not modified could drastically affect fish keeping there.

( Charleston Daily Mail article with links to the draft listing linked here)
( Here's a PDF of the draft)

Some highlights on the list include:

* Order Characiformes (All Species) - while this Order does include piranhas, it also includes EVERY SINGLE TETRA.
* Order Siluriformes (All Species) - Every catfish belongs to this order, including all plecos, all corys, glass catfish, etc.
* Order Tetraodontiformes (All Species) - Includes all puffer fish.
* Family Gobiidae (All Species) - Includes all Gobys

[Crispy]

wow, imagine getting raided because you have a schoal of tetras.

[Compass]

Oh that's nice. Good thing I don't live in West Virginia!

[aquariumlover10]

Wait so they have accepted it or are waiting on a decison

[Trillianne]

Wait so they have accepted it or are waiting on a decison

As I understand it, the first part HB4393 is the law and was passed. It requires a committee to come up with a list of the animals that it would ban. The list I linked is their first draft. Generally there is a period for public comment on items that are currently in committee, such as where this list presently is. This would be the time period when the public should be in touch with members of the committee and their political representative to offer some education and opinion on the list before it is finalized into the law.

[aquariumlover10]

Wow that's harsh why would they do that I meen just put guards at the river

[steeler58]

Waiting for Kevin to weigh in

[toddnbecka]

Hmm, I live in MD, only about 10 minutes from WV, I could make a killing running bootleg fish across the border... LOL.

[genocidex]

i still don't get how piranha are dangerous.... i mean you can get hurt bad with them if you are stupid but that's about it... they cant pull you into the tank to finish you off or jump out to do the same... or just about any other aquarium fish that doesn't use venom... wth is this world coming too... i understand the not wanting invasive/non native fish but thats no excuse for species wide ban...

[Trillianne]

Piranha are dangerous when released into the wild streams because they can outbreed, outfeed and alter the native fish.

There is a significant portion of the population that is willing to release an animal they no longer want because "what's the harm?" and "Well I didn't want to kill it!" type justifications. As evidenced by the myriads of people that come here*, the education requirement for selling, or owning a wide variety of animals is extremely poor.

So the theory behind this legislation is that if you don't let ignorant people own those wild animals, then they can't release them into when they are bored with them.

*To be clear I am referring to the number of people that run into an issue with overstocking/no concept of cycling/etc. type issues we see come to the forum. At that point, they are ignorant about fish keeping, and can choose to either learn or remain ignorant. Ignorance is only bad if you choose to remain that way.