Free Shipping at Oregon Silkworms!
News & Events:
Posted by LK on November 19, 2002 at 17:31:23:
In Reply to: Re: herp Laws posted by Lyle on November 14, 2002 at 23:17:19:
Lyle, I guess the advantage I see is in making
the non native species more difficult to obtain
to be released in the first place. Ie if pet stores
cannot import or sell said species then the public
is less likely to obtain them in the first place
thereby reducing the risk of release. This should
be true for all species not just heprtiles. Domestic
cats should certiantly be included in this, in fact I
think all domestic cats allowed to run wild should be
erradicated. I turn as many as I can trap over to
animal control to be euthanized.
I also know the laws would hurt those
who have nothing to do with the release
of non native wildlife so Im not saying Id
really be in favor of such laws. For instance
breeders of rare reptiles would be hurt if they
could not sell their offspring or trade freely
with other enthusiasts, it would be impossible to
have a tracking system like we do with firearms and
obviously such a tracking system would not solve the
problem to begin with.
Is there a better answer?
:"Most people do not know the laws much less follow them."
:That's why I don't feel creating more laws is the answer.
:"I guess the only real answer is to produce more material
:letting people know why should you not release animals
:into the wild rather than just saying because it's illegal."
:That's not what I meant. The fact that it's illegal isn't reason enough not to release non-native animals, but as far as legislation is concerned, I think it's far enough. I don't see why banning the keeping of non-native wildlife is any better than banning the release of non-native wildlife.