One step forward

and we see the beginnong of the end

Extiction of captive animal husbandry.

Be prepared when the time comes to drop your pants, turn around and bend over, when police come to your door to confiscate your animals and archive them in the freezers of the FWS and them burn them to ashes, if you loose the next round.

Some wild reptiles who migrated to the US in the early 19th century thrived in terrarium and divirsified to the point where new and completely different forms came into existence. Piebald ballpythons for example, and glow-in-the-dark amelanistic leopard geckoes. These new forms who first appeared in America are very on the brick of population collapse in very few years.

And if other countries of the world follow the american trend, a vast majority of the diversity in captive animal husbandry will go extinct across the globe within few decades.

two steps back.

We are now aware of the magnitude of the problem and the graveness of the matter.

50.000 letters divided by 22 cogressmen = 2273 americains who sent letters. I recon somewhere around 3000 american herpetoculturits and perhaps 30-90 people from abroad have engaged themselves in stopping HR669.



A very small number of people have put up a herculian effort but how can 3090 people in a joint effort undo the wrong doings of a multi million dollar AR industry?



We need to draft a bill, that outlines the right to responsible bioculture.

The right to responsible bioculture is essential to the existence of mankind.

Without the right to farm crops, ranch cows and breed frogs, we cannot sustain the cultural diversity of our society.

Examples of responsible bioculture may be responsible cropfarming, cowfarming, hunting, scientific experimentation or companion animal husbandry.

If we have a right to keep animals, we also have a corresponding duty to respect the exceptions to the general rule and the premises of the right.

In the effort to minimise invasive species it is not enough to slap a sloppy piece of legislation and expect the problem to dissapear.

After we got a reptile ban people still continued to keep reptiles.

People in america will still continue to keep reptiles even if this law is passed.

HR669 offers no sollution to invasive species risk reduction in respect to animal husbandry.

People will only go underground and no one will really know who keeps what where in america. Then the hunt will begin for illegal creep keepers who threaten society with invasive species.

What happened in norway after our ban was that fewer people kept reptiles, but the ones who continued keeping gradually shifted their choice species.

The commercial value of reptiles was shot to bits, so no one kept reptiles for profit anymore, so people started keeping more exotic species. Now we have a small but diverse captive population of reptiles over here. Before ban more people were keeping the same species.

In any case, the diversity of foreign species which reside in american vivariums will rise in the future, regardless of HR669.

People do not let go of the right to responsibly keep their reptiles, therefore we have to look closer at out duties.

Also, there is absolutely no way to tell if an invasive species has escaped from a vivarium, or if it has been introduced by Animal rights activists. There really is not, and if some one says otherwise they are already treating you as guilty until proven innocent.

For all we know, many introductions of invasive species may be the working of overseas terrorists.

Overseas terror lords parhaps sponsor ALF to release different animals in different areas in order to cause panic, concearn, and consumes energy, effort and resources to fix. Introduction of invasive species may be accidental or a form of biological warfare.

Perhaps it is not our duty to consider other pathways of invasive species but we have a duty to reduce risk of invasive species caused by the herpetocultural society. The general society must recognize the difference between a terrarist and a terrorist. Reptile keepers are not terrorists, this reasoning heard at one EUFORA conference, but I find that it applies to all responsible animal culturists.



The human right to responsible bioculture is the unwritten one that needs to find it´s way to your declaration of rights.

A farmer can loose "the right" to keep cattle for a certain period of time or perhaps indefenetly, if he abuses his animals and breaks the law, yet this right to keep cows is nowhere cited in american law I would expect?

I haven´t heard of other countries in which this right is stated but I have noted that farmers have the right to keep cattle under the right premises in all countries of the world.

I expect that the american army also has an interest in securing the peoples right to responsible animal husbandry, this will secure the steaks in the mess hall and raise the fighting spirit, lest we want to face the terrorists of tomorrow with vegetarian warriors.



Launch a bill that seeks to secure the human right to responsibly keep certain animals, and let it be the duty of the AR movement to stop the bill. If it fails, launch it again next year in an improved version which gives more concideration to all critisisms. But, it is realistic for PIJAC and all parties now involved to draft a bill which includes the rights and duties in modern animal husbadry?



We only have to shape the the rights-based arguments in respect to herpetoculture, then other groupings of animal keepers have to shape the rights and duties in respect to their animal culture.

If we define our rights more clearly and more in detail, we will have a better starting point in defending them. If you introduce such, even if it is not passed initially you will create a precedent of historical value.

In order for herpetoculture to be a sustainable herpetoculturists have to take measures to reduce risk of invasive species and do their own risk assesment.

What is the risk of being bit by escaped venomous snake compared to risk of being struck by lightning. Risk for introduction of invasive species from the pet trade can not realistically be set to zero, but it needs a reference. How big of a potential does a species need to have in order to be considered banned from a certain area or the whole of the US?



regards

oby

[ Show Entire Thread ]