Sailboat: CITES and amazons?

[Kiwibird]

Sailboat: you mentioned in another thread today CITES regulations will apply to all amazons starting in January. Where does that leave us owners of older zons with no bands (Kiwi didn't have one when we got him)? Do I have to get Kiwi microchipped to prove he's mine now? Is DNA banking a recognized alternative? I'm not overwhelmingly overjoyed about the concept of having something implanted in my bird.

 

[wrench13]

I believe that any CITES requirements are for birds born after the regulation is established, could be wrong tho. Salty was banded but I had the vet take it off.

 

[AmyMyBlueFront]

Amy was born either December 1989 or January 1990...She has some sort of "band' on her leg. It's not the typical wide type,it's a silver "round" type.
The diameter of it is small,I don't know how any numbers/identification marks could be stamped into it.
I will look at it closer when I let her and Beebs out later.




Jim

 

[SailBoat]

Sailboat: you mentioned in another thread today CITES regulations will apply to all amazons starting in January. Where does that leave us owners of older zons with no bands (Kiwi didn't have one when we got him)? Do I have to get Kiwi microchipped to prove he's mine now? Is DNA banking a recognized alternative? I'm not overwhelmingly overjoyed about the concept of having something implanted in my bird.

The up-coming change in the 'Status' of Amazons, i.e. those not currently classified as Endangered (I or II) is that 'All' Amazons will, as of 2 January 2018, be so classified.

Regarding having Hatch Documentation, that will only effect those newly born CITIES classified currently, as either I or II Amazons (as of 2, January 2017). And, as of 2, January 2018, all newly Hatched Amazons will require Hatch Documents.

Regarding all older Amazons, having medical and /or purchase documents indicating that your Amazon was alive prior to 1, January 2017 will be helpful in the future. As we both know, once an Amazon becomes more than a Young Adult, it becomes near impossible to determine their age.

- At this point, at least assure that your Avian Vet has some Indication of your Amazon's Age and that it is apart of his medical records.

- More and more Certified Avian Vet's (CAV) have been or will soon begin taking a photo of your Amazon and including it as part of your Amazon's (and all pets under their care) medical records.

I have not read or heard of any requirements of having one's Parrot Microchipped and /or DNA banking. I would be very surprised that such a requirement came about in the foreseeable future. So, deep breath and a feeling of comfort that Kiwi will not require such attention.

Hope this clears-up any confuse of my earlier Post.

 

[Birdman666]

All you need is a vet record proving the bird was alive prior to the time the statute was enacted.

As a practical matter, it's not exactly something the Feds are going to be going house to house to enforce. The only time it might become an issue is traveling out of state with the bird, or going out of the Country and trying to come back in... (I WOULDN'T LEAVE THE COUNTRY WITH A BIRD ANYMORE. GETTING THEM BACK IN IS PROBLEMATIC ANYMORE EVEN WITH A VET CERTIFICATE.)

 

[wrench13]

I guess Salty's World Tour should be cancelled.

 

[Kiwibird]

Thanks! I am glad I don't have to have him microchipped since he's not banded and that a vet history will be enough proof of ownership. This stuff is so confusing for the "layperson" who just doesn't want the feds stealing (and more likely than not, then destroying) their bird over some kind of bureaucratic BS. We will most likely never move out of the US but it is entirely possible we might move to another state at some point in our lives.

 

[Birdman666]

Thanks! I am glad I don't have to have him microchipped since he's not banded and that a vet history will be enough proof of ownership. This stuff is so confusing for the "layperson" who just doesn't want the feds stealing (and more likely than not, then destroying) their bird over some kind of bureaucratic BS. We will most likely never move out of the US but it is entirely possible we might move to another state at some point in our lives.

I took all of mine across country, and they didn't stop us at the state lines, even where they were running checkpoints...

 

[Kiwibird]

Thanks! I am glad I don't have to have him microchipped since he's not banded and that a vet history will be enough proof of ownership. This stuff is so confusing for the "layperson" who just doesn't want the feds stealing (and more likely than not, then destroying) their bird over some kind of bureaucratic BS. We will most likely never move out of the US but it is entirely possible we might move to another state at some point in our lives.

I took all of mine across country, and they didn't stop us at the state lines, even where they were running checkpoints...

When we moved up here, we looked up the regulations for where we'd be driving and ended up getting a health certificate for him "just in case" because Nevada apparently requires them (even though we were just driving through). Didn't need it, but it would've been our luck had we not gotten it some stupid scenario would've arose! I remember as a kid once my mom had a couple apples and oranges from the supermarket she brought as snacks confiscated by the California border people (the California boarder with Arizona, not Mexico!). We avoided CA deliberately on that move because of their stupid checkpoints for people traveling within the US.

 

[LordTriggs]

really I think most state guards would look at a singular bird in the care and go "yeah that's a pet" and be less inclined to think anything funny is going on. It would be in/out the country where issues would be likely to arise. Saying that being a new update to a law they may get some fresh documentation so they may be a bit hotter on it but as long as you can prove they're born before the changes then it shouldn't be any real problem

 

[SailBoat]

really I think most state guards would look at a singular bird in the care and go "yeah that's a pet" and be less inclined to think anything funny is going on. It would be in/out the country where issues would be likely to arise. Saying that being a new update to a law they may get some fresh documentation so they may be a bit hotter on it but as long as you can prove they're born before the changes then it shouldn't be any real problem

At present, when traveling within the Continental USA, with the exception of a few States that have restrictions on specific Parrots, the only requirement is a 'current' Healthy Bird Certificate which acts as a statement of ownership and the health status of the bird.

Normally, ownership is the only issue with most States as part of any travel except 'Air Transport,' which requires a Healthy Bird Certificate.

If you are planning to Travel the Highways and Byways of the USA with your Bird. It will be very important to keep a close eye on any State(s) that have 'Avian Flu' Hot Spots as they will likely set Boarder Check Points and halt travel or greatly limit travel with Birds in and out of their State. The same maybe true for those States that boarder such a State.

 

[wrench13]

You da man, 'Boats. You weren't a lawyer type fella in your former life, was you?

 

[Teddscau]

My question is, what would the Feds do with amazons who don't have proper documentation. I mean, they'll probably seize them, but then what? Amazons affected by CITES are endangered, and the whole idea behind these new regulations is to make sure these endangered species aren't being taken from the wild. But what are they going to do with hundreds of seized, ENDANGERED birds? You sure as heck can't release them back into the wild.

 

[Kentuckienne]

At least now there will be records for the poor babies who have to walk through the valley of PetSmart. Might make it easier to verify that the breeder is raising parrots in an ethical and humane way.

I lived in Kuwait during a previous administration and we took our cat with us. Getting the vet certification for the trip there was no problem. Coming back home was a different story as there was no vet to provide a certificate. Our cat had always been indoors and was in good health. Somebody may have used photoshop on a rug receipt, written in Arabic, to include the name and address in a English of what passed for an animal clinic there, along with the words “certificate of wellness cat”. Nobody asked to see it, so I’m not sure if I broke the law or not.

The most frightening moment was going through security in the Kuwait airport. I had the 13 pound cat in her carrier, and told the screener not to X-ray the case because it had a cat in it. He frowned and took it from me. Then he looked at me sternly and said “This is not cat!” Oh man, I thought, I don’t want any trouble with the authorities on my way out of the country, at midnight, with a health certificate from a rug shop and officials who can read Arabic. He glowered at me and continued “this is elephant!” and we both laughed hysterically. All’s well that ends well.

 

[Kiwibird]

My question is, what would the Feds do with amazons who don't have proper documentation. I mean, they'll probably seize them, but then what? Amazons affected by CITES are endangered, and the whole idea behind these new regulations is to make sure these endangered species aren't being taken from the wild. But what are they going to do with hundreds of seized, ENDANGERED birds? You sure as heck can't release them back into the wild.

If it's anything like what they do with other "illegal" animals, unless it's a spix macaw or something who's species is literally on the verge of extinction, if a licensed facility cannot be found to take the seized animals, they will most likely simply be destroyed. Facilities aren't going to be fighting over or wanting to take on large numbers of common birds confiscated from loving owners who failed to have proper documentation (or even ones illegally imported) who are classified as "Least Concern" or "Venerable". And no doubt the feds won't allow them to be sold or adopted out to anyone who's unlicensed (and I'm sure getting a license would be next to impossible unless it's a huge, professionally run facility). The thing to remember about the bureaucrats putting into place all these restrictions is that they don't love or care about endangered animals, they love regulations, power and control (oh, and the $$$ they'll get from fines!).

 

[Kiwibird]

The most frightening moment was going through security in the Kuwait airport. I had the 13 pound cat in her carrier, and told the screener not to X-ray the case because it had a cat in it. He frowned and took it from me. Then he looked at me sternly and said “This is not cat!” Oh man, I thought, I don’t want any trouble with the authorities on my way out of the country, at midnight, with a health certificate from a rug shop and officials who can read Arabic. He glowered at me and continued “this is elephant!” and we both laughed hysterically. All’s well that ends well.

Common sense and humor apparently DOES still exist in the world!

 

[SailBoat]

My question is, what would the Feds do with amazons who don't have proper documentation. I mean, they'll probably seize them, but then what? Amazons affected by CITES are endangered, and the whole idea behind these new regulations is to make sure these endangered species aren't being taken from the wild. But what are they going to do with hundreds of seized, ENDANGERED birds? You sure as heck can't release them back into the wild.

If it's anything like what they do with other "illegal" animals, unless it's a spix macaw or something who's species is literally on the verge of extinction, if a licensed facility cannot be found to take the seized animals, they will most likely simply be destroyed. Facilities aren't going to be fighting over or wanting to take on large numbers of common birds confiscated from loving owners who failed to have proper documentation (or even ones illegally imported) who are classified as "Least Concern" or "Venerable". And no doubt the feds won't allow them to be sold or adopted out to anyone who's unlicensed (and I'm sure getting a license would be next to impossible unless it's a huge, professionally run facility). The thing to remember about the bureaucrats putting into place all these restrictions is that they don't love or care about endangered animals, they love regulations, power and control (oh, and the $$$ they'll get from fines!).

Currently, North American (Canada, Mexico and the USA) are reluctantly proceeding with the majority of requirements of CITIES. Our good Friends who are under the guides of the European Union (EU) are being affect at much greater levels of Government oversight. With current 'anti-regulation' approach in the USA Capital, other than the basic hatch documenting of CITIES classified group I and II as of January 2017, -and our Certified Avian Vets (CAV's) being proactive and getting those hatch documents copied and part of the Parrot's health documents, -I really do not see it going much beyond that in the next seven years or so.

If you are traveling, I cannot stress the importance of monitoring any 'Hot Spots' of Avian Flu; Local, State and National Governments will restrict travel with birds in and out of those areas.

 

[SailBoat]

You da man, 'Boats. You weren't a lawyer type fella in your former life, was you?

Not me, I'm being coached by Julio as to the finer points of Government and issues of the Law!

 

[Teddscau]

My question is, what would the Feds do with amazons who don't have proper documentation. I mean, they'll probably seize them, but then what? Amazons affected by CITES are endangered, and the whole idea behind these new regulations is to make sure these endangered species aren't being taken from the wild. But what are they going to do with hundreds of seized, ENDANGERED birds? You sure as heck can't release them back into the wild.

If it's anything like what they do with other "illegal" animals, unless it's a spix macaw or something who's species is literally on the verge of extinction, if a licensed facility cannot be found to take the seized animals, they will most likely simply be destroyed. Facilities aren't going to be fighting over or wanting to take on large numbers of common birds confiscated from loving owners who failed to have proper documentation (or even ones illegally imported) who are classified as "Least Concern" or "Venerable". And no doubt the feds won't allow them to be sold or adopted out to anyone who's unlicensed (and I'm sure getting a license would be next to impossible unless it's a huge, professionally run facility). The thing to remember about the bureaucrats putting into place all these restrictions is that they don't love or care about endangered animals, they love regulations, power and control (oh, and the $$$ they'll get from fines!).

Currently, North American (Canada, Mexico and the USA) are reluctantly proceeding with the majority of requirements of CITIES. Our good Friends who are under the guides of the European Union (EU) are being affect at much greater levels of Government oversight. With current 'anti-regulation' approach in the USA Capital, other than the basic hatch documenting of CITIES classified group I and II as of January 2017. And, our Certified Avian Vets (CAV's) being proactive and getting those hatch documents copied and part of the Parrot's health documents. I really do not see it going much beyond that in the next seven years or so.

Like with the pit bull ban in Ontario. I'm fine with criminalizing the breeding of pit bulls (plenty of pit bulls are kept by humans who love them, but far more poor people, uneducated people, or criminals keep pit bulls). That way, there aren't thousands of unwanted, abused pit bulls. However, if pit bulls, even puppies, are found, they're killed because they're "dangerous". To keep certain breeds and species, you should need to have a license or background check done. But these animals shouldn't be treated as contraband. Like the poor Chattham pit bulls. Luckily, after more than TWO years, they were transported from Ontario to Florida for rehabilitation.

Now before anyone claims I'm being biased, if the majority of people who kept budgies were poor, uneducated, or were using them in **** fights, then I'd want it to be illegal to breed these birds and I'd want people to have to have a license or something to keep budgies. Dang it, I said rooster fights! But with cockroach, instead of rooster.

 

[GaleriaGila]

Rickeybirds (Patagonians) are not allowed in New Jersey (along with Quakers)... I guess the two are seen as able to live/multiply in Northern areas (Rickeybirds are from frigid steppe-y Southern Brazil/Chile). I have been told by staff from MySafeBirdStore (in NJ) that staff have knowledge of one Patagonian which was intercepted after being shipped from the UK to a nearby state, and then transported to NJ. Bird was detained. Owners tried to move back out of state lines but bird was not released for close to a year. Not sure about details.... rumor s that NJ wanted to ship the bird back to UK. So anyway, I guess the moral is that states may have complications to consider.