Reptile & Amphibian Forums

DAILY MAIL (London, UK) 11 January 11 Two Japanese men arrested for trying to smuggling live Turtles into the U.S. in cereal boxes
Photo: Snack-based smuggling: The turtles were concealed in small sacks hidden inside biscuit and cracker boxes
Two Japanese men have been arrested at Los Angeles International Airport after attempting to smuggling more than 50 live turtles into the U.S.
The men, both from Osaka, were arrested on Friday at LAX as part of a investigation into live animal smuggling known as 'Operation Flying Turtle'.
The pair had hidden turtles and tortoises in snack food boxes inside a suitcase and could face up to 21 years in prison if convicted.
Atsushi Yamagami, 39, and Norihide Ushirozako, 49, both Japanese citizens, are charged in a two-count criminal complaint that alleges one count of illegally importing wildlife into the United States, a smuggling offense that carries a statutory maximum penalty of 20 years in federal prison.
The men are also charged with one count of violating the Endangered Species Act, a misdemeanour that carries a statutory maximum penalty of one year in prison.
The pair were part of a smuggling ring that officers working with Operation Flying Turtle had infiltrated in recent months.
The U.S. Postal Service, U.S. Customs and Borders Protection and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement department's Homeland Security Investigations were all involved in Operation Flying Turtle, which began last year after U.S. Fish and Wildlife agents learned of a live animal smuggling ring.
'In August 2010, Hiroki Uetsuki, an associate of Yamagami and Ushirozako, traveled from Osaka, Japan, and arrived at Honolulu International Airport,' where turtles were discovered in his suitcase, prosecutors said.
'After U.S. Fish and Wildlife agents arrested Uetsuki, he informed the agents that Yamagami paid him approximately 100,000 yen ($1,200) and his travel expenses to smuggle turtles and tortoises into the United States,' officials added.
Claude Arnold, special agent in charge for ICE's Homeland Security Investigations in Los Angeles, added: 'The plundering and smuggling of rare plants and animals to satisfy the desires of hobbyists is not only shameful, in some circumstances it can pose a threat to public safety and the environment.'
Yamagami and Ushirozako's smuggling attempt, which saw Chinese big-headed turtles and Indian star tortoises, among other variants, packed inside cookie and cracker boxes, was one a number of bizarre attempts at concealment at LAX in recent years.
A man was charged with smuggling in 2002 at the airport after attempting to sneak birds of paradise, orchids and pygmy monkeys - the latter inside his underwear - into LAX, while another attempted smuggler was charged last year with trying to get through the airport with 15 live lizards attached to his chest.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1346065/Two-arrested-smuggling-live-turtles-Los-Angeles.html

LOS ANGELES TIMES (California) 11 January 11 Exotic turtles seized at LAX in smuggling arrest (Andrew Blankstein)
In the annals of smuggling, Los Angeles International Airport has seen it all — lizards in luggage, songbirds strapped to a passenger's legs, boxes of tarantulas and two pygmy monkeys hidden in a traveler's pants.
Now, officials said, they have recorded another milestone in the animal kingdom — smuggled turtles.
Authorities said two Japanese men were arrested with more than 50 live rare turtles, from Chinese big-headed turtles to Indian Star tortoises, packed neatly inside snack food boxes.
On Monday, Atsushi Yamagami, 39, and Norihide Ushirozako, 49, were charged in a two-count criminal complaint alleging that they illegally imported wildlife into the United States, a smuggling offense that carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in federal prison, and one count of violating the Endangered Species Act, a misdemeanor that carries a maximum penalty of one year in prison.‬
Federal officials, who arrested the men Friday, said the suspects had 55 live turtles sealed inside snack boxes of cookies and crackers.
Authorities said their investigation began a year ago, when U.S. Fish and Wildlife agents learned of a smuggling operation that was illegally bringing turtles into the United States.
They said they infiltrated the ring over the summer in an investigation known as "Operation Flying Turtle," which included the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Homeland Security Investigations, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
After U.S. Fish and Wildlife agents arrested one of Yamagami's associates at Honolulu International Airport trying to smuggle more than 40 turtles in a package, the man told them that Yamagami had paid him about 100,000 yen or about $1,200 and travel expenses to smuggle the reptiles, authorities said.
"The plundering and smuggling of rare plants and animals to satisfy the desires of hobbyists is not only shameful, in some circumstances it can pose a threat to public safety and the environment," said Claude Arnold, special agent in charge for ICE's Homeland Security Investigations in Los Angeles.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0111-turtle-smuggle-20110111,0,6789292.story

If there were a method/vehicle/protocol for qualified private citizens to legally acquire these rare and endangered animals, there would be no need for smuggling, and there would be one more asset added to their conservation portfolio.
Prohibition and Elitist discrimination alone will not solve the problem.

And, until the national populations of source countries understand the legitimate economic value for conserving such animals, those animals will continue their march to extinction due to the intentional and unintentional, legal and illegal activity of humans.

jsc

-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

Nice to know the dept. of homeland security is involved in this. I hope this point is brought up after the next terrorist attack (not a matter of "if" just "when".) since I thought the job of homeland security was to protect us from terrorists not from somebody's pet turtles.

My thoughts exactly.

Sounds like overkill and stepping out of bounds to me.
-----
Tim Cole
www.austinherpsociety.org
www.AustinReptileExpo.com/
www.AustinReptileService.net
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<
Conservation through Education

Homeland Security covers just about anything and everything these days. Most people would be shocked if they realized exactly how many personal privacy/freedoms they have lost since that law was enacted...and by a Right Wing Republican Administration, no doubt...who'd a thunk it?

jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

I always love the way they throw around the hue and cry of "public safety" as justification for extreme LE policies, as if that really says anything or that anyone except the ignorant sheeple actually believe it, but then they never get around to explaining in detail exactly how these small turtles can actually threaten "public safety". Oh yeah,...Salmonella, .. I forgot.

In this case, Salmonella is purely a Human behaviorally driven issue. A simple matter of hygiene.

Also a matter of parental supervision/parenting skills and of personal accountability for one's own actions.

Don't know any better/don't care...

In the Darwinian theme of things, were these people actually meant to survive? Of course, the more we save, the more we are responsible for maintaining forever more, as well as all their multiple generations of offspring. Those without sense enough to survive, become the majority of the population eventually, cared for by the few...But then, I digress...

Those that know animals know each has it's own reproductive strategy. Some species have very few offspring with a very dedicated parenting. High numbers survive for population equilibrium. Some species produce many many offspring with little parenting. Fewer survive, but population equilibrium is maintained.

Oh, but I forgot, we see ourselves as Gods, or Demigods at least. We do play God, don't we? For after all, the Earth and all it's bounty was left to us for our selfish pleasure, wasn't it? We do make up the rules as we go, don't we. That's what Society's Elite are for, isn't it? Judiciousness in morality, right?

Rant over!

jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

The salmonella issues could have been taken care of very simply by requiring sellers to provide and buyers to read and sign, a short and basic pamphlet detailing hygine practices. For gosh sake preventing reptile borne salmonella is even simpler than preventing salmonella borne by raw chicken. With the turtles you just have to keep the cage and equipment clean and wash your hands after handling. With chicken you have to do the exact same things plus you have to store it refrigerated or frozen, follow proper thawing procedures and cook it to an internal temp of 165 and hold it there for 10 minutes. Chicken is actually way more complicated than pet turtles. There are ton of other common household things, knives, ladders, bug killers, cleaning chemicals, etc. that present way more dangers and require way more safety procedures than baby turtles.

I think part of it is timing. The government nowdays seems to instinctively want to prohibit as much things as it can. It's just some things like dogs, cats, horses, etc. became entrenched way before the government developed it's current hands-off mindset.
-----
www.hcu-tx.org/

That is correct, Aaron. The 4" turtle rule was one of the, if not the first stealth AR agenda mission. Way back in '74. They've been at it a long time. Most people don't realize that. Most active stakeholders weren't even around back then. It scares me to think, when all us old farts are gone, there will be no one to stand up for truth. It will simply be what Big Brother says.

By this one early example, should be obvious that the overt stated motivation is NOT the true covert motivation in what they do. Dumb-ass American Sheeple are eager to swallow the candy coated pill without so much as a thought of the relevant bitter pill inside. "For our own good" is Big Brother's number one mantra. America still swallows it like candy.
jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

Frankly, I'm impressed more by the guy who shoved monkeys down his pants; at least in terms of sheer determination. At any rate, I find animal smugglers to be a vile breed. Trade laws regarding live animals are in place for only two reasons--to protect species from commercial expoloitation, and to prevent the introduction of disease (both human and animal). To violate these laws to make a quick buck at the expense of a specie's long-term wild survivability is disgusting to me.

I love seeing naïve people like you expound on a subject you know nothing about. First as an ex reptile collector who has been in more than 35 countries I can tell you that if it wasn’t people like me you wouldn’t have a tenth of the reptiles you see today. In most countries they kill every reptile they see. Even in so called civilized countries like Australia that protects everything, they kill every snake they see. You can’t ship a bird out of the country but the farmers there still kill thousands of cockatoos from galahs to palms. The wildlife laws for the most part are written by hypocrites. One day I should write a book on the zoos and universities of the world and how they really work. Michael Luhrs

Lets go down to Mexico. lol
jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

Did I ever tell you that I drove over 50,000 miles down there in just one year? Of course I was just looking. Michael Luhrs

I apologize if my understanding seems rudimentary. You have seen many things, and have been in the trade longer than I have. You have seen it evolve in many ways I'm sure. So, with all due respect, I must ask--do you see any value to wildlife laws whatsoever? Also, you don't have to go to 35 countries to see the blatant disregard many people have for wildlife, or wildlife laws. I see that everyday when I go to work and care for the shot raptors that come through our facility. It's true, a law in place does not deter everyone from harming wildlife, but if it deters 1 person or 10 people or a million people, the law is fulfilling its' purpose. I will say it; I'm a conservationist first and a herper second. Now, one could ask then why do I oppose bills like HR 669, etc. Easy--it is illogical to use the invasive species tag for an ectothermic animal that is tropical in a predominantly temperate country for the purpose of a national ban. Smuggling, regardless of what you are smuggling or why you are smuggling it, is wrong. It disgusts me that people disregard these laws, and furthermore give our industry, the consumer of the smuggled products--a bad rep. Or should I say worse rep. Think about it guys--whether we agree with the regs or not, when people violate them to satisfy the demand in our industry, it makes our industry look bad when things like this article are printed; and it leads to more restrictive regulations. Smugglers of reptiles should disgust all of us, as they hurt the industry.

aquick,
Basically you seem to be of the opinion that right or wrong a law I a law and they should not be broken period. I completely understand your comment about smuggling makes the industry look bad. We don't control the message. Most people believe laws are put in place to protect the animals. Unfortunately laws are made by politicians and are influenced by extremists and almost never solve, help or affect the real problem. If all law breakers of all types disgnimals. But the us will still not allow it in if it is an esa. So in other parts of the world legal captive bred animals are kept and bred but US laws completely restrict them from coming in and either allowing us to breed them or a transfer of bloodlines. The turtles were most likely either captive bred or bought out of a Chinese food market destined for a meal and now they are smuggled into the US to be bred, like the Underground Railroad for slaves of the past did that disgust you also. I am sure the turtles would thank the smugglers if they could even if it was to make a buck which is not always the motivation just a perk or necessity. Unfortunately the laws are black and white and so you have smuggling.
This is really a 3 hour discussion and is complicated to convey in writing.
Rob

"It disgusts me that people disregard these laws, and furthermore give our industry, the consumer of the smuggled products--a bad rep. Or should I say worse rep. Think about it guys--whether we agree with the regs or not, when people violate them to satisfy the demand in our industry, it makes our industry look bad when things like this article are printed; and it leads to more restrictive regulations. Smugglers of reptiles should disgust all of us, as they hurt the industry."

I believe you have a very valid point. In an ideal world smugglers would take the energy they spend smuggling and put it into getting the laws changed. It is sometimes just very hard to maintain that attitude once one has put alot of effort into getting very conservative changes and seeing little to show for it. From the time they banned commercial collection of rosy boas in CA, for example, it took about 20 years just to get the state to allow commercial captive breeding - a fairly modest and reasonable request if you ask me. So sometimes I do have a hard time feeling any sort of personal disgust for smugglers.

It is a case by case basis though, for example I would have no problems throwing the book at somebody who cleaned out an isolated bog of the majority of it's bog turtles over the course of a few years. On the other hand I would have a hard time villifying somebody(although I would not condone it either) who spent years to find an undiscovered thriving population of bog turtles and secretly took just one or two pairs and left it at that. That's just a theoretical example, I have never hunted bog turtles and know little about them.
-----
www.hcu-tx.org/

Are You familiar with Harriet Tubman, she was a smuggler. I guess according to your mentality she was a disgusting person.
Personally I do not allow a government that can sanction Jim crow laws and put American citizens in internment camps because they MIGHT be a threat to national security, to be my moral compass in life.
People who quite honestly scare the hell out of me.

AQuick, these all all good answers. Put in a nutshell, the politicians make the laws. They are responsible to the money interests that handle them. They further the money interest's agenda by scapegoating a class/segment of society and criminalize behaviors deemed morally inappropriate. Nothing is really done to address the real issues. The bulldozers roll, the trees are cut down, the habitat is lost.

It is simply an economic matter of acquiring wealth through the exploitation of natural resources. "Find a Boogy Man, sweep the issue under the rug, and move on with business as usual".

I think that is the point others are trying to make.

jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

What? I don't know all the details of this case but in general........

Trade laws regarding live animals are in place for many reasons and often they have little or nothing to do with protecting anything other then a vested interest. Cites regulation's are a complete joke, the 4 " turtle law? Are you kidding. Some of the worlds most common animals are included in the "Endangered Species Act" or are afforded appendix one protection by the cites convention. Its all part of the game.

In the case of live reptile smugglers 99 percent of the time the animals they are caught with are not genuinely rare or endangered. In fact they are almost always fairly common animals. In many cases these animals are openly collected and traded by hunters for food, skins and even pets in thier native country's in spite of the strict regulations, Nobody gives crap.

ERNIE EISON
WESTWOOD ACRES REPTILE FARM INC.

I agree with Michael and Ernie, of course.
jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

That is the reasons they use but the fact is that in many cases harvest is sustainable, they just find it easier to ban them than to determine and regulate what would be a sustainable harvest. This fact is evidenced quite easily by noting the extreme inconsistency of laws. For example Florida allows commercial harvet of L. getula, Georgia does not even allow possesion of L. getula. They can't both be right.

Another example that's more international. Texas allows take of graybanded kingsnakes. Mexico does not even though the species has a much larger range in Mexico. In fact I legally took a grayband from the Texas side, not even 100 yards from the border of Mexico. If I had done the exact same thing just a stones throw away in Mexico and taken it across the border I would be a criminal. There are countless examples of such laws that do not fall under your description in real life and the only "need" to protect many examples exists purely on man made paper, not in nature.

What is sad is that some species really do need protection and protecting stuff that doesn't need it weakens the respect for protections that are justified and wastes resources that could be spent on stuff that's actually needed.
-----
www.hcu-tx.org/

Alright, I'm getting it. I am definitely getting a better sense of the hypocricy; or I suppose you could say the nonesense. Thank you for being patient with me That's a reason I patrol forums like this, to learn. So I suppose my question for you guys would be--this pertains to the import of captive bred specimens--playing devil's advocate here; how do the guys at the points of entry know if an animal is really CB or if they are lying and the paperwork is forged? That is a common smugglers' tactic after all. How can we as an industry offer a rebuttal to that?
Again, thanks for the patience and the information regarding state laws in other parts of the country. We have a similar situation here in WV. We maintain no state protected list. So, we are basically the only state were hellbender salamanders are native that does not protect them. You can legally collect them with a fishing license. Go across state lines to Ohio, PA, KY, VA, MD and they are protected (granted, they need to be protected, the populations are small, quite spread out and in decline).

Also, on a more personal note--please do no suggest that because I oppose smuggling that I believe the underground railroad was wrong. I understand the point made with that, but I think we can all agree that comparing the wildlife trade to the slave trade is something HSUS would do; and we are all better than that. That, and that was a long time ago, and frankly not even in my thoughts when I look at modern wildlife smuggling issues. I get that the principle is the same, but for the record--freeing human slaves is a completely different beast than rescuing a turtle from a dinner plate, and I will go on the record of stating that I support the underground railroad.

The point about fake paperwork is the primary defense of the laws. Sure it will happen it happens now. With regard to the cities 1 to cities 2 scenario it is very hard to fake. It is not an easy process as it should be with the rarest of the animals in the world. But most animals people want are often times pretty common where they come from but they are "rare" because a country has a no take attitude. It is fine to eat them or kill them or they have no protection and are going extinct but the US protects it based on the lacey act because the origin country does not allow export. I believe all bearded dragons and most other Australian animals are technically illegal because none have been legally exported. Soon radiated torts could be extinct in the wild and people try to point to the pet trade and smuggling as one reason. The reality is maybe a couple thousand have been smuggled out and all of them are now being bred all over the world and 10,000 a month are being eaten. If it was not for smugglers radiateds would be almost nonexistent in the pet trade worldwide and they would still be in the exact same situation in the wild. I think the comment I read above was very accurate that when restrictive laws are over implemented it makes people have less respect for the laws protecting the animals that really do need protection. The underground railroad comment was just a extreme example. But would you smuggle an animal out of a country if it was about to go extinct and and no one had them and no one was stopping the extinction. Many times the legal process is so slow that thousands on animals die before any progress is made. The pet trade is always pointed to as a big part of the problem but it is always habitat distruction and locals killing or eating them that is the problem. What discusts me is people compairing someones who takes an animal to breed it to someone who takes an animal to eat it or for a trophy. It is easyier to go and kill an animal and bring it in than to bring it in alive.
Rob

They should junk the whole thing and start over with a system of Class 1, Class 2, Class 3,...

Private citizens should be able to qualify for access/the right to keep at all levels by demonstrating things such as -- subject knowledge/aptitude/ability, financial ability, experience, peer references,...

Animals should be tracked and records maintained in a bar coded data base.

I am very much in favor of an ISO type format to maintain standards and for quality assurance.

But hey, what do I know, I'm just some dumb High School drop out.

Just my thoughts.

jsc

-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

"Animals should be tracked and records maintained in a bar coded data base.

I am very much in favor of an ISO type format to maintain standards and for quality assurance.

But hey, what do I know, I'm just some dumb High School drop out.

Just my thoughts. "
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sentences 1 and 2 above invite a ridiculous invasion of privacy that would cause me to simply stop keeping animals entirely.
I just want to have a nice hobby. Government intrusion with arbitrary enforcement with inconsistent and unreasonable maintenance standards that invite charges, fines and seizures for violations is way more that I will ever expose myself to, and its not a hobby anymore, but serious legal risk instead. In WI, it is now illegal to keep snakes in "plastic storage boxes" (rack systems) and is a chargeable state animal cruelty law violation. My house is a Gestapo-free zone.
I can only agree to sentence 3

I am kind of tired of hearing how regulation is an invasion of privacy. Can someone kindly explain how regulation can be accomplished without inspections both in the field collecting or at the facility where the animals are housed? I can't think how the regulators are supposed to do their job without some invasion of your privacy. Please explain in detail.

Welkerii

Its like I said. My home is a gestapo-free zone. My privacy wouldn't be invaded because I refuse "licensing and regulation" of any type and would get rid of my animals first, and then find a new hobby, like collecting assault rifles.
The best government is less government.
In the Feb 2004 issue of Reptiles magazine, on page 60, in the article, Dicephalism in Snakes, the second paragraph begins as such;
"Famous Americans, including Thomas Edison, Ben Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson, all had two-headed snakes in their private collections, as did the King of France."

I clearly must have been asleep in my American History classes when this was discussed, but I wonder what Thomas Jefferson and the others would have thought about having their collections licensed and inspected.

Look at how enforcement is conducted on domestic pets:

http://www.thedogplace.org/LEGISLATION/Animal-Control-Terrorism_Snider.asp

http://www.thedogpress.com/SideEffects/09111-Breeders-Damaged_McCrickard.asp

http://www.thedogplace.org/LEGISLATION/Articles.asp

Join the discussion on this site:

http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/pet-law/
The Militarization of Animal Control by PETA and HSUS

Do you have a driver’s license?

So you would bail on keeping herps? Okay, that’s your right. So your personal privacy is more important then you and the herp industry being regulated? Well that’s your choice. But we will be regulated. The wildlife of each state is held in a public trust for all the citizens of the state. It is the job of wildlife agencies to conserve their native wildlife, protect it from invasives and, as a matter of moral fortitude, make sure wildlife held in captivity is taken care of properly. As we have seen with the banking industry, regulation is required. You can’t let humans run hog wild. And we have all seen the negative stories of yahoo herpers and exotic animal owners who are embarrassments. But I hear you on fair regulation. We don’t want regulation designed and controlled by animal rights groups or their academic buddies who feel the same way. So maybe I should have said “proper” regulation.

As for references to our founding fathers and the Constitution. Where is the amendment to conserve and protect our natural resources? It is rather short sighted to not protect what we need to survive for current and future generations don’t you think? One reason is because our founding fathers thought natural resources were vast and infinite. Well, we now know this is not the case. It was also pre-industrial revolution. So they missed the boat on this one. The world has changed. I have always said the more people you have, the less freedom everyone is going to have.

This is why everyone who keeps herps and other exotic animals must publicly band together, contribute money and fight for our rights and proper regulation. All the folks crying about privacy and no regulation are living in the past. In a perfect world, the government would stay out of our lives and we could do whatever we want. Not gonna happen! This is why everyone needs to come out of the closet and participate. They need to quit doing deals in the shadows. They need to get the permits and licenses required so, for one thing, we don’t get negative press. If they are a micro-business they should get legal. I understand not notifying the neighbors who could put up a fuss. But, definitely make yourself known and legal to the wildlife agencies, legislators and the state. And, again, businesses have more protections then hobbyists.

I don’t think some folks in the herp industry really understand or care about what we need to do to survive. Some seem to focus on ideological political rhetoric that I don’t think will help us at this point.

Welkerii

It would be entirely voluntary. If you want to keep tier 1 animals, you have to prove ability. If you want to keep tier 4 animals you can just go to PetsMart and throw your money down.

In other words, you need not be a scientist or a government official to gain access to and be a stakeholder with the most critically endangered animals.

I think the system would be more transparent, equitable, and less subject to abuse by the good old boy network of officialdom and their cronies.

Does this sound reasonable? Lighten up with the conspiracy jive.

jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

I like the model you are laying down, John. May I take it one step further? Tier 1&2 animals should also all be in a nationwide studbook; which theoretically should allow the best pairings in terms of genetics; and have an annual mandatory donation toward wild conservation (not necessarily money, either--in-kind donations would be good too, and no set amount either) would be part of the permitting process. This would allow for a larger number of individuals of a species to be bred, thereby making captive reproduction programs more effective. Believe it or not, a lot of zoo folks are favorable to a system like this, and I think we both could use each others' cooperation.

Yes. There are a lot of details to flesh out in a graduating scale of access and responsibility.
jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

>>Yes. There are a lot of details to flesh out in a graduating scale of access and responsibility.
>>jsc
>>-----
>>"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
>>John Crickmer

I certainly respect many of those who are commenting in this thread, and obviously everyone has good intentions. But given most well intentioned regulations (Lacey Act, ESA, etc.) quickly change into tools of "special interests" and those who want to force their opinions on others (ie, HSUS, agenda pushing "scientists", etc.)...

It's a tough issue. I guess it all comes down to one question -
"Is 'reasonable regulation' an oxymoron?" And maybe another one - "Would any species really be better off with licensing and regulation wrt pet ownership?"

I'm not so sure we can answer yes to either of those questions.
Good intentions are not enough, results are what should matter.

I hear you. It doesn’t seem like we can have reasonable regulation based on the current trends in regulations at the local, state and federal level. But what choice do we have? If the choices are: 1) cry and beeatch about being regulated but do nothing, or 2) roll over and take it, or 3) try and fight for reasonable and fair regulation. I think are only option is number 3.

There are many hurdles to proper/fair regulation. The biggest problem is having enough money to fight the fight. The second is to change the command and control system at wildlife agencies. Most wildlife agencies hire from academia. Most herp academics have a banning agenda or abuse the precautionary principle. We need game biologists to regulate herpetofauna. Someone that understands the principles of wildlife management, harvest and is pro-industry. Most game biologists are also hunters. With enough money and people fighting for the industry we can make changes and get reasonable regulations.

We need to work on getting money and participation from the industry stakeholders. There are some high end breeders that have not contributed to USARK (Crutchfield pers. comm.). There are some who are not giving as much as they can. And there are a whole mess of stakeholders who haven’t given anything and who don’t really get (or care) how important it is. Every herp sold in the US should include a pamphlet from USARK explaining why they should join and participate right now. USARK should be concentrating on forming state groups to facilitate this and getting new members. Breeders, dealers and pet stores should encourage all customers to join USARK.

We have to make it “mandatory” for all herp owners to join USARK. We need to engage all of our stakeholders in any way possible. We need to have an NRA type mentality about our national platform. We all need to be on the same page so we can be one voice pushing the same agenda. That is just the only way. It is high time everyone realizes this.

Welkerii

I like the idea of a program that provides some sort of way for private keepers to keep Endangered species. Edjucation, licensing, standards of care, inspections, mandatory studbook participation and mandatory record keeping are all workable solutions to combat the black market.

I believe that it's really the only way to substantially curb the black market. I also think that if there were legal ways for private keepers to participate in captive breeding, research and even commercialization of Endangered species the vast majority of hobbyists would prefer to work with legally produced and aquired specimens. Even if it meant waiting in line, filling out forms, etc.

Something that has always bugged me is how herp collecters and keepers/breeders always seem to be held to a much higher standard than other sportsmen. For example, poaching of game animals is fairly commonplace amongst hunters yet the wildlife agencies usually find a way to deal with it or factor it in to bag/take limits. With herps, the mere fact that some poaching/laundering might occur is commonly cited as a reason for not allowing anyone to work with those animals, ie. they say it's hard to tell the difference between a captive born specimen and a wild caught specimen so they ban them all.

In actuality the exact same thing can occur with any game animal. Somebody could buy a tag, shoot a bear, deer, etc. and if nobody sees it, that person can process the animal and sell it and save the tag for another one. But they still have a program that allows people to shoot these animals because they figure that the penalties of getting caught will deter most people from trying to abuse their tags.

The common analogy with herps is that somebody could produce a clutch of say 5 babies but then go out and catch 5 more and claim they produced a clutch of 10. Sure that could happen but that's no different than what could happen with any bear, deer, etc. Dishonest people will always be able to find ways to abuse any system but I believe that if you provide a way for honest people to do the things they want then most of them will not want to abuse the system and risk penalties. If an honest person produces a clutch of 5 babies but has a market for 10, most of the time they would simply opt to legally obtain another pair of whatever it is they want and thus legally increase their production to meet demand.

In most cases it's also cheaper to simply buy a legal captive bred pair and raise them up for a few years than it is to go out and collect a pair. Once a species has been produced a certain amount in captivity the incentive(ie financhial reward) to collect from the wild just isn't there anymore. The exceptions are slow producing species and in some cases it comes down to location. If a person lives within or very near the range of a particular species and doesn't have to travel very far to collect then it can be more cost effective than breeding.
-----
www.hcu-tx.org/

I think a big factor is also that the government would much rather have us working for a company than working for ourselves and they would much rather have us spending our money on televisions and x-boxes than on wild animals. Basicly, profiting from natural resources should only be reserved for big mining, timber and oil companies. The government just doesn't have the time or inclination to manage herp populations so that an independant person could go out and harvest some animals and then profit from selling and/or breeding them. They feel if somebody is interested in natural beauty let it be stuff like gold, gems and possibly woodwork because then they have to get their materials from a corporation. Ironically, in most cases the "harvest" of those things is much more invasive and much less renewable than a harvest of herps.
-----
www.hcu-tx.org/

I agree. Some other advantages of the private sector working with endangered and threatened species include: (1)The private sector would pay for permits and licenses to work with these species. This could provide the wildlife agency with funding to run the program and monitor wild populations. (2) The private sector would be paying out of their pocket to take care of and breed these animals. Thus the tax payers of the state would not have to pay to conserve these species. (3) Herp breeders make more of the species. It may continue to be endangered or threatened in the wild but the captive population would be growing and growing – a safety net. (4) The private sector has contributed much information/knowledge into the breeding biology and captive propagation of many species – why not endangered and threatened species? I know that AZ Fish and Game has to maintain a facility for displaced Gila Monsters. I heard they usually have 40 to 60 animals there. If they distributed these displaced animals into the private sector they wouldn't have to maintain such a facility thus saving tax payer dollars. This is already done with crocodilians. Most countries have an egg harvest program to supply the croc farms with babies. Almost every species of croc is protected. This greatly reduces the black market demand in crocodile products and provides employment in struggling economies. It really is rather stupid to not involve the private sector in endangered and threatened species management and conservation.

Welkerii

To reassure the nay-sayers...this would not be a regulation/inspection issue, so much as a what it takes to do the thing issue.

You have to close down their (Authorities) objections as to why the private sector isn't allowed to do such and such.

And address what it takes to remove those concerns.

Believe me, there are many on the inside (authorities) not doing what they say they're doing and this process will clean up a lot of the pandering to cronies behind closed doors.

I see people here usually on different sides of issues in agreement here. That says we have found some common ground. That means we are making progress.

You must address issues and concerns and be specific. The Authorities' boiler plate propaganda, that we're just no good, is just not good enough any more. I get this all the time from authorities, that we are unscrupulous and unqualified. That is why they place their blanket prohibitions in place. Not true! That old horse won't ride anymore.

Time to hold their feet to the fire and call them out on their non-specific assertions.

jsc

-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

>>To reassure the nay-sayers...this would not be a regulation/inspection issue, so much as a what it takes to do the thing issue.

I'm just having trouble understanding the basic problem you're trying to solve. What exactly is the problem your proposals will solve? If I understand you correctly (which I may not), your proposals are more aimed towards minimizing corruption, cronyism and agenda pushing. For me, however, it all comes down to, "Would any species really be better off with licensing and regulation wrt pet ownership?"

I own two species of endangered/protected snakes because I enjoy working with them, not only to breed but to educate others. I know others who do the same. Having to jump through another hoop to keep them, however, might actually dissuade responsible owners from keeping them. Not sure that's a good thing. I know I would probably go back to more common snakes if I had to takes some sort of test that was written by some gov't "academic" who might not even really understand how to care for the species in question.

Thanks,
Ed

If regulation is for the purpose of public or environmental protection, fine... but first there needs to be a definition of "risk", in addition to an assessment of what animals pose a real "risk", along with commentary from all interested snake-holders (pun intended). From that assessment, regulation can be responsibly implemented.

If regulation is for the purpose of public or environmental protection, then to regulate a harmless animal would serve no legitimate purpose.

If regulation is for the purpose of targeting a particular segment of our society for ridicule, scorn and malicious prosecution, then regulate all reptiles willy nilly regardless of any real "risk" they pose.

Just trying to get access by citizens to animals now off limits. Agreed, there are a few insiders that are allowed access carte blanche.

Here is an example of what I'm trying to say...

Question: What does it take for a private citizen to get a breeding group of Plowshare Tortoises and contribute to their survival?

Question: What do authorities do/provide that private citizens currently are not doing? Can private citizens meet those functional standards of infrastructure, process control and quality assurance; given the chance?

Question: What needs to be done within the infrastructure of regulations to bring these two entities into functional parity in order to increase participation and increase favorable outcomes?

I know there is currently a USF&W license requirement for Radiated Tortoises and what not. But as others have said, there are some animals protected that are not so endangered and others that could use a whole lot more help. That is my premise for the overhaul, to update and adjust the protections as well as to increase the private sector stakeholder participation.

I'm not real sure what is so hard to grasp here. Just my thoughts on the issue. Do with them what you will.

jsc

-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

Question: What does it take for a private citizen to get a breeding group of Plowshare Tortoises and contribute to their survival?

I think the only realistic way that could ever happen is if that individual was breeding them strictly for conservation purposes, and that the breeders were loaned to them, not the propery of that private citizen, and could be swapped or removed from that person if they were failing to breed them; and in all likelihood the lenders would be zoos and aquariums (ie the ones allowed to get endangered animals like these)

Question: What do authorities do/provide that private citizens currently are not doing? Can private citizens meet those functional standards of infrastructure, process control and quality assurance; given the chance?

I'll use the AZA member institutions for our example of authorities here, despite they are not really a regulatory association. I would say what they do that private citizens do not is self-police, and have a well-defined set of standards to which they must adhere. They have people from similar sized institutions come in and inspect other zoos every five years to assure that the association standards of animal welfare, personnel safety, guest safety (not necessary for us, but you get it), emergency preparedness, record keeping, etc. etc. are being met, and will boot any member not meeting them (which would cause that institute to lose any SSP species in the collection). They have kept tabs on their own members for years, have developed a track record of safey and success and thus get exempt when bans get put in place. And yes, private individuals could meet these standards--if they were informed of what these standards are, and put under the same scrutiny themselves. The only problem with that is many folks would feel that it were an invasion of privacy. As an aside point, in an effort to achieve popultion sustainability, AZA is looking to offer accreditation to private individuals in the future. It's an idea they are still tossing around, as there are some who favor it, others who do not. I favor it, it addresses the number one issue of sustainable captive populations--space. Once susatainability is achieved, commercialization can commence.

Question: What needs to be done within the infrastructure of regulations to bring these two entities into functional parity in order to increase participation and increase favorable outcomes?

Attitudes need to change on both sides of the divide--the regulatory agencies need to be more open-minded, and private individuals need to forget their hurt feelings from years of being snubbed by the regulatory agencies. We all need to find a way to work together, not in a seperate and unequal parallel. Unfortuantely, the only realistic way this will happen is through the passing of time, as those with the older mindsets retire or otherwise go away, and more folks with the newer attitudes come into power.

That's my .02

For details on how to do this, the TSA could provide you with that info.
I know several people in this organization that legally obtain, keep, and breed rare chelonians in their homes. I would also contact World Chelonian Trust.
I don't know if there are comparable orgs for other types of herps, but these orgs could be a start for getting info.
Isnt there a guy on one of the rocky mountains states (Wm. Zovickian?) that breeds ploughshares ? I have a paper on this that is authored by him.
Turtle Survival Alliance

A good discussion.

I do find it odd that so many people that have such strong opinions, and yet, apparently, few folks have actually ever bothered to read the laws (ESA, CITES, Lacey Act, etc). You should, it's very educational, and it may put you a step ahead of your game warden. Because as long as they know the laws and you don't, they are always going to win. Don't trust what "someone said", or "I heard"... Know the laws.

I think it's unlikely that we'll ever be taken seriously as a hobby by law enforcement or legislators when this many people can post on a topic like this, and there be so little condemnation for blatant smuggling of rare and endangered species. Why not just proclaim to the world that we are going to do what we want, whether it's legal or not? When we act like we support criminals, we shouldn't be surprised when we get painted with the same brush and get treated like criminals.

The problem with this hobby is (and always has been) selfishness and greed.

If you really want to help a species, and are willing to put in the hours to learn about and work FOR a species (not your own collection), you can get the federal permits.

High school dropout? That's really not going to help you here... The days are fast disappearing when you could get somewhere with what you learned on your own. Sorry, it may not be fair, but that's the way things are going. You need a degree (preferably a grad degree) to be taken seriously by other scientists, or you need to have done some serious, international field herping or "in situ" research. (and that's field herping for research, not to collect and sell).

If you are that serious about these animals, then you also know the laws, like what states you can and cannot live in. I know private individuals who have CBW permits, they're out there.

If you just want to import some CITES animals, anyone with the money and a little patience can get a CITES II or III permit. But seriously, how many private individuals here are (or want to be) importers? Yet lots of folks are quick to criticize the CITES system without having any personal experience with it. Importing is a pain in the butt. It's complicated, expensive and not recommended for newbs. Work with someone who does it first. But if you don't want to, you can still do it on your own. It's not rocket science.

And, if you really have the knowledge and skill to work with an ESA/CITES I species (like G. yniphora), then you know how to get one and why you should or should or shouldn't (and you won't be posting your intentions here). Few people qualify, and that's a good thing because few folks have the money/facilities for the quality care of a Sulcata for the entirety of it's life, let alone something really rare (your apt/dorm/parent's basement doesn't count). You don't get to own a Ferrari just because you read every review in Autoweek, you have to be able to afford cost.

Most of the posts here are people just whining because the Nasty FWS is keeping them from getting something to impress their friends, whether they can take care of it or not.

The sport of falconry overcame all the challenges we see as reptile hobbyists because they were willing to work WITH the fed/state agencies. They self policed and it payed off. They were able to get captive bred, ESA species when no one else could. There was even a limited take of wild ESA birds. They were knowledgeable and realistic in their expectations. And because of that, they'll be traveling around the country, flying Peregrines when Boa Constrictors are considered injurious species.

The petshop or breeder that sold the guy in FL an illegal Burmese (the one that killed the two year old girl) did more damage to the hobby than any ten smugglers could ever do. Yet, where is the clamor for self regulation within the hobby? It's all forgotten now by us, but not by the public. They and the media will never forget, or cease to remind us when the next horrific thing happens.

Until everyone in the hobby steps up, we are just spiraling down the drain of legislation. USARK may have success with a law or two, but eventually, as they say "We either hang together, or we'll hang separately".

Don't blame some government conspiracy, ...blame US!

I do find it odd that so many people that have such strong opinions, and yet, apparently, few folks have actually ever bothered to read the laws (ESA, CITES, Lacey Act, etc). You should, it's very educational, and it may put you a step ahead of your game warden. Because as long as they know the laws and you don't, they are always going to win. Don't trust what "someone said", or "I heard"... Know the laws.

Theres nothing odd about that. That`s how people are, INCLUDING YOU read your own post. I love that kind of preaching. You have never done anything but your telling others what to do. You have no idea how wildlife ledgislation and the " system? " really works. What really goes on. You can read all you want but unless you have the real life experience you will never know what your talking about. The way to learn the truth is to actually do it or to listen to someone that really has done it.

I dont blame some government conspiracy, ..... and I dont blame US! I dont blame anyone in particular but if I did . I think it would be the guys like you. The ones who try to sound so smart but in the end, they don't know their butts from a hole in the ground when it comes to how things really work. Your completely lost.

ERNIE EISON
WESTWOOD ACRES REPTILE FARM INC.

I thank you all. This has indeed been an interesting discussion. Somewhat enlightening.

IMHO, most issues arise from misunderstandings between parties. Effective communication is the starting point to resolve such conflicts. My intent here is to open dialog between stakeholders and to find common ground.

I'm no mediator, but I do my best to be one here.

jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer