21 



for this purpose. All species of commercial importance are already 

 represented in sufficient numbers in captivity to constitute a viable 

 gene pool under active cooperative management. Species with 

 fewer individuals obviously are not of commercial importance. If 

 aviculturists would manage their gene pools by moving birds 

 among private collections, they could take advantage of the great 

 genetic diversity that is already present. 



My fourth recommendation is not to amend the Act to exclude 

 any bird bred in captivity or overemphasize sustainable harvesting. 

 Captive breeding has the allure of potentially reducing pressures 

 on wild populations, but amending the Act to allow importation of 

 any bird bred in captivity will increase the number of wild birds 

 harvested. Because the demand right now far exceeds the capacity 

 of breeders to produce exotic birds, there is a great impetus to har- 

 vest birds from the wild and sneak them into the trade, as you 

 have heard, as captive-bred individuals. Presently no marking sys- 

 tem, including closed-ring banding systems, can reliably detect 

 laundering of illegal birds. It requires a well-documented pedigree 

 and tissue samples for DNA analysis. Serious funding would be 

 needed to enforce such legislation. The simplest and most cost-ef- 

 fective way to regulate captive breeding facilities outside the Unit- 

 ed States is the present list of species that are bred almost entirely 

 in captivity and the licensing of breeding facilities on an individual 

 basis. 



Sustainable harvesting could also provide conservation and trade 

 benefits, but also requires a degree of control that is difficult and 

 expensive to achieve. Important biological information to determine 

 sustainable levels of harvest have not been gathered for even a sin- 

 gle species in the trade, and no ranching projects with wild free- 

 flying birds have ever been done. Without strong controls currently 

 in the Act, attempts to sustain harvesting would likely cause more 

 conservation problems than they solve. 



Lastly, we would like to suggest that you do something. Do 

 amend the Act to include all bird families. Ten bird families were 

 exempt from this Act as a result of special interest group lobbying. 

 Excluding these so-called game birds and potentially other families 

 such as raptors from this legislation reinforces a market for them 

 and gives no impetus to develop captive management programs. 

 Only a handful of these species are covered by the Endangered 

 Species Act or CITES. Many of the rest are thought to be declining 

 in the wild. Not only are these families threatened by habitat de- 

 struction, but they are often hunted, or in the case of raptors, per- 

 secuted throughout their range. It is simply inappropriate to ex- 

 clude bird families from a conservation act. Instead, let the Fish 

 and Wildlife Service regulate which species should be traded. 

 Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 



[Statement of Steven R. Beissinger may be found at end of hear- 

 ing.] 



Mr. Saxton. Thank you very much for your testimony. You all 

 gave very good articulate testimony and I appreciate that very 

 much. 



Mr. Herrighty, you testified that you believe that as a represent- 

 ative of the State of New Jersey, which has its own wild bird pro- 



