Reptile & Amphibian Forums

This is frightening:

http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills081/biltxt/intro/HB1847I.htm

Reptiles (although unclear which ones other than the few specified), parakeets, doves, etc., are all covered under "wild animals" and would be banned/regulated.

Thanks,
Ed

This bill on the Herp/Cites forum. Due to the magnitude of this situation, Ginger is allowing me to make a post about it on three forums. Which members of which forums would you consider the most "pro-active"? According to 2Care, all we need are another 592 signatures to complete the petition, and they are pretty good at getting results.

I'm sure I'm not the right person to answer your question, but according to the activity statistics posted on the Main Forume page, the Ball Python, Leopard Gecko and Monitor forums would probably be good. There are several Monitor species specificly listed in the bill.

I already posted your petition link in the Rainbow Boa forum.

This proposed legislation is arbitrary, capricious, unnecessary, and to top it all off, poorly worded/written. What is the reasoning behind it? Did these Congresswomen just cut and paste some of this from somewhere? Do they have any clue that a Nile Monitor or Burmese Python would die pretty quickly if released into the wild in Missouri, especially in the fall/winter?

Would it do any good to also e-mail these "legislators?"

Good luck,
Ed

>>This bill on the Herp/Cites forum. Due to the magnitude of this situation, Ginger is allowing me to make a post about it on three forums. Which members of which forums would you consider the most "pro-active"? According to 2Care, all we need are another 592 signatures to complete the petition, and they are pretty good at getting results.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/stop-missouri-house-bill-1847-urgent

Am I reading this right? Aside from the reptile listings you can't havearrots, parakeets, finches, doves and pigeons, and canaries without a permit?

That's the way I read it. Scary, isn't it?

>>Am I reading this right? Aside from the reptile listings you can't havearrots, parakeets, finches, doves and pigeons, and canaries without a permit?

Why don't they go after all the Puppy Mills, Missouri is famous for? Do you think it's the Puppy Mill people trying to corner the market and stifle the competition?lol
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

Hey John,

I can't figure any of this out, it's like bizarro world. The only thing I can think of is that, like typical bullies, these extremist animal rights groups just go after the weakest, most unorganized targets. They know they won't be successful targetting common pets like dogs and cats and fish (even though it is a FACT these animals do harm humans and/or local wildlife.) There's too much public support for these animals. With reptiles (and apparently birds), there is not going to be that public support. That's why I keep saying this is a PR and media fight, not an insider's debate discussing scientific facts. That's the only chance we have, imo. Heck, let's try to get a big herp name (preferably female) on the Oprah show to display some snakes and explain the realities of any risk they present. Might sound crazy, but stuff like that would do more good than writing letters to the USFWS.

Thanks,
Ed

>>Why don't they go after all the Puppy Mills, Missouri is famous for? Do you think it's the Puppy Mill people trying to corner the market and stifle the competition?lol
>>-----
>>"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
>>John Crickmer

The way I see it...they do follow the path of least resistance.
It is easier to take on the least organized group; the one with the least at stake financially, and the one with the least political clout. We are all small business owner's at best. Not big corporations.
They do it for several reasons:
1) It's the easiest way to go, scapegoating the herp trade for reasons mentioned above. Political expedience.
2) It looks like they are actually doing something to benefit wildlife, when in fact, they are not. Political feel good.
3) It is a matter of control during these these hard financial times. Government entities are strapped for cash.
a) Since 9/11 the Federal Government has focused on Homeland Security, The War on Terrorism, and the elective War in Iraq. Is a big scramble by all other governmental entities below the Federal level to get their share of the pie, because the Federal Government is squandering all available resources and driving us all into debt to fund those previously mentioned boondoggles.
b) Municipalities and States are having to come up with new and creative ways of funding in order to function. They do this by enacting measures of control and regulation. That is exactly what we are seeing.
c) Activities that have little economic value, as revenue generators, for the smaller jurisdictions are being eliminated (regulated out of existence) because they are a distraction for said regulators and an inefficiency that must be eliminated from the system.
Hope this makes sense.
jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

Honestly,

With the way this is going...by the time I have grandkids, they are going to need a permit to have a baby...

I can see it now:

*In the state of Missouri it is illegal to keep more than one child per 250 square feet with out a permit. The permit is impossible to get, but you can try by contacting a number that doesn't exist.

Oh and btw...I heard those parakeets are deadly...better put a lock on the cage door before they escape and start pecking you to death
-----
Thanks,
Amy
My Boids

It's 2008 not 1984.

If this doesn't prove that government can go too far I'm not sure what does lol. I am really wondering if we all have another 10 years left in our hobby. I am thinking of trying to get AZA certified and become a bonafied museum or zoo so when it all comes down I would be exempt from the "future" laws.

Check out the link
Miss. bill would ban restaurants from serving obes

-----
Pythons.Net