Muscovies in US - REGULATION CHANGES OPEN FOR COMMENTS - 10/1 update

[floridamama]

I am in Florida and it really stinks.. If this is passed then what am I suppose to do with my guys? They say you can't breed them, or sale their eggs or hatchlings? I have owned muscovy ducks for over 4 yrs and my family loves them. They keep our pond clean. We never see any bugs around (we have a pig pen) and you would never know that their even here. They are so quiet. I use them for pest control and the eggs are great for baking with. The babies we sale off to help with the feed bill and some of the "teenagers" I know are possible going on to someones plate (just not mine) I don't think it is right that they do this to people who are raising them as Pets, food, what ever. Go after the sob that keep turning them loose on to public land!!! I don't see a problem with trapping feral muscovy ducks and either relocate them to more rural areas if needed OR open a hunting season like they do for other birds, deer, turkey, ETC. Come on this is just another way of telling us what we can and cant do with our lives it is a bunch of hogwash. They are not trying to "help" the problem they want to line their pockets with money from people who don't have the money in the first place. That is why we are raising our own food to feed ourselves. So get they $#%^% hands out of our pockets and their noses out of our rights to raise what we want or don't want to eat,breed, etc. As long as we are contaning our "livestock" on our own lands why should they get the right to tell us we are breaking the law. IT is a bunch of $%$&

 

[redhen]

Quote:
Hey..good idea..
How come they dont have a hunting season for them?? I think that would solve alot of the problem.... and they say Scovy is very good eating...
and i agree with you..go after the irresponsible owners that release them!

 

[Duck_feeder]

Iheart'scovies :

"With the new regulation the following would no longer be permissible:
1. Owning muscovy ducks as pets. While it may seem odd that people would would ducks as pets, there is a significant population in the US that does so. While we could have other ducks as pets, muscovy ducks tend to be more community friendly as they do not make loud vocalizations (quacks) that most other domestic ducks do."


Attn to this minor typo for those cutting and pasting this text: "would would" to "would want"

And THANK YOU SO MUCH for drafting this and collecting the addresses-- this makes it sooooo much easier to act!

Muscovy Power!

Fixed! Thanks for pointing that out.​

 

[Duck_feeder]

Quote:
i would urge others to contact the government officials first. Online petitions do not hold much weight (although there is nothing wrong with creating and signing them). Phone calls and letters to the correct authorities is much more effective.

 

[Parrotchick]

I just had a long discussion with my friend at Fish & Wildlife. Unfortunately, the regulation is real and it is a done deal. For the record, she is a scientist and not a policy and permit wonk. She was not familiar with the regulation although it came from her division. She does not recall any meetings or notices on the subject, but it probably received scant little attention even there. Apparently the comment period was in August 2008 and very few comments were received, so nobody at FWS must have thought it was a big deal. (The sets of comments are described in the link below, also on th OP. I find many of them to be very arbitrary and anecdotal, hardly the results of research and solid scientific technique.)

Notices of proposed legislation and regulation are posted in the Federal Register, a massive body of information that contains every single proposal, no matter how half-baked. And because it covers the entire federal government, one would have to review the Register full time on a daily basis to be aware of what issues are up for consideration. Because my friend is not with the permits department (what sounds like their Legal Department), she didn’t know the requirements for making aware interested or relevant parties or organizations, such as the APA. Can you imagine the AMA not being made aware of proposed changes in health care reform?

So why is there involvement of a federal agency? As I understand it, Muscovies recently came under the “protection” of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), because they are now considered native in a small part of Texas, and are therefore under federal jurisdiction. Many birds and other wildlife are expanding their ranges, often northwards, so new animals are becoming “native.” FWS even has some jurisdiction in American Territories and possessions, such as American Samoa.

OK so why the sweeping federal regulation? Federal “protection” doesn’t simply mean looking out for a species so that nothing harms it. It would also seem to mean involvement and interest in what otherwise would be a localized concern. What most likely happened is that a state or local entity, perhaps in a place like Florida because they have the biggest concerns with “problem muscovies”, asked FWS to get involved. FWS involvement is kind of an all or nothing deal: They can only make regulations covering the whole U.S. Perhaps your local DNR (Department of Natural Resources) was involved. Please contact them to find out, particularly as they are the ones most likely to enforce the regulations and to make allowances for loopholes.

Although this regulation did not come about through legislation, ie the votes of elected officials to represent the wishes of their consituents, it is not easily undone. Contact your representatives and notify your local DNR of how you feel. It also may or may not be effective to contact the big wigs at FWS (I understand the chief passed away in a skiing accident several weeks ago so I’m not sure the website reflects the new head.) But we at least have to try. Many people have a vested interest in this, be it folks who have a couple of pet muscovies like me, to the hatcheries, to people who wonder where the interference in private endeavors will end.

Here is the link again to the full regulation from the Federal Register, dated March 1st.:
http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/R...2010/Muscovy Duck Final Rule 1 March 2010.pdf


Below is something excerpted from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, although I don’t know the date. Obviously, things have changed since this was written as muscovies now fall under the MBTA .

Feral, domestic muscovies are abundant in Florida, particularly in residential and park situations. These birds were released primarily by private individuals for ornamental purposes or as pets. Domestic muscovies continue to create nuisance problems throughout the state. To our knowledge, no populations of wild-strain muscovies have been established in Florida. Muscovies are protected by Florida Statute 828.12 regarding animal cruelty. However, because these birds originatedin Florida from domestic stock, they are not considered "wildlife." Therefore, they are not protected by state wildlife laws nor laws set forth by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Muscovy ducks have been introduced into urban and suburban areas in Florida where they often occur in high densities. Muscovies can be extremely prolific, and local populations, if uncontrolled, can increase dramatically in a short time. As a result, controversies frequently arise
Domestic or captive-reared ducks, such as muscovies, can transmit disease to wild waterfowl. All confirmed outbreaks of DVE, also known as duck plague (a sometimes-devastating viral infection), in wild waterfowl have been linked to domestic or captive-raised waterfowl. Fowl cholera is another serious disease that is transmittable between domestic and wild waterfowl. Although we have had no major outbreaks reported yet in Florida, the potential for muscovies to spread disease to wild waterfowl remains a biological concern.
People often wonder about moving the problem muscovies to other areas. We consider feral domestic ducks to be undesirable in the wild because of their potential to transmit diseases to or interbreed with Florida's native waterfowl. To minimize these problems, Florida Statute 379.231 prohibits the release of exotic animals, including muscovies. Therefore, relocating muscovies into a wild situation is not a legitimate or appropriate solution to nuisance problems. You could, however, move muscovies to a captive situation where they would not come into contact with wildlife and would not escape.
Muscovy ducks, like other domestic animals, are considered private property. If someone claims ownership, the birds are the owner's to do with as he or she pleases, so long as Florida Statute 828.12 regarding animal cruelty is not violated. Similarly, if the muscovies have no owner, no state or federal law prohibits their capture and humane euthanization. This can be a last resort to resolve a nuisance problem.

It sounds to me like the poor muscovies are being labeled and re-labeled by whatever is convenient at the time. Florida officials’ position was that muscovies could spread disease to local populations of native waterfowl, while the background information in the beginning of the Federal Register states that muscovies “are wary and associate little with other species.”

 

[Duck_feeder]

Quote:
What he said...

Me three!

Make that 4!

It always disturbs me when people impulsively obtain pets but do not think things through first.

 

[muscovychef]

even if they are NOT fed..they wont go back to their owners house, will they? No, they wont.. they will stay free and breed, and.... hence the problem..
Just my opinion..

if there is no food source they couldnt survive ,,,,, logic here they are in yards and streets and park ponds are not large enough to aford forage, did your mother ever tell you if you feed the stray it will stay???

feral means a domestic animal that goes wild, It does not mean a tame animal loose or left. The birds they show are tame begging for food and following people that feed them. This is where the most problems are reported .The birds bothering people not other game.
people who dump will just get another breed thats easy to get and repeat.

reguardless on who you want to blame or say we asked for it, or deserve it . or if this wasnt done it wouldnt have happend. Its hurting those who are not guilty , Ive had muscovy for 35 years ive never had one walk or fly away. It is for control and the next step will be the 100s of geese and mallard based breeds. muscovy drakes keep growing for at least 2-3 years and than they pack on the weight females from decent lines wont be able to fly after a year or so. Muscovies do not shed water well and in cold wet weather can chill and die, there are two part problem those that dumped them and those that feed them. We who love the breed are in for it,

 

[muscovychef]

floridamama I wish more people thought like you. We have become a nation of nosey back biters , that look over fences to see what their neighbor is doing wrong, instead of helping we pat our selves on the back for feeding better or fancy houseing. how much we pay in vet bills,. A lady fell and broke her hip and lay in her house for days. her neighber reported her for not feeding or watering her dog. dogs dishes were not in plain sight. I have a friend that takes in special needs water fowl many are crippled , She was reported for abuse by some one who drove by . didnt like the look. all those crippled birds.

 

[Buster52]

I don't know if the muscovy is an invasive species or if this new regulation will solve the problem, but...

I see nothing wrong with the feds trying to stop the spread of an invasive species in general. They take up habitat and niches and compete with indigenous wildlife.

But, y'all know more about the muscovy than I do. I have only 1one, and I've only had that one for a couple of months. I don't know that I support this regulation. Just saying I support the concept of controlling the spread of invasive species.

They aren't harmless.

 

[Dances with Ducks]

That makes sense Buster, but it all depends on how you go about it. This regulation is OVERKILL!!