Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Hundreds urge subcommittee to reject blanket ban on venomous snakes, call for permit system instead
Summary
At a lengthy Wildlife Subcommittee hearing, private keepers, educators and zoos told lawmakers that House Bill 3,937's proposed statewide ban on venomous reptile ownership is overly broad and would harm businesses, research and conservation; many urged a regulated permitting approach and clearer exemptions than the draft bill provides.
Members of the South Carolina House Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs wildlife subcommittee heard nearly four hours of public comment opposing a proposed statewide ban on venomous reptile ownership contained in House Bill 3,937.
The opposition drew professional herpetologists, private keepers, licensed exhibitors and nonprofit advocates who said the bill, as drafted, would punish responsible owners and small businesses while creating exemptions that favor private accreditation over federal licensing.
The proposed ban “seems to be a knee-jerk reaction born from a single incident,” said Ryan Lapierre, a Myrtle Beach–area conservationist and USDA Class C licensed exhibitor. “Banning all venomous snake ownership because of one misguided act is as extreme as banning all dog ownership after an attack.”
Why it matters: Testimony warned the ban could reduce the statewide supply of venom for medical research, cripple breeders and private educators, and eliminate long-standing…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
