United States House of Representatives: Dismiss H.R. 996: Invasive Fish and Wildlife Prevention Act
  • Petitioned U.S. House of Representatives

This petition was delivered to:

U.S. House of Representatives

United States House of Representatives: Dismiss H.R. 996: Invasive Fish and Wildlife Prevention Act

    1. Erica Cole
    2. Petition by

      Erica Cole

      Richmond, VA

All animals deemed not to be "domesticated enough" will be banned and any animal currently within the United States that falls under this category will be "disposed of". If your pet is not on the following list, they will be considered "unaccepted species":
- cat
- cattle/oxen
- chicken
- common canary
- dog
- donkey/ass
- geese
- duck
- ferret
- gerbil
- goat
- guinea pig
- goldfish
- hamsters
- horse
- llama
- mule/hinny
- pig/hog
- rabbit
- sheep

So any reptile or amphibian, arachnids and other insects, hermit crabs, any bird other than the common canary, any fish other than the goldfish, sugar gliders, hedgehogs, chinchillas, degus, rats/mice, and other common pets that are not listed above will be banned and killed. Note that many of these animals are currently available at national pet store chains (such as Petco and Petsmart), as well as through local pet stores and breeders.

Want to help even more?  Write a letter like this and send it to your representative:

Dear [Your Senators and Representative],

I am writing you today to ask you to contact the Members of the House Natural Resources- Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans and Insular Affairs, House Budget, House Judiciary, and House Ways and Means committees and ask them to say "No on H.R. 996". This bill would hurt me, my family and our ability to earn a living. I work with high quality, captive bred reptiles and amphibians. Herpetoculture, a/k/a Reptile Farming, is a $1.4 billion industry here in the United States. H.R. 996, if passed as written, would not only put me out of work, but potentially bankrupt me.

H.R. 996 seeks to set up an “accepted” (white) list of common domesticated pets and livestock, and an “unaccepted” (black) list; that by default would be everything not included on the “accepted” list. This is a “guilty until proven innocent” approach that would add all “unaccepted” species to the Injurious Wildlife list of the Lacey Act in one massive blanket listing. Hundreds of species could be criminalized as to import and interstate transport. Most reptiles and amphibians would fall to the “unaccepted” list and be subject to sanctions under the Lacey Act.

The Lacey Act is over 100 years old and was originally enacted to stop poaching and the trade in bird feathers. It has since been corrupted into a "one size fits all" solution to almost all non-native animal issues. The Lacey Act has proven to be archaic, overreaching and ineffective as a tool to address invasive species issues. It has absolutely zero conservation value in the context of invasive species.

Please support the position of the US Herpetoculture Alliance on addressing invasive species as an alternative to H.R. 996. They are the advocate for the Herpetoculture community and recently took high level meetings on this very issue at the House Natural Resources committee.

If passed H.R. 996 will destroy tens of thousands of small businesses and criminalize the actions of millions of American tax payers. Please say, "NO on H.R. 996.

Thank you for your consideration.We have no more freedom's here in the good ole USA. I just simply find this unacceptable.Now they want to tell us what we can have and cant have as our beloved pets , I have been a bird owner all my life Macaws , big brother is watching us and taking more and more of our freedoms away. This country is becoming more like a dictator ship than a free democracy.  

Signed, [Your Name]

To:
U.S. House of Representatives
Dismiss H.R. 996: Invasive Fish and Wildlife Prevention Act

Sincerely,
[Your name]

Recent signatures

    News

    1. Reached 3,000 signatures

    Supporters

    Reasons for signing

    • Joshua Amaya SALINAS, CA
      • 8 months ago

      The majority of animals / fish in pet stores have not an issue as far as the environment is concerned . I believe any dogs / cats/rodents sold through shops should be spayed or neutered before being made available for homing . Reptiles/Fish should be those breeds that could not survive in that regions climate that way if escape or release occurred ,it would not be a threat to the environment. thoughtful planning , not banning is the answer.

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Amy Ropple READING, MA
      • 8 months ago

      This is ridiculous! As long as the animals are not taken directly from the wild, are healthy (well cared for), and are not a threat to others it is not the government's business. Parrots, for example, are pets I've purchased from pet stores. Are they not pets?

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Heidi Hines CHESTER, NH
      • 8 months ago

      All living beings have their place. All living beings love, feel pain, get angry, get scared etc. Smarten up House of Representatives!!!!!!

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Daniel Shearing CHEDDAR, UNITED KINGDOM
      • 8 months ago

      I believe it is important that people may care for other creatures as a pet or guest within their homes.

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:
    • Roland Cristo AUBURN, CA
      • 8 months ago

      Because it doesn't make any sence!!!!!!!

      REPORT THIS COMMENT:

    Develop your own tools to win.

    Use the Change.org API to develop your own organizing tools. Find out how to get started.