150 



this reauthorization process. While no single marking system has yet been perfected, 

 elimination of this important enforcement tool sends the wrong message to 

 smugglers: that Congress and the Fish and Wildlife Service are not serious about 

 cracking down on the illegal bird trade. 



International trade in captive-bred birds must be regulated to prevent the 

 laundering of wild-caught birds. Smugglers have been known to raise chicks from 

 eggs taken from the wild, or force closed leg bands over the feet of young wild- 

 caught birds so that they would appear to have been bred in captivity. Further 

 exemptions for captive-bred birds would only fuel this sort of illegal activity, to the 

 detriment of birds in the wild, as well as to most law-abiding aviculturists and pet 

 dealers in the United States, who would once again be forced to compete with a 

 flood of inexpensive wild-caught birds. 



Foreign breeding facilities may also export birds to the United States once 

 these regulations have been finalized by the Rsh and Wildlife Service. While some 

 critics have accused the Service of delaying these regulations, one must remember 

 that the Service has been charged by Congress with the difficult task of ensuring that 

 these facilities will not merely funnel vinld-caught birds into the United States. Until 

 effective regulations are in place, the conservation intent of the Act is far better served 

 by a ban on such exports rather than hastily-prepared, incomplete, or unenforceable 

 regulations. In the decades prior to passage of the WBCA, aviculturists and bird 

 dealers had ample opportunity to develop their own systems to prevent laundering of 

 wild-caught birds by foreign facilities. Their failure to do indicates the difficulty of this 

 task, and underscores the need for the Act. 



Another reason for maintaining the Act in its current form is the importance of 

 supporting the many countries that are acting to protect their native wildlife by 

 restricting or banning exports. Nations such as Australia, Guyana, the Philippines, 

 and Zimbabwe need the United States to slow demand in order to be able to enforce 

 their own bird export bans. Similarly, any significant reopening of trade would 

 undermine the enforcement of state laws in New York and New Jersey where pet 

 stores and consumers have learned to profit from bird import bans. A national 

 approach is needed to this national problem, and the Wild Bird Conservation Act 

 strikes the right balance between conservation and legitimate business and consumer 

 interests [9]. 



Conclusion: Reauthorize the Wild Bird Conservation Act 



As the world's largest importer of wild-caught birds, the United States was for 

 years the driving force behind much of the intemational trade that was decimating 

 populations of wild birds. Belatedly, the United States has t>een recognized as a 

 world leader in wild bird conservation following the passage of the Wild Bird 



