Abstract
On August 6, 1984, Governor Mario M. Cuomo signed into law Assembly Bill 11589. It amends the environmental conservation law by stating that, "Except as permitted by rule and regulation of the department, no person shall sell live wild birds, ... unless such birds were born and raised in captivity." The act shall take effect on the first day of November, 1985.
This devastating bill has had a short, but sordid, history. On May 9 Senator John Dunne was asked to sponsor the bill in the Senate by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. A similar bill was introduced by Assemblyman Maurice Hinchey. The bills were drafted by the Department of Environmental Conservation at the urging of an anti-bird trade coalition based in New York City. The coalition included The Fund for Animals and the Audubon Society in New York. It is important to note that the May 9th date was late in the legislative session, making it impossible for the bill to go through regular "program" channels.
On May 10th it was introduced in the Senate (S.9472) and in the Assembly on May 24th (A. 11589). It was passed in the final hours of the legislative session with no public hearings and no fiscal impact statement. It was sent to the governor for his signature in July.
While the bill itself was ill-conceived, ill-advised, and the product of an emotional, misinformed group of "environmentalists,'' the Memorandum in Support of it is a document of untruths, statistical manipulations, and exaggerations, a shameful piece of "research" and intellectual dishonesty which should be a source of embarrassment to New York legislators for years to come. Here are a few excerpts. How many untruths can you spot?
Purpose of the Bill
"The bill is intended to halt the killing of tens of thousands of wild birds each year as a result of the present commercial bird traffic . . .
Background
''The Commercial .traffic in wild birds to supply pet shops spreads death, disease and destruction to tens of thousands of parrots and other tropical birds each year. Very young birds taken from the nest and "hand raised" are the most sought-after tropical birds for the
pet trade. It is common practice for native hunters to cut down whole trees in order to reach newly-hatched babies. This method of capture results in the death of large numbers of birds and permanent loss of habitats. The birds which survive are exposed to overcrowding, forced feeding of drugs, and other traumas which produce high mortality rates . . .
"Mortality rates have been known to run as high as 80% for some species of tropical birds from time of capture to pet store delivery. Apparently, this high rate of loss by importers is adequately set-off through high mark-up prices on surviving birds."
Reference is then made to parrots carrying psittacosis and the requirement for feeding antibiotics during quarantine:
''. . . Due to difficulty in enforcing quarantine requirements following immunization of these birds, psittacosis continues to crop up in many parts of the country.
"The disease most widely spread by imported wild birds is VVND (referred to as "Exotic Newcastle Disease"), a highly virulent, contagious and often deadly affliction for wild birds and commercial poultry. VVND is nurtured in crowded quarantine holding pens and spreads rapidly to chickens and turkeys upon exposure.
"The most destructive outbreak of VVND occurred in 1973, spread by one or more parrots which had escaped from a pet bird importer in Southern California ... The outbreak ultimately led to the destruction of 11,808,242 chickens and turkeys. A similar outbreak on the East Coast in 1983 also resulted in the demise of large numbers of domestic poultry flocks.
''Untreated parrots can be carriers of VVND for 404 days from the onset of infection. To counter this serious threat to poultry, imported wild birds are now required to ingest antibiotics to destroy all bacteria in their systems ...
"The wholesale capture of wild birds for sale has threatened a number of species with extinction. The Amazon Parrot of Puerto Rico is now the most endangered bird in the Caribbean . . . The greatest threat from wild bird capture is to parrots and birds of prey, which are long-lived and have few offspring ...
"Low marketplace ethics in the pet industry encourage smugglers to circumvent export restrictions and quarantine by packing birds in closed containers, where they often die from suffocation ... Customs agents con-
fiscate thousands of smuggled birds each year, and more than 90% of those confiscated are parrots. All must be destroyed.
"The proposed legislation would undertake one step toward preventing the continued destruction of these bird species and habitats by limiting the sale of birds to those bred in captivity ... The few exceptions to successful domestic breeding are high-strung species which do not survive well in captivity anyway . . . Proof of domestic propagation is easily accomplished by sliding closed rings onto the ankles of infant birds which can be removed after purchase by the pet store customer."
So these are some of the lies handed out to the New York legislators as they went to vote on this bill. No mention, you'll notice, of existing Federal law that prevents or deals with some of the atrocities mentioned above. No mention of the efforts of AFA or PIJAC or even CITES to ensure humane treatment and conservation. Preposterous? Outrageous? Yes. But remember, even as you read this, it could be happening to you in your state.
Response from AFA and PUAC AFA learned of this bill on Friday ,July 13, 1984. President Phillips immediately sent Governor Cuomo a telegram:
"American Federation of Aviculture representing 5 5, 000 bird breeders strongly opposes A.11589. Detailed letter from our legal counsel following to correct misinformation and misunderstanding.''
Marshall Meyers, General Counsel for Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council sent a similar telegram but added: '' ... Industry believes hasty, last minute legislative action absent public hearings injurious to industry and general public. Economic impact significant. The law will encourage, not discourage, illegal activites."
The telegrams were followed by long and detailed letters. Legal Counsel Gary Lilienthal responded on behalf of AFA. Some highlights from Gary's exceptionally well-written comments:
" ... The New York law, which I believe is unenforceable and perhaps unconstitutional, seems to regulate, no, prohibit, the sale of every nondomestically bred bird now in captivity in the state of New York. Contrary to what some would have you believe, the law appears to apply not just to commercial vendors but to individual pet owners as well.