Tim,



The Ohio bust was the result of the actions of a few LE personnel involved, not the entire department. Ohio is just one of fifty states in the US, and the F&WS is a completely different agency all together. In short, you have a beef with a very small number of LE personnel, even if you put forth the argument that the entire Ohio department is incompetent. Is it fair for the herp community to blast all LE personnel based on the actions of a few in Ohio or Utah? The herp community certainly claims that it is not fair for LE to place limitations on all herpers as a result of the actions of a few individuals within the herp community, so why is it ok to blast all LE officials based on the actions of a few, but it is not ok for LE to blast herpers based on the actions of a few? Further, when you call someone an incompetent idiot, your not exactly promoting an atmosphere of cooperative problem solving. A combative atmosphere will not promote change, it will only force people to dig into their positions and be closed to any suggestions or comments you may have, and it doesn’t make you look very good either. Finally, LE has nothing to loose by sticking with their plan, and the majority of the public will think it is fine or just plain don’t care (remember, the herp community is in the minority), so LE has nothing to loose, but you sure do. This kind of rhetoric only makes the problem worse, not better.



As to the PIT tag issue, you might find the following bibliography helpful. You should look at the Keck (1994), Freeland and Fry (1995), Lehmann (1996) and Camper and Dixon (1988) papers in particular. I said I would put this bibliography together for folks, and I did because I am trying to improve the relationship between herpers and LE.



Big Brother





Boarman, W. I., M. L. Beigel, et al. (1998). "A passive integrated transponder system for tracking animal movements." Wildlife Society Bulletin 26(4): 886-891.



Bronikowski, A. M. and S. J. Arnold (1999). "The evolutionary ecology of life history variation in the garter snake Thamnophis elegans." Ecology 80(7): 2314-2325.



Camper, J. D. and J. R. Dixon (1988). Evaluation of a Microchip Marking System for Amphibians and Reptiles, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Research Report 7100-159: 1-22.



Fasola, M., F. Barbieri, et al. (1993). "Test of an electronic individual tag for newts." Herpetological Journal 3: 149-150.



Ferner, J. W. (1979). A Review Of Marking Techniques for Amphibians and Reptiles, Society For The Study Of Amphibians And Reptiles, Herpetological Circular No. 9: v-42.



Freeland, W. J. and K. Fry (1995). "Suitability of passive integrated transponder tags for marking live animals for trade." Wildlife Research 22(6): 767-773.



Jehle, R. and W. Hodl (1998). "PITs versus patterns: Effects of transponders on recapture rate and body condition of Danube crested newts (Triturus dobrogicus) and common spadefoot toads (Pelobates fuscus)." Herpetological Journal 8(4): 181-186.



Keck, M. B. (1994). "Test for Detrimental Effects of Pit Tags in Neonatal Snakes." Copeia(1): 226-228.



Lehmann, H. (1996). "Critical aspects of marking protected reptiles and amphibians for legislative purpose." Praktische Tierarzt 77(7): 589-&.



Ott, J. A. and D. E. Scott (1999). "Effects of toe-clipping and PIT-tagging on growth and survival in metamorphic Ambystoma opacum." Journal of Herpetology 33(2): 344-348.



Perret, N. and P. Joly (2002). "Impacts of tattooing and pit-tagging on survival and fecundity in the alpine newt (Triturus alpestris)." Herpetologica 58(1): 131-138.



Sinsch, U. (1997). "Effects of larval history and microtags on growth and survival of natterjack (Bufo calamita) metamorphs." Herpetological Journal 7(4): 163-168.



Vaughan, R. K., J. R. Dixon, et al. (1996). "A reevaluation of populations of the corn snake Elaphe guttata (Reptilia: Serpentes: Colubridae) in Texas." Texas Journal of Science 48(3): 175-190.

[ Show Entire Thread ]