House Bill Hr 669

[TylerFerretLord]

Okay, here's one of the reasons why this is bad:

(b) Factors To Be Considered- The regulations promulgated under subsection (a) shall include consideration of--

(1) the identity of the organism to the species level, including to the extent possible specific information on its subspecies and genetic identity;
(2) the native range of the species;
(3) whether the species has established or spread, or caused harm to the economy, the environment, or other animal species or human health in ecosystems in or ecosystems that are similar to those in the United States;
(4) the likelihood that environmental conditions suitable for the establishment or spread of the species exist in the United States;
(5) the likelihood of establishment of the species in the United States;
(6) the likelihood of spread of the species in the United States;
(7) the likelihood that the species would harm wildlife resources in the United States;
(8) the likelihood that the species would harm native species that are rare or native species that have been listed as threatened species or endangered species in the United States under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 ( et seq.);
(9) the likelihood that the species would harm habitats or ecosystems in the United States;
(10) the likelihood that pathogenic species or parasitic species may accompany the species proposed for importation; and
(11) other factors important to assessing the risks associated with the species, consistent with the purpose under section 2.

(1) Not every species in the trade had been described yet. Bye-bye, L-number plecs. Some are not properly identified as well, something common in rarer or oddball fish.
(2) Not known for every species.
(3-9) The US has a VERY diverse ecosystem. From Florida's everglades to the cold Alaskan wilderness. If it can cause harm to any area, IT WILL BE BANNED EVERYWHERE. State laws already cover this, such as Hawaii's strict laws.
(10) Many animals can carry fleas or ticks, and many have parasite species that are specific to them. Should they all be banned?
(11) Undefined.

Notice how this mostly boils down to the 'Not all states are ecologically equal'? This is why there are already state laws regarding banned animals. Why should a tropical marine fish be banned in, say, ND where there is no access to saltwater and it isn't exactly tropical.

Another issue is that there isn't a banned animal list. There's a list of what is allowed. This means that every single species has to have been assessed for risk individually.

I'm not even going into the economic impact of this crap, it should be plainly obvious.

So please, please actually read the bill before you start to debate it.