Python Rope A Dope

[ColinWeaver]

The reptile community has been suckered. We are falling for a very clever ruse and it is happening at this very moment.

What trick, you say? S373 and HR2811, of course. The clever nature of the trickery behind these bills has caused the reptile community to lose its perspective and react in a most unexpected way. We are now working for the other side. We are unintentionally supporting a ban. Allow me to explain.

Both S373 and HR2811 propose to add the entire genus PYTHON to the injurious species list of the current Lacey Act. If passed this will ban the importation of AND interstate transport of all pythons. This will effectively end the trade in every species of python there is. This is, of course, a horrifying proposition to python lovers everywhere. At first I laughed at the silliness of it and shook my head at how uneducated the people were who penned such legislation. But as I continued to think about it I came to realise that it may actually be brilliant wording on their part. It's brilliance lies their anticipation of our reaction. As a community we have played directly into the hands of those who wish ban the ownership of exotic animals. And leading the packed on being tricked is one of our most active voices, the United States Association of Reptile Keepers, USARK.

In my opinion USARK has officially thrown the Burmese Python under the proverbial bus. I have long feared it would one day happen but did not expect it to come so soon. On July 25th, 2009 USARK actively solicited the reptile community to contact members of the House Judiciary Committee to amend the wording of HR2811 to specifically address Burmese pythons rather than the entire python genera. In doing so they have become unintentional participants in the initiative to ban large constrictors in the United States. And I suggest that this is partially what the authors of S373 and HR2811 wanted to happen. I believe these bills are INTENTIONALLY vague (by using only the term 'python') in order to get us to say, "Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Don't ban all pythons! Just ban Burmse pythons! " Wait. Did we, the reptile community, really just say that? Yeah, we did.

The last I heard USARK's position was that they did not support legislation that was not based on a legitimate scientific analysis of the ability of the Burmese python to expand beyond the Florida Everglades. Has such evidence surfaced? No, it has not. But their position appears to have changed. USARK wants to be the voice of the reptile community and they appear to be suggesting that we offer up the Burmese python as a sacrifice to protect all the other pythons.

Please don't take my words to think that I am coming down on USARK as a whole. I do not intend to do so. I firmly believe that USARK has, at its foundations, nothing but the absolute best intentions for the reptile community. They are a group of people who have stood up to fill a void; a voice to represent reptile owners throughout the United States. But I do not agree with their reaction to this particular issue. And part of me thinks that they, like the rest of us, have been tricked into a position that supports the desired result of those who wish to ban the ownership of exotic animals. We have played into their hands. Just a few short months ago we were all screaming, "No. You may not ban pythons without scientific evidence to support their ability to be invasive beyond the Florida Everglades." Now, in a tiny amount of time, we seem to have changed our voice to say, "Please, please, please! Just ban Burmese pythons." The only way we could have changed our tune so quickly is if we were tricked into doing so. And tricked we have been.

If you are going to make a call on Monday to a member of the House Judiciary Committee regarding the wording of HR2811 (as the USARK suggests) you need to make a choice about what you are going to say. Are you going to advocate a change in the wording that says it's OK to ban the Burmese python or are you going to tell them that the Lacey Act should not be amended until proof can be found that pythons are a national problem rather than just an isolated problem in the south of Florida?

And by the way, there is already a bill floating around that will fund efforts to hunt Burmese pythons in the Everglades (as well as multiple dozens of other non-native creatures that get no publicity). If Burmese pythons cannot expand beyond the Everglades and we are going to hunt them down and remove them, why do we need a law banning them throughout the entire United States? In short, we don't.

Once the exotic animal banning gates are open we cannot close them. More and more reptiles and other exotics will find themselves legally unavailable for ownership.

P.S. - Where are the big shipping companies? Delta (via Delta Dash), FedEx and UPS all stand to lose a considerable amount of money if these bans are actually put into effect. They should want to lobby on behalf of the responsible reptile owning community and ensure the future of a large revenue stream.

Final note: It is not lost on me that USARK's position may be one of minimization. They may be taking a precautionary stance by seeking to amend the wording to minimize damage if the unthinkable should happen. But even if that is true it doesn't change the fact that there has been a shift in tone toward a willingness to let Burmese python ownership become a thing of the past.

[CoolioTiffany]

I never thought of it this way. I definitely didn't want them to ban ANY pythons, because I know how many, many people love to care for Burmese pythons. Burmese pythons should not be sacrificed to save all of the other pythons. Burmese pythons are a part of the hobby, and I know that many people love to have them as pets. Many people take wonderful care of their Burmese pythons and give them the correct care, while few others do not achieve that. That is why the pythons are all over Florida. Many people who purchased Burmese pythons when they were babies thought, "Hey, this snake will only get a little bit bigger." but instead the snakes ended up growing well over 10 feet making the owners think, "I don't want to care for this snake any more, I'll just release it somewhere." If people actually did their research before purchasing any snake would not have problems like that happen. If the people who purchased the Burmese pythons did their research, there would barely be any Burmese pythons in Florida and possibly wouldn't have purchase the snake in the first place. I think people should actually be informed about the snake BEFORE they make the purchase so they know what their dealing with.

[Hulihzack]

USARK wants the ban of importation of burmese pythons, they aren't saying "ok just ban burms all together". Usark still wants captive breeding and interstate sale and transfer to remain legal.
Exerpt straight from the email from USARK- "Please amend the bill to address only the IMPORT of the Burmese Python." I think you may have misunderstood their goal.

[ColinWeaver]

USARK wants the ban of importation of burmese pythons, they aren't saying "ok just ban burms all together". Usark still wants captive breeding and interstate sale and transfer to remain legal.
Exerpt straight from the email from USARK- "Please amend the bill to address only the IMPORT of the Burmese Python." I think you may have misunderstood their goal.

If the Burmese python is added to Section 3371(g) of the Lacey Act they are effectively banned in the United States because the Lacey Act prevents buying, selling and interstate transport. There is no captive-bred provision for listed animals. Section 3372(2) of the Lacey Act makes it a crime for someone to "to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase in interstate or foreign commerce" any animal on the list. Notice how it doesn't provide for banning ONLY importation. The Act does not provide for exceptions for any animal currently on the list.

HR2811 does not seek to amend the wording of the Lacey Act in any other way than to add "pythons" to Section 3371(g). USARK is suggesting the wording be amended to say 'python molurus bivittatus', rather than just 'python'. No other species (or subspecies) is so specifically listed in the Lacey Act and even if the wording is changed it does not prevent Burmese pythons from being captured in the umbrella statement of section 3372(2).

So no, I wouldn't say I'm confused about things.

[BiggBaddWolf]

For the most part I tend to stay away from topics like this, but I am going to make an exception this time. First off incidents like the recent one in Florida SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED And I don't think any responsible snake keeper would disagree with me. What the answer is as how to fix it I don't know. But something needs to be done so that every John Doe with a couple hundred bucks can't just walk into a pet store and get a large snake, just because they think it makes them look cool!!!!! Maybe some sort of permit system where prospective snake owners can prove they know what they are getting into with large snakes. Something similar to they use for firearms where there is a seven day waiting period before you can get your firearm. Or in one city near to where I live you have to have a permit to own a pit bull dog. Sure we do not need more government intervention in our hobby, but maybe if there had been rules and regulations in place it MIGHT have saved the little girl in Florida!!!!!!!!! I have seen posts on this forum where someone asks if they are ready for a large snake...Well if you have to ask, then my guess would be that NO you are not ready!!!!!!

[dsirkle]

The thing is Colin, that these politicians believe that a problem exists and that something must be done. They are ignorant of the facts and they haven't done their homework, but, you would gamble the whole python species in an all or nothing one shot vote. You can challenge them to prove the ability of the Burmese Python to migrate out of Florida but that would just be beating a dead horse. They don't need to prove anything. They have the power to institute these laws. They will pass a law. We can only hope to mitigate the damage at this point in my opinion. I respect your idealism, but life has beat much of the idealism out of me and I view compromise as better than defeat. I have used the provided script today in my contacts.

[wolfy-hound]

For the most part I tend to stay away from topics like this, but I am going to make an exception this time. First off incidents like the recent one in Florida SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED And I don't think any responsible snake keeper would disagree with me. What the answer is as how to fix it I don't know. But something needs to be done so that every John Doe with a couple hundred bucks can't just walk into a pet store and get a large snake, just because they think it makes them look cool!!!!! Maybe some sort of permit system where prospective snake owners can prove they know what they are getting into with large snakes. Something similar to they use for firearms where there is a seven day waiting period before you can get your firearm. Or in one city near to where I live you have to have a permit to own a pit bull dog. Sure we do not need more government intervention in our hobby, but maybe if there had been rules and regulations in place it MIGHT have saved the little girl in Florida!!!!!!!!! I have seen posts on this forum where someone asks if they are ready for a large snake...Well if you have to ask, then my guess would be that NO you are not ready!!!!!!

Excuse me? There ARE rules and regulations in place! The owner did NOT have the required permit and did NOT have the required caging, and did NOT have a LOCKED cage! There's already regulations and permits required in the state of Florida!

And look at what USARK said! "AMEND TO RESTRICT THE IMPORT OF BURMESE". It does not say to amend it to add burmese to the Lacey Act. It does not say to amend it to only say burmese banned. It says specifically to ask to amend to ban only the import of burmese.

Yes, you misunderstood what USARK said in the emails. No, you have not misunderstood the lawmakers goal. The lawmakers are not stupid, they are merely against snake keeping in many instances. That does not mean they are stupid, although some are misinformed, and some deliberately twist things to make it sound worse.

[Brewster320]

I do not agree with a complete ban on the burmese python! Although I have always thought there should be a permit system for keeping these large snakes(Not like the crappy one they got down in Florida) just so they have a better chance of staying out of the wrong hands. I've also thought the same thing for venomous snakes and crocodilians.

[Raptor]

The only ban being talked about is the importation of Burmese. That is, importing them from outside the US.

[BPHERP]

You are dammed if you do, dammed if you don't.