Should out-dated government laws be changed to help animals live a better life, or remain intact where hunting is legal, but keeping a non-native bird is not, and in danger of being euthanized?
The Migratory Bird Act was intended to protect wild corvids (ravens, crows and more), instead it takes the power out of a rescuers hands to help a bird if they can't get it to a federal or state rehabilitator.
These birds are not an endangered species, and they are found from Africa to Antactica. The government does not have the resources to take on the responsibilities of rescuing, rehabilitating and releasing them. Why not take that handful of us that have years of experience with these birds and let them be allowed to take some of that responsibility, given that we are proven to know what's necessary to keep these birds healthy and housed.
I try to preserve life at a great quality; not destroy It. Why take a perfectly healthy, happy bird, that has been bonded to his human companion since he was 6 weeks old, and euthanize him because his owner doesn't have the proper permit? Why not work with the owner to get the proper permit?
I've been rescuing crows and ravens for 8 years, with many veterinarians, and even other permitted rehabbers have given me birds. Would they do this if they thought I wasn't up to task or knowledge?
Just sayin' Maybe it should be determined on a case by case situation.