88 replies to this topic

[MysticNanitic]

That's an interesting point, NickAnter, about the destruction caused by housecats.  They've decimated songbird populations in many areas from what I've read.  I think the functional difference here is the threat insects pose to agriculture, which (if someone here knows better please correct me) is ultimately the driving force behind the laws in question.  Imagine if cats started eating almonds from orchards here in CA!  I'd love to hear from someone who has studied law, I have a feeling that protections and rules for business and commerce make up a large share of our laws, and most lobbying is centered around these as well.  There are laws protecting the environment, but there are not enough - and it seems like a lot of the frustration in this thread is lack of rules for some obviously destructive behavior, and somewhat arbitrary rules that try to minimize moving ant queens around. 

 

I think in this case, from an environmentalist perspective, we can celebrate that the interests of agribusiness and people who breath air and value natural ecosystems align in a crude way to try to keep some potential invasives in check.  If there is any doubt which pigs are more equal than other pigs - success at reining in overuse of pesticides (see honeybees), fertilizer runoff (see lake eutrophication in the US), and other destructive behavior that save the agriculture industry money has been abysmal at the federal level, with states taking some action of there own (in Ohio it took a river catching fire first!).

Edited by MysticNanitic, August 13 2021 - 10:07 AM.

[NickAnter]

Truly though, the main damage, aside from a few species, that ants cause crops, is the tending of aphids. And quote frankly, if the species is already there, then these problems are probably already occuring. Destructive species, such as S. invicta, and Atta texana, I can understand, however, Myrmentoma? Aphaenogaster? Acanthomyops? Formica?

In regards to the law, I don't study law, and frankly have no intention of becoming a lawywer, however, political donations, and other such influences play a big part in our politics. We see this with Unions, large companies, and just generally wealthy people. Now, a common sense thing such as species native to states being allowed to be transported between states might stabd a chance of passing as a bill, so long as the one who starts the bill is not a polarizing figure. We see policians oppose things purely because of the people who support them. See Nancy Pelosi refusing to negotiate a stimulus package before the election. This is sadly the way of politics.

[11.11.00]

I just want to add that places like Japan, Southern China, Italy, and Spain have no ant importation laws whatsoever and an even larger hobby compared to places as well as climate like California and Texas yet they all share the same 4-5 invasive species none of which were introduced through the ant trade. 

I have no doubt that a blacklist would acheive the same results as the status quo, but there is also no reason for aphis to change their regulations other than ease of enforcement. 

Edited by 11.11.00, August 13 2021 - 1:02 PM.

[MysticNanitic]

Given the reason for this board I think we can be excused for taking a narrow view... However the USDA PPQ 526 permit requirement applies to many many insect and mite species.  It's probably not reasonable to expect permit-free carve-outs for ants in general for the sake of hobbyists, let alone a species by species, zone by zone whitelisting -- or for that matter to expect funding for the staggering amount of research that would be required to do this.

[11.11.00]

Given the reason for this board I think we can be excused for taking a narrow view... However the USDA PPQ 526 permit requirement applies to many many insect and mite species.  It's probably not reasonable to expect permit-free carve-outs for ants in general for the sake of hobbyists, let alone a species by species, zone by zone whitelisting -- or for that matter to expect funding for the staggering amount of research that would be required to do this.

Except there are cutouts for the reptile and tarantula hobby. All the popular feeder roaches are exempt from regulation despite being more obvious plant pests than any ant. 

[MysticNanitic]

 

Given the reason for this board I think we can be excused for taking a narrow view... However the USDA PPQ 526 permit requirement applies to many many insect and mite species.  It's probably not reasonable to expect permit-free carve-outs for ants in general for the sake of hobbyists, let alone a species by species, zone by zone whitelisting -- or for that matter to expect funding for the staggering amount of research that would be required to do this.

Except there are cutouts for the reptile and tarantula hobby. All the popular feeder roaches are exempt from regulation despite being more obvious plant pests than any ant. 

 

 

Show me if I'm wrong, this is hardly my field.  But if we're talking about interstate transport and the requirement of a 526 permit - I'm looking at the categories of organisms regulated as plant pests by the USDA and neither reptiles are arachnids fit into any of them.  As for roaches, I don't know.  I assume some have been deregulated through efforts by the pet trade industry.  I can't find good information on this in google with a quick search.  It's certainly likely that if this hobby grows a lot, there will be money to make at scale and there will be efforts to deregulate less risky behavior, we already see it with P. occidentalis yes?

 

USDA APHIS | Regulated Organism and Soil Permits

[Kaelwizard]

 

 

Given the reason for this board I think we can be excused for taking a narrow view... However the USDA PPQ 526 permit requirement applies to many many insect and mite species.  It's probably not reasonable to expect permit-free carve-outs for ants in general for the sake of hobbyists, let alone a species by species, zone by zone whitelisting -- or for that matter to expect funding for the staggering amount of research that would be required to do this.

Except there are cutouts for the reptile and tarantula hobby. All the popular feeder roaches are exempt from regulation despite being more obvious plant pests than any ant. 

 

 

Show me if I'm wrong, this is hardly my field.  But if we're talking about interstate transport and the requirement of a 526 permit - I'm looking at the categories of organisms regulated as plant pests by the USDA and neither reptiles are arachnids fit into any of them.  As for roaches, I don't know.  I assume some have been deregulated through efforts by the pet trade industry.  I can't find good information on this in google with a quick search.  It's certainly likely that if this hobby grows a lot, there will be money to make at scale and there will be efforts to deregulate less risky behavior, we already see it with P. occidentalis yes?

 

USDA APHIS | Regulated Organism and Soil Permits

 

If I am understanding their post correctly they meant that their feeder roaches are the pests, not the arachnids or reptiles.

[11.11.00]

 

 

Given the reason for this board I think we can be excused for taking a narrow view... However the USDA PPQ 526 permit requirement applies to many many insect and mite species.  It's probably not reasonable to expect permit-free carve-outs for ants in general for the sake of hobbyists, let alone a species by species, zone by zone whitelisting -- or for that matter to expect funding for the staggering amount of research that would be required to do this.

Except there are cutouts for the reptile and tarantula hobby. All the popular feeder roaches are exempt from regulation despite being more obvious plant pests than any ant. 

 

 

Show me if I'm wrong, this is hardly my field.  But if we're talking about interstate transport and the requirement of a 526 permit - I'm looking at the categories of organisms regulated as plant pests by the USDA and neither reptiles are arachnids fit into any of them.  As for roaches, I don't know.  I assume some have been deregulated through efforts by the pet trade industry.  I can't find good information on this in google with a quick search.  It's certainly likely that if this hobby grows a lot, there will be money to make at scale and there will be efforts to deregulate less risky behavior, we already see it with P. occidentalis yes?

 

USDA APHIS | Regulated Organism and Soil Permits

 

Dubia roaches and other similar exotic roaches are the plant pests I am talking about and they are on the exempt list. 

Hopefully if antkeeping continues growing, there could be similar allowances made although what makes dubia's easier is their captive bred origin which could control for many pathogens in the wild. 

[MysticNanitic]

Dubia roaches and other similar exotic roaches are the plant pests I am talking about and they are on the exempt list. 

 

 

 

 

Hopefully if antkeeping continues growing, there could be similar allowances made although what makes dubia's easier is their captive bred origin which could control for many pathogens in the wild. 

 

Interesting little roaches, I hadn't heard of them before digging around on this site.  I imagine crickets and mealworms get a similar treatment.