Potential threat to everyones birds in the U.S.

[JSimko]

I was just informed today that California is trying to stop the possession and/or sale of unweened birds. To me it looks like they are trying to stop the sale of birds all together. It would even stop breeders from selling birds. If we do not get together on this one, this could pass in all states once it goes through in California. Below is a link to the revised version of (AB202), however I feel there is still lots of room for change in this bill.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab_0201-0250/ab_202_bill_20030402_amended_asm.html

[Jenny]

I think it just means that petshops, not the breeders, aren't allowed to have unweaned birds and sell them. To me, at least from how I read it, it seems like a good bill, because no petshop should sell unweaned baby birds anyway IMO. I think the worse thing that could happen would be that other states's petshops wouldn't be allowed to sell unweaned babies either, which wouldn't be bad at all. I'm pretty sure that all private bird breeders would be left alone, from what it said.

[JSimko]

All of the breeders that I know are against it. It is possible they have not read the revised version.

[pionuspasion]

Parrots are very common in California, and some people will just buy them on a whim. I think they are just trying to regulate avian deaths. If someone doesn't know how to handfeed, they should not be sent home with an unweaned baby. I am a breeder in NJ and I totally agree with the bill. Any breeder who sells unweaned baby birds to inexperienced prosopective bird owners is asking for trouble. Don't get me wrong, I would love to sell my baby lovebirds from the nest. Now, they are 7 weeks old and still on two feedings a day. I'm sick of getting up at midnight , but for their sake, I would never let their future owners take them home until they are fully weaned and have stabilized their weight. It's your responsibility as a breeder to ensure the health of your babies, which includes staying with them through this difficult time in their life. I don't mean to offend anyone, but selling unweaned babies is one of my biggest pet peeves.

-pionus_passion

[jackie]

i'm in favor for the bill

[Redstorm1721]

There is a pet store here ( I won't mention the name ) But they only handfees the baby's 3 times a day? 8 in the morning 12:30 and 8 at night? They don't even have their feathers yet? They are very cute they have 2 macaws and 3 cockatiels and very many parakeets. They never go in at night to fed? I feel so sorry for the birds. Also we have another pet store here, and they don't know how to feed? The formula is not hot enough? I feel very bad. I almost cry when I have been there to see the new baby's. I have to leave.

[JSimko]

You should complain about that. The pet stores that are near where I live, are very knowledgeable about hand raising birds. The ones that don't know how, only sell parakeets and other birds that can be raised by the parents and still be friendly to humans. I do understand how everyone feels about inexperienced people raising birds, however this bill would cause every pet store or breeder to have a vet on location. This would make obtaining a hand fed bird so difficult and expensive that they would lose any popularity that they currently have. What can happen is the same as what happened to ferrets. Some states made it so hard to get them that fewer people had them. Then when there were few enough people that owned them that these people could not affect the elections, these same states made ferrets totally illegal and the people who still had ferrets had to give their friends up. I would go crazy if I ever had to give up any of my pets, especially my birds. Once the amount of people who own birds drops below the point of having any effect on elections, we will not be able to do anything to stop the government from making possession of any bird illegal.

[Jenny]

I see what you're saying, but most (though not all) people who buy birds from pet shops usually get them on impulse without having done their homework before hand. If like you're saying it did make it hard to get parrots from petshops, then the more serious people would go to the breeders. Most breeders are quite picky about who they sell their babies to, so that would help solve the problem of so many uninformed people owning parrots who know nothing about them. The birds themselves would benefit, and breeders would also profit quite abit from that. I really doubt that parrots in captivity will ever become illegal mostly because of how endangered they are in the wild. For many species, like cockatoos, there are more of them in captivity than in the wild even, and if no one were allowed to keep them, than many of the species could possibly die out completely within a few decades.

[pionuspasion]

For anyone who receives Bird Talk magazine, look in the breeder section under California. There are dozens of reputable breeders in CA, and their business would only escalate from this bill, not decline. Some pet shops understand how to handfeed babies and that's wonderful. To these shops, this bill will damage their sales and that dissapoints me. This law is geared twoards those instituions that think of birds as profit and nothing more. But, unfortunatley, from what I know there are little ( depending on the state ) or no rules as to how birds should be kept in captivity. You could keep a macaw in a conure cage for all the government cares ( in most cases ), and I think it's important not to disrupt this first step twoard animal rights in the avian world. I have seen dozens of innocent babies die due to the mistakes of foolish people w th nothing better to do with their money than buy a talking decoration. I understand your story about ferrets, but I will take a guess and say that compared to ferret owners, there are at least triple the amount of parrot owners. Don't get me wrong, I think it is totally feasible that the government may be trying to outlaw birds. In NJ, where I live, Patagonian Conures, all Ringnecks, and Quakers are illegal. But, I highly doubt that they would be able to pass any laws on a national level. They're still trying to outlaw reptiles for heaven's sake, and there are way too many herp owners for them to do even that! And herps carry salmonella, amoung other dieseases. They couldn't outlaw birds, not without a riot of some sort. They have no justified reason, and in America, there must be a reason for everything.

-Pionus_passion

[Jenny]

I completely agree, and birds are the third most popular pet so it would be very hard to outlaw them. Pionuspassion, do you know why the outlawed patagonians, ringnecks, and quakers?? Also, does anyone know of a list of the states where quakers are illegal?

[Mrs.Birdy]

Jenny, I know of these sites:

http://www.quakerville.com/qic/statelaw.asp

and

http://www.quakerparrots.com/mattiesue/why_illegal.htm

Hope it helps your understanding of this situation.

[Jenny]

Thanks!