Posted by:
aquick
at Mon Jul 27 21:02:16 2009 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by aquick ]
I won't disagree, the writing is rather ambiguous. If you read on to section C, title 18, US code they are a tad clearer:
(c) The Secretary of the Interior within one hundred and eighty
days of the enactment of the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 shall
prescribe such requirements and issue such permits as he may deem
necessary for the transportation of wild animals and birds under
humane and healthful conditions, and it shall be unlawful for any
person, including any importer, knowingly to cause or permit any
wild animal or bird to be transported to the United States, or any
Territory or district thereof, under inhumane or unhealthful
conditions or in violation of such requirements.
I believe requirements for posession are covered in sub section 3, section a:
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Secretary of the Interior,
when he finds that there has been a proper showing of
responsibility and continued protection of the public interest and
health, shall permit the importation for zoological, educational,
medical, and scientific purposes of any mammals, birds, fish
(including mollusks and crustacea), amphibia, and reptiles, or the
offspring or eggs thereof, where such importation would be
prohibited otherwise by or pursuant to this Act, and this Act shall
not restrict importations by Federal agencies for their own use.
In other words, you want an injurious species--better get a permit and be prepared for red tape. Further, I doubt USFWS/Sec. of the interior would consider the pet trade a zoological, scientific, medical or educational purpose. Unless of course you did lectures or something. Beleive me though, injurious permits are a bear to get. Best to get this puppy amended now.
[ Hide Replies ]
|
RE: Clarity? - aquick, Mon Jul 27 21:02:16 2009