Reptile & Amphibian Forums

This should be everyone's priority, this weekend. It is not too late yet, to get letters sent. We must act NOW! http://www.usark.org/index.php

-Toby Brock

-----
Southwestern Center for Herpetological Research

Sorry, but I see a need for the bill. There are Cuban anoles well established in South Florida. There are pythons in the Everglades. Mediterranean Gecko's are spreading all over the south. Most of us are not the problem, but the problem does exist, and it does need to be addressed. This bill is a start in the right direction.

Everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion.

This bill, if passed will end breeding and selling of ALL nonnative species of animals. This bill does more than address the problem, it makes new ones. This bill is a gigantic step backward for herpetoculture and all other animal keepers and businesses, and will put thousands of people out of work. In my opinion, that alone is a very big reason that it should not pass. Aren't there enough people out of work in the U.S.?

Not to mention, what happens to all of the animals once they are banned? Mass euthanasia? This would be cruel to the animals and owners alike. I see this bill as a major loss of freedom, or privelege, if you prefer.

Certainly the Med Geckos are widespread, but really - are they an invasive species? What negative impact have they had on the environment and native species? I have seen none in my part of the country, and they seem to actually contribute as a food source for young snakes. (I personally use them for scenting for stubborn baby snakes.) Also, they have been established here since, at least, the 1950's.

Problem invasives are mostly very limited as to where they can thrive, like the pythons in southern Florida. I cannot see them thriving well enough to become established outside of that region. The data used in support of this bill is NOT based on scientific fact-based research, and is a product of extremist propaganda.

My $0.02.

-Toby Brock
-----
Southwestern Center for Herpetological Research

I see that the bill failed. I am sure that you are happy about it.

Did you read the bill? The bill wasn't banning the sale of anything at this time. In fact is was trying to bring science into the regulations.

While I am sure that you have never set a non native animal loose into the wild, the fact is that others have.

I am sure that you are aware that many species of native frogs are under pressure from a pathogen that is new to them in North America. Well, it looks like the cause of their decline is because of the introduction of African Clawed Frogs. People let them go after the novelty wore off. Clawed Frogs, it turns out are the source of the pathogen.

Should an individual be able buy a snake that will grow to be twenty feel long and weigh 200 lbs because the baby snake in the pet shop looked cool. Shouldn't a person buying such an animal be required to show proof that they have a plan to deal with the adult?

I personally am not for banning any animal, but I do think that some animals should require a permit. As we all know, there are now large pythons in the Everglades, and they didn't get there by swimming there from South America. They are a problem?

OK, you didn't like House Bill 669. What would you like to see done about the problem?

Are you sure that YOU read the bill?

I for one know that we need to do something about invasive species, but the way 669 was written would have destroyed the pet industry at a stroke. How?

The Bill established two lists-one a list of "invasives that would be verboten. No insoluble problems there (there ARE some problems, but they are solvable), at least on my own part. It is the second list that was the deal-breaker. The law mandated that ONLY those animals listed on an "approved list could be imported, shipped across state lines or BRED! Further, it gave the USFWS three years to come up with this second "allowed" list.

Any rational person should be able to see several fatal flaws in this approach:

First, the law itself would go into effect upon signature of the President, but the allowed list would not be available for YEARS. That means pretty much EVERYTHING (save a few domestic animals-dogs, cats, cows, sheep, etc) would be illegal to transport or breed unless and until studies could be completed to add that species to the list, and the list itself could be released! This alone would be enough to eliminate much of the herp hobby.

Second, the legislation failed to provide ANY funding for the massive increase in manpower that the USFWS would need , not only to enforce the law, but to perform the massive number of studies required to come up with the two lists in the first place!

Lastly, we have all seen the quality of the "science" the government is using to justify its opinion on what is and is not "invasive", and to what extent. Witness the infamous Rodda study that purports to show that Burmese pythons will soon be living in Oklahoma and virginia!

There has to be a better way, and now the folks in Washington realize they have to give herpers, aquarists and aviculturists a place in the decision-making process. What's wrong with that?
-----
Brad Chambers
WWW.HCU-TX.ORG

The Avalanche has already started-it is too late for the pebbles to vote....

First Point: The bill would ban nothing until the lists came out, and the lists had to be based on good science.

Second Point: The bill said there was to be two lists, not just one. The first one was of allowed animals, and the second was of banned animals. The bill was never intended to ban the import and sale of all nonnative wildlife.

We all know that a problem exists, but I don't see the USARK helping our congress come up with a solution to the problem.

Back in the mid 90's I did a fellowship at an EPA research lab. All the scientists there were dedicated to finding truths. I don't fear scientific studies. The only problems I ever see are from the political hacks twisting the facts to suit their own agenda.

BTW: Thank you for your thoughtful response.

First point- The way the Bill was written, nothing would be allowed that was not on the "allowed" list. Since there would be no "Allowed list" until months or years after the Bill went into effect, on what basis can you say that nothing would be banned until that list came out? Once the law was in effect, nothing would be allowed unless it was on the list-a list which would not even exist until sometime in the nebulous future!

I come from an academic background myself, and I can assure you that lots of scientists have their own axes to grind, and won't hesitate to twist the facts to suit an agenda. Not ALL scientists, but some-certainly enough that we have a right to be wary.
-----
Brad Chambers
WWW.HCU-TX.ORG

The Avalanche has already started-it is too late for the pebbles to vote....

I personally have long advocated that we begin to phase out mass importation of exotic reptiles, and replace it with a much more restricted process in which a few breeding groups are brought in to establish breeding colonies (after, of course, said species have been studied for invasive potential).

But such reasonable reforms are light years from the draconian restrictions in HR669.
-----
Brad Chambers
WWW.HCU-TX.ORG

The Avalanche has already started-it is too late for the pebbles to vote....

Yes, I have read the bill. Mostly, the truly restrictive nature of the bill is hidden in redundant legalese, however it clearly states in SEC. 9. that even the "approved" nonnatives would be nonmailable. This would end interstate sales of ALL nonnative herps, even those which are legal to keep (approved).

SEC. 9. TREATMENT OF NONNATIVE WILDLIFE SPECIES AS NONMAILABLE MATTER.

Nonnative wildlife species included in the list of approved species issued under section 4 shall be considered and treated as nonmailable matter under section 3015 of title 39, United States Code.

I agree with you, and I am in favor of permitting systems in regard to keeping the giant constrictors. This can be and is already handled at the state and municipal level, in many states - without federal invlovement. Yes, I agree that pythons are a problem in southern Florida, but again, I do not believe that they pose a threat as invasive species outside of that region, in the U.S. As Brad mentioned, the "scientific" study showing Burmese Pythons ranging up to Oklahoma, was NOT based on real, unbiased scientific research.

-----
Southwestern Center for Herpetological Research

One quick point: The USPS doesn't ship snakes by their rules, but they also don't inspect most small, light packages. Both UPS and FedEx ban shipping live snakes.

I am glad to see that we can post about this issue without insults and name calling.

While I haven't read the study that may be an example of bad science, but I do nnow that Mediterranean Geckos were first seen in Tx and over the years, their range has spread. While I may find them interesting creatures, that fact remains, they don't belong here.

I would be willing to say that most, if not all of our forum members are not part of the problem. We don't let or animals loose into the wild. Again, I ask: How do you stop the fools that do?

Yes, I know that USPS does not ship snakes (by law). They are not banned by UPS, though. - See companies such as "Ship Your Reptiles". Also, if FedEx and UPS choose not to ship reptiles, this does not make it illegal to do so, since they are not govt agencies, like USPS. This seems to be left to the shipping site manager, for the most part. I used to work for a courier company, and we delivered lots of reptiles. But, if you call and ask a rep, he/she will most likely tell you that they do not accept snakes. If the federal govt passes HR 669, then it WILL be illegal to ship nonnative animals through any courier.

Okay, on the subject of the Mediterranean Gecko: They seem to have imported themselves by stowing away, in shipments from the Old World. They were not, and (to my knowledge) have never been a popular herpetoculture item. So, this species' spread throughout the southern states cannot be blamed on keepers releasing them into the wild. In south Texas (for example) they seem to occupy a niche not previously occupied by any native herp. They are crevice dwelling, nocturnal lizards, which feed on insects, of which there are plenty for them, every other insectivorous herp, and then some. There are no other similar species with which they can hybridize, so there is no possibility of genetic contamination - so, other than the fact that they are not native, what is the problem with them? They are just not what I would consider an invasive species.

I don't have an answer for stopping fools from releasing pythons and other herps into the wild. Like I said, there are already laws in many states regarding the keeping of giant constrictors and venemous. These laws "should" suffice, if enforced properly. A federal law which bans all nonnative species is certainly not the answer. Maybe more responsibility on the part of people who sell these animals? Maybe prospective keepers of potentially dangerous animals should have to take some sort of test, or provide proof that they will be able to care for the animal throughout the duration of its life, in order to obtain a permit to do so. I would be in favor of this type of thing, on a state or municipal level, concerning not only large pythons and venemous, but also dogs and cats. Feral and/or abandoned cats and dogs are much more of a problem than any escaped herps, as I see it. You hear a lot more stories of dogs attacking and seriously injuring (or killing) people, than you do of pythons. They are certainly nonnative species, and yet they were exempted from HR 669. These animals also do much more damage to native wildlife than, say Mediterranean Geckos.

-----
-Toby Brock
Southwestern Center for Herpetological Research