Silver State Exotics

10/18/2023

🌴

10/10/2023

🐢

10/04/2023

10/03/2023

08/19/2023

Going to be at the Carson show Saturday and Sunday, come stop by!

07/19/2023

06/03/2023

🐍

11/05/2022

VPI Snows 🐍

10/15/2022

🐍

10/15/2022

From a ODYB Lesser Bongo het Clown to an Enchi het Clown. 🐍

10/13/2022

From a Male Enchi Champagne het Hypo to a Female Coral Glow het Hypo. Way better in person, such crazy oranges on the sides. 🐍

09/30/2022

🐍

09/30/2022

09/30/2022

The dad to some of my recent clutches. OD YB Lesser Bongo het Clown. 🐍

09/30/2022

🐍

09/30/2022

🐍

08/22/2022

06/11/2022

Male Combat

04/15/2022

The one and only Sacramento Reptile Show is back! Join us at Cal Expo, September 24th & 25th for the largest reptile exhibit in Northern California, with over 100,000 square feet of reptiles and supplies. We can't wait to see you! Like our page for updates!

02/09/2022

Federal Legislation Threatens Pets, Zoos and Aquariums, and Biomedical Research

All article credit to the author Art Parola as posted on the National Animal Interest Alliance (NAIA)'s website https://www.naiaonline.org/articles/article/federal-legislation-threatens-pets-zoos-and-aquariums-and-biomedical-research .IwJ212AC.dpbs.

A last-minute amendment to the COMPETES Act, H.R. 4521, was slipped in, presumably to avoid attention and pushback from the millions of Americans who will be affected, and to bypass congressional hearings. The language creates a major change to the provisions of the Lacey Act that regulate species deemed by US Fish & Wildlife Service to be injurious. While promoted under the guise of protecting the country from invasive species, the true goal of the legislative change is to ban as much of the wildlife trade as possible. Many of the organizations pushing this change oppose keeping animals in zoos, public aquariums, research facilities, and sometimes even as pets. While these organizations do not have the public support to implement their agenda outright, they have been effective in hijacking otherwise legitimate initiatives to achieve their ideological goals quietly, piece by piece.

Currently, the Lacey Act allows US Fish & Wildlife Service to promulgate rules that list species that could be injurious “to human beings, to the interests of agriculture, horticulture, forestry, or to wildlife or the wildlife resources of the United States.” Every state in the US also has legal and regulatory mechanisms for banning species that could cause harm to native species and habitats. The current federal Lacey Act list, and most state lists, are often referred to as “Black Lists.” Any species on the list is prohibited, while any species not on the list is allowed to be imported into the respective jurisdiction, sometimes with stipulations such as permit or health certificate requirements. This method of regulation is often regarded as best regulatory practice because it allows jurisdictions to prevent unwanted environmental and health threats that are relevant to their region without being overly burdensome to organizations, businesses, and individuals.

The language in the COMPETES Act would change the Lacey Act list to what is often referred to as a “White List.” If the bill passes, only species that go through an administrative rulemaking process and are found not to be a risk or an injurious species would be allowed to be imported into the United States. Any species not listed would be presumed to be injurious and would be banned from import. All species would be in essence regarded as guilty until proven innocent.

There are multiple problems with taking this regulatory approach.

First, it is impossible to prove a negative. Meeting the burden of proof to show a species would not be injurious is onerous and will require significant time and financial resources. Navigating the petition and listing process will be next to impossible for the average person, not to mention the problems in overcoming any subsequent legal challenges to listings.

The Lacey Act is a federal law, meaning if a species could be injurious anywhere in the United States including its territories and possessions, it could be considered injurious. Due to the vast differences in climate and habitats, effectively regulating potentially invasive species in Ohio or Minnesota requires evaluating drastically different criteria than in Florida or Hawaii or Puerto Rico. However, the Lacey Act is inflexible and leaves no room for more localized regulations. If a species could be a threat in south Florida, it is deemed to be a threat in Minnesota as well. Therefore, rules to prevent invasive species are most effective when implemented at the state level and not as a one size fits all approach for the entirety of the country.

“White Lists” also create enforcement problems. With a “Black List,” law enforcement primarily needs to be able to identify protected and banned species. Even in these cases, law enforcement can have difficulty and federal regulations ban imports of some species solely based on similarity of appearance to another protected or banned species. The only purpose of these bans are regulatory agencies perceive it would otherwise be difficult for law enforcement personnel to implement the law. This can lead to extremes. For example, Pennsylvania bans all crayfish species. This law is primarily an attempt to prevent invasions of rusty crayfish and a few other cold-water species that legitimately threaten native ecosystems. However, this also means the orange dwarf Mexican crayfish, a popular tropical aquarium species, is banned. An ecological risk screening by US Fish & Wildlife Service gives the species a climate match score of 0 (the lowest score possible and a key indicator that species presents no invasion risk) for the entire state of Pennsylvania. There is also little to no risk of confusing an orange dwarf Mexican crayfish with species that would actually harm the state’s aquatic ecology. Despite no reasonable purpose for banning the species in Pennsylvania, keeping orange Mexican dwarf crayfish is a crime at the state level, and could even become a federal felony if prosecuted under criminal provisions of federal law pertaining to state, tribal, and foreign wildlife violations.

While “Black Lists” create some regulatory difficulties such as this, these issues are exponentially aggravated when implementing a white list, as practical enforcement of a white list will require law enforcement officials to reliably identify every species, whether listed or not. This is impossible, as millions of species exist on planet earth. Therefore, it is likely species that present effectively no risk of actually being injurious would be excluded from the “White List” due to perceived burden to law enforcement, whether reasonable or not. Even worse, these regulations would apply across the entire US and not be confined to any single state.

Not only do species identification issues lead to overarching bans on otherwise non-injurious species, but problems can arise even when species are completely legal. Customs officials and wildlife inspection agents at ports of entry are tasked with clearing shipments of wildlife imported from abroad. Often, getting the shipments cleared and to their final destination as quickly as possible is paramount for the health and welfare of the animals. Misidentifications and mistakes by inspectors can lead to holding and seizure of perfectly legal shipments, resulting in significant stress on the animals being transported. This already can be an issue within the currently regulatory framework. But moving from a current Lacey Act “Black List” to a “White List” would result in even more instances of mistakenly held and seized shipments due to the increased complexity for custom officials and inspection agents. This will significantly increase cost of enforcement and reduce animal welfare by potentially prolonging transit times.

The proposed legislation would not only significantly impact importing animals into the United States, but also limit transportation of animals between states. Due to a 2017 D.C. Court of Appeals ruling, species listed as injurious under the Lacey Act can be moved across state lines in accordance with state laws (though many states already ban relevant Lacey Act “Black Listed” species that pose a threat to their native ecology considering their state’s respective climate and habitats).

The COMPETES Act would override the court ruling and outlaw interstate transport of all species considered injurious under the Lacey Act. Since every species not on the “White List” would be considered injurious, the proposed Lacey Act white list would not only prevent imports of most species into the US from abroad, but also ban movement between states. While animals possessed before the implementation of the white list would still likely be allowed to be kept under state law, unless the species is lucky enough to make it onto the proposed Lacey Act “White List,” transporting across state lines for any reason, whether because of a move, selling or gifting animals, or even taking an animal temporarily to another state for medical care (a common occurrence for fish, reptile, amphibian, and bird keepers, since finding a veterinarian specializing in treating non-mammals can sometimes be difficult) could result in federal prosecution.

Prosecution under the Lacey Act can be severe and heavy handed. Each violation can be prosecuted as a federal felony with a maximum punishment of $20,000 and/or five years imprisonment. Additional civil penalties could also be levied.

Changes proposed in the COMPETES Act will affect bird keepers, reptile and amphibian enthusiasts, and any other organization, business, or person who works with non-native wildlife. The definition of “wildlife” covers almost every animal, no matter how many generations it may be removed from its wild counterparts, with very few exceptions aside from dogs and cats. The consequences for reptile and amphibian keepers, bird owners, aquarists, and other pet owners if the COMPETES Act passes will be severe. This means every reptile, amphibian, arachnid, bird, fish, coral, and invertebrate will be subject to the new restrictions, whether captive bred, ranched, farmed, aquacultured, maricultured, or collected from a wild source or fishery. With more than 10,000 species of birds, reptiles, amphibians, arachnids, fish, corals, and invertebrates kept by hobbyists and in trade, it is likely only a small fraction of species would initially be able to overcome the onerous listing process on the “White List.” The process of petitioning to add species to the “White List” will be costly and time consuming, and likely be challenged in court by well-funded animal rights organization, resulting in long and costly delays, if successful at all. Most species will likely be considered injurious without any reason other than an unsurmountable burden of proving otherwise. For species that do manage to make it onto the “White List,” prices will likely rise significantly. Undescribed and newly discovered species will almost certainly cease to exist in the American hobby and trade. Even domestic captive breeding, aquaculture, and fisheries will be severely curtailed as companies and individuals will, for the most part, be limited solely to the “White Listed” species. For all intents and purposes, this legislation will dramatically change the hobby and pet trade as we know it, resulting in significantly reduced availability of species, diminished interest in pet keeping, severe retraction in the size of the industry resulting in substantial job losses, both in the US and abroad, and an extreme reduction in the scientific, economic, cultural, educational, and conservation benefits of the bird, reptile, amphibian, and aquarium hobbies and trade.

Let your senator know your views on the last-minute amendment to the COMPETES Act, H.R. 4521. - end article

Take action at https://usark.org/2022lacey/

Photo: © kerkezz / Adobe Stock (species ID: bearded dragon)

02/09/2022

ALERT: America COMPETES Act of 2022 Lacey Act Amendments

UPDATE 7/28/22: We have been posting relevant updates on our main alert page at https://usark.org/2022lacey/. To be brief, the “CHIPS-Plus” bill that passed in the Senate passed the House on 7/28 (243-187 vote). This bill includes some of the technology initiatives included in the America COMPETES Act, USICA, and other bills. The portions of COMPETES that were not germane to the intent of the bill (including the bad Lacey Act amendments) were not added to the CHIPS-Plus package. This should be the end of any threat from these Lacey Act amendments for this Congressional session.

Thank you to everyone who contacted their legislators and voiced opposition! Your opposition is hugely important and needed. When advocacy groups like USARK meet with legislators, they give us more attention if they have been hearing from their constituents. The Reptile Nation is a huge part of USARK and we just want to say thank you again to those who took the time to fight for responsible h**petoculturists.

Also, a huge thank you to other animal keepers and organizations who opposed these Lacey Act amendments! USARK and h**p keepers were certainly not the only ones fighting. The stoppage of these Lacey Act amendments shows that various animal interest groups can work together and make a difference. Thank you!

Read below or at https://usark.org/2022lacey/ (more info and What To Do at link). We also have a spin-off post at https://usark.org/2022lacey1/ and an FAQ page at https://usark.org/2022laceyfaq/.

UPDATE 7/28/22: The "CHIPS-Plus" bill passed the Senate and then the House (243-187 vote). This bill includes some of the technology initiatives included in the America COMPETES Act and other bills. The portions of COMPETES that were not germane to the intent of the bill (including the bad Lacey Act amendments) were not added to the CHIPS-Plus bill.

UPDATE 7/27/22: This is the current version of the technology-focused "CHIPS-Plus" bill. No Lacey Act amendments are in this bill.https://rules.house.gov/.../files/BILLS-117HR4346SASA.pdf

UPDATE 7/20/22: After months of negotiations, the Senate voted to advance a $52 billion bill aimed at boosting domestic semiconductor production. The House may vote next week as this works through the process. This will take some pressure off the conference committee and the USICA/COMPETES reconciliation may fade away but keep contacting legislators through our alerts!

UPDATE4/7: House Representatives have been announced to the S1260/HR4521 reconciliation conference committee. See the list at https://usark.org/laceycomm/. An unofficial list of Senate members has been released (included at link).

UPDATE 3/29: A top priority on Capitol Hill is to pass the Bipartisan Innovation Act (this is the current name for the bill that will merge HR4521 and S1260). The primary goal of this bill is to boost high-tech research and chip manufacturing in the United States. Since the House and Senate passed different versions, the two versions must now be merged (reconciled). The process to conduct a formal reconciliation finally started Monday evening with a move from the Senate that replaced the text of HR4521 with the text of S1260 and sent it back to the House. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said the House should vote this week against the bill from the Senate. This downvote will trigger the formation of a conference committee with members from both chambers. That committee will reconcile HR4521 and S1260 to produce a final bill. Following a vote to begin a formal conference negotiation process, Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell must define the structure of the committee talks.

UPDATE 3/28: Following a roll call to limit debate on the measure (cloture), the Senate voted 68-28 to send its version (text from S1260) of this bill back to the House. Next, the House will reject this bill. This was the process needed to set up a cross-chamber conference committee to settle on the final language for the bill (reconciliation of the two bills).

UPDATE 2/14: As we have stated, the America COMPETES Act (HR4521) and U.S. Innovation and Competition Act (S1260) will be reconciled (merged) in committee. The merged bill will likely have a new name (promoting a “Make It In America” or similar moniker). As of this update, the House has yet to send the final version of HR4521 to the Senate (due to over 200 amendments being added on the House floor). Informal discussion on the reconciliation may begin this week. The formal Senate/House conference should begin in March. This issue of strengthening the U.S. economy (specifically in the technology fields) is a priority for many in Congress. Our mission remains to keep the Lacey Act amendments from being added to this or any other bill. Full alert at https://usark.org/2022lacey/.

UPDATE 2/4: This bill passed in the House and will go to the Senate. We will adjust our alert to contact Senators at the appropriate time. It was a slim margin with the final vote at 222-210.

UPDATE 2/1: The America COMPETES Act passed out of the Rules Committee, as expected. It will next go to the full House for a vote [debate on February 2]. Our goal is not to stop the bill but to get the Lacey Act amendments removed before it goes to the Senate. During today's hearing, Arkansas Representative Rick Crawford specifically cited the Lacey Act amendments as provisions that, "...would not stand a chance if they were vetted through regular order and the legislative process." The hearing was filled with opposition and pointed concern that this Act is far too broad and unfocused with an unreasonable number of amendments (over 600). The Act strays far beyond its stated purpose. Keep contacting your Representatives! (See https://usark.org/2022lacey/ for directions.) end update

Buried within the 2,912 pages of the America COMPETES Act of 2022 lie Lacey Act amendments that affect all non-domesticated pet owners and the greater pet community. COMPETES is an acronym for Creating Opportunities for Manufacturing, Pre-Eminence in Technology and Economic Strength. The stated purpose of the Act is to strengthen America’s economic and national security but obviously, this was slipped into the massive bill in hopes to go unnoticed.

The amendments would reverse the USARK federal lawsuit victory by reinstating the ban on interstate transportation of species listed as injurious under the Lacey Act. The bill would also create a “white list” (see #2 below) that could affect millions of pet owners, as well as pet businesses. If your species of interest, even your pet, is listed as injurious (which could happen because it can survive outside somewhere in the U.S.), then it cannot be transported across state lines. That means you could not even take a pet with you if you moved to another state or needed veterinary care across a state border. This does not just ban sales but prohibits all interstate transportation. This will trickle down to hundreds or thousands of common pet species.

The America COMPETES Act may pass in the House next week. If passed in the House, it will then be sent to the Senate to be reconciled with an innovation policy package called the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, or USICA, that passed in the Senate last year. The America COMPETES Act is the House Democrats' response to USICA (which does not contain the Lacey Act Amendment). The House Rules Committee will hear the America COMPETES Act on February 1, 2022. This is the same language we saw introduced by Florida Senator Marco Rubio as Senate Bill 626 in 2021.

Briefly, the amendments will:

1. Provide that the Lacey Act bans the interstate transport of species listed as injurious. Specifically, it replaces Lacey’s current language ‘‘shipment between the continental United States’’ with ‘‘transport between the States."

2. Create a “white list” of species that can be imported. This means that any animal (reptile, amphibian, fish, bird, mammal) that is not on the white list is by default treated as an injurious species and is banned from importation.

3. Create a new authority allowing FWS to use an “emergency designation” that becomes effective immediately after being published in the Federal Register unless an extension of no more than 60 days is allowed. That means no due process, public input, hearings, advanced notice, etc. for injurious listings.

4. Permit FWS to not allow importation if a species has not been imported in “minimal quantities” (to be defined) in the year prior to the enactment of this Act.

5. The effective date would be one year after the enactment of this Act.

Read the relevant amendment text (these are pages 1661-1665) at https://usark.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/2022-HR4521-excerpt.pdf.

In our landmark court decision, four federal judges agreed that USARK was correct and that the Lacey Act (Title 18 Section 42 of the U.S. Code) did not ban interstate transportation of injurious species based on the original language of the Lacey Act and the intent of Congress. As a result of this fight for our members and the h**petocultural community, this meant animals domestically bred under human care could be moved and sold across state lines (within the continental United States). For h**petoculturists’ concerns, this included some species of constrictor snakes and 201 species of salamanders.

SAMPLE MESSAGING and more at https://usark.org/2022lacey/.