Issues and Concerns Associated with the Shambala Bill

Issues and Concerns Associated with the Shambala Bill

Misleading Description
The title and brief description states that this bill will regulate personal possession of certain wild animals and prohibit the transport or possession of certain wild animals for the purposes of hunting them. The true goal of the Shambala Bill is best expressed by Tippi Hedren's daughter, Melanie Griffith who stated last March, "I will accompany my mother on a trip to Washington D.C. on the 29th of March in an effort to promote legislation that will ban private ownership of wild animals."

And completely absent in this bill is any mention or reference to amending Title 18 of the United States Code. This summary is misleading and deliberately emotionally enflaming.

An Unconstitutional Amendment
The Shambala bill is based on amending the Animal Welfare Act to regulate activities that are not part of interstate commerce. Pet owners are not engaged in commerce. Commerce is defined as "the exchange or buying or selling of commodities on a large scale involving transportation from place to place." Single purchases are not commerce. Commerce is business. Consumers are not licensed or permitted - business are.

The authority for the Animal Welfare Act comes from article 1 section 8 of the Constitution of the United States. The federal government has the power to: "Regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes."

Further, in the Bill of Rights, article 10 states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Sec. 201 All Cats are regulated
All felines and hybrids require permits, regardless of their size or status in the wild.

Sec. 202 Future modifications to the list of protected wild animals can be made without Congressional approval.
The list of "protected species" covered by this Shambala bill can be changed by the Secretary at any time without further congressional action. However, as written, while it would be very easy to add a new species, it is all but impossible to ever remove any species from the list.

Sec. 203 Permits for everything, but no time frame given
All possession and transfer of protected species requires a permit to be issued by the secretary. There is no time frame mentioned to suggest what kind of waiting period a person might have to endure before a permit is issued by the secretary.

Offspring of protected species require a permit. Once offspring are born, you must apply for a permit - there is no guarantee you will be granted this permit to keep your offspring. And if it is denied, then your offspring will be taken to a sanctuary, and the company which underwrote your surety bond will be contacted so that insurance monies can be paid to the sanctuary that the secretary gives your offspring.

Transfer of possession for any purpose, requires that both parties hold a permit before transfer can occur. There is no time frame specified on how long the approval and issuance of a permit might take.

Breeding of any protected felines requires a permit. There is no information provided to suggest what criteria will be used by the secretary to base a permission to breed permit.

Exemptions to this bill's permit requirements are made for research facilities and state or federally licensed zoos, animal parks and wildlife sanctuaries. Sanctuaries, as defined by this bill, require that they must be all of the following: state licensed, non-profit and 501 c3's.

These exempted businesses mentioned above should already be licensed by the USDA as either Class C Exhibitors or Research facilities. This suggests that the intent of this bill will require all other already licensed USDA facilities (breeders, brokers, individual exhibitors) to also adhere to the provisions of this permit bill, since they are not specifically exempted. One could interpret this to mean that not just non-commercial "pet" owners will have to have individual permits for possession, breeding or transfer of their protected species, but that everyone, EXCEPT for the few commercial enterprise categories mentioned above, have to apply for these permits for each of these activities, even though they are already USDA licensed.

There is no guarantee that the secretary will issue a permit for possession of already possessed protected species. This bill only states that the secretary has one year to decide whether or not to grant the permit, but does not give any details for what will be the basis of this decision.

Sec. 204 The Surety Bond Issue
Applicants for a personal possession permit must be covered by "a surety bond for the animal in an amount to be determined by the secretary based on species, to compensate for the cost of transportation and care of the animal, in the event the animal is required to come into custody of the Federal, State or local authorities on a temporary or permanent basis. "

There is no indication of what amount the secretary will set for each species or how expensive this requirement will be for the applicant.

But you must already have purchased this bond and provide proof of it's existence when you fill out an application for possession of a protected species. If the secretary denies your permit application, your animal could be confiscated and the secretary has all the necessary information in it's file to access the insurance funding to transfer this animal and a substantial amount of money to a selected sanctuary. You are not only loosing your animal, you are giving the state and sanctuaries the funding to enable them to easily confiscate your animal.

Sec. 205 Liability Insurance Issue
Liability insurance coverage is required as a condition of issuance of a permit. No amount is stated, and therefore it is left to the up to secretary, and there is no assurance that an amount that is totally cost prohibitive would not be required.

As we are all well aware, the requirement for liability insurance can have nearly the same effect as a ban law. Because so little data is available for insurance companies to base their actuary tables on, for the most part, they refuse to issue such policies.

Sec. 206 Redundant and Unnecessary Import/Export Laws
This section is completely unnecessary - there are already laws in place which cover the importation and exportation of wildlife. It basically says no person shall engage in importation and exportation of protected species except according to the law.

Sec. 207 The Exclusion of USDA licensed facilities from being involved in providing captive habitat for protected species in need.
Protected species may be confiscated and placed with sanctuaries, or euthanasia may be performed. There is no provision for confiscated animals to be placed with USDA licensed exhibitors or breeders or brokers, just wildlife sanctuaries, as defined by the bill.

When the secretary authorizes the confiscation of your animal, for just cause or not, he will have all information on file to access your surety bond and gain payment for the sanctuaries to house and possess your animal.

The LIOC-Endangered Species Conservation Federation is a non-profit, 501(c)(3) organization for private owners of wild felines. The goal of the organization is to promote responsibility in private captive husbandry of wild felines and to educate the public in the need for sound conservation management of these species.

For more information email:Lynn Culver (culvers@voltage.net), orGeorge Stowers (gstowers@twcny.rr.com) or write:

LIOC-ESCF
P.O. Box 22085
Phoenix, AZ 85028