Critics still wary of exotic animal rules

Supporters of a proposed statewide ban on inherently dangerous animals unveiled a major concession today to critics who say the bill would put small, privately-owned zoos out of business.

The new legislative language, revealed during a Senate hearing, would exempt any exhibitor holding the most stringent license offered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Aimed at quelling some of the bill’s fiercest critics, the revision would allow zoos and other exhibitors holding a USDA license to keep banned animals — including lions, tigers, bears, wolves, elephants, monkeys and apes — and replace aging or ailing animals.

But the new provision would also require a $2 million liability insurance policy small zoos say would be tough to meet. It would also only apply to exhibits at a fixed location that are open to the public at regular hours. It wouldn’t apply to traveling animal education programs for schools and churches.

“I’m not a zoo — I’m an outreach program; I bring the animals to you,” said Dan Breeding, an exotic animal trainer and wildlife educator who keeps an alligator, apes and other exotic animals on a 25-acre compound near Wake Forest. “The way this bill is written, I’m out of a job, and that doesn’t sound very American.”

The concession also did little to quiet the opposition of state agriculture officials, who say a statewide ban is unnecessary. Nor did it please lobbyists for the pork and poultry industry, who say the bill opens the door for animal rights groups to restrict farm animals.

Agriculture industry officials say they’re suspicious of the bill’s chief backer, the Animal Protection Institute of Sacramento, Calif.

But state Sen. Ed Jones, the bill’s sponsor, scoffed at this concern, noting previous concessions removed the language farm lobbyists found objectionable.

“This is not about pork or poultry,” said Jones, a Democrat from Halifax County. “We’re talking about things that can kill you if they have a chance. I don’t know the last time a pig or chicken killed somebody.”

The public safety threat of exotic pets was highlighted by the 2003 death of a Wilkes County fourth-grader who was pounced on by a tiger kept at his aunt’s home. Jones said eliminating the threat of “backyard” tigers, lions and other large carnivores is the central purpose of his bill.

He also said the bill will prevent North Carolina from becoming a haven for exotic pet owners fleeing states that already ban or regulate such animals. North Carolina is one of nine states that don’t regulate the private ownership of exotic animals deemed a public safety or health risk, although 37 local governments have bans or regulations in place. Cary, Chapel Hill and Durham, Wake, Chatham and Orange counties all have such bans.

But critics say federal wildlife laws already prevent people keeping tigers, lions and other exotic animals as pets from bringing them to North Carolina. They agree the private ownership of “backyard” lions, tigers and bears should be outlawed, but don’t think the public safety threat from these animals justifies a statewide ban on monkeys, apes, bats and other exotic animals.

The revised bill would ban the private ownership of wolves, lions, tigers, bears, apes, monkeys, hippopotamus, elephants, bats, crocodiles, alligators and poisonous lizards deemed “inherently dangerous.”

The proposed legislation would also set tough requirements for “grandfathering” existing ownership of banned animals, such as a $1 million liability insurance policy.

Other exemptions to the ban would include circuses, university research labs, sanctuaries without breeding programs and zoos accredited by the American Zoo and Aquarium Association, a nonprofit standards organization whose members include the N.C. Zoological Park in Asheboro.

State Sen. Fletcher Hartsell, Jr., chairman of the Senate committee considering Jones’ bill, said the “majority of the committee” thinks the bill is too broad. He appointed a four-member subcommittee to work on the legislation and said he hopes to hold another hearing next week.

“It’s a very, very, very emotional issue for a large segment of the population and that’s what we’re trying to winnow through,” said Hartsell, a Republican from Concord.