# E.U. Invasive Species. N.B. Racoons and Chipmunks



## colinm (Sep 20, 2008)

https://word.office.live.com/wv/Wor...KD9A5fBtA&title=Draft+EU+List+of+Concern.docx

I have posted this here as it affects mammal keepers more than reptile keepers. Its a draft list so far.

Racoon and chipmunk keepers take note.


----------



## CloudForest (Nov 27, 2013)

isn't this per Nation anyway?

cant really ban Grey Squirrels from England :whistling2: much as Jack my cat would like them to be banned.


and who the hell is releasing carpet sea squirts into the wild?! :no1:


----------



## colinm (Sep 20, 2008)

No this one is for Europe wide (E.C.). Most species dont apply to us, just the Raccoons, Chipmunks and Ring Necked Parakeets. I assume the Grey Squirrels etc are on their because of their effect here and potential effect on the continent.

Pertinent points :

Proposed species list.

More than fifty species.

Can be added to at any time.

U.K. only list to come later.


----------



## CloudForest (Nov 27, 2013)

as far as I was aware, the EU list, is at the discretion of member states? has that changed?


----------



## aardvark28 (Oct 10, 2013)

No, it was never intended to be at the discretion of the Member States. The EU list is just that - a limited list of species totally banned across all Member States with Member States then also applying controls on additional species in their own domestic legislation.


----------



## colinm (Sep 20, 2008)

I have copied and pasted this from a post on shelled by Aarvark 28. Please take note.

Hi Colin,

Having sat on the EU working group for the three years of its existence and attended all the Brussels meetings I can tell you that their preferred option for any species listed is for the destruction of all specimens held in captivity or their gifting to zoos. There is an outside chance that individuals nations like the UK might allow for listed specimens to continue to be kept under a registration scheme but with the animals sterilised such that they become the last generation in captivity. Any movement or trade in listed species would be totally forbidden.


----------



## CloudForest (Nov 27, 2013)

colinm said:


> I have copied and pasted this from a post on shelled by Aarvark 28. Please take note.
> 
> Hi Colin,
> 
> Having sat on the EU working group for the three years of its existence and attended all the Brussels meetings I can tell you that their preferred option for any species listed is for the destruction of all specimens held in captivity or their gifting to zoos. There is an outside chance that individuals nations like the UK might allow for listed specimens to continue to be kept under a registration scheme but with the animals sterilised such that they become the last generation in captivity. Any movement or trade in listed species would be totally forbidden.


is this law in effect now, or coming in at a future date?

destruction of peoples pets is unacceptable on any level, I cannot imagine the UK gov would take that route...some countries are less animal welfare orientated, but i'm proud to be British in terms of our love of animals!!


----------



## colinm (Sep 20, 2008)

The confirmed list is ratified on the 2nd January 2016.


----------



## CloudForest (Nov 27, 2013)

colinm said:


> The confirmed list is ratified on the 2nd January 2016.


I guess its time to make some noise about it then, so at least those animals which are currently in captivity can live out their natural lives - i'm not entirely against the list tbh, but i'm not in favour of it either, i think humans trying to stop animals migrating, whether naturally or via humans, is absurd, pointless and a waste of money; but, I do also accept that some of our native species are threatened (more by humans than by other species...but that's another topic lol)

are the RSPCA involved, any idea what their stance is on it? (cant find a statement online...)

not on the animals which should be listed, but how currently owned animals should be dealt with?

...destruction just doesn't seem like it would stand up in the UK, regardless of what the EU may decree...


----------



## colinm (Sep 20, 2008)

The R.S.P.C.A. are not involved , this is the E.U. not the U.K. To be honest though their dislike of exotic pets is well known , so I dont think that they would care anyway.


----------



## CloudForest (Nov 27, 2013)

colinm said:


> The R.S.P.C.A. are not involved , this is the E.U. not the U.K. To be honest though their dislike of exotic pets is well known , so I dont think that they would care anyway.


I've not yet come across a single RSPCA member, or document, which gives any impression that they don't like reptiles, I've seen quite a few positive pamphlets from RSPCA regarding reptile care....i think prejudice plays more of a role in the perception from within the hobby 



but, anyways, I'm sure they would have something to say about hundreds, perhaps thousands of animals being killed when they pose no real risk, as long as owners are responsible.


----------



## colinm (Sep 20, 2008)

Why would they , they put to sleep more cats and dogs any year than any Raccoons or Chipmunks ?


----------



## CloudForest (Nov 27, 2013)

colinm said:


> Why would they , they put to sleep more cats and dogs any year than any Raccoons or Chipmunks ?


there is a difference between putting an animal to sleep because the RSPCA cannot afford to look after them, and owners being told to kill their pets because they the EU has deemed them an invasive species

the two subjects aren't remotely connected *scratches head*


If many "breeders" and owners where not greedy money grabbing irresponsible ****'s, then there would not be thousands of dogs and cats taking up room in animal welfare facilities...blaming the RSPCA for the problem, makes no sense at all...cant we just avoid this discussion entirely? its nonsensical, and isn't actualy going to help any of the animals on those lists..prejudice does not help anyone or any animal, ever; never has, never will.


----------



## Salazare Slytherin (Oct 21, 2009)

The RSPCA mentioned this on there own website last year, that they had concerns about the welfare of exotic animals and implied quite heavily that they pledged to reduce the amount or numbers of exotic animals. 
Having a quick look now, it looks like they have amended that origonal statement, to wild caught animals, whether they be exotic mammals, birds, or reptiles. 


https://www.rspca.org.uk/utilities/aboutus/mission/pledges/pledge5

I could agree with this partially, but it isn't a secret the RSPCA, haven't been friends of the hobby for a long time. 

My persnonal experience with some inspectors, (met a few working in and around varying other rescues) many of them are quite interested and show fascination, many of the inspectors go into this kind of work with a great love for the animals, but on an individual, case by case basis, it isn't meaning anything, these inspectors have to do as they are told, and follow the policies, and agendas that the RSPCA stand for when they wear that uniform, regardless of there own personal interests. 

So some people do and will have good experiences with individual inspectors, but things go far higher than individual inspectors when we look at things like there agendas, and what they want to see happen. 

Interestingly I am now interested to know why they have amended there origonal statement, has there been anyone actually educating these guys?
Captive breeding of a variety of species, would see an end to wild caught animals, so where would they stand then, back to square one?


----------



## colinm (Sep 20, 2008)

CloudForest said:


> there is a difference between putting an animal to sleep because the RSPCA cannot afford to look after them, and owners being told to kill their pets because they the EU has deemed them an invasive species
> 
> the two subjects aren't remotely connected *scratches head*
> 
> ...


To be honest this is a complete irrelevance because as R.S.P.C.A. has nothing to do with this legislation at all. Listen to Aardvark , he has been involved at a high level with this legislation . So keepers of these species can bury their heads in the sand or take note. I am merely imparting the information for the owners of these species .


----------



## aardvark28 (Oct 10, 2013)

Hi folks, a few additional comments on people's feedback. The 'reason' why it appears so extreme in terms of treatment to the current specimens in captivity is because the so-called Precautionary Principle has been invoked. In this the fact that the species appears on the list of Concern then becomes de facto 'evidence' that pretty much all and every measure needs to be taken against it. It is also the reason why both sexes would be expected to be prevented from any chance of reproduction - not only to prevent captive reproduction but also to prevent any escapees being able to mate with existing animals that might have already escaped. We can hope that the UK Government would try to allow procedures rather than forced euthanasia but this is very far from certain because the EU Principle of Subsidiarity does not apply to any stipulation on destruction from the European Commission only on what Member States choose to do or not do on their individual (and separate) Country Lists of concern. 

Colin is spot-on that the list must be ratified and circulated by the European Commission by 2nd January 2015, after which it must be confirmed by the Member States (most if not all the discussion/negotiation on this will take place this Autumn such that the list, in essence, has already been agreed by the time it is circulated in the New Year).


----------



## Loderuna (Mar 9, 2010)

Time to get out of the EU now then. Damn, should have voted for UKIP!


----------



## mrcriss (Nov 2, 2010)

Loderuna said:


> Time to get out of the EU now then. Damn, should have voted for UKIP!


Not even this is reason enough to vote for UKIP!


----------



## CloudForest (Nov 27, 2013)

colinm said:


> To be honest this is a complete irrelevance because as R.S.P.C.A. has nothing to do with this legislation at all. Listen to Aardvark , he has been involved at a high level with this legislation . So keepers of these species can bury their heads in the sand or take note. I am merely imparting the information for the owners of these species .


It is irrelevant - my point, was that the RSPCA has a (rather loud) voice, whether it chooses to use it in this matter is the question I was asking...but, due to prejudices (imo), that question was overlooked for the sake of an irrelevant point


----------



## CloudForest (Nov 27, 2013)

Loderuna said:


> Time to get out of the EU now then. Damn, should have voted for UKIP!


the UK would have brought in legislation on invasive species with or without the EU, sooner or later, why? because of irresponsible owners letting their animals go free into the wild, because of irresponsible businesses not protecting wild populations from imported-for-market non-native species (eg cray fish), because of irresponsible ship captains who sherk their duty to ensure animal stowaways are not allowed to leave or enter the ship, etc etc;

irresponsible/ignorant, probably interchangeable, but the end result is the same.

basically, because humans are a bunch of idiots who cannot be trusted to do anything very much at all, without significant regulations in place to make sure they do it properly.


----------



## ZachyBoy (Oct 4, 2012)

aardvark28 said:


> No, it was never intended to be at the discretion of the Member States. The EU list is just that - a limited list of species totally banned across all Member States with Member States then also applying controls on additional species in their own domestic legislation.





colinm said:


> The confirmed list is ratified on the 2nd January 2016.



So let me see if I've got this right. This list Colin has posted is a black list of banned species EU-wide that will come into force on 2nd Jan 2016. Species currently in captivity will probably have to be given to zoos or put down. The reason for banning these animals/plants is because they could be, or are, invasive. Is that right?


----------



## aardvark28 (Oct 10, 2013)

That's just about the sum of it although the date is not strictly correct in that 2nd January is when the European Commission will formally adopt the list. Thereafter, each EU Member State must bring this list into its own domestic legislation which is likely to be a matter of a few months.


----------



## naja-naja (Aug 26, 2009)

ZachyBoy said:


> So let me see if I've got this right. This list Colin has posted is a black list of banned species EU-wide that will come into force on 2nd Jan 2016. Species currently in captivity will probably have to be given to zoos or put down. The reason for banning these animals/plants is because they could be, or are, invasive. Is that right?


nearly correct, commercially held stocks of these species will need to be got rid of within 2 years, either culled, exported or otherwise. personal pets can be kept for life, on condition that they a) cannot escape and are confined and b) cannot reproduce.


----------



## CloudForest (Nov 27, 2013)

all they will do tbh, is create yet another unregulated black market; not good for anyone, esp not the animals


----------



## ZachyBoy (Oct 4, 2012)

naja-naja said:


> nearly correct, commercially held stocks of these species will need to be got rid of within 2 years, either culled, exported or otherwise. personal pets can be kept for life, on condition that they a) cannot escape and are confined and b) cannot reproduce.


Yes, but earlier on this thread Colin posted this-





colinm said:


> I have copied and pasted this from a post on shelled by Aarvark 28. Please take note.
> 
> Hi Colin,
> 
> Having sat on the EU working group for the three years of its existence and attended all the Brussels meetings I can tell you that their preferred option for any species listed is for the destruction of all specimens held in captivity or their gifting to zoos. There is an outside chance that individuals nations like the UK might allow for listed specimens to continue to be kept under a registration scheme but with the animals sterilised such that they become the last generation in captivity. Any movement or trade in listed species would be totally forbidden.


So how can you be so sure that personal pets can be kept and not destroyed?


----------



## aardvark28 (Oct 10, 2013)

Nobody can be certain. Naja naja is certainly correct that there is PROVISION for the possibility that private pets can be kept until they die (but must be sterilised or otherwise prevented from reproducing, must not be sold or passed to another private person) but that needs to be enacted. In essence, it means we must be lobbying like mad to ensure that the UK Government takes-up this provision for listed species and, also, that they work on limiting the EU List of Concern to a very small number of species that are causing or could cause a SUBSTANTIVE negative impact on ecosystems and/or the economy.


----------



## ZachyBoy (Oct 4, 2012)

Thank you for sharing. Now I'm off to start lobbying!


----------



## CloudForest (Nov 27, 2013)

UK Government has not got a chance in hell of making people have their healthy pets put to sleep, regardless of what the EU may demand (I am rather dubious of the claims that this is what they are demanding, however)

even without lobbying, which should of course happen anyway to be on the safe side, I do not believe the UK government would enforce any law which kills animals for no good reason, without first putting in place studies into the situation which will probably go on longer than the lifespan of most of the animals on the list :whistling2:


and this is also why I brought up the RSPCA previously, they would not allow this to happen either (animals being killed over this particular law) - I suspect allies will be found on the subject in places that many on this forum would never have suspected


----------



## aquajird (Oct 27, 2010)

Could you please cut and paste the list directly onto a reply. The word page thingy will not open for me. 

Some thoughts with what has been said bearing in mind that I have not seen this list. In the UK, it is also senseless to ban ring necked parakeets. They are everywhere in London. When you say raccoon, do you actually mean raccoon dog? I know these have already become established in small parts of the EC. I have never heard of anything but the odd escapee raccoon.


----------



## colinm (Sep 20, 2008)

*NIMALS*
*Scientific name Common name*
_Branta canadensis_ Canada goose Should not be included as already regulated by another EU Instrument ***8211; The Birds Directive
_Callosciurus erythraeus_ Pallas's squirrel
_Caprella mutica_ Japanese skeleton shrimp
_Cervus nippon _ Sika deer
_Chrysemys picta_ Painted turtle
_Corvus splendens_ Indian house crow
_Crassotrea gigas_ Pacific oyster Should not be included as already regulated by another EU Instrument ***8211; The Aquaculture Regulations
_Crepidula fornicata_ Slipper limpet
_Didemnum vexillum_ Carpet sea-squirt
_Eriocheir sinensis_ Chinese mitten crab
_Lithobates (Rana) catesbeianus_ North American bullfrog
_Muntiacus reevesii_ Muntjac deer
_Myiopsitta monachus_ Monk parakeet
_Myocastor coypus_  Coypu
_Orconectes limosus_ Spiny-cheek crayfish
_Orconectes virilis_ Virile crayfish
_Oxyura jamaicensis_ Ruddy duck
_Pacifastacus leniusculus_ Signal crayfish
_Perccottus glenii_ Amur sleeper
_Potamopyrgus antipodarum_ New Zealand mudsnail
_Procambarus clarkii_ Red swamp crayfish
_Procambarus spp._ Marbled crayfish
_Procyon lotor_ Raccoon
_Pseudorasbora parva _ Stone moroko
_Psittacula krameri_ Rose-ringed parakeet
_Rapana venosa _ Rapa whelk
_Sciurus carolinensis_ Grey squirrel
_Sciurus niger_ Fox squirrel
_Sicyos angulatus_ Star cucumber
_Tamias sibiricus_ Siberian chipmunk
_Threskiornis aethiopicus_ Sacred ibis
_Vespa velutina_ Asian hornet
_Trachemys scripta elegans_ Red-eared terrapin/slider

*PLANTS*
*Scientific name Common name*
_Ambrosia artemisiifolia_ Common ragweed
_Azolla filiculoides_ Water fern
_Baccharis halimifolia_ Eastern Baccharis
_Cabomba caroliniana_ Green cabomba
_Crassula helmsii_ Australian swamp-stonecrop
_Eichhornia crassipes_ Water hyacinth
_Fallopia japonica_ (& F. x bohemica?) Japanese knotweed
_Fallopia sachalinensis _ Giant knotweed
_Heracleum mantegazzianum_ Giant hogweed is not eligible as no approved risk assessment has been concluded for this species.
_Heracleum persicum_ Persian hogweed
_Heracleum sosnowskyi Sosnowski's_ hogweed
_Hydrocotyle ranunculoides_ Floating pennywort
_Lagarosiphon major_ Curly waterweed
_Ludwigia grandiflora_ Water primrose
_Ludwigia peploides_ Floating primrose willow
_Lysichiton americanus_ American skunk cabbage
_Myriophyllum aquaticum_  Parrot's feather
_Parthenium hysterophorus_ Whitetop weed
_Persicaria perfoliata (Polygonum perfoliatum)_ Asiatic tearthumb
_Pueraria lobata _ Kudzu vine
_Sargassum muticum_ Japweed, wireweed
_Senecio inaequidens _ Narrow-leaved ragwort
_Solanum elaeagnifolium_ Silver leafed nightshade 

My apaologies it is actually the Rose Ringed Parakeet but it is Racoons and not Racoon Dogs.
​


----------



## Natrix (Dec 9, 2006)

colinm said:


> My apaologies it is actually the Rose Ringed Parakeet but it is Racoons and not Racoon Dogs.
> ​


Colin
As far as I can see Rose Ringed and ring necked are the same thing _Psittacula krameri_ . It's just a variation on the common name.

Gordon


----------



## Loderuna (Mar 9, 2010)

CloudForest said:


> even without lobbying, which should of course happen anyway to be on the safe side, I do not believe the UK government would enforce any law which kills animals for no good reason, without first putting in place studies into the situation which will probably go on longer than the lifespan of most of the animals on the list :whistling2:


Erm. Badger cull anyone?


----------



## Natrix (Dec 9, 2006)

CloudForest said:


> even without lobbying, which should of course happen anyway to be on the safe side, I do not believe the UK government would enforce any law which kills animals for no good reason, without first putting in place studies into the situation which will probably go on longer than the lifespan of most of the animals on the list :whistling2:
> 
> 
> Loderuna said:
> ...


 
I'll see your Badger cull and raise you a Ruddy duck cull (done just to keep the EU happy).

Gordon


----------



## colinm (Sep 20, 2008)

Copied from a post by Chris Newman on Facebook.

I have just been passed the final draft of the List of Concern under the IAS Regs. This has been submitted to the WTO (World Trade Organisation). You will see Coati (Nasua nasua) and Asian mongoose (Herpestes javanicus) have been added. Also note, as expected, Slider as a species have been listed (Trachemys scripta) and not just (Trachemys scripta elegans). There have been some deletions, mostly plants. As this has now been submitted to the WTO it is highly unlikely there will be any more additions. However, it may still be possible to get some deletions before the List goes to public consolation in November.

Here`s the list.

https://word.office.live.com/wv/WordView.aspx?FBsrc=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fattachments%2Ffile_preview.php%3Fid%3D1383102908664142%26time%3D1437493420%26metadata&access_token=1550426632%3AAVIwUGJHJSiUq0KUSpatIXp4kG4yafiq7vWSlr8gf423ow&title=ANNEX_final.docx

I wont comment further you can all argue it out by yourselves as to whether species on the list will not be culled, whether the R.S.P.C.A. will come in as a white knight and save them etc.


----------

