FIGHT TO KEEP YOUR SNAKES- FIGHT bill S373!!!

JC

Arachnolort
Old Timer
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
1,421
No More Snakes?? Politicians At It Again


[YOUTUBE]<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/l7epX0h7G1s&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/l7epX0h7G1s&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

That's right there is a bill s373 that would ban the interstate transport of some Boas and Pythons forever! We need to stand up and fight for our rights to keep these incredible reptiles. Snakes are not what they are being made out to be in mainstream media. Even if this bill doesn't effect you directly you do not want the next animal bill to hurt the animals you love. Help us fight for the defeat of s373!
Make sure to go to:

http://www.usark.org
http://www.pijac.org
http://www.natpet.org
 

Lunar

Arachnopeon
Joined
Nov 30, 2009
Messages
46
Nice to see someone with the same post as me! =D Keep em coming, and don't stop, we need to spread this as much as possible.
 

UrbanJungles

Arachnoprince
Old Timer
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
1,125
Just FYI, the title of your post says "fight to keep your snakes..." but no one is really threatening to take them away. S373 has to do with banning interstate commerce (shipping) via the Lacey Act...not taking away your snakes.

I'm all for the good fight, but make sure you know exactly what it is you are fighting for.
 

pitbulllady

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
May 1, 2004
Messages
2,290
Just FYI, the title of your post says "fight to keep your snakes..." but no one is really threatening to take them away. S373 has to do with banning interstate commerce (shipping) via the Lacey Act...not taking away your snakes.

I'm all for the good fight, but make sure you know exactly what it is you are fighting for.
MOST reptile breeders who breed these species absolutely depend on interstate sales, as do the promoters of reptile shows, whose patrons are often people from other states, who travel across state lines to either vend or to purchase animals. Few, if any, breeders of large snakes could stay in business if they could not sell or transport animals across state lines, and so they would be forced to stop breeding. Their animals, many of which cost several hundred to several thousand dollars, would become worthless overnight. They could not obtain new animals, nor could they sell the ones they currently have, except to "re-home" them on a local Craigslist. If a large snake owner was forced to relocate to another state, they could not take their animals with them. Peripheral businesses which depend on breeders of large snakes, such as people who manufacture caging for these animals, would be severely impacted, economically. The in-state supply of breeding stock would eventually dry up as the current generation of large snakes died off, leaving none to replace them. Even those breeders who did manage to find stock for breeding would find the gene pool steadily shrinking, with no opportunity to bring in "fresh blood", and a genetic "bottleneck" will occur, with ever-increasing genetic diseases and abnormalities. This is exactly what the HSUS has in mind; this is what Wayne Pacelli meant when he said, "one generation and OUT". While the achievement of this goal will take a bit longer by adding these snakes to the Lacey Act than with an outright ban, the end result is still the same. It would be comparable to the Federal government telling owners and breeders of Thoroughbred horses that they can not transport these animals across state lines; they can only breed their horses to horses within the state and only sell horses to other owners in the same state, and can only race or show in their same state. How many would continue to keep their horses if that happened? The casual pet owner who just has one or two snakes, in this case, probably won't be affected much unless he/she tries to replace that snake years down the line, but for both hobby and professional breeders and reptile dealers, it will be devasting, financially as well as emotionally.

pitbulllady
 

snakemaster1

Arachnosquire
Old Timer
Joined
Jun 24, 2008
Messages
95
When they put any species into the lacey act that also applies to parts of the species so therefore that would affect the fashion industry. No more snakeskin boots, ties,shoes, purses or wallets jackets ecetera. Kust going accross the state line with a listed species would be a felony.
No snakes at a reptile show would equal no show.
FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT
 

UrbanJungles

Arachnoprince
Old Timer
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
1,125
MOST reptile breeders who breed these species absolutely depend on interstate sales, as do the promoters of reptile shows, whose patrons are often people from other states, who travel across state lines to either vend or to purchase animals. Few, if any, breeders of large snakes could stay in business if they could not sell or transport animals across state lines, and so they would be forced to stop breeding. Their animals, many of which cost several hundred to several thousand dollars, would become worthless overnight. They could not obtain new animals, nor could they sell the ones they currently have, except to "re-home" them on a local Craigslist. If a large snake owner was forced to relocate to another state, they could not take their animals with them. Peripheral businesses which depend on breeders of large snakes, such as people who manufacture caging for these animals, would be severely impacted, economically. The in-state supply of breeding stock would eventually dry up as the current generation of large snakes died off, leaving none to replace them. Even those breeders who did manage to find stock for breeding would find the gene pool steadily shrinking, with no opportunity to bring in "fresh blood", and a genetic "bottleneck" will occur, with ever-increasing genetic diseases and abnormalities. This is exactly what the HSUS has in mind; this is what Wayne Pacelli meant when he said, "one generation and OUT". While the achievement of this goal will take a bit longer by adding these snakes to the Lacey Act than with an outright ban, the end result is still the same. It would be comparable to the Federal government telling owners and breeders of Thoroughbred horses that they can not transport these animals across state lines; they can only breed their horses to horses within the state and only sell horses to other owners in the same state, and can only race or show in their same state. How many would continue to keep their horses if that happened? The casual pet owner who just has one or two snakes, in this case, probably won't be affected much unless he/she tries to replace that snake years down the line, but for both hobby and professional breeders and reptile dealers, it will be devasting, financially as well as emotionally.

pitbulllady
I'm aware of the effects of the bill. My point is, if you are going to fight make sure you are not swinging wildly.
 

Mack&Cass

Arachnoprince
Old Timer
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
1,574
MOST reptile breeders who breed these species absolutely depend on interstate sales, as do the promoters of reptile shows, whose patrons are often people from other states, who travel across state lines to either vend or to purchase animals. Few, if any, breeders of large snakes could stay in business if they could not sell or transport animals across state lines, and so they would be forced to stop breeding. Their animals, many of which cost several hundred to several thousand dollars, would become worthless overnight. They could not obtain new animals, nor could they sell the ones they currently have, except to "re-home" them on a local Craigslist. If a large snake owner was forced to relocate to another state, they could not take their animals with them. Peripheral businesses which depend on breeders of large snakes, such as people who manufacture caging for these animals, would be severely impacted, economically. The in-state supply of breeding stock would eventually dry up as the current generation of large snakes died off, leaving none to replace them. Even those breeders who did manage to find stock for breeding would find the gene pool steadily shrinking, with no opportunity to bring in "fresh blood", and a genetic "bottleneck" will occur, with ever-increasing genetic diseases and abnormalities. This is exactly what the HSUS has in mind; this is what Wayne Pacelli meant when he said, "one generation and OUT". While the achievement of this goal will take a bit longer by adding these snakes to the Lacey Act than with an outright ban, the end result is still the same. It would be comparable to the Federal government telling owners and breeders of Thoroughbred horses that they can not transport these animals across state lines; they can only breed their horses to horses within the state and only sell horses to other owners in the same state, and can only race or show in their same state. How many would continue to keep their horses if that happened? The casual pet owner who just has one or two snakes, in this case, probably won't be affected much unless he/she tries to replace that snake years down the line, but for both hobby and professional breeders and reptile dealers, it will be devasting, financially as well as emotionally.

pitbulllady
:clap: very well said

While I live in Canada, this ban would also affect us as many of our stock comes from the states, as well as many new morphs, etc. That would leave us to breed the snakes within Canada, and it wouldn't happen as quickly as it would in the states, the "genetic bottleneck" would certainly happen here too as there aren't nearly as many people here who keep/breed large snakes as there is there. There's a Canadian reptile forum we belong to, and I've noticed that a lot of people who are getting large snakes (especially the higher end morphs) are getting them imported from the states. On that forum I was talking about, there are multiple threads about speaking out against S373, and if there's anyone on here who doesn't live in the states who thinks this doesn't affect them, you're wrong, it affects everybody and everyone should be doing their part in preventing this from passing.

Cassandra
 

paul fleming

Arachnoangel
Old Timer
Joined
Aug 21, 2009
Messages
941
Im getting sick of my country.
You try it over here....at least you can keep venemous animals without paying a fortune for some micky mouse license.
Quite recently,they were trying to get a ban on large snakes too (burms,pythons and even boas) after someones snake ate a neighbours cat that was on the snake owners property.
 
Top