BEWARE OF PIJAC!!!!

Originally Posted by kmurphy

IMO people need to ease up on this liar name calling. Obviously Bobby called Brian. Whether Brian actually got the message is another story. Bobby needs to stop calling Brian a liar for saying he never called, because he may not have known that he did, and Brian certainly needs to apologize for saying the Bobby was lying about the call.

But I've go another question. Why don't you just call again? I assume you want to know what's really going on instead of just rumors on a BOI thread and Brian has already said he would have accepted the call if it had been made? So call again and be done with it.

Lastly this thread should never have been started with so little to go on and resulting from a short phone message that possibly never was heard.

Those are some excellent points (for rational and thoughtful people of course!).

I can't say Brian got the message and decided to not call back, I can't say he didn't get the message either, what I can say is that you left out that one option of him getting the message which makes me wonder if you have an opinion on the matter. If you do I'd like to hear it and the reasoning behind it, I'm someone open to hearing all sides so long as they have some basis for their stance.

Nope, no hidden opinion. I honestly didn't think to the option that Brian got the message and didn't bother to call back. He may have gotten it or he may not have. Don't talk to the guy, don't know him so I couldn't say.

If anyone read into this that I think Bobby lied about the call, please rethink it. Bobby may be quick to jump sometimes but I do believe he called. Never said he didn't. If I gave that impression I apologize.

I do agree that this thread should have been started with proof of the pudding being sour. I've seen the theories of why the big boys want us gone but still no answer on how anyone thinks a $5k - $15k morph, double het , quad visual or anything of that nature would fly in a pet shop. Everything that was sold to the pet shop would have to be under a $500 price tag retail for someone to want to consider an expensive pet. Since they wouldn't be allowed to breed it, what would be the point?

The theories are there, the rumors are there but the math doesn't add up. Unless there is something I'm not seeing, its nothing but a rumor or speculation that the big boys want to slit their own throats.

Here’s a helpful link for posts about BHB: http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/foru...newthread&f=13. To the best of my knowledge Brian does not have an official position at PIJAC and isn’t the topic of this thread.

This link may also be helpful for posts about Bill Brant or the Sutherlands, the only other people named in here. I don’t post a lot here, but I’m pretty sure unnamed ‘big breeders’ isn’t going to be allowed as a topic in the BOI, and the continuing use of this phrase in this thread does nothing to add to the credibility of those posting.

I’m guessing the General Business forum would be more appropriate to discus the USDA, the federal government, the export market, whether or not it’s wrong to produce 30,000 snakes, and the unfairness of supply and demand economics.

I think that covers most of the discussion in this thread.

There seems to a misunderstanding of who makes up PIJAC. PIJAC is not a consortium of big breeders, working to crush their competitors (or customers). PIJAC members and board members represent independent store owners, nationwide retail chains, feed manufacturers, dry goods manufactures, livestock producers, and dry goods and livestock wholesalers and distributors from all facets of the pet trade, including dogs, cats, birds, small mammals, fish and herps.

Like any organization, PIJAC is interested in growing its membership. Anything that reduces competition in the market is going to hurt their membership base. Anything that gives the big box stores more of an advantage over independent stores is going to hurt their membership base. A white list will impact independent retails more than chain stores, impacting competition, and hurting a significant part of the membership base of PIJAC. If the pet trade is reduced to big box retailers and their suppliers than there isn’t much need for PIJAC. Why would they promote this? Marshall’s statements to Adam Wysoki (linked again here: http://nohr669.com/blog/?p=245) indicate that PIJAC has not changed their stance since his testimony on 4/23.

PIJAC does have some flaws, some of which have been touched on in this thread. They can certainly do a better job communicating, and they have not always been as active as many of us would like on state issues. I haven’t seen any evidence posted that would lead me to agree that ‘they are scum’ as the OP states.

Joe Hiduke

Originally Posted by BryonsBoas

The theories are there, the rumors are there but the math doesn't add up. Unless there is something I'm not seeing, its nothing but a rumor or speculation that the big boys want to slit their own throats.

I agree Bry. I have looked at this from every possible angle and almost none of it adds up. The only scenario that would make sense is IF the governments planned restrictions were so damaging that this is the only thing these "big breeders/businesses" could do to save some semblance of a business. Which if that is the case then we were all screwed either way.

I've been hesitant to reply to this thread for a few reasons... I was otherwise occupied and not online when it was started, so I'm obviously tacking this on to the end of a fairly long discussion... and I'm not Bobby's favorite person as a result of a few completely separate and old disagreements, so I didn't think anything I cared to contribute would be well received, at least by him.

I'm going to go ahead anyway, but with the disclaimer that I'm reserving to right to toss my hands in their air and stop responding at any point if I don't like the direction of the discussion.

Bobby, I'm going to be slightly critical of you here- but please understand that, on this issue, at this time, I mean it in a genuinely constructive way.

I think you may have misunderstood some of the stated intentions of PIJAC, especially those centered around the idea of internal regulation via a white-list and the ideas of widely accepted standards of care. I then think you've gotten bogged down in some- comparatively unimportant- details that stem from the discussion that ensued.

The idea of internal regulation and white listing isn't one I disagree with. I regard it a little like I regard Better Business stamps of approval- or even BOI good guy threads/certificates. It doesn't legally prevent anyone from operating without the approval of the list, it's just another source of external verification of a set of standards and practices. I'd feel comfortable buying from a business who had met the PIJAC standards for their facilities, veterinary care or animal health. It wouldn't prevent me from making purchases from people who might not breed enough animals to bother with the stamp of approval and it wouldn't make it any more difficult for me to, for example, sell anything without it- but it'd be a nice system to see put in place, it'd give me more information about some of the standards and practices of companies and businesses big enough to take such things seriously. It'd also function as a control that the general voting public... and the politicians who could slap down actual federal regulations that seriously impaired my ability to keep animals... could see the results of and feel comfortable with.

We're already on the bubble of some federal regulations that could seriously hamper the ability of the small business to deal with live animals in this country. I'm happy to see a group like PIJAC, who have long been involved in the legal side of things stepping up with a plan that says "Settle down congress, we've got this one."

That said, I also see how easily a whitelist could be confused with a blacklist. Or how someone casually reading the proposals and ideas of self-regulation could misinterpret some of that as being pro-regulation. So while I do not remotely agree with the conclusions Bobby has drawn, and think he's wrong- I can see how he may have taken a look at things and had some suspicions or questions that he wasn't seeing answers to that he liked.

Unfortunately, he also came out swinging. Throwing blind punches and outrageous, damning accusations at the people he thought were worthy targets. Without... it seems to me anyway... really taking the time to fully understand what he was attacking. Things obviously degenerated from there and now he's backed into a corner where he feels he can't back down without losing and where there's obviously a lot of bad blood between him and the folks he's attacked.

I honestly don't know if he's able to step back, admit he was wrong and apologize, knowing he probably won't get one in return. I don't think he is, since the last few pages have been a fairly stupid argument about weather or not a phone call happened... but then, nobody is really making it any easier for him to try by arguing the inconsequentials. If he does back himself up... sort things out... and maybe change his position, he can be pretty well guaranteed to be kicked in the teeth for his troubles.

I doubt it'll help any Bobby... but I for one, won't be one of the folks who straps my boots on and aims for your head if you want to try sorting this out and taking it all back down to a reasonable level. I think your heart was probably in the right place, wanting to protect the rights of the individual to keep and sell reptiles, even if I don't agree with the conclusions you drew or the actions you took as a result... and quite frankly, considering the pressures that are being put on the industry by the truly malicious groups (PETA, HSUS, various other animal rights types), I think anything even remotely connected to discussions about regulation is too important to get petty and personal over. I hope you'll reconsider your position with regards to PIJAC and I hope any future discussions about the specific proposals and bills can be a lot more civil and focused than this one has been, agree or disagree, good or bad- and I'm not just talking to Bobby with that last comment.

"Yea, that’s right, they are scum. They are selling us out, don't be fooled, they are saying yes to HR669:
http://www.pijac.org/projects/project.asp?p=28 "

This is a lie, the link goes to NRIP, which has NOTHING to do with HR669, NOTHING to do with a federal law, and NOTHING to do with restricting the ownership or sales of anyone in the US of any reptile.

How about Bobby apoligizes for saying that? Anyone who read NRIP would see it was a voluntary program, and nothing to do with laws, and was furthermore written WELL before any of the HR669 business.

In addition, in the meantime AFTER this thread was started, USARK has gotten a LAW passed in a state that DOES put restrictions(albeit extremely loose ones) on how one can keep reptiles in that state. I don't believe I heard anything public from USARK about this law THEY pushed to get passed.

I would not post a thread screaming that USARK was out to get all small reptile breeders banned just because they pushed a law through without asking each and every public forum for opinions, or input. But Bobby felt it necasary to post THIS thread, and has YET to show one iota of proof of his claims.
The only thing proved was that Bobby made a phone call to Brian. Why not show the PROOF of all the schemeing and set up of PIJAC, or BHB, and of all the other accused breeders?

It's patently ridiculous to think that somehow the big breeders will make as much money selling normals and extremely low end underpriced morphs to pet stores, as they CURRANTLY do when selling high priced morphs, hets and combos to small breeders.
I'm still awaiting the PROOF.

Originally Posted by shrap

Now I have read this type of garbage from a couple of different members. A liar is one thing Bobby Hill aint. If Bobby says he left a message then he left a message. End of story.

I never said, anywhere, that he is a liar. I said there is no proof. Those are two completely different ideas.

Originally Posted by R. Eventide

I never said, anywhere, that he is a liar. I said there is no proof. Those are two completely different ideas.

If Bobby said he called and you're saying there is no proof, then your calling Bobby a liar.

Catamount A. Lyst

Originally Posted by 11Catalyst

If Bobby said he called and you're saying there is no proof, then your calling Bobby a liar.

*sighs in futility* And I wonder why I typically avoid public message boards....