Who cares if the government thinks they should be able to come into your house and inspect whatever you may have, herp or not? After all, if you're not doing anything illegal, you have nothing to worry about, right? 
keep in mind tp&w couldnt give a crap about snakes, they are just like any other agency they are a huge money machine. i want my money spent on specific studies on reptile species.
I'd like to see a separate herp permit/stamp, if for no other reason to better track what sort of economic and ecological impact we're having in the state. Plus, it would make it easier to collect data (sort of like HIP certification for birds; plus, I've seen where identification of a subset of sportsmen in other states enabled various researchers to conduct surveys to gain info on particular species).
A TP&W biologist told me a few years back that they're not too worried about the roundups because, as disgusting as some people find them, they don't pose as big a threat to the state's rattlesnake population as you'd think at first glance. I'm sure more atrox get run over or outright "hate crime" killed annually than are taken at the roundups. It's the unethical tactics of some that is the problem (gassing burrows etc even though it's illegal).
if your doing this for a friend just give them the animal, it just looks better that way.
I've offered to reimburse shipping ONLY for San Diego banded geckos from friends (explicitly stating I won't pay for the animals), but haven't had to put it into practice yet--the only specimens I have were given to me by someone who drove all the way to TX for me (and to herp).
>>ok troy now comes the pissing match, people like to say the game wardens can search for game animals, this is whats in parks & wildlife code so they believe it to be true.
The real problem is that there is a difference in interpretation of the law between herpers and LE, and even between individual herpers and individual wardens. It's neither of our jobs to interpret the law (that's what the proverbial 2am call to the JoP is for), but then again the laws shouldn't be so vague as to be open to erroneous interpretation in the field (I think they're written that way to keep lawyers in business).
now as you said in your post, it does say game animal, a snake is not a game animal or even considered an animal in the code or in case laws. an animal is a fur bearing animal in case law.
Correct--snakes are "wildlife resources" (read: hatband!) as are many other biological animals.
>>ever since then we got along much better, & we where always much more cordial to one another, i actually looked forward to chit chatting with him after that. i often would carry a copy of the supreme courts ruling with me for those types of stops.
That's another document I would find useful for my site.
-----
Chris McMartin
www.mcmartinville.com
I'm Not a Herpetologist, but I Play One on the Internet