TERRAPIN LAW Re: [diamondbackterrapins] Re: 2007 DNR regulation pro

[M Whilden]

M Whilden

October 4, 2007 at 10:19 am #25277

I_m not a reptilian lawyer, but I can tell you while I was employed at DNR Fisheries, the __3 per person__ rule was NOT interpreted by DNR as stated by Mr. Stanley. In fact, in 02 or 03 there was a court judgment based on the terrapin regulations so we can assume the regulations were deemed sufficient by the authority that matters most. I_m not going to debate the merits of the 07 amended statute or revisit the 07 extravaganza, but I can tell you that we believe the statute is a __technicality__ waiting to happen and as such may NOT achieve comprehensive conservation for the terrapin resource. We had the previous law 06 evaluated by an expert in environmental administrative law and feel confident with that assessment. Stripping the Fisheries Service of their traditional authority and deleting the 2001 Terrapin Task Force Recommendations may sound good on paper, but it does not make for sound conservation for the species or its habitat. In our opinion, the 07 bill makes for bad law. As Mr. Stanley indicates, the latest statute was proposed by a new group none of whom had experience or expertise in applied natural resource law/regulation or had any knowledge of the terrapin fishery situation throughout the Bay. I suspect the real impetus for the 07 terrapin law, i.e. a complete legislated prohibition, was the __miscalculation__ and __unintended consequence__ resulting from the 06 regulation amendments. Those regulations reduced the minimum size limits and the harvest season and were endorsed by the new terrapin lobby. The public record and audio tape of the July 06 hearing will confirm that. In the following three months during which those regulations were applied, 10,000 more terrapins were harvested, a 1300% Increase from a strategy that was expected to produce an 80% Decrease. That is one heck of a “miscalculation”. While their efforts to save the terrapin from the market basket are much appreciated, we feel the scientific advice and legal counsel provided by the new terrapin lobby is not reflective of traditional process, adequate/applied conservation or real world conditions. Anyone who believes the terrapin is safe as a result of the 07 law or by taking it away from Fisheries may be deluding themselves. My only point in responding with this brief history is to help us avoid making the same mistakes in the future. It’s too late for debate. The remaining natural resources cannot tolerate any further __trial and error__ and we do not necessarily need to restructure conventional agency authority.

[Author]

Posts