Re: NANFA-- Exotic Removal -Swans vs Snakeheads

Christopher Scharpf (
Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:31:19 -0400

Read the judge's opinion for yourself:

It's pretty technical. My eyes and brain started to hurt after 3 pages, so I
stopped reading. :-) Several issues are involved, including whether
wildlife managers have allowed for proper public comment and input as
dictated by law, and whether science has conclusively proven that swans are
bad for the Bay.

It does appear to me that the Migratory Bird Act protects any bird as long
as it's migratory. I presume the mute swan is migratory, although they hang
out on the Bay all year long. I'm no bird expert either, but as far as I
know, pigeons, English sparrows and starlings are not migratory and
therefore not protected.


> From: geoff <>
> Reply-To:
> Date: 12 Sep 2003 19:00:58 -0400
> To:
> Subject: Re: NANFA-- Exotic Removal -Swans vs Snakeheads
> I am by no means a lawyer or bird expert, but I don't think that exotics
> are covered by the migratory bird act. At least, pigeons, english
> sparrows, and starlings are not covered. I can kill them at will
> because they are exotics. I just can't discharge a firearm inside the
> city limits etc to do it.
> Perhaps there are other factors in play with these aerial vermin, but as
> I said - I'm not an expert.
/"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily
/ reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes
/ Association"
/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association
/ To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word
/ subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to
/ For a digest version, send the command to
/ instead.
/ For more information about NANFA, visit our web page,