• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Fedex and corns

I am just saying "Contains X number of Pantherophis Guttata" on the shipping label is all that is required. Where I work when we get chemicals delivered they are labeled with their chemical name and their amount not their common names so it would stand to reason that if they have to be labeled "in accordance with existing commercial practices" that the scientific name on the label is commercial practice.
 
I am just saying "Contains X number of Pantherophis Guttata" on the shipping label is all that is required.

Where I work when we get chemicals delivered they are labeled with their chemical name and their amount not their common names so it would stand to reason that if they have to be labeled " in accordance with existing commercial practices"that the scientific name on the label is commercial practice.

I understand what you're saying 100%, but I am saying it does not specify that scientific name is only required (as I thought we had both agreed?)...So you very well could be wrong on whether or not scientific and common name is required (as could I). Again, you are interpreting something as one thing when it could mean another...So why take the risk, why recommend to others to take the risk? Why not just list both and cover your butt (as many breeders already do)?

We also are not talking about chemicals, we are talking about live animals. I do not believe commercial practice for chemicals applies to live animal shipments in the least. Apples and oranges. ;)
 
Live and you learn, but I've always trusted those that have said you need scientific name, common name, and live harmless reptiles on the side of the box per the Lacey Act. My own fault for not reading it myself I guess. :) It would appear that per the letter of the law, the package needs to be labeled as to it's contents. Technically I guess you could just put "snakes" on it and it would be labeled accurately (though admittedly "dumb").

While scientific name, common name, number and Live Harmless Reptiles make for the most specific label you could attach, it's not required. I didn't notice reading anywhere that it specifically indicated that it needed to be that specific inside the box either, but I'll admit I skimmed. Am I going to change my labels at this point? No, but it's good great clarification of the information and on the personal level, it feels good to be vindicated when I just used Pantherophus Guttatus and Live HARMLESS reptiles to avoid the snake-o-phobes! :shrugs:

D80
 
I write "___corns" on one side of the box, and the scientific name way over on the other side. It is plain to see if you are looking for it, but NOT obvious. It is just written in regular pen and just big enough to read, but not jump out at you. The reason? Too many people still don't like reptiles, and I have heard horror stories from people who work at the various carriers of how some might treat a reptile package. By keeping the info subtle, I am hoping to comply with the law, but that any ophidiophobic workers are way too busy and hurried to scrutinize it and try to cause any harm to my shipment. Or for them to try to see if there is any way they can stop or slow down the transit, in case they don't even know their business does allow reptile shipments. Also, I don't want to possibly tempt somebody to steal something if they DO like herps!

Other than complying with the law, I don't see any good coming from obvious labeling. So I try to comply, while being as low key as possible.
 
We also are not talking about chemicals, we are talking about live animals. I do not believe commercial practice for chemicals applies to live animal shipments in the least. Apples and oranges. ;)

I don’t believe it is apples and oranges. The chemical names are listed instead of common names with shipments because we use both Propylene Glycol and Ethylene Glycol where I work, both are antifreeze both arrive in tankers but are used for two entirely different things in the plant and can’t be mixed. In Ky the corn snake is also the red rat snake and a chicken snake and a black snake can be a black rat snake (Pantherophis obselota), a Prairie King snake (Lampropelitis calligaster), or a black racer (Coluber constrictor). My point is common shipping practice is to include the scientific name on shipments animal and chemical because common names can be misleading.
 
I don’t believe it is apples and oranges. The chemical names are listed instead of common names with shipments because we use both Propylene Glycol and Ethylene Glycol where I work, both are antifreeze both arrive in tankers but are used for two entirely different things in the plant and can’t be mixed. In Ky the corn snake is also the red rat snake and a chicken snake and a black snake can be a black rat snake (Pantherophis obselota), a Prairie King snake (Lampropelitis calligaster), or a black racer (Coluber constrictor).

The argument can be made that scientific names can be changed as well (or two used at once)...Take the cornsnake for example...Look at the issue with them changing cornsnake taxonomy a few years ago. E. Guttatus and P. Guttatus are used interchangeably currently.

And again, you can't define (without a doubt) what the Lacey Act means by "commercial practices" and can not compare it to shipping chemicals. I see no logic in "because the Federal Gov't wants chemicals labeled one way you should label live animal shipments that way as well." :shrugs:

My point is common shipping practice is to include the scientific name on shipments animal and chemical because common names can be misleading.

Common shipping practice is to include the scientific name and common name on live animal shipments (and it doesn't hurt to add "Live Harmless Reptiles" so no one gets there panties in a twist thinking a cornsnake is going to kill them :rolleyes:). I never said list only the common name, but both together (as is obvious from the labels I attached in a previous post).
 
I, btw, contacted USFW for clarification on labeling on the Lacey Act. Hopefully I will hear something back (they automatic e-mail response said 2-5 days). :)
 
Last edited:
I'll admit it, I'm horrible at remembering to include outside labels. But I do have to say that the vast majority of packages I've received (including several from some of the bigger breeders out there) have never included any outside labeling regarding scientific name and common name. At best they sometimes have included "live harmless reptiles", but even then most just have the perishable that's on the outside of the box and thats it.
 
While James Brown may be the head of FedEx's Legal Department, he is not the head of the Federal Government

Lacy does not say it has to be on the outside box just with the shipment. The quantity and common name is on the bill of sale/ shipper inside the box. James Brown the head of Fed Ex’s legal department agreed that it was not defined and since there were several people along the Fed Ex line that kept calling me saying we don’t ship snakes I kept it a secret as best I could within the law.

Gee, I don't know who to take advice from, the head of the legal department of one of the biggest shippers in the world, or TME.
 
I'll admit it, I'm horrible at remembering to include outside labels. But I do have to say that the vast majority of packages I've received (including several from some of the bigger breeders out there) have never included any outside labeling regarding scientific name and common name. At best they sometimes have included "live harmless reptiles", but even then most just have the perishable that's on the outside of the box and thats it.

Ditto with some of the packages only saying perishable. That's how this thread started, because I was wondering if the customer is responsible for a lack of proper labeling in the eyes of the Lacey act. I had to ask because I thought that was against the lacey act, which apparently it is, but then I wondered why it happened so often. With regards to the run of the mill perishable box you get with corn snakes, does anyone here think it's a matter of "no one's been caught" so it's acceptable to do so, a simple slip of the mind, lack of knowledge of the actual law? It seems, based on the posts in this thread and what Ive read over the internet so far, that its mostly interpretation of the lacey act or lack of knowledge of what it actually says, and also a simple slip of the mind (which seems common, mistkaes happen). Also, do you think people realize they are putting their customers at risk too due to their mistakes or lack of knowledge? Better yet, do most customers who buy corn snakes even realize this risk (however big or small)? My example would still be that 15 year old who's parents consent to buying a corn online. Instead of going to a petstore, they will receive a shipment from a breeder. Since they are "new" to that process, do you think it's still their responsiblity to check out the lacey act themselves? I highly doubt that is a common practice amongst that one-time or first-time customer and if they do check it out, i doubt they would refuse a package with a poor live animal in it. This is all assuming the package is from a certified fedex/ups shipper by the way. I mean, I know most people don't have any trouble if it just say perishable, but it's something to think about. I hope all of this makes sense. I might be repeating myself...as for everyone else though, great discussion so far!
 
Gee, I don't know who to take advice from, the head of the legal department of one of the biggest shippers in the world, or TME.

Way to be a troll, Wade. :rolleyes:

I already proved that the statement made by James Brown (per Khaman) was inaccurate by posting the actual Lacey Act that states the package must be labeled (not simply in the bill of sale inside the box).

Still going to try and be a smart-butt when I post the USFW's reply to my inquiry on what specifically we're required to do?
 
does anyone here think it's a matter of "no one's been caught" so it's acceptable to do so, a simple slip of the mind, lack of knowledge of the actual law? It seems, based on the posts in this thread and what Ive read over the internet so far, that its mostly interpretation of the lacey act or lack of knowledge of what it actually says, and also a simple slip of the mind (which seems common, mistkaes happen).

People have been caught and fined...But I think most of it is a lack of knowledge on a shippers part. While the receiver could be held liable, IMO it is the shippers responsibility to be educated on the legalities of shipping as the receiver has no control over what the shipper does.
 
I already proved that the statement made by James Brown (per Khaman) was inaccurate by posting the actual Lacey Act that states the package must be labeled (not simply in the bill of sale inside the box).

Not inaccurate,I put the number (if more than one) and the scientific name on the shipping label on the outside of the box. I am not advertising “Hey look here! Snake here!” all over the box. I am labeling it by common shipping practices. I challenge you to find one manual that stipulates animal shipping practices. I found several just at one of our shipping gates that deal with all other shipping practice and procedures and used that as a guideline for my procedures when shipping animals.
 
I'll admit it, I'm horrible at remembering to include outside labels. But I do have to say that the vast majority of packages I've received (including several from some of the bigger breeders out there) have never included any outside labeling regarding scientific name and common name. At best they sometimes have included "live harmless reptiles", but even then most just have the perishable that's on the outside of the box and thats it.

People have been caught and fined...But I think most of it is a lack of knowledge on a shippers part. While the receiver could be held liable, IMO it is the shippers responsibility to be educated on the legalities of shipping as the receiver has no control over what the shipper does.

A lack of knowledge would have to be on the top of my list of reasons as I am completely guilty of that one. Up until this very moment, I was completely unaware of the Lacey Act and the requirement of the common and species name plus the quantity needing to be on the package. I have most of that info in the package, but that's just "because". Most of the packages I've received do not have that info, and the couple I have received (and noticed it on the box) I simply put down to that shipper's own personal way of shipping. FedEx did not make me aware of any regulations when I became certified, nor did they require it on the sample box I sent them. This thread most definitely needs to be "stickied", IMO!
 
The reason that the "correct" labeling has not become widespread is probably because, for the most part, it is not enforced. I don't personally know of anyone who was ever fined or prosecuted for incorrect labels. If a few people have been fined, it was most likely large, high profile dealers, or more likely, somebody whose labeling got noticed only because of some other infraction they were caught on, first. Once you get caught doing something wrong, they always look for other related things to make it more worth their while.

It is unlikely Fish and Wildlife will have manpower to start randomly checking FedEx or Delta packages. HOWEVER, if your package ever comes under scrutiny for any other reason, then incorrect labeling might get noticed and cause problems. Since it is pretty easy to comply, you might as well at least make the effort to do it as unobtrusively as possible (even though the chances are slim that anyone will ever notice a lack of labeling). If it looks like you "more or less" complied, you might be able to win your case before the judge, even if F & W wanted it done slightly differently, especially since the language is somewhat vague on what constitutes standard practice. But if it is not labeled at all, you probably would lose.

Of course, I am not a lawyer and am just going by logic, and what I have read about in past confrontations with US F & W. Anytime you deal with the government though, you can't always expect logical behavior.
 
Wade said:
Troll? that is really harsh.

Well, don't act like one. Participate in the discussion rather then trying to start trouble by posting smart-butt comments to/about me in threads I post in. ;)

,I put the number (if more than one) and the scientific name on the shipping label on the outside of the box.

Ooooo, I see. I took your first reply to me in the literal sense when you said Lacy does not say it has to be on the outside box just with the shipment. Sorry for misunderstanding.

I am not advertising “Hey look here! Snake here!” all over the box.

Now come on now, you're exaggerating. You can label accurately without being obnoxious about it (my labels case in point).

I challenge you to find one manual that stipulates animal shipping practices.

I am. :) I said I contacted USFW for them to spell out the labeling issue for me/us. I'm waiting with baited breath for their reply...Always better to get things from the horses mouth rather then rely on others interpretations which very well could be inaccurate. Why exactly did you ask FedEx about it over those who enforce the law (USFW)?

kathylove said:
HOWEVER, if your package ever comes under scrutiny for any other reason, then incorrect labeling might get noticed and cause problems.

I believe this is exactly how those that were fined got caught. For some reason their packages were searched or some other such thing for whatever reason. I read about it a long time ago (on KS.com I think).
 
That makes sense that a package would only get caught for the lableing thing if something about it was noticed first. That's like seat belt laws. The cops won't stop you for just that typically, but if you run a red light and they see you don't have one after they pull you over (you draw attention to yourself) they will obviously stick you for that.

Anyway...I'm interested to see what you find out from USFW. Thank you for checking that out for everyone. That should set things straight and I'm sure it will be useful to others as well :)
 
But don't forget...

You can ask the same question to 10 different agents (any of them - IRS, F & W, any government agency), and get 10 different answers. It would be nice if the answer has a name on it, so you can keep it safe and use it someday if you ever find yourself in front of a judge.

Nobody who works for the government likes to be the one to put their name on something and answer a question that could get them in trouble if their boss doesn't like the answer.
 
Back
Top