The longest running Amphibian Community on the Internet.

Tags Register FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Caudata.org Store Donate


Ban lawsuit?

This is a discussion on Ban lawsuit? within the Laws/Legality and Ethics forums, part of the Herpetological Science & Politics category; USARK (whom I'm not sure I like, but any port in a storm?) had a lawsuit going in April against ...

Laws/Legality and Ethics Discussion of the laws affecting herpetology around the world. Species legalities in different jurisdictions, import/export of animals, the legalities of species collection and the ethical considerations of all of the above.

Like Tree8Likes
  • 4 Post By FrogEyes
  • 1 Post By Rupert
  • 1 Post By FrogEyes
  • 1 Post By FrogEyes
  • 1 Post By BwKilcoyne

Reply

 

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10th May 2016   #1 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Nationality:
Location: [ Members Only ]
Posts: 59
Gallery Images: 0
Comments: 0
Rep: schmiggle is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Ban lawsuit?

USARK (whom I'm not sure I like, but any port in a storm?) had a lawsuit going in April against the injurious salamander listing. Does anybody know how that's going/how it went?
schmiggle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th May 2016   #2 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Nationality:
Posts: 15
Gallery Images: 0
Comments: 0
Rep: esherman is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Ban lawsuit?

I just heard about this crazy
esherman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th May 2016   #3 (permalink)
Prolific Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Nationality:
Location: [ Members Only ]
Posts: 892
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: Ban lawsuit?

I doubt there's any progress. It's been several years so far for the python lawsuit. In both cases, USFWS is basically in the wrong, so I don't see the necessity of a lawsuit to prove it, except to formally acknowledge that there's no such law for people to violate. The Lacey Act does not prohibit interstate transport of injurious species. In fact, when the injurious species provisions were added/revised, the arguments [and subsequent wording of the Act] were to bar the commercial shipping [I think they intended to bar intentional movement, not accidental, and may not have considered the chance of people intentionally moving injurious species personally], and then only between Hawai'i, Puerto Rico, USVI, other ocean territories, and the mainland USA. It was not intended to bar movement of any kind within CONUS because injurious species could easily move between those states all on their own, and any such law would be pointless and unenforceable. USFWS has its stance and arguments to go with it, but the actual written law, congressional arguments preceding the law, and court precedence all disagree with their position.
FrogEyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th May 2016   #4 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Nationality:
Location: [ Members Only ]
Posts: 86
Gallery Images: 0
Comments: 2
Rep: Rupert has shown reliable knowledgeRupert has shown reliable knowledge
Default Re: Ban lawsuit?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrogEyes View Post
I doubt there's any progress. It's been several years so far for the python lawsuit. In both cases, USFWS is basically in the wrong, so I don't see the necessity of a lawsuit to prove it, except to formally acknowledge that there's no such law for people to violate. The Lacey Act does not prohibit interstate transport of injurious species. In fact, when the injurious species provisions were added/revised, the arguments [and subsequent wording of the Act] were to bar the commercial shipping [I think they intended to bar intentional movement, not accidental, and may not have considered the chance of people intentionally moving injurious species personally], and then only between Hawai'i, Puerto Rico, USVI, other ocean territories, and the mainland USA. It was not intended to bar movement of any kind within CONUS because injurious species could easily move between those states all on their own, and any such law would be pointless and unenforceable. USFWS has its stance and arguments to go with it, but the actual written law, congressional arguments preceding the law, and court precedence all disagree with their position.
But for some reason USFWS stilll can and will punish people for interstate transportation of said injurious species, right?
Rupert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th May 2016   #5 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Nationality:
Location: [ Members Only ]
Posts: 59
Gallery Images: 0
Comments: 0
Rep: schmiggle is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Ban lawsuit?

...But no news on the lawsuit?
schmiggle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th May 2016   #6 (permalink)
Prolific Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Nationality:
Location: [ Members Only ]
Posts: 892
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: Ban lawsuit?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert View Post
But for some reason USFWS stilll can and will punish people for interstate transportation of said injurious species, right?
Well, in fact they never have. Lacey Act was intended to be enforced by state agencies. USFWS doesn't have the ability, for the most part to enforce away from borders/ports of entry, unless there's some kind of extensive paper trail for them to latch onto. In any case though, they can't 'punish' anyone. That's for the courts to do. Such a case has never been before the courts, and that might be partly because the law doesn't say what USFWS wants it to say. Logically, if the law doesn't agree with what you want it to, do you REALLY want to take someone to court and have your position PROVEN wrong? Probably not. Better to intimidate people into following your "rules", than to try and prove your case. There is very little ability to enforce their view regarding "shipping", and much less regarding personal transport [roughly zero, in my view]. I think what's really needed is for someone to force them into the courtroom. A lawsuit takes forever, especially if the courts have any reason to reject the case [they do, where USARK is concerned]. A "prosecution" probably happens faster, and if you read the law, the arguments for its original legislation, and congressional commentary for it, there's virtually nothing in USFWS favor.

As for current progress - I don't think so. There hasn't even been time to evaluate all the comments for the "interim" rule.
FrogEyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th May 2016   #7 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Nationality:
Posts: 15
Gallery Images: 0
Comments: 0
Rep: esherman is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Ban lawsuit?

Is the ban for frogs too ?
esherman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th May 2016   #8 (permalink)
Prolific Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Nationality:
Location: [ Members Only ]
Posts: 892
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: Ban lawsuit?

There was an attempt to cat-x frogs too, but it failed. The salamanders affected by this interim listing are listed in another post, although that listing is slightly incomplete and also includes some incorrect or improperly listed species.
FrogEyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th May 2016   #9 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Nationality:
Posts: 15
Gallery Images: 0
Comments: 0
Rep: esherman is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Ban lawsuit?

I do think this will get dropped its so dumb really
esherman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2016   #10 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Nationality:
Location: [ Members Only ]
Posts: 86
Gallery Images: 0
Comments: 2
Rep: Rupert has shown reliable knowledgeRupert has shown reliable knowledge
Default Re: Ban lawsuit?

I really don't know how the administrative system of US works, but most countries often allow their administrative bureaucracies/ministries to make regulations (within the boundaries of law "in principle"), AND enforce the regulations without going to court over. It's often unlawful, but in most countries the suffering individual must go to court over to "prove the government's enforcement/regulation is unlawful", and not the other way around.

I was wondering if it was the case for US as well.
Rupert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th June 2016   #11 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Nationality:
Location: [ Members Only ]
Posts: 51
Gallery Images: 0
Comments: 1
Rep: BwKilcoyne is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: Ban lawsuit?

I definitely agree that the USFWS does not have a leg to stand on. They do not have a legal basis of it so even if they tried to enforce it, they would not have an argument in court. What they are trying to do basically is bully people into not getting, or giving up their pets. This is a lot like the situation with mini potbelly pigs. Many people are bullied by their city government, etc. to try to get them them to give up their pet pig. Almost every time someone went to court over it, the case was dismissed because it is not illegal. This seems to be the case with the salamander ban. The Lacey Act states "any shipment between the continental United States, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any possession of the United States of [an injurious species] is hereby prohibited." According to this, all the states that make up the continental US are grouped together and counted as one, and because of that, interstate transport of states within the continental US is perfectly legal. Transport between any of the states in the continental US and for example, Hawaii, would be illegal though because Hawaii is not a part of the continental US.
BwKilcoyne is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads

Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lawsuit Filed to Speed Recovery of Endangered California Tiger Salamander Kaysie Laws/Legality and Ethics 1 13th April 2012 02:33


All times are GMT. The time now is 00:25.