Baoh said:Give me one example of nonnative (foreign) chelonia causing environmental or economic harm in the United States. Give me one example of captive bred nonnative chelonia presenting a greater measured pathogenic or parasitic degree of harm to human or animal health in the United States.
[throws hands in air] LOL...dude (or dudette? sorry I don't know ya that well yet) I can't give you an example of either because you and I and any experienced reptile hobbyist with a brain knows there isn't any. They do not pose any more of a risk than a python or a monitor or a gecko, economically or ecologically (outside of south Florida, that is).
I TOTALLY see your point. I just don't think you're seeing mine. Earlier this year, HSUS, the Defenders of Wildlife and the Nature's Conservancy convinced the White House to veto-in a rule change that put Burmese pythons, yellow anacondas and African rock pythons on the Injurious Wildlife list of the Lacey Act....all on from a bogus study done by the U.S.G.S. that said those snakes could migrate out of Florida and establish themselves in the lower 2/3s of the country.
Anyone who knows reptiles enough knows that is ridiculous. It didn't matter that the science doesn't support that theory and that the U.S.G.S. didn't even use Burmese pythons in their study. It didn't matter that the rule change would have zero effect on the environment; after all, people can still own the things and release them in their own states and furthermore, the feral pythons in the Everglades are still there, just the same. None of that mattered. The only things that mattered was the agenda of a few special interest groups trying to make life difficult for everyone else, and a couple politicians using a hot topic to further their career.
Now I'm really not trying to make this about snakes. I'm just trying to make you (and others) see what's going on here.
Much like I said before, I will go by what is stated instead of what is effectively engaging in the employment of a slippery slope fallacy.
Slippery slope? Here's your slippery slope. When originally proposed, that rule change originally included NINE species of snakes, red-tailed boas, reticulated pythons and green anacondas among others. Because of the economic impact on the pet trade by adding those 5 species to the Lacey Act, they were removed. The other 4 species (burms, yellow anaconda, and 2 Afrock species) fell under a $100 million-a-yr threshold, which voided them from being held accountable for the quality of information. In other words, because the economic impact of adding Burmese pythons & the other 3 was not that great, no one had to be responsible for the shoddy, bogus science that the rule change was based on.
Not enough for ya? During this 4-year process, Senator Nelson in Florida (one of the main pushers for this) grew impatient with all the delays, and tried to lobby a new bill (S.373 & H.R. 2811) that would have added ALL species of the genus Python to the Lacey Act. Lucky for us, it got defeated.
----
Trust me, they know just as well as anyone on this forum that this bill would no little to nothing in regards to preventing the spread of pathogens/contagions or protecting the environment. All this bill would do is restrict the freedoms of pet owners nationwide.
Much like I said before, I will go by what is stated
Well...I don't know what else to say to you. You're welcome to your own viewpoints as I am mine. But unless you can find somewhere in the text of this bill that states that non-native chelonians will be exempt or excluded, I can only follow your own words and go by what is stated.
I don't know about anyone else, but when it comes to this kind of stuff, I don't like things that are open to interpretation or left up to the discretion of such-and-such govt official. If non-native chelonians are exempt/excluded, I want them listed, down to every single genera. Them and every other exotic reptile, too!
...because right now, it doesn't.