reptileiere avverger reptilforbud nesten! (HR669)

[obeligz]

test
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/BTRPlayer. ... mcount%3D4

[obeligz]

PIJAC THANKS PET OWNERS, HOBBYISTS, AND OTHERS WHO CARE

Washington, DC, April 24, 2009

The Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC) gratefully recognizes the collaborative efforts of pet owners, aquarium societies, bird clubs, herpetological societies, hobby clubs, pet organizations, and pet industry members who took time to educate their communities and express their concerns about the proposed Nonnative Wildlife Invasion Prevention Act (HR 669).

Collectively our voices were heard on a bill that could potentially ban nonnative species of wildlife not specifically approved by US Fish & Wildlife Service. The pet owners and keepers across America responded in great numbers, rallying together to oppose a poorly crafted piece of legislation. It was evident from several comments made during the April 23 hearing before the House Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife that members of the Subcommittee received an enormous response from their constituents. PIJAC has learned that members of the Subcommittee received thousands of phone calls, emails, and letters from all corners of the US urging them to defeat the bill in its current form.

PIJAC’s Chief Executive Officer and General Counsel Marshall Meyers, who testified at the hearing, noted, “It is clear that Committee members from both sides of the aisle heard from the pet-owning public about their concerns with this bill.” PIJAC greatly appreciates the tremendous efforts of pet owners and organizations representing all types of pets. Added Meyers, “We’re extremely grateful to the thousands of groups who galvanized their members leading up to yesterday’s hearing. This following list is just a sample of the organizations that responded --- but thanks to everyone involved whether or not you are on the list. PIJAC will continue working with members of the Subcommittee, the Executive Branch, and other stakeholders to ensure the process proceeds in a transparent, inclusive, and strategic manner.” PIJAC will be posting on its website – http://www.pijac.org – additional information on likeminded groups and up-to-date information on HR 669 as the process evolves.

Much work is left to be done as meetings are held to discuss possible amendments to the bill.

Acadiana Bird Club
Advocates for Bird Conservation
American Cichlid Association
American Fancy Rat and Mouse Association
American Federation of Aviculture
American Ferret Association
American Pheasant and Waterfowl
Association
American Pet Products Association
AquariumHobbyist.com
Ar-La-Tex Caged Bird Club
Avicultural Society of America
Bird Clubs of Virginia
BirdChannel.com
BirdHobbyist.com
BlueZooRadio
Brotegeris Society International
California Hawking Club
Central Ohio Friends of a Feather
Chicago Herpetological Society
Cockatiel Foundation, Inc.
Companion Bird Club of Delaware Valley
Contra Costa Avian Society
Eclectus Group
Exotichobbyist.com
Exotic Wildlife Association
Federation of American Aquarium Societies
FishChannel.com
Florida Federation of Aviculture
Florida Keys Herpetological Society
Florida Tropical Fish Farms Association
Greater Cincinnati Herpetological Society
Forum
Hernando Exotic Bird Club
Hoosier Herpetological Society
Imperial Bird Club
Insecthobbyist.com
International Association for Falconry &
Conservation of Birds of Prey
Jacksonville Herpetological Society
Kenosha Exotic Bird Club
Kingsnake.com
Maine Herpetogical Society
National Animal Interest Alliance
National Aquaculture Association
Nature’s Corner Magazine
NoHR669.com
Northeast Council of Aquarium Societies
North American Falconers Association
Northern Illinois Parrot Society
Northern Iowa Racing Pigeon Club
Ohio Society of Animal Owners
On Wings
Old Dominion Aviary
Pet Industry Distributors Association
PetHobbyist.com
Pittsburgh Marine Aquarium Society
Pondhobbyist.com
Pyrrhura Breeders Association
ReptileChannel.com
ReptileRadio.net
ReptilesTV.com
Responsible Exotic Animal Ownership
(REXANO)
S & D Exotic Bird Rescue
San Diego Bird Breeders
Shawsheen River Gerbils
SmallAnimalChannel.com
Southern Nevada Parrot Education Rescue
& Homing Society
Southwestern Michigan Aquarium Society
Stop669.org
The Organization of Professional
Aviculturists
The Reno Area Avian Enthusiasts
USARK
Wild Raptor Take Conservancy
World Wide Pet Industry Association
York Area Pet Bird Club
Zoological Association of America

- http://www.reptileradio.net/reptileradi ... php?t=6999

Lang liste

[obeligz]

- http://endangeredowner.blogspot.com/200 ... ogram.html


Pet Defense
http://petdefense.wordpress.com/obey-ex ... -business/


- http://www.usark.org


- http://www.bluezooradio.com/


- http://www.naiaonline.org/images/home_logo.jpg


- http://www.naturescornermagazine.com/


- http://www.reptilechannel.com/


- http://www.smallanimalchannel.com/


- http://reptileradio.net/

ReptilesTV.com
- http://reptilestv.com/

Mange av disse burte kanskje hatt et banner på reptilweb, i tillegg til Oslo dyreklinikk, NHF sin hjemmeside samt repti.net og spesiellt reptilfreaks.
just my 5 cents.
oby

[Duckman]

Mange av disse burte kanskje hatt et banner på reptilweb, i tillegg til Oslo dyreklinikk, NHF sin hjemmeside samt repti.net og spesiellt reptilfreaks.
just my 5 cents.
oby

Blir litt "reklameplakat" av å ha bøttevis av bannere.
Men vi kan lage en egen side med bannerlinker - det er jeg glatt med på

Oslo Dyreklinikk og NHF skal linkes opp via bannere på forsiden sammen med Reptilparken.

Repti skal ikke linkes opp herfra.

[obeligz]

ok, repti er slemme da, men reptilfreaks er good guys!

Gjorde et søk på "HR669" på google i Norge of det er bare reptilfreaks og reptilweb som gav treff, det må jo bety ar repti.net er med på konspirasjonen mot oss fornuftige reptileiere, men mer seriøst..
er det ikke underlig at "hr669" ikke får noen andre tref i Norge? ikke blant dyrevernktivister, eller blant dyreeiere.
Vi er de eneste som har reagert på denne saken i hele Norge.
De andre selskapsdyreier knutepunktene i Norge på nett har ikke funnet verdi i å kaste lys på denne saken eller ta den opp til debatt, selv om det er veldig mange likhetstrekk mellom det som skjer i USA nå og det som skjer i Norge mht positivliste.
Det ville ikke sett bra ut for NHF å trekke frem at det amerikanske reptilsamfunnet har store vegringer ovenfor positivliste, av forståelige årsaker.

Personlig mener jeg fornuftige reptileiere burde engasjere seg sterkere i denne saken, men så er også problemene til amerikanerne er langt ute i periferien til interessene til den gjengse reptieier, også av forståelige årsaker.

Sku gjerne hørt Jannickes synspunkter i denne saken.
Sku også ønske at flere i team reptilweb hadde tatt til ordet i denne tråden, enten i den ene eller den andre retningen.

Mvh
oby

[obeligz]

The Information: Domestication of animals

By Meredith Haaf

Published: April 25 2009 02:04 | Last updated: April 25 2009 02:04

Humans and animals began to live together about 15,000 years ago, when dogs were domesticated. Cats and men began a coalition of interests around 8,500BC in the Fertile Crescent: cats liked hunting mice around the humans’ grain stores and humans were happy to be rid of the rodents. It’s a relationship that has only got better – in the UK, a 2007 survey by Cats Protection found that 26 per cent of male cat owners and 40 per cent of female owners would rather change partners than give up their pets.

Recently, researchers at Exeter University established that horses were domesticated 1,000 years earlier than previously believed. According to their report, published in the journal Science News, archaeological findings in Kazakhstan, including horse teeth bearing the indentations of bridles, suggest that horses were ridden by the Botai tribe as early as 3,500BC. Also discovered were pots containing ancient traces of horse milk – to this day considered a delicacy by Kazakh horsemen.

Kilde;
Financial times
- http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/ca6295b2-2d73 ... abdc0.html

[obeligz]

selvlysende leopardgeckoer er ikke domestisert må vite.

[obeligz]

oi, fikk et personlig svar da..
Limer inn;

Oby,

All excellent points in both of your posts but the problem with the phrase of "legitimate biodiversity"...In that legitimate as defined by who? Scientists? Which scientists? The government? As Rep. Pastor states in his response letter back to Greg which states "It is widely accepted by the scientific community that nonnative invasive wildlife is having an impact on our nation's ecosystem"...

He is right about the impact on the nation's ecosystem...For decades, SOME Nonnative Invasive Species (NIS) have had a negative impact on the environment (habitat) here in the US (e.g. Zebra Mussell, Fire Ant, etc). In other instances, the NIS has been very beneficial to the economy (they are only concentrating on the negative). He, and the supporters of HR-669 (and other bills/regulations before it), are wrong with their solution. On the face of it, banning plants and animals seems logical (especially if you are in the regulating/enforcement business) but will that "solve" the problem? No it will not.

The reason it will not is because even if they ban everything, there will STILL be NIS here in the US because of our trade policies such as GATT, NAFTA, etc. Trade is essential for our economy (import/export) because the raw materials, finished goods, agricultural products, etc all generate income for people and people pay taxes (sales, income, property, etc). Additionally, there are other taxes generated as well...All to benefit the people and the government. So unless the government is prepared to ban ALL foreign trade, the NIS WILL ALWAYS FIND THEIR WAY INTO THE HABITATS OF THE US.

The reason for this is because in most other countries, they either will not (lower cost = higher profit) or they simply do not have the ability to "regulate" or enforce regulation for that matter, even the simplest of inspection protocols...Whether its an animal/insect, plant/seed, etc...The NIS will find their way here and there isn't anyhting the government can effectively do to stop it. NOTHING! As a matter of fact, can you think of a single instance where the government has been able to stop any of the NIS that are currently in the US? Think about it.

In other words, animals do not recognize international borders by any means...They are just trying to survive and they've been "migrating" or "hitch-hiking" on their own for how many years before man even existed on earth? So, there must be some other agenda in the works here because no matter what the government does, they cannot stop NIS in any economical manner without making virtually every product so expensive that our economy would simply fail...

The NIS (HR-669) is just the "tip-of-the-iceberg" as the government; its "approved" scientists and academics (you pick the university and you'd probably guess correctly); Non-Government Organizatin (NGO); etc already know that, TRADE = NIS. Check your email...

Later,
Jim.
-----
CSRAJim

mye mye mer spam på;

http://forums.kingsnake.com/forum.php?catid=13#1686649

[obeligz]

crossing the border

Back in the 70's and 80's many herps now commomplace in the Pet Trade were ALL smuggled into the U.S. Some examples are Bearded Dragons, all Varanids from Australia, Womas, Diamond Pythons, Carpet Pythons [except for Irian Jayas], Spotted Pythons, many types of Bluetongue Skinks, Olive Pythons, every Australian Gecko species, and a host of other commonly seem inexpensive herps were ALL derived from illegal origins. I have many times heard some prominent herpers condemning the smugglers that did these heinous crimes. Realize that the majority did because they wanted to work with the species involved and not for the money. Also many of these people that now profess their disgust at smugglers were doing it themselves in that time period. I'm not suggesting that smuggling wildlife is a positive thing to do just stating facts. One thing is for sure now, NO ONE WOULD CONSIDER SMUGGLING A BEARDED DRAGON BECAUSE THEY ARE MUCH LESS EXPENSIVE HERE THAN IN AUSTRALIA.
-----
Tom Crutchfield

[obeligz]

Back stabbing festival in herp industry

All,

I just scanned it. Its main goal is to squeeze out the little guy who can't afford to conform to these standards. As a little guy that's how I read it. There are some good things in the document that would help the industry, however. I know of a certain former burmese python breeder that now does chondros, boas and colubrids in the Gainesville, Florida area that was talking a few years ago about doing something like this. His arguement was that the "backyard breeder" didn't have the over head he did and thus could under cut him on price. I find the opposite to be true. The "warehouse snake breeders" usually under cut the "backyard breeder." There are many more "backyard breeders" then big commercial guys. Another interesting fact is that many of the big guys in the industry use to be small guys. Now they have theirs and they want to close the door on you getting yours.

This sounds really familiar. Some of you may remember my arguements with a certain group of west Texas herpers. They claim to not be commercial when it comes to collecting from the wild. They want to throw the commercial guys under the bus so they can keep theirs. They claim to be recreational hobbyists. As with the fishing industry we know that the recreational folks greatly out number the commercial folks. Now, if the big breeders get their way, the small recreational hobbyists will now have to admit to being commercial and conform to these new commercial standards to be in the game.

This industry has always been interesting and cut throat. It will be interesting to see how this works out. I will support an individual's rights to be in the game at any level. However, it looks like we are moving towards the Wal-Mart model if we don't get castrated by the academics and AR groups first. Oh the joys of herpetoculture.

Welkerii
El Paso, TX

- http://forums.kingsnake.com/view.php?id=1685807,1685889

[obeligz]

Pet gatekeeper bill
Saturday, May 02, 2009
BY ALBERT CONNELLY JR. AND DAVID E. BORUCHOWITZ

Under the guise of protecting animals and the environment, opponents of pet ownership are lobbying for a disastrous bill now being considered by the Congress that would effectively outlaw most pet ownership in the U.S.

The Nonnative Wildlife Invasion Prevention Act, H.R. 669, seeks to ban the importation, distribution and breeding of all nonnative wildlife in the U.S. except for specific species appearing on an "approved list" created by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Aside from the callousness that would take most small pets (including the vast majority of aquarium fish, if not all of them) out of American homes, the bill would all but shut down the $45-billion-a-year American pet industry and all the jobs associated with it. At this time in our history, in this challenging economy, this is the wrong bill at the wrong time for America.

H.R. 669, originally proposed by Rep. Madeline Bordallo, D-Guam, requires that any species that is kept must be on an "approved list," under penalty of law. To get on the list, each pet species will have to be separately petitioned for within a year's time -- and there are more than 20,000 fish species alone -- with an application fee paid by the petitioner, who must then prove a negative to the government: that the species can do no possible harm within the entirety of the U.S.

Note that under such criteria, the U.S. is treated as one ecosystem -- applying the same standards to the tropical environs of Hawaii, the vast deserts of Nevada, and the freezing mountains of Alaska, despite the fact that most students of basic science would understand how foolhardy such an assumption is, and that a potentially invasive species in Hawaii might not survive 10 minutes outdoors in Nevada's arid heat, nor two minutes in the cold of Alaska.

The proposed act is based on faulty principles, lacks realistic execution methods and suffers from ill-defined goals. H.R. 669 was reportedly based largely on Rep. Bordallo's experience with the damage wrought by invasive brown tree snakes in her home district of Guam. While we all readily recognize the need for sane, responsible regulation of exotic species in the pet trade, many states already have environmentally appropriate regulations in place to prevent such an occurrence, not to mention the federal Lacey Act. And few areas in the U.S would be as hospitable as Guam to exotic tropical invasive species year-round.

H.R. 669 requires the scientific evaluation of thousands of imported species to be completed in less than two years, despite the fact that it now takes double that time to conduct such an assessment for a single species. Even more incredibly, there have been no additional funds allocated for the first phase of the process. And anything that is not evaluated by the end of the two-year period will be placed on the prohibited list along with the evaluated-and-banned species, making for a wholesale gutting of the pet hobby, and with it the American pet industry, with little chance for approval of most species currently owned, loved and responsibly cared for by pet owners nationwide.

We as responsible pet owners and members of the pet industry recognize the need for the regulation of animal imports to prevent the establishment of truly risky species, but the banishment of all but a few select species has an Orwellian quality to it. Instead, why not an amendment to the Lacey Act? Why is Congress considering an entirely new suite of regulations crafted from the ground up, with the attendant taxpayer expense and inevitable snafus, loopholes, and unintended consequences sure to accompany such a poorly crafted piece of legislation?

Even if the goals laid out by H.R. 669 were achievable and enforceable, a slash-and-burn approach to animal regulation is hardly beneficial to the citizens and economy of the U.S. And the black market that will most likely rise up as a result of the bill would harm both the environment and the trafficked animals themselves, as existing controls and protections disappear along with the legal, regulated pet-animal market.

If Congress believes this new bill is truly called for, putting in place a new suite of regulations above and beyond the Lacey Act, our representatives need to rework it to include realistic timelines, scientifically valid evaluation methods, provisions to meet any tasks specified, equal access to all parties involved in the risk assessment process, and a re-evaluation of the goals of the bill.

A simpler, fairer and eminently more workable solution would be to simply strengthen the Lacey Act. Or, if it is truly deemed necessary, at least craft a more sane and workable H.R. 669 so that the end result is a list of prohibited species, not an inevitably faulty and incomplete list of those approved for legal ownership. The former is sensible and would have our full support; the latter amounts to no less than an irresponsible, ill-conceived, and cold-hearted plan to prohibit most pet ownership in the U.S., something we hope nobody truly wishes to see.

Albert Connelly Jr. is associate publisher, and David E. Boruchowitz is editor in chief, of Tropical Fish Hobbyist Magazine, based in Neptune.

http://www.nj.com/opinion/times/oped/in ... xml&coll=5

[obeligz]

Saturday, May 2, 2009
Stop Fighting Animal Abuse
It is time to stop fighting animal abuse. The fight reached the point of diminishing returns a long time ago. Activists are no longer fighting people who beat animals to death. They're fighting people who try to provide comfortable lives for animals and the industries that produce our food. The fight generates a lot of profits for lawyers, so-called humane societies and shelters, and politicians. It also allows the most anti-social element of our society to band together to damage other humans.

When Dwight David Eisenhower left office as President of the United States, he said "beware the military-industrial complex." The puppy mill raiders have developed a little military-industrial complex of their own. They have become dependent on finding people guilty of animal abuse in order to gain donations and a bit of money from the people whose homes and businesses they invade.

This does mean that the humane societies have sought and obtained undue influence over the process of law-making and law enforcement. They first demanded licensing then treated the results of mandatory state inspections with contempt, re-inspecting and "finding" things wrong. They handle and interpret all of the evidence. They get the local prosecutor to present the animal owner with a choice: Give the animals to the Humane Society or be charged with a felony. A lot of kennel owners have no choice but to comply, largely because they are also forced to secure their property by posting a bond. Their property can be taken from them for failure to give a lot of money, tens of thousands of dollars, to the county and to the Humane Society that has stolen their property under color of law. This is done to the owners before a trial. Doing this denies them due process. An organization that would do this is as criminal as it gets and should go to jail for doing it, let alone have any credibility with the press, the judiciary, or the police. This is a tremendous fault in our justice system, that rarely does law enforcement get prosecuted for violating civil rights. The prosecutors often help them do it, and for the sake of animals! They are already acting as if animals have more rights than humans do.

Fighting against animal abuse makes this kind of corruption a lot easier to perform. People excuse it thinking that we're getting at the bad guys. Our bad guys turn out to be people who humanely breed a variety of animals to sell to consumers, essentially honest farmers who do take good care of their animals. When "fighting animal abuse" sometimes so-called humane society officers will pick on as little as a few hairs and a piece of dogfood on the floor, as they did to Linda Brown for the high crime of selling a purebred dog to the Vice President of the United States. This is because, corrupt or not, a "fight" includes a bone of contention, no pun. It's hard to contrive a better illustration of how corrupt fighting animal abuse has made the humane authorities.

I used to say that I was fighting abuse when I fed an animal, gave it comfort, took it to the vet, and so on. Not any more. In a way it's a good position to take but that's giving PETA, the HSUS, and their various followers far too much credit. Anything that a human does with an animal can be and has been interpreted as abuse of that animal, by people who although human harbor a sick grudge and contempt against humanity. It's giving them too much credit to say that doing this is anything but malicious, even if this malice is disguised, poorly, as some kind of philosophy. Now I say what I should have said all along, that I'm caring for the animal. "Abuse" or "not abuse" is not rightly judged by isolated incidents or a little bit of dirt on the floor, and certainly not by malicious lies about cruel exploitation. It is judged by whether, on the balance, the care of the animal is of benefit to that animal. The caged tiger doesn't tell me that she's miserable and that the cage is "all that can be done." She tells me that she is happy and wants to play. She and the pet dog range between "happy" and "ecstatic" most of the time. And no matter how happy they are, I will always wish that I could make their lives even happier, and that's a fight I'm happy to join.

Sunday, May 3, 2009
Stop Fighting Animal Abuse, Part II
It takes more than one part to explain this.

How does anyone "fight" animal abuse? They have to find a person to fight. They have to label that person as an abuser and fight that person. They make that person the personification of evil in the eyes of their chosen audience. When scapegoating old ladies as witches was in fashion, they also had to make some kind of profit doing it. This is why the properties of the accused were turned over to the state for the state to sell. This gave the governing bodies involved a cash incentive to convict an old lady of witchcraft. "Puppy mill" and "animal abuse" are the modern witchcraft.

It's hard to separate the idea of corruption from the idea that a humane society can be overzealous. "Overzealous" is just as bad if not worse. Go to Care2 and look at the comments for any subject line that has any kind of connection with animal abuse. Some of those "animal protection" people want humans to be tortured and murdered because they had animals in pens with wire floors, that were designed to help the animals stay clean. I suppose Care2 might get wind of this and clean up some of their comments and pretend this never happened, too.

The only legitimate reason to fight animal abuse is to try to improve living conditions for animals. It is not legitimate to do this to hurt other humans, to corrupt a free society, or to profit from the abuse while also increasing the incidence of abuse and unnecessary deaths. The Blue Dog State blog is just one good source of information about the fact that the HSUS puts a great deal of effort into getting dogs killed. A great number of atrocities have been performed against all kinds of dogs, including cramming dogs into crates too small for them, choking them, and basically breaking the animals to get them into the crates. There's someone who knows how to fight animal abuse. That's what I'm talking about.

The animal rights movement is already famous for fighting every kind of human care of animals as "exploitation." When they fight abuse, they sometimes set homes on fire, or cars, or laboratories that are doing research into improving the health of animals. As I reported earlier, they also sometimes set fires that kill animals, or release animals from confinement to die in the wild or on the highways. They also get laws passed to deny homes for animals. They try to get all domesticated animals outlawed, sterilized, and they kill them by the millions. This is also a method for "fighting abuse."

The simple fact is that there is rarely anything to actually fight. You bring food, clean pens, work with the animals, and help the human. This is not a fight. It's work. A person doesn't "fight" against it, he works to bring about the desired conditions that are "not abuse." "Not abuse" isn't a state of being. It isn't anything. Caring about your animals, loving them, feeding them, grooming them, sheltering and protecting them, these are far better things than "not abuse." It's sickening to think that anyone has ever been under attack for giving care to an animal, has spent even one hour in jail, has had to answer to some neurotic stupid useless person, or has spent even one minute feeling guilty because a so-called animal advocate said something.

The place that we want to be is where we have our pets and livestock and do the best that we can by them. Instead of a thousand words here about how we're being abused, we need to write stories about how glorious it all is, and how even when we're tired and weak there is still goodness and light.

http://realanimalculture.blogspot.com/

[obeligz]

*grin* I've been preparing for months, just letting all the salient points perculate into a sharper blend! :~)

THANK YOU for your input, you were very very helpful in your critique. You're a Blessing.

'Nouf said, G Forth and Do Battle ! *grin*

--
~Kat >^,,^<
The Strength of the Pack is the Wolf, &
The Strength of the Wolf is the Pack
Wolfdancer Creek http://www.wolfdancer.org
http://wolfdancercreek.blogspot.com/
"Many have forgotten this Truth, but you must not forget it.
You remain responsible, forever, for what you have tamed."
-- Antoine De Saint-Exupery
http://www.underwoodavenue.com/RWolfdogOwnershipPP.pdf
~~ Starwolf Weavings ~~ Profits for Rescues
http://starwolfweavings.wolfdancer.org
^,,^ Wakan Tanka Nici Un
'\_/` May the Great Mystery Walk with you, and Guide you.
This post is copyright © 1987-2009 All rights reserved
Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, martini in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming ~ WOO HOO what a ride!

----- Original Message -----

From: V å len G å nev <mailto:obeligz@reptilweb.no>

To: REXANO@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2009 12:34 PM

Subject: Re: [REXANO] my speech to OR SB391






Hey Kat!
There you go again prancing up and down waving arms in everything....
When you go fishing, you have to be quiet, as to not scare the fishes away.
If you light up a big fire beside the lake and turn on your portable boom box very loud, you won´t be getting any fishes on the hook, no matter how good bait your bait is... So.. be careful where you tread, you are making a lot of noise!
I was able to secure some small juicy bits of information for you that came to my attention through the back channels.
There was this guy I heard of who was terrorised by a certain organization, they even poisoned his dog to keep him quiet. Another guy was threatened with the police and governmental sanctions. One other guy was even forced to shoot his snakes with a shotgun?! 8but this last one happed more than 5 years ago though.)
I sent you the rest of the text on PM. It is really frightening how deep this rabbits hole is, once you start diving down in search of the bunnies.

Anyways..
The world rests on your shoulders on Tuesday, American woman, don´t let us down now. Hear?
Be silent and don´t bug us more with your problems, we need to focus on turning the tide in extinction of responsible husbandry while you are home playing with your words on paper! We have no time to help you any more, you should have started preparation for your speech a lot earlier! Geez, you remind me of those kids at school who just hang around and play during classes and never do any sorts of homework. You are a responsible person though, how can you live with yourself?!
Well.. Better late than never anyways I suppose...
Enough said. Now we need to get back to adressing the spots of wildcats. As I understand, if the cat has spots, then it is domestecated, but if a cat has stripes, then is is wild, because tigers have stripes and they are definitely wild animals, if I have understood correctly?

Regards
Obeligz
Vivarium consultant, reptilweb, REXANO

[Repti_queen]

Vet ikke om dette har noe med saken å gjøre, så flytt det gjerne om det er feilplassert.

Min søster bor i Canada og fortalte meg nettop at det meste av amfibier som ikke er native til Canada er blitt ulovlige. Hun er sammen med en som har en av landets største samling av amfibier, og han fortalte at grunnet forbudet får han ikke lenger lov å avle opp flere amfibier som ikke tilhører Canadas innfødte.., men må la dem dø ut av alderdom. Det kom ikke helt fra om han mente de nå kunne søke om dispensasjon til videre hold av andre arter, men dette har skjedd nå den siste tiden.
Noen andre som har hørt noe om dette også gjelder reptilene? Skal se om jeg ikke får tak i ham i morgen å høre med ham...
Dette er jo trist, for han drev bl.a oppdrett av Axolotl og flere andre som trenger sterke fangenskaps bestander..

[obeligz]

hmmz.
takker for verdifullt bidrag.
følg gjerne opp den saken.