Exotic pet laws in Massachusetts

321 CMR 9.01(11)(a)(1), (3)

List of Birds. (a) The following groups of birds are prohibited without a permit: 1. Species categorically non-exempt pursuant to 321 CMR 9.01(3). 2. Migratory birds listed in the Code of Federal Regulations, 50 CFR 10.13. 3. Any other bird native to the United States and Canada. (b) Except for species listed in 321 CMR 9.01(11)(a), the birds or groups of birds may be kept without a permit: ... 6. Psittacidae (parrots and their allies)

The family exemption for Psittacidae is expressly subject to 9.01(11)(a), and clause 1 pulls out anything categorically non-exempt under 9.01(3). Psittacus erithacus is assessed by the IUCN as endangered, so it falls inside 9.01(3)(b) and outside the parrot clearance. This is the clearest illustration on this map of why the categorical bar has to be read before the group listing: on the group listing alone an African grey is an ordinary pet parrot in Massachusetts, and it is not. MassWildlife's own guidance is blunt about what that means in practice: permits for non-exempt wildlife "are issued only for certain scientific, educational, commercial, or other specific reasons" and "You will not be issued a permit for keeping a wild animal as a pet." The statute is less absolute, since § 23 contemplates "an individual license for an animal that is not on the special exemption list" and even sets a preference for captive-bred animals where wild depletion is an issue, so the licence exists on paper and the agency says it will not grant one for a pet.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(3)(b), (9)

List of Amphibians. All amphibians may be kept without a permit except species categorically non-exempt pursuant to 321 CMR 9.01(3).

The class-wide amphibian clearance is subject to 9.01(3), and Ambystoma mexicanum is assessed by the IUCN as critically endangered, which makes it categorically non-exempt. The axolotl is the sharpest case for that clause anywhere on this map: the wild population is confined to the Xochimilco canals and is genuinely near extinction, while the captive population is enormous, entirely laboratory-derived and in no sense taken from the wild. The regulation draws no distinction, and unlike the chinchilla entry it writes no captive-stock exception here. MassWildlife's own guidance is blunt about what that means in practice: permits for non-exempt wildlife "are issued only for certain scientific, educational, commercial, or other specific reasons" and "You will not be issued a permit for keeping a wild animal as a pet." The statute is less absolute, since § 23 contemplates "an individual license for an animal that is not on the special exemption list" and even sets a preference for captive-bred animals where wild depletion is an issue, so the licence exists on paper and the agency says it will not grant one for a pet.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(3)(c), (10)(a)(1); 321 CMR 10.90

All species of turtles may be kept without a permit, up to a limit of 100 turtles and/or eggs, in any combination, of each species, except for the following species for which a permit is always required: 1. Species categorically non-exempt pursuant to 321 CMR 9.01(3). 2. Argentina or Chaco Tortoise (Geochelone chilensis). 3. Gopher Tortoises (Gopherus polyphemus) and all other species in the genus Gopherus. 4. Pancake Tortoise (Malacochersus tornieri). 5. Spotted Turtle (Clemmys guttata). 6. Red-eared Slider (Trachemys scripta, including all subspecies and forms).

Caught twice by the categorical bar, which is why the general turtle allowance does not reach it. The eastern box turtle, Terrapene carolina, is listed as a species of special concern on the Massachusetts list at 321 CMR 10.90, which triggers 9.01(3)(c), and it is IUCN vulnerable, which triggers 9.01(3)(b) independently. Nothing in either turns on where the animal came from, so a captive-bred box turtle bought from an out-of-state breeder is in the same position as one found in the woods. Massachusetts joins Connecticut in answering this species through its endangered species listing rather than its pet rules, which is why it is easy to miss. MassWildlife's own guidance is blunt about what that means in practice: permits for non-exempt wildlife "are issued only for certain scientific, educational, commercial, or other specific reasons" and "You will not be issued a permit for keeping a wild animal as a pet." The statute is less absolute, since § 23 contemplates "an individual license for an animal that is not on the special exemption list" and even sets a preference for captive-bred animals where wild depletion is an issue, so the licence exists on paper and the agency says it will not grant one for a pet.

How this rule works: The third leg of the categorical bar in 321 CMR 9.01(3)(c), and the one that catches ordinary pet-trade animals. Three entries matter for this map: the Eastern Box Turtle (Terrapene carolina), special concern; the Eastern Hog-nosed Snake (Heterodon platirhinos), special concern; and the Eastern Ratsnake (Pantherophis alleghaniensis), endangered, which the exemption list already carves out of Pantherophis by name. The tiger salamander is NOT on it, so the general amphibian clearance reaches it.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(3)(b), (10)(b)(1)

All venomous snakes require a permit. The following snakes may be kept without a permit: 1. All species of boas and pythons (family Boidae), except those species categorically non-exempt pursuant to 321 CMR 9.01(3), and except the African Rock Python (Python sebae), Reticulated Python (Python reticulatus) and all species of Anaconda (Eunectes spp.), which require a permit.

The three pythons and anacondas named in the exemption are the African rock, the reticulated and Eunectes, and the Burmese is not among them, which makes this look like a legal state on a first read. It is not: Python bivittatus is assessed by the IUCN as vulnerable, so 9.01(3)(b) makes it categorically non-exempt and the family clearance is expressly subject to that clause. MassWildlife's summary reads the same way, clearing boas and pythons "except rare species and those listed as unlawful", which is two separate exclusions rather than one. Massachusetts is the state on this map where the Burmese python is restricted by a conservation listing rather than by an invasive-species rule. MassWildlife's own guidance is blunt about what that means in practice: permits for non-exempt wildlife "are issued only for certain scientific, educational, commercial, or other specific reasons" and "You will not be issued a permit for keeping a wild animal as a pet." The statute is less absolute, since § 23 contemplates "an individual license for an animal that is not on the special exemption list" and even sets a preference for captive-bred animals where wild depletion is an issue, so the licence exists on paper and the agency says it will not grant one for a pet.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(1), (12)(a)

The purpose of 321 CMR 9.01 is to list those species which are exempt from the licensing provisions of M.G.L. c. 131, § 23, and which may be imported, possessed, maintained, propagated, bought, sold, exchanged or offered for sale without a license or permit from the Division. Species not listed, or which are expressly listed as "require(s) a permit", are not exempt from the provisions of M.G.L. c. 131, § 23.

The mammal exemption list is thirteen entries and the capybara is not one of them, which in a closed-list state is the whole answer. 9.01(1) says species not listed "are not exempt from the provisions of M.G.L. c. 131, § 23", and 9.02(2)(c) adds that any vertebrate taxon not on the domestic list is presumed wild. The list does include the paca, Cuniculus spp., a South American caviomorph rodent of the same general kind, which is a reminder that this list is a set of individual decisions rather than a principle. MassWildlife's own guidance is blunt about what that means in practice: permits for non-exempt wildlife "are issued only for certain scientific, educational, commercial, or other specific reasons" and "You will not be issued a permit for keeping a wild animal as a pet." The statute is less absolute, since § 23 contemplates "an individual license for an animal that is not on the special exemption list" and even sets a preference for captive-bred animals where wild depletion is an issue, so the licence exists on paper and the agency says it will not grant one for a pet.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(3)(b), (10)(c)(6)

All Geckos (Gekkonidae) may be kept without a permit except for those species categorically non-exempt pursuant to 321 CMR 9.01(3) and the Big Bend Gecko (Coleonyx reticulatus) which require a permit.

The gecko family clearance is expressly subject to 9.01(3), and Correlophus ciliatus is assessed by the IUCN as vulnerable, so it is categorically non-exempt. MassWildlife's own summary phrases the clearance as "All geckos except rare species and the Big Bend gecko", which is the same reading. This is the most surprising entry in Massachusetts, because the crested gecko is an ordinary captive-bred pet-shop animal whose entire trade is captive stock, and the rule that catches it turns on the wild population in New Caledonia. The regulation offers no captive-bred exception of the kind it wrote for the chinchilla. MassWildlife's own guidance is blunt about what that means in practice: permits for non-exempt wildlife "are issued only for certain scientific, educational, commercial, or other specific reasons" and "You will not be issued a permit for keeping a wild animal as a pet." The statute is less absolute, since § 23 contemplates "an individual license for an animal that is not on the special exemption list" and even sets a preference for captive-bred animals where wild depletion is an issue, so the licence exists on paper and the agency says it will not grant one for a pet.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(1), (12)(a)

The purpose of 321 CMR 9.01 is to list those species which are exempt from the licensing provisions of M.G.L. c. 131, § 23, and which may be imported, possessed, maintained, propagated, bought, sold, exchanged or offered for sale without a license or permit from the Division. Species not listed, or which are expressly listed as "require(s) a permit", are not exempt from the provisions of M.G.L. c. 131, § 23.

The mammal exemption list is thirteen entries and the fennec fox is not one of them, which in a closed-list state is the whole answer. 9.01(1) says species not listed "are not exempt from the provisions of M.G.L. c. 131, § 23", and 9.02(2)(c) adds that any vertebrate taxon not on the domestic list is presumed wild. No canid of any kind appears on either list, wild or otherwise, apart from the domestic dog. MassWildlife's own guidance is blunt about what that means in practice: permits for non-exempt wildlife "are issued only for certain scientific, educational, commercial, or other specific reasons" and "You will not be issued a permit for keeping a wild animal as a pet." The statute is less absolute, since § 23 contemplates "an individual license for an animal that is not on the special exemption list" and even sets a preference for captive-bred animals where wild depletion is an issue, so the licence exists on paper and the agency says it will not grant one for a pet.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(10)(c)(11)

The following Monitor Lizards (Varanidae) may be kept without a permit: Spiny-tailed or Ridge-tailed Monitor (Varanus acanthurus).

Not the exempted monitor, so it is in the permit tier. Worth contrasting with the states that restrict this animal as an established invasive: Massachusetts reaches it by a closed family list that would catch a harmless monitor just as readily, and does not mention Florida populations or escape risk at all. MassWildlife's own guidance is blunt about what that means in practice: permits for non-exempt wildlife "are issued only for certain scientific, educational, commercial, or other specific reasons" and "You will not be issued a permit for keeping a wild animal as a pet." The statute is less absolute, since § 23 contemplates "an individual license for an animal that is not on the special exemption list" and even sets a preference for captive-bred animals where wild depletion is an issue, so the licence exists on paper and the agency says it will not grant one for a pet.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(1), (12)(a)

The purpose of 321 CMR 9.01 is to list those species which are exempt from the licensing provisions of M.G.L. c. 131, § 23, and which may be imported, possessed, maintained, propagated, bought, sold, exchanged or offered for sale without a license or permit from the Division. Species not listed, or which are expressly listed as "require(s) a permit", are not exempt from the provisions of M.G.L. c. 131, § 23.

The mammal exemption list is thirteen entries and the prairie dog is not one of them, which in a closed-list state is the whole answer. 9.01(1) says species not listed "are not exempt from the provisions of M.G.L. c. 131, § 23", and 9.02(2)(c) adds that any vertebrate taxon not on the domestic list is presumed wild. Note that the southern flying squirrel and the deer mouse ARE listed, so being a North American native rodent is not the obstacle; the prairie dog simply was not put on. MassWildlife's own guidance is blunt about what that means in practice: permits for non-exempt wildlife "are issued only for certain scientific, educational, commercial, or other specific reasons" and "You will not be issued a permit for keeping a wild animal as a pet." The statute is less absolute, since § 23 contemplates "an individual license for an animal that is not on the special exemption list" and even sets a preference for captive-bred animals where wild depletion is an issue, so the licence exists on paper and the agency says it will not grant one for a pet.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(10)(a)(6)

All species of turtles may be kept without a permit, up to a limit of 100 turtles and/or eggs, in any combination, of each species, except for the following species for which a permit is always required: 1. Species categorically non-exempt pursuant to 321 CMR 9.01(3). 2. Argentina or Chaco Tortoise (Geochelone chilensis). 3. Gopher Tortoises (Gopherus polyphemus) and all other species in the genus Gopherus. 4. Pancake Tortoise (Malacochersus tornieri). 5. Spotted Turtle (Clemmys guttata). 6. Red-eared Slider (Trachemys scripta, including all subspecies and forms).

One of only five species pulled out of the turtle allowance by name, and the parenthetical is deliberately wide: "Trachemys scripta, including all subspecies and forms". So the yellow-bellied and Cumberland sliders are caught alongside the red-eared, and so is a captive-bred colour morph. The reason is ecological rather than conservation-driven, since the slider is IUCN least concern; it is on the list because an escaped one establishes. MassWildlife's own guidance is blunt about what that means in practice: permits for non-exempt wildlife "are issued only for certain scientific, educational, commercial, or other specific reasons" and "You will not be issued a permit for keeping a wild animal as a pet." The statute is less absolute, since § 23 contemplates "an individual license for an animal that is not on the special exemption list" and even sets a preference for captive-bred animals where wild depletion is an issue, so the licence exists on paper and the agency says it will not grant one for a pet.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(3)(b), (10)(a)(1)

All species of turtles may be kept without a permit, up to a limit of 100 turtles and/or eggs, in any combination, of each species, except for the following species for which a permit is always required: 1. Species categorically non-exempt pursuant to 321 CMR 9.01(3). 2. Argentina or Chaco Tortoise (Geochelone chilensis). 3. Gopher Tortoises (Gopherus polyphemus) and all other species in the genus Gopherus. 4. Pancake Tortoise (Malacochersus tornieri). 5. Spotted Turtle (Clemmys guttata). 6. Red-eared Slider (Trachemys scripta, including all subspecies and forms).

The turtle allowance is generous and the categorical bar is what removes this species from it. Testudo horsfieldii is assessed by the IUCN as vulnerable, so 9.01(3)(b) applies and it cannot be exempted whatever the general clause says. Note that MassWildlife's own summary page lists only four tortoises as off limits and does not carry the rarity clause into its turtle table, while it does carry it into its snake and gecko tables; the regulation governs, and the page itself says its lists may not be all-inclusive. MassWildlife's own guidance is blunt about what that means in practice: permits for non-exempt wildlife "are issued only for certain scientific, educational, commercial, or other specific reasons" and "You will not be issued a permit for keeping a wild animal as a pet." The statute is less absolute, since § 23 contemplates "an individual license for an animal that is not on the special exemption list" and even sets a preference for captive-bred animals where wild depletion is an issue, so the licence exists on paper and the agency says it will not grant one for a pet.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(10)(c)(11)

The following Monitor Lizards (Varanidae) may be kept without a permit: Spiny-tailed or Ridge-tailed Monitor (Varanus acanthurus).

Varanus exanthematicus is IUCN least concern and it makes no difference, because the monitor entry exempts one species and this is not it. MassWildlife states the result plainly on the other side of its own table: "Any monitor lizards except the spiny-tailed (ridge-tailed) monitor" cannot be kept. Nothing about the savannah monitor's size or temperament is doing the work here, only its absence from a one-line list. MassWildlife's own guidance is blunt about what that means in practice: permits for non-exempt wildlife "are issued only for certain scientific, educational, commercial, or other specific reasons" and "You will not be issued a permit for keeping a wild animal as a pet." The statute is less absolute, since § 23 contemplates "an individual license for an animal that is not on the special exemption list" and even sets a preference for captive-bred animals where wild depletion is an issue, so the licence exists on paper and the agency says it will not grant one for a pet.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(1), (12)(a)

The purpose of 321 CMR 9.01 is to list those species which are exempt from the licensing provisions of M.G.L. c. 131, § 23, and which may be imported, possessed, maintained, propagated, bought, sold, exchanged or offered for sale without a license or permit from the Division. Species not listed, or which are expressly listed as "require(s) a permit", are not exempt from the provisions of M.G.L. c. 131, § 23.

The mammal exemption list is thirteen entries and the serval is not one of them, which in a closed-list state is the whole answer. 9.01(1) says species not listed "are not exempt from the provisions of M.G.L. c. 131, § 23", and 9.02(2)(c) adds that any vertebrate taxon not on the domestic list is presumed wild. No felid appears on the exemption list at all, and the domestic list carries only Felis catus, so Massachusetts reaches every exotic cat by omission rather than by naming one. MassWildlife's own guidance is blunt about what that means in practice: permits for non-exempt wildlife "are issued only for certain scientific, educational, commercial, or other specific reasons" and "You will not be issued a permit for keeping a wild animal as a pet." The statute is less absolute, since § 23 contemplates "an individual license for an animal that is not on the special exemption list" and even sets a preference for captive-bred animals where wild depletion is an issue, so the licence exists on paper and the agency says it will not grant one for a pet.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(3)(b), (10)(a)(1)

All species of turtles may be kept without a permit, up to a limit of 100 turtles and/or eggs, in any combination, of each species, except for the following species for which a permit is always required: 1. Species categorically non-exempt pursuant to 321 CMR 9.01(3). 2. Argentina or Chaco Tortoise (Geochelone chilensis). 3. Gopher Tortoises (Gopherus polyphemus) and all other species in the genus Gopherus. 4. Pancake Tortoise (Malacochersus tornieri). 5. Spotted Turtle (Clemmys guttata). 6. Red-eared Slider (Trachemys scripta, including all subspecies and forms).

Centrochelys sulcata is IUCN endangered, which makes it categorically non-exempt under 9.01(3)(b) and takes it out of the turtle allowance. Massachusetts is a genuinely unusual answer for this animal: most states that restrict the sulcata do it for size or for the burrowing, and this one does it through a conservation listing that has nothing to do with either. MassWildlife's own guidance is blunt about what that means in practice: permits for non-exempt wildlife "are issued only for certain scientific, educational, commercial, or other specific reasons" and "You will not be issued a permit for keeping a wild animal as a pet." The statute is less absolute, since § 23 contemplates "an individual license for an animal that is not on the special exemption list" and even sets a preference for captive-bred animals where wild depletion is an issue, so the licence exists on paper and the agency says it will not grant one for a pet.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

M.G.L. c. 131, § 77A; 321 CMR 9.02(2)(e)

No person shall possess, sell, trade, breed, import, export or release a wild canid hybrid or wild felid hybrid, except as otherwise provided by rules and regulations of the division. ... The provisions of this section shall not apply to an owner or person possessing a domesticated show or pet cat registered with a nationally or internationally recognized breeding association or registry which certifies the pedigree and registration of such cat to be without any wild felid parentage for a minimum of three generations.

The tenth Bengal answer on this map, and the only one that requires the registry paperwork rather than merely referring to it. § 77A prohibits possessing a wild felid hybrid outright, and 321 CMR 9.02(2)(e) confirms the route by making every wild-domestic mammal hybrid domestic EXCEPT wild canid and wild felid hybrids, which it sends back to § 77A. The exit is a cat registered with a national or international registry whose pedigree certifies no wild felid parentage for at least three generations, which lands on the same animal as Iowa's fourth filial generation but reaches it by counting backwards from the cat rather than forwards from the cross. Two conditions, not one: the generations alone are not enough without the registration, and the registration alone is not enough without the certified pedigree. MassWildlife applies the same test to the Savannah, saying it is domestic "only if it can be documented to be generations (F4) past the original mating with an African Serval".

Existing owners: An owner in possession on 1 January 1994 who obtained a permit from the director on or before 31 July 1994 is outside the section.

How this rule works: A flat prohibition with one exit. "No person shall possess, sell, trade, breed, import, export or release a wild canid hybrid or wild felid hybrid, except as otherwise provided by rules and regulations of the division." The exit is the last paragraph: the section does not apply to "a domesticated show or pet cat registered with a nationally or internationally recognized breeding association or registry which certifies the pedigree and registration of such cat to be without any wild felid parentage for a minimum of three generations." So Massachusetts writes a generation rule without using filial numbers, and 321 CMR 9.02(2)(e) points to this section by treating wild felid hybrids as the one hybrid class that is not automatically domestic.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(12)(a)(2)

List of Mammals. (a) The following mammals may be kept without a permit: 1. Four-toed (African pygmy) hedgehog (Erinaceus albiventris) (= Atelerix pruneri) 2. Chinchilla (Chinchilla spp.) derived from captive stock. 3. Deer Mouse and White-footed Mouse 4. Degu (Octodon degus) 5. Egyptian Spiny Mouse 6. House Mouse 7. Jerboas 8. Norway Rat 9. Paca 10. Southern Flying Squirrel (Glaucomys volans) 11. Striped hamster ... 12. Sugar Glider (Petaurus breviceps) 13. American Bison

The entry reads "Chinchilla (Chinchilla spp.) derived from captive stock", and the qualifier is doing real work. Wild chinchillas are IUCN-listed as endangered, which under 9.01(3)(b) means the species cannot be exempted at all, and the Division answered that by exempting the captive-bred form specifically. A keeper is asked for provenance rather than paperwork: there is no permit and no registry, but the animal has to be captive stock. This is also the clearest evidence on the face of the rule of how the Division reads the categorical bar, since it exempted a species whose wild population is listed by writing the captive qualifier into the entry.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(11)(a)(1), (b)(6); § 9.01(3)(b)

List of Birds. (a) The following groups of birds are prohibited without a permit: 1. Species categorically non-exempt pursuant to 321 CMR 9.01(3). 2. Migratory birds listed in the Code of Federal Regulations, 50 CFR 10.13. 3. Any other bird native to the United States and Canada. (b) Except for species listed in 321 CMR 9.01(11)(a), the birds or groups of birds may be kept without a permit: ... 6. Psittacidae (parrots and their allies)

Cockatoos are parrots for the purpose of the family exemption, so the answer turns entirely on the species and on 9.01(3)(b). The common pet cockatoos split both ways: the umbrella (Cacatua alba) and Moluccan (C. moluccensis) are IUCN endangered and the sulphur-crested group includes critically endangered species, all of which are categorically non-exempt, while the Major Mitchell's (C. leadbeateri) and long-billed corella (C. tenuirostris) are least concern and clear the bar. Goffin's (C. goffiniana) is near threatened, which is where the language runs out: the statute bars listing an animal "in any category" of the IUCN Red Data Books and MassWildlife paraphrases that as "any rarity category", and whether near threatened counts is not answered anywhere in the text. Check the species before assuming this is a bird question rather than a permit one.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

M.G.L. c. 131, § 77(1); 321 CMR 9.02(2)(b)

A person may possess a ferret (mustela furo or mustela putorium furo) for the following purposes:— (1) As a household pet; provided, however, that such pet has been at the time of purchase neutered or spayed and has received inoculation against distemper and rabies or other inoculations that the director may require; and provided, further, that evidence of neutering, spaying and inoculation is kept available for inspection by the director.

Legal as a household pet on three conditions that all attach at purchase: neutered or spayed, inoculated against distemper and rabies, and documentary evidence of both kept available for inspection. Breeding is a separate licence at not less than $1,000 a year under § 77(2). The section closes with a hunting prohibition that has teeth in an unexpected way: merely having a ferret in a place where birds or mammals may be found makes the keeper liable to its penalties.

How this rule works: Massachusetts legalised the pet ferret by statute in 1996 and attached the conditions to the purchase rather than to a permit: neutered or spayed at the time of purchase, inoculated against distemper and rabies, and evidence of both kept available for inspection. 321 CMR 9.02(2)(b) points here rather than treating the ferret as an ordinary domestic animal, which is why the ferret is the one conditional entry on an otherwise binary domestic list. Breeding is a separate licence at not less than $1,000 a year under § 77(2). The section also makes merely having a ferret where birds or mammals may be found evidence of hunting with it, which is a real trap for anyone who takes one outdoors.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(10)(b)(4), (3)(c); 321 CMR 10.90

Snakes of the family Colubridae, as follows: ... Garter and Ribbon Snakes (Thamnophis spp.) ... Kingsnakes and Milk Snakes (Lampropeltis spp.) ... North American Ratsnakes (Pantherophis spp.) except the Black Ratsnake (Pantherophis alleghaniensis other than albinistic and leucistic individuals) which requires a permit ... Western Hognose Snake (Heterodon nasicus)

Massachusetts answers the two hognose species differently, and the common name hides it. The colubrid list clears the Western Hognose Snake, Heterodon nasicus, by name and by name only, so the ordinary pet-trade hognose is exempt. The eastern hognose, Heterodon platirhinos, is a Massachusetts species of special concern on the 321 CMR 10.90 list, which makes it categorically non-exempt under 9.01(3)(c) and puts it in the permit tier that MassWildlife says is not issued for pets. Both animals are IUCN least concern, so this split comes entirely from the state list.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(10)(a)

All species of turtles may be kept without a permit, up to a limit of 100 turtles and/or eggs, in any combination, of each species, except for the following species for which a permit is always required: 1. Species categorically non-exempt pursuant to 321 CMR 9.01(3). 2. Argentina or Chaco Tortoise (Geochelone chilensis). 3. Gopher Tortoises (Gopherus polyphemus) and all other species in the genus Gopherus. 4. Pancake Tortoise (Malacochersus tornieri). 5. Spotted Turtle (Clemmys guttata). 6. Red-eared Slider (Trachemys scripta, including all subspecies and forms).

Falls under the general turtle allowance: no permit, capped at 100 of the species in any combination of animals and eggs, which is a dealer-scale limit rather than a keeper-scale one. The categorical bar is worth checking here and comes out clean on the current IUCN checklist, which carries no assessment for Chelonoidis carbonarius; the older 1996 assessment was published under Geochelone carbonaria and is not on the current list. That makes this a thinner answer than the other tortoises on this row, and a reassessment would move it into the permit tier without any change to Massachusetts law.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.

321 CMR 9.01(10)(a)

All species of turtles may be kept without a permit, up to a limit of 100 turtles and/or eggs, in any combination, of each species, except for the following species for which a permit is always required: 1. Species categorically non-exempt pursuant to 321 CMR 9.01(3). 2. Argentina or Chaco Tortoise (Geochelone chilensis). 3. Gopher Tortoises (Gopherus polyphemus) and all other species in the genus Gopherus. 4. Pancake Tortoise (Malacochersus tornieri). 5. Spotted Turtle (Clemmys guttata). 6. Red-eared Slider (Trachemys scripta, including all subspecies and forms).

Chelydra serpentina is not one of the five named exceptions, is IUCN least concern and is not on the Massachusetts list, so it falls under the general turtle allowance: no permit, and a cap of 100 turtles or eggs of the species in any combination. The cap is written for dealers rather than keepers and no pet owner will meet it. The separate rule to know is about acquisition: MassWildlife allows taking two snapping turtles from the wild in Massachusetts as personal pets under 321 CMR 3.05, and animals taken that way may not be sold, bartered or exchanged, or released back.

How this rule works: Massachusetts runs a closed white list and says so in terms: a species not on it, or listed as requiring a permit, is not exempt from M.G.L. c. 131, § 23. Two structural points decide most of this state. First, 9.01(2) defines "species" as a "distinct non-domestic VERTEBRATE animal population", and § 23 itself reaches only fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, so terrestrial invertebrates are outside the scheme entirely. Second, 9.01(3) is a categorical override that most readings of this rule miss: no species may be exempted if it is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, appears in the IUCN Red Book(s), or is on the Massachusetts endangered, threatened and special concern list at 321 CMR 10.90. Nearly every group listing in 9.01 repeats the cross-reference, so it operates as a live carve-out rather than as drafting furniture, and it is what pulls the Burmese python out of Boidae, the crested gecko out of Gekkonidae and the box turtle out of the turtle allowance.

Checked against the published text on 5 September 2026.