Herps in the News: Snake Import Ban Takes Effect Soon

News Link:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/17/us/florida-python-ban/index.html

In January, 2012, the United States Department of the Interior banned the importation of four exotic species of snakes and their eggs to the country. These species were the Burmese python Python molurus, northern African python Python sebae sebae, southern African python Python sebae natalensis and yellow anaconda Eunectes notaeus. These four species of snakes were deemed harmful to the United States due to their negative ecological effects on native fauna. These snakes were targeted due to their large size, propensity for being kept in captivity, and frequency of being released or escaped into the environment. Additionally, these snakes have been shown to do well in the native ecosystems of the United States, especially in the warmer, subtropical parts of the country. In particular, the Burmese python is of concern in the Florida Everglades. This large species of python has set up a large population in the Everglades after many years of pets either escaping of being released there by unprepared or negligent owners. According to the news report, the population may be in the tens of thousands, with breeding evidenced by egg clutches containing as many as 83 eggs. In addition to taking away resources from other large, native predators, the snakes are wreaking havoc on native prey items, several of whom are endangered or threatened.

It is important to note that this importation ban will not have any applications to those individuals who already own any of these snake species. The ban will, however, restrict the movement of these snakes between state lines. In other words, the snakes currently owned now must stay in the state they are being held in. It is hoped that this transportation ban will also help to limit the release of these snakes into new areas.

This story is currently relevant because this ban, while passed in January, does not take effect until late March. It is being enforced under the Lacey Act, which was designed to stop illegal animal trafficking. Penalties under the Lacey Act are severe, and it is hoped these consequences will be harsh enough to deter those individuals who might otherwise continue to trade these exotic species illegally.

In my opinion, I support this legislation very much, as I believe this is an excellent first step to controlling the exotic pet trade that has been demonstrated to have negative impacts on native fauna and on the species itself, especially when unregulated. While an unpopular view among many herpetologists and those interested in exotic animal care, I support legislation that maintains wild population in their own native habitats and limits global movement of pets. It has always been a belief of mine that humans should not transport animal species around the globe. Instead, we should work to conserve wild population of these charismatic species in their native habitats. It is important to note that many of the places and habitats that these animals are being harvested from are under peril, and the conservation efforts in these places are typically underfunded, understaffed, and ineffective. If all the money in the pet trade was applied instead to native conservation efforts, the health of innumerable animal and plant populations would be much better and ready to take on the perils of the future for others to enjoy.