My understanding of this bill is that if sugar gliders get added to the list of "unacceptable" (for lack of a better word) then you won't be able to sell them or even if you find you can't continue to care for them for whatever reason - you won't be allowed to give them up, not even to family members outside of your own home. They would have to be destroyed. Not sure about the breeding aspect.
Also, you won't be allowed to transport them over state lines. So if you enjoy going to glider get togethers as so many of us do, you won't be allowed to take your babies with you.

grrrr I like this bill to a certain point... but they have to understand, these are not just pets...they are family to some. These are my kids...

I hate that we as humans see ourselves as superior when we are just animals ourselves, and when we get scared of these so called "animals" taking over the human land we attack back even though we took so much from the wild...

I agree. My gliders are part of our family. I wrote to my representative and asked him to vote no on this bill as it is presently written. Some exotics shouldn't be banned.

This worries me a lot but they need to realize dogs attack people too, not just pet snakes (or other exotic pets). Animals attacking people is caused my human error. Or some people being igorant letting go their snake...why would you want to let go a huge snake when you know it will hurt other people let alone some elses pets? Doesn't make sense. People provoke them to attack when they don't want to be messed with even whenpeople don't mean to (or they are just being really mean to the animal). People get stomped, mauled, even thrown off a horses back trying to break it, for it can be rideable. People have to know the animals behavoir to avoid getting bitten or worse. A ton of people have exotic pets. It's not the animals fault! People like to invade their(the animal's) personal space so they attack or warn you.

Reading this really confused me because of the way it was written. Yeah I also see a problem with enforcing this law, if it is passed. Are they going make sure everyone has a permit even though they are legal in some states already? Or make sure people aren't buying sugar gliders or other exotic pet across the borders when you are forced or you have to move to another state?

This really worried me though. Most pets arent just pets they are part of the family...

WOW i love my suggies. i couldn't think of them not being with me. they keep doing this. i hear of a new law trying to be passed about every 6 months or so. in north carolina we already have an inheriantly dangerous animal laws. they have gone as far as the encloser sizes and how many you can have. the state has given enforcement to the cities and counties. if you own native wildlife you are to have a permit. i had 6 cornsnakes and because their native here i had to have a ppermit even though they were captive bred. these new laws are just getting more insane. do they not understand that we need the comfort of our babies to survive.

Oh geez... next they'll find a way to tax us to death on our pets. When have you heard in the headlines, "Gliders Attack." Their not like a pit, rottie, snakes or any animal that can pose a threat or harm if provoked. I'm not against those types of animals, my Mom has a rottie so does my uncle. But if treated & cared for improperly they can be dangerous, you hear of dog fights all the time & it's cruel to them. When have you heard of suggie fights. I blame the breeder mills for this. It's people like them that are making it hard for us good & decent people that want these types of animals to love & care for hard for us. What ever happened to America? Friends of mine in VA have 2 tigers & a black panther it took them several years for the permits & paid a high price to be able to have them. Seriously, what harm can a suggie actually do? Ugh this just makes me so mad.

I have a rottweiler and have had dobermans, pits, chows, shepherds & great danes! I prefer the big working breeds personally and have always had little children around them, either my own or my grandkids. All animals are a product of their environment and can be made to be mean if not properly cared for. They need to crack down on the people that are abusing animals ((PPP) Perfect Pocket Pets comes to mind) and not the rest of us that are responsible pet owners.
When have you heard of suggie fights.
Please don't give anybody ideas! You know someone would do this if they thought they could make some $$$ and get away with it! lol

If this law did pass it would be USELESS. The only effect it would have is on people like us who ARE responsible pet owners. They can't enforce the laws on the books now. USDA would be in charge of most of the regulations and around here we have one rep that covers NC, SC and GA now and she only handles the few people who ARE usda licensed. Imagine the chaos if she had to enforce these laws too?!?!?! The only thing it does is punish us for owning pets really.

Every single organization that would be in charge of regulating and policing this....the dept. of natural resources, animal control, law enforcement and USDA are already understaffed, under budgeted etc.....

It'll be a nightmare.

I agree if they could fight them to turn a buck, they would. I'm a lover of all sorts of animals. Ok, I don't care for snakes, spiders, lizards well you get my point. Their not pets I would have, they scare me to death.

While I can understand why people might be upset over this, I really don't see this as a major problem. As was stated by more than one person above - Read the ENTIRE bill first!

Yes, there is a very short list of animals on the "approved" list. BUT there is also another very important part:


(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary shall include in the preliminary list under this section nonnative wildlife species that the Secretary finds, consistent with the factors described in section 3(b) and based on scientific and commercial information that is provided in a proposal under paragraph (2) or otherwise available to the Secretary--

(A) are not harmful to the United States’ economy, the environment, or other animal species’ or human health; or

(B) may be harmful to the United States’ economy, the environment, or other animal species’ or human health, but already are so widespread in the United States that it is clear to the Secretary that any import prohibitions or restrictions would have no practical utility for the United States.


Please note - "the Secretary may add animals to the list that are considered NOT HARMFUL", or "that are so widespread that any import prohibitions or restrictions would have no practical utility". Which means things like guppies (which are not on the original list), hamsters (also not on the list), guinea pigs, budgies, canaries, turtles, snakes, lizards, etc. can be included on the "approved" list.

This bill is intended to prohibit the importation of things like the snakehead fish that has now invaded the Eastern US. And there are animals out there that need to be prohibited! Off the top of my head I can think of one species of African honeybee that can under no circumstances be allowed into the US. It is not aggressive like it's cousins. It lives to invade and kill other hives. It sneaks into them, kills off the queen, reproduces in them, and eventually kills off all the remaining worker bees. The invader bees then disperse to take over new hives. It is fortunately located in only one small area in Africa, but the consequences if let loose elsewhere could be devastating! (And before you think that "someone wouldn't do that", snakehead fish got in, didn't they?)

I honestly have my doubts as to whether a bill like this could get passed being worded as it is, but if it does pass, it seems to me the thing to do is to make sure that sugar gliders (and a whole lot of other common household pets) are included on the approved list. Seeing as how gliders are legal (and in many cases no longer even considered an exotic pet) in many states, I would think it would be pretty easy to get them on the list. (Just a side note here. I would think if the bill passed and sugar gliders were put on the approved list, that would give those states that currently list gliders as illegal a pause!)

That doesn't mean this bill doesn't bear watching. But I think there is a lot of fear over this that isn't justified. If you think I'm wrong, that's fine. But please, read the WHOLE bill first!

Joni

correct me if i am wrong please. Im new here i am getting a suggie on the 26th. But that would mean horses would have to be banned because they are not indiginus to the U.S. certain breeds of cats and Dogs will have to go. Mixed breeds of certain cats and dogs will have to go. Many types of birds will have to go certain types of salt water and fresh water fish will have to go. Man i would hate to think about some of the homes of say previous presidents congressman and senat reps will have to say when say for some reson they have to move or what not. They would have to be held accountable and put there family pets to sleep or they will have to get rid of horses on there ranch or what ever it is absolutally rediculis. I think its wrong. And somehow I got a funny feeling they would be able to find some crazy loop hole. But it is very sad. Lets see Lamas will have to go camels will have to go. Its very sad to think about all the species of animals that would have to be left behind because a person is moving or what ever else. They will cause more harm then good all because someone does something that well didn't power the light buld. Perhaps they should limit the amount of exatics in the house like they try to do with cats and dogs and such not ban them. Or allow only a certain amount for breeding purpises and if you have an exatic they have to be registered. i think this makes more since. I mean look at some of the stipulations that breeders have when it come to there sugar gliders. There rules make alot more since. Perhaps the congressmen should actaully talk to very reputable breeders of exatic type animals and come up with some resonable stipulations rather than a mass ban. Like some of them say if for what ever reson you are no longer able to take care of you pet they will take them back or help you find a home for them. Perhaps this should be an alternitive to prevent people from putting them into the wild. And for making extra percaustions to prevent some sort of exscape attempt. I believe these make more sence. But what do i know? Sorry my spelling and grammer is horrible so please forgive me. One last thing can anyone truly name all the animals that were not origionally from the US before the settalers showed up and took over. A very large portion of animals that are for live stalk purpises or working purpises are on that list. I dare the Reps to actually do a little research i bet they wont like the numbers.
Sorry about my vent i will step off my soap box now!


Hi-my name is Cindy and i am a suggie adict

HI all, I think we should take and stand and tell them NO we will keep our pets!! This a free country! Our loved ones shed there blood for our freedom!So speak up and say no. I sent a e-mail to congres and called my Rep,today.and I'am very shy,so if I can you can.
http://www.nohr669.com

One more time, with feeling!

The way I read this is: Unless an animal is "approved" through a rather lengthy process, it is "banned". Banned means NO interstate travel - what if your vet is in another state? What if you're forced to move to another state? What if you become sick and can't care for your pets and the best new home is in another state?

Should HR669 be adopted AS CURRETNLY WRITTEN only the following non-native animals would be allowed:

any cat (Felis catus)
cattle or oxen (Bos taurus)
chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus)
dog (Canis lupus familiaris)
donkey or [censored] (Equus asinus)
domesticated members of the family Anatidae (geese)
duck (domesticated Anas spp.)
goat (Capra aegagrus hircus)
goldfish (Carassius auratus auratus)
horse (Equus caballus)
llama (Lama glama)
mule or hinny (Equus caballus x E. asinus)
pig or hog (Sus scrofa domestica)
domesticated varieties of rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus)
sheep (Ovis aries)

The way this bill is worded, it will cause problems for gliders and any other "non-native" animal not on the approved list when/if this bill gets passsed. There are better ways of doing what this bill wants to do (ban importation but not intersate movement, ban sale, whatever), but that's probalby what the special interest groups want us to do - agree to a lesser form of the bill so our rights are slowly eroded.

---- In order to be placed on the "Approved List" it must be established that the species has not, or is not likely, to cause "harm" anywhere in the US. Species that are considered potentially harmful would be placed on an "Unapproved List." Furthermore, HR 669 would essentially ban all species that do not appear on the Approved List, regardless of whether or not they have ever been petitioned for listing or are sufficiently well studied to enable a listing determination. ------

I contacted my local news...although I haven't heard anything from them - so they probably won't run the story...
But I did write a letter and I forwarded an e-mail on to everyone I know...and I followed up with them to make sure they sent a letter as well.

Contact info for the sub-committee members and the co-sponsors of the bill is below.

A call or faxed letter is best at this point - it's still taking time for mailed letters to get to Congress because of anti-terrorism measures, and e-mails are taken less seriously. If time is short, concentrate on the representatives in your state or surrounding states. If you feel this bill will hurt your right to keep your gliders (remember, NO crossing state lines unless on the "approved" list), please contact ASAP. The hearing in the committee is tomorrow - let's stop this so it won't get to the House or Senate floor for a vote.

If the sub-committee member is a co-sponsor and vise versa, that's noted next to the name.

Also keep in mind, many non-native animals that are causing ecological problems WERE NOT pets - they were brought over as accidental stow-aways on freight. Zebra mussels came in with ships' bilge water without our knowledge, many reptiles, rodents, and insects came in with cargo from overseas, and so forth. This bill wouldn't have stopped them.

Plus, do you know how many tax dollars could go into researching if an animal should be approved or banned? What do you think they'll do to save money? Ban your non-native pet rather than research it. Each state can ALREADY decide what animals can be sold or kept in the state, so why do we need it at the federal level?

-----------------------

Mrs. Madeleine Z. Bordallo, Guam, Chairwoman
427 Cannon House Office Building
United States House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515-5301
(202) 225-1188, fax (202) 226-0341

Mr. Henry E. Brown, Jr., SC (Ranking Republican Member)
103 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-3176 Fax: (202) 225-3407

Dale E. Kildee, Michigan (Co-Sponsor)
2107 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-3611 Fax 202-225-6393

Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American Samoa (Co-Sponsor)
2422 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-5201
Phone 202-225-8577 Fax: 202-225-8757
Email: faleomavaega@mail.house.gov

Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii (Co-Sponsor)
1502 Longworth House
Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
phone: (202) 225-2726 fax: (202) 225-4580

Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey (Co-Sponsor)
237 Cannon Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-3006
Phone: (202) 225-4671
Fax: (202) 225-9665

Gregorio "Kilili" Sablan, Mariana Islands (Co-Sponsor)
423 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-2646 Fax: (202) 226-4249

Donna M. Christensen, Virgin Islands
1510 Longworth HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: 202-225-1790 Fax: 202-225-5517

Diana DeGette, Colorado
2335 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-4431 Fax: 202-225-5657

Ron Kind, Wisconsin
1406 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515
PH: (202) 225-5506 FX: (202) 225-5739

Lois Capps, California
1110 Longworth House Office Building
Washington D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-3601 Fax: (202) 225-5632

Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire
1330 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515
p. (202) 225-5456 f. (202) 225-5822

Frank Kratovil, Jr., Maryland
314 Cannon House Office Building
Washington D.C. 20510
phone: 202-225-5311
fax: 202-225-0254

Pedro R. Pierluisi, Puerto Rico
1218 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515-5401
Phone: (202) 225-2615

Nick J. Rahall, II, West Virginia (ex officio)
2307 Rayburn HOB
Washington,DC 20515
(202) 225-3452

Don Young, Alaska
2111 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-5765

Jeff Flake, Arizona
240 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-2635 (202) 226-4386 fax

Doug Lamborn, Colorado
437 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-4422 Fax: (202) 226-2638

Robert J. Wittman, Virginia
1318 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515
ph: 202-225-4261 fax: 202-225-4382

John Fleming, Louisiana
1023 Longworth HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-2777 Fax: (202) 225-8039

Jason Chaffetz, Utah
1032 Longworth HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-7751 Fax: (202) 225-5629

Bill Cassidy, Louisiana
506 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-3901 Fax: (202) 225-7313

Doc Hastings, Washington
1203 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5816 Fax: (202) 225-3251


Bill Co-Sponsors

Rep. Grace Napolitano [D-CA]
Del. Eni Faleomavaega [D-AS] sub-committee
Rep. Frank Pallone [D-NJ] sub-committee
Rep. Neil Abercrombie [D-HI] sub-committee

Rep. James McGovern [D-MA] 202-225-6101

Rep. Lynn Woolsey [D-CA]
2263 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
Ph.: 202-225-5161 Fax: 202-225-5163

Rep. Raul Grijalva [D-AZ]
1440 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515
ph (202) 225-2435 fax (202) 225-1541

Rep. Barbara Lee [D-CA]
2444 Rayburn HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-2661 Fax: (202) 225-9817

Rep. Barney Frank [D-MA]
Rep. Steve Kagen [D-WI]
Rep. Maurice Hinchey [D-NY]

Rep. Sam Farr [D-CA]
1126 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-2861 Fax 202-225-6791

Rep. Alcee Hastings [D-FL]

Del. Gregorio Sablan [I-MP] - sub-committee

Rep. Steve Cohen [D-TN]
1005 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-3265 Fax: (202) 225-5663

Rep. Ronald Kind [D-WI] sub-committee

Rep. Rush Holt [D-NJ]
1214 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-5801 202-225-6025 (fax)

Rep. Dale Kildee [D-MI] sub-committee

Rep. Ron Klein [D-FL]
313 Cannon House Office Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20515
p: (202) 225.3026 f: (202) 225.8398
Toll Free #: (866) 713.7303

Rep. Peter DeFazio [D-OR]

Rep. George Miller [D-CA]
2349 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-3201 Fax: 202-226-6962

Hearing on H.R. 669 Thursday 10AM LIVE webcast

Watch what happens

The Subcommittee hearing on H.R. 669 will be broadcast via the Internet tomorrow (Thursday, April 23rd). Below is the link information.

The following link will get you to either audio or video webcast of Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife Legislative Hearing on H.R. 669

(10:00 am). The webcast should go live at 10:00 a.m.

http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/inde...273&Itemid=

Has anyone heard of this bill before it was passed???

No more breeding or selling -

No more going across state lines -

I think that's the way I read it -

And if you don't already have a vet for your glider or any other exotic animal your in deep kaka

Sue
owned by &
mom to

http://www.glidercentral.net/ubbthreads/...TS_I#Post762567

There's been a thread on it for a while...

I've been waiting to hear if it passed or not...this is really sad

Are we sure this PASSES!

I can't find any articles on it myself...

Where did you hear this at Beezer?

Yes, I could not find any articles stating it passed either. I thought they were just supposed to hold a hearing about it today? I'm not even sure what that means, but I was under the impression that it had to go through many more steps before it actually became a law??

*crosses fingers*

The list for the animals that will be included has not even been considered yet. I believe this legislation is basically for dangerous animals such as snakes, etc.

I"m currently reading a blog on a herp message board. I dont know how updated it is really but whoever is posting this info is/was there in person hearing everything. I dont know if I can post the link or not...if you want to send me a PM I can send it along...it's a long read so far...most of the objections seem to be geared toward fish farms and a few defending the pet industry as a whole, and how it would effect unemployment, etc...

And no...this bill has NOT passed....they aren't even up to that yet.

It has to go thru many more people to "Pass" but I do believe if they squash it today that is it for now????

It would never pass 'as is' because it is to encompassing, but at some point some version of it will pass. Don't know how they plan to carry it out. There are already laws on the books that they can't and won't enforce.

The SUBCOMMITTEE hearing for the proposed bill was today. So, it never even came up for a vote, thankfully. This is where you want to kill a bad bill, in the subcommitte or committee before it gets to the House or Senate.

As seen on a reptile list:

<quoted text removed>

Of course, if you live in a county, city or state where your glider is illegal, you might not want to bring attention to yourself.

I agree...I think a lot of exotic pet owners should continue to write letters. I'll gladly do it!