H.R. 5864 - Invasive Fish and Wildlife Prevention Act of 2012

[StudentoftheReptile]

I'm putting it here, because it does regard tortoises (exotic reptiles non-native to the U.S.) If the mods see fit to move it elsewhere, so be it.
--------------------------

H.R. 5864​

Summary: To establish an improved regulatory process for injurious wildlife to prevent the introduction and establishment in the United States of nonnative wildlife and wild animal pathogens and parasites that are likely to cause harm.

You can find and read the full text here (both in plain text and in PDF)

*****
Make sure you take the time to read the full text. If anyone remembers the bill H.R. 669 back in 2008, this is more or less a revision of it.

H.R. 669 was essentially an attempt to ban ALL non-native species from importation, interstate travel and ownership within the United States. Think about that; that’s any species of animal (and plant) that is not native to the U.S. This would include dogs, cats, several forms of livestock, hamsters, rabbits, tropical fish, most exotic reptiles, amphibians and birds, etc. If it had passed, that bill would have decimated the pet industry and made millions of pet owners felons overnight. Fortunately, the efforts of the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC), United States Association of Reptile Keepers (USARK) and the collective pet community as a whole, H.R. 669 was defeated.

Now, with a few modifications, it’s back in the form of H.R. 5864. One major difference in this bill and its predecessor is that it excludes most common/domesticated animals from “non-native” status. This list of exemptions includes dogs, cats, most forms of livestock & poultry, rabbits, hamsters, gerbils, guinea pigs, ferrets, canaries, goldfish and “any other species or subspecies that the Service determines to be common and clearly domesticated.”

What it curiously does not include on that list of exemptions are any exotic reptiles, amphibians, invertebrates, tropical birds, tropical fish, chinchillas, hedgehogs, or sugar gliders…just to name a few. So to sum it up, if you were to own any type of tortoises or turtles that are not native to the United States...it would be illegal if this bill gets passed.

******

Now, realistically, this bill will likely not pass in its current form. H.R. 669 had plenty of opposition from PIJAC, USARK and the pet industry in general. But I did post this to show everyone that these “dumb laws” aren’t going to quit.

I would start typing out some letters and get ready to do what you need to do to fight this one. Stay tuned for updates.

 

[DixieParadise]

WOW...thanks for the info and update.

 

[chairman]

Already had to shoot off a couple letters this calendar year to my state reps for a proposed partial reptile ban in my state. I ought to put together a form letter and find an email program that will automatically send it to all my elected officials on an annual basis.

 

[Tom]

Great... here we go again...

The economy is collapsing, the constitution is being eroded, crime, injustice and corruption are rampant at every level of government, we are spending far more than the working class is earning,.......................

BUT lets spend a whole bunch of time and resources on banning the horrible scourge Tom and Mike's pet turtles. Now THIS is a matter of HUGE national importance. Joe the plumber's pet ball python could RUIN our entire society as we know it, so we must work tirelessly to BAN it. Lets put war, poverty, joblessness, crime, AND GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION, all on the back burner for now... We have got to put an end to the terrible threat of people having pet tarantulas and such!

 

[Jacqui]

BUT lets spend a whole bunch of time and resources on banning the horrible scourge Tom and Mike's pet turtles.

So this is all yours and Mike's fault!!!

 

[StudentoftheReptile]

BUT lets spend a whole bunch of time and resources on banning the horrible scourge Tom and Mike's pet turtles.

So this is all yours and Mike's fault!!!

[Feints hand on forehand in dramatic fashion]

They finally caught up to us! Us and our dangerous tortoises digging tunnels under highways and eating up all of the flowers and....grass. Now the non-native tortoises are going after our native birds!

 

[Jacqui]

[Feints hand on forehand in dramatic fashion]

They finally caught up to us! Us and our dangerous tortoises digging tunnels under highways and eating up all of the flowers and....grass. Now the non-native tortoises are going after our native birds!

Shows just how smart the non-native tortoises really are. It appears only they eat the native plants and birds, while the native ones leave them alone.

 

[dmmj]

I always thought it was tom's fault,now my suspicions have been confirmed.

 

[jaizei]

So to sum it up, if you were to own any type of tortoises or turtles that are not native to the United States...it would be illegal if this bill gets passed.

I do not think this is an accurate summary.

 

[Baoh]

So to sum it up, if you were to own any type of tortoises or turtles that are not native to the United States...it would be illegal if this bill gets passed.

I do not think this is an accurate summary.

I see injurious, pathogens, and parasites as the key criteria. I am not sure that this applies to any or all nonnative chelonians.

 

[StudentoftheReptile]

So to sum it up, if you were to own any type of tortoises or turtles that are not native to the United States...it would be illegal if this bill gets passed.

I do not think this is an accurate summary.

I see injurious, pathogens, and parasites as the key criteria. I am not sure that this applies to any or all nonnative chelonians.

That's how H.R. 699 started, too.

I didn't see anywhere in the text where any non-native chelonians (or reptiles period, for that matter) were exempt, so unless I just missed something in there (and I'll admit, I've been wrong before), one could only surmise that any tortoise or turtle species not native to the U.S. would no longer be imported, and prohibited from interstate travel. If I remember the text correctly, current owners would be grandfathered in, but it would certainly be difficult for someone to acquire any new ones.

Again, I would assert that in its current form, this legislation is too vague and too broad and would have too much of an economic impact to get passed. It will meet enough opposition from special interest groups to knock it back. My main point is that they've tried this before 4 yrs ago, and they're not backing down.

Now it is still early on where it is only my opinion that their objective on paper is different from their underlying agenda. I still personally think they could give a rip about the environment, and this is just about attacking the exotic pet trade again. [shrugs] They just had a reasonable victory in Ohio and I fear it will only inspire more. Time will tell, I suppose.

 

[Baoh]

One could surmise that if the animals were known to be injurious and/or carry pathogens and/or parasites which are likely to cause harm, then they would not be exempt.

Are these nonnative chelonians considered to be injurious and/or possess pathogens and/or parasites which are likely to cause harm?

I am going by what is stated rather than what has not been stated as it relates to this proposal.

 

[StudentoftheReptile]

The purpose of this Act is to establish an improved regulatory
process for injurious wildlife to prevent the introduction and
establishment in the United States of nonnative wildlife and wild
animal pathogens and parasites that are likely to cause--
(1) economic or environmental harm; or
(2) harm to humans or animal health.

(8) Native.--The term ``native'', with respect to a
wildlife taxon, means a wildlife taxon that historically
occurred or currently occurs in the United States, other than
as a result of an intentional or unintentional introduction by
humans.
(9) Nonnative wildlife taxon.--
(A) In general.--The term ``nonnative wildlife
taxon'' means any family, genus, species, or subspecies
of live animal that is not native to the United States,
regardless of whether the animal was born or raised in
captivity.
(B) Inclusions.--The term ``nonnative wildlife
taxon'' includes any viable egg, sperm, gamete, or
other reproductive material or offspring of an animal
of a family, genus, species, or subspecies described in
subparagraph (A).
(C) Exclusions.--The term ``nonnative wildlife
taxon'' does not include--
(i) any taxon that is--
(I) specifically defined or
regulated as a plant pest or approved
for biological control purposes under
the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701
et seq.); or
(II) defined or regulated as a
threat to livestock or poultry under
the Animal Health Protection Act (7
U.S.C. 8301 et seq.); or
(ii) any common and clearly domesticated
species or subspecies, including--
(I) cat (Felis catus);
(II) cattle or oxen (Bos taurus);
(III) chicken (Gallus gallus
domesticus);
(IV) common canary (Serinus canaria
domesticus);
(V) dog (Canis lupus familiaris);
(VI) donkey or *** (Equus asinus);
(VII) domesticated members of the
family Anatidae (geese);
(VIII) duck (domesticated Anas
spp.);
(IX) domesticated ferret (Mustela
furo);
(X) gerbil (Meriones unguiculatus);
(XI) goat (Capra aegagrus hircus);
(XII) guinea pig or Cavy (Cavia
porcellus);
(XIII) goldfish (Carassius auratus
auratus);
(XIV) domesticated hamsters
(Cricetulus griseus, Mesocricetus
auratus, Phodopus campbelli, Phodopus
sungorus, and Phodopus roborovskii);
(XV) horse (Equus caballus);
(XVI) llama (Lama glama);
(XVII) mule or hinny (Equus
caballus x E. asinus);
(XVIII) pig or hog (Sus scrofa
domestica);
(XIX) domesticated varieties of
rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus);
(XX) sheep (Ovis aries); or
(XXI) any other species or
subspecies that the Service determines
to be common and clearly domesticated.

 

[Baoh]

Are nonnative chelonians considered to cause

(1) economic or environmental harm; or
(2) harm to humans or animal health.

?

 

[Tom]

Well they did ban sulcata and leopard importation based on the possibility of ticks and heart water disease as a potential threat to the cattle industry. The possibility of salmonella is another bogus way for them to make chelonians fit this criterion. Call me cynical, but I think with this sort of wording, the government will interpret this any way they see fit.

 

[Baoh]

That importation is already nixed. There is no indication they are attempting to take, say, captive bred sulcatas and leopards away from their keepers.

Salmonella has no distinction I have seen identified between native and nonnative species. The threat would not be additional or increased.

 

[StudentoftheReptile]

Are nonnative chelonians considered to cause

(1) economic or environmental harm; or

?

You tell me.

I can't speak for every species out there, but we all know that sulcatas are fairly adaptable and can live outdoors in much of the year in the southern portions of the country. They are more than capable of digging burrows to survive the winters. If non-govt organizations can convince the govt to do the same thing for Burmese pythons and yellow anacondas (which they did, and those snakes have even less of a chance of establishing themselves outside of Florida), then I say its possible for them to make the case for non-native chelonians as well. Of course, they would have to do research all aspects of each taxon, evaluating all potential effects on the environment and the economical impact on the pet industry. Of course, given the slip-shod pseudo-science "research" they did to support putting 4 constrictor snakes on the Lacey Act, I don't hold high hopes for integrity or quality information accountability on their part.

Then let's take a look at red-eared sliders. Yes, they are native to the U.S. but not ALL of the U.S. Look how much of their range has expanded just from people releasing unwanted pet RESs in areas outside their natural range. RES are a seriously invasive problem both inside and outside the U.S. and I imagine they could use that in their case for non-native aquatic turtles.

(2) harm to humans or animal health.

As far as this goes, I'm sure they'll use the Salmonella card, as well as making the case with the larger species that "these animals just require so much specialized care that most people get them on impulse and then dump them at shelters." blah blah
-----

I'm not for this bill; I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I'm not trying to insinuate that they are targeting chelonians specifically, either. My assumption is that they will attempt to just toss a blanket-ban all exotic reptiles, along with other animals not on that exemption list (tropical fish & birds, inverts, etc.). I only made that statement in my OP so that it would relate to everyone here. I've said it before and I'll say it again: do not make the naive mistake of believing that you are "safe" just because you just keep chelonians.

One thing to keep in mind is that once this bill is enacted (if it is successful in getting passed), it will be exponentially more difficult to get particular taxon removed (or rather, be placed on the list of exemptions). That is why I feel it is vitally important for everyone in the reptile community to be opposed to this bill in its current form, and push to have exotic reptiles exempt. In most cases, once a bill is passed, it is more difficult to defeat or overturn. We gotta nip this thing in the bud. Please do not sit idly by and assume, "well, this doesn't affect me so I'm not gonna worry about it." I assure you: it DOES affect you.

These are my opinions based on observing the activities of USARK and restrictive reptile-related legislation since 2008.

---

That importation is already nixed. There is no indication they are attempting to take, say, captive bred sulcatas and leopards away from their keepers.

Salmonella has no distinction I have seen identified between native and nonnative species. The threat would not be additional or increased.

LOL...I saw this post on the 2nd page, I was like "How on earth did you reply to my post 9 minutes before I posted it?!"...then I saw Tom's response on page 1!

But Tom's right. Facts are irrelevant to these people. Just look at the laws that have already been passed! Money and politics and agenda are the only things that influence these things. They'll spin it however they want to get their point across. They've done it before and they'll do it again. They're good at it.

 

[Baoh]

Give me one example of nonnative (foreign) chelonia causing environmental or economic harm in the United States. Give me one example of captive bred nonnative chelonia presenting a greater measured pathogenic or parasitic degree of harm to human or animal health in the United States.

Much like I said before, I will go by what is stated instead of what is effectively engaging in the employment of a slippery slope fallacy.

 

[dmmj]

Let me just put this out there, in California RES have decimated the pond turtle population.

 

[Baoh]

Let me just put this out there, in California RES have decimated the pond turtle population.

While certainly a valid example of a native, I am talking about nationally nonnative chelonia in accordance with the terms of the proposal.