Lacey Act 2022

[goliathusdavid]

Wildlife enforcement is actually a career path I am thinking about, so here's my hot take: this is stupid on every level.

USFWS does not have, nor will it ever be given the resources to actually enforce this, so it will just be diverting their few resources from REAL wildlife trafficking. This is not even useful on a biosecurity perspective (@CJJon) : we're currently importing over 200 million live animals a year (and that's only legally, may I note usually only quarantining bats and nonhuman primates) and these amendments force USFWS to direct significantly greater attention than it has to interstate transport of exotics. I cannot emphasize how much that a) is not our biggest threat and b) is ridiculously difficult to control, as COVID has proven state borders are pretty darn tricky. The USFWS office of law enforcement only has 261 special agents and 122 wildlife inspectors right now btw, for the whole country. That's already not NEARLY enough for our ports, one of the reasons why I know way too many people who have smuggled Phasmids into the States successfully from Europe-- yet a major worry of this amendment is interstate transport? Plus, if we really wanted to prioritize biosecurity than this bill would do more to address the epidemiological risk of factory farming, but I don't really see that...

It is, quite simply, unenforceable and useless. And while students such as myself, zoos, and scientists will still have some ability to obtain and transport exotics, it will be twice as hard to do within the confines of USDA and FWS law, which (unlike individuals) we have no option to not abide.

So, in summary, these Lacey Act Amendments
a) criminalize an entire industry and make the lives of both individuals and organizations more difficult.
b) do nothing (as @Arthoverts so eloquently pointed out) for conservation.
c) force the creation of a black/white list that if actually done based on research would take a few decades to create.
c) are unenforceable.
d) aren't even that effective in a epidemiology/biosecurity context.

I am someone who controversially believes that the US wildlife trade needs greater and better regulation. COMPETES as a whole provides some. But the Lacey amendments aren't regulation, they are just idiotic political posturing on behalf of animal rights groups who are hypocritical and ignorant in their own right.

EDIT: It is important to note that a separate section of the COMPETES Act is authorizing an additional $150 million per year to USFWS and 50 new agents. While this is a SUBSTANTIAL increase in resources, it is till not nearly enough to control state borders, and focusing those much needed resources on inter-state transport is...well...dumb.

 

[CJJon]

The big issue I have is with the language in the legislation in that it effectively gives a federal department the ability to do whatever they please. The language is so broad that one person can basically do what they want with zero repercussions. Language that special interests write and our stooge politicians adopt as their own. This is the interstate commerce clause bastardized to the Nth degree.

The inmates are running the asylum folks. If you think this can't happen, you may be very surprised one day.

 

[spideyspinneret78]

Wildlife enforcement is actually a career path I am thinking about, so here's my hot take: this is stupid on every level.

USFWS does not have, nor will it ever be given the resources to actually enforce this, so it will just be diverting their few resources from REAL wildlife trafficking. This is not even good on a biosecurity perspective (@CJJon) : we're importing over 200 million live animals a year (and that's only legally, may I note usually only quarantining bats and nonhuman primates) and these amendments force USFWS to direct significantly greater attention than it has to interstate transport of exotics. I cannot emphasize how much that a) is not our biggest threat and b) is ridiculously difficult to control, as COVID has proven state borders are pretty darn tricky. The USFWS office of law enforcement only has 261 special agents and 122 wildlife inspectors btw, for the whole country. That's already not NEARLY enough for our ports, one of the reasons why I know way too many people who have smuggled Phasmids into the States successfully from Europe-- yet a major worry of this amendment is interstate transport? Plus, if we really wanted to prioritize biosecurity than this bill would address the epidemiological risk of factory farming, but I don't see that anywhere...

It is, quite simply, unenforceable and useless. And while students such as myself, zoos, and scientists will still have some ability to obtain and transport exotics, it will be twice as hard to do within the confines of USDA and FWS law, which (unlike individuals) we have no option to not abide.

So, in summary, these Lacey Act Amendments
a) criminalize an entire industry and make the lives of both individuals and organizations more difficult.
b) do nothing (as @Arthoverts so eloquently pointed out) for conservation.
c) force the creation of a black/white list that if actually done based on research would take a few decades to create.
c) are unenforceable.
d) aren't even that effective in a epidemiology/biosecurity context. Let's put our attention on ports, factory farming and deer populations maybe?

I am someone who controversially believes that the US wildlife trade needs greater and better regulation. But this isn't regulation, it's just idiotic political posturing on behalf of animal rights groups who are hypocritical and ignorant in their own right. And hey, if we actually want to address wildlife trafficking then maybe give USFWS that $100 million for our next F-35 -- they don't seem to be doing too well... Never mind what the $13.2 billion spent on an aircraft carrier that can't effectively launch aircraft could do to address environmental racism and injustice...

Very well said. I agree with everything you mentioned. It also makes captive breeding so much more difficult, encouraging illegal smuggling through the black market. Just ridiculous and counterproductive on so many levels.

 

[darkness975]

This is beyond stupid. The invertebrate hobby is one of the few things I enjoy.

Cats and dogs have caused the most damage worldwide but they get a pass?

 

[Introvertebrate]

Cats and dogs have caused the most damage worldwide but they get a pass?

Mammals have a greater right to live. You didn't know that? It's in the PETA handbook. PETA also prioritizes by total body mass. Mice have the fewest rights, and then it goes up from there. Lions, elephants, and rhinos get all kinds of privileges. Whales have the greatest right to life. There are exceptions of course. If an animal is particularly cute, cuddly, or needy of human attention, it gets a free pass, even if it's relatively small.

 

[mantisfan101]

I’m surprised pet corporations, zoos, museums, and aquariums haven’t said anything about this yet.

 

[darkness975]

Mammals have a greater right to live. You didn't know that? It's in the PETA handbook. PETA also prioritizes by total body mass. Mice have the fewest rights, and then it goes up from there. Lions, elephants, and rhinos get all kinds of privileges. Whales have the greatest right to life. There are exceptions of course. If an animal is particularly cute, cuddly, or needy of human attention, it gets a free pass, even if it's relatively small.

Sadly true.

 

[spideyspinneret78]

I just donated to USARK and wrote my senators. If this passes it will be devastating to many people in this country, myself included. If I didn't have hobbies like keeping inverts and aquariums, I'd be in a much darker place right now that's for sure.

 

[JonnyTorch]

I'd be in a much darker place right now that's for sure.

Same. After becoming sober, it has become a great way to focus and put time and energy into something other than drinking or drugs.

 

[goliathusdavid]

For those curious about other (actually good!) wildlife law encased in COMPETES, head on over to this thread. If nothing else, then check it out to improve lobbying strategy. I have also updated my above post with a few corrections.

I’m surprised pet corporations, zoos, museums, and aquariums haven’t said anything about this yet.

In terms of zoos, museums, and aquariums I would say it's likely because many institutions view the changes as just yet another layer of permitting and paperwork. Most people in institutions (and those who move through both hobby and professional worlds such as myself) are really angry about it but it isn't an industry criminalization in the way it is for the hobby. And given that most organizations already have to go through a million federal inspections, a press release doesn't seem super worth it for their administrations. In other words, many institutions would rather take the additional work than threaten their relationships with the agencies that inspect them.

That's at least my experience with the places I am at or have close contacts at. Would be curious to hear from others about theirs, perhaps @MasterOogway?

 

[spideyspinneret78]

In terms of zoos, museums, and aquariums I would say it's likely because many institutions view the changes as just yet another layer of permitting and paperwork. Most people in institutions (and those who move through both hobby and professional worlds such as myself) are really angry about it but it isn't an industry criminalization in the way it is for the hobby. And given that most organizations already have to go through a million federal inspections, a press release doesn't seem super worth it for their administrations. In other words, many institutions would rather take the additional work than threaten their relationships with the agencies that inspect them.

That's at least my experience with the places I am at or have close contacts at. Would be curious to hear from others about theirs, perhaps @MasterOogway?

As a former zookeeper, I can confirm that amount of paperwork, permitting and regulations are intense. Getting the paperwork finished each year to renew permits for native species easily took weeks if not months, exotics even more so in some cases but not always. Plus every other year there are detailed inspections by the FDA. We had to hire someone just to keep records and submit paperwork, and this wasn't a large facility. These additional regulations would surely take up more time and effort, but would likely be seen as just another hurdle to jump through (and there are many).

 

[ChaniLB520]

As a former zookeeper, I can confirm that amount of paperwork, permitting and regulations are intense. Getting the paperwork finished each year to renew permits for native species easily took weeks if not months, exotics even more so in some cases but not always. Plus every other year there are detailed inspections by the FDA. We had to hire someone just to keep records and submit paperwork, and this wasn't a large facility. These additional regulations would surely take up more time and effort, but would likely be seen as just another hurdle to jump through (and there are many).

But this implies that there are ways to fill out paperwork to get around these rules, if they are corporations? The language of the amendments doesn't say anything about permits - are these included in other laws, elsewhere? Does this mean that pet stores will still be able to get in exotic animals from across state lines? In that case, would there be a possibility for pet owners to file for exemptions as well? I truly find legal-ese extremely confusing...

 

[spideyspinneret78]

But this implies that there are ways to fill out paperwork to get around these rules, if they are corporations? The language of the amendments doesn't say anything about permits - are these included in other laws, elsewhere? Does this mean that pet stores will still be able to get in exotic animals from across state lines? In that case, would there be a possibility for pet owners to file for exemptions as well? I truly find legal-ese extremely confusing...

Unlikely. Exemptions/ permits for species that are illegal for the average person to keep are usually only granted to accredited zoos and research institutions, and even in these cases there is a lot of paperwork and hurdles to jump through.

 

[ChaniLB520]

Unlikely. Exemptions/ permits for species that are illegal for the average person to keep are usually only granted to accredited zoos and research institutions, and even in these cases there is a lot of paperwork and hurdles to jump through.

Thank you. That makes sense. I actually work as a biology instructor at a public community college, so I hope at least I will have the ability to keep my exotics that I use for education and keep in my office. It would be unfortuante if I had to apply for permits, though. And I live right on the border of two states, and am planning to move across it to live with my fiance within the next year. But I would still regularly travel from state to state to work and back... the idea that this would prevent me from bringing extra feeders from home, for example, to my office... this is insane.

 

[spideyspinneret78]

Thank you. That makes sense. I actually work as a biology instructor at a public community college, so I hope at least I will have the ability to keep my exotics that I use for education and keep in my office. It would be unfortuante if I had to apply for permits, though. And I live right on the border of two states, and am planning to move across it to live with my fiance within the next year. But I would still regularly travel from state to state to work and back... the idea that this would prevent me from bringing extra feeders from home, for example, to my office... this is insane.

It's too broad, too absolute, and done without considering what the far reaching consequences are. I wholeheartedly believe that certain animals should not be kept by people as pets....especially large birds (think cockatoos, macaws, African Grey Parrots, etc), primates, some reptiles, etc. because their needs are next to impossible to meet in captivity. And definitely there are some invasive species in some areas that should be banned because they've wreaked havoc on the environment. I've personally seen the consequences of these things. But to automatically ban almost everything.....that's extreme and unfair to everyone. The thing that really bothers me about these amendments is that they will stifle successful captive breeding programs. Poecilotheria metallica is one example. It's sad that they will likely go extinct in the wild over the next few years. But thanks to captive breeding efforts, they will not disappear from the face of the earth entirely. In my opinion we NEED to encourage captive breeding wherever possible to reduce pressure on wild populations. Successful aquaculture is another example. Many species that are endangered in the wild are readily breeding and available in captivity due to breeding programs. We also need to encourage responsible pet ownership and promote education instead of punishing people who do adequate research and go above and beyond for their animals. Be proactive instead of reactive. This will absolutely backfire if it gets passed. I wish that the people who wrote it weren't so short-sighted of the consequences.

 

[Introvertebrate]

It's not like there checkpoints at the stateline. "Do you have any feeders to declare?"

 

[spideyspinneret78]

It's not like there a checkpoints at the stateline. "Do you have any feeders to declare?"

Yes sir. I have 24 House crickets, 2.5 nightcrawlers, feeder cricket gel, and a few egg crate pieces. Do you need to do a cavity search on me, Officer?

 

[ChaniLB520]

It's not like there checkpoints at the stateline. "Do you have any feeders to declare?"

I mean, true. Others on the thread have also expressed how difficult it would be to enforce some of this. So I could probabaly still move things within reason, but would certainly stress about it, that's just how I roll. A bigger concern is probably the affects it would have on the availability and/or price of these organisms in general. Not sure - just hoping we won't have to find out.

 

[spooky7]

Does anyone have any legitimate means for getting PR or press to run this story of the LACEY ACT in AMERICA COMPETES?

Reporters have slow news days, which mean they need stories. If we can get this in the hands of even local press that would run with these DOOMDSDAY headlines (as mainstream media loves to do) it could get picked up and syndicated and spark outrage. Politicians only care about negative PR, and I feel while very much a longshot and a pipe dream, it could work if done well.

If you listened to Tom Moran's podcast about this on Sunday, he made some good talking points about writing your Senators and mentioning the types of constituents who benefit from keeping nondomesticated animals:

• Veterans suffering from PTSD
• differently abled people who can't care for a larger animal due to limited mobility
• schoolteachers who instruct students
• People overcoming addiction (myself included)
• EVERYONE dealing with COVID lockdowns

I encourage members here to lean on REP Senators as they are more likely to have reasons to reject this bill. If you have DEM Senators in your state--ask them to provide a good show of bipartisanship. Remind them that they will be heralded as a hero by people across the aisle for speaking their conscience and not just voting with their party.

Thoughts?

 

[spideyspinneret78]

Does anyone have any legitimate means for getting PR or press to run this story of the LACEY ACT in AMERICA COMPETES?

Reporters have slow news days, which mean they need stories. If we can get this in the hands of even local press that would run with these DOOMDSDAY headlines (as mainstream media loves to do) it could get picked up and syndicated and spark outrage. Politicians only care about negative PR, and I feel while very much a longshot and a pipe dream, it could work if done well.

If you listened to Tom Moran's podcast about this on Sunday, he made some good talking points about writing your Senators and mentioning the types of constituents who benefit from keeping nondomesticated animals:

• Veterans suffering from PTSD
• differently abled people who can't care for a larger animal due to limited mobility
• schoolteachers who instruct students
• People overcoming addiction (myself included)
• EVERYONE dealing with COVID lockdowns

I encourage members here to lean on REP Senators as they are more likely to have reasons to reject this bill. If you have DEM Senators in your state--ask them to provide a good show of bipartisanship. Remind them that they will be heralded as a hero by people across the aisle for speaking their conscience and not just voting with their party.

Thoughts?

I agree. Everyone needs to band together and speak up as much as possible. I listened to Tom's podcast last night and really agreed with a lot of the things he said. And one thing that will resonate with everyone is money. Explain how this will hurt the economy and hit people in their pocketbooks.