WARNING - BAN ON BOAS & PYTHONS!! - HR6311 Reintroduced as HR669

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BrucenBruce

Keep in mind folks, that "Non-native wildlife" includes a lot more than the reptiles we love - near as I can see, that definition would include every single non-domesticated animal. By its strictest definition, that could be just about every single non-native species except cats, dogs and traditional livestock.

That's parakeets.

Ferrets.

Canaries.

Hamsters.

Parrots.

Guinea pigs.

Tropical fish, from neon tetras to snakeheads. Tilapia? Who's writing the definitions? P.E.T.A.? Hope you like tofu.

The upside is - we're not quite alone here - though the bird hobby has already lost most of its importing, they still rely on captive breeding and transportation across State lines. So does the tropical fish industry. (And compare the size of the fish section with the size of the reptile section at your local pet shop.) Of course, there'll be exceptions made for laboratory research - which H.S.U.S. and P.E.T.A. activists can then concentrate their efforts on - and release all those animals into the environment.

My (fairly cynical) $.02 - and I may owe you change.

~Bruce

---

That's the main thing I noticed when reading the bill. It doesn't say anything about any species in particular. It's ALL non-native animals.

And there is a section to include animals to be exempt from the restrictions. That's what we need to work on. Getting our beloved snakes on the list of animals that WILL be allowed. This seems like a more constructive and likely scenario, as opposed to trying to get the bill thrown out all together.

With the Great Lakes right in my backyard I've seen firsthand the damage invasive non-native species can do (zebra mussels, goby's, certain aquatic plants).

IMO The bill could be a good thing just as easily as it could be detrimental. What we need to do is make our voices heard so that responsible, educated pet owners still have the right to enjoy our hobby.

This is the link for the broken screen article/report.
http://www.defenders.org/programs_an...en_screens.php

This is a link for another petition to fight the bill H.R. 669
This petition is set up for responsible owners.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/HR669

I'm have my doubts as to how many people commenting on this issue and signing the petitions have actually completely read through the bill. There is a whole section about approving animals to be exempt from the ban. Any breeder, importer, hobbyist, or any other interested parties will be able to voice their opinion.

I am quite concerned about this issue, don't get me wrong. But I just wonder how many people sign these petitions and spread the "THE MAN IS TAKING AWAY ALL MY REPTILES AND MAKING THEM ILLEGAL!!!" hysteria, without actually reading the whole bill. As I said before I think the lawmakers will be more likely to listen to "We understand invasive species need to be controlled, but animals X, Y, and Z are not a threat, and should be allowed" rather than "This is a bad bill, throw it out"

I'm not saying don't be against the bill. I'm saying if you are going to be against it make sure you know exactly what you are against.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by simplechamp

That's the main thing I noticed when reading the bill. It doesn't say anything about any species in particular. It's ALL non-native animals.

And there is a section to include animals to be exempt from the restrictions. That's what we need to work on. Getting our beloved snakes on the list of animals that WILL be allowed. This seems like a more constructive and likely scenario, as opposed to trying to get the bill thrown out all together.

With the Great Lakes right in my backyard I've seen firsthand the damage invasive non-native species can do (zebra mussels, goby's, certain aquatic plants).

IMO The bill could be a good thing just as easily as it could be detrimental. What we need to do is make our voices heard so that responsible, educated pet owners still have the right to enjoy our hobby.

---

the sponsors and co-sponsors of this bill are the ones that have tried to ban both boa and pythons in the past.
out of all the great lakes invasive species only the asian carp came from the pet trade.
the great lakes situation started in various ways either from bilge water, stuck to sides of ships, and some of those plants were introduced by the dept. of natural resources for feeding trout/salmonoids. some of these are now entering the food cycle.

Additionally to signing the petition you can also email/send your letters to the repetitives who are co-sponsoring this bill

Be polite, be articulate and DO NOT BE DISRESPECTFUL! This is very important!!

Fill in subject field with 'OPPOSE HR669'

Congresswoman Madeleine Z. Bordallo http://www.house.gov/bordallo/IMA/issue.htm

Congresswoman Grace Napolitano http://www.napolitano.house.gov/contact/feedback.htm

Congressman Ron Kind http://www.house.gov/kind/contact.shtml

Congress Raul Grijalva http://grijalva.house.gov/?sectionid...ctiontree=2,49

Congressman Dale Kildee http://www.house.gov/kildee/

Congressman Ron Klein http://klein.house.gov/content/contact/

Congressman Alcee Hastings http://www.alceehastings.house.gov/i...&id=104&Itemid

Congressman Neil Abercrombie http://www.house.gov/abercrombie/e_form.shtml

Congressman George Miller http://georgemiller.house.gov/contac...08/post_1.html

Rep McGovern (no link)

I've been reading over the bill several times myself to understand exactly what it's aiming for (slowly getting the picture too)... and what I think we really need at this point is someone more educated on the subject to break down the entire bill and explain it to those of us who don't speak politician. Before we go making any further assumptions on what exactly this is going to mean for us.

What I get out of the bill is this:

If the bill is enacted there will be two lists created: a list of approved non-native species, and a list of banned non-native species.

Any citizen, group, or interested party will be able to voice their opinion about which animals should be approved and which should be banned. The suggestions of animals to be included in either list "must include sufficient scientific and commercial information to allow the Secretary to evaluate whether the proposed nonnative wildlife species is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to other animal species’ or human health."

For a species to be on the approved list there must be proof that the animals "are not harmful to the United States’ economy, the environment, or other animal species’ or human health" or "may be harmful to the United States’ economy, the environment, or other animal species’ or human health, but already are so widespread in the United States that it is clear to the Secretary that any import prohibitions or restrictions would have no practical utility for the United States."

To be included on the list of approved species, the animal is either not a threat, or if it is a threat the problem is already so widespread and out of control that banning the animal would have little to no postive effect.

Basically, we need to prove to the powers that be that our BP's and other snakes of interest do not pose any threat to the environment or economy. If there is enough evidence provided that the animal is not harmful it will be put on the list of approved species, and we will be allowed to keep, breed, and sell them without any issues.

I also suggest joining usark.org they are trying to organize the reptile community.checkout the web site

Did my part

Count me in just did it.!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greghall

I also suggest joining usark.org they are trying to organize the reptile community.checkout the web site

---

I checked out the usark.org website. It seems like a good start but I don't think they're up to lobby at the national level.

Has anyone looked in to PIJAC.org ? They work for the entire pet industry and they have people that lobby at the state and federal level.

Any feedback on PIJAC?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThyTempest

As for the issues, I agree with you again. If the hobby cannot regulate itself such that congress does not have to intervene, then, yes, they are going to step in and I believe they have the duty to the public to do just that. I agree with permit requirements for hots, large constrictors (10+ feet), and possibly potentially invasive species. I know this last one may seem a tad much and tedius, but I think it is the keepers responsibility to think of the general public and environment just as much as the hobby........

---

And just WHERE do you think the money is going to COME FROM to pay for all the bureaucratic bull**** to MANAGE these licenses?????? More paper-pushers, loopholes and system abusers....just what we need. NOT!

Do you actually think that the fees you'll have to pay to be licensed will cover the expenses to regulate, manage and maintain this system??? How many times do we have to see gov't regulation eff something up before we stop voting away our right and giving it to Big Brother to protect us from ourselves??? :mad::mad:

I signed it.......and will continue to sign such petitions---if for no other reason than to stop the HSUS (being the front-man for PETA).

Regulation and banning by the gov't is NOT the way to solve the problem of idiots turning their pets lose. If you think this will help, then I hope to Hades you also license (and punish for violation) all of the backyard breeders who continue to create more of a cat and dog population problem, instead of fixing Fido and Fluffy!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadera

I agree that yes we need regulation. BUT. The problem with bills like this is that it starts small and then gives them a foot in the door to eventually completely ban our animals.

There was recently a bill proposed in PA to ban nanday conures and some other exotics. I don't own a nanday, nor do I live in PA, but I still wrote and fought the proposal. Why? Because today it's nandays in PA, but given a foothold tomorrow it might be a species I do have and in my state.

When they propose something with some genuine thought behind it that will actually benefit the hobby and not hurt it, THEN I'll support it. But until then, I guess I'm just another "sheep on the bandwagon".

---

Same sort of thing with breed specific legislation for dogs.....All it takes is for BSL again pits, then it'll be GSDs, then maybe chows or akitas. Eventually there will be enough outrage against doxies and beagles...etc......Start with one and it becomes a nightmare snowball from H*LL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sg1trogdor

Well If I read that correctly its still just a ban on importing animals correct? Not on banning the owning of boas or pythons. Which I am sure im missing the bigger picture here but I don't and wouldn't knowingly buy a WC animal anyways so whats the deal. Still a stupid proposal but I don't see it affecting us too much right? Or do wild caught animals play more of a role than I am thinking. I am only talking about snakes here not lizards or amphibians which I know there's a lot of wild caught specimens out there. Just curious. I tend to read more into things than is really there sometimes. Please correct me if I am missing the bigger picture here as politely as possible :D

---

S, it also bans the interstate transportion and selling of the banned animals, and only licensed facilities (read, zoos) could do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by simplechamp

What I get out of the bill is this:

If the bill is enacted there will be two lists created: a list of approved non-native species, and a list of banned non-native species.

Any citizen, group, or interested party will be able to voice their opinion about which animals should be approved and which should be banned. The suggestions of animals to be included in either list "must include sufficient scientific and commercial information to allow the Secretary to evaluate whether the proposed nonnative wildlife species is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to other animal species’ or human health."

For a species to be on the approved list there must be proof that the animals "are not harmful to the United States’ economy, the environment, or other animal species’ or human health" or "may be harmful to the United States’ economy, the environment, or other animal species’ or human health, but already are so widespread in the United States that it is clear to the Secretary that any import prohibitions or restrictions would have no practical utility for the United States."
To be included on the list of approved species, the animal is either not a threat, or if it is a threat the problem is already so widespread and out of control that banning the animal would have little to no postive effect.

Basically, we need to prove to the powers that be that our BP's and other snakes of interest do not pose any threat to the environment or economy. If there is enough evidence provided that the animal is not harmful it will be put on the list of approved species, and we will be allowed to keep, breed, and sell them without any issues.

---

Do you reaaaally believe that once HSUS and PETA gets their grubby paws into this (and later, other ones) hobby via this law (if passed), that you'll have enough lobbying POWER AND MONEY to get your animals on the "approved" list????!?!!!! :colbert: If you do, then I've got a bridge to sell you! It's a nasty fight, but would be much easier to prevent it from passing, than to try and get certain species on an exempt list. Don't even let them get a TOE in the front door!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sweety314

Do you reaaaally believe that once HSUS and PETA gets their grubby paws into this (and later, other ones) hobby via this law (if passed), that you'll have enough lobbying POWER AND MONEY to get your animals on the "approved" list????!?!!!! :colbert: If you do, then I've got a bridge to sell you! It's a nasty fight, but would be much easier to prevent it from passing, than to try and get certain species on an exempt list. Don't even let them get a TOE in the front door!

---

How do you know this? Getting an animal on the approved species list requires huge amounts of money and lobbying power, yet getting the bill thrown out alltogether doesn't?

Of course I myself wouldn't have enough power and money to convince the government to allow a certain species to be approved. I could ask the same question of you: Do YOU think you have enough power and money to influence the government to throw out this bill? You know as well as I that there are very few people in this country in a position to have governmental influence on an individual basis.

That's why it's important for individuals to come together as a single entity. Isn't that the plan for everyone who wants the bill thrown out? They won't listen to one person, but if many come together they just might listen?

If the bill doesn't pass, then great, it will be a huge relief, and everyone can continue with business as usual. But what if it does pass? What then? From the way you make it sound, we are all screwed, the man will have won, and we are helpless, since none of us have money, power, or influence.

I would love to see the bill thrown out, but if it passes then our only other option is to get the animals we love on the approved species list. If you think it's naive or ridiculous to believe in that, fine. I just can't agree.

heres the other ban they are trying to pass

Here she is guys and gals!

By Mr. NELSON, of Florida:

S. 373. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to include constrictor snakes of the species Python genera as an injurious animal; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss exotic pythons and the devastating impact they are having on wildlife in my home state. To combat this deadly nonnative nuisance, I am also filing a bill that will ban the interstate commerce and importation of these snakes.

Pythons were first discovered in the Everglades in the mid-1990s, and now have a rapidly-growing breeding population within the boundary of Everglades National Park. They impact almost seventy endangered species living in the Everglades and threaten to upset the natural balance that we are spending billions of dollars to restore. When I toured the Everglades with Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer, we witnessed firsthand the damage pythons are causing, and the efforts researchers are making to eradicate them from the wild.

These snakes were brought to Florida to be sold as pets, and were introduced into the wild by owners who could no longer handle them. They eat animals ranging from songbirds to white ibises, as well as endangered and threatened species such as the Key Largo woodrat. Pythons can grow to be 23 feet long and weigh up to 200 pounds, and there is currently no effective way of eradicating them in the wild.

They can consume animals many times their size, and recently, researchers also found cougar parts in the stomachs of captured pythons. This development could signal a new threat to the endangered Florida panther, which we have been working so hard to save.

Python populations have also been discovered in Big Cypress National Preserve to the north, Miami's water management areas to the northeast, Key Largo to the southeast, and many state parks, municipalities, and public and private lands in the region.

Because climate range projections from the U.S. Geological Survey show that pythons may soon expand their range to include much of the southern third of the United States, getting their populations under control is even more pressing.

In the last year, the State of Florida has taken some actions to address the problems created by owners who release their pythons into the wild, and I applaud these efforts. The State now requires owners of animals they call ``Reptiles of Concern''--a category that includes two species besides pythons--not only to obtain permits for their animals, but also to implant a tracking microchip in larger pythons.

I believe federal action is also needed. That is why today I am introducing a bill that would amend the Lacey Act to ban the importation and interstate commerce of the python . This step is needed to reduce the number of pythons released into the wild by pet owners who don't understand the responsibility caring for a python entails. In 2007, preeminent environmentalist and former assistant secretary of the Interior Nathaniel Reed wrote, ``The dramatic increase in the number of snakes in the Park and Big Cypress call into question why it has taken so long for the Service to utilize its powers under the Lacey Act to prevent importation of the snake into an ecosystem where escapees and rejects have built a sustainable population.''

If we do not take action now, we will let python populations in Florida continue to grow and further ravage the already-fragile Everglades, as well as risk letting them spread throughout the Southern portion of the United States.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

S. 373

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. IMPORTATION OR SHIPMENT OF INJURIOUS SPECIES.

Section 42(a)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended in the first sentence by inserting ``; of the constrictor snake of the species Python genera'' after ``polymorpha''.

that reminds me...i have to email nelson again!

signed.

I was wondering if all of us reptile and other animal keepers out there started to e-mail the people at HSUS and or PETA and your local humane society that because of their stance on reptiles we will no longer be sending in the _____ donation we have done in past years. I am thinking that if enough of us did this the humane society and HSUS would start to think their precious free money is not going to be coming in. Even if you have never donated to them before. If i ran a charity and got a hundred thousand e-mails saying i will not be giving my hard earned money to you because of BLANK i would be thinking that it is time to change policy.

Done!!

Done deed!!!:salute: