A Step Toward Human and Primate Safety
Last week in Connecticut, we had a tragic example of how reckless and dangerous keeping primates as pets can be. A chimpanzee that had been treated like a member of the household snapped. We still don't know exactly what transpired, or exactly why. What we know are the results, the animal was killed, people were horribly maimed, police officers attacked. Primates are wild animals, keeping them in our homes and our communities poses a serious threat to public safety and public health. In light of this horrific attack, we must move forward with legislation to prohibit the interstate trade of these animals, for human and animal welfare.
The importation of primates into the United States for the pet trade has been banned by Federal regulation since 1975. Although twenty states prohibit keeping primates as pets and many others require permits, these animals are bred in the United States and are readily available for purchase from exotic animal dealers and even over the internet. Because of the importation laws, there remains an active domestic trade in these animals.
Primates pose serious risks; they can transmit diseases, and inflict serious physical harm. These risks are increased by interstate transport of the animals. Even in states where it is legal to keep primates, most people cannot provide the special care, housing, and social structure these animals require.
That's why I introduced the Captive Primate Safety Act to amend the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981. This bill would add primates to the list of animals that cannot be transported across state lines. It would prohibit the import, export, transportation, sale, receipt, acquisition, or purchase in interstate or foreign commerce of nonhuman primates in order to safeguard public health and safety and protect the welfare of monkeys, apes (which include chimpanzees and orangutans), marmosets and lemurs. The bill is similar to the Captive Wildlife Safety Act, which Congress passed unanimously in 2003 to ban interstate commerce in lions, tigers, and other big cats for the pet trade.
In the 110th Congress, the Captive Primate Safety Act received strong support from Dr. Jane Goodall, the American Veterinary Medical Association, the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, and The Humane Society of the United States. When this bill was last introduced in Congress, Republicans mocked the legislation on the House Floor, and 96 members of their party voted against the measure. Lat week's attack-more than ever-shows the time has come for these Republicans to prioritize the health of both humans and primates over the desire to maintain a partisan divide. This legislation is a step in the right direction, it preserves the jurisdiction of states while giving federal law enforcement the discretion to crack down on the interstate sale of primates as pets. This will help stem the tide of these potentially dangerous animals going into our communities to better protect our families and to better ensure the safety of the animals.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Good article.
Except for the "A chimpanzee that had been treated like a member of the household snapped."
It reads like "ungrateful chimp goes crazy". Which of course wasn't the case. The chimp was simply trying to dominate in a way that was perfectly normal (and predictable) behavour for it's species.
Thank you for introducing this legislation, which I think is a great step. As a child, I wanted a pet chimpanzee or orangutan. Thankfully, my parents wisely did not give in to my desires. Apes and monkeys are adorable, especially as infants, but they grow into strong and unmanageable adults. Another step I would like to see Rep. Blumenauer and others take is ending the use of apes in the entertainment industry. People laugh at a funny commercial with a chimp but don't think about all the consequences they have (encouraging pet ownership, taking infants from their mothers to train them for show biz, and the huge problem of caring for these apes for the rest of their 50 or so years after their careers end). If you read up about the use of apes in entertainment, you'll find more sad stories like Travis's.
"...the use of apes in the entertainment industry. People laugh at a funny commercial with a chimp..."
After reading Frans de Waal piece on Huffpo...
http://www
http://www
...I picked up some of his books on primate behaviour. He had some very interesting things to say on why we find our primate cousins so amusing in commercials, movies, etc.. The most interesting part is when stop finding their 'human like' antics amusing and start finding them threatening to our self-perception as King of the primates. I suggest searching him out next time you're at the library.
The trade in exotic animals is a bad one. These animals are treated like commodities. They end up with people who don't know how to care for them properly or give them a frustrated and unhealthy living situation, or the animals end up in seedy roadside zoos or worse.
This is a good bill. It's a start toward putting a stop to this. If the law starts tightening up, there are going to be heartbroken people with the best of intentions. But their intentions are misguided. These animals belong where the wild things are. They don't belong in a living room sipping wine with "mom". They don't deserve to end up in a situation where in following their nature they hurt someone, and they in turn are shot in the driveway.
The Connecticut story disturbs me greatly. I think of the woman in the hospital every day and am hoping for doctors with miracle techniques who can give her her face and her life back. And I'm sorry the chimpanzee lost his from being in a situation he should never have been in. Just a terrible tragedy all around.
I think we must look at the people who are "adopting" these animals. Almost all have stated there is something lacking in their lives. They were not put on this earth to be replacements for children. Why not volunteer at schools, take in a needy foster child, etc. The article concerning the recent attack stated that the woman gave the chimp Xanax!!! She must now live with the consequence of her actions.
What really concerns me is how these people take their monkeys, out in public, around children.
You know...whi
Um...now..
Too... many...ell
There is only one small issue with Rep. Earl Blumenauer's well written piece. Humans are also classified as primates. And as such, the same descriptions apply. It's time to stop people from crossing state lines, they are violent, unpredictable, transmit all sorts of deseases, and subject to rages.
That said, non-human primates are not pets. If we want to treat them as quasi-sentient beings, then let's return them to their native homes and interact with them there.
Unfortunately, the people this legislation is directed toward will completely ignore it, the same ways that criminals who want guns or drug users who want illegal drugs ignore the prohibition laws in place to curb the abuses that are attributed to guns, drugs or in this case captive wild animals
Don't you think it is easier to hide a gun or drugs in your house than a chimpanzee?
Thank God people will ignore it. This is another bad piece of legislation that is entirely inspired by a violently destructive sect that hates the human race, including itself. All of this talk about "human hubris" is simple self-loathing.
Rep. Blumenauer needs to turn his efforts towards investigating animal rights terrorism and the charities fraud that supports it. There are a lot of key players who belong in jail for both. The sick philosophy of animal rights needs to be disabled from causing more damage.
Project much?
Primates should NOT be pets. Nor should any other wild animals be pets. I applaud any legislation that will stop this practice. I love animals, and that is why it's important for them to be treated appropriately according to THEIR needs, not ours.
It is completely unacceptable that the animal rights movement, which hates and terrorizes humanity, has managed to corrupt the government this much.
There have never been and never would have been enough incidents to justify this kind of abuse of governmental powers. Animal owners have rights to due process, substantive due process, and equal protection under the law, and this denies it. "Potentially dangerous" is a meaningless term that can be applied to anything. This is simply a stupid law, an unfair burden on the population, and it gives too much power to the wrong people.
Look up what the HSUS is on www.consum
Who are the right people to have the power to control abuses of animals, or guns, or drugs? If these laws are not enacted then the abuses will continue unchecked and our entire society has the potential for falling into complete social anarchy that will be the downfall of our civilization
Ever notice that it is the authoritarian police state that always falls apart? There is a reason why some powers must be left with the people. The people need practice with tough situations in real life, with making their own decisions. You don't get that capability from reading books. Yes, we should use animals for this practice.
Personally, I value keeping chimpanzees and their cousins (our cousins) in healthy, natural environments more than I value some random dude's "freedom" to keep a chimp as a pet.
There's no constitutionally guaranteed right to "use" animals (your word, in the post below) to satisfy our own distorted emotional desires.
While I agree with the intent of the amendment and thank you for it, I don't really see it having any ability to be effective at preventing interstate transport of primates, nor do I see it being enforceable. There simply aren't many people with said authority with the skills and knowledge to do so. State game wardens don't, and locality animal control officers most certainly don't, and though it's a federal statute, ultimately enforcement would would come down to them. They can't call in specialist animal handlers every time something comes up, so usually things end exactly the way this case did. With the animal being shot. The best it could hope for is to deter people by punishing violations after the fact.
Considering your apparent interest in animal related issues, I'm curious what your stance is on HR669?
Thank you for introducing this important and compassionate legislation!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
