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

[DuckLady]

Instead of outlawing them how about actually stepping up and enforcing animal dumping laws.

In Oregon it is a class 3 misdemeanor to dump a domestic animal anywhere, but in the years I did rescue, I never knew of anyone being actually ticketed much less prosecuted.

 

[Duck_feeder]

Another important section of the new code:

(c) Disposal of muscovy ducks. You
may donate muscovy ducks taken under
this order to public museums or public
institutions for scientific or educational
purposes, or you may dispose of them
by burying or incinerating them. You
may not retain for personal use or
consumption, offer for sale, or sell a
muscovy duck removed under authority
of this section, nor may you release it
in any other location.

If I'm reading this correctly, it'll be illegal to capture a feral muscovy and keep it for any reason after March 31.

 

[floridamama]

I am in florida. I have had muscovies for years and now they want to start this crap up? My guys stay in a large pen with a pond, I get calls from time to time from people who got a duckling cause "it's so cute" and then grows up in to a muscovy. I go and pick it up bring it back and it joins my flock. I guess with this new law I won't be able to do that or will have to track down what liceneses I need to still do that and to keep the guys I already have. This just stinks.

All because of idiots who don't think.

 

[CTChickenMom]

Here's what I found....

We amend the regulations to prohibit sale, transfer, or propagation of muscovy ducks for hunting and any other purpose other than food production

We propose to revise 50 CFR 21.14 to prohibit sale and, in most cases, possession, of muscovy ducks; to revise § 21.25 to prohibit sale or transfer of
captive-bred muscovy ducks for hunting; and to add § 21.54 to allow removal of introduced muscovy ducks from any location in the contiguous United States outside Hidalgo, Starr, and Zapata Counties in Texas, and in Alaska, Hawaii, and U.S. territories and possessions. This removal is in keeping with the Service’s other actions to reduce the spread of introduced species that compete with native species or harm habitats that they use. It also is in keeping with the intent of the Migratory Bird Treaty Reform Act of 2004 (16 U.S.C. 703 (b)), which excluded nonnative species from MBTA protection.

This rule is intended to limit production and releases of muscovy ducks in locations in which the species is not native. However, it is unusual because we will continue to allow ongoing commercial endeavors with a species that was not protected under the MBTA. We are aware of the production of muscovy ducks for food, and this rule is intended to allow that production to continue. We will allow continued production of muscovy ducks for food because we do not want to create economic dislocation. We may review allowing possession for food production in the future if escapes and releases from this source are shown to be a problem. However, the regulations state that release of muscovy ducks to the wild is not to be allowed, regardless of the source of the birds.

Issue: The organization is very concerned about the proposed regulation’s impact on currently owned ducks who are not kept for food production. As proposed, the regulations seem to outlaw these ducks. It is not clear what USFWS expects will become of them but it seems it would be illegal for their owners to continue to keep them. This would be unreasonable and unnecessarily cruel for both the ducks and their owners. Many people keep ducks as pets.

Response. We allow private ownership of MBTA-protected species in few circumstances. We intend to disallow private possession of muscovy ducks, except to raise them to be sold as food (which has been ongoing for years). However, we will allow possession of any live muscovy duck held on the date when this rule takes effect.

So, if you have Muscovies now, your okay. If you want them, get them now (like I need to do

). They are talking primarily about these ducks in the wild. Short of a few counties in Texas, they are considered an invasive species if in the wild. Be sure that you keep your ducks on your property or they will fall under the new law. Check out the law: Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 39 / Monday, March 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations

 

[Duck_feeder]

Here is a section from the document that specifically addresses how the FWS will handle private ownership of muscovies:

Issue. Capture and transfer of
muscovy ducks, and muscovy ducks on
private property.
‘‘Live-capture and transfer to responsible
private ownership is also a humane
resolution for so-called nuisance ducks.
While the opportunities for such transfer are
limited, where there are potential new homes
it is humane to the ducks and offers
communities an uncontroversial solution.
With the proposed restrictions on
propagation and release, this resolution
would also achieve the regulation’s goal. The
final regulations should allow this option for
controlling Muscovy ducks.’’
‘‘The organization is very concerned about the
proposed regulation’s impact on currently
owned ducks who are not kept for food
production. As proposed, the regulations
seem to outlaw these ducks. It is not clear
what USFWS expects will become of them
but it seems it would be illegal for their
owners to continue to keep them. This would
be unreasonable and unnecessarily cruel for
both the ducks and their owners. Many
people keep ducks as pets. Waterfowl
fanciers maintain hobby flocks. Waterfowl
rescuers have removed ducks from places
people considered them nuisances; keeping
some and finding new private owners for
others. Forcing all these private owners to
kill their birds or be in violation of this
regulation would be outrageous. However,
that appears to be the only way to construe
the proposed regulation.’’

Response. We allow private
ownership of MBTA-protected species
in few circumstances. We intend to
disallow private possession of muscovy
ducks, except to raise them to be sold
as food (which has been ongoing for
years). However, we will allow
possession of any live muscovy duck
held on the date when this rule takes
effect.
In most every location, the muscovy
duck is an introduced, invasive species.
We will allow control of muscovy ducks
as best suits the needs of the States and
wildlife management agencies, who
requested this authorization. Though
the control order allows States and other
entities to remove muscovy ducks, we
do not expect that they will do so when
the ducks are on private property.
However, people who propagate
muscovy ducks or allow them to
multiply and move off their property
should realize that the muscovy ducks
may be subject to the control efforts that
the State or local wildlife agency deems
necessary.​

 

[shay20]

Now i really want some of these,

Thinking about it, as time goes on they do you think they will end up on the enstiction(spelling) list because of this?

 

[Dread Pirate Roberts]

who's got some hatchin' eggs for me?

 

[gamebirdsonly]

Quote:
Hey easy I guess I'm one of them rednecks.

 

[CTChickenMom]

I would also like a few if I can find anyone close to me who has some. I'd only need, say, a trio, and that would be plenty. My DH is already going crazy with all of my feathered children!

 

[Iheart'scovies]

"Though the control order allows States and other
entities to remove muscovy ducks, we
do not expect that they will do so when
the ducks are on private property."

This seems like a really flimsy excuse for the protection of individual's rights! This really is completely outrageous. If you read the exceptions raised, they are perfectly resonable: to sum "Relocating populations to responsible owners is a solution where everyone wins and NO ONE as a probelm with it, can we still do that?" "Uh, nope, but we don't 'expect' the gov to raid your personal land and steal your ducks, whatever that means."