Reptile & Amphibian Forums

There was strong turnout from both sides of the issue and frankly a lot of confusion among the commissioners and those there to testify on what they were there to testify about.

At question was whether or not to restrict the import of all non-native turtles and frogs. In the end it appears it was decided to restrict the import of those animals destined for the food market as a first step. It was unclear how the commissioners were going to make the distinction, but it was clear from the video they were all ready prepared to blame, and punish, the pet community for any "leakage".

Representing the pet community were Scott Solar, with PIJAC and Amazon Reptile Center, Andrew Wyatt representing USARK, Shane Bagnall for ZooMed and others, while other noted herpers such as Philippe De Vosjoli were in the audience.

The video has been broadcast live all day, once an archive of today's session has been posted we will link it here.

TODAY's RESULT: The pet trade was excluded from ban on import of turtles & frogs in California

I would love to take this opportunity to thank a few folks.

1) Marshall Meyer: without Marshall we would not be here

2) Shane Bagnall: Shane was a shining star today making heartfelt and sincere testimony today. He clearly has the ear of the commission. Wise beyond is years.

3) Randy Wright: the commission was clearly pleased to hear Randy's statement. Randy was honest, thorough, credible & beyond sincere. I am sure his input will be considered heavily by the commission. Likely we will see the "671 permit" procedures follow his input.

4) Christine Roscher: after I/PIJAC exposed Fish & Game had excluded the pet trade from the ban on import of turtles & frogs, Christine spent her testimony time getting the Department & the Commission to be 100% certain they were NOT trying to backdoor our industry. Good on her for proving it! Awesome Chris!

5) The commissioners: All five commissioners clearly take their assignment very seriously. They are passionate & truly care about the wildlife & habitats of California. They are diligent in their efforts to maintain or improve them. DAN, thanks for taking the time to speak with me. Your honesty & recognition are not forgotten.

6) The DFG itself: DFG staff was clearly spot on with the assessments and assistance to the Commission. When the time came to discuss the turtle/frog ban, it was mentioned that the pet trade has a "261 exemption". I caught this, albeit many of the commission did not. I started our (My/PIJAC's) testimony & after providing my background info I asked for clarification on this point. To the Department's credit they presented a powerpoint that made it clear to anyone watching present or future the department maintained an exemption for the pet industry. Thanks for being prepared and forthright. DFG you rocked today! Keep up the good work.

7) Everyone who wrote letters. You rock too!

Thanks everyone! Woo hoo!
-----
AMAZON REPTILE CENTER

I am a little confused. While your post says pretty much everything I was hoping to hear, a thread in this forum titled "Get out to Ontario Tomorrow! - TammyJoseph, Mar 2, 2010 *HOT TOPIC*" (which I read earlier this evening) seems to paint a very different picture.

In that thread she (TammyJoseph) references a Facebook post where she describes in great detail the proceedings of today's meeting. In that post it sounded like no one from the reptile industry spoke. Did she just not see that part of the meeting? Could you shed some light on what seems like a conflict between these two sources?

It is not my intent to start anything between anyone, or to be disrespectful to anyone, I just want to get the clear facts about what happened at the meeting today.

http://www.facebook.com/notes/tammy-joseph/fish-and-game-commission-proposed-ban-on-turtles-and-frogs/336740264369
Link

Tammy is referencing the meeting which occurred on Feb 3rd which did not have anyone representing the reptile community in attendance. Yesterdays meeting, in Ontario, had a good number of
reptile community members attending.

Ahhh, I see that now. That makes much more sense. I am glad I was mistaken. Thanks for the clarification!

"Did I say that? What I meant to say was...". So often our politicians and officials enact laws and regulations proposed and written by special interest groups, without even knowing the contents or consequences.
I thank all our watchdogs for keeping them honest.
jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

I'm glad to hear that things went well in Ontario yesterday. Sounds like everyone did a good job. But, I'm not sure things are quite as rosy as we'ed like to believe. While the commission is saying that the ban is for the food trade, how exactly would the "pet industry" be "excluded" from a ban?? In other words, if California bans turtles and frogs, how could they possibly word the regulations to only ban frogs and turtles for food.

A ban is a ban. Even if the CDFG and the commission only "meant" to ban these animals from the food trade, allowing the pet trade to have them would make any regulations unenforceable. They will either have to ban all frogs and turtles from the state or not bother banning any.

I think we better not just sit back and assume the CDFG and Commission are going to be looking out for our best interest. Any language for proposed regulations needs to be reviewed and if the possibility of the ban extending to pet and hobbist uses appears, we need to oppose it.

Still, as one of the people who found out about this issue at the Sacto Commission meeting last month, I'm glad to hear that everyone did a good job in Onterio.

Now what about the beaded issue? How did that go?

The exemption already exists. They will be continuing to use it. Here is the language:

2271. (a) No live aquatic plant or animal may be imported into this
state without the prior written approval of the department pursuant
to regulations adopted by the commission. A written application for
the importation, submitted in conformance with the procedural
requirements established by the commission, is deemed approved where
it has not been denied within 60 days.
(b) This section does not apply to the following plants or animals
unless the plants or animals are or may be placed in waters of the
state:
(1) Mollusks.
(2) Crustaceans.
(3) Ornamental marine or freshwater plants and animals that are not utilized for human consumption or bait purposes and are
maintained in closed systems for personal, pet industry, or hobby
purposes.
(c) The section does not apply to any live aquatic plant or animal
imported by a registered aquaculturist.

NOTE #3 above

You may read the original HERE
-----
AMAZON REPTILE CENTER

I am in 100% agreement with you. It is far from over. This ban on turtles and frogs for food is just a facade, and Commissioner Rogers made it clear that once they still find them in food markets (Which they will), they will blame and go after the pet industry. They are being deceitful in their procedures, and uninformative to the people their actions are going to affect. To the people that were there, or watched it, did you notice how long it took till Commissioner Rogers laid out the real intention of what they were doing?
Noooo, it has nothing to do with the pet industry, it won't affect you at all, you don't have to worry....Wait wait wait. Unless you find turtles and frogs in food markets?... Then it's OUR fault? It's lunacy, and just coniving on their part.
I'm writing a summary report tonight on yesterdays meeting for NAIA. I will post it later.
Thanks to everyone that came out and supported the reptile community.

Tammy

I believe they want to listen and the only conspiracy here involves AR groups who wish to make us pets. We must be able to speak as loud as they do. It will never be easy. Simplest point is that we must be heard, from here on out. We can be as decentralized as we like till it comes to countering the dishonest ploys of groups like HateSUS. We have to be a team when it comes to this and then everyone can compete with one another. If we stay vigilant, communicate and move together as a team, we will maintain our rights to live as we please and look at the world a little differently than most. And don't forget, Never Be a Soft Target. Be proud.

I agree. Something just isn't quite right here. What about frog legs for food. Perfectly acceptable. None live, or what? I'm pretty sure a large number of frozen processed frogs come in from Asia, to satisfy the U.S. market. Pretty sure they would enter somewhere in California.
How in the heck does the Beaded Lizard equate to a food issue?
Sounds to me like they are being less than candid here.
Stay on 'em!
jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

In the video they talk about ceasing the issuing of permits for the import of LIVE turtles and frogs for the food market. Anything that comes in as meat would be OK. The frog and turtle keepers have gotten a pass for now, but if you watch the video it is very clear that they left things open for more severe restrictions in the future.

The beaded lizard issue is completely separate, but was discussed at the same meeting (its also on the video). A group of us has been following this issue for the last month or so since we were alerted to pending changes in the Restricted Species regs. It was during this time that some of us noticed the turtle and frog ban in the works, so we alerted concerned parties immediately.

Two issues are at hand. First, they are looking at adding beaded lizards (currently legal to keep without a permit in California) to the restricted species list by changing the language from restricting only the reticulared gila monster to restricting the entire genus Heloderma. Second, they are (among other things) looking to change the language in the restricted species permit regs such that you could no longer breed restricted species for commercial purposes (which is currently legal under a Section 671 permit). There are a number of other problems we have with the proposed regs that I won't go into right now, but the biggest effect of these proposed changes is that anyone who currently holds a permit to breed and sell gila monsters in California would no longer be allowed to do so. Additionally, although those who currently own beaded lizards would be grandfathered in, they too would be restricted from breeding for commercial purposes.

No decisions were made on these issues at this meeting, but we will be at the next commission meeting in Monterey to fight these changes further.

>>I agree. Something just isn't quite right here. What about frog legs for food. Perfectly acceptable. None live, or what? I'm pretty sure a large number of frozen processed frogs come in from Asia, to satisfy the U.S. market. Pretty sure they would enter somewhere in California.
>>How in the heck does the Beaded Lizard equate to a food issue?
>>Sounds to me like they are being less than candid here.
>>Stay on 'em!
>>jsc
>>-----
>>"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
>>John Crickmer

Just curious, what is the justification for or reasoning behind the proposed restrictions on beaded lizards???

Thanks,
Ed

The Heloderma/671 permit issue is completely different than the live food market ban. They will no longer issue permits for live food importation of turtles and frogs.

What may seem to not be right is the way it happened. We all thought we were falling victim to a much larger deal. That was until the DFG realized they were not following THEIR OWN RULES.

The Commission wanted a scorched earth outright ban on all frogs ans turtles. When the Department realized this is not legal the tact was changed. I knew this was likely going to be the case (Marshall prepped me) and this explains why I quit my testimony. No need to put up a fight for something that does not exist.

If they want to add animals to the 671 list of prohibited species there is a procedure. Exactly what the Helodermas are going thru now.
-----
AMAZON REPTILE CENTER

Your doing a grate job Scott,stand up to these clusters. "They'll be back" The loooong arm of the law will reach out and touch us all if we dont beat'em back from the get go. Thanks for being a DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT GUY, even if you can work what ever 80 hrs.a week you want. Vic Morgan.........pic Calif.bound now and forever!