Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 1,514

0 members and 1,514 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 76,073
Threads: 249,220
Posts: 2,572,808
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, LeonoraOrdonez5
Results 1 to 10 of 48

Threaded View

  1. #16
    Super Moderator Homebody's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-19-2019
    Location
    Jersey City, NJ
    Posts
    2,181
    Thanks
    6,986
    Thanked 2,961 Times in 1,632 Posts
    Images: 23

    Re: New Lacey Act Amendments

    Quote Originally Posted by bcr229 View Post
    This is incorrect. The amendment does away with the Lacey Act injurious species list and it will be replaced with a "white list" of approved animals. Anything not on the white list will be deemed injurious and thus not importable or transportable across state lines.
    I've heard that from credible sources, but I don't agree. The amendment to section (a)(1) gives the Secretary the emergency power to add a species to the injurious species list. That doesn't make sense if there is no injurious species list. Furthermore, section (d)(1), added by another amendment, refers to the (a)(1) injurious species list. Again, this wouldn't make sense if there isn't an injurious species list. I do agree that these amendments are potentially disastrous to the exotic pet community.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Homebody For This Useful Post:

    Albert Clark (03-05-2022),Erie_herps (02-13-2022)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1