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

[simplechamp]

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.

[Reptihabitat]

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

[simplechamp]

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.

[nixer]

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.

[Stewart_Reptiles]

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)

[Caskin]

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.

[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.

[greghall]

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

[2kdime]

Did my part

[scales owner]

Count me in just did it.!!!!