Current Proposal To Outlaw Nanday Conures In Pennsylvania:

[MrRick]

Currently, there is an amendment before the Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC) that will prohibit the "importation, possession, sale, and release" of Nanday conures in Pennsylvania. If passed, it generally means that Nandays already in PA would also become illegal and subject to confiscation and euthanasia as pests.

An organized effort to prevent the passing of this amendment is now being formed. We are holding a preliminary prep meeting in the Pottstown, PA area this week. You can attend in person or by dialing in on a toll free conference line. There will then be a final meeting in Harrisburg, PA on the morning of 1/27 before the PGC meeting.

Even if you are not from Pennsylvania, passage of this amendment could affect you! YOUR STATE COULD BE NEXT! If passed, the question becomes what species in which state is next.

If you would like to participate in this effort, please contact Rick Rowland (president@berkscountybirdclub.com) or Kristy Garcia (KristyGarcia@comcast.net) as soon as possible. We can provide you with a script to use when calling the PGC or your local senator or representative. We also have a letter that you can fax or email. Below is more information from Genny Wall, AFA Legislative VP.

Please join us in this effort and help to protect all of our feathered companions. The PGC will hold its meeting on January 27-29, 2008.

[Lisa B]

Yes, Rick, please stay on top of this! thats what Jersey did.......

[LilacCrownedAmazonLover]

Why are they against parrots???
All the birds do is bring people joy, entertainment, and a friend.
I shudder to think, but... what is everyone going to do if/when this law is passed.
They should atleast make up a contact that states that people who already own the bird can keep it if they don't breed it.

[Peaches]

I just got this in an e-mail. The article says the birds will be grandfathered in. Last sentence.


Quote:
The following is an email sent to you by an administrator of "Second Chance Birds". If this message is spam, contains abusive or other comments you find offensive please contact the webmaster of the board at the following address:



Include this full email (particularly the headers).

Message sent to you follows:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Feel free to share this article w/ other bird boards you belong too. Nandays WILL be grandfathered. You have it in writing now.

No, no, Nanday - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

Bird owners are raising a flap over a Pennsylvania Game Commission plan to ban a fowl some now keep as pets.
With phone calls and postings on Internet bulletin boards, owners of Nanday conures are trying to get a flock of protesters to a Harrisburg public hearing this weekend in hopes of blocking a rule that would prohibit the birds' importation, sale, possession and release.

If the South American birds -- also known as black-hooded parakeets -- aren't kept out, the commission claims, escaped conures might spread disease or form colonies that compete with native species for food and nesting sites.

Roberta Weisensee, founder of West View-based Pittsburgh Parrot Rescue and owner of two Nanday conures, said the game commission is just flapping its wings. Nanday conures can't live through the winter, she said.

"They could never find the proper food and couldn't survive the natural climate in Pennsylvania," she said.
Tennessee already bans the foot-long green birds, which eat mostly seeds and berries.

"If they can survive in Tennessee, they can survive in Pennsylvania," commission spokesman Jerry Feaser said.

U.S. birdwatchers spotted 920 of the birds last year in the wild, according to the National Audubon Society. Neither it nor the commission has an estimate of how many live in Pennsylvania, either in the trees or in cages.

With Tuesday's scheduled vote approaching, the commission has a bird-ban precedent. The state prohibits the Quaker parrot, in spite of the Argentinian fowl's Pennsylvania-friendly name.

Donald Blosser, owner of Pretty Birds pet store in Millvale, said he used to sell two to four Nanday conures a year. They were not popular enough to keep in his inventory, Blosser said, but he still thinks a statewide ban is unjustified.

"If anything was there to show this was a problem in Pennsylvania, I'd be there to help," Blosser said.

Nanday conure owner Melissa Burkhardt said it's not just the cold temperatures that would keep the birds from thriving.

"These are hand-raised birds," said the Monroeville woman, who runs Sprite's Avian Friends Endeavor, a bird rescue group.

"They don't know how to forage for food. They rely on humans for everything," Burkhardt said.

She and other bird owners said they at least want a grandfather clause in any ownership ban, so they can keep their conures.

A new regulation would not include a grandfather clause, Feaser said, but the enforcement guidelines conservation officers use would have one.

[iowahawk1]

I sent the following to the Pa Game Commission:

Pennsylvania Game Commission
2001 Elmerton Avenue
Harrisburg, PA 17110-9797

RE: Proposed amendment of 58 Pa. Code §137.1 (Relating to Nanday Conures)

Dear Commissioners:
I have read the proposed amendment and also spoken with Jason Decoskey regarding the purported need for such a change. Additionally, I have read the comment of Jerry Feaser regarding the survivability of Nanday conures in Pennsylvania as published in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review on January 26, 2008.

I oppose this proposed ban because it appears to be based on irrational fear, under the guise of being pro-active, rather than actual science and statistics. Mr. Decoskey indicated to me that the main concern was to prevent the birds from ever becoming a problem in Pennsylvania by banning them early enough to keep them from becoming established. His concerns were linked to the Quaker parrot which has become a problem in some northern urban areas. He indicated that there was currently no population of these birds in Pennsylvania, nor had there even been a single sighting in the wild, although there are several hundred living in Florida. As justification for the proposed ban he noted that Tennessee had already imposed a ban. He did not however, indicate whether Tennessee was having a problem with these birds which caused them to ban them. In further justification he indicated that a zoo in Oklahoma was keeping a population of Nandays outdoors and that if they could survive in Oklahoma, which has harsh winters, they could survive here. Likewise, Mr. Feaser noted that if the birds could survive in Tennessee they could survive here.

First, concerning the comparison to the Quaker parrot, the Nanday conure has completely different nesting habits than do the Quakers. Nandays are cavity nesters, they would not build the types of stick colonies on utility poles that have caused a problem in other areas with the birds chewing the insulation on wires.

Additionally, Nandays are not native to as temperate a climate as the Quakers, thus their ability to survive Pennsylvania winters is highly suspect. Nanday conures are native to regions where the low temperatures rarely reach down to the high 30’s. Pennsylvania winters are considerably more harsh than that. The fact that a zoo in Oklahoma has managed to keep a small population alive outdoors has no bearing on whether such birds could survive a winter on their own, unless of course the zoo isn’t feeding them and they are foraging on their own.


I examined the National Audubon Society’s Christmas Bird Count results, as well as the Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology Backyard Bird Count results going back to the year 2000. These bird counts are created by using thousands of observers across the country during a specific period each year. Most of the observers are extremely interested and knowledgeable about birds. If Nanday conures were moving north out of the semi-tropical regions of Florida or west from the coast of California, they would have been noticed in the counts. As you must be well aware, parrots can be raucous, gregarious creatures, they will not slip quietly by in the dead of night. I note that no Nanday conure has been sighted anywhere other than in Florida and California. Obviously the climate of Florida is nothing like the climate in Pennsylvania. The California sightings have all been on the Pacific coast, which enjoys considerably more mild winters than Pennsylvania. Conures have not been observed in Tennessee, so while Mr. Feaser’s comment about survivability may be correct, “that if they could survive in Tennessee they could survive here,” there is no evidence at all that they can survive there.

Parrots are popular pets. I have lived in Pittsburgh, since 1985 and, as a bird owner, I often look at the classified pet ads. Nanday conures have always appeared for sale as they have in Cleveland, Iowa City and Chicago when I lived in those cities. There are hundreds of pet Nanday conures in Pennsylvania and have been for decades. No doubt some of them over the years have escaped the confines of their homes into the environment. Despite this, no population has established itself here. The southern populations in Florida have not advanced even to the northern tier of that state, let alone to states farther north.

For the above reasons I urge the Commission reject the proposed amendment of 58 Pa. Code §137.1. Should the Commission see fit to adopt the proposed amendment despite the lack of any objective scientific evidence demonstrating a need for such a ban, I urge the Commission to insert a grandfather clause into the regulations specifically allowing Nanday conure owners to maintain possession until the end of the birds’ natural lives. Such a provision would ease the minds of hundreds of pet owners who have visions of game wardens breaking down doors and carting off the family pets, some of whom have been with them in excess of 20 years. While Mr. Decoskey has assured me that an internal memorandum would be generated allowing people to keep pets already in their possession, so long as they can prove possession prior to the effective date of the regulation, there is no guarantee that such a memorandum would be generated, nor would the proposed regulation require it. Additionally, I would suggest that any new regulation have an effective date no less than 90 days from the date of passage so that existing owners have time to document their animals presence in the Commonwealth prior to the amendment.

[iowahawk1]

The Game Commission has withdrawn the language on Nanday conures from its proposed amenndment. It appears that the danger has passed...for now.

[MrRick]

Cross posting requested.

I have just received a call from Kristy Garcia of The Coalition of Pennsylvania Aviculturists (TOCPA), and Kelly Williams of the American Federation of Aviculture (AFA), who, together with Rick Rowland of TOCPA, attended all sessions of the Pennsylvania Game Commission to advocate for the rights of bird owners to own and keep their Nanday Conures and other exotic birds in Pennsylvania.

Kristy and Kelly asked me to relay the good news that Nanday Conures have been removed from the proposal to amend 58 PA Code Section 137.1.

This means that Nanday Conures WILL NOT BE BANNED IN PENNSYLVANIA.

Kristy, Rick, and Kelly will have more information later today or tomorrow when they issue their full report to us. Right now they are on their way home, and will be taking a well-deserved rest from their three days of advocating for you and your birds.

Kelly wanted us to know that the Commissioners thanked them and all who appeared at the hearing, for their politeness, organization, professionalism, and thoroughness in addressing the Commission. They said that it is obvious that we all love our birds and they were impressed that so many people took the time to come before the Commission and advocate for them.

I want to personally say THANK YOU to Kristy, Kelly, and Rick, and everyone who called, faxed, wrote, emailed, and attended the hearing. Each person who got involved played an important part in this victory for bird owners and our birds. Without your help the Nanday Conure would have been banned in Pennsylvania. With your help we were able to show the Commission that a ban of this bird was not necessary either to protect human health or wildlife habitat.

I hope that each of you who responded this time will view this victory as a learning experience, and that you will continue to respond when we ask for help fighting other restrictive animal proposals that come up in other areas.

Thank you again.

Genny Wall
AFA Legislative VP
gennygem2@aol.com
American Federation of Aviculture

[LilacCrownedAmazonLover]

Horray!!!!
So relived.
I own a nanday conure and 2 hybrid babies.
Now they r safe.