No to the Lacey Act
No to the Lacey Act
Why this petition matters
The Lacey Act would devastate the exotic pet industry. Within the act would ban the transportation of species that “they” consider injurious. Meaning a person could not move and or seek treatment outside of their state lines for any species not on a “white list.” These species are not limited to reptiles. Fish, birds, amphibians, and mammals will also be included. Due process for those who do transport will not be necessary under the act; and quantity of species would also be limited. This act should NOT be allowed to pass. One Team One Fight.
“These amendments will be devastating to thousands of businesses of all sizes, which is absolutely contrary to the purpose of the COMPETES Act.
Millions of pet owners will be harmed by this misuse of the Lacey Act.
As seen previously when listing species as injurious under the Lacey Act, a heavy-handed brush is used to paint species as injurious that may only be an issue for one or two states, and hardly any large percentage of the U.S.
If one state has a threat, that state can address it. All other states should not suffer the unjust implications and restrictions.
The lack of forethought involved makes these amendments rife with unintended consequences and government overreach.
Peer-reviewed science has been previously ignored in favor of garbage pseudo-science to artificially validate biased injurious species listings.
If these amendments pass, the Lacey Act will leave pet owners everywhere unable to move across state lines with their family pets.
This restriction would include prohibitions on interstate travel for veterinary care, for educational programs, and for relocation of family.
The impact will be disproportionately felt by military service members, who are often relocated multiple times during a pet’s lifetime.
The federal and appellate courts have already decided that a ban on interstate transportation with injurious species is not based on the original intent of Congress, but a gradual overreach by the federal agency.
The Court ruling upheld that banning interstate transportation is overreaching and that only the localities, or states, with legitimate range matches should consider regulations regarding these species.
Incorporating interstate movements into the Lacey Act will turn law-abiding pet owners into potential criminals.
Regulation of wildlife has traditionally been a matter reserved to the states.
State borders are already secure from injurious and invasive species as those states have the authority to regulate them.
The states should decide which species need to be addressed, not the federal government which must consider all climates zones across the entirety of the U.S.
The opportunity for injustice and oppressiveness from this power grab is disturbing.
Rather than this new knee-jerk and supreme authority provided to the federal agency, any expansion of the Lacey Act to create interstate movement bans and a ‘white list/black list’ scenario should include reforms to the injurious listing process, including proof of widespread impact based on sound, peer-reviewed science, and definitely not the biased, pseudo-science witnessed previously.
The role of the state wildlife agencies should be preserved in matters related to the regulation of wildlife within their borders or through regional agreements.
Individual states are best positioned to assess local threats and balance the relative costs and benefits of prohibiting species.
These Lacey Act amendments are far-reaching and, frankly, un-American.
Please realize that the Lacey Act amendments found within the America COMPETES Act are illogical and unjust.
The aquaculture industry alone anticipates losses of nearly half a billion dollars.” -USARK
For more information go to USARK.org
If you want to help further contact your local senators! Please be professional in messaging them. #ONETEAMONEFIGHT ��❇️