USARK Lawsuit-THE BAN IS OVER

Jake

New member
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
Messages
1,620
Reaction score
37
Points
0
Location
Illinois, US
Country
United States
Display Name
Jacob Bidinger
It's 22 pages worth the read. They have not been removed from the Injurious Species List, just to be clear.

"For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the district court’s
judgment and hold as a matter of law that the government lacks
authority under the shipment clause to prohibit shipments of
injurious species between the continental States"


http://usark.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/USARK-Lawsuit-Appeals-Mem-Op.pdf
 

michael

2010 Research Grant Donor
Joined
Apr 12, 2003
Messages
3,262
Reaction score
67
Points
48
Location
Ephrata,Pa
Country
United States
Display Name
Michael Shrom
Re: USARK Lawsuit

Are they trying to push me over the edge? What exactly does it mean?
 

FrogEyes

Active member
Joined
Sep 5, 2010
Messages
908
Reaction score
36
Points
28
Location
Southern Minnesota
Country
Canada
Re: USARK Lawsuit

The Appeals Court found decidedly in favor of USARK; specifically, the Lacey Act does NOT prohibit interstate shipment of "injurious species", except between those states, territories, and possessions actually listed in the Act...which is what I've been arguing for ages :>

Basically, you can't import injurious species, ship them to Puerto Rico, Hawai'i, Guam, USVI, DC, or into the 49 continental states from elsewhere...but you CAN move them freely between any of the 49 continental states [stay out of DC though]. This ruling was based on the python injunction, but is a finding as to the meaning of the section of the Lacey Act which USFWS has for years treated falsely as a prohibition on interstate movements. It applies equally to salamanders, brown tree snakes, zebra mussels, and giant snakes. However, one must still be in accord with state and foreign laws to avoid violating section 16. Tree snakes and mussels are subject to other restrictions.

In short, the court finds that you can ship injurious species [salamanders and giant snakes] freely between any of the 49 continental states in which they are legal to possess. In addition, you can import and ship eggs anywhere that they are legal, including Hawai'i, DC, PR, etc.

http://usark.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/USARK-Lawsuit-Appeals-Mem-Op.pdf
 

Otterwoman

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
6,568
Reaction score
57
Points
48
Location
Wappingers Falls, NY
Country
United States
Re: USARK Lawsuit

I can't believe this!! I want to throw a party!!
I'm sending US ARK a fat donation!!
addendum: I did, I sent them a hundred bucks and a thank you note!!
 
Last edited:

rijnbrand

New member
Joined
Jan 21, 2011
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Country
United States
Does anyone know what this section on the USARK website means?


There are still steps in the process before those without USARK verification letters should be shipping species which are part of the injunction, or any other species listed as injurious.
 

Sith the turtle

New member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Messages
677
Reaction score
15
Points
0
Location
Georgia, USA
Country
United States
Display Name
Xavier
Ahh, this was very good to hear, especially with how busy I've been recently. Thanks for the info! :happy:
 

Rgrice21

New member
Joined
Feb 19, 2017
Messages
13
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Texas, US
Country
United States
Awesome! Who's sending me newts just to be sure?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Otterwoman

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
6,568
Reaction score
57
Points
48
Location
Wappingers Falls, NY
Country
United States
Consensus is twofold.
1. It has to do with snakes.
2. We did not need letters from US Ark to ship before the ban, we do not need them now. THe only thing that stopped us was the ban which has been voided. Ship away
3. It says "should" not "must." [I can't count. ask me how many salamanders I have. "A mess of them."]

Does anyone know what this section on the USARK website means?

There are still steps in the process before those without USARK verification letters should be shipping species which are part of the injunction, or any other species listed as injurious.
 

ndbug

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2012
Messages
87
Reaction score
3
Points
8
Location
Massachusetts
Country
United States
Display Name
Nathan
This is awesome guys! Now I shouldn't have a problem getting pyrroghasters woohoo!
 

josh1990

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2009
Messages
54
Reaction score
3
Points
8
Location
Dublin Virginia
Country
United States
Display Name
Josh
Re: USARK Lawsuit

The nightmare is over! Lol! I`m glad to see some damn common sense being used for once when it comes to regulations in the herp hobby. This was just low-hanging fruit for the anti-pet and PETA lobbies to destroy and trot around and go "Look how much we did for the cause! Please donate so we can take away for rights from these people." All of them that did this can go pound sand! I`d like to say other words but this is a family friendly site. lol.
USARK did good, I need to give a big fat donation as soon as I have the money!
FrogEyes was always right on the money with this.
So lets get to expanding our hobby.
Josh
 

Bahauck

New member
Joined
Jun 29, 2016
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Michigan
Country
United States
This is great news, its good to know that we can still fight and win for whats right.
 

michael

2010 Research Grant Donor
Joined
Apr 12, 2003
Messages
3,262
Reaction score
67
Points
48
Location
Ephrata,Pa
Country
United States
Display Name
Michael Shrom
USARK advises against shipping at this time.

In addition, and as a general matter, a court will stay its order until the time has lapsed for the government to file an appeal or seek reconsideration of a decision. In the interim, our legal team advises that USARK members postpone any shipments or other related business decisions until the lower court’s order is lifted and the ruling is broadly applied. USARK will provide updates on these concerns.

We should mention, however, that requests for a rehearing and petitions for appeal to the Supreme Court are rarely granted. Further, this was a unanimous decision by a three-judge panel that affirmed the decision of the trial court judge. Chances of a successful appeal, or the government appealing at all, appear very remote.

While the Court has stated their ruling quite bluntly, we do ask that the Reptile Nation await the final go-ahead from USARK before shipping species listed as injurious.
 

salvoz

New member
Joined
Apr 8, 2009
Messages
31
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Country
United States
Kudos to the USARK legal team!!!!!! Would love to be a fly on the wall at USFWS right now!
 

SteGriffWales

Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2015
Messages
48
Reaction score
1
Points
8
Location
Deeside
Country
Wales
you can't say the ban is over yet as the lawsuit was challenging snakes not amphibians

the whole process of amphibians ban was to control a disease that is killing native ones

the information is for in reference to snakes in question whether the ban will still be enforced in reference to disease control in concern with native amphibians is to be asked and watched on a lifting of all concerned i believe is to do with reptiles and not considered amphibians as of yet

its a totally different reason phibs were banned and we all know why and hated it but it was important to protect them
 

FrogEyes

Active member
Joined
Sep 5, 2010
Messages
908
Reaction score
36
Points
28
Location
Southern Minnesota
Country
Canada
you can't say the ban is over yet as the lawsuit was challenging snakes not amphibians

the whole process of amphibians ban was to control a disease that is killing native ones

the information is for in reference to snakes in question whether the ban will still be enforced in reference to disease control in concern with native amphibians is to be asked and watched on a lifting of all concerned i believe is to do with reptiles and not considered amphibians as of yet

its a totally different reason phibs were banned and we all know why and hated it but it was important to protect them
Basically, not true. The court ruled on the use of the Lacey Act to prohibit interstate movements of "injurious species". It did not rule on snakes, salamanders, tortoises, trout, or spiders. It ruled that the Lacey Act does NOT bar interstate movements and cannot be applied that way by the USFWS. The automatic consequence of this is that there IS no ban on interstate movements of giant snakes or salamanders, since there is no law which does this. Shipment of salamanders between the 49 states comprising CONUS [that is anywhere within OR between the 49 continental states, which together are 'CONUS'] is perfectly legal and unimpeded. Do not ship into CONUS as a whole, nor into Hawai'i, DC, Puerto Rico, Guam, or USVi, as these entities are specifically covered under the Lacey Act.

The motivations behind the salamander ban are not relevant here, since the means chosen to do so was the same and that's what the court ruled on. The ban cannot be enforced with respect to interstate movements because the law doesn't give them that choice. On the other hand, import to the country or to the listed entities, is still prohibited for any listed injurious species.

A key point here is that title 18 of the Lacey Act lists shipment into several individual regions as prohibited. One of those regions is CONUS as a whole. Shipment into Hawai'i, Puerto Rico, DC, or the continental USA is banned. Shipment within Hawai'i is fine. Shipment within Puerto Rico is fine. Shipment within DC is fine. Shipment within CONUS [that is anywhere within OR between the 49 continental states, which together are 'CONUS'] is fine. In fact, this is the main thing the court explained, using several comparisons as well as American English language standards to prove the USFWS position to be wrong. The law and history show that Congress never intended to bar interstate movements.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Methos5K

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2014
Messages
142
Reaction score
12
Points
18
Location
Twin Cities, MN
Country
United States
So... was USARK or USFWS going to issue some kind of an update or statement? It's been a week now.
 

John

Founder
Staff member
Joined
Feb 6, 2001
Messages
7,981
Reaction score
61
Points
48
Age
43
Location
USA
Country
Ireland
Display Name
John Clare
So... was USARK or USFWS going to issue some kind of an update or statement? It's been a week now.
They should but frankly they're probably scratching their heads wondering what to do now. Once they've figured out a course of action they might make a statement. Their choices at this point are limited. They could appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, but that court hears very few cases and those cases need to be of significant importance (e.g. a person's rights under the constitution), AND the District Court of Appeals ruled unanimously on the Lacey Act, which means the Supreme Court wouldn't likely take it up for that reason alone.

Now, over a year after the import and the interstate bans were imposed, there are still no known cases of B.sal in the US (other than in the labs of the US researchers who lobbied for the interstate ban....). Since the import ban is still in place, it stands to reason that USFWS shouldn't need an interstate ban since there should be no disease carrying animals coming into the country (because the import ban still stands as legal).

To get a specific interstate ban would require a new law. That's pretty hard to get, frankly, and they would need senators and congressmen on board to do it. If I were advising the USFWS I would tell them to take the import ban as a sufficient success and move on.

PS: In my opinion USARK did a fantastic job carrying the torch on this. I intend to donate to them as a form of thanks. Regarding shipping, the law is the law and I don't see any reason to not ship newts and salamanders on the list again, keeping in mind that you still can't ship in or out of DC or the states/US holdings off shore.
 
Last edited:
General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
  • Sal22:
    I think my axie is dying, he’s never had any issues before, I’ve had him 3 years, today I noticed some fluffy looking stuff coming from his genital area so I took him out of his tank and did a full tank clean to make sure the water wasn’t infected as I thought it was fungus and then I noticed he had a cut on his belly which was only small about 5 hours ago and now it’s spread to all of his belly, what do I do I’m freaking out
    +1
    Unlike
  • Sal22:
    Update about my axie, unfortunately he has died over night, he looked as if he was bruised allover his belly, his mucus layer had also started to come off.
    +1
    Unlike
  • Ganaa:
    Anyone here from DMV?
    +1
    Unlike
  • Unlike
  • AlexisJG:
    Hi I have 2 4in juveniles (I’ve had them about 2 weeks and they are doing well I think they’ve grown a little already honestly) but I am supposed to go on a 5-6 day vacation in October about 3-4 months from now. I am wondering how I should go about their care when I am gone. I thought about putting them in separate (fairly big) containers with live plants and/or bubblers with a fan in the dark and either fridging them (my last plan) but I am hoping to to either have someone I trust come feed them and turkey baste waste out or just leave them out and clean the containers before we leave and have someone come check on them once or twice. Does any of this sound like a good or bad idea? I want the best for them. All help appreciated :)
    +1
    Unlike
  • Ganaa:
    @patrickstar116, do you still have your fire salamanders?
    +1
    Unlike
  • patrickstar116:
    @Ganaa, I do you may message me if you wish
    +1
    Unlike
  • HalfDrunkToast:
    hi.....
    +1
    Unlike
  • JDeslippe21:
    Hi, so I have 2 male axolotls and about an hour ago they were both perfectly fine and now only one of them has his tail curling up and his gills are slightly curled?? But other than that they’re both acting normally
    +1
    Unlike
  • Murk:
    Could be he's just excited, spooked or temporarily stressed, which could pass in a few hours. It could also be an indicator of other problems. Do you have any recent water parameters?
    +1
    Unlike
  • AlexisJG:
    Does anyone have any idea how to help with high ammonia levels? I have the API freshwater master kit and everything else’s test results were great besides ammonia. I did a 50% water change and I use API products including ammonia lock.
    +1
    Unlike
  • MuggleMiChu:
    Help! I got my first axolotl two days ago and they have stopped eating. They ate a few frozen blood worms the first day and haven’t eaten or been interested in food since. I feed them frozen blood worms and the tank is around 64 degrees. I do have a filter that moves sometimes and I noticed them swimming up to it, I have a new filter and a fan coming today or tomorrow. I leave the worms in the tank or a little bit before taking them out so I don’t know if they ate when I wasn’t looking. I know it takes a while for them to digest. Does anyone have any tips or knowledge they can share? The pet store I bought them from didn’t have gravel or sand in the tank so I’m not sure if theres an issue or if I’m just impatient. Thank you!
    +1
    Unlike
  • HalfDrunkToast:
    @MuggleMiChu, how big they are? also for substrate, i would not do gravel at all I would either do sand or none at all!
    +1
    Unlike
  • MuggleMiChu:
    They are about 2-3 inches long and I have them in a bare bottom tank
    +1
    Unlike
  • HalfDrunkToast:
    @MuggleMiChu I would say try live black/blood worms untell they are full or just turn there head away ( that's what mine do) if that does not work try to get some live brine shrimp and see if they eat that. baby axolotl prefer live food over frozen food as the frozen food is too cold for them or they can't eat it in one go( that's if you do the blocks) mine eat chopped up frozen thawed shrimp. as for them not eating from what I have experienced with my second axolotl, I got her when she was about an inch long and she ate every day, when they start getting 3-4 inches long they will gradually slow down there eating. and if you really want to do substrate I would do sand because if they do ingest a little bit it won't hurt them.
    +1
    Unlike
  • MuggleMiChu:
    Thank you so much for the information and advice! They are eating again, they ate a lot today. I think it might have been stress from the move or digesting old food, I also noticed they ate some of the food left in the tank (I removed the rest). I’m going to keep the tank bare bottom.
    +2
    Unlike
  • HalfDrunkToast:
    @MuggleMiChu,your so welcome im glad to be of help! and I'm glad that they are eating as well!
    +1
    Unlike
  • Chat Bot:
    AidanD has left the room.
    +1
    Unlike
  • MotherofAxolotls:
    Does anybody know where I can find a Starburst Wild type axolotl??
    +1
    Unlike
  • Alice28:
    Good morning everyone.
    +1
    Unlike
  • HalfDrunkToast:
    morning!
    +1
    Unlike
  • HalfDrunkToast:
    @MotherofAxolotls, i have like 3 but they aren't for sale T-T
    +1
    Unlike
  • Chat Bot:
    MermaidMommy has left the room.
    +1
    Unlike
  • Unlike
  • MotherofAxolotls:
    @HalfDrunkToast is their a price that could change your mind? 🙂
    +1
    Unlike
    MotherofAxolotls: @HalfDrunkToast is their a price that could change your mind? 🙂 +1
    Top