Looks like USARK prevailed

[MDT]

This is great news and the right decision.


http://usark.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/USARK-Lawsuit-Appeals-Mem-Op.pdf

https://www.facebook.com/UnitedStatesAssociationOfReptileKeepers/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED&fref=nf


Next up, getting the species REMOVED from the list.

[Albert Clark]

Thanks for the update! Onward and upward.

[Minkness]

Not to sound like a lame-o, but can we get a breof summary of the outcome? My phone is being a dicl and I lack the patience to deal with it at the moment.

[MDT]

Not to sound like a lame-o, but can we get a breof summary of the outcome? My phone is being a dicl and I lack the patience to deal with it at the moment.


I found this USARK FaceBook site.. from what i gather, retics/anacondas now ok. burmese still prohibited until hopefully removed from list. if someone with a legal understanding can clarify and make sure this info is correct, that would be much appreciated:



Lawsuit update: U.S. Court of Appeals says USARK got it right!

Briefly, it is even more than just a win on the appeal, the Court of Appeals determined that, as a matter of law, the Lacey Act does not prohibit transportation and commerce of species listed as injurious between the continental states. That issue is decided in the eyes of the U.S. Court of Appeals.

"The government submits that the shipment clause bars those shipments as well. ARK argues otherwise. We agree with ARK."

Final line of opinion: "For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the district court’s judgment and hold as a matter of law that the government lacks authority under the shipment clause to prohibit shipments of injurious species between the continental States."

We'll have a formal newsletter soon. MOST IMPORTANTLY! This is a time to continue to act as a responsible reptile community and for proper self-policing of those acting otherwise. There are still steps in the process before those without USARK verification letters should be shipping species which are part of the injunction, or any other species listed as injurious. USARK will keep the herp community posted as always. And please be aware that any relevant State laws are still effective.

HUGE thank you to Richard Stanley, our legal team, supporters, donors and everyone else who made this possible.

LINK: http://usark.org/…/uploads/2017/04/USARK-Lawsuit-Appeals-Me…

[trailblazer295]

Good news south of the border. Up here it's a patchwork of prohibited to own and not.

[GyGbeetle]

Burms are now legal to transport within the continental US. These animals are still on the injurous animals list, which is the next battle from USARK, but for now, if a burm, anaconda, retic are legal in your city, you can have them shipped to your doorstep from reputable breeders within the continental US.

[chairman]

Assuming the summary is correct, this sounds like a right outcome, bad reasoning situation. The government should be able to restrict the movement of invasive wildlife at a federal level. That is more desirable than a patchwork of state laws to muddle through. The problem was USFW adding non-invasive animals to the list. Nothing has been accomplished on creating a mechanism to determine what constitutes an "invasive" animal, or what citizens can do to challenge bad "science" that incorrectly categorizes animals as invasive.

Oh well, at least exotic pet ownership just got a little easier until congress or a different circuit change something.

[jay's reptiles]

I'm so confused, if reticulated pythons were illegal how did i obtain mine from bob clark. he shipped her to me.

[jay's reptiles]

i already new they were on the lacey act. but i didn't know you couldn't ship them.

[GyGbeetle]

If you hold a USARK membership, you can ship retics across state lines. Burms were out. not entirely sure what was up with the anacondas. Bob Clark has USARK membership. Now Burms can be shipped, but I'm still not clear if this is with membership, or for anyone; same with retics, if that's for anyone or just those with USARK membership.

[MDT]

my understanding is that retics/anacondas may be shipped anywhere, based on the fact the ruling to add them as injurious had injunction placed on it (allowing permit holders to still ship to all states but Texas/Florida)...only Burmese were "officially" on the list from a previous ruling. Now, because of the language of the Lacey Act (that pesky grammar thing), retics/anacondas (not injurious) may be shipped other states. The Burmese is still considered injurious species and may have to be removed from list in order to ship.

looking at the retic sites on FB and other reptile sites, i think this is the gist of the ruling. having said that, if anyone with a legal background can interpret the ruling and give the Spark's Notes version of what it means, i would be very grateful!!

edit: no membership/permit required

[pet_snake_78]

It doesnt matter if they arenlisted or not the lacey act as stands never applied to shipping between states and the courts are now weighing in and interpreting the law

[MDT]

From USARK dated April 10, 2017:

U.S. Court of Appeals says “We agree with ARK.” | USARK (http://usark.org/2017-blog/u-s-court-of-appeals-says-we-agree-with-ark/)

[chairman]

Finally had a chance to read the ruling...

The court ruled that it is currently legal, at the federal level, to ship any injurious species within the 49 continental states. Individual states do bar the entry of some species on the list but, generally, you can ship burms, retics, anacondas, etc. However, you cannot ship any injurious species from a continental state to Hawaii (or vice versa). You cannot ship an injurious species from a continental state to Washington D.C.(or vice versa). If there are burms or retics in D.C. then that gene pool is going to be very shallow as no injurious species are allowed in or out.

Now, there is still a ban for shipping injurious species between the states if the animal was unlawfully imported. If you buy a retic from Germany tomorrow, you are breaking the law by importing it, and you would be breaking it again to allow it to cross state lines.

This result is "big" because it protects the keepers of some less flashy, less popular, amphibians and fish that have been quietly added to the injurious species list with little notice because, quite frankly, few people keep the animals. But it is also a little unsatisfying because USFW didn't get their hands slapped for using pseudoscience to add random animals to the injurious species list.

But the Spark's Notes version... a person living in the continental US may buy, sell, or transport injurious species to/from any continental US state that can be reached by car. And any injurious species, except politicians, are banned from entering/exiting D.C.

[dave himself]

I'm glad to see some movement in the right way, of what imo is a stupid law

[GyGbeetle]

This was my understanding as well. USARK's next step, according to their website, is to have the injurious animal list updated based on actual science, not the pseudoscience that got these animals added to the list initially.

[pet_snake_78]

Yes the law never actually banned shipping in the continental United States it's quite clear by reading the text this was always the case and testimony given the time law was passed provided further clarification of it but usfw tried to appease animal rights nuts by intentionally misinterpreting the law