Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 1,333

0 members and 1,333 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 75,934
Threads: 249,129
Posts: 2,572,283
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, LavadaCanc
  • 10-13-2012, 01:40 PM
    Brewster320
    Python molurus subspecies and Lacy Act
    I was curious as to whether just the Burmese is affected by the lacy act or if the Indian and Sri Lankan python subspecies were also affected by this? I don't have any interest in keeping any of these but I was just curious as everything seems to be pointed toward the Burmese itself and not the other two subspecies.
  • 10-13-2012, 03:17 PM
    Andybill
    If it is a subspecies of the burm it is included as well as any hybrid burmese pythons such as the bat eater (retic x burm). Also there were 2 types of African rock pythons and the yellow anaconda? added to it as well. Somebody correct me if I am wrong about the yellow anaconda...
  • 10-13-2012, 03:33 PM
    Brewster320
    No your correct about the rocks and the yellow anaconda. I just didn't know if it was just the Burmese subspecies or all the subspecies.
  • 10-13-2012, 08:07 PM
    reptileexperts
    Indian rock is included in the Lacy Act which is included for the Sri Lankan.

    As of right now it is - Asian Rock (burmese), Indian Rock (Sri Lankan), African Rock, Yellow Anaconda
  • 10-14-2012, 07:28 PM
    Denial
    Indian pythons were already on the lacey act before the whole burmese mess happened
  • 10-14-2012, 08:04 PM
    reptileexperts
    Indians are also under the CITES appendix that prohibits them from being owned without proper permits :-) Should aslo be noted that burmese are now Python Bivitatus bivitatus correct?
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1