Group lobbying for possible Amphibian pet trade ban in US

[John]

From what I understand this isn't an outright ban, but a move to test all imported amphibians. Which should have been done years ago when this first crept up. We probably could have saved several species if something was done earlier.

And that is why:

I think the press release makes a good point - when have you known legislators to care enough to fairly regulate for a topic like this of marginal voting consequence? Easier to ban outright.

[JeffX]

Well hopefully an outright ban won't happen. We can always start writing to let our representatives know the facts.

[Iratus ranunculus]

I will be blunt. There needs to be some sort of regulation in place to slow the spread of bd. Not shipping amphibians around all over the place unless there is testing for the disease is probably a good idea. An example of how this works:

With stuff like cattle and poultry, facilities must be periodically tested to determine whether or not the animals are infected with Mad Cow, Avian Flu etc. A similar protocol could be in place before people are allowed to ship amphibian adults and larvae. Not all frogs need be inspected in this manner, simply a sample of each species under consideration. A toe clipping or skin swab would be taken of a sample of the amphibians. This sample would be mixed with Taq Polymerase, Nucleotides, a Primer that marks the start and stop markers for a genetic marker for bd, and some pH Buffers and this would be subjected to a cycle of heating and cooling to amplify the DNA and make it detectable. If when run through an electrophoresis jell something shows up, the frog is infected and the facility will need to be quarantined and the frogs treated.

Third party or even university labs can be used for this, and PCR is relatively cheap. Multiple samples can be run in each well plate to save time and money, and it provides good data on the spread of the disease within the US. Particularly with wild caught specimens collected for the pet trade and Biological Supply Markets. Locality data would also be a good idea.

See this is another example of people over reacting and NOT thinking. The problem of Chytrid is not because of people raising and keeping amphibians. The fungus is present every world in the world and has been probably for centuries.

No. It has not. Chytrid is native to Africa and has been spread to the the New World and Asia by releases of Xenopus laevis from research and medical colonies, and later by the spread of infected bullfrogs which have been introduced... pretty much everywhere.

The sheer pettiness of the scientific community and the zealots' lobby powers will ultimately be the downfall of us all.

Most of us scientists that work with reptiles and amphibians do keep them as pets. I would be careful how you approach this...

Frankly, an outright ban is too costly to enforce. A testing protocol for interstate trade and importation is what you are more likely to see, because the cost of that can be passed on to consumers and the fees for import permits can generate a small amount of revenue.

[John]

Those animals are tested because they are in our food chain. With the exception of Asian food markets around the US, the majority of amphibians in the US are not part of the human food chain and thus are a low priority for any powers-that-be.

I disagree with what you see as the probable result of the two possibilities - an outright ban is easier to legislate and fund than testing for pets that, let's face it, are not kept by many people.

[Iratus ranunculus]

Those animals are tested because they are in our food chain. With the exception of Asian food markets around the US, the majority of amphibians in the US are not part of the human food chain and thus are a low priority for any powers-that-be.

I disagree with what you see as the probable result of the two possibilities - an outright ban is easier to legislate and fund than testing for pets that, let's face it, are not kept by many people.

Frogs are kept by plenty of people. Maybe not as hobbyists, but frogs are used both living and dead for biological experiments in primary, secondary, and post highschool educational environments. Live bullfrogs get shipped to universities in every state in the country. To say nothing of Xenopus.

It would be flat out stupid to ban the interstate transport of frogs, and the FWS knows it. Which is why they wont do it. In this case, it is not a politician making the laws. Elected officials are not the ones proposing these rules. It is the FWS acting under existing regulation.

If you would actually read the rule itself:

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.

In other words, the interstate trade in amphibians would be prohibited unless said amphibians are certified to be free of chytrid. Again, the exact steps in all likelyhood that I mentioned above.

Amphibians infected with chytrid are prohibited from being shipped across state lines unless a proper permit is obtained for research, educational, medical, or zoological reasons. In other words, labs, teaching institutions, and museums can get frogs with chytrid by permit.

Oh the horror! The shock! This regulations is common sense and does not even resemble the amphibian ban that paranoid hobbyists with persecution complexes think it does.

[Iratus ranunculus]

While I am at it, I have a general question.

Why is it that herp hobbyists in general seldom actually read the text of rule changes or legislation before getting into an uproar about them? People take organizations with explicit political agendas at their word that legislation or regulations amount to a ban but never actually read the text that is being objected to. It is really funny when someone puts their foot in their mouth in that respect.

[froghobbiest]

Well this is the first time I read something like this and I see alot of good points but ima put it like this; as with anything else they ban or make illegal people are still going to find a way to do it no matter what only to get rid of it years later. For example marijuana is illegal yet in some state its becoming legal..why?Ive witnessed first hand what it could do to your brain an ima be honest I use to smoke it but not no more. Anyway to pass this (in my opinion) is a waste of time. Im upfor making the world better but some things are pointless unless they really tend to enforce this to the full extent.

[Kurt]

Why is it that herp hobbyists in general seldom actually read the text of rule changes or legislation before getting into an uproar about them?

I think its people in general. Just look at the big uproar over Healthcare reform. The right had a lot of people so scared over it. Did any one of these scared, paranoid people actually read it? Probably not, its too long to read, so they listened to the pundits and got angry.
I have read the proposal and I agree with it, so does Frank Indiviglio. Spot testing needs to be done on imports. Not every frog needs to be tested, just a few from each shipment. There is no need at this point to panic or get paranoid.