This will end the hobby: AMENDMENTS TO LACEY ACT IN HOUSE COMPETES ACT HR4521

[RSnodgrass]

Having worked for the MN Department of Natural Resources and dealing with significant regulations in my career I have a near zero faith that this was slipped in at the 11hr with good intentions. I've personally seen how an open ended language of seemingly altruistic or benign language turns into something not for the people or planet.

The tactics used to shut down Hawaii on patently fraudulent data flew in the face of 30 yrs and thousands of hours of verified research. They paused collection to 'sit and assess', ultimately going along with their special interest version of the law instead of actual evidence. Our Attorneys General behavior around the country has shown many that having a law, and following the law are not connected in their eyes.

 

[AlexandraDreadlocksPanda]

Only if they are hazardous to humans, animals or the environment.

So that’s Zoas gone, and any venomous fish…

 

[MnFish1]

PETA also doesn't think people should own dogs last I checked no one was worried about their dog being banned. I get your point that public consesus/laws will move towards restricting exotic animal trade. Will wild collection bans periodically come and go to various regions? Sure, but noone is going to ban aquariums.

Actually, I dont believe thats true. PETA does want to ban dog breeding by most people, in favor of 'rescue' animals. Of course this makes no sense - because eventually then there will be 'no dogs'.

You're also right - I don't think anyone is going to 'ban aquarium keeping, but - if you cant buy equipment, fish, etc what are you going to do. BTW - I have also said it that I don't believe the law is as 'bad' as people are saying - but - IMHO, its definitely a prelude to the future.

 

[Porpoise Hork]

So that’s Zoas gone, and any venomous fish…

Clowns too cause they can/will bite if you get too close to them.

 

[MichaelReefer]

Well it will be more efficient if the government takes my fish when they stop by to take my guns, microchip me, and make me drink Starbucks every day.

who am I kidding, I don’t have a gun. Media literacy…..it should be required to leave your house or own a computer/phone

I lost all 11 of my guns in a boating accident on January 20th 2021.

 

[ThRoewer]

Just to clarify for everyone who thinks that as soon as they have power to declare a species invasive that they will determine all species are invasive. They already have this power!

This bill simply means if some new lizard is found in the amazon and someone wants to start importing it that by default it would be illegal unless/until it is added to the whitelist. Fish/reptiles/mammals currently being commonly imported or traded across state lines would automatically be whitelisted.

No, not in this way. Right now they have to declare species by species invasive for any given state and each case can be fought if it can be demonstrated that a listed species cannot survive in the wild in that particular state. The burden of evidence is on the state's side.

The new amendment would turn that around and automatically assume that every species is invasive. And, by applying it to the entirety of the US and its territories and not distinguishing different states, it would be impossible to show that any given species has not the capability to be harmful somewhere in the US or its territories because one or the other location in this vast region would be a suitable habitat for pretty much anything.

 

[DopamineKata]

Exactly - as usual - the problem is the wording - which is ambiguous

What is ambiguous about the bit that says that if it's been imported in the past year the law doesn't apply?

 

[mdb_talon]

No, not in this way. Right now they have to declare species by species invasive for any given state and each case can be fought if it can be demonstrated that a listed species cannot survive in the wild in that particular state. The burden of evidence is on the state's side.

Yes. Exactly. Thank goodness. Anyone being honest realizes that state by state declarations in many cases is completely useless. Again....animals dont understand borders. If preventing "lionfish 2.0" means that even residents in north dakota cant get lionfish 2.0 then i am perfectly fine with that(and more to the point i bet the general public is going to increasingly be fine with that as more of these things occur).

The new amendment would turn that around and automatically assume that every species is invasive.

Nope not at all. The new amendment would assume every species not already here in "more than minimal amounts" is invasive until proven otherwise. As i have said many times i dont support this bill purely because they wont define or identify how they are going to define "minimal amounts", but otherwise that presumption makes complete and total sense. Declaring a species as invasive after it is here and has a foothold is again useless. The burden of proof for new entries of species to the US should be that it is not going to decimate ecosystems. Our hobby of course thinks we can just keep the default whitelist and that the public will continue to be ok with things like lionfish and pythons causing havoc. I believe it is a very shortsighted view and will lead to the eventual true armageddon style ban so many are painting this to be

 

[ThRoewer]

Yes. Exactly. Thank goodness. Anyone being honest realizes that state by state declarations in many cases is completely useless. Again....animals dont understand borders. If preventing "lionfish 2.0" means that even residents in north dakota cant get lionfish 2.0 then i am perfectly fine with that(and more to the point i bet the general public is going to increasingly be fine with that as more of these things occur).


Nope not at all. The new amendment would assume every species not already here in "more than minimal amounts" is invasive until proven otherwise. As i have said many times i dont support this bill purely because they wont define or identify how they are going to define "minimal amounts", but otherwise that presumption makes complete and total sense. Declaring a species as invasive after it is here and has a foothold is again useless. The burden of proof for new entries of species to the US should be that it is not going to decimate ecosystems. Our hobby of course thinks we can just keep the default whitelist and that the public will continue to be ok with things like lionfish and pythons causing havoc. I believe it is a very shortsighted view and will lead to the eventual true armageddon style ban so many are painting this to be

I truly have the feeling you're not getting the point here.
Anything will be invasive somewhere, ergo, everything will be banned everywhere!

Everything in this hobby is "minimal quantities" when compared to the trade of food animals or just cats and dogs and guinea pigs.
This isn't a common sense law but an axe to chop down the hobby for good. And this isn't just my view but also that of all the legal experts consulted by the industry.

Just one example:
Clownfish could happily live in Hawaii and would even find there the anemones they need to survive. Same for Guam, which actually has indigenous Amphiprion species that could be threatened by the introduction of non-native Amphiprion species. So all Amphiprion species, including designer morphs, would be unable to make the white list and by that be banned for all of the US.

You think it wouldn't get that far? Just wait and see!
PETA, Sea Shepard, and all the other "well-meaning" and well funded Animal Rights extremists would do anything in their power to prevent any species in the hobby to make the white list. And it will actually be easy for them the way the amendment is worded. Just wait and see.

 

[mdb_talon]

I truly have the feeling you're not getting the point here.
Anything will be invasive somewhere, ergo, everything will be banned everywhere!

Lol and that is where the hyped up exaggerations start. Thousands of species are imported to the US. They already have the power to classify them as invasive(ie move them from the default whitelist to blacklist).....yet they have no done so for 99.9999% of them. This bill makes the default the blacklist for new entries and of course it gonna be tiresome and difficult to add new species to whitelist. Seem a reasonable burden to prevent destruction on our ecosystems.

 

[2Wheelsonly]

So I’m guessing this is all bs and typical outlet for outrage snuff? Probably a ton of loud mouth youtubers trying to make money getting people all bent out of shape.

social media is cancer

 

[ThRoewer]

Lol and that is where the hyped up exaggerations start. Thousands of species are imported to the US. They already have the power to classify them as invasive(ie move them from the default whitelist to blacklist).....yet they have no done so for 99.9999% of them. This bill makes the default the blacklist for new entries and of course it gonna be tiresome and difficult to add new species to whitelist. Seem a reasonable burden to prevent destruction on our ecosystems.

It isn't hyped exaggeration!

And no, it won't be tiresome and difficult to add new species to the the "white list" - it will be outright impossible!
PETA & Co. will make sure of that. They will fight tooth and nail against every single species someone wants to add, and they have the means and backing to do so successfully. That they are already celebrating this amendment should tell you everything you need to know about it!

And you are utterly mistaken that species already present in the US will automatically added to the white list.

Reasonable is something different.

BTW, humans are the worst of all invasive species, a real pest, and utterly devastating to any environment on the planet, even those they don't occupy. And the worst is: they are already everywhere!
Let's do something about that.

 

[mdb_talon]

BTW, humans are the worst of all invasive species, a real pest, and utterly devastating to any environment on the planet, even those they don't occupy. And the worst is: they are already everywhere!
Let's do something about that.

Lol i think that ends this discussion

 

[ThRoewer]

So I’m guessing this is all bs and typical outlet for outrage snuff? Probably a ton of loud mouth youtubers trying to make money getting people all bent out of shape.

social media is cancer

No, it is not.
If this amendment passes into final law, it's game over for the reef hobby and most of the pet industry will be reduced to cats and dogs.

 

[N27252]

No, it is not.
If this amendment passes into final law, it's game over for the reef hobby and most of the pet industry will be reduced to cats and dogs.

You can yell it out all you want until you're blue in the face.

Your post is, at best, blatant misinformation.

 

[MnFish1]

What is ambiguous about the bit that says that if it's been imported in the past year the law doesn't apply?

Quote it - in all honesty - I read the whole thing a couple days ago - and cant quote it word for word. However - vendors here, etc - are concerned - you tell me why?

 

[MnFish1]

Lol and that is where the hyped up exaggerations start. Thousands of species are imported to the US. They already have the power to classify them as invasive(ie move them from the default whitelist to blacklist).....yet they have no done so for 99.9999% of them. This bill makes the default the blacklist for new entries and of course it gonna be tiresome and difficult to add new species to whitelist. Seem a reasonable burden to prevent destruction on our ecosystems.

Since you seem so smart - and read up on this subject - what do you think the purpose of the new bill/re-written bill is designed to do? I mean - whats the purpose? According to my reading (perhaps I'm misunderstanding ) - its already all taken care of?

 

[DopamineKata]

Quote it - in all honesty - I read the whole thing a couple days ago - and cant quote it word for word.

It's right here in this this thread. On the first page. Read the bit starting at line 13

As for why they're freaking out? I dunno, maybe because they're people who skimmed the dang thing like most of the people in this thread?

 

[mdb_talon]

.

 

[MnFish1]

It's right here in this this thread. On the first page. Read the bit starting at line 13

As for why they're freaking out? I dunno, maybe because they're people who skimmed the dang thing like most of the people in this thread?

I'm going to regretfully disagree with you - I'm sure you know I already liked the post that was quoted. I have already said - I think people are over-reacting. On the other hand - the language is not clear - Not when I read it the first time - nor the second tonight. It could mean multiple things. Do I think the goal is to abolish the reefing hobby - no. Do I think some moron in Florida, Hawaii, or especially CA could interpret in a negative way - YES. If I'm wrong - all good - but - just a question - why do you think the fish industry is fighting against it - and if all of this is already covered - why change the bill. In other words - forget all what I said - what is the purpose of the bill as compared to the laws already 'on the books'?