Getting a Grip on Wildlife Importation

by Read D. Porter

Imagine a pet owner who can’t let her dog roam the backyard for fear it might be eaten by a giant lizard. For some Florida residents, this isn’t a bad dream. The Burmese python may grow to 20-feet long and 200 pounds and is an indiscriminate killer of dogs and cats, in addition to endangered and threatened species. Small pythons are also readily and cheaply available as an exotic pet. Not surprisingly, many owners have difficulty handling their growing pythons and release them under cover of night. The result? The Burmese python morphed from a curiosity into an established part of South Florida’s ecosystem.

Other species are smaller, but just as scary. In 2003, a shipment of Gambian pouched rats — a cat-size exotic pet native to Africa — was infected with monkeypox, a virus similar to smallpox. Before the outbreak was contained, the contagion spread to 71 people across the Midwest.

Exotic animals also affect the economy. Asian carp, escapees from southern aquaculture ponds, have swum up the Mississippi River little by little. The federal government recently spent $9 million to build an electric barrier to keep them out of the Great Lakes, where they would devastate the region’s $4.5 billion commercial and recreational fishing industry. Overall, invasive species directly cause billions of dollars of damages in the United States each year.

These exotic animals were all legally imported into the United States. The current wildlife importation law dates to 1900, when Iowa Congressman John Lacey first railed against exotic animals like the house sparrow, “that rat of the air, that vermin of the atmosphere.” More than a century has passed since Congress enacted the Lacey Act, but America’s invasive wildlife problem is worse than ever. The burgeoning exotic pet, aquarium, and aquaculture industries have driven an explosion in animal importation to which the federal government has not adequately responded.

The antiquated Lacey Act allows the importation of any non-native species that has not been declared injurious by the Fish and Wildlife Service. The injurious animal blacklist includes only 35 entries, and the process to add new species requires four years between conception and implementation. By comparison, a recent study by Defenders of Wildlife, an environmental organization, found that about 3000 unique animals were imported between 2000 and 2004, of which approximately 300 are known to pose risks to the environment, public health, or economy. Despite this threat, the Service does not systematically screen these species for risk of harm and adds species to the list only after it is too late to prevent harm. The existing law is too reactive, too cumbersome, and too slow. A new approach is needed.

Animal invasions are preventable. In recent years, scientists have developed methods to predict in advance whether exotic animals will be injurious. These prescreening methods have been applied with success in other countries, preventing financial loss and protecting native ecosystems. New federal legislation is needed to require the Service to prohibit importation of any animal that has not been screened. Species that pose an unacceptable risk — l ike the Burmese python — should be banned.