OK this is a joke - here are some specifics

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Field Collecting Forum ]

Posted by Tim on October 29, 2001 at 21:47:21:

In Reply to: I hope everyone reads the fine print here... posted by Rick Staub on October 29, 2001 at 20:44:18:

Lets begin with the Salamanders:
I see some really funny recommendations here...they make me wonder WHO is at the helm!
"An additional eight species of amphibians, for which sportfishing take is currently
: allowed, will be exempted from sport take. Specifically, these eight amphibian species include:
: Four salamander species (families Ambystomatidae, Dicamptodontidae, and Plethodontidae):
: the long-toed salamander (Ambystoma macrodactylum), California giant salamander
: (Dicamptodon ensatus), Dunn�s salamander (Plethodon dunni), and the Ensatina (Ensatina
: eschscholtzii).

First of all, let me point out that whomever is trying to pass these laws is following the disturbing trend towards full species protection (not recognizing subspecific forms for protection, but instead barring collection of a species in certain counties where that subspecies lives). This is the way most state departments are trying to go, (such as Colorado who wanted to outlaw the keeping of ALL native forms at the specific level, such as Lampropeltis triangulum.)
OK, anyways...I can see why they would protect dunni. It is only found in two drainages in Del Norte County (in this state). However, those of us who eat sleep and breathe amphibians know that within it's range, P.dunni is extraordinarily abundant; there is no market whatsoever for P.dunni. Next, they propose a ban on Dicamptodon ensatus (oddly they haven't listed tenebrosus as well). Dicamps are extremely common animals throughout their ranges. Ensatina?! WHY would anyone move to protect the currently collectable Ensatina ssp??? These things are everywhere, and are in no danger of any widespread extirpation. The Long-toe sallies are being protected because the sigillatum ssp from the high sierras "looks like" the croceum form (federally protected) in Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties. Look like each-other? NO. Not hardly. One is yellow and black, the other orange and black. I wish someone would just elevate the croceum form to species status anyway.
My head really hurts now, but I'll be back in a while to pick up where I left off in part two of my "Dumb Government Rant".
Tim

Follow Ups:

Change of view Tim 10/29/01 (6)
- Tim - do you live in a wood house? hehe Ryan Hoyer 10/30/01 (3)
  - I'm not a hypocrite (in this case) Tim 10/30/01 (2)
    - Can't do. . . Ryan Hoyer 10/30/01 (1)
      - I'm sorry lol Tim 10/30/01 (0)
- Re: Change of view Richard F. Hoyer 10/30/01 (1)
  - What I meant was... Tim 10/30/01 (0)

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: Lets begin with the Salamanders: : I see some really funny recommendations here...they make me wonder WHO is at the helm! : "An additional eight species of amphibians, for which sportfishing take is currently : : allowed, will be exempted from sport take. Specifically, these eight amphibian species include: : : Four salamander species (families Ambystomatidae, Dicamptodontidae, and Plethodontidae): : : the long-toed salamander (Ambystoma macrodactylum), California giant salamander : : (Dicamptodon ensatus), Dunn�s salamander (Plethodon dunni), and the Ensatina (Ensatina : : eschscholtzii). : First of all, let me point out that whomever is trying to pass these laws is following the disturbing trend towards full species protection (not recognizing subspecific forms for protection, but instead barring collection of a species in certain counties where that subspecies lives). This is the way most state departments are trying to go, (such as Colorado who wanted to outlaw the keeping of ALL native forms at the specific level, such as Lampropeltis triangulum.) : OK, anyways...I can see why they would protect dunni. It is only found in two drainages in Del Norte County (in this state). However, those of us who eat sleep and breathe amphibians know that within it's range, P.dunni is extraordinarily abundant; there is no market whatsoever for P.dunni. Next, they propose a ban on Dicamptodon ensatus (oddly they haven't listed tenebrosus as well). Dicamps are extremely common animals throughout their ranges. Ensatina?! WHY would anyone move to protect the currently collectable Ensatina ssp??? These things are everywhere, and are in no danger of any widespread extirpation. The Long-toe sallies are being protected because the sigillatum ssp from the high sierras "looks like" the croceum form (federally protected) in Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties. Look like each-other? NO. Not hardly. One is yellow and black, the other orange and black. I wish someone would just elevate the croceum form to species status anyway. : My head really hurts now, but I'll be back in a while to pick up where I left off in part two of my "Dumb Government Rant". : Tim

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Field Collecting Forum ]

KINGSNAKE.COM

Enjoy all our content free of charge with a user account that gives you full access to every feature. For added visibility, paid options are available - post in our Classifieds, showcase your business with Banner Ads or a Directory listing, promote reptile events, and more.

OK this is a joke - here are some specifics

KINGSNAKE.COM

Quick Links

Community

Legal & Safety

Support