BTW does anybody know where they posted the Muscovy ban proposal in 2008?
Muscovies in US - REGULATION CHANGES OPEN FOR COMMENTS - 10/1 update
- Thread starter Duck_feeder
- Start date
BTW does anybody know where they posted the Muscovy ban proposal in 2008?
Here is one: http://www.epa.gov/EPA-IMPACT/2008/August/Day-22/i19550.htm
Second site: http://regulations.justia.com/view/118721/
There was a thread started on the BYC concerning this back in 2008. It didn't get a whole lot of attn. but it was noticed AFTER the comment period was over. Doesn't help if you don't know about it after the fact.
I've had been wondering about it and had checked for a update back in Nov. 2009 but of course there wasn't any at the time. Glad Duck_Feeder caught it quickly.
Here is one: http://www.epa.gov/EPA-IMPACT/2008/August/Day-22/i19550.htm
Second site: http://regulations.justia.com/view/118721/
There was a thread started on the BYC concerning this back in 2008. It didn't get a whole lot of attn. but it was noticed AFTER the comment period was over. Doesn't help if you don't know about it after the fact.
Last edited:
- Mar 4, 2010
- 80
- 0
- 29
I get form letters all the time , I am sorry I have no trust in these replies at all. How many have conversed with this guy instead of emails???
What do we want??? LOL to be able to keep our birds sell breed and show with out big brothers eye on us. How simple is that. I dont know my gut says things are not right, But im on heavy pain killers.
What do we want??? LOL to be able to keep our birds sell breed and show with out big brothers eye on us. How simple is that. I dont know my gut says things are not right, But im on heavy pain killers.
Quote:
I suggest that anyone with ideas for realistic alternatives start writing them up. Try to use a similar format and style.
Can also look at how other waterfowl are handled--different states have different regulations as to what needs a license, hunting, etc. All of htis is done through the same regulatory process--but the rules vary depending on hte particular state. In areas where they are an indemic problem, licensing is probably needed, and fines for allowing domestic birds to escape into the wild. In areas where they are not a problem or threat to native wildlife, permits/licenses and extra rules are not needed.
I htink that a part of the problem with the lack of response is that the proposed rule changes were directed at wildlife organizations & state-level game & fish departments. However, muscovies are a domestic duck, and the various domestic waterfowl organizations and groups were not addressed for input to the rule changes, or even informed about them. Naturally, anyone with domestic muscovy experience would have a dramatically different viewpoint than anyone with merely wilflife muscovy experience.
I suggest that anyone with ideas for realistic alternatives start writing them up. Try to use a similar format and style.
Can also look at how other waterfowl are handled--different states have different regulations as to what needs a license, hunting, etc. All of htis is done through the same regulatory process--but the rules vary depending on hte particular state. In areas where they are an indemic problem, licensing is probably needed, and fines for allowing domestic birds to escape into the wild. In areas where they are not a problem or threat to native wildlife, permits/licenses and extra rules are not needed.
I htink that a part of the problem with the lack of response is that the proposed rule changes were directed at wildlife organizations & state-level game & fish departments. However, muscovies are a domestic duck, and the various domestic waterfowl organizations and groups were not addressed for input to the rule changes, or even informed about them. Naturally, anyone with domestic muscovy experience would have a dramatically different viewpoint than anyone with merely wilflife muscovy experience.
- Mar 4, 2010
- 80
- 0
- 29
All im going to say is if this is going to be how this works than be careful because somebodies going to get bit in the but . And if we say florida should have to have permits when florida breeders become out raged they can point the finger at us . than if florida has to have permits and muscovies are still dumped and you know they will be. Why not the rest of the states. I still say for better or worse APA and the other biggies should be handling the wording and formation . If we need to tell him something why not say we dont want any changes in our backyards. worded as you you wish.
- Mar 4, 2010
- 80
- 0
- 29
Delete
Last edited:
- Mar 4, 2010
- 80
- 0
- 29
THIS WAS SENT 2 TIMES TO ME FRAKED ME OUT BECAUSE IT SAYS FINAL RULE CANT VARIFY BUT I POSTED IT
CFR 21.54 - Muscovy Duck
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has changed the regulations governing
Muscovy Ducks. The species now occurs naturally in southern Texas, so it
has been added to the list of migratory birds. However, it has been
introduced in other locations. The Service now prohibits sale, transfer, or
propagation of Muscovy Ducks for hunting and any other purpose other than
food production, and allows their removal in locations in which the species
does not occur naturally in the contiguous United States, Alaska, and
Hawaii, and in U.S. territories and possessions. The Service has revised 50
CFR § 21.14 (permit exceptions for captive-bred migratory waterfowl other
than mallard ducks) and § 21.25 (waterfowl sale and disposal permits), and
has added § 21.54, an order to allow control of Muscovy Ducks, their nests,
and eggs.
Final Rule
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
CFR 21.54 - Muscovy Duck
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has changed the regulations governing
Muscovy Ducks. The species now occurs naturally in southern Texas, so it
has been added to the list of migratory birds. However, it has been
introduced in other locations. The Service now prohibits sale, transfer, or
propagation of Muscovy Ducks for hunting and any other purpose other than
food production, and allows their removal in locations in which the species
does not occur naturally in the contiguous United States, Alaska, and
Hawaii, and in U.S. territories and possessions. The Service has revised 50
CFR § 21.14 (permit exceptions for captive-bred migratory waterfowl other
than mallard ducks) and § 21.25 (waterfowl sale and disposal permits), and
has added § 21.54, an order to allow control of Muscovy Ducks, their nests,
and eggs.
Final Rule
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #408
I asked Dr Allen about changing 21.54 to explicitly give states or local governments the authority to require permits or ban muscovies so problems can be dealt with locally without impacting areas without feral muscovy problems.
His response:
His response:
States can ban possession of muscovies or require permits. I don't think a change to 21.54 is needed.
Based on that response, I would not expect to see any changes to the regulations that set different restrictions for problem areas.
Based on that response, I would not expect to see any changes to the regulations that set different restrictions for problem areas.
Im thinking that one of you good, duck-loving people has the time to collate the ideas and workable solutions that are to be found here.
Much of it is emotional or just opinion. But buried on these many pages are the exact things we should respond with.
It could be he only sent out a generic email and has no intention of listening to anything. But we don't know that, so here is our chance. Possibly the only one we will get. Lets get together as a unified voice and send him our concerns.
One of the mods, like Nifty, should ask for volunteers and then appoint someone who has,
a). the time
b). the skills
... to gather the good stuff into a concise response and post it to Dr. Allen. Many of you are educated and able, and may be at home or have other opportunity for this effort. In return, our friendly Mods could award the selectee with a prize of some sort.
Ive gone back to work now, 12 hours a day, or I would do it. Perhaps another could step up?
Much of it is emotional or just opinion. But buried on these many pages are the exact things we should respond with.
It could be he only sent out a generic email and has no intention of listening to anything. But we don't know that, so here is our chance. Possibly the only one we will get. Lets get together as a unified voice and send him our concerns.
One of the mods, like Nifty, should ask for volunteers and then appoint someone who has,
a). the time
b). the skills
... to gather the good stuff into a concise response and post it to Dr. Allen. Many of you are educated and able, and may be at home or have other opportunity for this effort. In return, our friendly Mods could award the selectee with a prize of some sort.
Ive gone back to work now, 12 hours a day, or I would do it. Perhaps another could step up?
Last edited:
- Mar 4, 2010
- 80
- 0
- 29
Delete
Last edited:
Similar threads
New posts New threads Active threads
-
Threads with more replies in the last 15 days
-
