128 



trade. The court has held that the WBCA made no such distinction even though it 

 may have intended to do so. 



Section 105(c) should have appropriate wording added to effectively limit the 

 coverage of the WBCA of Appendix in birds to wild exotic birds originating in the 

 country of listing only. 



4. Amend Section 112(2) "Exemptions for Personal Pets" by requiring the 

 USFWS to issue regulations simplifying the importation of pet birds. 



The WBCA allows that an individual may import up to two exotic birds in 

 any year upon his/her return to the United States after having been continuously 

 out of the country for a minimum of one year. Issuance of such pennits should be 

 based upon nothing more than an affidavit from the applicant that he/she has met 

 the out-of-country requirement, has not exceeded the allowable two birds, has 

 acquired the birds legally, has the proper CITES or other required permits, and that 

 the intent of the importation is not for re-sale purposes. The requisite permits 

 would be attached to the affidavit. Abuse of the "personal pet" exemption is 

 unlikely to ever reach proportions that will be detrimental to wild populations. 

 Presently, due to the relatively large number of personal pet versus other 

 applications, and the complexity of the existing information requirements, it is 

 likely that a large fraction of available USFWS staff time is spent in processing 

 innocuous pet-bird permits. As a result, more significant and complex permit 

 applications experience unacceptably-long delays. 



5. Amend Regulations under Section 112(4), "Cooperative Breeding 

 Programs", to eliminate the requirements imposed by the USFWS under the 

 Regulations that participants be required to "track the whereabouts of progeny of 

 imported birds." 



In its Report, Page 20, Congress directed the Secretary to issue permits if the 

 applicant Cem demor^strate that he or she is capable cmd fully intends to keep track of 

 imported birds and their offspring. The purpose of this requirement was to ensure 

 that if efforts to reintroduce the species into the wild were undertaken, the location 

 of birds that might be included in such a program and their genetic makeup would 

 be known. However, upon reflection, aviculture believes that WBCA regulations 

 requiring the tracking of the progeny will act as an impediment to aviculturists 

 participating in captive breeding of captive-bred offspring of birds imported under 

 Section 112. Additionally, due to the breeding biology of many of these species, this 

 could eventually lead to the tracking of hundreds, or even thousands, in the case of 

 more prolific species, of birds and will be totally unworkable and unmanageable. It 

 also introduces the specter of unwarremted law enforcement activities involving 

 U.S. captive-bred exotic birds. Certainly, cooperative breeding programs will 

 encourage the participation of aviculturists in continuing to breed captive-bred 

 offspring of imported cooperative breeding program birds. However, if these 

 programs become successful in producing large numbers of offspring, regulation 

 requiring tracking of captive-bred offspring will deter avicultural breeding efforts. It 



