So I found a slide in my ecology class's lecture notes for this Friday that features the bogus map of the Burm invasion to the lower third of the U.S. I talked to my professor after class about it, and told him that the study had been refuted and was not accurate.

I got a much longer conversation than I wanted, and it led into me mentioning HR 669, which apparently he wasn't aware of.

To be perfectly honest I don't like arguing a point, nor am I good at it, and I prefer to just stay out of things. But, I care about these issues (obviously) and I didn't want him to present a one sided argument to our class. I sent him an email with some links about the US burm issue, as well as the GovTrack site on HR 669, and some of my own opinion... His reply included:

"I am not sure why you think HR 669 was poorly written, or why the import of non-native species into the U.S. should be dealt with on the state level, but maybe you can explain that on Friday as well."

Now that's where you all come in... What should I say to an ecology professor about HR 669? He'd probably rather let the pet industry go to waste than risk the tiniest possibility of an invasive species... I have no idea how to approach him, or if I even should... what do you all think? I would really appreciate some input...