scary

[digital-audiophile]

Really? This isn't an april fools joke?

What are they really trying to accomplish here? Keep PETA happy?

[Pan]

Originally Posted by digital-audiophile

Really? This isn't an april fools joke?

What are they really trying to accomplish here? Keep PETA happy?

PETA may go about it wrong...but their message is worthwhile.

[mike31154]

Originally Posted by jsmth321

Dogs, cats and goldfish and some farm animals have an exemption.

Yes, I was aware of that, the point I'm trying to make is, where do you draw the line? What makes one species more harmful to the 'native' land than another?

You should see the headlines in Kelowna due to the feral rabbit problem in the city. It's hilarious. Downtown is overrun with the critters and on one side you have the folks that want them gone no matter how and the other camp is in a tiffy because of the 'method' used to cull them. And it was so called pet lovers that created the problem in the first place because they set them loose after the novelty of having one wore off.

In the south Okanagan there's an issue with wild horses and I remember living in Ottawa, people complaining about the 'native' deer population being a danger to drivers. If people just used a little common sense and took responsibility for their actions with respect to pet ownership, there wouldn't be a problem nor a need for some misguided politician to draft up something like this. People are losing their jobs/livelihood and certain politicians have nothing better to do than come up with something like this?

Ok, gotta calm down... Happy Easter.

[Delphinus]

Huh. Interesting..

[jsmth321]

Originally Posted by mike31154

Yes, I was aware of that, the point I'm trying to make is, where do you draw the line? What makes one species more harmful to the 'native' land than another?

I suppose that would be up to the biologists and other experts at the US Fish and Wildlife service to determine.

Appears there were a group if 14 democrats who were bored.

The main sponsor is from Guam and Guam does have a serious issue of introduced species that are wrecking havoc on native bird populations, so I can see why it would be of importance to that particular member of congress.

It would be better to mandate each state/territory to bring up their own list as a species that is a threat to Florida may not be one in Maine.

[Sebae again]

Yep Delphinus you are right.When I used to work at the old Woodwards food floor one came out of a bunch of bananas at the check out.The cashiers screams were more terrifying than the sight of the spider.That cashier had dance moves that Michael Jackson couldnt even do.Two more seconds and I would have had the thing bagged for the lucky customer.

[midgetwaiter]

Originally Posted by jsmth321

The main sponsor is from Guam and Guam does have a serious issue of introduced species that are wrecking havoc on native bird populations, so I can see why it would be of importance to that particular member of congress.

It would be better to mandate each state/territory to bring up their own list as a species that is a threat to Florida may not be one in Maine.

See now that's completely unrealistic.

It would require that the representative actually invest time and attention to crafting a bill that would allow and require each state to do the the job. You'd then need some kind of reporting and monitoring framework, etc. Way more work to draft that bill than having your unpaid intern write a two pager while you attend a $2000 a seat fund raising dinner. It might even require the representative to actually miss a couple of those fund raisers and that can't happen.

This is why this legislation doesn't especially worry me.

[mike31154]

Originally Posted by jsmth321

I suppose that would be up to the biologists and other experts at the US Fish and Wildlife service to determine.

Appears there were a group if 14 democrats who were bored.

The main sponsor is from Guam and Guam does have a serious issue of introduced species that are wrecking havoc on native bird populations, so I can see why it would be of importance to that particular member of congress.

It would be better to mandate each state/territory to bring up their own list as a species that is a threat to Florida may not be one in Maine.

Hmm, interesting. Thanks for the info on Guam. Did some reading on this US 'territory'. Seems they do have some serious issues with their ecology. Apparently mainly due to tourism though, before the EPA got in there an laid down some rules. Good article on wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guam

All kinds of horror stories re the introduction of non native species, but I don't really see the correlation to our hobby, other than overfishing maybe. Introduction of domestic livestock, tourism, agriculture... Not hobbyists creating the problem as much as the human species doing what they do, move in, develop and try to make a living.

"Aquatic preserves
As a vacation spot for scuba divers, efforts have been made to protect Guam's coral reef habitats from pollution, eroded silt, and overfishing that have led to decreased fish populations. In recent years the Department of Agriculture, Division of Aquatic and Wildlife Resources has established several new marine preserves where fish populations are monitored by biologists.[20] Prior to adopting U.S. Environmental Protection Agency‎ standards, portions of Tumon bay were dredged by the hotel chains in order to provide a better experience for hotel guests.[21][22] Tumon Bay has since been made into a preserve. A federal Guam National Wildlife Refuge in northern Guam protects the decimated sea turtle population in addition to a small colony of Mariana fruit bats.[23]"

[BlueAbyss]

Originally Posted by mike31154

Yet tropical fruits like bananas, pineapples etc. come into virtually every northern/western country daily. Who knows what lurks inside those shipping containers, despite the toxic pesticides they use to supposedly render them safe from hitchhikers.

I've seen banana spiders come out of crates of bananas. These things are, as it turns out, poisonous tarantula-type spiders... most of the time they are dead by the time they get to Canada, but at least one has survived long enough to be captured and identified. And this is in Northern Manitoba, so these guys are pretty tough and can survive a long shipping route. EDIT: just noticed some other posts about these guys. Cute, aren't they?

If they ban non-native species, EVER, I'm gonna start breeding lynx. We'll see how they like very large housecats that can take down ravens. So much for the songbird population...

[GreenSpottedPuffer]

I didn't read this thread so i am not sure if its been brought up but the knee jerk reaction is that its a bad idea. Not really true. Personally I like it to force the aquaculture industry to pick up and start the breeding of angels, tangs, ect.

But most importantly people need to actually read and understand the bill, not just get caught up in the hype of RC posters.

It DOES NOT ban all non-native species and would not kill the industry at all.

Only would ban species that are (a) non-native AND (b) on the unapproved list.

INCLUDED SPECIES- The list under this subsection shall include--
(A) those species listed as injurious wildlife under section 42 of title 18, United States Code, or under regulations under that section, as of the date of enactment of this Act; and
(B) any other species the Secretary determines under section 4(c)(2)(B) is not approved for importation.


So only species that pose a threat to local wildlife as they are invasive and can do some real harm. As we are seeing in Florida and the Caribbean right now.

Based on how the 'unapproved list' is proposed, its unlikely to effect the pet trade much at all. Some common species like Lionfish may be tough to get but even then, before any species go to the 'unapproved list' there is a chance for the public to speak up:

(3) PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT- Before issuing the final preliminary list of approved species under this subsection, the Secretary shall--
(A) publish in the Federal Register and make available on a publicly available Federal Internet site, the proposed preliminary list; and
(B) provide for, a period of not less than 60 days, an opportunity to submit public comments on the proposed preliminary list.

And:

(f) Animals Owned Lawfully Prior to Prohibition of Importation- This Act and regulations issued under this Act shall not interfere with the ability of any person to possess an individual animal of any species if such individual animal was legally owned by the person before the risk assessment is begun pursuant to subsection (e)(3), even if such species is later prohibited from being imported under the regulations issued under this Act.


In the end, reefers should be supporting bills and proposals like this to protect local wildlife and reefs. I think people just need to do a bit more reading before commenting. It seems everyone took this as a ban on the hobby when it really is nothing close. Will it effect the hobby? For sure but not likely to effect it much...not to mention the likely hood of it being passed is slim.