Take action or give up your Pokies!

[Comatose]

Why is that so few of us are adding comments is what I want to know..

This forum has had 392 members logged in the last 24hrs now multiply that loosely by how many days ago this post was created and there should be well over a thousand comments from this site alone...

How many posts do we respond to where keepers are asking for help with a sick or injured T or any of the hundreds of questions that are asked on a weekly basis? Yet very few have taken the same amount of time to drop a comment on the FWC page...I don't get it!

This subject is just as important as any that has ever been brought up,more so IMO because it could lead to multiple species being wiped from the hobby... How little people actually care about this is leaving me with a really bitter taste as far as the "community" goes..

Amen. Hopefully things pick up after the holiday. It would be great to see dealers and breeders bringing attention to this too.

 

[Comatose]

Just a month to go and this thread has more comments than the public commenting section at the Federal Registrar. Just to be clear, if this rule passes then P. subfusca, fasciata, ornata, smithi and vittata will all require permits to keep, breed, sell or transport within the US and a plain English reading of the permitting process indicates permits will not be issued for the purposes of keeping these species as pets. Once the currently held specimens die, these five species will either disappear or simply become 'black market' bugs.

It takes literally five minutes to click this link and leave a well thought out comment. If you don't bother to, don't complain when these species aren't available anymore. We did this once, we can do it again!

 

[14pokies]

Just a month to go and this thread has more comments than the public commenting section at the Federal Registrar. Just to be clear, if this rule passes then P. subfusca, fasciata, ornata, smithi and vittata will all require permits to keep, breed, sell or transport within the US and a plain English reading of the permitting process indicates permits will not be issued for the purposes of keeping these species as pets. Once the currently held specimens die, these five species will either disappear or simply become 'black market' bugs.

It takes literally five minutes to click this link and leave a well thought out comment. If you don't bother to, don't complain when these species aren't available anymore. We did this once, we can do it again!

Litterally no one is behind this.. I don't understand..

I'm wondering how many are just planning on keeping and trading this species illegally.. I'm also wondering how many of them are the same ones that bash brown boxers and illegal importers ..

 

[bryverine]

Well there's been almost 500 views of this thread. Maybe people don't see this as a problem.

It only takes five to ten minutes to post...

 

[BobBarley]

Just left a comment... really hope these amazing spiders aren't going to be banned. I don't keep any Poecilotheria, but this is something that needs to be backed by all of us hobbyists.

 

[Leonardo the Mage]

Just added a comment. Hopefully an addendum will be added allowing us to sell and bred in captivity.

 

[BobBarley]

@Comatose , do you mind if I copy and paste your first post in this thread onto my Instagram page? Lots of spider people are on Instagram, and perhaps we can get more people to comment.

 

[snakecollector]

I have left a comment

 

[Comatose]

Well there's been almost 500 views of this thread. Maybe people don't see this as a problem.

It only takes five to ten minutes to post...

I think there's a misconception that this is liek CITES and Brachypelma where it doesn't really impact the hobbyist. It's important to note that it's not, and I'm not exaggerating when I say it may literally eradicate these species from the US market.

@Comatose , do you mind if I copy and paste your first post in this thread onto my Instagram page? Lots of spider people are on Instagram, and perhaps we can get more people to comment.

Absolutely! Anywhere you want! Check out the post where I describe the permitting process too, and how permits aren't issued for the purposes of "pets".

 

[BobBarley]

Absolutely! Anywhere you want! Check out the post where I describe the permitting process too, and how permits aren't issued for the purposes of "pets".

Ok, thanks, I'll get on it.

 

[Chris LXXIX]

Just a month to go and this thread has more comments than the public commenting section at the Federal Registrar. Just to be clear, if this rule passes then P. subfusca, fasciata, ornata, smithi and vittata will all require permits to keep, breed, sell or transport within the US and a plain English reading of the permitting process indicates permits will not be issued for the purposes of keeping these species as pets.

That's completely beyond me. It's incredible that in a disgraced nation like Italy (even under an arachnid ban!) was and still is, possible to own for every CITES protected animal, the CITES paper necessary but in the U.S, according to your comment, if that rule will pass, a similar thing for those 'Pokies' no.

Then I'd realized that, in two years of this site, I was the only one that uploaded a picture of a official CITES paper (for a genus Brachypelma, but there's for P.imperator and the other, not necessary arachnids, into CITES).

Here something like that would never happen. A ban of arachnids moved by BS reasons? For sure: happened and can happen again. But if genus Poecilotheria (or part of the genus) would, in a worldwide scenario talking, needed to be regulated... no issues here.

Laughable also those few comments about, considering how much T's keepers there's in the U.S. Here we were less than 200 in the entire nation yet we managed to have the hobby back, while in a N.Y corner only (just for saying) you can have definitely more than 200 keepers.

Since I'm fair enough, and not a U.S citizen, I wouldn't comment in something that do not involves my nation with rules/laws I don't even know but sucks, if you ask me.

 

[Venom1080]

Left a comment as well... Would be a shame if these spiders were lost to the hobby... If this does get passed I just hope it stays in the states.

 

[BobBarley]

I posted it: https://www.instagram.com/p/BO_O8WODC1N/ However, unsure how much of a difference it will make.

 

[Chris LXXIX]

Would be a shame if these spiders were lost to the hobby...

The only spiders that are "lost" to the hobby are the extincted ones. The rest are those that, for a lot of different reasons, aren't allowed by single nation/s laws, like Atrax robustus, a perfect example of that.

Thing is, as I've said, when it comes to protected arachnids (read genus Brachypelma) in the U.S, as far as I know, keepers doesn't have this:



* the hidden parts (for privacy) are mine and breeder personal details. See, how it's easy? If tomorrow genus Poecilotheria, or part of that genus, will be at risk or fall into CITES or something, here in Italy breeders will do just exactly when it comes to genus Brachypelma. Here I read a lot about Brachypelma... "hobby form, WC..." etc yet I have to see a U.S keeper with a personal CITES for those genus.

If this does get passed I just hope it stays in the states.

Probably.

 

[BobBarley]

The only spiders that are "lost" to the hobby are the extincted ones. The rest are those that, for a lot of different reasons, aren't allowed by single nation/s laws, like Atrax robustus, a perfect example of that.

Thing is, as I've said, when it comes to protected arachnids (read genus Brachypelma) in the U.S, as far as I know, keepers doesn't have this:

View attachment 228657 View attachment 228658

* the hidden parts (for privacy) are mine and breeder personal details. See, how it's easy? If tomorrow genus Poecilotheria, or part of that genus, will be at risk or fall into CITES or something, here in Italy breeders will do just exactly when it comes to genus Brachypelma. Here I read a lot about Brachypelma... "hobby form, WC..." etc yet I have to see a U.S keeper with a personal CITES for those genus.




Probably.

Here, as far as I know, we don't need CITES papers for keeping Brachypelma. However, those WC Nicaraguan Brachypelma albopilosum entering the states... Well, I just don't know.

 

[Chris LXXIX]

Here, as far as I know, we don't need CITES papers for keeping Brachypelma. However, those WC Nicaraguan Brachypelma albopilosum entering the states... Well, I just don't know.

This. And it's absurd IMO, for that CITES is CITES, and technically is a worldwide issue. Therefore for every single (in this case, genus Brachypelma) CITES protected arachnids everyone should have at home a CITES paper for him/her. Yes: 100 genus Brachypelma Theraphosidae? 100 CITES papers like those, otherwise it's smuggling, since you can prove how you gained that.

Now I don't know, obviously, what the outcome of this Poecilotheria U.S discussion would been, but let's assume part of that genus will fall into CITES... business as usual here, the authorities no matter what happened during the ban period, are always friendly and severe on those issues. But "you" can, and, most important, are on the right side of the laws.

 

[Philth]

How many people commented on that one compared to this though?

The last time 11 species were on the chopping block, and there was 232 comments. Admittedly it was like pulling teeth trying to get people to comment back then, and I don't think we will get anywhere close to that this time. My comment will be up tomorrow then I will urging others to do so, by sharing the links on social media outlets.

Later, Tom

 

[Walker253]

I wanted to get my head around this first to leave a decent comment. Thank you @Comatose for the bullet points to help me put it in what I thought a helpful comment, at least I hope so. I only have my P regalis, but I'd hate to lose any of them. I'll paste my comment here.

Hello,

Whatever good intentions were for these species, are lost in the proposed set of new regulations being set forth. These new rules are a major overreach and will not help these species survival.

Clearly, the greatest threat to 5 Poecilotheria species affected is habitat destruction and human encroachment. There is no wild stock being taken out of the wild for the pet trade. The pet trade has been responsible and the species often available for sale are captive born. I don't ever remember seeing a wild caught Poecilotheria species in captivity. If they go extinct in the wild, the established breeding programs from responsible enthusiasts might be the only way to keep them from total extinction. If these new regulations were to go into effect, current captive bred stocks don't adhere to IUCN standards or guidelines, extinction would be likely. There are no programs that adhere to the standard and few if any zoos have the breeding programs to keep sustained populations.

I'm sure the authors of the original proposals had good intentions. The problem is the extreme overreach and not looking at the big picture. If these rules are enacted, it could and likely will criminalized many thousands of responsible Poecilotheria keepers and many responsible breeders. They are beautiful tarantulas that many will still desire to keep. "Brown Boxing" would likely increase and someone might even be willing to acquire a wild caught specimen. Nobody wants that.

Ultimately, survival of the species is the ultimate goal. I would suggest even stronger penalties for anybody caught smuggling these or any other wild caught species currently under some sort of protection. A healthy "captive born" pet population is a vital part of the wild population success.

Thank you for your time.

 

[Cheo Samad]

Left a comment. I'd hate to see such a beautiful genus take such a devestating blow in the hobby as I'm just starting. I'm failing to see any real upsides to these impending regulations. All I can see is a huge decline over the next few years of the species in this genus that would be subject to these regulations.

If conservation was the goal, wouldn't destroying potential future private collections, and breedings be the total opposite of what you'd want to do?

 

[Ungoliant]

If conservation was the goal, wouldn't destroying potential future private collections, and breedings be the total opposite of what you'd want to do?

Their argument is that since the private breeders don't keep good records on their lineages, the current captive population is useless for conservation purposes, because they can't guarantee that there hasn't been hybridization or excessive inbreeding.

That may be true. However, I contend that the domestic pet trade has little effect on the survival of these species of Poecilotheria in the wild, because the current demand is met by captive breeding. Banning these animals from the domestic pet trade, however, could very well have the effect of creating demand for these animals to be smuggled out of their native habitats.