Just wanted to make a comment on the thread started about a week ago dealing with molurus sp. The unfortunate thing about an ESA listing is that it is above and beyond the CITES Appendix I listing, and totally supercedes it as far as federal law is concerned. CITES listing has nothing to do with interstate movement of a species within the U.S. It is the P. molurus molurus listing under the ESA that is the reason for all of the laws controlling the movement of these pythons. Any CITES Appendix I animal can be shipped anywhere in the country without federal permits as long as it is not also covered by the ESA. CITES only deals with movement between different countries. ESA only covers interstate transport between states within the U.S. I believe molurus is the only python species covered by the ESA. If it had been left just as a CITES Appendix I species, interstate transport would be legal without a CBW permit. And on the question about driving across state borders, it is illegal to drive this species from one state to another without a permit. Both buyer and seller must have a CBW permit for interstate transport. The other interesting thing is that the ESA only covers interstate commerce with a listed species. This means that ESA listed animals can be moved across state borders without a CBW permit if no money or trade goods change hands in a transaction. In other words, if you just give a molurus to someone, it can be legally owned and transported interstate without a permit. You can however sell and move ESA listed species within a single state with no problem, feds are only interested in interstate transport. It's the interstate commerce part that caused all the problems for having to acquire permits for interstate transport of ESA species.

The other part of the puzzle is that CITES listed pimbura as synonymous with molurus molurus because customs inspectors were having difficulty distinguishing the two subspecies, so regardless of taxonomic classification, CITES decided to list them as identical only for enforcement purposes. The problem is that U.S. Fish and Wildlife decided to use CITES own classification list for all of their enforcement activities also, just to make things less complicated. This is why P. m. molurus = pimbura under the federal ESA. I will be curious to see the results of the mDNA analysis when it comes out.

I have had a CBW permit for molurus for several years and I am glad I already have it, as the price went up last summer from $25 to $200. However, I would still not hesitate to pay the extra if I had too. And, I must agree with Bill’s comment in the earlier thread, in that Sri Lankans do have a classic look found in no other python. Thanks,

Kelly