I understand Gregg, and as I said, I do not disagree. But Will has a point, and its unrelated to your approach.

Will's concern and my concern in my disuccsion With Dr. Frye was, aside what your terminology.

Its some yahoo lawyer and/or, some yahoo politician Trying to make a name for himself by passing laws or ordinances. They could careless if the animals in concern are toxic, or venomous, or dangerous or harmless. They are only looking for a tool to further their career.

About Frye, Hes doing an amazing job. But you have to understand what he is doing. Hes making a name for himself in the field of venoms. They want to do such things as find new chemicals or proteins to help cure disease etc. The field is or was somewhat limited. So whats a boy to do. Change the field of play. Make it bigger. The truth is, colubids including hogs were harmless last decade and have not changed. Just the terminology changed. The animals are the same.

In his case, you have a lot more to play with, if there is more venomous species, ones never studied. Also in his case, its not about their animals, Hes from OZ. and these snakes are not. So its not his concern what our yahoo law makers do. IT has nothing to do with him or his work.

In Oz. there is a different mentality, They go by the end result. If a species of elapid does not have deleterious effects when it bites you, its considered harmless.

Heck they toss around really venomous dangerous snakes like they are play toys. The reason is simple, those snakes are peawater poor at biting. If rattlesnakes had Elapid venom, there would be no one in Az or texas. Jokes please.

Its not Fryes concern what happens here and lawmakers are not concerned with your terminology, as long as it serves their purpose. Best wishes

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Show Entire Thread ]