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 didnt 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 doesnt 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 Im 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 dont 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.
