Quote:
Originally Posted by btmexotics
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.
|
I don't think I have meet this person. But I do not question the position that USARK has set for this community. If it was not for USARK we would be in a world of hurt. Being the attack dog for any industry is not easy. But they are our attack dog. And I do support them. Which is why Mr. Boalich opinions are kind of surprising.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
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....
|
Ok, lets actually look at what 18 usc 42 and 43 says. I will not quote the whole 2 pages just the part we are arguing over.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 18 USC 42
(a)
(1) The importation into the United States, any territory of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any possession of the United States, or any shipment between the continental United States, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any possession of the United States,
|
USARK is suing over the fact that the above does NOT include interstate shipments. It says you can not import into those places, but it does not state that you can not ship between states once imported.
The states inside the continental United States is not listed in the above list. USARK has a very strong case./
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
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
|
I have never met the guy. But I will say this. Some has to own something. The owner of this website. The owner of the server. The owner of your internet connection. You could own your house, your car, your own business. Does not make it all evil.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
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. .
|
If he was doing what you say he is doing, then report him to the FBI . It was 100% illegal and he, the senators, and anyone that had proof of this will go to jail for that behavior. IF you have proof of this, you need to report it. It is a federal crime to bribe senators. It is also a federal crime to know about it and not report it. You are breaking the law, if what you say is true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
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
|
You keep bringing this up, I looked, i have found a few bills that failed. USARK opposed them, they failed. I am trying to figure out where the corruption was.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
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
|
It is completely possible to pass a bill in a few hours. You don't have to do all that, you just have to agree to do all of that in the future.
And if he did set up a bill as a collection item for making money against future bills? What about it? There is no crime saying this could possibly in the future effect your rights. Fund raising during a time you know you are not going to need the money for a time you might is just good lobbying.
Claiming a false victory and getting money for the real war is not corruption.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
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
|
Show me one lawsuit over a executive order in which the actions of the order was not enforced. Take your time. You can't. If there was one, it was an invalid lawsuit. You have to wait until you have an effect of the order. You just can not sue the president of the united states until someone is directly harmed.
USARK could not sure the president in 1999, they had to wait until people where injured.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
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. ...
|
You keep insulting. And ranting. Can you proof any of this. You keep repeating yourself with out proof. Do you have proof?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
7 I'm saying you don't understand the negative impact of usarks pretend fight against the python ban on legislative level. ..not sure what you think I was saying there
|
Ok, I don't understand. Tell me? Give me any proof? Anything?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
8 we are both saying the same thing. ..not sure what you're not understanding there...I know why usark is suing and it's based on their claim that 18 42 and 43 doesn't authorize Fws to ban interstate transportation. .......but it is this approach which will lead to a much bigger fight then anyone realizes
|
What bigger fight? What do you think is going to happen? You are screaming impending doom, with out actually tell us what the doom is.
You clearly have a personal problem with USARK. I just don't understand why.
Linear Mode
