Before the ban was passed it was noted that the term “foreign (exotic) species” should be interpreted as foreign not in the biological sense of the expression. It should be interpreted as what was exotic to the local population (Norwegian community/society).

§1. It is illegal to import, sell, buy, give away or accept or in any other manner keep as companions or as captives in other way foreign (exotic) species of mammals, reptiles, toads, frogs and salamanders.

In case of doubt it is Mattilsynet (The Food Safety Authority, currently the right authority) that decides whether an animal is concerned by this regulation or not.

Exception from this regulation are those animals to which a permit for exhibit has been given in accordance to §15 in the animal welfare law. [Comment: permit to show such animals is given only to zoos]

§2 in the same regulation notes that in “special circumstances” the right authority can give dispensations to the ban in §1.

Before the 1^st january 1977,  keepers of herptiles had to apply for dispensation to keep their animals.
Offspring from legal animals in Norway have to be euthenised or exported.
In order to export offspring a new dispensation to export has to be applied and granted

for each and every individual.
 

The situation today
It is next to impossible to get a dispensation for herptiles unless one has severe asthma or allergy to furry animals, in which case one can receive a dispensation to keep a terrestrial turtle.
About 20 dispensations are given to allergic people in Norway each year.

Around the year 2000 an estimate based on sales of petshops showed that there are around 100.000 illegal herptiles in Norway.
Due to increased interest in herpetoculture over the last years it is likely to assume that the number is beyond 100.000 animals today.
The Norwegian herpetological association has worked for about 12 years to lift this ban and the government has noted that they wish a “softening of the current legislation around exotic animals”.

The government cannot avoid overlooking the large quantity of illegal animals in the country and acknowledges that something has to be done to improve the situation.

As of 2006 a “positive list” containing a small number of species may be permitted kept as pets but there are no plans of lifting the import ban on neither wild caught nor captive bred animals.

Effects of the herptile ban and examples of malpractice
Through nearly 30 years of herptile ban some tendencies have evolved in the Norwegian society.
            There are no norwegian books about herpetoculture. Herptiles are only described generally in encyclopedias and animal-books but no caresheets are available to the public.

Limited amounts of literature is available on the internet.

The lack of literature affects primarily young and inexperienced herpetoculturists who have a hard time locating and reading literature on foreign languages.

Only a handful of vets are qualified to treat herptiles in Norway and because herptiles are illegal owners often avoid going to a vet in fear of having their animals confiscated.

Through the years there have been examples of malpractice also from the authorities.

            Animals are normally euthenised by being cooled to death in a freezer.

            In one case, the owner himself was given permission to euthenise his snakes with a shotgun.
            In another case the animals were euthenised before the owner was notified. These animals were euthenised by putting the terrariums out in the snow during the winter.

            Animals have on numerous occasions been euthenised before identification of species was made.

Trend/theory

Based on my experience with the Norwegian herpetocultural community and the legislation in my country I have reached the following theory;

What happens when a ban against herptiles is passed?
Initially the number of captive animals is significantly reduced but right away an illegal market for animals is opened. The government looses track of what comes in and out of the country and which species are kept.

Herptiles appeal to all types of individuals from all levels of the society. They are kept by both lawmakers and lawbreakers. In Norway herpetoculturists in the “lawbreaker category” are perhaps overrepresented, or at least it seems that they are.

The police have limited funding and herpetoculture is viewed as a minor offence, not much funds are invested into catching herpetoculturists.

In most cases, only herpetoculturists who are also conducting other criminal activities get caught.

This leads to bad publicity for herptiles as pets. In newspapers herptiles are portrayed as dangerous animals that are kept by dangerous criminals. Headlines such as “snakes on the rise amongst heavy criminals” are not unusual.

The stereotype of a normal Norwegian’s feelings about herptiles seems to be this;

Reptiles are exotic animals that creeps in some bushes on the other side of the earth, some look scary and some are almost extinct. One doesn’t really take notice. There is a lot of misery in the world but one still has to buy a new pair of trousers for a party next week.
Nearly extinct reptiles are about as distant as starving children in Africa. A monthly donation to an animal preservation organisation cures a bad conscience because one’s making a difference and supporting a good cause. Most people are scared of reptiles, spiders and especially wasps. People fear the Vipera berus because it has happened that highly allergic people have died from it’s bite. Most people have heard of salamanders but don’t really know what they look like. Salamanders are some weird animals that still live in ponds somewhere.

There has never been so many reptiles in Norway as right now and the hobby in Norway is expected to become more popular in the future.

Herpetoculturists in Norway often show signs of paranoia. Some live in constant fear of getting caught and don’t even dare asking advice on the internet.

They live behind closed doors and drawn curtains. As long as the herp ban is present, the herpetoculturists hide their animals from the rest of the society in fear of getting caught.

In the rest of the society, over time, understanding of herptiles gradually diminishes and herpetoculturists are stereotyped as weirdoes and criminals.
The word “reptiles” itself is slowly becoming a negatively charged expression and is increasingly being associated with deadly snakes and drug dealers.

The police are aware that owners trade animals and information thru the internet, of course. The police are not interested in the animals but in enforcing the law and catching lawbreakers.

The authorities have no control over which venomous species are kept in Norway and where. There is no antivenin in Norway and if someone in Tromsø is bitten by a hot snake, the nearest antivenin is more than 1100km away, in Stockholm.

The people who are motivated to work in order to lift the ban often keep animals themselves, making them criminals. The authorities have a hard time taking people who break the law serious.

In the mean time destruction of habitat that is populated by Norwegian species of herps is gradually augmented due to cultivation, mining and construction.
The preservation of herptiles is written in the law but there’s gradually fewer and fewer people “on the spot” to point that out.

The habitat of the giant salamander of Norway annually shrinks in the Oslo region due to construction, drainage of ponds and cultivation.

The claws of bulldozers don’t have eyes and the mouths of herpetocultusists are shut in fear of being caught.

The situation in Norway is strongly influenced by the fact that herptiles are legal in Sweden.

It is easy to smuggle animals into Norway and through the internet popularity of the hobby is raised. There is no organised smuggling of animals into Norway today, contrary to popular belief. Animals are easily bought in Sweden and smuggled in by their owners.

If reptiles were illegal in Norway’s neighbouring countries the situation would be much different. The illegal herpetocultural society of Norway would be smaller and organised crime would import animals instead of everyone smuggling their own animals into the country, such as the case is today.

Looking at the big picture;

The herp ban in Norway acts against it’s intention. The herptile ban has contributed to animals being kept under poor conditions due to lack of literature and poor access to veterinary aid.

It is easier to be heard when crying “wolf!” then when crying for freedom to keep reptiles.

An appeal to uphold the freedom to keep herptiles is easily toned down by the appeal to ban herptiles in order to promote animal welfare and animal preservation.

Unfortunately, the most serious effects of a ban appear several decades later, in form of different values in the society and general loss of interest to protect banned species in their native habitat.

I fear that animal welfare and animal preservation will suffer greatly if herptile bans are effectuated all over Europe.

One important factor of animal preservation is the private sector who keeps “exotic animals” as pets. Herpetoculturists are the main factor that promote and fund preservation of herptiles in the private sector.
Loss of information and change in mentality in the society seem to be the worst consequences in Norway and are also the fuel for many prejudices and misunderstandings.

The easy way out.

Moving out of Norway, to another country where reptiles are legal, seems to be the easiest way out. Experianced, knowlegable people who could make a difference in changing the legislation in Norway are also the ones that invest much time and money into their hobby. In fear of getting caught they often move to Sweden to avoid the Norwegian ban.

Unfortunately, if herp bans become a trend in Europe pretty soon herpetoculturists in Europe will find them selves in a difficult position...