• Posted 12/19/2024.
    =====================

    I am still waiting on my developer to finish up on the Classifieds Control Panel so I can use it to encourage members into becoming paying members. Google Adsense has become a real burden on the viewing of this site, but honestly it is the ONLY source of income now that keeps it afloat. I tried offering disabling the ads being viewed by paying members, but apparently that is not enough incentive. Quite frankly, Google Adsense has dropped down to where it barely brings in enough daily to match even a single paid member per day. But it still gets the bills paid. But at what cost?

    So even without the classifieds control panel being complete, I believe I am going to have to disable those Google ads completely and likely disable some options here that have been free since going to the new platform. Like classified ad bumping, member name changes, and anything else I can use to encourage this site to be supported by the members instead of the Google Adsense ads.

    But there is risk involved. I will not pay out of pocket for very long during this last ditch experimental effort. If I find that the membership does not want to support this site with memberships, then I cannot support your being able to post your classified ads here for free. No, I am not intending to start charging for your posting ads here. I will just shut the site down and that will be it. I will be done with FaunaClassifieds. I certainly don't need this, and can live the rest of my life just fine without it. If I see that no one else really wants it to survive neither, then so be it. It goes away and you all can just go elsewhere to advertise your animals and merchandise.

    Not sure when this will take place, and I don't intend to give any further warning concerning the disabling of the Google Adsense. Just as there probably won't be any warning if I decide to close down this site. You will just come here and there will be some sort of message that the site is gone, and you have a nice day.

    I have been trying to make a go of this site for a very long time. And quite frankly, I am just tired of trying. I had hoped that enough people would be willing to help me help you all have a free outlet to offer your stuff for sale. But every year I see less and less people coming to this site, much less supporting it financially. That is fine. I tried. I retired the SerpenCo business about 14 years ago, so retiring out of this business completely is not that big if a step for me, nor will it be especially painful to do. When I was in Thailand, I did not check in here for three weeks. I didn't miss it even a little bit. So if you all want it to remain, it will be in your hands. I really don't care either way.

    =====================
    Some people have indicated that finding the method to contribute is rather difficult. And I have to admit, that it is not all that obvious. So to help, here is a thread to help as a quide. How to become a contributing member of FaunaClassifieds.

    And for the record, I will be shutting down the Google Adsense ads on January 1, 2025.
  • Responding to email notices you receive.
    **************************************************
    In short, DON'T! Email notices are to ONLY alert you of a reply to your private message or your ad on this site. Replying to the email just wastes your time as it goes NOWHERE, and probably pisses off the person you thought you replied to when they think you just ignored them. So instead of complaining to me about your messages not being replied to from this site via email, please READ that email notice that plainly states what you need to do in order to reply to who you are trying to converse with.

usark lawsuit

rodneynboalich said:
That's the first line from the link...read it...lacey act was made to make it illegal to go across state lines with the intent to sell poached animals from another state....interstate commerce is crossing state lines for sales.....you really don't understand much do you
Click to expand...

You know the definition of bias. You are asking me to read and believe a line from an anti exotic website and believe it?

What are you going to do next, start quoting the humane society?

The anti pet trade and FWS want you to believe that, but the actual law, the actual words on paper does not say that. Show me in the actual law where it says anything about interstate commence.
 
You are one step away from posting directly from Humane society.

I understand what you are reading, but you are actually not correct on it.

This part.

Finally, it sought to buttress state laws already in existence for the protection of game and birds
Click to expand...

If it is illegal in x state, it makes it illegal to import from y state to x state.

Pythons are not illegal in Idaho, they are not illegal in Oregon. If you import a snake from Idaho, you are not violating state law. So lacey act does not apply.

And that is only in states with laws that ban exporting or importing.

To be clear on this. The lacey act only applies to states that have restrictions or bans in place. The law was made to support state laws.

The FWS is saying that they have the right to make up a ban and enforce it on the states. The states don't ban the animal, they do. And they have the right to force that ban on all states, regardless.

That is not remotely what the lacey act says or was intended. Now that I got you to read articles about it, do you understand.

States have the right to restrict or ban animals. The lacey act only enforces those bans on a federal to support the state bans. It can not just make up bans and enforce it everywhere.
 
Dude you said there's nothing in the lacey that prevents interstate commerce....and I pointed out that the whole reason it was started was to ban interstate commerce...which is the actual reason it was formed ...and im right....you really need to learn how to 1 understand things and 2 learn how to argue....you keep changing to another subject every time I prove you wrong....do a search on the history of the lacey act and John lacey the person it's named after...and I'll repeat you said the lacey can't ban interstate commerce and there's nothing in the lacey act about interstate commerce...
Now this is the part where you change your argument and we'll I was only referring to the big snakes....sso go ahead and say that and I'll post what you said earlier
 
Animals can get ban without a state law...what you are referring to is the criminality of interstate commerce when an original state law was previously broken then the going across state line with an animal that is being possessed illegally becomes under the jurisdiction of federal government ..and in these cases it's prosecutible under lacey act..the point of that part of the lacey act is to insure that the violations in one state can still be prosecuted if the animal or person who committed the violation gos to another state....this law is totally separate from the invasive/injurious aspect of the lacey act.

That law you are talking about deals with mostly native animals...only in cases of exotics with state laws banning import or ownership does lacey act come into play...and its a whole different aspect and part of lacey act....
 
Seriously dude how dumb are you...you say that the secretary of the interior doesn't have any procedures to follow then you yourself post 4 for of them....you out say the lacey act has nothing to do with interstate commerce..I show you that banning interstate commerce was the reason it was started and you say I'm wrong....now your posting on the original offensive aspect of lacey act for that makes interstate commerce illegal...dude look at your own post...you out are continually proving yourself wrong with you post.....


Now your only option is to switch your argument to say that you went referring to one part of the lacey act when you said the lacey can't ban interstate commerce....you argue like a child....
 
And the whole point of this thread was missed because of Captain I support usark so that makes me a expert on federal legal code....the point was that pushing fws on the interstate commerce issue is going to cause fws to seek an amendment to the lacey act with very clear language that states they can regulate interstate commerce...and if the snakes are still on the lacey act when that happens we will be right back to square one.
 
I could not understand that long run on diatribe that looks like it was written by a third grader.

But since it is rodney, let me take a guess. The last time he was here, he was saying usark is wrong for NOT suing.

And now that usark is suing, he is going to say usark is wrong for suing.

And let me not forget the usual. " Oh you do not know what you are talking about. I do. I did research. I read the stuff. I read all of it. I know how it works. Prove it? Hang on let me ask them for it so I can read it."
 
rodneynboalich said:
And no I can't start an organization....there's no money...there's no organizing people....and there's just too many people willing to believe you can give usark 10 dollars and all their problems will be solved...the industry is lazy and uniform and it seems to want to stay that way....kinda like this whole country
Click to expand...
Weird. I could have sworn you and terry already had one. Then there was the other group in the retic community. That is two groups I could have sworn you were involved in.
 
As usual you are looking to post something just to tey and start a fight...at least this time you admitted not taking the time to read and think about the post first. Read the thread you will see what the issue is with the lawsuit...a 3 year old understand it....Terry's organization is no longer up and running as far as I know...the retic group not sure what happened there....once usark finally said ok we will sue people started backing them again....but unfortunately usarks lawsuit if handled wrong will open the door for Fws to gain a lot of authority...


It's important that is at least some kind of record of issues people have with the lawsuit...and a record that it was public......just in case usark tries to back peddle in the future....
 
You post a lot of stuff, but you don't back it up. The lacey act can be used if the state is shipping outside of the usa or if it is illegal in that state.

But the lacey act can not create new species to ban. There has to be a ban before the lacey act can enforce it. The lacey act can not effect interstate shipping or sales if the species are not banned in the states they are exporting from or to.

The FWS could not get a ban through congress, thanks to USARK (which is still complain about), so they used the lacey act, illegally, to do what the law was going to do.

Mr. boalich, I know you have to be right on this. But please, no insulting. It shows that you really don't have a good argument.
 
What on earth are you talking about now...any time a ban or new law is passed it go under whatever legal code would apply to it....and now fws used the lacey act illegally to add the snakes when just a few post ago you said that the secretary of the interior added the snakes to the lacey act because he can add anything he wants without any scientific research or data...those were your words....and no fws didn't use the lacey to ban the snakes...and injurious listing is added to lacey because that's the legalcode/jurisdiction that would cover the ban.....Fws can't add anything to the lacey act without a bill being passed or the secretary of the interior adding them....seriously stop making thins up and saying random stuff just to try and be right.....
 
You are correct, I missed typed. I meant to say Secretary of interior.

I miss typed.

I am sorry.

But you still have not proven that he needs to use anything close to science to add anything to anything.
 
And no its not a lacey act violation to ship out of a state to another country like you posted...and that another issue usark should be focusing on
 
rodneynboalich said:
Then how was it illegal to add the snakes to the lacey if there's is no standards or protocols for listing
Click to expand...

You are the one that is arguing for a lawsuit for adding the animals. I told you it was a lost cause.

rodneynboalich said:
And no its not a lacey act violation to ship out of a state to another country like you posted...and that another issue usark should be focusing on
Click to expand...

Actually it is.

§ 3372. Prohibited acts
(a)
Offenses other than marking offenses
It is unlawful for any person -
(1)
to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire,
or purchase any fish or wildlife or plant taken,
possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any la
w, treaty, or regulation of the United States or in
violation of any Indian tribal law;
(2)
to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase in interstate or foreign commerce -
(A)
any fish or wildlife taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law or
regulation of any State or in violation of any foreign law;
Click to expand...

Mr. Boalich, I think you might want to read what we are talking about.

You are the expert, and yet the person you claim is never read it, is proving you wrong by quoting it.

That part is also important in another manner.

You see here it states it either has to be regulated by a state or US government. The lacey act, its self can not ban species. It only enforces on the federal level other regulations.

Which is why adding the 5 to the lacey act is illegal, when they are not regulated by anything else.
 
That's only if an original law was broken. Then it becomes lacey act / federal offense if any kind of border is crossed...that law doesn't apply to say exporting a species th as t is listed as injurious or invasive....and if you try and say it applies to everything then you will have to admit that the fws can restrict interstate commerce...because it says that
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top