Abstract
The following announcement was drafted as an informative background to the recent AF A Legislative Alert disseminated by Genny Wall. If you wish to receive future Legislative Alerts, please contact AFAOf fice@earthlink.net.
In the last issue of AFA Watchbird, I wrote to tell you ofH.R. 669-the misguided piece of legislation against the aviculture community. Now unfortunately, this same animal rights community is suing the Secretary of the Interior and the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to add fourteen species of parrots for protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
The only real effect this suit will have is to burden aviculturists with an arbitrary permitting paperwork process for hundreds of thousand of animals in the United States. Make no mistake- these activists are not running to the aide of avian species in the wild by using sound science. They are suing the agency to encumber aviculturists and pet owners from owning these animals.
Two bird examples: the Golden Conure and the Vinaceous Amazon.
The few individuals that have these birds and are successful in propagation to several generations have lost interest in the species as there is no outlet for the offspring. By encumbering the owners and bottle necking the genetic lines of these species, we have only done a disservice to them. Free commerce has always been the best motivation behind entrepreneurs. Owners of valuable genetic stock have been warehousing their offspring when local markets and other permit holders are saturated with inventory. Once this occurs, those who are successful are only burdened by their success and stop breeding.
The Gouldian Finch is an example of where the birds are becoming extremely rare in the wild because of the loss of their natural food source and yet they are bred by the thousands in US aviculture annually.
The Scarlet-chested Parakeet once restricted by its ESA listing, has been unrestricted because of the success of aviculturists across America and the thousands of birds raised in captivity. With the volume of production, genetic diversity is extremely important and can only be achieved when unencumbered commerce is allowed between breeders.
Captive birds are our property, not wild animals roaming freely in danger of man's encroachment on limited habitat. They are dependent on their keepers to have free movement of the species for their own betterment.
There are numerous species across the globe that have greater numbers in captivity than in the wild. If we are ever to return any of these birds to their native habitat we need to have the best possible gene diversity and the most robust specimens available to do so.
After the suit was filed, FWS issued a notice of findings for the possible ESA listing. Aviculturists and scientists who care for these animals are being asked to comment on the notice within 60 days (on or before Sept.14, 2009) without being given the opportunity to see or review any of the "science" provided to FWS by the activists to support their claims. We should all be extremely concerned that the ESA not be used as a tool by the animal rights community to enforce their agenda-that no one owns parrots or any other animals-upon other people. Adding a huge number of species that are not in need of protection to the endangered list does not concentrate on those animals needing the most help and does nothing but burden FWS.
We should all immediately write FWS to extend this comment period to allow sufficient time for aviculturists and scientists to provide FWS with the facts and the decision-making tools it needs on this arbitrary proposal. At the end of this article, I will provide you with the tools you need to comment on the proposal and to ask for an extension of the comment period.