Meyer,That's true and for that reason I do not keep bullfrogs because they are so invasive and squeeze other species out, but........my point is that often laws and regulations are not well thought out. In my industry we see a new regulation almost every day and a good portion of them are modified or eliminated not much later. Maybe I am jaded but I don't feel that the legislators at the local level are always properly informed and the most qualified people to make laws. If you look at Australia their regulations about what fish and marine life can be imported are incredibly strict and much tougher than than the US. Now which set of laws are correct? The ones in Australia or the US?
I will agree that on a local level government bureaucracy is not always the best informed. This is less so on a state or federal level.
Yes, Australia has some very strict invasive specie regulations. Considering the country's past experience with introduced species, it is hardly a surprise. From the rabbit explosion in the 1930's to the present Cane Toad situation, Australia has had a long history of major environmental damage from introduced species. This has resulted in laws and regulations aimed at controlling the problems based on jurisdictional dictates. Australia has chosen to act with a firm hand in controlling what they have deemed threats to the natural environment.
The U.S., on the other hand, has historically been slow to act on most any issue, but eventually gets around to taking appropriate action. I think Winston Churchill put it best when he said "The United States will always do the right thing......after they have tried everything else."