BOA CONSTRICTORS, pythons and corn snakes decorated sellers’ tables at the Reptile Show in White Plains, New York, last month. Awestricken visitors peered at them with delight. Experts examined them under the light and scrutinised their colouration. The breeding of snakes is serious business in America. Revenue from the sale of boas and pythons amounts to around $1.6 billion-1.8 billion each year.
Americans own more than 2.5m snakes, according to the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council, a trade association. The snake industry has grown dramatically over the past decade because of frenzied competition to create new “morphs”, the industry term for new colours of snakes. Rare morphs can fetch astonishingly high prices, sometimes more than $20,000.
The recession, however, has hurt what used to be a lucrative hobby. Fewer people want to splurge on snakes that cost thousands, if not tens of thousands, of dollars. According to Brian Barczyk, a snake-breeder, demand for “pet-grade” snakes, which cost under $50, has sunk even more than demand for “investment-grade” ones, because the average person is hesitant to buy a new pet.
The snake industry’s most dangerous predator, however, is not the economy but the government. Ken Salazar, the secretary of the interior, wants to add nine types of large constrictor, including the Burmese python (pictured), to a list of “injurious” species regulated by the federal government. This would make it illegal to import or transport these types of snakes across state lines. Congress may also consider a bill that would do the same.
The spread of Burmese pythons in the Florida Everglades is responsible for sparking this wave of herpetophobia. Burmese pythons are thought to have found their way into the wild because pet-owners released them, and now thousands are slithering around there. They are eating some endangered species, like the Key Largo woodrat.
Breeders are up in arms at the prospect of the ban. Some opponents speculate that if snake-owners are unable to transport or sell some of their snakes beyond state lines, they may just release them into the wild. The federal government may have to consider offering “amnesty days”, as Florida does, when snake owners can turn in their foreign pets. Florida has also started giving people permits to kill Burmese pythons. Some may say this is cruel. But that depends on whether you side with the pythons or the woodrats.
I didn't know the snake industry in America was that big, considering the figures provided above. Small markets like these even feel the impact of the down economy. It seems like government regulation might have some effect on this industry because of the restrictions as well. Should the government ban certain types of snakes for good, or have certain regulations on the requirements to own one? Instead of banning these snakes, maybe the government should create a program to try and make some money off the people who want to own one.
Even a "small" industry affects a good number of people. There are well over a million knitters in the U.S, spending anywhere from $1 to $100 on yarn (not including patterns and other supplies). There are plenty of unnoticed, specialized industries out there, and because what they specialize in isn't really considered a necessity, they are the first to feel the economic impact, as consumers will cut out or cut back on the "extras" first.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what creates this intense demand for snakes as pets and what purpose they serve in the economy. Do people desire snakes as a status symbol? I wonder what other hidden markets there are, like Katie mentioning the knitting market, and how they have or haven't been affected with the change in consumption in America.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think that the amount of money being made off of snake owners is already too high. I do no think that governments should regulate the selling and crossing f snakes over state borders. I believe that this would cause more problems than any potential good that it would do. I went to teh Florida Everglades last year and at every point, it seemed as though someone was talking about the harm of these pet snakes that have been let go into the wild. Just like noxious weeds, they cause harm to teh natural environment. For this reason, I think that "Amnesty Days" are good thing, even without other government regualtion.
ReplyDeleteA,E
I don't think that government banning would help control the woodrat endangerment, if that is peoples' most concern. Even with amnesty days, people aren't comfortable with giving up certain items (pythons in this case; in Chicago it's usually guns). I think it would increase people setting pythons free into the wild, which is probably why the woodrats are endangered in the first place.
ReplyDeleteAlso, people may setting the snakes free because they do not know how to take care of snakes or do not know where properly to give them away. For this reason, the government shouldn't ban them but support the education, proper care, and adoption methods for snakes. T
In my opinion, governments shouldn't have anything to do with regulating sales of snakes. I mean I personally feel that if someone is stupid enough to buy a poisonous snake in the first place, he should deal with the consequences (harsh I know).
ReplyDelete