• Responding to email notices you receive.
    **************************************************
    In short, DON'T! Email notices are to ONLY alert you of a reply to your private message or your ad on this site. Replying to the email just wastes your time as it goes NOWHERE, and probably pisses off the person you thought you replied to when they think you just ignored them. So instead of complaining to me about your messages not being replied to from this site via email, please READ that email notice that plainly states what you need to do in order to reply to who you are trying to converse with.

  • IMPORTANT! PLEASE READ!! About the Google Adsense ads being displayed

    =====================
    Posted 08/15/2025
    =====================


    Yeah, I know. They are a pain in the butt. But they pay the bills to keep my server running. Just a fact of life, I am afraid.

    Want to get rid of them? Simple. Just become a Contributor level member or above and they will be gone. -> Please click HERE."

    Is that too much for me to ask of you to keep this site running? Well, sorry about that. I too wish I could get everything for free. But alas.....

    =====================
    Addendum: 01/10/2026
    =====================


    Google Adsense ad revenue for December, 2025 was just $30 over the cost of the lease for the server running this site. So, in effect, the money providing the incentive for me to continue running this site is coming SOLELY from the paid memberships and sponsorships here. Which honestly ain't much....

Inquiry is usark scamming the reptile industry

Myatesomaha said:
Ok I'll bite but I will keep it short and sweet. I saw the title of the thread and was curious what you had to say. Though I believe that USARK is fighting the good fight and pray that I'm right you do bring up some good points. Some of that wording is concerning I don't think its bad idea to know a little bit more about the people that are representing our industry. I think it would be a great idea for USARK jump on this thread and explain their rationale.
Click to expand...

i think how vague the wording is can really be damaging in a court of law. and if the exposure of said listed animals is crime then is it a chargeable offense to even let someone hold your snake and is the police hearing of it probable cause to raid your house. and what about venomoids and hatchlings. there is nothing in the model legislation that deals with venomoids or the size of the animals listed. its just says listed species
 
Here is my opinion. I do support USARK because we need a lobbying group to support our cause. You mention the hotel costs. Do you know that Andrew lives in NC and whenever he goes to get support from people or goes to support our industry that is going to require a hotel room? Andrew is not going out on vacation on the money he receives from donations. All lobbyist groups use money for hotels and money for things that requires traveling to get support for their cause.

As for the NC laws, I am not going to say I was happy with all the rules in place; however, NC was getting ready to BAN snake ownership, including boa constrictors. We had a huge fight here for a really long time and almost lost. It was either, we lose or we compromise. I hate compromising on this issue. I really do. However, I would rather compromise than lose everything.

I personally, keep all my snakes in very secured enclosures and a secured room. Even if I make a mistake, because I am human, I will not lose any snake. I have never lost a snake so with that being said, I don't worry about ever having to tell law enforcement officials I lost a snake.

Rodney, it seems as though you really care about being able to have reptiles. It seems that you don't like the fact that USARK has made compromises. The thing is, we are not going to always agree with all the compromises, just as we don't always agree with all the laws the governments put in place.

With the amount of bad publicity surrounding exotic animals, if we don't start compromising and making people feel safe (even if it is an illusion of safety), we are completely outnumbered and we are going to lose this hobby.

1 bad thing happens and the media will bring it up for years. We need to show those who fear exotics and the government that we are going to do what it takes to keep people safe. Unfortunately, that does not come without consequence on our part.

Star
 
let me make something clear. i dont like usark for a lot of reasons but i do think usark or a usark like organization is needed. i personally dont feel they are being open enough with what they are doing, nor do i feel andrew wyatt is the right person to be the figure head or front man of the organization. i know ive said a lot of negative things about usark and ive done so because of how quick they are to throw the venomous big snake and croc people under the bus. if they want to claim to represent the industry as a whole then thats what they need to do.
 
The first time I met Andrew, it was before he was in USARK. He had the most beautiful lavender albino retic climbing around his head. The last I have heard, he still owns that snake. I can't imagine him lobbying to get rid of large constricting snakes when he owns them.

Star
 
weird_science04 said:
Here is my opinion. I do support USARK because we need a lobbying group to support our cause. You mention the hotel costs. Do you know that Andrew lives in NC and whenever he goes to get support from people or goes to support our industry that is going to require a hotel room? Andrew is not going out on vacation on the money he receives from donations. All lobbyist groups use money for hotels and money for things that requires traveling to get support for their cause.

As for the NC laws, I am not going to say I was happy with all the rules in place; however, NC was getting ready to BAN snake ownership, including boa constrictors. We had a huge fight here for a really long time and almost lost. It was either, we lose or we compromise. I hate compromising on this issue. I really do. However, I would rather compromise than lose everything.

I personally, keep all my snakes in very secured enclosures and a secured room. Even if I make a mistake, because I am human, I will not lose any snake. I have never lost a snake so with that being said, I don't worry about ever having to tell law enforcement officials I lost a snake.

Rodney, it seems as though you really care about being able to have reptiles. It seems that you don't like the fact that USARK has made compromises. The thing is, we are not going to always agree with all the compromises, just as we don't always agree with all the laws the governments put in place.

With the amount of bad publicity surrounding exotic animals, if we don't start compromising and making people feel safe (even if it is an illusion of safety), we are completely outnumbered and we are going to lose this hobby.

1 bad thing happens and the media will bring it up for years. We need to show those who fear exotics and the government that we are going to do what it takes to keep people safe. Unfortunately, that does not come without consequence on our part.

Star
Click to expand...

im glad you posted. im not for compromise but thats beside the point.

my question to you is. what are the NC shows like now that you have model legislation. is there venomous big snakes and crocs and NC show?

are you allowed to have them at show?

and what was some of the impacts of model legislation the venomous big snake and croc part of the reptile indusrty in NC

and what was the impact of the exposure laws and unsafe contact with the listed animals and how were these laws implicated and enforced?
 
weird_science04 said:
The first time I met Andrew, it was before he was in USARK. He had the most beautiful lavender albino retic climbing around his head. The last I have heard, he still owns that snake. I can't imagine him lobbying to get rid of large constricting snakes when he owns them.

Star
Click to expand...

so the guy that wrote the book on exposure laws, unsafe contact and responsible handling practices likes to let retics crawl around on his head.

thats priceless
 
Rodney, by reading all of your posts on this subject, it is apparent that you have no grasp on what is going on around you. I have been a part of USARK since the first meeting of it's predecessor, NCARK. I spoke to Andrew about reptile legislation before NCARK was ever started. I have donated a considerable amount of money to USARK and plan on continuing.

This organization is using common sense and realistic viewpoints to protect our rights as reptile keepers. Wake up and smell the coffee, you keep dangerous animals. They have and will kill people. Combine that with the fact that they are highly stigmatized in the general population. When you think about those things, you better thank your lucky stars if USARK is able to make legislation in your state that you only have to have locking cages for them.

On to your belief that one piece of legislation immediately means that they will continue to pass harsher laws. That is horse crap. What you need to be concerned about is when a state has no laws on the subject. If FL had that locked cage law when those idiots got their kid killed (supposedly), they would have been looked at as criminals and it would have been seen as more their fault than the snake's.

And honestly, your reason for putting this post up is because you think USARK is a special interest group? Of course they are a special interest group. Everyone who tries to get anything done legislatively in one specific area is a special interest group. I hope they are spending a ton on lobbying, it's how you get things done in Washington, unfortunately.

Also, who do you think is on the board of most organizations, it's normally composed of? You get on the advisory board of an organization by being a large donor.

I don't know what bone you have to pick with Andrew, but I have to assume that is what is driving these attacks, because if you really are attacking them based on what you're describing, you're an extremely naive person to the way the world works.

I hope your tic-keeping lawyer does well by you, but I think you have a thing or two to learn about politics and legislation.

Chris Canada-Smith
 
I have never seen any venomous snakes at reptile shows here in NC even before the regulation. The Reptile Show in Raleigh has went downhill but not from regulation.

I personally haven't been affected by the new laws nor have my 20 something snakes been affected.

It has been a while since I went to a show and looked around here in NC. I don't go to too many shows because I don't want to spend money and I don't trust all the breeders there. It is harder to use my cellphone to check up on breeders at reptile shows. However, Andrew has brought retics to the shows in NC.

Star
 
I am very interested in this topic seeing lobbyists are usually in it for more than they say IE: money.
I do believe you are wrong about the whole firs ammendmant crap and you brought it all down on yourself with that comment. Now with that being said if USARK is indeed playing both sides of the court and feeding off our fears then I do have an issue and would stop supporting them immediatly, but until I see evidence that 100% shows them sticking it to us then I will continue to support them. Just my 2 cents.
 
JCCS said:
Rodney, by reading all of your posts on this subject, it is apparent that you have no grasp on what is going on around you. I have been a part of USARK since the first meeting of it's predecessor, NCARK. I spoke to Andrew about reptile legislation before NCARK was ever started. I have donated a considerable amount of money to USARK and plan on continuing.

This organization is using common sense and realistic viewpoints to protect our rights as reptile keepers. Wake up and smell the coffee, you keep dangerous animals. They have and will kill people. Combine that with the fact that they are highly stigmatized in the general population. When you think about those things, you better thank your lucky stars if USARK is able to make legislation in your state that you only have to have locking cages for them.

On to your belief that one piece of legislation immediately means that they will continue to pass harsher laws. That is horse crap. What you need to be concerned about is when a state has no laws on the subject. If FL had that locked cage law when those idiots got their kid killed (supposedly), they would have been looked at as criminals and it would have been seen as more their fault than the snake's.

And honestly, your reason for putting this post up is because you think USARK is a special interest group? Of course they are a special interest group. Everyone who tries to get anything done legislatively in one specific area is a special interest group. I hope they are spending a ton on lobbying, it's how you get things done in Washington, unfortunately.

Also, who do you think is on the board of most organizations, it's normally composed of? You get on the advisory board of an organization by being a large donor.

I don't know what bone you have to pick with Andrew, but I have to assume that is what is driving these attacks, because if you really are attacking them based on what you're describing, you're an extremely naive person to the way the world works.

I hope your tic-keeping lawyer does well by you, but I think you have a thing or two to learn about politics and legislation.

Chris Canada-Smith
Click to expand...

usarks stance is and you can look this up is that these animals are not dangerous. i would just like to point that out.

and the idea that i should thank my lucky stars for usark to get legislation passed is a joke. the only rules we have here in PA is if you want to legally breed and sell reptiles you get your license and that system has worked fine.

you mite want to read up on your FL laws. they had the roc permits and cage requirements at that time. at that time if you wanted to own a burm you had to get your roc permit and you have to follow the caging protocol. how dont you know this. and right now the father of that kid is suing the state for not taking the kid away when they knew the mom and boyfriend had the snake and wernt keeping it in accord with FL law.

and for the record since then FL has actually eased up on their laws. now all your need to own sell bred big snakes and nile monitors is a $50 class 3 dealers license. feel free to look into it.

as for this regulation not leading to more your wrong about that. its just a way to chip away at the industry slowly
 
rodneynboalich said:
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.
Click to expand...
he obviously does not want to be bothered with the fact that these legislations are only proposed as an alternative to an outright ban. In other words, when there is no other option, that is when they propose these legislations. When there is an outright and imminent ban, that is when these things are proposed. Here is an Example. There is no impending ban in AZ. I do not see him coming here and writing and proposing legislation. Why do yo insist on not seeing this part?

rodneynboalich said:
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?
Click to expand...

I have been around a while. Andrew came from his momma. I have heard of him before. I did not buy an animal from him because he was interested in the big animals and I was not. I do not go to that many shows.

rodneynboalich said:
there model legislation is a ban.
Click to expand...
Dude, really? Are you stating a fact? An opinion? or perhaps spewing things out your rear end from pure ignorance on your part. Because I just took a test for reading comprehension last year and I got a perfect 100%. And I did not see where the outright ban is, in his model legislation. By the way. Model legislation. It is not exact. It is just a model. Changes can be made at the state level. It is just a guide.

rodneynboalich said:
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
Click to expand...
They did not say it is unlawful to even expose someone to listed animals. I don't know what your primary language is, but you totally did not comprehend what you read. In fact I think you are seing things that are not there. In fact I thin you are just spewing things in hopes of convincing some person who does not know how to read.

Let me give you an example. It is against the law for me to expose my children to unsafe acts with my firearms. Guess what? My children are exposed to firearms. But they are not exposed "unsafely".

Rodney you are throwing out these arguements that rally have no merit with people that have at least half a mind. However you might be able to convince those who have less than half a mind and can't read or can't be bothered to read. Just because you say something is fact does not make it so. For example, if I say it is a fact that you are dumb, does not make it necesarily so.
 
Wow, really, do you realize that you completely contradicted your entire point.

as for this regulation not leading to more your wrong about that. its just a way to chip away at the industry slowly
Click to expand...

since then FL has actually eased up on their laws
Click to expand...

Now, which way do you want it? It can't be both ways at once, so pick.

Chris
 
weird_science04 said:
If Andrew is against large constrictors, why is he doing this?

http://united-states-association-of...-bad-american-small-business-families-alread/

Star
Click to expand...

i dont think they want an out right ban i just think the want to put laws in place around the venomous big snake and croc to help take pressure off the industry as a whole and i dont agree with that. they are pandering to the publics manufactured fears and to their big backers and pretending like they represent all of us

now sicne the model legislation has been in place do you see any of the listed animals at shows
 
rodneynboalich said:
they are pushing their legislation that will destroy the venomous big snakes and croc part of the reptile industry.
Click to expand...
"venomous big snakes" or "venomous, big snakes"

rodneynboalich said:
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.
Click to expand...
Again "venomous big snakes" or "venomous, big snakes"

Also have you done research on their "big backers"? I believe they have some big backers who specialize in "big snakes"


I just realized something. I just realized what this whole thing is about.

You are against Andrew Wyatt and USARK because you are a Wilkins Crony.

like I have told you in the past. Do some real research. Find some real facts. Understand the language you are pretending to read. Find someone else besides Wilkins. Then come back here and present real, valid, arguements.
 
I can't remember honestly Rodney. Venomous were never at shows but I am only into Boa Constrictors (BCI and BCC mostly) and my husband is wanting to get into BP's. The last who I went to here, I was out in about 10 minutes. I walked in, got a bumblebee female BP and left. I am going to say I have seen burms and stuff at the shows but not venomous because they were never allowed anyways. However, I honestly can't remember because I don't go often and when I do go, it is to strictly pick up a snake.

Star
 
HerpVenue said:
he obviously does not want to be bothered with the fact that these legislations are only proposed as an alternative to an outright ban. In other words, when there is no other option, that is when they propose these legislations. When there is an outright and imminent ban, that is when these things are proposed. Here is an Example. There is no impending ban in AZ. I do not see him coming here and writing and proposing legislation. Why do yo insist on not seeing this part?



I have been around a while. Andrew came from his momma. I have heard of him before. I did not buy an animal from him because he was interested in the big animals and I was not. I do not go to that many shows.

Dude, really? Are you stating a fact? An opinion? or perhaps spewing things out your rear end from pure ignorance on your part. Because I just took a test for reading comprehension last year and I got a perfect 100%. And I did not see where the outright ban is, in his model legislation. By the way. Model legislation. It is not exact. It is just a model. Changes can be made at the state level. It is just a guide.

They did not say it is unlawful to even expose someone to listed animals. I don't know what your primary language is, but you totally did not comprehend what you read. In fact I think you are seing things that are not there. In fact I thin you are just spewing things in hopes of convincing some person who does not know how to read.

Let me give you an example. It is against the law for me to expose my children to unsafe acts with my firearms. Guess what? My children are exposed to firearms. But they are not exposed "unsafely".

Rodney you are throwing out these arguements that rally have no merit with people that have at least half a mind. However you might be able to convince those who have less than half a mind and can't read or can't be bothered to read. Just because you say something is fact does not make it so. For example, if I say it is a fact that you are dumb, does not make it necesarily so.
Click to expand...

their model legislation is a ban of sorts when it sets up so many rules around ownership and will drive away buyers. it allows you to have them and breed them but whats the point if nobody wants to buy them with all the regulations around them.

the model legislation i posted is what is law in NC. its not a paradigm its not a suggestion. its what would be enforced by law.

clearly you reading comp isnt as good as you think it is or you would realize when your dealing with courts they twist and manipulate words to fit their arguments and since the model legitimation is so vague in its application, it needs clear definition and be not open to interpretation.
 
rodneynboalich said:
there model legislation is a ban.
Click to expand...
rodneynboalich said:
i dont think they want an out right ban i just think the want to put laws in place around the venomous big snake and croc to help take pressure off the industry as a whole and i dont agree with that.
Click to expand...

This dude will say whatever he thinks you want to hear. He will say whatever it takes for you to stop supporting Andrew Wyatt and USARK and start supporting his new group with his buddy Wilkins.
 
JCCS said:
Wow, really, do you realize that you completely contradicted your entire point.





Now, which way do you want it? It can't be both ways at once, so pick.

Chris
Click to expand...

FL eased up because of who help write their new legislation and it wasnt andrew wyatt.

the reason they start getting specific in their proposed bans is because attempts to have large bans have failed in the so they try to do smaller bans and we are falling for it.
 
rodneynboalich said:
clearly you reading comp isnt as good as you think it is or you would realize when your dealing with courts they twist and manipulate words to fit their arguments and since the model legitimation is so vague in its application, it needs clear definition and be not open to interpretation.
Click to expand...

So the courts twist words.
And you want to make it so that they can't twist words.
And you will have to write the legislation.

So my options are USARK with SAFE keeping and handling procedures
VS
You and Wilkins with keeping and handling procedures that are spelled out for me so there is no room for interpretation.

One guy tells me to keep it safe.
vs
You telling me what I can and can't do. :thumbsup::thumbsup:
 
Back
Top