is usark over stepping its rights by proposing rules for states without asking us

If you speak with usark about what I'm saying and remind them they are welcome to come on here and discuss these issues. ...I would love to see Gary Bagnal on here so I can publicly ask him why he ignored all my phone calls . Would never speak to me or return any of my calls when I was tying to talk to him about wyatt lying to my state and taking donations under false pretenses. ...I guess unless you're a personal friend of Bagnal and wyatt tells everyone you rape babies Bagnal just doesn't care. ....even when the laws being broken and money is being stolen from the same industry he claims to be fighting to protect

Originally Posted by rodneynboalich

How usarks lawsuit is set trying to save interstate transportation it will.if usark wins basically undo all Fws listing prior to the lawsuit being won in terms of Fws authority to prohibite interstate transportation. ..I doubt a judge will want to do that....As for the other issues. ..usark in its earlier fight with the ban was based around lobbying to stop the bill with no actual fight or preparation for a fight.... As for proof of thinks like wyatt wasteful spending you simply have.to look at usarks d financial statements. ...As for wyatts lying you just have to look at something like wyatts nonsense about PA bills that were amendments to titles that reptiles aren't covered under... and taking donations to fight them under the guise that the could affect reptiles... this kind of stuff happened throughout wyatts reign...and when the usark board was told and confronted the ignored it every time.......the second hr511 hearing wyatt set up and told everyone it was a serious threat....it was a way for him to ask for donations and seem victorious...when he was simple putting out a fire he start....and usarks board stood by and did nothing. .....Usarks way for so called fighting is what gave Fws the perfect opportunity to go the executive order rout which they can do under executive order 13112 which was signed into law in 1999.......the thing is I won't make any sense to you if 1 you don't know usarks history. .2 you don't understand how legislation works..3 or understand the implications and ramifications of fighting bills in bans in a passive aggressive manner which intentions don't extend pass simply block legislation from passing. ..instead of attack the legitimacy of the bills themselves. ...without doing that usark has ended up in the situation they're in.... because usark has never really attacked the science of Fws and focused on interpretation of 18 42 and 43 and the limitations of enforcement now usark has to get a judge to basically undo the lacey act...which the entire government will fight to protect. .....

Originally Posted by rodneynboalich

How usarks lawsuit is set trying to save interstate transportation it will.if usark wins basically undo all Fws listing prior to the lawsuit being won in terms of Fws authority to prohibite interstate transportation. ..I doubt a judge will want to do that....

You don't have proof they will do that. You don't offer a different opinion on it. How would you fight the rules?

Originally Posted by rodneynboalich

As for the other issues. ..usark in its earlier fight with the ban was based around lobbying to stop the bill with no actual fight or preparation for a fight.... As for proof of thinks like wyatt wasteful spending you simply have.to look at usarks d financial statements.

When you don't have a defendant and you want to save millions of dollars, you lobby. Lobbying can cost thousands of dollars. Lawsuits will cost millions. He seems to have tried to pick the low laying fruit first. When that did not work, he went higher up the tree.

I did look at the financial statement. I can not see anything that come be considered wasteful. Remember people give money to USARK for them to try to change laws. They are trying.

Originally Posted by rodneynboalich

.As for wyatts lying you just have to look at something like wyatts nonsense about PA bills that were amendments to titles that reptiles aren't covered under... and taking donations to fight them under the guise that the could affect reptiles... this kind of stuff happened throughout wyatts reign...and when the usark board was told and confronted the ignored it every time

I looked into the PA bills, there is not many. Both of them seemed to have failed after USARK said they where bad bills. There where bad bills. I don't see one place where USARK lied. Care to quote or link to the lies?

Originally Posted by rodneynboalich

the second hr511 hearing wyatt set up and told everyone it was a serious threat....it was a way for him to ask for donations and seem victorious...when he was simple putting out a fire he start....and usarks board stood by and did nothing. .....

It was a bad bill. Every bill could pass. The only way for lawmakers to know what the people want is lobbying. USARK lobbied against the bill, it failed. Mission accomplished. Do you think that if someone should win the fight they don't deserve money for trying?

Originally Posted by rodneynboalich

Usarks way for so called fighting is what gave Fws the perfect opportunity to go the executive order rout which they can do under executive order 13112 which was signed into law in 1999.......the thing is I won't make any sense to you if 1 you don't know usarks history.

You can not sue over an executive order. Sorry. Just not the way the world works. You have to find the defendant that was harmed by the order. You have to get it time to effect person. Sorry. Just the way the system works. USARK, you, or me could not do a thing until they use the order to make a law that harmed someone.

Originally Posted by rodneynboalich

2 you don't understand how legislation works..

You are insulting me. The quickest way to tell if someone does not have a good argument is they insult. I completely understand how the legal system and legislation works. If you want to have a conversation about this you will stop insulting.

Originally Posted by rodneynboalich

.3 or understand the implications and ramifications of fighting bills in bans in a passive aggressive manner which intentions don't extend pass simply block legislation from passing.

Two things. You are not telling the truth.

1.) The NRA (one of the greatest lobbying groups in the world) spends most of its time and money blocking legislation. They are passive aggressive and openly aggressive. Blocking a bill from passing cost thousands of dollars. Suing to over turn laws cost millions.

2.) They are actually suing the government. So the above statement is a complete lie. If you point out specficiely where USARK lied, I will call them a liar too. But I will not let you lie because you think they do.

Originally Posted by rodneynboalich

instead of attack the legitimacy of the bills themselves. ...without doing that usark has ended up in the situation they're in.... because usark has never really attacked the science of Fws and focused on interpretation of 18 42 and 43 and the limitations of enforcement now usark has to get a judge to basically undo the lacey act...which the entire government will fight to protect. .

You are really confused right here. Laws are not about right or wrong, good or bad. Laws are about legal and illegal.

Here again, you are lying. USARK is suing if the government has the right to enforce a law created for international importation to interstate transportation. The legitimacy of the bill is what they are suing over. If the bill is legal or illegal.

Laws and courts could careless about what is right or wrong, good or bad science. Most laws get past because someone feels that it could effect someone maybe.

When you go to court you have to prove three things.

1.) The actions of the defendant was illegal. USARK is arguing you can not ban interstate transport with a bill that only regulates international importation.

2.) The actions of the defendant harmed someone in the united states. USARK has several people claiming they lost their pets or clients because of the rule change.

3.) The actions of the defendant does not serve the public good. USARK is arguing that the constrictor rule fixes a non issue.


If you don't have those three things, you can not win. USARK has those three things. They are arguing about the legality of the, because the courts only care if the rule is legal or illegal.

I have no idea what USARK has done to you. But they are not scamming anyone.

If you have proof of this, please post it.

Gary B. Is one of the most easy going straight up guys around. He is still to this day in the hobby for the love of his animals. if people don't like the way things are handled then throw down 6 figures and start your own organization. Usark does nothing that anyone else can't do. You have the same rights and opportunity to voice opinions lobby and fight the power! Wyatt is gone so we should all move forward just as usark has. Gary is not the king of usark. There is a board and they all get a voice and vote. If Gary's voice and opinion has more weight than the others( not saying it does) well I guess that's just the way things work. Money talks and bs walks. Like I said I will defend Garys character on here. He's a good guy. He is so humble most people wouldn't even know who he is if they saw him at a reptile show. He's the guy looking at some cool salamander on someone's table with a big smile on his face enjoying his day hanging around a bunch of herps. I get tired of folks attacking him. Trust me ,the owner of zoomed has a lot to loose if our hobby/ industry goes down. So he definitely has a dog in this fight, more than most.Not everything can be a perfect win. But usark is doing good things and we would be worse off without them.

Ok I'll try answer all of that....1. Fws claims to be able to restrict interstate transportation via 18 usc 42 and 43....and have already listed animals and restricted interstate transportation under the claim the 18 usc 42 and 43 gives them authorization to do so....so if usark wins On that basis that 18 usc 42 and 43 doesn't authorize Fws to ban interstate transportation of animals added to the lacey act under an invasive listing then it means that the law has been interpreted as such by the court...meaning All invasive listed animals will be able to cross state lines again and anyone find or jailed for violating the interstate transportation aspect of the previously listed animals will immediately have an appeal and will win. And will also leave Fws and lacey act with no jurisdiction in interstate transportation....

Gary Bagnal owns usarks. He bought it from wyatt for around 200000 and is the head of the board and is usarks largest financial contributor....so I think it's safe to say Gary Bagnal is the king of usark

2 as for the lobbying issue. .. wyatt was paying off senators to hold the python ban bill and not sign it so when the session would end the bill would die. ..wyatt wasn't lobbying to change the government's mind about the python issues he was just finding senators for hire....and while usark was paying off senators the went putting a lawsuit together or hiring herpetologist to put together data to show that the Pythons weren't invasive. ...As for wasteful spending... if you think wyatt spending 20000 staying in the star hotels is a responsible use of donations we have a very different opinion wasteful. .

3.... pa bills don't fail because usarks says they're bad...they fail because the people that would enforce them the pa fish and boat commission don't support them. ..As for wyatts dealing in PA bills you have to go back to 2011 12 and 13...pa doesn't have any bills right now that can effect reptiles

4....hr511 could not have passed there was 30 days left in the session and the both the sponsor of the bill and the fws no longer supported it because of the knowing clause that was added to it in February of that year when it was in the house judiciary committee. For that bill to pass in the 30 days left it would to pass from the hnr subcommittee to hnr full committee pass out of that then into the Senate where it would have to go through that whole process again in the Senate and then to the president to be signed into law....it wasn't possible with on one supporting it ...wyatt set up the Second hr511 hearing to create a false victory

5 you can sue over and executive order especially if it's dealing with constitutionality issues that said executive order May or does violate..you can sue over anything. ..there's 2 ways that the Pythons could be added to the lacey act..legislative ly or via executive order. ..executive order 13112 was put in place to do invasive listing when bills that would do the same where getting held up in the legislative process. ..which paying senators to hold a bill til the end of the session so it dies is exactly what 13112 was put into place to circumvent. ...and also a bill doesn't have to be given time to do harm that's why we have temporary restraining orders. And injunctions. ..to avoid the harm

6...you clearly don't understand how legislation works. ..or you wouldn't say things like usark said pa bill were bad and they didn't go anywhere. ....or when you don't understand how is a laws legal interpretation decides that jurisdiction of restrictions on interstate commerce is non existent then any and all laws formed under the false claims of jurisdiction and prosecutions for violations of said laws will basically be destroyed because the laws never were legally enforceable. ..or when you support usark hr511 hearing you really dont understand the legislative process. . If you did you would see how much damage it did and how it was just what Fws needed to have an excuse to move forward with executive order. ...