All Need to see this.....

[Lori~D]

Common Birds in Aviculture to be Placed

Under Endangered Species Act?



The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is considering the possible listing of up to 14 additional parrots as "Endangered" under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA).



If adopted, the proposal would list the following species as "Endangered" under the ESA: umbrella cockatoos, moluccan cockatoos, lesser sulphur-crested cockatoos, red-vented cockatoos, blue-headed macaws, blue-throated macaws, buffon's macaws, hyacinth macaws, scarlet macaws, military macaws, shining parrots, grey-cheeked parakeets, yellow billed amazon parrots and green-cheeked amazon parrots.



Many of these species are being successfully bred in large numbers by U.S. aviculturists and are owned by many thousands of U.S. citizens as pets.



Once listed, a species could not be sold across state lines without the appropriate federal permit, a permit that does not recognize "pet purposes" as a valid permitting basis.



AFA believes that this proposal is not supported by reliable scientific or commercial data, will discourage captive breeding of these species in the U.S. and will have a detrimental effect on U.S. interstate commerce, without any corresponding benefit to the species purported to be protected. Since none of these species has been imported into the United States since the Wild Bird Conservation Act (1992) went into effect, AFA sees no material scientific or commercial justification for the uplisting, but does see a huge detriment to aviculture and to the future of these species themselves in the U.S.



The USFWS has initiated a call for information on scientific and commercial data with regard to whether these species should be proposed for Endangered status, with comments due by September 14, 2009. They are not looking for general public comment on uplisting at this time, but are looking for input on whether there is a scientific and/or commercial basis for these species to be proposed for uplisting. If the FWS actually proposes these species for uplisting, that proposal should be open to general public comment. AFA will advise all of its members if this occurs.



AFA is developing a position paper on the scientific and commercial aspects of this call for information and will submit it by the deadline.



People concerned about the scientific and commercial pros and cons of this proposal may make their thoughts known to FWS by September 14, 2009.



Contact information for the Service and this important proposal can be found at U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Home or by contacting the AFA Business Office at afaoffice@earthlink.net.



You can make a formal comment to FWS online by September 14, 2009 at: Regulations.gov



Or you can mail your comments to:

Public Comments Processing

Attn: FWS-R9-IA-2009-0016

Division of Policy and Directives Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 222

Arlington, VA 22203



In either case, refer to FWS-R9-IA-2009-0016.

[sebastiantheparakeet]

:o wow i cant believe it

[LovelySydney]

Am I the only one who thinks that is ridiculous? Im all for people not getting birds that really cannot and should not have them - but what about the people who truly love their birds and treat them as family?? What happens to them?

[RicosMom]

What would this mean to those of us who live with one of these species?

[Eloise]

For all birds on the ground I think they should be grandfathered (banding/micro chipping to prove), but this is wonderful! Most of the species however much we love them do NOT belong in our houses, they belong free in the wild.

there are 3 maybe 4 thousand Hyacinth macaws in the wild, and about 10-12,000 in 'pet situation' around the world, I would rather see 15,000 bird in the wild, and none in 'homes'. This is unrealistic but I maybe just maybe this is step in the right direction.

[Lisa B]

nope, they dont get grandfathered.

[RicosMom]

Eloise, I 100% agree with you. I live with a green-cheeked amazon and am just curious about what it means if we ever move across state lines, for example. He is not banded (wasn't when we adopted him) and not microchipped. I worry about microchipping him as I have seen a few birds who have mutilated themselves trying to remove them. But, I totally agree that it would be nice to see birds 100% in the wild (however much I love Rico).

[sodakat]

Parrots International has a position statement that pretty much nails it in my opinion. The full position can be found here: Parrots International Position Statement on Proposed Addition of 14 Parrot Species to the US Endangered Species List : Living the Scientific Life (Scientist, Interrupted)

Here is a bit from that paper. The second sentence says it all:

Begin quote:

In summary, there is no viable scientific value in adding these 14 species to the U.S. Endangered Species Act.

Conversely, there is a predictable detrimental consequence of this addition, whereby the captive breeding population and domestically supported genetic diversity of these species will be negatively affected.

Currently, captive breeders and aviculture in general, are the main potential contributors of reintroduction captive individuals to in situ conservation efforts of exotic parrot species. To further limit their commerce here in the United States through listing under the U.S. ESA would begin to erode that financial base of support. Is Congress willing to pick up the tab for exotic species conservation and captive breeding of these species?

If the addition of these fourteen species to the Endangered Species Act guaranteed substantial funding for the recovery and conservation of these species, then the benefits might outweigh the liabilities and detrimental effects on the captive breeding populations. Since there is no available funding, and no foreseeable source in this economic climate, then the liabilities severely outweigh the assets, as the genetic pool and diversity of these species in US aviculture and captive breeding programs would be severely, negatively affected.

End Quote

[NotEnoughTime]

Originally Posted by Eloise

Most of the species however much we love them do NOT belong in our houses, they belong free in the wild.

From my reading parrots, and their kin, have exisited in human households for many thousands of years. I believe it is a misstatement, and somewhat cruel, to say that a bird that is raised in a domestic aviary/environment should be "wild."

[perchingbird]

This has been brought up earlier this month:

Common Birds in Aviculture to be Placed Under Endangered Species Act

To follow this proposal, check the Federal Register for postings and the USFWS website that I posted in the other thread.