Scot,
Your first point is precisely what I was trying to say in my posting of
yesterday!
Your second point is good - but I suggest that animal breeders who are not
interested in bringing in domestic-wild crossbreeds, rather just new
"conventional" breeds may object. Still, I reckon as a place to start,
better to be over-restrictive than too lax.
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From:
On Behalf Of Scot Mcphee
Sent: Tuesday, 5 August 2008 11:17 AM
To: Peter Shute; Birding Aus
Subject: Savannah cat story
Peter Shute wrote:
> And perhaps if they manage to sue the government, it might discourage
> government departments from giving approval for things that they
> shouldn't, only to have the decision changed later. I'm sure these
> people wouldn't have put any money into the idea if they didn't think
> they had approval.
>
Has anyone determined yet - approval from whom? and for what? Because
it's one thing for Customs to say that's OK by us to import this animal,
another for the Department of the Environment to allow or ban certain
species (there is two departments there). For example Environment could
add a species to the CITES list, which then makes import/export illegal
where previously it wasn't.
Frankly as a matter of policy I think the default position for importing
any species, or cross-breed, into Australia should be "banned" until
explicitly approved rather than the other way around.
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.12/1591 - Release Date: 4/08/2008
7:23 PM
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
|
