Reptile & Amphibian Forums

KPIX (San Francisco, California) 06 May 10 California Bans Imports Of Live Turtles, Frogs (Joe Vazquez)
The California Fish and Game Commission has recently banned the importation of live frogs and turtles for food. State officials are worried about imported species wiping out native ones, but some Asian-American politicians are fighting the ban.
William Chan likes his meals fresh. That's why he's disappointed to learn that foods he considers delicacies, such as turtles and frogs sold in the markets of San Francisco's Chinatown, can no longer be imported into California.
"Their restrictions are too much," Chan said.
The animals are alive while on display, but shop owners say they are killed before they are sold, as per state law. Community leader Pius Lee said a ban on their importation, just passed by the Fish and Game Commission last month, could seriously hurt small privately owned markets.
"They're going to cut some of their workers because about 20 percent of their income," Lee said. "It's a major industry for the Chinese community."
A CBS 5 report last year showed the Fish and Game Commission has been worried that imported species, if they're ever released into the wild, will wipe out the native species. Animal rights activists have spoken up at public hearings, claiming something entirely different: that the animals are abused when they're kept in such crowded conditions.
But now six members of the legislature have written a letter calling for the commission to reconsider, saying "A disturbing part of your recent decision is that it appears to disproportionately target Asian-American owned businesses."
State Senator Leland Yee, and the other five legislators are scheduled to meet next week with representatives of the commission.
"These animals are imported for specifically for food, not for pets, for food. And so, the interest in the community is to allow that sort of cultural practice" Yee said.
The state will no longer issue new licenses to importers. It will take a few months for the existing licenses to expire. Meanwhile, turtles and frogs can still be sold for now ... as a decades-long discussion continues over what's culturally appropriate when it comes to food.
California Bans Imports Of Live Turtles, Frogs

I think I noticed your name as a peer-reviewer for the risk assessment of the 9 constrictors. Could you share what you reviewed out of that report? Was it the report as a whole, or a section of it?

If I'm mistaken, I apologize.

Thanks!
jb
-----
What's written above is purely my opinion. In fact, MOST of what you read on the internet is someone's opinion. Don't take it too seriously

Jonathan Brady
DeviantConstrictors.com
Deviant Constrictors picturetrail

JB;
First of all ... it's 'Wes'.

Second, I'm afraid that you've mixed my modest efforts into somebody else's initiative.

A couple of years ago, my modest contribution to kingsnake.com was as the roving 'paperboy' - posting press items in the various forums as appropriate - and then a collation in the kingsnake.com Herp News forum. The idea was, to get the open press info into the hands of people that had to know - and could possibly do something about it - as quick as possible.
When I was deployed 18 months ago (and, concurrently, had my laptop stolen), I wasn't in a position to post much of anything ... much less press or reports on boas. I'm back now, and hoping to get back into 'usual routine'. I've tried to make a special effort to keep 'au fey' with what's going on legally down in your part in the world in regards to herps, because I believe that Canada will be next in implementing, sometimes ill-considered herp-related legislation. Hence my recent concentration at posting herp-law press to this forum as soon as I could find it.

Again Sir, I'm just a paperboy.

If my name has been associated with 9 boas;
A. I'm in for a wee bit of a shock when I get back to the house today and go to check on my 100+ newts and salamanders in the basement ... the cold, dark basement that nobody visits .... (insert ominous music here ...); or
2. I might have posted a press item on the subject - and thus your 'name association'; or
3. Somebody is using my moniker!

I hope this clarifies.
respects
Wes

Hey Wes, I thought it was Wes but didn't want to assume.

I suppose it's either a second W von Papineau or my other theory (see below) because I just double checked and your name is mentioned on page 261 of the report.

CLICK HERE FOR THE REPORT

Your name is listed on the third line from the bottom on pg 261.

But I was wrong in one thing (forgive me for relying on my memory), they didn't cite you as a peer reviewer, just as someone who was: "providing various tidbits on snake biology, alerting us to important references, discussing distributional limits, verifying specimen identifications, and offering moral support" along with a group of others. My guess is they found an article you posted a link to somewhere online and gave you credit.

Didn't know you were referenced in a "scientific" paper, did ya? lol

No harm no foul my friend Thanks for all of the articles you bring to our attention. I know I read them very frequently and enjoy them.

jb
-----
What's written above is purely my opinion. In fact, MOST of what you read on the internet is someone's opinion. Don't take it too seriously

Jonathan Brady
DeviantConstrictors.com
Deviant Constrictors picturetrail

I've missed you. Welcome back. Thanks for serving.
jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

I wondered where you went.