Usark wins!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cron14

This may be a really stupid question but does this mean that the state laws are void? For example, if it was illegal for you to own one in your state/city can you now own one? No where near buying anything but would love to own a SD one day and it is illegal in my state/city.

---

Local and state laws are still in effect. All that the ruling means is that species listed under the Lacey Act as injurious can now be shipped between states in the continental US, provided that there are no state laws prohibiting the import of those species. Those species still can not be imported into the US from other countries, state permit requirements and/or bans are still effective, etc.

With that said I'm still a Criminal in NY [emoji23][emoji23][emoji1360][emoji1360]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Sully

With that said I'm still a Criminal in NY [emoji23][emoji23][emoji1360][emoji1360]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

No burms in NY? I was told retics are illegal there.

Burms were 10 years after I got MR & I heard Tics where too after but honestly thats only what I heard from a Tic owner I know... NY has gone to the birds since I was a kid... Cant slip on a Banana peal without getting a ticket for littering. Gotta love this Government.. ( I better just be quiet before I really say how I feel hahahaha[emoji23][emoji23][emoji631]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Sully

Burms were 10 years after I got MR & I heard Tics where too after but honestly thats only what I heard from a Tic owner I know... NY has gone to the birds since I was a kid... Cant slip on a Banana peal without getting a ticket for littering. Gotta love this Government.. ( I better just be quiet before I really say how I feel hahahaha[emoji23][emoji23][emoji631]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Im from NY too and am genuinely jealous you have a burm lol. Pretty much everything is illegal in NYC its insane

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cron14

Im from NY too and am genuinely jealous you have a burm lol. Pretty much everything is illegal in NYC its insane

---

Theres a member with a great Dwarf in the UK & he says its like a mini Burm. Great temperament ect.. I would love one once I have more room.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tigerhawk

I have never seen a pied burm. Do you have a picture?

---

These were just posted to one of my facebook groups the other day.


Here and here.

USARK comment from Facebook: Contrary to the quote from Collette Adkins of CBD, there actually was NOT any "scientific data that justified the ban." The government's own scientific data, especially regarding reticulated pythons, supported no need for federal action to be taken barring interstate transportation.

AP article from today on the ruling:
https://www.apnews.com/ab67b0e8d3c544e3b72c40d24dda50a9

Court sides with reptile keepers against giant snake ban
By JENNIFER KAY

MIAMI (AP) — U.S. wildlife officials can't legally stop interstate trade of giant exotic snakes such as Burmese pythons, which threaten to eat all the native mammals in the Florida Everglades, an appeals court has ruled.
However, snake owners are cautioned not to move their reptiles just yet, as other legal challenges may remain. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is reviewing the ruling.

The North Carolina-based United States Association of Reptile Keepers sued the U.S. government in 2013, asking a federal court in Washington, D.C., to overturn a nationwide ban on importing certain constrictor species or transporting them across state lines.

Trying to protect native wildlife and prevent non-native snakes from spreading, U.S. wildlife officials banned Burmese pythons, yellow anacondas, and northern and southern African pythons in 2012. The ban was extended to reticulated pythons, DeSchauensee's anacondas, green anacondas and Beni anacondas in 2015.

The first giant snake ban was announced in 2012 in the Florida Everglades, where officials say tens of thousands Burmese pythons have decimated populations of native mammals that had never before encountered such a large predator. Native to parts of Asia, pythons found a home in the Miami-area wetlands after being intentionally let loose by their owners or escaping breeding facilities after Hurricane Andrew in 1992.

The ruling does not change the ban on importing these snakes or other "injurious" species, nor does it affect state laws such as Florida's prohibition against keeping pythons as pets.

The entire ban was unnecessary because the vast majority of exotic snakes sold in the U.S. are bred domestically, and they could only survive in the wild in a handful of counties in Florida and Texas, said Phil Goss, president of the reptile keepers association.

"I understand Florida has a unique situation, but if you look at this anywhere else in the country, it's an issue of government overreach," Goss said.

In an April 7 decision, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court's ruling that the wildlife service didn't have authority under the Lacey Act to restrict interstate trade of these snakes.

"While we are aware of the risk posed by the spread of invasive species, one size doesn't necessarily fit all. We will work with the Department of Justice to identify impacts and appropriate next steps for the Administration," wildlife service spokesman Ken Warren said in an email Monday.

Acknowledging that snakes that can grow 20 feet long "are no garden-variety snakes," the court said the act only gives the government the authority to stop trade between the continental United States and Hawaii or other territories — not shipments within the continental states.

The court cited the Chicago Manual of Style among other guides for proper grammar to rebuff the government's argument that the act's wording bars shipments from any of the 49 continental states to any other continental state.

"The government's arguments cannot overcome the plain text of the shipment clause," the ruling states.

The court didn't address the scientific data that justified the ban, said Collette Adkins, senior attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity, which partnered with the government and the Humane Society of the United States in the litigation.

"This has implications for any invasive species that could establish populations through interstate trade," Adkins said Monday.

The reptile keepers' attorneys said the ruling would restore snake owners' freedom to attend trade shows, seek veterinary care and keep their pets with them when they move to different states.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShaneSilva

And someone's already being a party pooper...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...ng-python.html

---

Ugh, why do people have to be that way? And what kind of professional uses phrases like "creepy-ass" in an article? That's their opinion. Like anyone would spend good money to buy a snake and ship it to someone as a joke. Heck no, I'd rather keep the snake.

"which threaten to eat all the native mammals in the Florida Everglades"

Are you kidding me. Most people who have looked at the number coming out of the studies conducted have concluded that Burms actually aren't out competing native predators, and native prey species seem to be keeping up their numbers just fine. What a load of crap.