HB 1725 has only recently been brought to my attention.  That such a piece
of legislation could even be considered is a shock to me.

I keep reptiles and amphibians, occasionally venomous (where not prohibited
by law) or very large ones, and have done so without incident for over
twenty years.  I am acquainted with a large number of Washington State
residents who engage in similar pursuits, both recreationally and
professionally.  Many of these people have been working with these animals
even longer than I have, and at no time has any of their creatures - no
matter how large, "scary," or venomous - posed any sort of threat to the
public.

There are a number of reasons for this, apart from the general care level
maintained by the animals' keepers.  The first of these reasons are
biological.  Simply put, the type of larger reptile (and even smaller ones,
in the case of the venomous species cited) mentioned in HB 1725 cannot
survive in the wild in Washington State.  Reptiles are ectothermic, often
defined (though not entirely accurately) as "cold blooded."  They are unable
to maintain an internal body temperature, as mammals do, and must depend on
other sources of heat to stay warm enough to function.  They will bask in
the sun, or come out of burrows at night to lie on a warm asphalt roadway in
order to raise their body temperature and enable their body processes to
kick in.  Without this warmth, even basic functions such as respiration and
circulation slow dramatically down, while digestion stops completely.  It is
not unknown for a snake with a full belly to die from secondary infections
resulting from temperatures too low for it to digest its food, which in turn
lead to anaerobic bacterial growth in its intestinal tract.  Despite the
relative warmth of the summer months, Washington's climate is emphatically
not suited to the needs of the giant snakes and lizards HB 1725 is most
concerned with.

Second, all reptiles are very secretive animals.  Despite their size, this
applies to the larger snakes and lizards as well.  The only reptile I can
think of that could be described as a "top predator" (the biggest link in
its local food chain) would be the Komodo dragon (Varanus komodoensis)
which, owing to its CITES Appendix I protected status, is not available to
the public anyway.  What this means is that the first thing any reptile does
when in nature is to seek shelter, or camouflage of some sort - even before
searching for food or water.  As a fictional example, if a monitor lizard
kept in a private residence were to escape its cage, and then (however
unlikely) to escape the residence where it was kept, it would "go to ground"
and find a nice, dark hole somewhere to hide in until it felt safe enough to
emerge.  This could take literal weeks, as it may take that long for the
animal to overcome its initial panic reaction to the situation, aided by the
fact that reptile anatomy and physiology are very water-conservative (as
long as the animal is kept humid), and their metabolic rates are very
different from those of mammals (meaning that they can go for weeks,
sometimes months without food).  Even if this were to happen during the heat
of an Eastern Washington summer, either the nighttime cool, the lack of
humidity, or the summer's brevity would mean the death of the animal,
probably even before it came out of its initial hiding place.

There are also economic reasons why these animals are not likely to become a
public threat.  These reasons are important, though they pale next to the
significance of the animals' temperature-dependence as outlined above.
These reasons are tied closely together: first, the animals cost money
(sometimes up to thousands of dollars, especially taking housing and
veterinary care into account) and second, many of their keepers have an eye
toward long-term breeding of the animals.  Carelessness in husbandry will
not only cost them their initial investment in the animal, but would rob
them of any potential return. Having worked exclusively with small
businesses since 1989, I am well aware that the pocketbook is far and away
the most sensitive part of the body.  Many reptile keepers in Washington do
so as a business, in fact, and derive a good percentage of their income from
breeding their animals and selling the offspring.  HB 1725 thus threatens
the livelihood of some of the residents it purports to protect.

I must also take issue with some of the bill's wording.  The phrase
"dangerous wild animals" on line 7 and its subsequent explanation in that
paragraph, and definition in the next, are in my studied opinion simply
nonsensical.  The multigenerational captive breeding, by myself as well as
many people I know personally, of many of the species listed by the bill
negates its claim that they "by their very nature ... are wild and
inherently dangerous and do not adjust well to a captive environment (lines
9-11)."

Rodents have historically been responsible for more human fatalities than, I
would bet, all other animals combined, yet they aren't even mentioned in the
bill.  Conversely, many of the reptiles named specifically in the bill have
never been implicated in a human illness, let alone a death.  Many larger
breeds of domesticated dog have also been responsible for human death or
disfigurement, and the toy poodle has quite seriously been described by
several mail carriers of my acquaintance as "the dog they fear the most,"
yet the bill makes no mention of these animals, despite their well-founded
reputations.

There may always be the occasional grandstander who can't resist a walk in
the park in the summer with a large boa draped across his shoulders, but
there will also be people who train pit bulls, rottweilers, doberman
pinschers, or German shepherd dogs to attack.  There will also always be
people who let their cats roam free to decimate local wildlife populations
and spread disease via their feces.  Speaking with regard to your own
personal experience (and asking you to put aside any phobias you may have
with regard to snakes), how much more common are the cat and dog offenders
than the snake?  Personally, I have been attacked by stray or feral dogs on
four separate occasions, and have lost count of the number of times I was
grateful for the fence separating me from a large and obviously upset
canine.   I have never, however, been attacked or menaced by, or even seen,
a stray python, viper or monitor lizard.  I am not requesting that laws be
passed in regard to such persons or their activities, only that some
perspective be retained and that a well-intended but misinformed piece of
legislation be allowed to fade into obscurity.  If HB 1725 is enacted,
however, I will very likely leave the state, despite having been born and
raised here (in Spokane).  It's that important to me.

Thank you for your attention.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXX