Bill H.R.669 -

In short this proposed bill would make it a illegal to: Sell, Trade, Breed, Mail or in anyway Transport, any non-domesticated animals not native to America.

The only accepted animals are: Dogs, Cats, Rabbits, Goldfish and Livestock, that's it. All species of pet Reptiles, Amphibians, Invertebrates, Birds and Small Mammals would be severely restricted in the United States. Only the mentioned species owned prior to the bill passing would be legal.

The purpose of the Bill is “To prevent the introduction and establishment of nonnative wildlife species that negatively impact the economy, environment, or other animal species’ or human health and for other purposes” yet I believe such an act would do just that.

If passed H.R.669 would:

~ Destroy a strong and popular industry, causing countless jobs to be lost in a time lacking Economic Stability

~ Waste the Government’s time with having to assimilate a list of all “Approved” and “Disapproved” species

~ Create headaches for police nationwide, as such legislation would be difficult to enforce

~Give rise to an underground market, adding to the heavy work load of the law enforcement suddenly trying to keep tabs on the current captive animal population.

~Cause great stress and grief to pet owners everywhere

~ Irrevocably widen the divide between society and the natural world.

This is NOT a joke. So many think it will never become a law and do nothing which only makes it easier for lobbyists to swing this into passing

If you find this proposed Bill upsetting, there is still time. A sub committee will vote on Thursday April 23rd. Check out the link below for simple and effective ways you can make a difference

http://www.nohr669.com/dosomething.htm

I don't know if that is even a viable law... It seems a bit over the top.

And if they are trying to protect American wildlife, which is a valid reason to bring something like this in, then why aren't cats on the banned list? They kill millions of small native birds and mammals every year.

Surely there would be too much opposition to this to bring it into force.

^ It's of "non-native species" and if I remember correctly, cats are the second most popular pet animal, and banning them would pretty much guarantee that this bill would not pass. It would also be impossible to ban them given their sheer number.

You could say a cat is a non-native species. The domestic cat doesn't exist really in the wild. Especially in the numbers they do. I know it's aimed at non-native species, but cats are a common species they wouldn't dare get rid of, but they cause a hell of a lot of damage. I'm saying that what they are proposing so far doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

I see what you mean by that, and maybe I should have clarified: it's to prevent the introduction of non-native species. Cats have already been introduced. But at the same time, that does sound hypocrytical since species other than those listed have also been introduced and are proposed to be banned.