Info Seeking Advice on Dan Scolardo

[Seamus Haley]

Doesn't the Lacey Act require the scientific name of the species to be on the outside of the box?

Or easily accessible on a packing slip or inventoried list specific to the total shipment. Common name, nomenclature and number.

Either written on the box itself or an invoice stuck to the outside of the box or the very top contents of a box that's labeled as containing the invoice- with everything clearly marked as having live animals inside it.

"Perishable" or "Handle with Care" are insufficient by themselves in order to be compliant. Mislabeling- for instance labeling whatever you are sending as being something it is not; i.e. shipping a snake or crocodilian and labeling it as a turtle is also a definite violation.

All that said, I don't know of anyone who has been prosecuted solely for Lacey Act labeling violations, it seems to be much the same as seatbelt laws when it comes to enforcement, it's an extra charge tacked on to a list when someone is caught doing something else. A far more common result of Lacey Act violations is the seizure and destruction of the animals in question without additional prosecution.

It is a federal law though and regardless of the chances of being caught, it should be followed. Dan broke the law by not labeling this package and sending it across state lines. Jerry continues to endorse breaking this law in his posts on this thread. It's an unethical and illegal practice that they should both be condemned for.

And somehow I remain unswayed by the "Everybody else is doing it!" validation that's being throw out there as an argument for mislabeled shipments.

 

[KNOBTAIL]

Give me a break

"Jerry continues to endorse breaking this law in his posts on this thread."
Haley, your a fool! .. I seriously doubt that the federal authorities would consider this a federal violation because the package was not listed with the contents...

Maybe via airlines I can see the necessity, but through the postal system or other methods of delivery such as private carriers, whether one should label it "Pythons" as opposed to Live Animals really should be at the discretion of the shipper.

Incidentally, I dont endorse breaking any law. You are just attempting to bait me into an argument .... Thats not going to work ! Your argument is ridiculous and I know of no one ever being indited by the federal govt on that charge.... Your a fool..

 

[rosebud945]

Your argument is ridiculous and I know of no one ever being indited by the federal govt on that charge.... Your a fool..

You seem to be missing Seamus' point. He stated that it is rarely enforced, ie, the feds rarely INDICT people for this violation, but that does not mean that it isn't a law or that breaking it is okay.

Jerry, I am kinda new to this forum, relatively speaking, but are you a buddy of Dan's?

 

[NeoReptiliac]

What I don't think you realize is the severity of what he has done and may have done with every thing he has ever shipped. Imagine this, if he ships a 15 inch long caiman in a snake bag across the state line, with a carrier that strictly told me very clearly over the phone they do not allow such a thing, and he does it with out marking the box in any way - then what makes you think he wouldn't ship something else the same way just to save a buck? Something that perhaps would be classified as a dangerous species. Like a venomous snake for example? I wouldn't put it past him doing so for a second. It's very likely he might have already done this more then once. And if perchance a venomous snake got out during the shipment and injured someone then that could be a huge problem.
If people keep over looking this sort of behavior from people like him then they might as well be doing the shipping themselves. Breaking the law is breaking the law. And you can not justify it just cause you don't find it to be fair.

 

[KNOBTAIL]

Rosebud

I think YOU seem to be missing the point: Here is the quote from Haley : "Jerry continues to endorse breaking this law in his posts on this thread" I endorse nothing ! Enough said on that topic ! If the authorities wanted to , they could do allot of things much worse to this industry then concern themselves with box labeling... Sometimes its better to let sleeping dogs lie then to open a can of worms. More shippers use a non discript method of shipping with the LEAST amount of awareness being brought on there shipments... So lets move on from this ridiculous topic that only Haley would bring up because he has nothing worthwile to contribute...

NO I am not a buddy of Dan. I met him once, thats it.. But my posts are not based on Dan but rather the content, and in trying to understand what had actually transpired, I sent Dan an email asking for any correspondence that may have occurred, and I posted it here.... You make up your own mind... The buyer was by evidence happy once the Caiman arrived... That for the final time: fulfills Dans obligation. Thats it, and why you cannot understand that is beyond me..

Its a no brainer... Had NeoReptiliac been a bit more mature in dealing with Dan or anyone else, I think the outcome would have benefited him.. Instead he chose to intimidate the seller by threatning to notify the world . Now the buyer is crying pity. !!! Now Dan is the culprit.

Its a bad way to do business. Its very apparent that he does not know how to resolve a situation with reason instead of emotion... His lost ! If Dan is reading this message I hope you do nothing to help these people, as there intentions are far from honorable .

 

[Seamus Haley]

"Jerry continues to endorse breaking this law in his posts on this thread."
Haley, your a fool! .. I seriously doubt that the federal authorities would consider this a federal violation because the package was not listed with the contents...

Oh, it was definitely a violation of federal law. The question isn't really about the violation- which is clear and obvious, it's one of what is done about it.

It's still a crime, even if the perpetrator doesn't get caught and even if the individuals responsible for detection and enforcement don't detect and enforce every incident.

Maybe via airlines I can see the necessity, but through the postal system or other methods of delivery such as private carriers, whether one should label it "Pythons" as opposed to Live Animals really should be at the discretion of the shipper.

It's not the shipper's discretion. It's a federal law... you don't get to pick and choose which ones apply.

Incidentally, I dont endorse breaking any law. You are just attempting to bait me into an argument .... Thats not going to work ! Your argument is ridiculous and I know of no one ever being indited by the federal govt on that charge.... Your a fool..

You have made several posts that endorse the idea of incorrect, incomplete and non-compliant labeling on packages being shipped across state lines. The action you have promulgated and put up as being something you consider positive is a violation of the Lacey Act, a federal law. Aristotle's Logic; if A = B and C is an A, then C is a B. Incomplete labeling is a violation of federal law. You endorse incomplete labeling. You endorse a violation of federal law.

 

[spawn]

If people keep over looking this sort of behavior from people like him then they might as well be doing the shipping themselves. Breaking the law is breaking the law. And you can not justify it just cause you don't find it to be fair.

Nice. So you're an industry whistleblower? Quite convenient that you're only following up on the one person (Dan) that you did business with, rather than going after all the people in the industry that don't label their packages with the actual animal names (like say, the majority?) etc. etc.

Karl, just admit you're going through with this 1) not because you have a sweet moral obligation to protect shipping employees from venomous animals; 2) not because you were screwed by an easily avoidable BOI quick-read; 3) but because you [or your wife] made a BOI topic about a caiman that died and posted a long dramatic story about how your wife loves caimans and blah blah blah she told the seller through email it looked good and everything was alright but THEN it died...

This isn't even passable as saving face. You're just straight-up trying to detriment Dan's business because your caiman died and there's nothing you can do about it. I call your BS because you make blanket statements like this and try to smokescreen your real motives:

What I don't think you realize is the severity of what he has done and may have done with every thing he has ever shipped.

Wow...real freaking insightful. Take a hint: read some of the old Scolaro threads and you'll see he doesn't have many fans, including me. But this is far from helpful. I have yet to see you admit that the possibility that you bought a WC animal could be the downfall of your deal with Dan. Dan MUST have known right?

Dan himself even said "everything appeared to be well with the caiman" Appear is the key word there. He likely knew something was wrong with it. There is no telling how long it was not eating or ill in his care before he sent it to us.

Holy crap Dick Tracy! It's almost as if Dan purposefully avoided bringing the animal to the vet so that its health status would remain ambiguous until it hit the customer's hands and would die shortly therein so that Dan could solidify a profit within his terms of service without being off the hook. He probably has a time-line algorithm calculated for every WC animal he brings into his care so that they stay alive long enough for him to make a sale but then expire after 4 days of being in his customers' care, right?

You're right though - there's no telling how long it was in his care. My guess is a short time though, because it wasn't eating, and dumping non eating specimens on customers is stupid from any business standpoint - especially someone who needs to make sales to continue to living since being banned from defending himself on this website.

Your logic is analagous to saying this rock in my hands keeps bears away from our city. Why you ask?? Well, do you see any bears? Because we don't know if it actually does anything, there's nothing saying it DOESN'T keep bears away.

Sorry Karl - don't buy it.

 

[Seamus Haley]

Your logic is analagous to saying this rock in my hands keeps bears away from our city. Why you ask?? Well, do you see any bears? Because we don't know if it actually does anything, there's nothing saying it DOESN'T keep bears away.

The rock kept tigers away. The bear patrol kept bears away.

Still, I'd like to buy your rock.

 

[spawn]

Damn. I knew I'd screw it up, but it's from the Simpsons pre-2001.

 

[Lucille]

If the authorities wanted to , they could do allot of things much worse to this industry then concern themselves with box labeling... Sometimes its better to let sleeping dogs lie then to open a can of worms. More shippers use a non discript method of shipping with the LEAST amount of awareness being brought on there shipments
.

I've posted in the last year or so several times about (and against) illegal shipping, especially of spiders and snakes. A lot of critters illegally shipped are harmful, and I absolutely agree with you Jerry, if the authorities wanted to, they could to a lot of things worse to this industry than concern themselves with box labelling.

And if they see reptile and spider folks continuously and openly breaking the law, and come onto sites like this and see shippers who advise a wink and a nod instead of truthful labelling and obeying the law, they WILL do much worse.

 

[NeoReptiliac]

I will choose to ignore some of the weak insults you decided to throw my way in order to make yourself seem intelligent Jerry.

But what I do have to say of importance is a comment based on what Lucille said. It was a very good point I would like to second. Already, many states have suffered new laws that make our hobby very difficult. And its cause people like Dan dont respect the law. Dont get caught and no one will be hurt right? Well I dont agree with that. Sure I seem to be focused on Dan right now. But thats only cause I dont know of anyone else to point a judgmental finger at and scold at the moment. But what you might not know is that I have volunteered myself plenty of times to help the wildlife as well as captive animals as well as officials that do the same. You just assume that cause this is the first you have heard of me - that I've never done anything to help anyone other then myself. But that's just cause you dont know anything about me and I understand that and dont blame you for it. How could you know a thing about me when you've never spoke to me before? I fear like Lucille does that if things like this that appear meaningless and small to you or a hand full of others continues, then we wont have the right to continue our hobbies any more of reptile keeping and breeding.

 

[brrrman]

I've posted in the last year or so several times about (and against) illegal shipping, especially of spiders and snakes. A lot of critters illegally shipped are harmful, and I absolutely agree with you Jerry, if the authorities wanted to, they could to a lot of things worse to this industry than concern themselves with box labelling.

And if they see reptile and spider folks continuously and openly breaking the law, and come onto sites like this and see shippers who advise a wink and a nod instead of truthful labelling and obeying the law, they WILL do much worse.

I couldn't agree with Lucille more, It's the "little laws"people break and cheap ass standard live arrival guarantees, people hide behind. that will bring the wrath of big brother down and ruin our hobby. Any reptile that dies in 4 days is not healthy when shipped, poor husbandry takes awhile to kill an animal unless it was grossly abused.

 

[Wolfy-hound]

Poor husbandry can kill a young animal in less than four days, so that's no argument at all.

Neo is trying to say that Dan broke mulitple laws and is "probably" breaking many more, or "might" breka many more.. all based on his legitimate claim that he did not label the box with the common and scientific names of the animal.

First he tried to say that Dan didn't have the permits, then that the shipping company doesn't ship caimens. It's already been stated that other than the labeling of the box, the rest is either made up without any proof, or wrong.

Yes, Dan should have labeled the box. After reading the LONG LONG discussion with quotes from the LAcey Act, it seems to say that "live animals" is fine.. but then says the box must have the type of animal, either in the box or on the box.. but then says that it must be on the box.. but then says they must put common and scientific name on the box.

All put together, if you read the entire thing and all amendments and add ons and all that stuff, they want the box labeled on the outside with the common and scientific names of what is inside.

Most of what I see is statements over and over that MISLabeling is a offense.. but if you dig around, you find the rest.

With the wording sort of scattered around, when you gather it all up, you could say it means "Live animals" and/or common name on the outside as long as the inside on top has a detailed invoice with scientific names also...... OR.... you have to put common and scientific names on the outside, regardless of whether it has a invoice on the INSIDE.

After I looked the thread over a few times, *I* think it says the latter, Seamus seems to say it's the former. I should probably read the ACTUAL Lacey act a few times before I say definitively.

At any rate... the only thing you've proven that Dan did wrong (in this instance) is to not label the outside of the box. Yet you are trying to pull in every connected agency to get him in trouble any way you can. It gives all of us a poor image to all the agencies you contact, since each one will remember the issue regarding a reptile, and not whether it is a legit issue.

 

[lanceheads]

Poor husbandry can kill a young animal in less than four days, so that's no argument at all.
Neo is trying to say that Dan broke mulitple laws and is "probably" breaking many more, or "might" breka many more.. all based on his legitimate claim that he did not label the box with the common and scientific names of the animal.

First he tried to say that Dan didn't have the permits, then that the shipping company doesn't ship caimens. It's already been stated that other than the labeling of the box, the rest is either made up without any proof, or wrong.

Yes, Dan should have labeled the box. After reading the LONG LONG discussion with quotes from the LAcey Act, it seems to say that "live animals" is fine.. but then says the box must have the type of animal, either in the box or on the box.. but then says that it must be on the box.. but then says they must put common and scientific name on the box.

All put together, if you read the entire thing and all amendments and add ons and all that stuff, they want the box labeled on the outside with the common and scientific names of what is inside.

Most of what I see is statements over and over that MISLabeling is a offense.. but if you dig around, you find the rest.

With the wording sort of scattered around, when you gather it all up, you could say it means "Live animals" and/or common name on the outside as long as the inside on top has a detailed invoice with scientific names also...... OR.... you have to put common and scientific names on the outside, regardless of whether it has a invoice on the INSIDE.

After I looked the thread over a few times, *I* think it says the latter, Seamus seems to say it's the former. I should probably read the ACTUAL Lacey act a few times before I say definitively.

At any rate... the only thing you've proven that Dan did wrong (in this instance) is to not label the outside of the box. Yet you are trying to pull in every connected agency to get him in trouble any way you can. It gives all of us a poor image to all the agencies you contact, since each one will remember the issue regarding a reptile, and not whether it is a legit issue.[/QUOTE]

 

[Southern Wolf]

Or easily accessible on a packing slip or inventoried list specific to the total shipment. Common name, nomenclature and number.

Either written on the box itself or an invoice stuck to the outside of the box or the very top contents of a box that's labeled as containing the invoice- with everything clearly marked as having live animals inside it.

Which I do

 

[KNOBTAIL]

From Brrrman

"I couldn't agree with Lucille more, It's the "little laws"people break and cheap ass standard live arrival guarantees, people hide behind. that will bring the wrath of big brother down and ruin our hobby. Any reptile that dies in 4 days is not healthy when shipped, poor husbandry takes awhile to kill an animal unless it was grossly abused. "

I dont know if its your lack of knowledge in this business, or your naiveties that should be brought in to this discussion, but you are so wrong with the above statement...

"Any reptile that dies in 4 days is not healthy when shipped, poor husbandry takes awhile to kill an animal unless it was grossly abused. "

How did you reach this intelligent conclusion ? What if the animal was very healthy and the delay or the cold or the heat or the stress killed the animal.!

I think you are taking liberties well beyond what would be a normal shipment that could have arrived fine as the email indicated, by the receiver.....and that the death of the Caiman could have been brought about by poor handling by the recipient...

Is that not possible ?? Or according to your logic, if it dies in 4 days it was unhealthy to begin with... What if it dies in 8 days ? Do yourself a favor and leave this industry ! There are allot of little people who ship very well, and are more concerned then allot of big people.

Insofar as Live Delivery Guaranteed. Its a standard term and it has a variety of interpretations.. Check the TOS from the seller and see if it fits into your agreement to make a purchcase.. Its really that simple.. Everyone in the industry uses it, so to single out 1 person as hiding behind it is just your only excuse, or whatever excuse you have left......



How many times do you have to be told that Dan met his TOS with the buyer... The buyer sent Dan an email which I already posted here, (read it! ) the obligation is over.... If the animal dies, as happens all the time, there could be a multitude of reasons why, but stop reading into these things . Its over... The consignee could have handled it a bit more diplomatically...when he made contact.... Instead he chose a more direct approach of blaming Dan .

 

[Seamus Haley]

Yes, Dan should have labeled the box. After reading the LONG LONG discussion with quotes from the LAcey Act, it seems to say that "live animals" is fine.. but then says the box must have the type of animal, either in the box or on the box.. but then says that it must be on the box.. but then says they must put common and scientific name on the box.

All put together, if you read the entire thing and all amendments and add ons and all that stuff, they want the box labeled on the outside with the common and scientific names of what is inside.

Most of what I see is statements over and over that MISLabeling is a offense.. but if you dig around, you find the rest.

With the wording sort of scattered around, when you gather it all up, you could say it means "Live animals" and/or common name on the outside as long as the inside on top has a detailed invoice with scientific names also...... OR.... you have to put common and scientific names on the outside, regardless of whether it has a invoice on the INSIDE.

After I looked the thread over a few times, *I* think it says the latter, Seamus seems to say it's the former. I should probably read the ACTUAL Lacey act a few times before I say definitively.

Yeah, there's some degree of ambiguity about how "accessible" is defined with regards to the Lacey act and the list of contents.

Still, the question of printed on the box versus external packing list versus internal packing list (at the top of the box) which exists doesn't have any room for an argument of "Ah, skip it and don't label anything." which is what Dan did.

Unlabeled or mislabeled shipments may be a common practice but that doesn't excuse the violation of the law. When it becomes known that any given individual chooses to ship in a manner which is not compliant with the Lacey act- and indeed not even attempting to be compliant- that practice should be held up, regarded as negative and condemned so that others do not make the same mistakes.

Dan followed the letter of his Terms of Service. The customer agreed to those terms of service and is, unless there's some law in the state the transaction occurred in that would override that TOS, they get to swallow the results of their choices of who to send their money to.

It is alright though to look at Dan's TOS and say... "These are the terms of a person who will screw their buyer at every opportunity." Which they are. Every clause and every line is designed to give Dan a retreat when something goes wrong. Sellers should take the time to write up a reasonable set of guarantees and terms to protect themselves but they should not do this at the expense of their buyer. Dan won't cover anything that's alive but visibly ill or injured. Dan won't cover an animal that is having issues as a result of carrier mishandling (the carrier is Dan's subcontractor in the case of a remote sale, he pays them to perform a service FOR HIM and he then does not stand behind that service- the buyer didn't pay FedEx, UPS, USPS or Delta Dash- the buyer paid DAN and DAN should be responsible for delivering). Dan has a history of fobbing his unhappy customers back off on his own suppliers- claiming that the customer who paid him should have to deal with the person Dan was flipping animals for if they want resolution or restitution.

Dan is a bad guy. He has a history of being a bad guy. He's got a slew of people who have had issues with his practices and he refuses to ever acknowledge culpability or responsibility with any of them.

 

[NeoReptiliac]

"I couldn't agree with Lucille more, It's the "little laws"people break and cheap ass standard live arrival guarantees, people hide behind. that will bring the wrath of big brother down and ruin our hobby. Any reptile that dies in 4 days is not healthy when shipped, poor husbandry takes awhile to kill an animal unless it was grossly abused. "

I dont know if its your lack of knowledge in this business, or your naiveties that should be brought in to this discussion, but you are so wrong with the above statement...

"Any reptile that dies in 4 days is not healthy when shipped, poor husbandry takes awhile to kill an animal unless it was grossly abused. "

How did you reach this intelligent conclusion ? What if the animal was very healthy and the delay or the cold or the heat or the stress killed the animal.!

I think you are taking liberties well beyond what would be a normal shipment that could have arrived fine as the email indicated, by the receiver.....and that the death of the Caiman could have been brought about by poor handling by the recipient...

Is that not possible ?? Or according to your logic, if it dies in 4 days it was unhealthy to begin with... What if it dies in 8 days ? Do yourself a favor and leave this industry ! There are allot of little people who ship very well, and are more concerned then allot of big people.

Insofar as Live Delivery Guaranteed. Its a standard term and it has a variety of interpretations.. Check the TOS from the seller and see if it fits into your agreement to make a purchcase.. Its really that simple.. Everyone in the industry uses it, so to single out 1 person as hiding behind it is just your only excuse, or whatever excuse you have left......



How many times do you have to be told that Dan met his TOS with the buyer... The buyer sent Dan an email which I already posted here, (read it! ) the obligation is over.... If the animal dies, as happens all the time, there could be a multitude of reasons why, but stop reading into these things . Its over... The consignee could have handled it a bit more diplomatically...when he made contact.... Instead he chose a more direct approach of blaming Dan .

I would like to just say that when the caiman arrived, appearance wise it looked fine from what we could tell. It was moving, breathing, and had no visible injuries. But we are not capable of telling any underlining problems with it after just seeing it for the first time after it arrived. The problem that was unseen to the eye was not noticed right away.

 

[spawn]

I would like to just say that when the caiman arrived, appearance wise it looked fine from what we could tell. It was moving, breathing, and had no visible injuries. But we are not capable of telling any underlining problems with it after just seeing it for the first time after it arrived. The problem that was unseen to the eye was not noticed right away.

Right. Why is Dan responsible for this? The fact that you suggested Dan planned for the animal to be dead in your care is ludicrous. This is a chance you take when buying WC from anyone [and even Dan]. Dan is no more fit to tell a caiman is in poor shape than you are, and this is why your argument holds no water.

 

[Uroboros]

You know, as much as I don't like scolaro, he's right in this instance.

That was determined a while ago.

I got into it with scolaro over his attitude, not his animals, really.

Instead of paying $Z for a cbb animal, you pay $Y for a wc. You take that $Y add $X (vet bills, possibility that it may just die) and you wind up with a bit more than $Z from my experience. So, X + Y => Z IMO

What you did was take a chance. The chance didn't pan out. It pains me to say this, but scolaro is clear here. His TOS is vague and very limited on your recovery. That's the way it goes. Yep, a healthy herp shipped well has pretty low odds of dying in four days. scolaro's TOS says he guarantees live arrival, which was met.

Take your lumps and move on. Quit while you're behind. You seem like a cool dude, I'd like to keep it that way. As far as life lessons go, this one isn't that expensive.

And you know that he's reading this periodically and smirking to himself everytime you post, knowing that he's freaking right. That annoys me, too.