The Underreported Good Wildlife News in the COMPETES Act

[goliathusdavid]

Unfortunately due to the stupidity of the Lacey Act Amendments, a lot of really valuable wildlife regulation achievements are being overlooked. Many of us are actively pressuring legislators to remove Lacey from the larger COMPETES Act, but as we do that it's also important to take a moment to reflect on the good potential regulation that is not getting adequately reported. COMPETES, if passed, (ideally without Lacey) will...
1. Allocate an additional $150 million per annum to USFWS to combat wildlife trafficking through 2031.

2. Order the creation of at least 50 new wildlife enforcement officer positions, most to be deployed internationally.

3. Order a MASSIVE federal study and investigation of the global wildlife trade: in terms of criminality, biosecurity, social media, international cooperation-- the works. The same study will also assess whether or not to renew the task force created by the END Act.

4. Extend marine mammal protections and conservation.

5. Prohibit the trade of Shark fins.

6. Further investigate the origins of COVID-19, and examine future pandemic prevention/public health measures as relating to wildlife.

7. Aid CITES enforcement in the Pacific Islands.

There is a ton of reason to be frustrated and angry over the Lacey idiocy, and I would never try to erase that (I know I'm furious), but there's also a lot in this act for wildlife lovers and exotic keepers to get behind. Just figured it would be good to share, if for no other reason then to be better informed in lobbying strategy.

 

[Arthroverts]

Most interesting, thanks for sharing @goliathusdavid! I wasn't even aware of the END Act.

Thanks,

Arthroverts

 

[The Snark]

3. Order a MASSIVE federal study and investigation of the global wildlife trade: in terms of criminality, biosecurity, social media, international cooperation-- the works. The same study will also assess whether or not to renew the task force created by the END Act.

The gigantic herd of day glow purple elephants in the room is the word Federal. They can screw up a one man rock fight.

 

[Jonathan6303]

1. Allocate an additional $150 million per annum to USFWS to combat wildlife trafficking through 2031.

I’m sure everyone knows who pays for that 150 mil.

I thought everyone decided that Covid didn’t come from animals. Wasn’t that some weird propaganda with bats.

 

[goliathusdavid]

I’m sure everyone knows who pays for that 150 mil.

I thought everyone decided that Covid didn’t come from animals. Wasn’t that some weird propaganda with bats.

Personally, I'd wholly support redirecting the entire F-35 or supercarrier program funding to USFWS. It truly is amazing how bad engineers can become when given WAY too much cash...

Multiple studies of its viral structure and similar viruses (many of them in bats) strongly suggest that COVID-19 was not bioengineered. The ongoing debate is whether its emergence in human populations came out of a lab leak or a zoological spill over event. There are still some unanswered questions, but after some flip flopping the vast majority of the epidemiological community is leaning hard towards the spillover theory, as the evidence supporting it exponentially increases. Spill over events were after all what brought on the 2013 Ebola epidemic, 2003 SARS, swine flu, and countless other diseases. The big question re spill over is what species it spilled over from (as the list of possibles is extensive).

The reason the scientific community is still pushing hard to find out all the specifics of COVID's emergence is to create improved pandemic-prevention policy. But, regardless of COVID-19's origin, wildlife protection and wildlife trade regulation are going to be essential parts of those new policies: epidemiologists have been warning for DECADES about the spill over potential of our interactions with wildlife. And, as I said, there is a mountain of scientific evidence behind the spillover hypothesis for COVID specifically, but absolutely no evidence to suggest it was bioengineered or some sort of bioweapon gone wrong. Thus, a new focus on the wildlife trade has emerged in both the US and across the world.

 

[mickiem]

I'm not against regulation - it is necessary and can be a good thing. But I am 100% against this being entirely in the governments hands. They hire more bureaucrats than they do people with wildlife experience. We don't need pencil pushing feds making these decisions. Imagine if USARK individuals paired with government workers were making decisions?! That would make sense to me. Laws and regulations are ok if they make sense.

 

[goliathusdavid]

Personally, I'd wholly support redirecting the entire F-35 or supercarrier program funding to USFWS. It truly is amazing how bad engineers can become when given WAY too much cash...

Multiple studies of its viral structure and similar viruses (many of them in bats) strongly suggest that COVID-19 was not bioengineered. The ongoing debate is whether its emergence in human populations came out of a lab leak or a zoological spill over event. There are still some unanswered questions, but after some flip flopping the vast majority of the epidemiological community is leaning hard towards the spillover theory, as the evidence supporting it exponentially increases. Spill over events were after all what brought on the 2013 Ebola epidemic, 2003 SARS, swine flu, and countless other diseases. The big question re spill over is what species it spilled over from (as the list of possibles is extensive).

The reason the scientific community is still pushing hard to find out all the specifics of COVID's emergence is to create improved pandemic-prevention policy. But, regardless of COVID-19's origin, wildlife protection and wildlife trade regulation are going to be essential parts of those new policies: epidemiologists have been warning for DECADES about the spill over potential of our interactions with wildlife. And, as I said, there is a mountain of scientific evidence behind the spillover hypothesis for COVID specifically, but absolutely no evidence to suggest it was bioengineered or some sort of bioweapon gone wrong. Thus, a new focus on the wildlife trade has emerged in both the US and across the world.

Figured this article would serve as a good addition/update to this post. This is a scathing Scientific American analysis of the lab leak theory in the context of new evidence and the danger of having ever given it a platform in the first place. Also some good points about wildlife trade and wildlife regulation.