It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
www.theblaze.com... USDA rabbit license requirement has taken another ridiculous twist. I just received an 8 page letter from the USDA, telling me that by July 29 I need to have in place a written disaster plan, detailing all the steps I would take to help get my rabbit through a disaster, such as a tornado, fire, flood, etc.
They not only want to know how I will protect my rabbit during a disaster, but also what I will do after the disaster, to make sure my rabbit gets cared for properly. I am not kidding–before the end of July I need to have this written rabbit disaster plan in place, or I am breaking the law.
t00nces2
Jun. 29, 2013 at 11:04pm
Dear USDA, My plan is to eat the rabbit should an emergency situation arise.
Thank you.
Jive Mickey
Jun. 29, 2013 at 11:09pm
So give them a disaster plan:
Step one … grab the rabbit.
Step two … stuff rabbit in shirt.
Step three … run like hell with rabbit to safe location.
Step four … when safe, remove rabbit from shirt.
Step five … give the rabbit a carrot.
See … no big deal.
bobmccarty.com...
Finally, it was time for the inspection at the Hahne’s home. Marty decided to ask some questions.
“My friend has a snake,” he said. The inspector quickly told him they don’t regulate snakes.
“No,” Marty said, “I mean he feeds his snake rabbits. He breaks their necks and drops them in the cage for the snake’s food. Does he have to have a permit for that?” Again, she told him there’s no regulation for that.
“So I could break my rabbit’s neck and feed him to my friend’s snake and I wouldn’t need a license?” Marty asked.
“Correct,” she said, “But you need a license to use him in your magic show.”
Within an hour after the incident at the library, librarians at the other nine libraries in the system had heard what happened. By the next morning, the lady had emailed every library in the state of Missouri — close to 700 libraries! She informed everyone that Marty could cause problems because of his rabbit!
Originally posted by defcon5
This is really not that shocking to me, and it's not as unnecessary as you might think at first glance.
Animals used in any type of entertainment endeavor have historically been abused, and often killed in inhuman ways. They work in environments involving stunts, pyrotechnics, etc... They are being used in that way to generate a profit for the entertainer, unlike someone using them as “feeding”, or livestock. As an example, this is why you now see blurbs at the end of movies stating “No animals were harmed during the filming of this movie”.
Originally posted by jude11
But..."Disaster Plan" is going too far IMO.
When the SHTF, it's every bunny for themselves.
Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by jude11
News stories, especially from “sensationalist” sources like “The Blaze”, often skew the facts of a story, or leave out pertinent information that makes the story less “spectacular” sounding. I would have to a some digging to find the truth behind this, and I just don't have the time ATM. However, I'm suspecting that its not “Just rabbits”, but any "performance" animal falling under the USDA's Animal Welfare Act.
Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by jude11
It has to do with the way that the law works. There are laws applying to the use of animals in entertainment, but there are no federal laws on animal ownership in general that I am aware of. Most laws applying to animal ownership are local ordinances, and state laws regarding agricultural animals. I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that the legal definition of “performance animals” applies to all “mammals”, and that is why he got dung.
It obviously does not apply to reptiles or insects (for example), as those are considered vermin and pests. If it did, then a company shooting a movie could get in trouble for spraying for mosquitoes, or have to ensure that none of their camera equipment rolled over a “green anole” (those little lizard buggers that are all over Florida where many movies are filmed).
So while it seems silly, its a byproduct of how the legal system works and defines things, more than an intentional waste of taxpayer money.
Originally posted by defcon5
One more thing I forgot to mention.
Originally posted by jude11
But..."Disaster Plan" is going too far IMO.
When the SHTF, it's every bunny for themselves.
The reason is because of lessons learned from disasters like in Louisiana. Do you really want the local zoo to leave their animals caged up to drown, or be electrocuted? Would you rather that the local “big cat sanctuary” turned its animals loose to fend for themselves in the local neighborhood, and endanger the public?
While it seems asinine for a rabbit, the fact is that the laws are most likely written in general terms that apply to all “mammals” or something similar. So while it again might seem asinine to know what a person is going to do with their trained performance rabbit, it doesn't seem quite so insane when you ask what is someone going to do with a tiger or lion... The law though is most likely written in a generic fashion.
Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by jude11
I was under the impression that these disaster plans are for more than just rabbits.
What comes to mind is during a longer term evacuation where food is being rationed you cant expect children to go hungry because some people were too bored or stupid to resist the urge to own an animal. Probably why the DHS bought all those bullets....
edit on 30-6-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by jude11
But rabbits are actually considered pests as well.
Originally posted by pheonix358
I have a question though, why is the law written in a generic fashion. Should it be!