The post implies that the mere *possession* of said animals would lead to prosecution. I disagree with that inference.

I doubt that anyone would try to charge me for owning something I had obtained legally, anymore than they would try to go after dealers *retroactively* for having shipped animals prior to the enactment of the law.

Of course, I would have to provide proof that I'd obtained said animal legally (timing is everything), and there would be hurdles to surmount if I were to need to transport said animal. But the straightforward ownership issue would be easy enough to handle.

[ Hide Replies ]

• PR: Invasive Species Hearing - USARK, Tue Mar 23 09:02:16 2010
• Lacey Act Could Rip Reptile Industry - USARK, Tue Mar 23 11:29:22 2010
• RE: Lacey Act Could Rip Reptile Industry - StephF, Tue Mar 23 11:43:53 2010
• RE: Lacey Act Could Rip Reptile Industry - fumanchu858, Tue Mar 23 12:05:16 2010
• RE: Lacey Act Could Rip Reptile Industry - StephF, Tue Mar 23 14:35:52 2010
• RE: Lacey Act Could Rip Reptile Industry - Calparsoni, Tue Mar 23 15:26:50 2010
• RE: Lacey Act Could Rip Reptile Industry - Hiss_N_Herps, Tue Mar 23 15:28:56 2010