# Muscovy Ducks Banned!



## QTee (Dec 1, 2002)

_This is crazy!_
Have your read or heard of the new law to make it illegal to own Muscovy Ducks after March 31, 2010? There is a thread on BYC.
PLEASE WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN!

http://www.backyardchickens.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=304055


----------



## Guest (Mar 4, 2010)

QTee said:


> _This is crazy!_
> Have your read or heard of the new law to make it illegal to own Muscovy Ducks after March 31, 2010? There is a thread on BYC.
> PLEASE WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN!
> http://www.backyardchickens.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=30405


I read that entire thread and not a word about banned, march 31. Perhaps its in a different thread?


----------



## sunflower-n-ks (Aug 7, 2006)

I didn't read the whole thread, but am understanding that they can only be raised with a permit and/or sold for "meat". I am still trying to understand it.

It is hard to think of a muscovy duck as a migratory bird. ???? Even if the ducks were to get the idea to go to another part of the country, they would be leaving most if not all of the drakes behind, not to mention their established source of food and shelter.


----------



## Guest (Mar 4, 2010)

What the heck? I'm getting a thread called "Cocci in the brooders, just treat everyone?" Are ya'll reading something different?


----------



## Guest (Mar 4, 2010)

From the Federal Register:
http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/R...2010/Muscovy Duck Final Rule 1 March 2010.pdf

*SUMMARY:* We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, change the regulations governing control of introduced migratory birds. The muscovy duck (Cairina moschata) occurs naturally only in southern Texas. It has been introduced in other locations, where it is considered an invasive species that sometimes creates problems through competition with native species, damage to property, and transmission of disease. We amend the regulations to prohibit sale, transfer, or propagation of muscovy ducks for hunting and any other purpose other than food production, and to allow their removal in locations in which the species does not occur naturally in the contiguous United States, Alaska, and Hawaii, and in U.S. territories and possessions. This requires revision of regulations governing permit exceptions for captivebred migratory waterfowl other than mallard ducks, and waterfowl sale and disposal permits, and the addition of an order to allow control of muscovy ducks, their nests, and eggs. We also have rewritten the affected regulations to make them easier to understand. 

*DATES: This rule will be effective on March 31, 2010.*

*FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:*
Dr. George T. Allen, Division of Migratory
Bird Management, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 703â358â1825.

I don't even like the things but this is ridiculous.

.....Alan.


----------



## sunflower-n-ks (Aug 7, 2006)

http://www.backyardchickens.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=304055&p=1


----------



## Guest (Mar 4, 2010)

thanks sunflower


----------



## ||Downhome|| (Jan 12, 2009)

I just got off the phone with Dr. Allen,nice guy it seems.

from published reasearch it was concluded that muskovys had changed thier home range
by moving into texas. so the fish and wildlife service was forced to add them to the migratory bird list. I pointed out to Dr.Allen that muskovys have been domesticated by native americans and also europeans and are considered livestock worldwide. they did not get much input from people like me or you but I think if we can show that the texas ducks are not immigrent but introduced they would reverse this. or at the least get a concession of some sort for domesticated muskovys. I just got my flock last year and was looking forward to not being a criminal and provideing my own table fare.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

Ignore it.


----------



## ||Downhome|| (Jan 12, 2009)

no correct it. other wise you or I will be held to this standard and the remedys.
I have a email to one of the guys who wrote up the rule , I belive Dr.Allen was only involved as a adviser. so I'm going to find out what the litarary citations where and see if I can turn up any other published work wich would be contrary to it. Im also going to start contacting hatcherys that sell muskovys and see if they will chip in on the effort as they will stand to suffer a portion of thier buisness.


----------



## xoxoGOATSxoxo (Jul 29, 2006)

That's pretty ridiculous, in my opinion. :grump: I will be writing some letters.


----------



## QTee (Dec 1, 2002)

Sorry about the incorrect link.
Looks like some of the numbers got left off the end of the link.
http://www.backyardchickens.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=304055

I can understand a ban in southern states were feral Muscovies
are a problem but nation wide its not an issue.
Fish & Game have classified Muscovies as "migratory"
Well my drakes can't even get off the ground let alone fly off
and if they did they would certainly get eaten by some predator.
I doubt this will be enforced.
What are they going to do, have a Muscovy census?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> to prohibit sale, transfer, or propagation of *muscovy ducks for hunting *and any other purpose *other than food production*


They arent banning *domesticated* Muscovy ducks.
They are banning the sale of birds released* for hunting*, and will be eliminating WILD populations that don't belong.


----------



## ||Downhome|| (Jan 12, 2009)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They arent banning *domesticated* Muscovy ducks.
> They are banning the sale of birds released* for hunting*, and will be eliminating WILD populations that don't belong.



no bearfoot read the whole act its a catch 22 in there the wording is not clear and left open to some serious interpretation, I will also point out its not a law but a new regulation to a old law. the birds owned prior to the regulation taking effect are grand fathered, but you cant legaly breed them or sell them and the meat production clause was more intended for the corporate farms not the individual. I know I cant sell them as meat, I can sell them for meat but only on the hoof, and that could be misconstrued by the FWS could it not. If I was a corporate farm shipping to a proccesor or had a onsite processing facility I would be golden.

I talked to one of the biologists involved for a good solid half hour. they are banning us from producing Muscovys.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> the wording is not clear


It seemed clear to me.

Every time it was mentioned, it said they would* still be allowed for food production*.
It said they "wouldn't be controlled on private property".

I dont think most people will see any changes at all, and most of the "control" will be in Florida and other coastal Southern states with large feral populations.



> I can sell them for meat but only on the hoof, and that could be misconstrued by the FWS could it not


Anything can be "misconstrued".
It's not hard to cover yourself when selling meat birds or breeding stock for food production.
I really dont think there's a big push to ban* all *the Muscovy ducks in the country



> you cant legaly breed them or sell them


Please show the *specific wording *that states that. I read most of it and saw nothing like that at all


----------



## HappyFarmer (Jun 17, 2006)

This is ridiculous. Do they not have better things to do with their time?

I read the Federal Register quickly, but every reference to meat was preceded by the SALE of the bird, and for the sale of muscovies you need a permit. No breeding, no eggs, no birds that havn't been grandfathered.

Again I may have missed it and will re-read. 

Why don't they just allow open season on them, there are plenty of hungry people especially now.
HF


----------



## Joshie (Dec 8, 2008)

OK, anybody have any in central IL? I'd like to get them before 3/31.


----------



## Judy in IN (Nov 28, 2003)

I'm supposed to be picking up a drake and some hens from Danous this weekend. 

I'm in NW IN, if that helps you any. 

I don't see how they can inforce this. As the thread states, it's a federal thing, and would go against state's rights. 

Let them concentrate on getting the Burmese Python out of Florida first. THAT would seem to be the more serious problem. Those eat anything, up to and including deer and alligators!


----------



## bbbuddy (Jul 29, 2002)

Jeez, I've had Muscovies for over a decade now. They are loose on my property, they RARELY fly (females only, and that is just to get up on a shed roof), and they have chicks each spring if I don't find all the eggs... Am I now illegally breeding Muscovies?


----------



## Bricheze (Jun 21, 2008)

I was planning on buying and raising some from eggs this spring! This really stinks


----------



## LFRJ (Dec 1, 2006)

How about I just don't breed them anymore and leave them free to migrate if they choose to.

I bet they'd continue to succesfully proliferate, and would continue to litter up my back yard Summer through Spring.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

That's YOU Judy!!!! Wow! I had no idea!

Read the whole legislation. It does say domestic Muscovies that escape from captivity would fall under the the legislation. Stupid Rachel escapes every day but always comes back. And no raising them for eggs. They wouldn't be allowed for that purpose, just meat production. I raise mainly for the eggs.

http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/R...2010/Muscovy Duck Final Rule 1 March 2010.pdf

I'll be reading the whole thing again and firing off some emails tomorrow. It says they will use non-lethal methods of removal (by HSUS request) but does not say where they will go after being removed. 

I don't see why specific populations cannot be declared nuisances and dealt with accordingly. I can't see a country-wide ban. Even banning release for hunting purposes like they have on other non-native game birds. Nobody banned Canadian Geese which are not native to most of this country. Or open the feral populations to hunting, oh wait, the HSUS won't allow that.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> They wouldn't be allowed for that purpose, *just meat production*


I still think you're overreacting.
The regulations never say "meat production"
They say "*FOOD *production"

Eggs are food. 
Breeding stock is sold for "food production".


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Read this SLOWLY"



> We amend the regulations to
> *prohibit sale, transfer, or propagation *of
> muscovy ducks for hunting and any
> other purpose *other than food
> production*,


Nothing there prohibits breeding, sale, or transfer* FOR *"food production"


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

We intend to
disallow private possession of muscovy
ducks, except to raise them to be sold
as food (which has been ongoing for
years). However, we will allow
possession of any live muscovy duck
held on the date when this rule takes
effect.

Ok, my bad. Raising for food is allowed, as long as you have the birds when this law is passed.

Eggs only, don't expect to raise more to eat them:

In most every location, the muscovy
duck is an introduced, invasive species.
We will allow control of muscovy ducks
as best suits the needs of the States and
wildlife management agencies, who
requested this authorization. Though
the control order allows States and other
entities to remove muscovy ducks, we
do not expect that they will do so when
the ducks are on private property.
However, people who propagate
muscovy ducks or allow them to
multiply and move off their property
should realize that the muscovy ducks
may be subject to the control efforts that
the State or local wildlife agency deems
necessary.

Sent my letter to the dept of the interior, like it will make any difference.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Sent my letter to the dept of the interior, like it will make any difference


It cant hurt. I signed a petition to stop it.
I dont see why they think it's a "national" problem anyway.
The only place I've seen too many running wild is in Florida

They should leave it up to the States, or declare them to be "domesticated" and remove them from the Treaty


----------



## LaniganRiver (Feb 18, 2010)

QTee said:


> _This is crazy!_
> Have your read or heard of the new law to make it illegal to own Muscovy Ducks after March 31, 2010? There is a thread on BYC.
> PLEASE WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN!
> 
> http://www.backyardchickens.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=304055


That is so crazy.Muscovy ducks have been raised as livestock in Louisianna for something like 100+ years. Muscovy Ducks are on ponds in city parks all over. Put there by the city. Just more big brother government micromanaging things it doesn't understand.


----------



## LaniganRiver (Feb 18, 2010)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It cant hurt. I signed a petition to stop it.
> I dont see why they think it's a "national" problem anyway.
> The only place I've seen too many running wild is in Florida
> 
> They should leave it up to the States, or declare them to be "domesticated" and remove them from the Treaty


 Florida has a bunch of crazy exotics running wild. Muscovy Ducks can't be any worse than those green parrots or the Boa or the python or nutra or those monkeys florida has running wild. Why try to punish every state for florida's problems?


----------



## Allen W (Aug 2, 2008)

I think this is because of some feral Muscovy ducks crossing back and forth on the Mexican border. Mexico requested protection for them under some treaty. I understand that in some areas they are a considerable problem and have established feral populations and disrupted native wildlife. But to ban one particular animal when there are many more that have feral populations is ridicules. Muscovy only produce sterile off spring when crossed with other ducks unlike the ducks and geese living on park lakes all over the US that can cross with wild ducks and geese and produce fertile off spring.


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

I can hardly wait for the MN DNR to get a hold of this and go nuts. There'll be meetings followed by more meetings followed by group hugs and pledges to 'nip it in the bud'. New positions will be created. New vehicles will be bought. Press releases will be issued.

I can see it now. 

MN DNR motto: We're not happy until you're not happy!


----------



## sunflower-n-ks (Aug 7, 2006)

There is some progress being made with information and communication with the people involved with this regulation. If you are interested, keep checking the thread at BYC. The first post is kept updated as information is gathered. 

Things are looking more hopeful, but a lot of work to be done yet. Page 28 has some current info also.

http://www.backyardchickens.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=304055&p=1


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Bumping this so I can write to Dr. Allen.

Won't be so hard to find if it's on page 1 Monday.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Ok, Dr Allen is no longer accepting email on the subject (I read the entire post before writing). However there is a petition requesting the repeal of the legislation. Please sign if you are interested in keeping Muscovy duck ownership legal.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/481112174


----------



## Mac_ (Sep 27, 2009)

I've spent some time researching this ban. I think that it is important that we speak out against this rule. Below is a summary of the research that I've done. 

Mac_


A rule by the U S Fish and Wildlife Service (50 CFR Part 21) went into effect on March 31, 2010 that makes it illegal to raise domestic Muscovy ducks in the U S. 

According to this bill, it is now illegal to raise domestic Muscovy ducks without a federal permit. Even though the FWS states in a fact sheet âEven though these feral muscovy ducks bear little physical resemblance to the muscovy duck in its native rangeâ¦â they make no distinction between wild Muscovy ducks and domestic Muscovy ducks. 


Section 21.14 of the regulation reads: 

â(g) You may not acquire or possess live muscovy ducks, their carcasses or parts, or their eggs, except to raise them to be sold as food, and except that you may possess any live muscovy duck that you lawfully acquired prior to March 31, 2010. If you possess muscovy ducks on that date, you may not propagate them or sell or transfer them to anyone for any purpose, except to be used as food. You may not release them to the wild, sell them to be hunted or released to the wild, or transfer them to anyone to be hunted or released to the wild.â

Questions 3 and 4 of a fact sheet issued by the Fish and Wildlife Service reads:

3. Muscovy ducks are widely raised for food and maintained as pets and show ducks. Are these muscovies now protected? Yes, muscovy ducks are now subject to regulation wherever found in the United States and its territories, whether in the wild or in captivity.

4. Do I need a migratory bird permit to raise and sell muscovy ducks now? No. Although we amended the regulations at 50 CFR 21.14 and 21.25 to restrict possession and sale of muscovy ducks, we will not restrict possession or sale, or issue permits for this species at this time. As a result of information received since publication of the final rules, the Service has decided to revise the regulations.

Please note that this law is still currently in effect. Only itâs enforcement is being temporarily suspended

The regulation that went into effect on March 31, 2010 requires a federal permit like the permit for breeding hawks or other raptors in captivity, in order to propagate or sell Muscovy ducks. See 21.25, pages 5-6 of the regulation for the permit conditions.

Apparently, the Fish and Wildlife Service was ââ¦unaware of the extent to which muscovies are maintained in captivity and did not know of any organization to inform about the proposed changes.â (from fact sheet), and the Fish and Wildlife Service is now working on revisions to the regulation. Now is the time to make your views on this issue known to the Fish and Wildlife Service and other government officials.

Muscovy ducks have been domesticated since the 1500s. Numerous hatcheries in the US sell domestic Muscovy ducks, many bred from Muscovies from France. Turkeys and Muscovies were both domesticated in the Americas and both are now raised as domestic livestock around the world. (A âDocumentation of the Long History of the Domestication of the Muscovy Duck â is attached below.) The FWS has failed to recognize this long history of the domestic Muscovy as livestock. Domestic Muscovy ducks are livestock, and as such should not be subject to U S Fish and Wildlife regulations.

We feel strongly that the U S Fish and Wildlife Service should recognize a distinction between wild Muscovy ducks and the domestic Muscovies that have been raised as livestock all across the world for hundreds of years, and that the U S Fish and Wildlife Service does not have jurisdiction over domestic livestock, whether raised commercially, privately, for food, as pets, or exhibition. Please see the Suggested Letter Template below for proposed language.

We see no problem with the portions of the rules (21.54 Control order for muscovy ducks in the United States) that allows localities to control feral populations of Muscovies that have become a problem. There does not appear to be any conflict between this control order and recognizing domestic Muscovies as livestock and exempting them from this regulation. This should not hinder the abilities of localities to control problem feral populations of wild or domestic Muscovies.

Below you will find additional information and links:

Links to the Regulation and Fact Sheet

Suggested Letter Template

Contact Info

Documentation of the Long History of the Domestication of the Muscovy 
Duck 

Results of Brief Online Research Regarding Hatcheries Selling Muscovies in 
the US








Links to the Regulation and Fact Sheet


The final bill, 50 CFR Part 21 [Docket Number FWSâR9âMBâ2007â0017; 91200â1231â9BPP] RIN 1018âAV34 Migratory Bird Permits; Control of Muscovy Ducks, Revisions to the Waterfowl Permit Exceptions and Waterfowl Sale and Disposal Permits Regulations, can be viewed at: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/R...2010/Muscovy Duck Final Rule 1 March 2010.pdf

A FAQ fact sheet prepared by the U S Fish and Wildlife Service can be viewed at:
http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/NewReportsPublications/FactSheets/Muscovy Fact Sheet 3-31-2010.pdf


Suggested Letter Template

Dear Rep/Senator XXXX

I am a resident of (state or congressional district goes here). I am contacting you in regard to the recent regulation by the Fish and Wildlife Service (CFR 21.54) regarding Muscovy Ducks.

This new regulation makes it illegal for private citizens or organizations to possess Muscovy ducks. While I understand the need to pass regulations that help control the feral Muscovy duck problem in some communities in the United States, I feel that this new regulation overextends the rights of the FWS in regards to private ownership of Muscovy ducks. It is my understanding that Dr. George Allen with the Fish and Wildlife Service is currently working on a revision to this new rule. I feel that it is important that Dr. Allen gives the issues raised in this letter consideration in drafting his proposed revision. 

Muscovy ducks have been domesticated since the 1500s. Numerous hatcheries in the US sell domestic Muscovy ducks, many bred from Muscovies from France. Turkeys and Muscovies were both domesticated in the Americas and both are now raised as domestic livestock around the world. (A âDocumentation of the Long History of the Domestication of the Muscovy Duck â is attached below.) The FWS has failed to recognize this long history of the domestic Muscovy as livestock. Domestic Muscovy ducks are livestock, and as such should not be subject to U S Fish and Wildlife regulations.

I feel strongly that the U S Fish and Wildlife Service should recognize a distinction between wild Muscovy ducks and the domestic Muscovies that have been raised as livestock all across the world for hundreds of years, and that the U S Fish and Wildlife Service does not have jurisdiction over domestic livestock, whether raised commercially, privately, for food, as pets, or exhibition. This is an unacceptable infringement on the long-standing right to farm and to feed oneâs family.

I see no problem with the portions of the rules (21.54 Control order for muscovy ducks in the United States) that allows localities to control feral populations of Muscovies that have become a problem. There does not appear to be any conflict between this control order and recognizing domestic Muscovies as livestock and exempting them from this regulation. This should not hinder the abilities of localities to control problem feral populations of wild or domestic Muscovies.

Additional information on this issue is available online at ____________________________.

Please ask that the US Fish and Wildlife Service incorporate the following language in the revisions to the current rule:

"Domestic Muscovy shall be defined as any Muscovy that was owned prior to March 31, 2010 and it's offspring.", and 

"Domestic Muscovies have a long history of domestication and have long been raised as livestock both in the United States and around the world. Domestic Muscovy are not subject to this regulation."

I have copied this letter to _________________________.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

________________________




Contact Info

U S Fish and Wildlife Service

Dr. George Allen
703-358-1825 (direct line, voice mail may be full)
703-358-1825 (main number)
[email protected]
[email protected]

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
1849 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20240
http://www.fws.gov/duspit/contactus.htm

Chief, Office of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 634, Arlington, Virginia 22203 (fax: 703/358-2272 phone: 703-358-1714). 


You can find contact information for your representative in the house and senate at these links: http://www.house.gov/ (upper left) http://www.senate.gov/ (upper right) 


Ken Salazar , Secretary of the Interior
Department of the Interior
1849 C Street, N W
Washington, DC 20240
202-208-3100
E-Mail: [email protected]


Senator Lincoln, Arkansas â Chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee
912 West Fourth St., Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
800-352-9364
202-224-4843
Fax: 501-375-7046; 202-228-1371
If you are a constituent, you can e-mail at: http://lincoln.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm


----------



## Mac_ (Sep 27, 2009)

Below is the research that I've done to support the argument that domestic Muscovies are livestock and not subject to regulation by the USFWS.

Mac_



Documentation of the Long History of the Domestication of the Muscovy Duck 


1.	"Muscovy Ducks had been domesticated by various Native American cultures in the New World when Columbus arrived. The first few were brought to Europe by the European explorers at least by the 1500s."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscovy_Duck


2.	This book chronicles the long history of the domestication of Cairina moschata domestica.

Donkin, R.A. (1989): Muscovy duck, Cairina moschata domestica: Origins, Dispersal, and Associated Aspects of the Geography of Domestication. A.A. Balkema Publishers, B.R. Rotterdam ISSN/ISBN 9789061915447


3.	Googling â Cairina moschata domesticaâ results
[ame]http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Cairina+moschata+domestica&start=10&sa=N[/ame]



4.	âThe dog (Canis familiaris) was already domesticated when early humans entered the western hemisphere. Over the ensuing millennia Native Americans domesticated comparatively few indigenous animals, in contrast to the many animals that were genetically and behaviorally modified from their wild ancestors through captive controlled breeding in the Old World. New World animal domesticates included only two large birds (the turkey in North America and muscovy duck, Cairina moschata, from Mexico south into South America), a medium-sized rodent (guinea pig, Cavia porcellus), and two camelids (llama, Lama glama, and alpaca, Vicugna pacos).â

http://www.springerlink.com/content/l892508146x46141/ 


5.	"The muscovy duck (Cairina moschata) was domesticated in Colombia and Peru before the arrival of the conquistadores."

http://www.britannica.com/facts/5/25314/Muscovy-duck-as-discussed-in-anseriform-bird-order


6.	"HISTORY mentioned L'Hist nat des Oyseaux p 176 fol. Paris published 1545 then being mainly black variegated with other colours ie wild colouration.Confirmation source 'The Poultry Yard' by Peter Boswell"

http://www.domestic-waterfowl.co.uk/mozzie.htm


7.	This is a link to a page from 'Poultry Breeding and Genetics' by R. D. Crawford. This traces domestication back to the 1500s and through Africa, Taiwan, France, etc.

http://books.google.com/books?id=VM...nepage&q=Muscovy domestication France&f=false


8.	"When the first American poultry show was staged in Boston in 1849, three people exhibited Muscovies. In 1874, when the first American Standard of Perfection was compiled, the White Muscovy was included, even though colored birds were more common."

http://books.google.com/books?id=DD...resnum=2&ved=0CAkQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=&f=false




Results of Brief Online Research Regarding Hatcheries Selling Muscovies in the US


How long have hatcheries been selling domestic Muscovies in the United States? The following are my notes from a brief online attempt to answer this question.

1.	Grimaud Farms, California 

Grimaud Farms parent company has been raising Muscovy ducks since 1965, with breeding stock from France.

"A breed apart - Originating in the warm climates of South America, the Muscovy duck is a breed apart from the rest. It is by far the leanest domesticated duck breed. Long the favorite of Europeans, Muscovy now the duck of choice here in the United States.

All natural - Groupe Grimaud, our former parent company, has been raising Muscovy ducks since 1965. To take advantage of all this experience and ensure the genetic quality of our products, (French consultants continue to visit our operations every year). The birds are barn-raised without the use of steroids, antibiotics or growth hormones. We don't hurry nature: we grow our ducks for 70-85 days compared to 42-45 days for most Pekin ducks. This allows the bird to fully mature. Feed is carefully selected for a balanced diet and for the best possible yield and flavor."

http://www.grimaudfarms.com/duck.htm


2.	J M Hatchery sells Muscovies from breeding stock from France.

http://www.jmhatchery.com/ducks/white-muscovy-ducks/prod_4.html 


3.	Ridgway Hatchery sells Muscovies. 

http://www.ridgwayhatchery.com/ducks.htm


4.	McMurray Hatchery has been selling Muscovy eggs for over 20 years.

http://www.mcmurrayhatchery.com/assorted_muscovy_duck_eggs.html



The above info is from just the first few results from googling "hatchery muscovy".

The link below will take you to the entire list of results for googling "hatcheries muscovy".

[ame]http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=hatcheries+muscovy&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=[/ame]


----------



## UNCLE123 (Feb 20, 2011)

The state of Connecticut is classifying Muscovy ducks as category-2 wildlife and adding them to a list of animals that require a permit to own. Only zoos, aqauriums, wildlife conservation centers and veterinarians will be allowed to own them in Connecticut.

Here is a link:

http://www.ct.gov/dep/cwp/view.asp?A=2586&Q=471192

There is a link on that page to a PDF document with more info.

It does not state any exceptions to domesticated Muscovies, it simply reads: 

"(xxxii) Muscovy duck (_Cairina moschata_)"


----------



## Wisconsin Ann (Feb 27, 2007)

Uncle123, you do realize that those are PROPOSED or DRAFT regulations, right? It isn't law yet. This is the time period when the people of CT contact their legislators and make their views known. That process is why Muscovy weren't classified as BANNED at the national level. Or in various states. The law was proposed, the people responded, and the law was re-written.

Now...since they specifically state Muscovy as a class 2, and give SOME exemptions, if enough people put forth the effort to email and mail their congresspeople, you have a good chance of getting an exemption for raising for food. Possibly showing (which could loosely be put under "exhibitor", which is an exemption).


----------



## SherrieC (Aug 24, 2002)

Oh goody, where can I get some scovies quick!!


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Call me stupid if you want but I couldn't find the list of animals. Does anyone have a link to the list? If so would you please post that? Thanks so much.


----------



## lonelyfarmgirl (Feb 6, 2005)

well, its no wonder none of the bigger hatcheries have them this year. I found 4 places that do though.

ridgeway hatchery , hoffman hatchery , jmhatchery, and lazy54farm. Mcmurray has hatching eggs


----------



## Wisconsin Ann (Feb 27, 2007)

Danaus, it's in the PDF file that is the actual proposed bill. 2nd section...category 2 wild animals. http://www.ct.gov/dep/cwp/browse.asp?a=2586&depNav_GID=1511 will take you to a page of their legislations, and I believe the relevant one is the 2nd. 

The public hearing was Feb 15, with written comments due by March 1, I think I read. so..might actually be too late there.


----------



## ||Downhome|| (Jan 12, 2009)

Wisconsin Ann said:


> The law was proposed, the people responded, and the law was re-written.


Ann the law was not rewritten, the law remains the same but the Muscovy rule or regulation under that law is being reviewed and updated.

the Migratory Bird Treaty Act is written sort of like a Blanket PO (purchase order)
like a lot of laws any more, pass a law giving all the administration and powers to a agency that can at will add or subtract with out, bothering the busy nor well informed legislature. 

I only point this out as it helps when you know the real nature of what your dealing with. 

the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, is the law, the Muscovy Regulations are a rule to the law. this is important because of various reasons but its a simple administrative act to do away with a rule then to repeal a law.

well you can buzz in you congress critter and senator sitters ear they have no authority in the matter as it was delegated to the dept of the interior which the fws is part of. they could in essence strike down the treaty and repeal the law but that does not happen often. to boot they thought the whole matter fell upon a small voiceless percentage of people, they back tracked quickly upon the outrage but it still opened doors for things like what is happening in Connecticut, which will be kindling to light a fire else where.

its funny how those little harmless laws that do not effect you really do in the scope of things.you don't always see it and sometime you may never .


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

The proposed regulation as authorized pursuant to CGS section 26-55 is to add a new section which effectively replaces section 26-55-2 and addresses the importation, possession of wild birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates. More specifically, the proposal will: 1) establish a list of wild animals that, due to their inherent threat to public health and safety may not be imported or possessed in Connecticut except by zoos, aquaria, circuses, laboratories, research facilities, municipal parks, museums, nature centers, exhibitors or, for purposes of care and treatment, veterinarians, 2) establish a list of wild animals that, due to their inherent threat to agricultural crops or native plants and animals, may not be imported into Connecticut except by zoos, aquaria, circuses, laboratories, research facilities, municipal parks, schools, museums, nature centers or exhibitors, or as otherwise provided for pursuant to state law, 3) establishes that importation, possession or liberation of wild animals defined as endangered, threatened or of special concern under state law shall be subject to permits issued by the commissioner, 4) add definitions for domestic animal, wild animal, hybrid animal, import, zoos, aquaria, circuses, laboratories, research facilities, municipal parks, museums, nature centers, exhibitors, schools and veterinarians for purposes of these regulations, 5) establishes permit duration and revocation standards, 6) establishes explicit criteria for what constitutes a museum, nature center and exhibitor, and 7) establishes requirements for notification in the event of wild animal escape, 8) establishes wild animal disease reporting and prevention requirements.

The above is the context of the bill. There is no list of animals. 

At any rate, until domestic Muscovies are removed from the Fish and Wildlife regulations there really isn't much that can be done. It is currently illegal to breed Muscovy ducks. The comment period for regulation revision has long since passed. Writing your congress person might help, can't hurt.


----------



## KnowOneSpecial (Sep 12, 2010)

Four of them migrated onto my farm the day after Christmas. They have been hesitant to show my their papers, so I don't know if they're illegals or not. I do know they don't speak the native language, but when it comes to working a soggy yard they're right on that! ound:


----------

