Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Thank you for clarifying your words below, and also in your e-mail to me. I sent you another and hope you read it.

For those of us who are very familiar with zonata, it sometimes pushes negative buttons to hear the words "endangered" or "threatened" used in the same sentense as "zonata." I apologize for sounding rude or hostile. Its just that I've heard these things for so long that my patience is getting thin. That was one of the prime reasons I wrote the natural history of mountain kingsnakes in the first place-to combat the misinformation concerning these snakes, and the output of that information. My book is very conservation oriented, but I also point out how numerous and safe these snakes really are.

It is true that collectors have visited the same places for years and continue to collect every snake they find (shame ON them), and at many localities there are fewer zonata than there may have been 40 years ago. But, the remaining snakes continue to breed and replenish those that are lost, albeit in smaller numbers, but in sufficient nunbers to maintain the population. These are isolated localities, and truthfully, I'd rather see the collectors visit the same time-worn areas every year than have them find 100 new spots where the zonata densities are at their peak. Does that make sense?

I understand that all of us cannot be experts in every area, but please, let's try and not spread rumor, conjecture and heresay in public forums where we may be influencing an untold number of people who will never know any better. We have enough of a problem with that in game management organizations like the CA F&G. We don't need the hobbyist and academic sector falling into the same mudhole. Thank you again for your clarification, Randy.

As for collectors, I would really question how much a collector loves zonata if he continues to collect every one he finds, or creates habitat damage by not replacing rocks or logs as he found them. Is that person really a snake enthusiast, or is he just a profiteer, who only sees dollar signs, and not the beautiful natural gem that a zonata is. Is he contributing to the survival of the species, or making it more difficult for future generations to easily see them? I have no problem with people who limit their take to 1 or 2 zonata per outing, but the pigs who have to sack every snake they find are not true herpers. Those people are piles of crap in my estimation, and I don't associate with them. And this is nothing new from me, my book will tell you the same thing.

....ahem...greetings...does the good Dr know if the regulation limiting one zonie per person...require that person to have a brain, or can a repugnican have one too!

Saludos / RxR

Now John, that type of question might be construed as being offensive to some of our politically minded friends here (not me, I'm an independent) but the answer is NO. All you need is a fishing license, not a brain. And that has been demonstrated by many who collect too many zonata, and damage habitat. by the way, I fixed some habitat this year so that no one will ever collect from that site again. heh heh

I'll bet that those demidiots can even purchase a fishing license. LOL. Shane
>>....ahem...greetings...does the good Dr know if the regulation limiting one zonie per person...require that person to have a brain, or can a repugnican have one too!
>>
>>Saludos / RxR
>>

Anyone who really knows zonata knows how common these snakes are. They are the safest snakes in California. All we can do is try to quell the rumors, bad information, and incorrect opinions. Find any gold lately?

FH

Wow, I hadn't bothered to check this forum until just now. Thanks Mr Hubbs and everyone else who has contributed to this discussion. I thought I was just talking out of my ass over on the zonata forum, well not really, I knew I was on the right track. Thanks also go to Rick Staub. I got kinda frustrated reading the drivel coming out of Rhallman's original posts and subsequent posts on "zonata laws" like he was some sort of expert. The hobby has enough issues to deal with without someone spewing gross misinformation on a widely read forum like kingsnake.
Link

Have never seen a ZONATA in the wild, though they can be found in San Diego,Ca. No worry though, see them at shows occasionally. And in books. ACQUISITION is the name of the game, people just like the idea of getting something for virtually nothing. I like them, but frankly can appreciate them via pictures or CB offspring.

Sincerely,

Fred Albury

P.S.
Have seen habitat TRASHED by people looking for them, chucks, and a host of other S.W. herps. Again...people focused on getting MORE.....

Randy
The laws on zonata are to strict on California residents.
Example if I where to come here from another state I could get
my out of state liscense and go hunt zonata all day long and
each time I got one I would send it back to my state each day
by UPS next day mail. So each day I would max out on the limit and then I would send it out of state where there are no limits
and I would be able to start over each day with nothing. Just think how many zonata I could send back to my home state legally. Then I could do what ever I wanted with them pretty
scarry thought. But they could do it legally California residents can't what a loop hole for out of state hunters.
KC
I don't Like to post because of people like you.

The laws on zonata are to strict on California residents.

It is true that the loophole exists, but only because CA cannot legislate what happens outside its borders. Therefore, CA has chosen to try and regulate the take of zonata by keeping a 1Z bag limit.

If they raised the possession limit, that would just increase the number of Zs that the out of state hunter could ship out every day.
And BTW - there is nothing to stop residents from doing exactly the same thing. The difference is the residents would have to ship them to wholesalers, not just home for personal "use".

There are two solutions to this loophole -

1. Close the season on Zs altogether for everyone. Any possession of a zonata in the state boundary is a crime.

2. Try and close it to non-residents. Could CA allow a 1 snake bag limit for resident hunters and a no snake limit on non-resident permits? I doubt it. I suspect states are required to allow the same regs for residents and non-residents, but I don't know.
And this still wouldn't stop residents from shipping one snake a day out to wholesalers.
-----
Chris Harrison
Does anyone else here think that these scrolling signature lines are stupid?

Why not add them to the breeders permit for california.
This would ease alot of collecting just as it has worked for the
rosy boa's and cal kings. It would also work for zonata.
If you make harder for everyone to have them it will only make
them have worth more money to out of state residents the goal is not to punish californians. One must remeber why we have CAFG
it is to manage wildlife for the benifit of californias not to restrict or make it illegal. Three words FOR THE BENIFIT.
KC

>>Why not add them to the breeders permit for california.
>>This would ease alot of collecting just as it has worked for >>the rosy boa's and cal kings. It would also work for zonata.

Here's where the logic fails me. If there are large numbers of Zs being taken out of CA by out of staters, a sizeable population would exist in captivity which means they ought to already be available in captivity.

If this isn't happening, it must mean two things -
1. the protection is working and the "loophole" isn't being overly abused.
2. there is not enough market for Zs so people don't bother breeding them.

It seems the real beef is that CA residents aren't able to breed and profit from their own native species.

Here's an idea - CA residents could get together and share breeding pairs and give away the offspring every year. Think of how many offspring a herp society could get together and produce. If each group of breeders had been unselfishly doing this for the last several years, there would be Zs available widely in the market and THEN collecting pressure would reduce. Why hasn't this happened? No one is interested in doing this for free simply to "reduce collecting pressure".

Otherwise, it doesn't seem anyone is negatively impacted and the snakes are clearly benefitting.

Remember, part of the basis for protection of Zs in CA is to reduce the habitat destruction that has accompanied collecting in the past. CA F&G is trying to protect the habitat by restricting collection.

I might also add that opening seasons and captive breeding hasn't been shown to diminish collection activity.
I would argue that Rosyboas are being taken in MUCH larger numbers now than they were a few years back when they were restricted by bag limit numbers. Yes, they are widely bred, but there are still large numbers of people out there on Whitewater and in the foothills flipping rocks in the spring.
-----
Chris Harrison
Does anyone else here think that these scrolling signature lines are stupid?

Personally I am glad the loophole exists because at least it allows some people to establish breeding groups even if state residents can't. Actually state residents can too just not for commercial purposes, see Ric Staubs post. I don't think commecial collecters use the loophole anyway as shipping snakes one at a time is not very profitable. Consider how long the zonata season lasts as far as number of days in a row they are up and the time of an extended stay in California for a commercial collecter to pay for food and lodging and gas to go back to the same spot to collect one zonata and then back to the shipper every day as the ground dries up and the zonata slowly go back underground. In reality a commercial collecter is just going to ignore the law completely. Complete Federal protection may have some effect on commercial collecting but California has already tried to Federally protect pulchra and failed. If the subspecies pulchra cannot pass the test then there is no way the species as a whole would fly, they just aren't endangered. There are enough other animals that really need federal protection and they don't need to bother with the expense of adding a species that numbers in the millions and whose habitat is largely undevelopable.

It's been 10-15 years since I think anybody tried to collect and sell. Not many wholesale dealers even carry wild caught snakes anymore. I haven't seen a wild caught florida king in pet store in over ten years. I just think this guy stepped on his meat. Next time think before opening the mouth and inserting your foot.

Speaking about thinking before typing.... You must be joking.
If you really believe your statements, you should take a peek at some wholesale price lists. IMO if someone wants to legally collect, then that is their business. Regs are regs, and I don't agree with all of them (sometimes with restricted take, and sometimes with legal take), but don't think that just because you haven't noticed it, it doesn't exist.
Shane

>>It's been 10-15 years since I think anybody tried to collect and sell. Not many wholesale dealers even carry wild caught snakes anymore. I haven't seen a wild caught florida king in pet store in over ten years. I just think this guy stepped on his meat. Next time think before opening the mouth and inserting your foot.

The one bag limit does allow an out of state collectors to take one zonata a day as long as they ship them out of state. For that matter, any state resident can take one a day as long as they give the animal away before the next day. The key is that the animals can not be sold nor can they be transported out of state for the purpose of selling them. If sold once they are out of state then this is a violation of the Lacey Act and is a Federal crime. The issue is getting the Feds to prosecute these offenses.

>>Randy
>>The laws on zonata are to strict on California residents.
>>Example if I where to come here from another state I could get
>>my out of state liscense and go hunt zonata all day long and
>>each time I got one I would send it back to my state each day
>>by UPS next day mail. So each day I would max out on the limit and then I would send it out of state where there are no limits
>>and I would be able to start over each day with nothing. Just think how many zonata I could send back to my home state legally. Then I could do what ever I wanted with them pretty
>>scarry thought. But they could do it legally California residents can't what a loop hole for out of state hunters.
>>KC
>>I don't Like to post because of people like you.
-----
Rick Staub
R&R Reptiles

Would the captive born offspring of such animals that have been legally shipped out of state be considered saleable or would selling the babies still be considered commercial use of the originally legally exported animals?

I don't know if the Lacey Act pertains to animals that were legally transported accross state lines. I don't know who you could ask about that one either. Arizona believes they can make it illegal to sell cb babies from their native wildlife that were transported legally out of state. AFAIK they cannot enforce it and I do not know how they can make that claim. Essentially they are saying that they retain ultimate ownership of any animals that are removed sort of like Australia does. Difference is that Australia puts that into their permits. For AZ, you need a small game hunting license to collect reptiles. Does this mean that if you use that license to hunt squirrels, that the state of AZ owns those frozen squirrels while they are in your freezer up until the time you consume them as stew?? Seems to me that when you purchased the hunting license, you are essentially purchasing whatever wildlife you take under that license. The state has the right to put qualifications on that wildlife (cannot sell or trade it), but babies produced by it later would seem to be out of their jurisdiction when you do not live in that state IMO.

Any lawyers out there?

>>Would the captive born offspring of such animals that have been legally shipped out of state be considered saleable or would selling the babies still be considered commercial use of the originally legally exported animals?
-----
Rick Staub
R&R Reptiles

C'mon Rick, do you really think that any two lawyers will interpret the regs any better than you?
I'm a third party here, but I'd be curious to know how many people were actually punished by regs that were left to interpretation, especially concerning the Lacey Act.
Shane

>>I'm a third party here, but I'd be curious to know how many people were actually punished by regs that were left to interpretation, especially concerning the Lacey Act.>>

I believe that would be heavily dependent upon how many of those who were charged with such offenses had the resources and will to defend themselves in court. A judges' interpretation is the only one that counts, but it costs a lot to hear it.
-----
Rick Staub
R&R Reptiles

I just don't see the problem. Now, I don't live in CA, and my bias is toward not trying to push the regs if they aren't unreasonable, but I have a hard time believing that anyone who is charged with a crime didn't have it coming. The law is not fair to everyone. That's a given. To me, the CA regs seem reasonable, but then again I'm not a commercial hobbyist. I agree with you that the hobby can be expensive, but, once again, do you know of anyone who was charged with a federal crime, that didn't have it coming?
The regs seem pretty clear-cut. If you follow them you're legal, if you try to protest them while they're still in effect you get spanked.
Shane

Hiya Shane...this is John from America,... re your post...

[[Posted by: TxHerper at Sun Jul 10 00:17:53 2005 [ Report Abuse ] [ Email Message ]

I just don't see the problem. ..... but, once again, do you know of anyone who was charged with a federal crime, that didn't have it coming?
The regs seem pretty clear-cut. If you follow them you're legal, if you try to protest them while they're still in effect you get spanked.
Shane]]

Yes "spankings" occur w/ regularity around what was once the land of the free...home of the brave., provided your poor enough, Enron/WorldCom types we prefer not to spank at all, we just sort of strum the legal air guitars & pretend something happened...

Google up "Waco" or "Ruby Ridge" & you might learn about a litany of creative federal spankings... such as the burning of women & children, cowering under their beds. Or a federal sharpshooter shooting a baby out of its mothers arms. Makes me proud... how about you?

See down here theres a few of us who use different terms for this elevated level of dicipline...some of us call it murder.

You will not SEE the problem...because none are so blind as he who will not see.

While Pol Pot & Saddam Hussein would heartily agree w/ your position, I suggest its the ultimate un-american statement that non-violent civil disobediance should be met with "spanking",

John Gunn

Hi John. I guess I could have been a little more precise in the wording, but then again this is a herp forum. Rest assured, I am Shane from America, and I don't like bad enforcement any more than you do.
I was asking Rick a question about his experience with cases that were the result of questionable interpretation. In my experience, those who have been busted had it coming (state or federal). Now, I'll give you that some of those busts were ridiculous (IMO), e.g. someone looking for frogs in a National Wildlife Refuge with the aid of a spotlight, but it's hard to argue with a judge when the regs are clearly typed. Take a look at the kid who took some Burmese Pythons out of Everglades National Park. Good for him, I certainly don't have a problem with it, and I'm glad to know that at least one park ranger had some common sense, but he could have easily been spanked for that. You can't legally take any animal out of a national park without proper permission.
Hopefully that clarifies my question, and please comment if you know of anyone who has been prosecuted (herp-wise) for something that wasn't clearly stated in the regs.
Shane

I know someone that was charged that didn't have it comming...

Fundad

Do you really think that doesn't happen?/

It happens, I have no doubt about that, and know of one such case myself (the fine was relatively slight, hence it was easier to let it slide; that was a mistake), but I do beleive it's the exception rather than the rule. Also, I might add, that just because someone was found not guilty doesn't mean they didn't deserve the charge (has nothing to do with what "is fair". If LE didn't do what they were supposed to, then that person should walk, and LE should be spanked. If herpers can't follow the state regs, or don't try to change them, instead of breaking them, then I imagine the regs will become increasingly strict.
I'm torn on the issue of state herp protection. State jurisdiction can be great in order to come up with positive solutions, as a model for other states to follow, but then again they can be horrible by that same device. I really wonder if federal regulation may not be the best answer, since most species cross arbitrary state boundries. I do know that if someone breaks a state reg, because they don't beleive it's fair, then that will only increase tension between herpers and LE, instead of positive interaction. Just my two. Shane

Brian,
Do you still have the same e-mail address and did you get my recent email message?

Richard F. Hoyer

The only problem is that it IS illegal to sell, ship, import, or export any native species in or out of the state.

Look again! Shane

Here's the link: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/licensing/pdffiles/fg1502.pdf

I pasted most of the relevant portions bellow.

-Alice

§40. General Provisions Relating to Native Reptiles and Am-phibians.
(a) General Prohibition It is unlawful to capture, collect,
intentionally kill or injure, possess, purchase, propagate, sell,
transport, import or export any native reptile or amphibian, or part thereof, except as provided in this chapter, Chapter 2 of this subdivision relating to sportfishing and frogging, sections 650, 670.7, or 783 of these regulations, or as otherwise provided in the Fish and Game Code or these regulations.

§43. Captive Propagation and Commercialization of Native Reptiles
and Amphibians.
(c) Propagation and Possession for Commercial Purposes.
Native reptiles may not be sold, possessed, transported, imported, exported or propagated for commercial purposes, except as pro-vided in Section 40(e) and except as follows:
(1) Subspecies Authorized. Only the following subspecies may
be propagated, imported, exported, or possessed for commercial
purposes, or purchased or sold pursuant to the provisions of this
section:
(A) California common kingsnake (Lampropeltis getulus californiae);
(B) California subspecies of the gopher snake (Pituophis
melanoleucus): Great Basin gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus
deserticola), Pacific gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus
catenifer), San Diego gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus
annectens), and Sonora gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus
affinis);
(C) California subspecies of the rosy boa (Lichanura trivirgata):
Coastal rosy boa (Lichanura trivirgata roseofusca) and Desert rosy boa (Lichanura trivirgata gracia).
(2) Bill of Sale. All animals sold pursuant to these regulations
must be accompanied by a numbered bill of sale which shall contain the name and permit number of the permittee, the complete
scientific name of each native reptile sold and the name and address of the buyer. A copy of the bill of sale shall be retained by the buyer.
(D) Limits. Except as otherwise authorized, no person shall
take or possess native reptiles and amphibians taken from the wild in excess of the bag and possession limits specified in sections 41.5 and 42.5. There are no possession limits for captively-bred native reptiles and amphibians authorized by subsection 43(c) for persons possessing a native reptile and amphibian propagation permit or for which the person has a bill of sale as required in subsection 43(c)(2).
(E) Pet Shops.
(1) Defined. A "pet shop" means a permanent place of business,
licensed by a city or county, that is open to the public and
maintains normal business hours, where pet animals are kept for
retail sale. An "owner or operator" means the person who owns or
is in charge of the pet shop.
(2) Exemption. Pet shop owners or operators or their employees
or agents, are not required to obtain a native reptile and am-phibian propagation permit to purchase, transport directly from the point of purchase to the pet shop, possess or resell native reptiles and amphibians purchased from a permittee pursuant to subsection 43(c). This exemption applies only to native reptiles and amphibians sold by the pet shop from the premises of the pet shop.

>>Here's the link: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/licensing/pdffiles/fg1502.pdf
>>
>>I pasted most of the relevant portions bellow.
>>
>>-Alice
>>
>>§40. General Provisions Relating to Native Reptiles and Am-phibians.
>>(a) General Prohibition It is unlawful to capture, collect,
>>intentionally kill or injure, possess, purchase, propagate, sell,
>>transport, import or export any native reptile or amphibian, or part thereof, except as provided in this chapter, Chapter 2 of this subdivision relating to sportfishing and frogging, sections 650, 670.7, or 783 of these regulations, or as otherwise provided in the Fish and Game Code or these regulations.
>>
>>§43. Captive Propagation and Commercialization of Native Reptiles
>>and Amphibians.
>>(c) Propagation and Possession for Commercial Purposes.
>>Native reptiles may not be sold, possessed, transported, imported, exported or propagated for commercial purposes, except as pro-vided in Section 40(e) and except as follows:
>>(1) Subspecies Authorized. Only the following subspecies may
>>be propagated, imported, exported, or possessed for commercial
>>purposes, or purchased or sold pursuant to the provisions of this
>>section:
>>(A) California common kingsnake (Lampropeltis getulus californiae);
>>(B) California subspecies of the gopher snake (Pituophis
>>melanoleucus): Great Basin gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus
>>deserticola), Pacific gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus
>>catenifer), San Diego gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus
>>annectens), and Sonora gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus
>>affinis);
>>(C) California subspecies of the rosy boa (Lichanura trivirgata):
>>Coastal rosy boa (Lichanura trivirgata roseofusca) and Desert rosy boa (Lichanura trivirgata gracia).
>>(2) Bill of Sale. All animals sold pursuant to these regulations
>>must be accompanied by a numbered bill of sale which shall contain the name and permit number of the permittee, the complete
>>scientific name of each native reptile sold and the name and address of the buyer. A copy of the bill of sale shall be retained by the buyer.
>>(D) Limits. Except as otherwise authorized, no person shall
>>take or possess native reptiles and amphibians taken from the wild in excess of the bag and possession limits specified in sections 41.5 and 42.5. There are no possession limits for captively-bred native reptiles and amphibians authorized by subsection 43(c) for persons possessing a native reptile and amphibian propagation permit or for which the person has a bill of sale as required in subsection 43(c)(2).
>>(E) Pet Shops.
>>(1) Defined. A "pet shop" means a permanent place of business,
>>licensed by a city or county, that is open to the public and
>>maintains normal business hours, where pet animals are kept for
>>retail sale. An "owner or operator" means the person who owns or
>>is in charge of the pet shop.
>>(2) Exemption. Pet shop owners or operators or their employees
>>or agents, are not required to obtain a native reptile and am-phibian propagation permit to purchase, transport directly from the point of purchase to the pet shop, possess or resell native reptiles and amphibians purchased from a permittee pursuant to subsection 43(c). This exemption applies only to native reptiles and amphibians sold by the pet shop from the premises of the pet shop.