Chris below is the partial text from the passed version of HB 1309 that deals with your question.
-------------------------------------------
SECTION 41. Chapter 43, Parks and Wildlife Code, is amended
by adding Subchapter V to read as follows:
SUBCHAPTER V. NONINDIGENOUS SNAKE PERMIT
Sec. 43.851. PERMIT. (a) The commission by rule shall
establish permits that allow permit holders to possess or transport
in this state a live nonindigenous:
(1) venomous snake; or
(2) constrictor that is one of the following:
(A) African rock python, Python sebae;
(B) Asiatic rock python, Python molurus;
(C) green anaconda, Eunectes murinus;
(D) reticulated python, Python reticulatus; or
(E) southern African python, Python natalensis.
(b) The commission shall establish separate permits for
recreational and commercial purposes.
-----------------------------------------------
You will note that it reads that a permit is required for any "live nonindigenous venomous snake". In HB 1309 before they sneaked it into HB 12 that section read "live venomous snake non indigenous to this country". They have now conventiently and quietly droped the verbage about "this country". So it now appears to me that this has opened the door for TP&W to be the ones who will define "nonindigenous" when they write the rules to enforce this provision. My opinion is that they will define "nonindigenous" to mean "non-indigenous to the state of Texas". But that is only my personal opinion.
-----
Gerald Keown
Southwestern Center for Herpetological Research
www.southwesternherp.com
