Impending TX legislation - DEADLINE TODAY!!!

Great news if its true!!!!!

:carrot: :D :carrot: :salute: :fest2: :salute: :fest: :partyon: :fest: :grouphug: :pinkele: :grouphug: :community :laughing: :community :w00t: :neener: :w00t: :headbang: :picknose: :headbang:



HAPPY!

Lets hold the corks till we know for sure.

Seems like really positive news!! Hopefully we've fully dodged the bullet this time.


I am in no way a politically savy person...and barely aware of local politics at all. It's just not where my interests and energies are focused. I'm certainly no activist for either side of center. However...I do believe I will be signing up with PIJAC, and I highly encourage everyone interested in protecting our rights to enjoy this unusual hobby to do the same.

I'd rather not be blindsided by something like this again...even if the rest of the political spectrum passes me by.

Excellent! Thanks, Lawrence!

Good news.

Here's a somewhat dated, yet still relevant, letter that has been attached to personal letters by herpers in the past. It's been passed around on other forums before, but I thought I'd post it here as it may aided in future letter writing. I also learned a couple of things from it.

I really like because it is based on sound scientific policy analysis. Furthermore, it is not particularly partisan and it avoids oversimplified knee-jerk labels such as "liberal" etc.

I had to break it up into two posts because of character limits on posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ARAV

ASSOCIATION OF REPTILIAN AND AMPHIBIAN VETERINARIANS RESPONSE TO HSUS PROPOSAL FOR BAN ON REPTILE PETS.

November 10, 2001

We are writing in response to the recent publication by the Humane
Society of the United States (HSUS), "Reptiles as Pets: An
Examination of the Trade in Live Reptiles in the United States."
While we applaud HSUS for highlighting many of the problems
associated with the trade in live reptiles, we cannot agree with
their conclusion that the reptile trade must be ended, and that the
sale of reptiles as pets should be banned. Maintaining captive
reptiles can be a rewarding, educational experience, and in some
cases may have significant conservation value. Problems associated
with the reptile pet trade have been noted by conservation
biologists, herpetologists, and veterinarians for decades. These
problems include, but are not limited to, zoonotic diseases such as
Salmonellosis, damage to wild populations of rare species due to over-
collection, introduction of non-native species or exotic diseases,
and animal welfare issues regarding transportation of reptiles and
survival of reptiles in captivity. These are serious concerns;
however, such problems can be overcome by effective education,
legislation, and research.
Caring for a captive reptile, like caring for any animal, can
provide an understanding of the organism that can be achieved in no
other way. It may pique ones curiosity, leading to further, more
advanced study. Most professional herpetologists, reptile
veterinarians, reptile curators, etc. report that maintaining
reptiles as pets was an influential part of their childhood and may
have guided their career choice. As habitat loss and urbanization
continue, maintaining captive reptiles may provide ones only exposure
to these organisms. Individuals that maintain captive reptiles are
likely to be more concerned with local, regional, and global reptile
conservation issues than individuals that have never seen or touched
a live reptile. In her recent book "Why the Wild Things Are: Animals
in the Lives of Children", psychologist Gail Melson investigates the
potential benefit that animals may provide in childhood development.
While the field is largely unexplored, Melson suggests that pets may
play a role in the development of nurturing skills, compassion,
affection, and "may function as a meaning system through which
children make sense of both themselves and their surrounding
environments." We believe that these theories are true, and that
owning a corn snake as a child can be as developmentally important as
owning a dog. Obviously, good judgement on the part of a responsible
adult is needed, and one must ensure that children caring for
reptiles are mature enough to provide proper care and hygiene for the
animal, while maintaining their own safety from zoonotic disease.
Owning a reptile requires a commitment of time and money as
with any pet. It also requires that an appropriate animal be chosen
for a given circumstance, and that ethical concerns be addressed. It
is no more reasonable to think that a large aggressive reptile will
be a good pet than to think that a large aggressive dog will be a
good pet. It is no more reasonable to expect an ill, dehydrated,
imported reptile to adapt to captivity than to expect a parasitized,
parvovirus-infected puppy from a poor source to thrive in its new
home. There are a number of species of reptiles now available in the
pet trade that are born in captivity, remain relatively small, have
known husbandry requirements, and can be obtained in healthy
condition from reputable sources. Examples of species in this
category are bearded dragons, leopard geckos, corn snakes, milk
snakes, ball pythons, and Mediterranean tortoises.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ARAV

Salmonella is a well-known zoonotic disease associated with
keeping captive reptiles. Human fatalities do occur from reptile-
associated Salmonellosis. However, we are well aware of the risk of
zoonotic disease associated with owning dogs, cats, birds, horses,
etc, as well as the threat of fatal trauma induced by some dogs or
horses. An estimated three to four million dog bites occur each year
in the US, half of which involve children. Salmonella is just one of
dozens of zoonotic diseases we may get from our pets. Should we avoid
owning all animals to prevent zoonoses? The risk of Salmonellosis can
be reduced by following guidelines established by the Centers for
Disease Control (CDC) and the Association of Reptilian and Amphibian
Veterinarians (ARAV), which are available from the ARAV.
Decreasing the massive importation and exportation of
reptiles may be desirable, particularly for species whose post-
importation survival is known to be poor. As an example, we know that
hingeback tortoises (Kinixys spp.), that were imported by the
thousands from Africa in the past decade, do very poorly in
captivity, as do many, many other species. Ending the trade in such
species would likely be met with little resistance, and is becoming
more practical as more captive-born animals of other species become
available However, we are not in favor of complete shut-down of the
international reptile trade. There are many very motivated,
dedicated private reptile keepers that have made tremendous
contributions to herpetological taxonomy, husbandry techniques, and
conservation based on the availability of imported animals. As an
example, the endangered radiated tortoise (Geochelone radiata) from
Madagascar was first bred in the US by a private individual in the
1970s. The progeny of this individuals group formed the basis of much
of the captive-breeding program for this species later adopted by
zoos throughout the country. More recently, the worlds known
population of the endangered McCords box turtle (Cuora mccordi) has
been nearly doubled by the breeding groups of private individuals.
Completely eliminating the availability of imported specimens may
prevent the development of captive assurance colonies of species that
are being driven to extinction in their native habitats. While
collection for the pet trade has undoubtedly damaged some species
populations, habitat destruction and consumption in the international
food trade remain the most significant threats to most reptile
species.
Concerns regarding the welfare of animals in transit and in
captivity are valid. Improper shipping techniques and improper
husbandry can result in mortality. However, we believe that the best
approach to this is not to stop the trade in reptiles, but to work to
constantly improve shipping regulations, inspections, penalties for
violations, and dissemination of proper husbandry information. We
have developed techniques to allow the humane movement of other
species, and such techniques can be developed for reptiles. This may
involve decreasing the numbers of animals moved in a given shipment,
and may mean that prices of animals will increase; but such changes
may be inevitable if the demand for healthy, ethically shipped
animals increases. Husbandry techniques have improved greatly in the
past decade and many excellent texts exist for most of the commonly
kept reptiles. Owners that do not provide adequate husbandry simply
have not done their research. This should not motivate a ban on
reptile pets any more than the dog owner who calls their veterinarian
on the day their dog whelps and asks "what do I do?" should
motivate a ban on dog ownership.
Finally, regarding the issue of the introduction of exotic
disease by imported reptiles, we are quite concerned. It is clear
that the potential for exotic disease entering the US with reptiles
exists. The case of African tortoises imported to Florida, found to
be infected with ticks carrying the causative agent of Heartwater
disease, brought this risk to the attention of many interested
parties. However, this is another situation where research, rather
than banishment, is needed. Since the original incident, and
stimulated by the incident, an effective and safe acaracide has been
identified for use in tortoises. By thinking about the problems,
identifying risks, and increasing the vigilance of monitoring, it is
possible to discover and address previously unrecognized diseases. If
certain diseases are found that cannot be controlled, then an
importation ban on the involved reptile species may be warranted.
In conclusion, we believe that reptiles should be available
as pets. It is desirable to greatly reduce the large-scale sale and
importation of reptiles in favor of supporting the more selective
sale of domestically bred reptiles of relatively easy to maintain
species. The path to this end will involve participation of many
groups, but at the forefront should be individual state governments.
State governments have control over allowing collection of native
animals, as well as which species may be sold in pet stores. In the
past, many states have taken the approach of banning a few
undesirable species, while allowing the sale of all other species.
Perhaps states should consider instead allowing the sale of only
certain species that have been captive bred and have known husbandry
requirements. Provisions for more serious keepers to obtain permits
to maintain restricted species could be issued based on guidelines
established by each state. We encourage the veterinary and
herpetological communities to voice their dissent to the conclusions
of the HSUS Live Reptile Trade report.

Sincerely,

Charles J. Innis, VMD
President, Association of Reptilian and Amphibian Veterinarians

Teresa Bradley. DVM
Belton, MO

Mark Mitchell, DVM, PhD
Louisiana State University

Elliot Jacobson, DVM, PhD, DACZM
University of Florida

Dale DeNardo, DVM, PhD
University of Arizona

Kevin Wright, DVM
Phoenix, AZ

William Griswold, DVM
Tempe, AZ

---

Hope everyone else finds it as helpful and enlightening as me. ARAV is here.

Fantastic news *huge sigh of relief*

Thanks for that link there, Judy.. very interesting organization, I will have to look into it more.

Thank you all for the valued support! This was not voted on or even reviewed today due to the amazing responses and provided information :gj: This will be reviewed and rewritten with the help of David Barker over the next few days. I will certainly keep everybody posted as to the results. This bill was coming anyways and at least they are interested in input to make it realistic for Texas herpers. More details later this week. Chris

Please submit your input for change to the current bill to David Barker vpi@beecreek.net Due to the time restrictions and overload you might not get a reply but please know that your input is appreciated and important. We will be meeting with the office late this week.

I saw many of the responses sent into the state and they where all excellent. The passion was pouring from the pages :grouphug:

Thank you all again for the support in this very important matter!

i just wanted to tell everyone who participated. a big thanks from the bottom of my heart :) i currently live in texas and have been for years and this was really troubling me cause i love my baby so much id rather be fined for having her. but thanks to all your efforts it wont happen :) thanks!

Alright, I sent in my opinion to Mr Barker.. everyone else please do the same.. the more input from everyone, the better!

BTW Kara, I have a thread right under this.;) :rockon: Mr Rick Perry is coming to the elementry schools here( some thing about they were the only school in texas to do something) and, i amy have to give him a little visit.

Thanks Everyone!! We couldn't have stoped this without you! I could see a permit on out of country venoumous snakes, just for saftey issues. :rockon: Herpers!:rockon:

Got this today....I know it's just a standard-reply form letter....but it's still cool when they use your real name... LOL

_______________________________________

Dear Mrs. Clothier:



Thank you for your recent email regarding House Bill 1309. I always appreciate knowing the questions, concerns and suggestions from you and all Texans.



House Bill 1309 would amend the Parks and Wildlife Code to require a permit for the possession or transportation of live, non-indigenous snakes or constrictors in Texas. This bill would require a permit or permit fee to be issued to the owner of these non-indigenous venomous snakes and constrictors.



The committee on Culture, Recreation, and Tourism was to hear this bill on March 20, 2007 but the bill hearing was postponed. Chairman Hilderbran announced he will collaborate a working group to focus on the bill in the next few weeks.



It is my suggestion that you continue to follow the progress of House Bill 1309 throughout the remainder of the session via the Texas Legislature Online Web site: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/ or by calling the following toll-free number, 1-877-824-7038.



Thank you, again, for your correspondence on this issue. If I can ever be of assistance to you on this or any other issue, please do not hesitate to contact my office.



Sincerely,



TOM CRAD****

Speaker

Thanks Judy! I think I might put that link in my signature.

omg!! I live in Austin, and work blocks from the capitol. I didn't find out about this until tonight, and have to admit that I read the first page of this thread and skipped to the last page. I can't believe this is what some elected person thinks is worth spending the little time they have on. :mad: :mad:
I hope this bill dies a quick death, and will be sending my email to the appropriate person.
Dang! Government just isn't happy without their nose in every little bit of your business!!

Yea Judy I got that one.

I came across this on another forum, same info. I called and ACCTUALLY got someone. I spoke with a gentleman named Todd. He was very polite, and informative when speaking with me on the phone. First off if you call and talk to him be polite and ask questions he will answer them. He told me that most people calling are rude and calling them names of the worst kind. THAT won't help our cause to keep our snakes we wish to keep. Second the BILL has been pulled until more information can be researched. I see this as a temporary win on our side.
This is what he told me over the phone: They are viewing the venomous snake issue as a safety issue( I can kinda understand safety, but thats like gun control I think, we need more education not laws). The constrictors are being revamped. They are working with Dave Barker in researching the constrictors. Thus far Dave has told them that there are 5 constrictors he feels people should not own as pets. This is the list I was given over the phone:
African Python
Asian Rock Python
Reticulated Python
South African Python
Green Anaconda
I gave him the name of a breeder I know who is very knowledgable, to help assit in researching information. What they want is good information from what I can gather. If we can show them that those of us who are responsible snake owers we can get this bill stopped. By no means dont stop sending in letters, but lets use the lack of knowledge they have to help us.
To reach Todd who is on the committee for this bill the number is 512-463-1974 ask for Todd when someone answers. Please dont be rude that wont help our cause.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by longviewbplover

To reach Todd who is on the committee for this bill the number is 512-463-1974 ask for Todd when someone answers. Please dont be rude that wont help our cause.

---

Excellent excellent! Thank you!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by longviewbplover

Thus far Dave has told them that there are 5 constrictors he feels people should not own as pets. This is the list I was given over the phone:
African Python
Asian Rock Python
Reticulated Python
South African Python
Green Anaconda

---

I had to look up "Asian Rock Python"... AKA Burmese Python.

Sadly, that might also include dwarf Retics and drwarf Burms...

They need to be educated on the differences of WC, CB. I think there is a difference in the snakes temperment, when its a WC or CB.

Thank you for all the valued input! We are working on the revision now and a newly revised bill should be available next week for review. I will keep you all posted.

Well if they include those above mentioned species, I hope there will still be a permit available.. since I own two of those species.

From what I understand, there will.

It seems so.. but I'm still worried about it.

I got an e-mail back from Dave Barker regarding the permits they intend to instate for venomous and giant constrictors:

Quote:

---

This law creates only a registry for the snakes the Committee perceives as
potentially danger. It does not ban them, nor does it require any
inspections or qualifications. They simply require that the owners of large
snakes and, more importantly, venomous snakes be registered so that
first-line responders will know about this "hazard" at given locations.

I can't say what the Texas Legislators will come up with in future years,
but right now, other than some city and county ordinances, your big snakes
should be welcomed in the State.

Dave

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JL9wf...related&search= -Part one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNnTmVZIlZU -Part two.

Dave Barkers testimony.

-Jason

Thank you Jason for the LINKS. :blowkiss:

Thanks Jason. I thought Dave was very well spoken and did a great job of showing the respectable side to herpers.

I only had time to watch the first one now.. he did a fantastic job, and I think I will write him a thank you letter for doing that for us.

You can see all the videos at Kingsnake.

so does anyone have any updated info on what became of the hearings...? I watched the videos of Dave and he did great, but I was wondering how they took it...

We met with the committee on Tuesday. They did not have the revised version of the bill available to review. There will also not be another public hearing before the committee votes on this bill. They have promised a copy of the revised version as soon as it becomes available...nothing as of yet. There where many tricks played and many hidden agendas behind this bill. More info as it becomes available :cool: