Action needed by all exotic keepers!

[JeffreH]

Please follow this link and take 10 minutes to do your part to save the hobby. Deadline for public comment is February 21st!
2014: Cat Ex Action Alert (Deadline 2/21/14) | USARK


Categorical Exclusion is the single greatest threat to the exotic hobby that we have ever faced. It will directly effect the keeping of reptiles, amphibians, aves, fish, and mammals. Under Categorical Exlcusion (Cat Ex) the USFWS will have the power to add species as injurious wildlife to the Lacey Act without due process of law and without ANY scientific founding! You will not be allowed to cross state lines with your pet. The entire exotic industry will be forever crippled. It is not enough to sit back and pretend to be compassionate about the animals you care for... take 10 minutes and act!

ALL amphibians are at risk due to the rapid decline of many species across the globe and the spread of Chytrid Fungus.

ACTION ALERT: Cat Ex
Deadline is 2/21/14

Now is the time to be LOUD! This affects the entire exotic pet community and needs to be shared. Keepers of fish, birds, small mammals, reptiles, amphibians, invertebrates, etc. should all be involved. This rule would allow USFWS to add species as injurious (making importation, interstate commerce and interstate transportation illegal) without full due process afforded under the law. Any species listed could disappear from the pet community. Spread this information to all exotic pet owners and protect your freedoms.

The U.S. Government needs to hear your voices! Remember to be civil and professional in any correspondence. This “Categorical Exclusion” would make USFWS exempt from NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) requirements. Note: This is a new comment submission format, so comment even if you have previously.

You can view the Action Alert with 4 steps on how to support your herp and exotic pet community at www.usark.org/action-alert/usfws-categorical-exclusion-2/.

You can read about USARK's involvement with Cat Ex at www.usark.org/uncategorized/catex-update-and-usark-in-d-c-92413/.

ACTION ALERTS: STATE LEVEL
Your legislators need to hear from you!

Wisconsin AB 703: This bill makes changes to the laws relating to the possession of certain wild animals. It impacts these reptile species: Crocodylia: an alligator of any species, crocodile of any species, caiman of any species, or gharial. View the ACTION ALERT at www.usark.org/uncategorized/2014-wisconsin-assembly-bill-703/.

West Virginia House Bill 4393: The bill seeks to form a Dangerous Wild Animal Board which will have rulemaking authority (no public input) to list any species as a “dangerous wild animal.” View the Action Alert at www.usark.org/2014-blog/2014-west-virginia-house-bill-4393/.

West Virginia Senate Bill 428: The bill seeks to form a Dangerous Wild Animal Board which will have rulemaking authority (no public input) to list any species as a “dangerous wild animal.” View the Action Alert at www.usark.org/2014-blog/2014-west-virginia-senate-bill-428/.

West Virginia Senate Bill 371: The purpose of this bill is to prohibit the possession of wild and exotic animals (including herps) through a permit system, providing rulemaking authority (no public input) to authorities. View the Action Alert at www.usark.org/2014-blog/2014-west-virginia-sb-371/.

Additional State Issues

Other 2014 proposed legislation and information can be found at www.usark.org/2014-legislation/. This includes bills in Maryland, Indiana, New Jersey, New York and Oregon. This page is updated regularly and makes it easy to follow 2014 issues.

[Mentat]

I've completed the action and it's quite an easy thing to do. Big Brother is starting to word regulations toward the snakes; but the target is to regulate, control, and eliminate the majority of exotics kept as pets . If we do not band together and act now; once the reptiles are eliminated, all that bureaucracy will look around hungrily while wondering "What other pets do we get next?"

[JeffreH]

[JeffreH]

Bump.

Only a couple of days left to your part. Everyone, please... spread the word and make your voice heard for the hobby. I don't think many people appreciate just how devastating the effects of Cat Ex can be for herpetoculture and the entire exotic trade in general...

[BlueisallIneed]

Done! For state of TX!

[Heatheranne]

Please everyone, sign the petition to help us keep our wonderful hobby.

[JeffreH]

<24 Hours left.

[Silkmoth]

How and where do I sign it? I see the part that wants a donation but I dont have the money.

[JeffreH]

Hi Silkmoth,

Follow the link below and the steps that follow. There are 4 actions you can take, 3 of which can be done online within about 5-10 minutes (Leaving public comment at regulations.gov; contacting senator; contacting fed. representative). Simply copy and paste the provided sample letter (or write your own) as instructed and sign your name. The only step that cannot be done online is the physical sending of a letter.

2014: Cat Ex Action Alert (Deadline 2/21/14) | USARK

I will paste the info from USARK's website from the link below:

_____
2014: Cat Ex Action Alert (Deadline 2/21/14)

Note: This is a new comment submission format, so comment even if you have previously.In response to the USFWS proposal to allow a “Categorical Exclusion” from NEPA requirements: This rule would allow USFWS to add species as injurious (making importation, interstate commerce and interstate transportation illegal) without full due process afforded under the law. This affects reptiles, amphibians, fish, birds, small mammals and a huge portion of the pet industry. Any species listed would disappear from the pet community. Spread the information and protect your rights. Remember to be civil and professional in any correspondence. View the reopening announcement in the Federal Register at http://usark.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/FWS-HQ-FAC-2013-0118-0005.pdf.
You can also view additional USARK information and previous action concerning Cat Ex at www.usark.org/uncategorized/catex-update-and-usark-in-d-c-92413/.

How You Can Help (Deadline extended to February 21, 2014)It is most effective to do all 4 steps below

1. Copy and paste the subject line and sample letter below (or edit) and complete the form at www.regulations.gov/#!submitComment;D=FWS-HQ-FAC-2013-0118-0005.


2. You can mail a letter to USFWS. Just print the letter at http://usark.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Dear-Interior-Secretary-Jewell.pdf. Be sure to sign it and print your name and address at the bottom (you may include your email address and phone number if desired). Also, write the date in the upper right. The mailing address is below. Write “NO to CatEx” on the envelope.
Public Comments ProcessingAttn: Docket No. FWS–HQ–FAC–2013–0118Division of Policy and Directives ManagementU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS–2042–PDMArlington, VA 22203

3. Contact your Senator: Simply click the link and then “Choose a State.” Click on your Senator’s contact link and you will be provided with a contact form and contact information for your two state Senators. Copy and paste the letter and subject title below and send it. http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm


4. Contact your federal Representative: Simply click the link and enter your zip code. You will see your Representative’s information (you may need to narrow search with your address). You will see a small envelope next to your Representative’s picture that you can click to send an email (or you may visit the Representative’s website provided). Simply copy and paste the subject title and sample letter below and send it: http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/
__________________________________________________ ________________________________________

Sample Letter

Subject: NO to USFWS Categorical Exclusion
Sample letter below:
I write today to oppose the Service’s proposed categorical exclusion from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for proposed listing of species as injurious under the Lacey Act.
As a reptile hobbyist, I am overwhelmingly troubled over the impact that listing certain species of snakes and other species commonly held in the reptile trade in the United States will have on my pets, as well as the livelihoods and small businesses of others in the reptile segment of the pet industry. The United States Association of Reptile Keepers (USARK) and others have conducted extensive research and due diligence. They have provided economic impact data and sound science to USFWS to refute many of the findings and concerns raised in the initial proposals. These concerns included the possible violation of NEPA requirements.
Specifically, USFWS ignored important scientific findings that contradicted its pre-determined outcome. State fish and wildlife agencies, research institutions, conservationists, zoos, public educators and even other federal government scientists raised important conservation concerns. Although such concerns are at the heart of NEPA, these were unlawfully ignored. The Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA), Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC) and many other reputable organizations oppose this categorical exclusion.
I, therefore, object to the Service’s last minute effort to remove the NEPA protections that are afforded to citizens under the law to prevent the implementation of an onerous rule that will impact the freedom of Americans to enjoy reptiles as pets and own reptile-related businesses while failing to address the potential negative environmental impacts of the rule.
I believe that the listing of these snakes, and any other species without due process, is unwarranted and infringes on our rights to engage in an activity that we enjoy and that poses no threat to the environment. The proposed exclusion from NEPA just adds insult to injury in denying American citizens the due process the law affords to challenge the impact of the proposed rule.
As a citizen of America, the land of the free, my freedom to own reptiles and amphibians as pets has been under attack for several years. These attacks have caused great hardship to myself, my family, my friends who own reptile-related businesses and the economy of the United States. By allowing this rule, the FWS would have overreaching power to severely affect the pet reptile community further. I implore you to not allow this exclusion as it is only one more step toward destroying a $1.4 billion industry and my freedom to enjoy my beloved pet reptiles, along with over five million other families.


Sincerely,
Your name, address, contact info, etc.

[Bombina Bob]

Just filled it out, I did not see this coming! thank you so much Grif the great who referred me to this post!

[Heatheranne]

Hey Jeff,

I don't think people realize the scope of it. I'm praying my sending it all over my bunch of fb groups might help a little. At least we're trying. I'm still crossing my fingers. I know the big breeders and vendors know too. Last year I sent out many letters. They have been following closely. I even sent out letters to the bigger companies like Exo terra, Zoo med, Zilla, Foster and Smith, Black Jungle, Josh's, NE Herp, Mike Novy...etc. I sent out lots. Took 2 or 3 days.

[deranged chipmunk]

I mentioned it on my radio show last night. So there are 2 more people informed we can only do our best to put the info out there. And you guys have.

[flybyferns]

Luckily there has been information posted on every frog/ forum ( that I know of ) as well.
Hopefully all of this effort has had a bigger impact then we think ?
We can only hope.

[WorldClassFrogCoddler]

I didn't see this until it was too late...

When will we find out how this will impact us, and what can we do now that the deadline is passed?

That stuff in West Virginia looks especially sinister.

Thanks guys for doing your best! Sorry I didn't see this sooner.

[MsBlueRose]

I wish I had joined the FF sooner... I had no idea this was taking place. I am trying to find more information on how it turned out. Is there any word yet as to what happened with this?

[JeffreH]

Here is the latest updated from last month (March 19, 2014) via USARK's website:
3.19.14 FWS Reply to USARK Opposition

By USARK on March 19, 2014
FWS has filed their reply to support their motion to dismiss USARK’s complaint. Below is a summary, as well as what will happen next. The reply can be found at www.usark.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/3.19.14-FWS-Reply-Dkt_17_Governments_Reply_re_MtD.pdf.
Lacey Act Claim, Arbitrary and Capricious (Count 4)
The government has backed off its contention that USARK lacks standing under the Lacey Act. All FWS now states is that USARK’s complaint must be amended to add the words “Lacey Act” to Count 4.
Lacey Act Ultra Vires Claim (Count 1)
In terms of Count I, the ultra vires challenge to FWS’ prohibition on interstate transportation and commerce of the listed snakes, the government continues to insist that the claim is barred by the six-year statute of limitations. Importantly, FWS only addresses the question of whether the challenge to its substitution of the word “transportation” for Lacey Act’s term “shipment” is timely. On that issue, there are good arguments on both sides. It is thus impossible to predict how the court will decide this question.
More importantly, FWS fails to address the Count 1 argument that neither the Lacey Act nor its regulations bar interstate transport and commerce among the continental states. In 1966 and today, its regulation simply copies the words of the statute. Because the regulation echoes the language of the law, the government cannot claim to have issued an interpretative rule in 1966 or since. FWS’ failure to make any case that USARK is barred from raising this claim should mean that it waives this argument and Count 1 should go forward, at least on this question.
NEPA Claims (Counts 2 and 3)
The government hits very hard on NEPA standing, perhaps due to the weak legal defense it has to these claims. FWS dedicates half of its reply arguing that USARK and its members lack “prudential” standing under NEPA. Our assessment is that USARK alleged sufficient environmental injury to get past the pleading stage.
The government’s argument is that NEPA’s concern is for what it refers to as the “natural or physical” environment, by which it seems to mean land and air, and not animals themselves. Mixed in the brief is the inference that USARK’s members are only concerned with captive, as opposed to, wild snakes. (For example, on page 6: “Simply put, captive snakes are not a part of the ‘natural and physical environment’ contemplated by NEPA.”) The first principle is not supported by case law. The government has simply stretched a general statement about NEPA’s purpose far beyond what it will bear. The second is flatly contradicted by USARK’s specific allegations regarding the purpose of developing captive breeding techniques.
When convenient, FWS also combines allegations of economic interests and injury with claims relating to environmental interests. For instance, in its discussion of captive breeding for conservation purposes, the brief focuses on the Indian python (which is considered “threatened” under the ESA and which FWS considers to be a “subspecies” of Burmese python). Defendants claim this is not an environmental concern because not only do USARK members have, “no intent to release [captive-bred pythons] into the wild,” but also because, “Plaintiff’s members’ captive-bred specimens would not be suitable for reintroduction.” The basis of that claim is the reference to morphs, which were discussed in the complaint and in some declarations for their economic value. In other words, these are two completely different issues.
FWS also contends that USARK’s members’ efforts to eradicate Burmese in southern Florida amounts to a concession that, “these species are non-native and invasive.” While true, it does not address the point that the listing has impeded what is clearly an environmental activity designed to preserve the Everglades ecosystem. All the government claims is that listing does not prohibit removing these snakes from the wild. It misses the central point that the ban on interstate transportation and commerce acts as both a burden and impediment to private efforts to eradicate these snakes.
FWS goes so far as to assert that USARK’s “interest in these snakes is in breeding and raising them in captivity, not maintaining a wild population of the snakes in the United States.” To be sure, the implication that USARK would have environmental interests if its purpose was to establish non-native species in the wild here in the U.S., but does not if it seeks to mitigate ecological damage from those inadvertently established, can only help.
Finally, the government contends that even if USARK’s members have environmental interests, those interests are not harmed by the rule. As a legal matter, this charge of lack of injury is not relevant to the point of prudential standing, which is all FWS claims to be arguing here. Prudential standing is a matter of showing that a plaintiff’s claims arguably fall within the “zone of interests” that NEPA protects. Injury goes to constitutional standing. Beyond that, however, we are confident that USARK has demonstrated sufficient injury to its conservation interests.
Next Steps
The government’s motion is now submitted for decision. Typically for such a consequential motion, one that puts in question whether some counts can go forward, the court holds oral argument. This is not required, however, as the judge could decide the issues on the briefs alone. Either way, the next step will be an order from the court that sets a date for argument or decides the merits. There is no time frame for issuing such an order. If Judge Sullivan wants oral argument, however, it will most likely be issued in the next few weeks.