i would like to hears peoples opinions on this. after looking at their 2010 financial report and seeing that $12,000 was spent on hotels and $150,000 lobbying i think they are not what they say they are. usark tells us they are fighting for us yet they write legislation for other peoples states and at the same time ask us for money so they can keep fighting for our rights to keep these animals.
i am of the opinion that usark is a special interest lobbying group masquerading as the industries savior. they are pushing their legislation that will destroy the venomous big snakes and croc part of the reptile industry. and their calling it bmp's. and saying its for the good of the animals. yet they dont want bmp's for all reptiles and amphibians. just the one that they want your state authorities monitor and control.
i challenge usark to come on here and discuss this issue.
also i believe usark has duped the reptile industry into thinking they represent us as a whole, when really they are just a lobbying group pushing the agenda of their big backers. namely the people they are not representing are the breeders of venomous big snakes and croc.
if you read the legislation andrew wyatt wrote for his state NC and you really think about it you will see that it is ban of sorts and will shut down the venomous big snake and croc people.
if you read it you will see that their bmp's only apply to the venomous big snakes and crocs, and yet they try to act like their only doing it for the animals sake.
heres a link to their model legislation that they put in place in NC and recommend for your state.
http://usark.org/uploads/USARK%20Model%20Reptiles.pdf
what gives usark aka andrew wyatt the right to write legislation for other peoples sates and not ask them
what gives then the right to come into other peoples states and sit down with your legislators with out first sitting down with you
where did andrew wyatt come from? who ever heard of him before usark? who ever bought a animal from him? who ever saw him at a show selling animals he produced?
i really think people were so worried about the legislation that was popping up and when usark showed up people put their faith in then without asking any question. and keep in mind how much of this legislation did you see before usark and how much more have you seen since they have been around
there model legislation is a ban.
their model legislation give the police or animal control the right to come into your house and take your animals on an impending violation.
their model legislation makes it illegal to even ask someone if they want to hold one of your animals if said animals are on their list.
please read their model legislation and really think about it.
lets take a look at what some of it says
Regulation of Certain Reptiles.
§ I Mishandling of reptiles declared public nuisance and criminal
offense.
The intentional or negligent exposure of other human beings or the
environment to unsafe contact with reptiles that are venomous, with large
constricting snakes, or with crocodilians being potentially injurious and
detrimental to public health, safety and welfare, and the environment, the
indulgence in and inducement to such exposure is hereby declared to be a
public nuisance and a criminal offense, to be abated and punished as
provided in this Article.
so the intentional or negligent exposure to unsafe contact with venomous, big snakes and crocs.
who is to determine what is unsafe and if it is to be determined by the result of what happens if you let some one hold your animal and they get hurt, it would be by default considered negligence on your part. since if you never let the person hold you snake they would have never got hurt in the first place. so you see in every instance of owner ship you will be held accountable for any accident that may happen. and how the law is written you are not allowed to expose people to the animals on the list. even if its of the other persons own volition to take the risk of handling the animal on said list that are owned by someone else the owner will be held accountable by the courts.
see any and all cases where someone gets hurt the courts will automatically consider it negligence on the owners part, because if there was no negligence involved no one would have got hurt.
so you can never expose people to the animals on the list with out the possibility of getting arrested
§ III Regulation of ownership of large constricting snakes.
As used in this Article, large constricting snakes shall mean: Reticulated
Python, Python reticulatus; Burmese Python, Python molurus; African Rock
Python, Python sebae; Amethystine Python, Morelia amethistina and Green
Anaconda, Eunectes murinus or any of their subspecies or hybrids. It shall
be unlawful for any person to own, possess, use, transport or traffic in any of
the large constricting snakes that are not housed in a sturdy and secure
enclosure. Permanent enclosures shall be designed to be escape proof and
shall have an operable lock. Each enclosure shall be labeled clearly and
visibly with the scientific name, common name, and owners identifying
information. Transport containers shall be designed to be escape proof. A
written safety protocol and escape recovery plan must be within sight of
permanent housing and a copy must accompany the transport of any of the
large constricting snakes. In the event of an escape of a large constricting
snake, the owner or possessor of the large constricting snake shall
immediately notify local law enforcement.
In the event of an escape of a large constricting
snake, the owner or possessor of the large constricting snake shall
immediately notify local law enforcement.
so if one of your babies gets out you must by law call local law enforcement
now keep in mind under this law you must by law be using escape proof cages and containers. so if one gets out you must be in violation of the law since if you wernt your animal would never had escaped in the first place. and your first order of business if is by law to call the cops and tell them you just broke the law. which will just be more chargers for them to hit you with
§ V Prohibited handling of reptiles or suggesting or inducing others to
handle.
It shall be unlawful for any person to intentionally mishandle any reptile
of a species named in this Article in a way or manner that intentionally or
negligently exposes another individual to unsafe contact with such reptile. It
shall also be unlawful for any person to intentionally suggest, entice, invite,
challenge, intimidate, exhort or otherwise induce or aid any person to handle
or expose himself to any reptile of a species named in this Article in a way
or manner that intentionally or negligently exposes another individual to
unsafe contact with such reptile. Safe and responsible handling of reptiles
for purposes of animal husbandry, training, transport, exhibition and
education is permitted.
this one pretty much is the same as the first one i talked about.
one thing you mite want to ask your self is why arnt there any laws for mishandling reptiles not on the list. couldnt you let a little kid hold a ball python and get bite in the eye and lose their eye.
look at this part
It shall be unlawful for any person to intentionally mishandle any reptile
of a species named in this Article in a way or manner that intentionally or
negligently exposes another individual to unsafe contact with such reptile. It
shall also be unlawful for any person to intentionally suggest, entice, invite,
challenge, intimidate, exhort or otherwise induce or aid any person to handle
or expose himself to any reptile of a species named in this Article in a way
or manner that intentionally or negligently exposes another individual to
unsafe contact with such reptile.
keep in mind what they are saying. its unlawful for a person to even expose someone to listed animals. and they also say unsafe contact. not unsafe contact and someone gets hurt just unsafe contact. and it list all said species. and what is meant by unsafe contact and who decides whats unsafe
§ VI Investigation of suspected violations; seizure and examination of
reptiles; disposition of reptiles.
In any case in which any law-enforcement officer or animal control officer
has probable cause under the law to believe that any of the provisions of this
Article have been violated, it shall be the duty of such officer and he is
hereby authorized, empowered, and directed to immediately investigate such
violation or impending violation and to forthwith seize the reptile or reptiles
involved, and all such officers are hereby authorized and directed to deliver
such reptiles to the State Department of Natural Resources or to its
designated representative for examination for the purpose of ascertaining
whether said reptiles are a venomous reptile, large constricting snake or
crocodilian subject to this Article. If the North Carolina State Museum of
Natural Sciences or its designated representative finds that said reptile is a
venomous reptile, large constricting snake or crocodilian subject to this
Article, the Department of Natural Resources or its designated representative
shall be empowered to determine final disposition of said reptiles in a
manner consistent with the safety of the public; but if the Museum or its
designated representative find that the reptile is not a venomous reptile,
large constricting snake or crocodilian subject to this Article and either no
criminal warrants or indictments are initiated in connection with the reptile
within 10 days of initial seizure, or a court of law determines that such
reptile is not being owned, possessed, used, transported or trafficked in
violation of this Article, then it shall be the duty of such officers to return
said reptiles to the person from whom they were seized within five days.
this is what bothers me the most
In any case in which any law-enforcement officer or animal control officer
has probable cause under the law to believe that any of the provisions of this
Article have been violated, it shall be the duty of such officer and he is
hereby authorized, empowered, and directed to immediately investigate such
violation or impending violation and to forthwith seize the reptile or reptiles
involved, and all such officers are hereby authorized and directed to deliver
such reptiles to the State Department of Natural Resources or to its
designated representative for examination for the purpose of ascertaining
whether said reptiles are a venomous reptile, large constricting snake or
crocodilian subject to this Article.
usark wants to allow law enforcement to come into your house and take your private property( your animals) on a impending violation. the same people that it inherently states cant even identify your animals has the right to take them.
is usark scamming the reptile industry
Linear Mode
