Amphibian Rule Change--Lacey Act

[WingedWolfPsion]

DOI/FWS RIN: 1018-AX05 Publication ID: Spring 2010
Title: ¤Injurious Wildlife Evaluation; Amphibian Trade and Chytrid Fungus
Abstract: We are reviewing a petition to add all traded live amphibians or their eggs to our list of injurious wildlife under the Lacey Act unless certified as free of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (chytrid fungus). The importation and introduction of live amphibians infected with chytrid fungus into U.S. Natural ecosystems may pose a threat to the interests of U.S. Agriculture, fisheries, and commerce, as well as to the welfare and survival of wildlife and wildlife resources. For live amphibians or their eggs infected with chytrid fungus, an injurious wildlife listing would prohibit the importation into, or transportation between, States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any U.S. Territory or possession by any means, without a permit. Permits may be issued for scientific, medical, educational, or zoological purposes.
Agency: Department of the Interior(DOI) Priority: Substantive, Nonsignificant
RIN Status: First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking: Prerule Stage
Major: No Unfunded Mandates: No
CFR Citation: 50 CFR 16 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
Legal Authority: 18 USC 42
Legal Deadline: Action Source Description Date
Final Judicial Final decision. 11/02/2010

Timetable: Action Date FR Cite
ANPRM 04/00/2010

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required: Undetermined Government Levels Affected: Undetermined
Small Entities Affected: Businesses Federalism: No
Included in the Regulatory Plan: No
RIN Data Printed in the FR: No
Agency Contact:
Susan Jewell
Biologist
Department of the Interior
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
4401 N. Fairfax Drive , MS 770,
Arlington, VA 22203
Phone:703 358-2416
Fax:703 358-2487
Email: susan_jewell@fws.gov

View Rule

[boabab95]

so in other words... they want to ban amphibians in America [not Canada...heh... give it a year though...]

right???

[WingedWolfPsion]

This is going through under the guise of controlling chytrid, which is is a legitimate concern. The problem will be determining exactly how animals can be certified as chytrid-free.

What is stated here is that animals that are certified to be free of chytrid can be freely traded--those that are not will be subject to Lacey Act injurious species restrictions.

[Epiphile]

I wouldn't call it much of a guise- I think the transmission of chytrid is a valid concern.

I sure hope this doesn't fly, though, for your sake. That'd really be a blow to the hobby down there.

[beckdg]

i actually see this one as it might be a good thing. it might put a hamper on trade in the u.s. (and likely internationally) temporarily, but in the end it's for the greater good. i wouldn't mind proving my $45-$100 frogs don't have chytrid... especially if it saves all my animals because everyone else is forced to do the same. prices may go up at first but deaths should go down... and prices should follow (at least for c/b specimens).

i really do think this will sting most when it comes to w/c suppliers and their international trade. we might expect a slight drought in that area for some time i'd guess.

[Epiphile]

Based on the abstract above, I think it would be fairly difficult for a hobbyist to get a permit, as "permits may be issued for scientific, medical, educational, or zoological purposes."

One can only hope that it affects the trade in wild caught specimens.

[beckdg]

Originally Posted by Epiphile

One can only hope that it affects the trade in wild caught specimens.

+1

although... i'd think a fairly determined hobbyist could possibly work around the guidelines or abstract as it were. it's something (the way it's worded) used in legislature to make it seem impossible in many cases as i see it... or to keep your common idiot from taking things too far. i have friends and neighbours that have been able to get around them before... and will do again. how tight they make the hold on that is determined by species and specific threats. the wording just gives them the ability to loosen or tighten the neuce where they see fit. it's not necessarily a death sentence for the hobbyist. what i think it would affect more would be importation. of course that would raise prices on imported specimens and lower the numbers available overall. i think the trouble at that point would be locating and importing the desired species as well as inflated prices due to customs confiscation, the risk involved and the likes.

of course there's the black market...
there's c/b...
there's what's already here...

now, what goes without saying is that chytrid is certainly a worldwide epidemic... so that could certainly be cause for the government to close all doors and avenues for permits. depends on who gets involved and the education at hand. i certainly think one of us could probably get permits for educational permits. either for the purpose of writing an article for a publication or for elementary or middle school purposes. whether it be to educate the children on how to care for a specimen, education on different climates and the diversity of the world or for a child to do an exhibit for a science fair, etc.. it all depends on how they tighten the neuce.

there should be options and the fact that educational purposes is one of the reasons for permits opens it up to the general population. of course one would most likely have to display proper understanding of certain things as well as put the time, effort and money out... follow the proper procedures and such... and then follow through with the proposed reasoning for such a permit so it isn't revoked, but... they may not be out of reach altogether.

one good thing is that raising the prices for w/c specimens through such legislature is sure to increase the demand for c/b specimens of species that may cost too much to raise to be worth it currently. this will certainly be a huge break for successful hobbyists who have breeding specimens of species that are too cheap for w/c to justify breeding for profit. we may just see an increase in availability of c/b specimens of species that prior to were almost completely w/c. so... get those rare critters now folks, lol. the down side... price and possibly availability...

[Herpetology101]

Too little regulation and Far to late to have any noticeable effect now.

[beckdg]

this certainly is a guise. our uneducated politicians have been pushing to make every animal on the market completely illegal for a decade now. recently it's been pushed to unprecedented proportions. they've taken half arsed science and personal opinions way too far. anything that isn't cute, cuddly and furry has been on the chopping block for quite some time. the same government that's been supporting hatcheries of fish that are indigenous to other continents and have completely wiped out entire species to stock our own rivers and lakes with for the purpose of selling fishing licenses and permits is now telling us things like... burmese pythons have taken over the everglades so all anacondas, many python species and the boa constrictor should be illegal to own across the entire other 99.9% of america so as to stop the spread of species that can't even survive in the climate across 80% of the country... it's ridiculous the avenues they're willing to take while being under or falsely educated... yet still willing to force species upon us who have not only completely wiped out enormous wild populations but also are a threat to what's left through diseases that otherwise would still be isolated/restricted to asian continents.

i understand and completely agree with not allowing tropical species in florida. that's florida's problem though. their state legislature should get their arses in gear and quit pushing their problems on the rest of the country. we're not a country that's completely tropical. as a matter of fact there's probably more desert land in the u.s. than tropical. i completely understand maryland wanting to rid the bay of the inedible, poisonous japanese green crab that's wiping out the indigenous, delicious blue crab population. i completely understand wanting to get rid of the northern snakehead population since it's made it's way just about from one coast to the other and has almost reached the northern border (including being spotted in water otherwise thought to be outside of it's proper living parameters in ny). the fact still remains that people see the green crab and are like... "it's a crab"... no bother. people see a mole and are like "there goes the garden"... they see a fish and are like... "let's fry it up" so long as it doesn't have "fangs" like the channa (which i would presume are the reasons channa that are not suited to nor will survive our waterways are illegal as well as the giant that's getting a foothold in florida and the northern that's becoming a pest basically 40% of everywhere). people see frogs and are like "ewww... slimey" or see snakes and are like... "don't touch it or it could bite and kill you" this... common thought/instinct... without actual knowledge or education is what's driving these laws.

nobody has passed a law to make it illegal to put salt lick on the side of the road for dear though. i suggest anyone interested in finding out what's driving our government to pass these laws look up what animal causes the most damage and death across the entire united states each year. i'm pretty sure (if i remember correct) it's dear being hit by cars along the roadway... but i can put salt lick at the curb and nobody will think twice. also... our most deadly/dangerous snake (by numbers of course) is indigenous also... the eastern diamondback. that bad boy needs not to be provoked and is a hot. it will kill for no reason and slither away at will. most other snakes kill for fear of their own lives or to eat only. on that note... i want to see proof that pythons and boas are eating enough alligators to actually be the sole cause of their population decimation. as well i'd like to hear from somebody in florida that's seen more pythons in the wild than alligators. i doubt i will though.

the problem is that these officials get their jobs by understanding and pursuing jobs related to politics... not by understanding the issues. they get elected by their campaign... not by acquiring the knowledge necessary to deal with the actual issues at hand. it's the same as any other job. if you're hired and horrible at your job you can't just be fired. you have to miss 2 days without calling, grope a co-worker (several times), do the opposite of what's in the handbook, etc.. being too hopped up on smac to do your job and costing your employer thousands of dollars now costs your employer more money because he's obligated to send you to rehab and fit the bill several times before he has the right to fire you. this is what's wrong with this situation as the people who the inadequate (applies to many, but not all) politicians are going to for answers are simply people who have jobs related to the issues. in other words they're subject to scrutiny in their abilities for the same reasons anybody else in the country is... legal reasons... not their knowledge of the matter at hand. the director of fish and wildlife isn't a snake specialist... he's the director of fish and wildlife... a very broad job description. why not ask the foremost leader/knowledgeable person on snakes what to do with snakes... but that's somehow beyond the intelligence or time that our politicians have in a single day to accomplish... so we have to fight back. and if the population of knowledgeable people is outnumbered by the population of uneducated hypochondriac, paranoid idiots... guess who wins the votes and makes the laws...

power in numbers my friends... power in numbers...

[froggsong]

Just thought I'd point out this bit so that it's a little easier to read:

For live amphibians or their eggs infected with chytrid fungus, an injurious wildlife listing would prohibit the importation into, or transportation between,... or possession by any means, without a permit. Permits may be issued for scientific, medical, educational, or zoological purposes.

Note that the permit requirement is only for animals infected with the fungus, not for clean animals. Permits would be required for those needing to study the fungus and that sort of thing, I imagine. The permit issue wouldn't affect hobbyists, unless they wanted to house infected amphibs (doubtful).

Personally, as long as they keep it worded that way, I wouldn't have a problem with it. It will promote captive breeding of clean animals and help reduce the chytrid problem. It would also leave more of these animals in their native habitats so that there is a larger population to overcome the threat of the fungus.

It would however, increase the price of imported specimens, since there will have to be some (likely expensive) test run on each animal before it can enter the country.


That said, maybe if they would give the FUNGUS an injurious wildlife listing, with a requirement that all imported amphibians be tested before entering the country, rather than the amphibs themselves, this would turn out better in the end if passed. Otherwise this gives them a toe hold in the future to ban the animals outright.