[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]

CONTROL OF MUTE SWANS AND OTHER EXOTIC SPECIES



 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 9:42 AM
Subject: [IBLE] Mute Swan Revisited

Previously we have had some discussion regarding Mute Swan in Idaho, focusing on both its presence and potential establishment, reasons it is not on the official state checklist of birds, and also efforts to control its spread.  Forwarded below is a very informative post from CA BIRDS by Kimball Garrett that we all should consider as we look at the status of Mute Swan in this state:


Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 13:59:12 -0800
From: "Kimball Garrett" <kgarrett@nhm.org>
Subject: RE: Status of Mute Swan in CA

Calbirders:

It is clear that small numbers of Mute Swans occur throughout California
(mainly in coastal counties) and that a few pairs breed locally
(particularly in Marin Co. and elsewhere in the north Bay Area).
Free-flying birds can be seen almost anywhere and occasionally cause
confusion by being identified as Tundra or Trumpeter Swans.

It is currently the opinion of the CBRC's Introduced Birds Subcommittee
that Mute Swan populations in California are not large enough, nor have
any of the small populations persisted long enough (except perhaps in
Marin Co.), to warrant consideration of the species on the state list as
an established exotic.

As most of you are aware, the USFWS has been prevented from eradicating
or otherwise controlling naturalized Mute Swan populations (which are
doing considerable ecological damage on the Atlantic coast, etc.) by a
court ruling that the Migratory Bird Treaty Act applied to all swans.
[Once again, certain misguided animal rights groups were successful in
pushing an anti-environment agenda]. Thankfully, things are looking
more hopeful, as an amendment to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act was
published in yesterday's (4 January 2005) Federal Register that
explicitly excludes Mute Swans and other non-native species from MBTA
protection. Not wanting to clutter up Calbirds, I haven't pasted the
entire text from the Federal Register below, but interested parties can
check the Federal Register announcement on their own (sorry, I don't
have a link handy).

Below is just a SMALL PORTION of the Federal Register text; your
comments in support of this amendment (see procedure below) would be
helpful.

Published in the Federal Register today (4 January 2005), pursuant to
legislative mandate: the USFWS proposed list of bird species to be
EXCLUDED under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

The legislative mandate is that provision of the FY2005 Omnibus
Appropriations Act that incorporates what was HR4114, a bill introduced
by Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD) to amend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act so as
to exclude non-native species. That legislation directed the USFWS to
publish "Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this
section....a list of all nonnative, human-introduced bird species to
which the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.) does not
apply." Said legislation in turn being a response to the decision of a
federal appellate court that under the terms of the Migratory Bird
Treaty with Canada and in the absence of regulation by the USFWS to the
contrary, Mute Swans could not be excluded from MBTA protection. The
Congress responded by amending the MBTA to provide that:
(1) IN GENERAL- This Act applies only to migratory bird species that are
native to the United States or its territories.
(2) NATIVE TO THE UNITED STATES DEFINED
(A) IN GENERAL- Subject to subparagraph (B), in this subsection the term
`native to the United States or its territories' means occurring in the
United States or its territories as the result of natural biological or
ecological processes.
(B) TREATMENT OF INTRODUCED SPECIES- For purposes of paragraph (1), a
migratory bird species that occurs in the United States or its
territories solely as a result of intentional or unintentional
human-assisted introduction shall not be considered native to the United
States or its territories unless--
(i) it was native to the United States or its territories and extant in
1918;
(ii) it was extirpated after 1918 throughout its range in the United
States and its territories; and
(iii) after such extirpation, it was reintroduced in the United States
or its territories as a part of a program carried out by a Federal
agency.'.

COMMENTS DUE ON OR BEFORE 3 FEBRUARY 2005.

Mail public comments to Chief, Division of Migratory Bird Management,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Mail Stop
4107, Arlington, VA 22203.

E-mail comments to nonnativebirds@fws.gov
<nonnativebirds@fws.gov','','','1')">nonnativebirds@fws.gov>. E-mail comments should be submitted as
an ASCII file with Nonnative Birds in the subject line. Avoid the use of
special characters and any form of encryption.

-- Kimball

Kimball L. Garrett
Ornithology Collections Manager
Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County
900 Exposition Blvd.
Los Angeles CA 90007
(213) 763-3368
(213) 746-2999 FAX
kgarrett@nhm.org



To Post a message, send it to:   ible@yahoogroups.com

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:

ible-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

To view archived messages go to:

http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/ible

To view the IBLE Photos archive go to:

http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/ible/lst




Yahoo! Groups Links