It passed the house. The senate is the last hope. Here is the information the National Aquaculture Association is putting out.
Read the relevant amendment text by clicking
here.
What To Do
Through Feb. 2, contact the House Rules Committee and your federal Representative. Remember to be civil and professional at all times. Please personalize/edit your letters, if possible.
- Call your Representatives’ offices (link below) and the Rules Committee at (202)-225-9091;
- Email Representatives (link below);
- Fax letters to (202)-226-9191 and your Representatives;
- SHARE this and encourage others to complete the Alert!!!
Find your U.S. Representative:
https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative
- Simply go to the link above and enter your zip code. Your Representative will appear. Just click on his/her name to send them emails through their websites. You will simply complete the contact form and copy your version of the sample letter below.
- The America COMPETES Act was referred to the House Rules Committee on Ways and Means. You can find those members at https://rules.house.gov/about/rules-committee-members. If your Representative is on this Committee, be sure to contact her or him and tell them you are a negatively affected constituent.
Subject line:
NO to Lacey Act Amendments in America COMPETES Act
Sample letter
I oppose provision the America COMPETES Act establishing authority for the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to regulate the movement of Injurious Wildlife within interstate trade of the continental United States. This provision does not provide any flexibility to the FWS to allow trade of species in portions of the country where they pose little to no risk (e.g., a tropical species in Alaska does not pose a similar risk as a tropical species in Florida) or for farms to ship fertile eggs, fry or fingerlings to states that allow culture.
Very few nonnative species pose continent wide risk. States have, and are, better positioned to regulate those species that pose a risk within their borders to locales that may be conducive for species colonization and potential damage. The Lacey Act supports federal, state and tribal wildlife management laws and will continue to provide this invaluable enforcement tool. Each state fish and wildlife agency and department of agriculture has the authority to prohibit or restrict native or nonnative species. Because of state prohibitions and restrictions, the Lacey Act already achieves the goal of regulating interstate trade while also supporting the flexibility by the states or tribes to discern where nonnative species pose ecological or economic risks.
I oppose provisions in the America COMPETES Act creating the authority for the Secretary of Interior to create an approved list of species for importation and interstate movement. Commonly termed “white lists,” the implementation of white lists is unusual amongst nations with Australia being an exception. White lists are also unusual for the federal government as a regulatory body and signatory or participant to international agreements and organizations predicated on prohibiting or restricting species trade for at-risk animals (i.e., Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora), noxious plants (i.e., International Plant Protection Convention), pathogens that may infect US agricultural animals (World Organization for Animal Health) and imported animals and animal products capable of causing human disease (Center for Disease Control and Prevention).
A white list is simply not feasible, given the millions of live organisms representing ~13,000 species imported to the United States annually and the potential for ~2,500 native US aquatic fish species to move in-and-out of the country or across state borders. The National Aquaculture Association estimates that there are 1,000 to 1,100 aquatic animal species farmed in the United States. The United Nations-Food and Agriculture Organization estimated 466 individual aquatic species, 7 interspecific hybrids of finfish, 92 species groups at genus level, 32 species groups at family level, and 25 species groups (fish, shellfish, reptiles, and crustaceans) that were farmed globally for food, stocking to enhance at-risk fisheries, and commercial and recreational fishing.
A white list would forestall the opportunity for: 1) US farms to produce these species for food or ornamental uses or to produce eggs, fry, fingerlings or seed to stock domestic or foreign farms and 2) US farmers to innovate. A national white list approach for the United States is not feasible for these reasons:
- Does not allow species possession in parts of the country where they would not pose a risk to the natural or human environments.
- May be opposed as a non-trade barrier by other countries.
- Animal identification challenges posed by species taxonomy which is always changing and common names are problematical for the many names that may be applied to any one species.
- Animal identification challenges posed by species morphology (color, shape, or size) can be influenced by the farm environment during grow-out or through animal breeding and selection to attract buyer interest.
- Processing incoming shipments and providing the animal care required during the species identification process may not be physically possible at the FWS designated ports of entry (Anchorage, Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Honolulu, Houston, Los Angeles, Louisville, Memphis, Miami, New Orleans, New York, Newark, Portland, San Francisco and Seattle) or special ports (Agana, Fairbanks, Juneau, and San Juan).
- The responsibility placed upon FWS Law Enforcement to rapidly distinguish, for animal health and welfare reasons, the >1,000 farmed aquatic animals in the United States, >2,500 native freshwater and marine fish species, ~13,000 white list species, 466+ globally farmed species and the current 785 Injurious Wildlife Species is well beyond the ability of experienced taxonomists. Notably, the number of fish species in the world are estimated to be ~34,000 and grows at approximately 250 new species each year.
- May direct agency resources away from interdicting illegal trade to focus on adequately monitoring legal trade in white listed species at designated and special ports of entry.
For these reasons, I believe the provisions creates punitive, unjustified prohibitions and criminal risk that may be opposed by the public for the lack of basis in science and risk which may erode a bedrock concept to US regulation: Consent of the governed.
Sincerely,
[your name]
The entire America COMPETES Act can be read at
https://rules.house.gov/sites/democrats.rules.house.gov/files/BILLS-117HR4521RH-RCP117-31.pdf.
I think that one big problem is that the people who are selling the fish do not educate the buyers properly. If we were to educate the workers of the stores as to what the fish require then maybe things would get better?
