116 



amended to include consultation language similar to that being considered in modifications 

 to the Endangered Species Act. 



In summary, while FWS pays lip service to the WBCA, it has crafted Regulations 

 which are totally at odds to the Congressional declaration of intent. 



Approval of Captive-Breeding Facilities 



The proposed mechanism for approving foreign captive breeding facilities is Orwellian 

 at best and simply ludicrous. No regulation could be better designed as a disincentive for 

 captive breeding than the one proposed here. Moreover, the proposal goes far beyond the 

 enabling statute. 



Part of the rationale for the WBCA was the encouragement of captive breeding; the 

 requirements proposed by the Department, however, provide one of the greatest disincentives 

 to captive breeding one could ever devise. The purpose for qualifying such facilities is clearly 

 spelled out in the Congressional history. The Report accompanying the final legislation 

 specifically states that: 



It is the intent of the breeders bill to encourage captive breeding both in the 

 United States and elsewhere. Concern has been expressed that small breeders 

 may wish to ship birds to the United States via larger scale breeders but may be 

 precluded fi^om doing so under this Act. It is not the intent of the Committee 

 to prohibit such transfers, and the Committee believes that the Secretary has 

 suflBcient discretion to allow them under this bill. It is also the intent of the 

 Committee that the paperwork burden required of participating captive 

 breeding facilities be minimized, especially as it applies to small facilities that 

 employ few people. (House Report 102-479 (I) at page 18; emphasis 

 supplied). 



In short, the proposed regulations are far more than procedural in nature; they contain 

 a number of substantive provisions that go far beyond the enabling legislation and a number of 

 proposals are contrary to Congressional intent. The proposal contains various provisions that 

 are overbearing and impose inappropriate requirements on foreign governments and are totally 

 unwarranted. The proposal hardly encourages captive breeding in foreign facilities, but rather 

 creates an isolationist approach that discriminates against foreign breeders. The proposal, if 

 adopted in its present form, would result in an unnecessarily arduous and cumbersome process 

 adversely affecting not only potential foreign breeding facilities, but also their governments. 

 The end result will thus be to thwart the intent of the legislation. 



The proposed regulations would impose on foreign breeders a complex regulatory 

 mechanism requiring an overwhelming degree of regulation and unnecessary detail, not 

 consistent with the purposes of the Act. Such requirements would include. 



