“I wanna be tree boa!”
He felt like taking a shower.
So, HR 996: Invasive Fish and Wildlife Prevention Act. I highly suggest reading through the bill yourself, but I’ve tried to break it down as I understand it (with the caveat that I’m no lawyer). USARK has a summary you can read as well. While this bill seems unlikely to pass, it’s still important to understand what this would mean, and let your lawmakers know what you think. Also, I’m approaching this from a reptile (snakes, specifically) angle, though it could affect any species of animal that isn’t native to the US. This is going to be long.
- Full text of bill
- USARK’s page, with a pdf summary/analysis
- Where you can sign and send emails (free) or letters (for a fee)
- Where you can contact the Natural Resources Committee
The gist: In a nutshell, it’s about regulating the movement of non-native animals, both in importation and movement between states. As well as mandating recordkeeping of their movement, and establishing import fees that will go toward paying for the management of all of this. For the most part zoos and aquariums (at least AZA accredited ones) and other “qualified institutions” are unaffected because they’re either exempt or can obtain permits.
Exempt animals: The bill includes a list of animals that are exempt, which for the most part are cats, dogs, and animals you would find on a farm. Ferrets, hamsters, gerbils, and guinea pigs also made the cut. There are no reptiles, no “pet” birds other than canaries, and no fish other than goldfish on the list. There’s also the catch-all of “any other species or subspecies that the Director determines to be common and clearly domesticated,” but that’s no guarantee that any species not specifically on this would be exempt.
Non-native wildlife: Anyone can propose that a “nonnative wildlife taxon” be evaluated for designation as either Injurious I or Injurious II. (If something was previously declared injurious, it’ll be put into one of these two categories.) Also, there would be a process put into place so that all non-native wildlife taxa would be reviewed before importation was allowed.
- Injurious I: Dangerous to people/agriculture/horticulture/forestry/US wildlife or wildlife resources, and qualified institutions (ie zoos, etc) don’t have significant experience keeping and containing them. (If there’s an “imminent threat,” a species can be temporarily declared Injurious I, and then have its final status sorted out later.)
- Injurious II: Like Injurious I, but either potentially less harmful or qualified institutions are experienced in keeping and containing them. (Per USARK’s summary, the bar for Injurious II designation is lower than what is currently on the books, so there’s potential for a lot of animals to end up in this category.)
It’s possible that a taxon would NOT be designated Injurious I or II. There’s no mention in the bill of a “white list” being created, but as USARK notes, the result would probably be similar to having a white list.
Review process: There’s a section which goes into how the risk assessment of each species will be done. The part here that concerns me most is one little word in this section:
(2) whether the taxon has established or spread, or caused harm to the economy, the environment, or the health of other animal species in the United States or in an ecosystem similar to an ecosystem in the United States;
“An” ecosystem in the United States. So, if something could potentially inhabit the tip of Florida (or Hawaii, which AFAIK already prohibits ALL species of snake), does that mean it will be labeled Injurious to the entire United States? I’d like to think that common sense would prevail, and in that case regulation or banning could be handled at a state level. But considering what happened with the Burmese python, yellow anaconda, and African rock python, I’m very pessimistic. This FAQ on the US Fish & Wildlife Service’s site about the already-enacted “python ban” flat out says that a “regional restriction on the movement of these snakes would be prohibitively costly to enforce”, so the restriction is nationwide (page 7 of the linked pdf).
Restrictions: Anything Injurious I or II cannot be imported to the US by the average person, transported across state lines for commercial purposes, or released into the wild. Of interest to the average pet owner is that an Injurious II animal, if owned legally prior to being regulated, can be transported across state lines for noncommercial purposes only:
(b) Exemption for Interstate Transportation of Animals of Later-Regulated Taxa-
(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (2), an individual animal that was lawfully owned prior to the taxa to which the animal belongs being regulated by the Director under this Act as Injurious II may be transported interstate without a permit by any person for noncommercial purposes only.
(2) EXCEPTION- The exemption under paragraph (1) does not apply to an animal of any taxa designated by the Director as Injurious I.
If you have an animal that ends up in Injurious II and you later have to move to another state, you can take your animal with you (assuming it’s legal to have the animal where you’re moving). But if it’s Injurious I, you’re out of luck. Note that it’s interstate transport for noncommercial purposes only. That means no selling your animal to someone in another state.
I find it gets a bit murky here:
(a) Possession of Lawfully Obtained Injurious Wildlife Taxa- Possession of lawfully obtained injurious wildlife taxa within a State shall—
(1) be a matter of State law; and
(2)(A) not be federally regulated; or
(B) not require a Federal permit under this Act.
So…if it’s Injurious I or II, the average person can’t import it or sell it across state lines. But if someone already has them legally, and is breeding them within your own state, you can still buy them (but no interstate sales). If you bought an Injurious II animal legally post-regulation, could you bring your pet if you move to another state or not? Would a breeder of Injurious II animals be able to relocate to another state? They’re your own, legally obtained animals, and you aren’t selling them across state lines, but because you’re a business, you couldn’t really say you were bringing the animals for noncommercial purposes, either.
There’s also this, which I’m not sure how it would shake out. Basically trying to avoid having a rush of folks importing animals before it’s illegal to do so, but no indication of how it would be done.
AVOIDANCE OF NEW INCENTIVES- In promulgating the regulation under clause (i), the Secretary shall seek to avoid creating a new incentive for animal importers to import novel taxa prior to the effective date of the regulation.
My own personal position: While I don’t have a problem with the overall spirit of this bill—trying to prevent nonnative animals from causing problems here in the US—I ultimately can’t support it.
Based on past experience, I have zero reason to trust that reptiles will be reviewed in a fair and objective manner if this were to become law. Especially when the bill mentions that in order to make more rapid determinations on Injurious status, they can potentially “forego time-consuming optional administrative steps” as well as “forego economic impact analyses”. I’d like to believe that common sense and actual science would prevail, but I also know you’d be incredibly naïve to think that politics won’t play a role.
To many people, reptiles are icky, scary critters that no sane person would keep as a pet anyway. This makes them an easy target for Injurious designation so politicians can show they’ve “done something” about invasive species. Even if the only place that species could survive in the US is in part of Florida. And if Florida is the only place a species could survive, why regulate on a national level what should be a state concern?
Not to mention, since anyone can propose species for regulation, it sets the stage for organizations like PETA to press for species to be designated Injurious for their own reasons.
The “good” part of all this is that trade within the borders of each state would still be allowed, but that’s not ideal, either. Many reptile keepers buy and sell animals around the country, to bring in different bloodlines. Some species just don’t have many people working with them, so you need to look around the country to find a breeder. From a breeder’s perspective (particularly someone who’s been able to made breeding their livelihood instead of just a hobby) if your potential buyers are reduced to just your own state, it could very well drive you out of business.
There’s more I’d like to say about both the politics of which “invasive species” get the spotlight as well as how freaking important it is to be a responsible pet owner, but that’s for another post.
PLEASE READ
Send a letter to your congressmen with this form to stand against HR996!
If you are an animal lover or keeper, you NEED to do this. Don’t even think twice. Sign it. This is not a petition. Your signature gets a letter sent to your state’s congressmen, in email or if you so choose, as a physical letter as well, so do not pass over it because you think petitions are worthless. These are your babies this bill is targeting. Your birds, your fish, your reptiles, your amphibians, even your precious fuzzy sugar gliders and chinchillas.
HR996 is the re-written form of HR669, but rewritten means nothing but bringing it back to threat status. It is still as harmful as ever, aiming to take exotics away from the people who love them, certain to put many out of work, demolish millions of dollars of revenue, criminalize exotic pet owners for doing something simple like taking their pets with them, and risk the lives of every animal that does not make the white list. All species are treated as guilty until proven innocent, so you can guarantee not many will make the white list, and even fewer will be permanently banished to the black list for a reasonable purpose.
For the full proposed bill: http://usherp.org/2013/03/18/hr996-hr669-rewrite/
Think this could actually do some good against invasive species? Think again. If this bill was actually to deal with invasive species by adding them to a black list criminalizing their importation and interstate transport, it would be redundant. We already have the Lacey Act for that, and it operates in a more sensible manner: innocent until proven guilty. HR996 is a bill targeted specifically at taking exotic pets away from the people who love them.
Note that there is absolutely no mention of what is to happen to any animals that don’t make it on to the white list already in-country, nor mention for the keepers that already maintain such species. You can expect that the animals will NOT be protected, and that the very moment the opportunity would arise, they would be put to death.
If you are a reptile lover, it is ESPECIALLY up to you to step up to the plate. If you remember the HR669 fiasco, you will also remember that the death of the bill only gave rise to the years-fought and only wounded, not defeated, Python Ban. We are the BIGGEST targets. Our beloved pets are among the most misunderstood, and unlike insect or rodent-like pets they are assumed to be a murder happy public menace by the ignorant masses. We already lost our burms, condas, and rock pythons in the wake of HR669’s original form. LET’S NOT LOSE ONE MORE SPECIES.
As with the Python Ban and HR669, you can expect HSUS to be lobbying with all their might for this to pass. They have already proven they are not against tossing money and penning fiction disguised as scientific study to try and get their way. Not aware of what a sack of crap HSUS is? Educate yourself here: http://humanewatch.org/
Do not assume that the sheer stupidity of this bill and its intentions means it will fail even if you don’t lift a finger. We already have seen that presented the right way, bans CAN happen. Learn from the Python Ban. Take action.
Even if you don’t keep exotics, you should still be concerned about and stand against the rights of others being stripped in ignorance and the lives of animals being endangered for nothing but baseless fear.
Spread this like wildfire, guys.
This is a draft for an idea I had that obv. needs some tweaking and cleaning. One of those few pieces I ever do that is sure to take multiple whacks at it. A co-worker thinks its funny to tell me about how the snakes he meet become 6 smaller snakes, because he delights in chopping them up. He, like many others, kills snakes out of fear and then thinks himself some kind of badass for it. I feel awful for those snakes, and worse that folks seem to delight in the notion and readily condone that kind of response to a snake presence. I wish the snakes could fight back.
It’d be pretty nice if these scared twats could just be haunted by the chopped up snakes, if nothing else. Maybe chopped up zombie monster snakes with ghost snakes for blood and it whispers creepy shit at them all the time and it wasn’t venomous before but now it sure as shit is and I NEEDED TO DRAW THAT?!
I actually sort of want this/this concept as a tattoo, like some weird memorial to all the snakes ever killed out of ignorance and fear, as well as topic changing fodder because people tell me snake murder stories way more than I would like to hear them and I usually have no escape… but I’d need to find someone to redraw it with a lot more competence than I could manage to go through with it.
Love love love this.
90% of his time is spent like this…
I hardly ever take pictures of my boys.
Apparently he eats vertically.
