Will Changes to the Lacey Act affect chicken and quail keeping?

[NatJ]

My understanding is that nonnative species would fall under the "wild" category which would apply to many fish (some of which no longer exist in nature sue to loss of habitat), reptiles, and birds.

I agree it might apply to many kinds of fish, reptiles, and birds.
But the title of this thread referenced CHICKEN and QUAIL keeping.
Those should exempt twice over:

(1)...Importation into the United States of any species of wild mammals, wild birds... is prohibited, unless—

Not wild, so not prohibited.

...prohibited, unless—
...during the 1-year period preceding the date of enactment of the Lacey Act Amendments of 2021, the species was, in more than minimal quantities—
...transported between the States, any territory of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any possession of the United States...

Because chickens and quail WERE transported between the States in a lot more than "minimal quantities" in the year before this was enacted, they are exempt this way too.

(Note: Coturnix quail are domesticated, and regularly transported. Some other quail are native to the United States. I do not know enough about kinds of quail to be sure whether there are any kinds that are wild but native to somewhere else-- if there are, they would be affected, unless they are already imported or transported in sufficient quantities.)

 

[AgnesGray]

The original discussion I saw was from breeders of rare chickens and coturnix (japanese import) quail who do this on a much higher level than I ever will. I hope you are right about those two being exempt, but still don't see the point of starting down that road at all. There is already legislation in place regarding these animals in most states.

A black list is a much better system, in my opinion, for addressing these issues than a white list that creates a blanket legislation for any unlisted species/ breed. To me it's like going from innocent unless proven guilty to guilty unless proven innocent. No need to make the pressure on the majority to be put on an "ok" list when they could just contine to list species that have been proven to need that protection and special handling.

 

[NatJ]

The original discussion I saw was from breeders of rare chickens and coturnix (japanese import) quail who do this on a much higher level than I ever will. I hope you are right about those two being exempt

It's done on the level of species, not breed. Since they belong to very common domesticated species, the rare breeds & colors should be just as legal as the common ones.

but still don't see the point of starting down that road at all.

I can sort-of see both sides of this one. Importing new things, that are not on the black list because no-one thought to list them, can cause problems. But allowing only things on a white list causes trouble too, because it causes trouble for so many things that are NOT a problem.

Overall, I would prefer this not be enacted, but I also don't think this particular version should cause trouble for people who keep chickens or coturnix quail.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

That page does have the "presumptive prohibition on importation" and other ammendments to the Lacey act that are being discussed. It's among the amendments, WAY down the page.

(I don't know whether it was added after you posted that link, or if it was hiding down there all along.)

then I didn't see it. I recall trying to run the slider down the page and finding the bill to be very short - sounds like it didn't completely load for me (my internet does that).

 

[NatJ]

then I didn't see it. I recall trying to run the slider down the page and finding the bill to be very short - sounds like it didn't completely load for me (my internet does that).

I had the same problem. I had to let it load for quite a while, but then a search for "wild mammal" took me right to it. The whole bill is something over 2000 pages, according to a .pdf of it that I found on another site.

 

[Chullicken]

Little late to the party here. This bill isn't aimed at domesticated animals etc. Its more of an addition to the established bill that I don't think has been modified since the early 1900s when it was created. It's to stem the damage caused by non native species, i.e. visit Florida sometime and see the now 'wild' Oscars swimming around, Pythons, Iguanas, escaped Nutria from the 1930s fur farms and the like. I also think its to keep the government and states from doing ill-gotten things to control other things like the Lamprey infestation in New England, Duck Weed, Wild Hogs and that bamboo stuff you can't ever get rid of. And the interstate travel thing was already in the original bill, it's just been updated and made current. Though, some of the other wording I feel should be edited and/or adjusted for pre existing owner situations.

I kind of have mixed opinions about it, I don't feel it is entirely horrific and the impact on domesticated species would probably be irrelevant if you're not in the business/hobby of exotic animals and husbandry.