I think you are confusing two different things.

HR669 would have eliminated pet ownership in a single generation. It was anti pet legislation, not focused on conservation. The support by R. Bordallo of this horrible bill, was based on the introduction of the brown snake to Guam. Oh yeah, HSUS gave her an award as a politician of the year! Brown snakes were not pets in people living rooms with names and were not part of families. The were "stowaways" in aircraft tires and were an accidental introduction. Anti pet organizations like PETA (group responsible for the deaths of more pet animals than any other organization in the country) and H$U$, who do nothing for animals anywhere, sponsor legislation like that to foster their selfish agenda of no animals for food, experimentation, entertainment (circuses and Zoos) and NO PETS.

Hobby and commercial breeding has to be split into two types. Species preservation and selective breeding. NO, hypotrans would not survive in nature and I do not kid myself when I produce them that I am saving the species. HR669, would have affected zoos and private breeders who, in fact do breed reptiles and amphibians for species preservation. If you ever go to the San Diego zoo, notice the number of signs indication that this species only exists in captivity. Your sponsors of bills like HR669 and the python ban, H$U$ and PETA really are not interested in the animals. WE now have the python ban looming. The Bermese python was the issue (although they arent and all evidence points to that), but thanks to special interest groups, lets add boas and Deseanseans Anaconda. My understanding is there is not even a zoo specimine of Deseanseans Anaconda in the united states. Don't quote me on the spelling. So why were they added? Pressure from special interest groups.

So can we say that breeders are saving the species, yes we can, but not all of them. These bills are based on very flawed logic and misrepresentation of the facts. And for the most part, they do not distinguish between breeding for species preservation and morphs. Beacause legislation is not written by legislators, but by special interest groups, the line is blurred. The invasive species bills are based on the random number of 6 billion dollars in damage annually as a result of the introduction of invasive species, focused at the pet trade. Here is a little fact that no one talks about. Most of those invasive species are federally funded, deliberate introductions of non native species. Kudzu is always brought up...introduced by the US govenment to aid in the prevention of soil erosion. Yes your tax dollars paid for that. That is one of dozens. Florida spends 60 million in the persute of the elimination of a South American tree that up until about 5 years ago was sold for landscaping and was planted in yards all over Florida.

What is my point. Don't lump our politicians being bullied or bribed by H$U$ and PETA, animal rights group who want to take away your right to own a pet and make millions for themselves in the process, breeders who enjoy breeding animals and creating new morphs, and people who are trying to save the species we are responsible for destroying in the same bowl.

I think the new trailer for WhaleWars, clearly an animal right endevor, says it all.

"It is not about whales....it is about 72 die-hards on a mission".

That is the core of animal rights in a nutshell......the hell with the animals, we want our money and 15 minutes of fame.
-----
www.moonstonedragons.com

[ Show Entire Thread ]