Mississippi H1293

MISSISSIPPI LEGISLATURE
2010 Regular Session
To: Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks
By: Representative Banks
House Bill 1293
AN ACT TO ESTABLISH THE MISSISSIPPI NON-NATIVE REPTILE PROGRAM; TO REQUIRE THE PROGRAM TO BE ADMINISTERED BY THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE, FISHERIES AND PARKS; TO PROVIDE MINIMUM GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAM; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI:
SECTION 1. (1) There is established the Mississippi Non-native Reptile Program to be administered by the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks. The purpose of the program is to prohibit the release of non-native reptiles that may breed and endanger Mississippi native animal species and citizens.
(2) The Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks shall create rules and regulations to implement such programs that, at least:
(a) Prohibits the release of snakes not found in and are not indigenous to Mississippi from being released in the state's wildlife;
(b) Regulates venomous, poisonous and constrictor snakes of any kind; and
(c) Requires a person to report or turn in any snakes to the department.
SECTION 2. This act shall take effect and be in force from and after July 1, 2010.
http://pijac.org/_documents/ms_hb_1293.pdf

This seems like an ok bill to me...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Derrick13

This seems like an ok bill to me...

---

How though will they regulate "constrictor snakes of any kind"? Ban them? Require a $500 montly permit to keep a ball python?
And what does it mean by a person is required to report or turn in their snakes to the department? Unless the intent is otherwise, this sounds like we would be mandated to surrender our animals???

Those two sections just strike me as vague and unclear.

I don't know but I happen to know that monday morning our reps will be getting a call or visit to find out

(a) Prohibits the release of snakes not found in and are not indigenous to Mississippi from being released in the state's wildlife;

Is this seriously the result of our current education systems?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WingedWolfPsion

(a) Prohibits the release of snakes not found in and are not indigenous to Mississippi from being released in the state's wildlife;

Is this seriously the result of our current education systems?

---

It was apparently written by the department of redundancy department. :)

Seriously, don't the people who write these things at least have staff that can proofread for them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ER12

(b) Regulates venomous, poisonous and constrictor snakes of any kind; and
(c) Requires a person to report or turn in any snakes to the department.

---

FAIL.

Wow, it looks like people will not be able to keep poisonous snakes, what a shame.;)

Just so every one is aware the law is for "Reptiles". There "poisonous" reptiles so the language is correct..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freakie_frog

Just so every one is aware the law is for "Reptiles". There "poisonous" reptiles so the language is correct..

---

Really? I didn't know. Which ones?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc261

Really? I didn't know. Which ones?

---

Things like the cane toad, or if fed the right diet dart frog there are even newts in CA that are toxic. It's simply put in the to cover their bases..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freakie_frog

Things like the cane toad, or if fed the right diet dart frog there are even newts in CA that are toxic. It's simply put in the to cover their bases..

---

Yeah, but those are amphibians, not reptiles. Are there poisonous reptiles?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc261

Yeah, but those are amphibians, not reptiles. Are there poisonous reptiles?

---

Good point!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freakie_frog

Just so every one is aware the law is for "Reptiles". There "poisonous" reptiles so the language is correct..

---

Another thing to look at with this language is that depending what literature they are using and how old, all snakes are considered constrictors there is also the true constrictors which is what we all know. Broad based language covers just a little too much and can be used for a wide interpretation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snakemastercanada

Another thing to look at with this language is that depending what literature they are using and how old, all snakes are considered constrictors there is also the true constrictors which is what we all know. Broad based language covers just a little too much and can be used for a wide interpretation.

---

Exactly which is why I plan to meet with my local State government and see exactly what they plan and what exactly they are trying to achieve..because we all know there are only two ways a snake kills its prey..Venom and constriction.

http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/201.../HB/HB1293.xml

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis Kirkland

http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/201.../HB/HB1293.xml

---

For those who'd rather skip the trip, or perhaps can't view it, it says the bill died in committee! Woohoo!!!!! That's one victory for our side!

I think we should be on the lookout though... in case it just died because it was too broad or something, and a new, "improved" version shows up soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc261

For those who'd rather skip the trip, or perhaps can't view it, it says the bill died in committee! Woohoo!!!!! That's one victory for our side!

I think we should be on the lookout though... in case it just died because it was too broad or something, and a new, "improved" version shows up soon.

---

The word I got from a staffer was that the MS Dept of Wildlife didn't feel that there was enough threat to warrant the bill..