New Bill Threatens Aviculture & other Pets....

[ticks]

Quote:
Yes, but the pheasant came to North America around 1857. Now there is MANY wild pheasants in the western states, and some in the east.

 

[CARS]

Quote:
Yes, but the pheasant came to North America around 1857. Now there is MANY wild pheasants in the western states, and some in the east.

I was thinking the same thing. They have adapted and been managed forever. Heck, I can't even get to work without dodging a couple of pheasants

(and I love it!!)

 

[seedcorn]

If I understand correctly the bill would not stop pheasants (quail are native to here) but from introducing "NEW" non-native animals to America.

So those that want to import animals from other countries unless you get necessary permits, they won't be allowed.

I'd love to see an America w/out starlings, grackles, sparrows, corn borer's, carp, etc.

 

[waynesgarden]

Quote:
I read the text of the bill and believe his summary and conclusions to be inaccurate.

The bill does not restrict importation of "all non-native and non-domestic animals." It restricts importation of:

"A) any species included in the list of prohibited species under section 5; or
(B) any species, the importation of which is prohibited by any other Federal law or regulation of the United States due to the likelihood of causing harm to the economy, the environment, or other animal species or human health.

Lophura's argument seems to be based on an idea that the Secretary of the Interior will violate the provisions of the law and
remove all harmelss non-native species from the list of species approved for importation. As I read it, harmelss non-native species are not subject to restrictions.

Lophura states: "I would like to know who will compile the list and what critrea they will use." It is clear to anyone that has read the bill carefully that the Secretary of the Interior will compile the list and the criteria to be used is to include scientific and commercial data.

I urge anyone interested to read the bill carefully themselves before giving any credibility to Lophura's conlusions. I think this "issue" is much alarmist ado about nothing.

Wayne

 

[Lophura]

Do you keep species other than domestic fowl?

Quote:
We may disagree in our interpretations, but it is vague and NO species has been listed. I'm not sure how long you've been involved in aviculture, but if you recall the battles aviculturists had in the early 90s with similar legislation, we had the same open ended list proposed. A group of us banded together (before the internet mind you) and submitted species that we felt needed to be omitted. Eventually, the bill was defeated and aviculture continued, but without a few raising an eyebrow to such legislation, we could have lost our birds.

Give me a list now and I will shut up.

Quote:
Thanks for your input, I as well encourage everyone to read it carefully. As I stated before, I will shut up once I see the "any species included in the list of prohibited species under section 5;". Right now, no species are listed and who knows what they may choose - this concerns me and I would think would be concerning to any aviculturist.

I recommend folks to also visit the links I provided, see what you think. See that others (including several animal industry organizations) are also very concerned about this "issue that is much alarmist ado about nothing".

Dan

 

[FrChuckW]

Any bill that impinges on our rights to raise, breed or own animals needs to be carefully scrutinized.

By making a blanket banning of animals on a list will prohibit people from raising them in areas where there would be no hope of survival if said animal escaped into the wild. This would include those people involved in captive breeding programs to help save species from extinction.

Piranhas are illegal here in Kentucky, yet across the river in Indiana they are perfectly legal. Snakehead species of fish have been banned in a large number of states because of the threat to native species. Detroit has a prohibitition against the illegal keeping of exotic species without a permit. Quaker Parrots(Parakeets) are illegal here in Kentucky, but legal across the river in other states. Java Finches(Sparrows) are illegal because of the potential for them to adapt and cause crop damage.

I am all for saving the environment, and preventing the loss of native species of flora and fuana, however, I am not about to let the government run rampant over my personal liberties just because somebody decides to cry about something.

Read the bill, write your congressman and senator and voice your opinion to them about the matter.

 

[waynesgarden]

You've listed a bunch of great examples why a comprehensive bill to protect our native land and water animals is necessary. States (and individuals) can't be trusted to act responsibly. The have proved it, as you have demonstrated.

I see no signs of anyone running rampant over anyone's liberties. Anyone that choses to act irresponsibly by importing species dangerous to our animals or ourselves deserves to be subject to restrictions.

Wayne

 

[B. Saffles Farms]

Quote:
And you think a bunch of law makers in Washington can do a better job? I dont.

 

[waynesgarden]

Quote:
And you think a bunch of law makers in Washington can do a better job? I dont.

\\
That's why we all have a say in the process on a national level. If a bunch of ignorant state lawmakers in Indiana permit an irresponsible practice that endangers animal owners across the border in Kentucky, there is little the Kentucky residents can do to prevent it.

If you don't trust your lawmakers, elect ones you can trust. That is what we are trying to do here in Maine.

Wayne

 

[Lophura]

I wanted to bring up another bill that was in a Commitee here in Missouri a couple of years back. It was started with puppy mills in mind and soon had restrictions to all non-livestock. One could only possess nor more than 5 birds that were not domestic fowl. This included budgies, finches, pheasants, etc. Thankfully, it eventually died, but I am concerned that this proposed bill could also have the same material added. The scary thing is that no particular species were listed in the bill and who knows what will be added for whatever reasoning.

Dan