Yeah I just got done reading it to!!!! ... Thats some fast results !!!

I sure hope so

It'll be back. They never give up. They'll just try to slick it in somewhere else.

@@jentanner9418 indeed

Well, thankfully, the bill just got pulled by the sponsor so at least for the time being you’re safe.

Yeah, the whole premise of the bill and tax does not take into account that a large majority of pet owners are families, so there is innately someone else that is a caregiver already established, be it a spouse or other family member. It’s the government trying to play big Brother, thinking they know better than we do as pet owners, and that we’re not already setting certain things up in advance. I am just glad that it got pulled this time around.

@Only2irish I don't think that anyone is making a blanket statement that all pets are being provided for or taken care of here. The premise of this bill though mostly targets those individuals who I think would fall in the category of being responsible owners though as I don't think people doing things as you describe above would be concerned with "registering" their pets to being with if they are doing those cruel things to them. But you are right that Not all animals live in a dream world and that breaks my heart every time I hear of these types of stories. The predominate issue with most of these ordinances/bills/laws that are proposed though give the pretext that NO pet owner is good enough and that only the Government knows the best and has the answers to make things right. When that is almost never the case, Take FWC for a prime and current example with how they handle someones pet as case in point. They are government officials who choose to Kill rather than rehome someones pet. Most of these get tabled or turned down because they aren't actually in the best interest of the animals but rather a way to gain funding and to support other agendas like those from some groups that think no one should have pets at all. I don't think there is really a right answer to something like this as there will always be events like you describe no matter who's at the helm playing the role of protector....

It’s a most serious matter, indeed.

I couldn't agree more. I will note that there has been word that the sponsor of the bill just pulled it due to overwhelming opposition!!!!! ... Thanks for all the support!

??? because gun owners don't have pets??

Thanks very much for the support. I am happy to hear that the bill has already been Killed due to the overwhelming opposition !!!!!

It’s a step in the right direction for the time being.

Thankfully, at least this time the bill is dead. The Sponsor pulled the bill due to the overwhelming opposition!

I don’t look at the political aspect but understand where you’re coming from. I’ve lived in NY my whole life so I’m accustomed to some of the things here. The weather though has been mild the last few years where I am.

@@Pythonaddiction We have had a very mild winter as well. We've had maybe 7 days of pretty cold weather. At least enough to freeze the bugs. I used to not look at the political side of anything too close. But after my mother passing and all that that entailed, and my husband and I gettinh olfrt (61, and 52) I try to be more careful about who I vote for!

This is exactly why I had to do a video regarding it because people need to know the scope of what something like this happening even in one state could mean as it will have a ripple effect across the US. If a bill like this passes in Colorado, I can guarantee that it will happen in almost every other state. And call it what it is it’s a tax lol As always, thanks for the support, and please do share this as people need to speak up and not let this type of overreach happen !

@@Pythonaddiction definitely, I live in Arizona and if this does pass in Colorado...my state isn't too far behind and that will really screw me and many others over.

Exactly. It's wrong in so many ways. And if it's allowed to pass in CO then it won't be far off from being something in every state.

That explains a lot with why they called it a fee and why I kept tossing in my little meme in the video lol. I hate that laws are all about verbiage. Sometimes it’s the same exact thing in all but name. But thank you for the support. I am also glad that things didn’t go through this time around.

I liked the example that USARK utilized with the ant colony. I mean you figure you have one queen and you can have thousands of workers and we can’t forget about the drones. Because they are invertebrates. So you could be looking at thousands with this fee just for one colony. This is why I wanted to try to bring attention to this to everyone that I can, as it doesn’t just affect reptile owners. It literally affects every pet owner.

It's enough homeless animals out here, what are they thinking, this would do to some pets that need loving homes or a home in general. ITS always about the Money. ITS WRONG in so many ways, Because the money could be going towards care of the animals not free money to GOV.

They are trying to make it look like they're providing a valuable service, when the truth of the matter is they are not. Generally speaking the likelihood that something will happen to you, that would "trigger" the need for their "Caregiver" contact is very small. They way they are pushing it, they are saying we aren't responsible pet owners and don't already have things in place if something bad were to happen. It's that whole "Gov't knows best mentality!"

I don’t really know, especially considering most of the time these types of laws are made from people who are not keepers or pet owners to begin with. I’m just glad this didn’t pass this time around.

If you found a collar that would not harm a snake that would stay I just might. 😂. But in all seriousness, no and I won't microchip either.