US House Committee Meeting on Invasive Species

[USARK.Jonathan.Brady]

US House Committee Meeting on Invasive Species
The United States House Committee on Natural Resources is preparing for a March 23rd oversight hearing on invasive species, specifically snakes. This will be a joint hearing between the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands and the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife. The hearing has not been formally announced yet, but we are told it will focus on the Lacey Act and whether this law is an effective method to control invasive species, particularly constrictor snakes.

We believe this hearing will be used to try and support the case for proposed Rule Change to the Lacey Act; adding the 9 constricting snakes addressed in the recent USGS report to the Injurious Wildlife List of the Lacey Act. If enacted this regulatory change could put tens of thousands of Americans in jeopardy of felony prosecution.

USARK will continue to monitor this important issue, its relevance to propose Rule Change, and forward along any new information as it becomes available.

[ScottyBoa]

So basically we need to get our printers/faxes/pens ready for another letter campaign? I'm all for it if we have to do it again. Could this possible be a blessing in disguise if we swap them with a ton of letters again and make them realize how many people are oppossed to it? Or is this going to screw us royally?

I was suppossed to deploy today but got delayed a day... would hate to come back and not be able to own my boas anymore because these idiots pulled this crap while I was gone. Getting my boas back is one of the things I am looking forward to the most when I get off active duty. And they're in PA with a breeder right now and I currently live in NJ so I couldn't even legally pick them up even if I wasn't moving out of state...

It is really sad that I can volunteer to fight and die for my country and have charge of a literally $200 million+ aircraft but I can't be trusted to be a responsible pet owner? Ugh... /rant.

We need to know what we can do to fight this like... now. This scares the hell out of me more than anything else because it can be an overnight thing basically if I understand it correctly. Salazar signs a paper and blam, all 9 species added to the Lacey act? You guys know they'll go after Ball Pythons and Colubrids next right?

[West Coast Jungle]

So basically we need to get our printers/faxes/pens ready for another letter campaign? I'm all for it if we have to do it again. Could this possible be a blessing in disguise if we swap them with a ton of letters again and make them realize how many people are oppossed to it? Or is this going to screw us royally?

I was suppossed to deploy today but got delayed a day... would hate to come back and not be able to own my boas anymore because these idiots pulled this crap while I was gone. Getting my boas back is one of the things I am looking forward to the most when I get off active duty. And they're in PA with a breeder right now and I currently live in NJ so I couldn't even legally pick them up even if I wasn't moving out of state...

It is really sad that I can volunteer to fight and die for my country and have charge of a literally $200 million+ aircraft but I can't be trusted to be a responsible pet owner? Ugh... /rant.

We need to know what we can do to fight this like... now. This scares the hell out of me more than anything else because it can be an overnight thing basically if I understand it correctly. Salazar signs a paper and blam, all 9 species added to the Lacey act? You guys know they'll go after Ball Pythons and Colubrids next right?

You make some excellent points. I think Congress needs to hear about how this would persecute those who fight so valiantly for our freedoms while they sit back and poop on us all.

Got get'em Scotty

[Vypyrz]

So let me get this refreshed in my muddled brain again. If 373 passes, it does not ban ownership, but it does ban interstate sales and transport, and international import and export. If they are added to the Lacey Act, then they are banned outright with no "grandfather" provisions for current owners. Which means hundreds of thousands of snakes would have to be destroyed almost overnight or face prosecution.

Last month when I sent the letters to my Senators, I alluded to the same thing Scotty is talking about, and to put it bluntly, boils down to this, concerning 373: If I had to make another deployment, and God forbid, I got killed in action, my family would have to come here from Texas to pick up all of my personal belongings, however, my pets would either a) end up in a rescue with the thousands of other homeless and hopeless animals or b) have to be destroyed, because it would be illegal for my family to take them back to Texas and provide them a good home in my memory. Which means, the same government that I just gave my life for is going to thank me by giving my beloved pets a death sentence. Which leads me to this conclusion: At my funeral a self righteous politician is going to present my grieving family with three things 1) an American flag, 2) the bodies of my two dwarf boas, and 3) a bill for the euthanization fee...

I promise that the letters I sent to my Senators were way more tactful and respectful. I apologize for the rant, but my cloaca is a little tender from almost 20 years of government policy and double standards towards it own military. I'm not even sure what I fight for any more. The rights of the American citizen to maintain freedom and liberties, or the rights of the government to take them all away...

[USARK.Jonathan.Brady]

Being listed as an injurious species (ie, the Lacey Act) does not prohibit ownership. In fact, an often overlooked fact is that the Lacey Act is actually a supplemental statute that serves the purpose of providing larger penalties for a law that has already been broken.

A person can NOT be prosecuted ONLY under the Lacey Act. They have to violate another law or rule FIRST. Hence "S373 and HR2811" as well as the proposed "rule change".

For instance, if S373 passed and was signed into law, then a person violated that law, they would be guilty of a felony and could then be prosecuted under the Lacey Act.

So, in effect, ONLY adding the animals to the Lacey Act wouldn't do much unless another law is created or rule change is made.

This issue has actually been oversimplified (due to its EXTREMELY confusing nature) and S373 and HR2811 do not actually seek to add these animals to the Lacey Act. It will make violating a law with regards to these animals PUNISHABLE by the Lacey Act. The net effect to the average person is zero, but there is a subtle difference.

That either helped, or confused you more. I hope it helped...

jb

[Vypyrz]

Thank You for the explanation. Now I can see the difference a bit clearer...