RED ALERT: Stop Federal Python BAN!

sent my letter and put a like on facebook

I got a "reply"

Dear Friend: Thank you for your email. I appreciate hearing from you. We are experiencing a high volume of incoming emails, but every message is read by my staff and if you live in Illinois we will provide a response as soon as possible. I appreciate your comments.:cens0r: Thank you again for contacting me. :cens0r:Sincerely, contacting me. :cens0r:Sincerely, Richard J. Durbin United States Senator

I know this is the EXACT copy as another IL person got. IA anyone getting a legitimate response?

Sent! I really hope the ban doesn't come into action.

I sent my letters early on (both e-mail and hard copy) and the only response I've received so far has been:

Quote:

---

Thank you for emailing me. I truly appreciate your taking the time to be in touch. Listening to my constituents is a priority for me. If you are a constituent and provided me with your full name and postal mailing address, I will be responding to you as soon as possible.

If you have written regarding a problem you are having with a federal agency, a caseworker in one of my district offices will be contacting you shortly. If your problem is time-sensitive, you may also call my Madison office (608-258-9800) or Beloit office (608-362-2800) for immediate assistance.

If you are contacting me for information about tours for your visit to Washington, DC, please call any of my offices and I will be glad to help make your visit enjoyable.

Finally, I encourage you to further explore my website at www.tammybaldwin.house.gov. Through it, you can sign up to receive my e-alerts on news from the House, learn more about current issues before Congress and find out what I have been doing to represent the people of Wisconsin's 2nd Congressional district.

Thanks again for staying in touch!

Tammy Baldwin
Your Congresswoman

---

I got that shortly after I sent the letters on the 4th.

Letter sent.

Quote:

---

Dear Adam:

Thank you for contacting me about your concerns regarding the Lacey Act. I appreciate hearing from you.
The Lacey Act (the “Act”) was originally introduced by Rep. John Lacey of Iowa and signed into law by President William McKinley in 1900. Since, the Act has been amended numerous times. The law in its current form makes it unlawful to purchase a plant that is traded or taken in a manner that does not comply with U.S. law. The intent of this law is to preserve and prevent the illegal trafficking of certain plants and animals, and to prevent the potentially harmful effects of non-native species of plants and animals.
I support trade measures that allow Colorado’s farmers, ranchers, and businesses to sell their products around the world. However, it is also very important that our trade agreements should protect environmental standards both here and abroad. Our country has struggled to strike the right balance on these issues for years.

Should legislation amending the Lacey Act come before the full Senate for consideration, I will keep your concerns in mind. I hope you will continue to share your thoughts with me.

For more information about my priorities as a U.S. Senator, I invite you to visit my website at http://bennet.senate.gov/. Again, thank you for contacting me.


Sincerely,

Michael Bennet
United States Senator

Please do not respond to this email. To send another message please visit my website at http://bennet.senate.gov and fill out the webform for a prompt response. Thank you.

---

:rolleyes:

Lol, you can tell they didn't even read what you sent them since the whole response was focused on plants. :rolleyes:

Our tax dollars are hard at work there. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlitherinSisters

I just did a search and a lot of these snakes top out at 6-10 feet, these aren't big snakes, not good...

---

That is correct. The three of mine that will be affected will only get to 4-6 feet long.

Signed and sent! Honestly, this ban doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I can't see how anybody but the people behind it's creation could support it.

Giant boids are invading the Everglades?! Well, lets ban transportation between any state!
compare to:
Feral cats are running wild and decimating bird and wildlife populations?! But they're so cuuuute~ ...

Not that I want cats banned or any such nonsense. But you can see where this totally makes sense. :rolleyes:

"This rule, if enacted, would ban the import and interstate transport of nine constricting snakes; Burmese python, Northern & Southern African pythons, Reticulated python, all four Anacondas, and Boa constrictor."

Sent the letter, Seriously though.....the economy is doing poorly enough as it is and they want to make things worse by taking away the jobs of 90% of the snake breeders in america?

Being a politician is just like being a hooker, you have to be able to pretend to like people while your screwing them.:rage:

Signed and sent. Going to try to print and mail out hard copies.

Posted an article about it myself on my facebook. Spoke about not just the banning of snakes, but also the banning of OTHER exotics pets that will surely follow if THIS is allowed. Because quite frankly, where would it stop if this is okay? What would they go after next that takes away from our rights and freedom in the united states?

Just signed petition and sent emails.:banana:

I am a full time working mother of 3 and the government needs to realize that the "herp community" consists of far more people than they realize. I don't understand their basis for this law at all, do they have a law against "dangerous" breeds of dogs?? take the pit bull for example is the pit bull a dangerous breed of dog that should be banned or is it the pet owners actions and inaction's that make that particular dog dangerous, it is the same thing with Burmese pythons and all of these other animals they are now trying to ban, its not the animal that is dangerous by itself it is the owners actions that make it so and i don't see how they could possibly legally ban them. Maybe new constrictor owners should be required to take a class or obtain a permit or something. You know something like "this snake will get big and live for XX years, don't let it loose, here's how to take care of it properly, here's how to get rid of it properly if you can no longer care for it" DUH

oh yeah and sent

Hm.. Didn't realize this bill would also prevent "interstate transport." Now I'm very angry.

signed, will mail out hard copies tomorrow. thanks for the heads up

I am not an american citizen so I can not intervene in this issue but i want to give you the advide to send letters instead of e-mails. Letters are far more effective!

My wife works at one of the biggest and best animal hospitals in the country, so tonight she's going to go on BP.NET and copy this and pass it out to everybody to get everyone to send letters and email. It has a huge staff. Laws like this just blow my mind, are they going to ban swimming pools, cars, planes,motorcycles, guns,fast food,cigarettes, alcohol, and all humans etc.. If only everything in this country was as dangerous as supposedly these snakes and caused such few deaths the world would be a much safer place.. I already went through this junk when I bred and showed weight pulled and hunted with American Pit Bull Terriers and the constant attacks on them and breed specific laws were ridiculous and still constantly ongoing. It was such a headache and then I had my kids that I got out of the dogs and got into Reptiles my childhood passion and now here we go again. Incredible!!!!!!! Let's all stick together and fight this tooth and nails to the end. This time there no way I'm getting out of Reptiles ever!!!!!

Signed, emailed, and will print hard copy as well. Thanks for bringing the matter to our attention!

Trying to clear up some confusion I've seen on this thread (I was rather confused as well until I read the actual amendment being proposed)

A lot of people (other blogs and websites included) are saying that ALL pythons, including the ball python, would be banned. According to the species listed in the legislation this is not correct.
The legislation is written very clearly as to what species they are talking about, and I googled the names to verify which breeds these are and ball python (Python Regius) is not included.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s373/show

Sent. Hope this all works out.

Sent! This BS has got to stop!

Sent! :salute:

Sent!!!:taz:

This is absurd........ When is this bill suppose to be finalized???

This is absolutely ludicrous! We have as much the right to keep any reptile we please as anyone who has a dog. There have been over 300 people killed by domestic dogs in the last twenty years. The number of people killed by pet reptiles in this amount of time is minuscule in comparison. Are they going to ban dogs next? Of course not! The government needs to just let it go and keep its nose out of this wonderful business. By the people for the people? Yeah right, I believe that. Seventeen thousand Americans have said no to this awful reptile ban, will it make a difference? I sure hope so.

Sigh. How many more times do you think this bill will be republished under different names before we are done with it? :rolleye2: I'll keep fighting it til the end!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neondreams

Trying to clear up some confusion I've seen on this thread (I was rather confused as well until I read the actual amendment being proposed)

A lot of people (other blogs and websites included) are saying that ALL pythons, including the ball python, would be banned. According to the species listed in the legislation this is not correct.
The legislation is written very clearly as to what species they are talking about, and I googled the names to verify which breeds these are and ball python (Python Regius) is not included.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s373/show

---

I don't think it matters if ball pythons are included or not. A lot of us own snakes that will be included if this passes and as a community we need to come together to stop this because if this passes they will start to come after the smaller snakes next.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by evan385

This is absolutely ludicrous! We have as much the right to keep any reptile we please as anyone who has a dog. There have been over 300 people killed by domestic dogs in the last twenty years. The number of people killed by pet reptiles in this amount of time is minuscule in comparison. Are they going to ban dogs next? Of course not! The government needs to just let it go and keep its nose out of this wonderful business. By the people for the people? Yeah right, I believe that. Seventeen thousand Americans have said no to this awful reptile ban, will it make a difference? I sure hope so.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by purplemuffin

Sigh. How many more times do you think this bill will be republished under different names before we are done with it? :rolleye2: I'll keep fighting it til the end!

---

Most of the politicians who sponsor thease bills are lobbied by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). Their ultimate goal is to end all pet ownership. They will do whatever is necessary to keep donations coming in, whether it's by creating a percieved threat to public safety or by playing on peoples sympathies from their advertising campaign. Sooner or later, cats and dogs will be on their ban list. They have already tried to take down a large part of the pet industry and failed because of the backlash from the pet industry as a whole. Now, their plan is to take it down in small pieces...

The problem has to do with simply too many irresponsible keepers buying little snakes and letting them loose in Florida when they get big where they are proving to be able to live and breed in the wild. They cited these 9 snakes because they're the largest, most likely to be abandoned, and do in fact pose public safety risks in terms of their ability to harm livestock, pets, and even small children under the wrong circumstance.

I agree that legislation is helpful here. In my opinion, however, this legislation should be limited to states where the animals can live a full life cycle. They'd die within a year in 45 of the 50 states practically, so it seems stupid to have this be federal.

If the bill doesn't get dropped, I'd like to see them simply make the animals require a permit rather than ban them outright. The permit would require the owner to prove that they have properly secure facilities and the ability to care for the animal properly through its life. This generates revenue and keeps a tab on what are, to be fair, big nasty invasive dinosaurs. Keepers who are worthy of the big snakes can keep, breed, and sell them to other worthy keepers.

Quote:

---

You should realize that this does NOT ban the sale or breeding of snakes already IN the united states.

---

You would be able to sell within your own state, but importation and interstate transport and commerce would become a felony.

Where in the language of the bill does it say you cannot sell across US state lines? All I have read is that it bans the import of the snakes into the country. It doesn't even ban ownership unless I totally missed something.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/us...2----000-.html


The language and link are on page 3 of this thread. Plus the US code is above.

Anybody have a law degree?

Have you sent your letter(s)???

When is this bill being voted on? and how many emails/letters do we need? Is it being attached to another bill? I've emailed/ mailed mine. Also if its just banning out of country imports wouldn't that almost help the hobby? Breeders wouldn't have to compete with the cost of cheap imports.... Just a thought I do realize that if it is passed it is a step in a direction to make them completely illegal.

this is the second letter I have recieved now by two different people :) and if you could see the actual email it looks extremely fancy unlike the first and its deffinately alot longer



January 13, 2012



Dear Ms. Wolford,

Thank you for contacting me regarding your concerns with the Lacey Act. I understand this issue is important to you and appreciate the time you have taken to contact me.

Last August, the Department of Justice raided Gibson Guitars on alleged Lacey Act violations. The Lacey Act is intended to prohibit trade in wildlife, fish and plants that have been illegally taken, possessed, transported or sold. Justice Department officials claim that wood imported from India by Gibson Guitars was fraudulently labeled to conceal a contravention of Indian export law. Gibson has argued that the government has failed to demonstrate how companies can ensure they are complying with the law. Further, according to Gibson, these raids have resulted in lost productivity and cost the company approximately $1 million. I believe we must carefully examine these allegations and pursue common-sense policies that promote job growth in the United States.

In the 112th Congress, there have been two pieces of legislation introduced to amend the Lacey Act as it is currently being enforced. The first was a Senate amendment proposed to H.R. 2112, the Agriculture appropriations bill on October 17, 2011. This amendment would have prohibited the use of federal funds to prosecute any violation of foreign law with respect to a plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold, unless the applicable foreign government initiated proceedings against the suspected company or individual. This amendment was never voted on and was not included in the language of the passing bill.

The second pending amendment to the Lacey Act is H.R. 3210, the Retailers and Entertainers Lacey Implementation and Enforcement Fairness (RELIEF) Act. This bill was introduced on October 18, 2011, and was referred to the House Natural Resources' Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs for consideration. The RELIEF Act would clarify previous amendments made to the Lacey Act by excluding violations that occurred prior to May 22, 2008, and would outline the requirements for wood products that would entering the United States. In addition, the bill would provide certain protections to companies or individuals who may have unknowingly possessed illegal wood and would cap civil penalties for first violations at $250.

Like you, I share in the belief of preserving and creating legislation that protects American jobs and spurs domestic economic growth. Be assured that I will keep your thoughts on amendments to the Lacey Act in mind should H.R. 3210 and other related legislation come to the House Floor for a vote.

Thank you again for contacting my office. Please do not hesitate to reach out if you have any questions or concerns. To stay informed on what is happening in Washington and around the 17th District, I invite you to visit my website http://schilling.house.gov to sign up to receive my e-newsletter.


Sincerely,

Bobby Schilling
Member of Congress

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kinra

I don't think it matters if ball pythons are included or not. A lot of us own snakes that will be included if this passes and as a community we need to come together to stop this because if this passes they will start to come after the smaller snakes next.

---

Oh, I agree! I was just trying to clear up the confusion :)

Sent!

Actually I sent it on the 6th, but it is sent.

DONE! Signed, emailed, printed, and posted all over numerous social networking sites :D

when are they going to vote on this?

Sent emails. Why does our government have to stick their noses into where it doesn't belong? Why are they stripping us of our freedom and happiness. They need to focus on other things like the war in the Middle East. There are more Americans dying in the Middle East right now than from snakes.

Letter's have been sent.

From USARK facebook page: "We need 25,000 by Tommorrow!!!" (sorry don't know how to do a screen shot). We need to get another 950 sent in by tomorrow! If you have anyone you can ask to send one in, or if for some reason you haven't sent one in your self, now is the time to do it!

Here is the even scary part. http://www.interior.gov/news/mediaad...yH0oA.facebook Though they don't disclose what they're going to announce, if this bill passed then this would be how they announced it.

I am bumping this back up because we need to work together in getting these letters out. 25,000 letters is NOT 25,000 signatures. There are not even 9,000 people who have participated in this. :( :( :( :(

Star

Done! even though this will NEVER be passed.. if it does im keeping my animals, i'll take whatever i get..

Omg That is so not cool!!!!!! I have always wanted a red tail. That sucks!! People can't do that!!!

Just sent it. I hope you get enough letters!!!!

^ Unless I'm mistaken, I think there's some confusion...

...the ban isn't saying you can't OWN the animals listed on it (besides Flordia and the burms you know...) just that you can't buy between states - you need to buy within your state. I didn't see anything that said you can't OWN (or breed) x, y, or z.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daybreaker

^ Unless I'm mistaken, I think there's some confusion...

...the ban isn't saying you can't OWN the animals listed on it (besides Flordia and the burms you know...) just that you can't buy between states - you need to buy within your state. I didn't see anything that said you can't OWN (or breed) x, y, or z.

---

You got it...BUT, doesn't it seem odd? Banning them all together is next. at least that's my opinion... We just need to keep up the efforts, work together, and stay professional as a community.

I sent mine in! Although I was unable to send out hard copies!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by python_addict

January 13, 2012



Dear Ms. Wolford,

Thank you for contacting me regarding your concerns with the Lacey Act. I understand this issue is important to you and appreciate the time you have taken to contact me.

Last August, the Department of Justice raided Gibson Guitars on alleged Lacey Act violations. The Lacey Act is intended to prohibit trade in wildlife, fish and plants that have been illegally taken, possessed, transported or sold. Justice Department officials claim that wood imported from India by Gibson Guitars was fraudulently labeled to conceal a contravention of Indian export law. Gibson has argued that the government has failed to demonstrate how companies can ensure they are complying with the law. Further, according to Gibson, these raids have resulted in lost productivity and cost the company approximately $1 million. I believe we must carefully examine these allegations and pursue common-sense policies that promote job growth in the United States.

In the 112th Congress, there have been two pieces of legislation introduced to amend the Lacey Act as it is currently being enforced. The first was a Senate amendment proposed to H.R. 2112, the Agriculture appropriations bill on October 17, 2011. This amendment would have prohibited the use of federal funds to prosecute any violation of foreign law with respect to a plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold, unless the applicable foreign government initiated proceedings against the suspected company or individual. This amendment was never voted on and was not included in the language of the passing bill.

The second pending amendment to the Lacey Act is H.R. 3210, the Retailers and Entertainers Lacey Implementation and Enforcement Fairness (RELIEF) Act. This bill was introduced on October 18, 2011, and was referred to the House Natural Resources' Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs for consideration. The RELIEF Act would clarify previous amendments made to the Lacey Act by excluding violations that occurred prior to May 22, 2008, and would outline the requirements for wood products that would entering the United States. In addition, the bill would provide certain protections to companies or individuals who may have unknowingly possessed illegal wood and would cap civil penalties for first violations at $250.

Like you, I share in the belief of preserving and creating legislation that protects American jobs and spurs domestic economic growth. Be assured that I will keep your thoughts on amendments to the Lacey Act in mind should H.R. 3210 and other related legislation come to the House Floor for a vote.

Thank you again for contacting my office. Please do not hesitate to reach out if you have any questions or concerns. To stay informed on what is happening in Washington and around the 17th District, I invite you to visit my website http://schilling.house.gov to sign up to receive my e-newsletter.


Sincerely,

Bobby Schilling
Member of Congress

---

did anyone actually read this letter he sent me? I have read it several times why is he talking about trades in wildlife plants and fish that are illegal but the new proposed bill is about constrictors that arent illegal yet? Im not getting this lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by python_addict

did anyone actually read this letter he sent me? I have read it several times why is he talking about trades in wildlife plants and fish that are illegal but the new proposed bill is about constrictors that arent illegal yet? Im not getting this lol

---

It's a auto reply... I got the same thing...