127 



may be smuggled across the Mexico border into the United States every year. In 

 contrast, between 1991 and 1994, it has been reported that a total of only 573 birds 

 were confiscated by the U.S. law enforcement agencies at that border. While it is not 

 suggested that only 573 birds were smuggled in a four year period, there is clearly a 

 huge credibihty crisis here. 



Aviculture and aviculturists do not support smuggling, laundering or other 

 illegal activities. Aviculturists abhor smuggling. In fact, AFA has produced and 

 furnished to the USFWS a bilingual anti-smuggling poster on parrots for the United 

 States /Mexican border. At the very height of avicultural concerns is that smuggled 

 birds jeopardize the health of avicultural collections with disease. 



The USFWS Division of Law Enforcement has told Congress of intensive and 

 expansive enforcement activities. USFWS conducts sting operations and publicizes 

 indictments. Through as little as hearsay or rumor, come undeserved arrests, broad 

 search warrants and unwarranted confiscation of birds (in some cases having led to 

 the deaths of the birds, even rare birds). Many of the resulting charges involve only 

 paperwork or other minor technical violations. Aviculturists are intimidated by 

 such events, even when not directly involved. Certainly, smugglers should be 

 prosecuted, but there appears to be a deliberate effort to expand enforcement to 

 entrap irmocent aviculturists and to place a stigma on all aviculture. 



Aviculturists would like to work with USFWS to stop the real smuggling of 

 exotic birds, but until USFWS Division of Law Enforcement stops seeing all 

 aviculturists as potential smugglers or law breakers, this will be impossible. On a 

 positive note, recently a new Chief has been appointed at USFWS Office of 

 Management Authority and he has reached out to the avicultural community. 

 Aviculture believes that this is signaling a new era of cooperation and 

 understanding between USFWS and aviculture. Aviculture welcomes this. 

 Hopefully, this outreach will expand to law enforcement. 



3. Amend Section 105(c), "Moratoria on Imports of Exotic Birds Covered by 

 Convention", to clarify that exotic birds covered on Appendix III of the Convention 

 shall only be subject to the WBCA as to those species found in the country of 

 Appendix III listing. 



After adoption of the WBCA, anti-trade activists took the USFWS to Federal 

 Court to effectively include in the WBCA birds listed on CITES Appendix m (that is 

 birds listed specifically as to certain countries of origin, but not as to all CITES parties 

 at large), regardless of their country of origin or listing. The anti-trade plaintiffs 

 alleged that this was justified because the WBCA failed to make a distinction 

 between birds listed on Appendix III which are country-specific, and the same 

 species occurring in non-listing countries. Under CITES, birds listed on Appendix HI 

 are only included within the CITES Treaty for specific countries where the species 

 may be rare and not as to other countries of origin where the species may be 

 abundant. Appendix HI listed birds are not endangered or threatened species. They 

 are merely birds in which specific countries, but not CITES at large, do not wish to 



