Is It Legal to Own a Nile Monitor? State-by-State Guide
On This Pageâ–¾
Most reptile restrictions reach an animal through a family or a genus, which is why keepers spend so much time arguing about taxonomy. The Nile monitor is the opposite case. Florida, Louisiana, New York and New York City all name Varanus niloticus specifically, and Florida names it while leaving every other monitor in the chapter alone. That is not a drafting accident.
Where Nile Monitors Stand
| Where | Status | What the rule says |
|---|---|---|
| 32 jurisdictions | Legal, no permit | No restriction found on private possession |
| Florida | Prohibited | 68-5.006(4)(l) names the species; the only monitor on that list |
| Louisiana | Banned by name | § 101.K.2.a.iii names the Nile monitor, Varanus niloticus |
| New York | Banned by name | Named in both ECL § 11-0103(6)(e)(5) and 6 NYCRR § 180.1 |
| New York City | Banned | § 161.01(b)(10) names it and catches it by family as well |
| Connecticut | Banned | § 26-55-6 names five monitors, this one first |
| Georgia | Exhibition only | Licensable for scientific, educational or public exhibition, not as a pet |
| New Mexico, Hawaii, DC | Banned | Absent from the cleared list in each, which is the operative rule |
| RI, ME, AR, VT, DE, MA, NJ | Permit required | Reached by a family or genus entry rather than by name |
| Minnesota | Conditional | § 97A.401 subd. 8 makes lizards a protected wild animal as a whole category |
| Idaho, Iowa | Unclear | Wording that could reach it, with no binomial to settle whether it does |
| West Virginia | Permit required | § 20-2-13 bars possessing live wildlife from without the state without an importation permit from the director |
Florida Named One Monitor and Left the Others Alone
Florida's prohibited list at 68-5.006(4)(l) contains exactly one monitor, and it is this one. The savannah and ackie monitors are untouched by that chapter and require no permit at all under the captive wildlife rules.
The reason is not size or temperament, although a two meter lizard with a serious bite would be a defensible thing to regulate on those grounds. It is that Florida has established Nile monitor populations and the other two species do not. This is a rule about what is already living in the canals, which is the same logic that put the green iguana on the prohibited list in 2021.
Louisiana reached the same conclusion in its own list, naming the Nile monitor directly at § 101.K.2.a.iii. New York named it in both the statute and the regulation, inside a six-species monitor entry covering the Asiatic water, Nile, white-throat, black-throat, crocodile and Komodo monitors. When four separate jurisdictions name one species out of roughly eighty in the genus, they are describing the same animal for the same reason.
Georgia Licenses It and Still Says No
Georgia deserves separating out because its rule looks like a permit and is not one. Six reptiles are named in the license rule, and the same subparagraph closes the pet route on all of them: they shall only be licensed for scientific, educational, or public exhibition purposes.
A private keeper reading the words wild animal license could reasonably think there is an application to fill in. There is, and it is not available to them. This is the same shape as Hawaii's Part A listings, where a licensed exhibitor or a university qualifies and a household does not.
Two States Where the Wording Does Not Settle It
Iowa's statute lists the water monitor without a scientific name. In most contexts that means Varanus salvator, the Asian water monitor. But Varanus niloticus is commonly called the African water monitor, and nothing in the statute picks between them.
Idaho has a different version of the same gap, turning on an undefined non-dangerous qualifier. A two meter monitor with a powerful bite sits exactly on whatever line that phrase is drawing, and the rule does not draw it.
Neither of these is a loophole. A keeper who reads ambiguity as permission is the keeper who finds out at a seizure.
The Permit States Reach It by Group
Where the Nile monitor needs a permit rather than being banned, the rule almost always catches it as part of something larger. Rhode Island requires a permit for all monitors, the whole of Varanidae. New Jersey catches it through the genus entry, Monitor - Varanus spp. Massachusetts places it in the permit tier simply by not being the one exempted monitor.
Maine and Vermont both work from unrestricted lists where absence is the restriction. Maine clears exactly one Varanus, the savannah monitor. Vermont clears four small ones by name. The Nile monitor is on neither list, so it is restricted in both without either state having formed a view about it specifically.
West Virginia Regulates the Shipment, Not the Species
West Virginia never names the Nile monitor, and no species list reaches it. A Nile monitor is a reptile and an African species, so it is wildlife from without the state on any route into West Virginia. That puts it under W. Va. Code § 20-2-13, which bars bringing live wildlife in from out of state, or keeping it there, without an importation permit from the director. The state's definition of wildlife covers reptiles with no captive-bred exception, so buying from a breeder does not change the answer.
The permit exists on paper only. The Division of Natural Resources publishes no application for it, and no rule puts the section into practice outside aquaculture. If you keep one in West Virginia or are moving there with one, ask the DNR in writing before the animal crosses the state line and keep the reply with its purchase records.
What to Check Before Buying
This is an animal that reaches two meters, and several of the states that restrict it did so after populations established from released pets. Local rules can be stricter than the state. The full jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction detail, with the regulation text and the date each entry was verified, is on the Nile monitor page of the exotic pet law map.
Sources & Further Reading
Last reviewed 2 Oct 2026 · 7 sources
- Florida Administrative Code Chapter 68-5, Prohibited and Conditional Nonnative Species (official index)
- Louisiana Administrative Code Title 76, Wildlife and Fisheries (official document)
- New York Environmental Conservation Law § 11-0103 (official text)
- New York City Health Code Article 161, Animals (official PDF)
- Georgia Rules 391-4-8, Wild Animal Licenses and Permits (official text)
- Connecticut Agencies Regs. § 26-55-6, Importation and Possession of Wild Birds and Quadrupeds (official text)
- Iowa Code § 717F, Dangerous Wild Animals (official PDF)
Frequently Asked Questions
Which states ban the Nile monitor?
Nine jurisdictions: Florida, Louisiana, New York, New York City, Georgia, Connecticut, New Mexico, Hawaii and the District of Columbia. Eight more require a permit: Rhode Island, Maine, Arkansas, Vermont, Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey and West Virginia.
Why does Florida ban the Nile monitor but not other monitors?
Because it is the only monitor on the prohibited list. Varanus niloticus is named at 68-5.006(4)(l), while the savannah and ackie monitors are untouched by that chapter and need no permit at all. Florida has established Nile monitor populations, which the other two do not.
Is a Nile monitor legal where the rule says water monitor?
Do not assume so. Iowa's statute says water monitor with no scientific name attached. That usually means Varanus salvator, but Varanus niloticus is commonly called the African water monitor, and the statute gives no binomial to settle it. Idaho has a similar problem with an undefined non-dangerous qualifier.
Does Georgia allow a Nile monitor with a license?
Not as a pet. Georgia names six reptiles in its license rule and closes the pet route on all of them in the same subparagraph: they may only be licensed for scientific, educational or public exhibition purposes.
Written by Michael Ryan
Mike keeps two rescued bearded dragons, Dex and Cera, and writes the care guides on BeastlyFacts from his own research and mistakes. He is not a veterinarian.
More about Michael Ryan →
