View Single Post
Old 7th March 2015   #10 (permalink)
FrogEyes
Prolific Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Nationality:
Location: [ Members Only ]
Posts: 893
Gallery Images: 0
Comments: 8
Rep: FrogEyes is considered an Authority at Caudata.orgFrogEyes is considered an Authority at Caudata.orgFrogEyes is considered an Authority at Caudata.orgFrogEyes is considered an Authority at Caudata.orgFrogEyes is considered an Authority at Caudata.orgFrogEyes is considered an Authority at Caudata.orgFrogEyes is considered an Authority at Caudata.orgFrogEyes is considered an Authority at Caudata.orgFrogEyes is considered an Authority at Caudata.orgFrogEyes is considered an Authority at Caudata.org
Default Re: Pseudoeurycea bellii

In the laws of both Canada and the USA, if at any point in time a law was broken to obtain the animals, then a federal law is broken to obtain them in these countries. That's Lacey Act for USA and WAPPRIITA for Canada.

It's my understanding that this is essentially why USFWS won't issue papers for CITES export of Australian species from the USA - the ancestors of CB animals could not have been obtained legally, and thus issuing of export permits would be one more link in a chain of violation. They can't directly prove it, but it's a logical conclusion and they can choose not to participate in it. Non-CITES species are different because USFWS doesn't have to provide such permits and can't normally prove illegality, so they have little control over the matter.
FrogEyes is offline   Reply With Quote