Posted on 08/06/2002 6:03:00 AM PDT by serinde
We were both riding in the back seat of the car, on our way to a concert. We were talking back and forth about minutia, and then "J" turned to me and said.
"You'll never guess who called me today."
"Who," I responded.
"Someone from the USDA."
"The USDA?" My mind started to whirl. I have always associated the U.S. Department of Agriculture with those little labels you see on milk, poultry and beef products. I knew intellectually that they encompassed a much larger role than just that, like farming and food subsidies and agricultural research and what not, but it was all I could think about at the moment. I pulled my thoughts back together as "J" continued.
"Yeah. They told me I needed a license to run a petting zoo."
"What?" I was incredulous. I think if my eyebrows had gone any higher they would have hit the roof of the car.
"Yeah. I got a call from a lady at the USDA. She asked me if I was "J" and I said yes. Then she asked me if I ran a petting zoo, and I told her yes again. Then she informed me that they had no record of me ever getting a license from them to run a petting zoo."
I was astounded. "You mean to say that you have to get a federal license to run a petting zoo?"
"That's right. And apparently the license isn't cheap, either. The size of the fee you pay is based on the number of animals you have."
"For crying out loud!" Now I was starting to get angry. "You've been doing this for some time, now, a couple of years. Why did they decide to pick on you now?"
"I don't know. I called up "A" and asked her if she had ever heard about it and she said no. Then I called up some of my other friends and they had never heard about it either."
"So what now?"
"Well, they're sending the paperwork in the mail, and after I fill it out, they will send an inspector to check out how I'm keeping up the animals. They also said that until I get the license, I couldn't hold any more petting zoo parties."
My wife, who was in the car and had been listening to all of this, chimed in and asked me, "Well, what do you think of that, Mr. Libertarian?"
I thought for a second, and then exclaimed, "I think I've got a topic for my next column!"
A quick search of the USDA website will turn up more than you ever wanted to know about how petting zoos are to be regulated. Title 9, Volume 1 of the Code of Federal Regulations amounts to relatively light reading. After downloading to a text file, the relevant sections only come to 135 pages. Enclosed within are all manner of standards and requirements, from records keeping and veterinary care, to housing standards and feeding, and everything in between.
In fact, there are even standards on the size, shape, composition, and content inscribed on the federally required identification tags that must be kept for each exhibited animal. (Of course, exceptions can be made for unweaned puppies and kittens, so long as they are kept in the same litter with their properly identified mother, residing in their properly identified enclosure.) There are minimum requirements for the amount of floor space that must be allotted to adult pygmy hamsters (9 square inches). And be sure to take care to remember that "forced exercise methods or devices such as swimming, treadmills, or carousel-type devices are unacceptable for meeting the exercise requirements " for dogs used in the petting zoo.
And how does the federal government justify the enforcement, nay, the very existence of these rules? I point you to Section 1.b. of the Animal Welfare Act: "The Congress finds that animals and activities which are regulated under this Act are either in interstate or foreign commerce or substantially affect such commerce or the free flow thereof, and that regulation of animals and activities as provided in this Act is necessary to prevent and eliminate burdens upon such commerce and to effectively regulate such commerce."
That's right, folks, the Interstate Commerce clause of the Constitution grants Congress the right to pass standards on the number of guinea pigs you keep in a single cage. But only if those guinea pigs are part of a petting zoo. Of course, with the thousands upon thousands of pages of laws that are on the books that cover all aspects of life in this country today, I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't a law out there that did regulate the number of guinea pigs you could keep in a cage, whether you exhibit them or not.
What is the ultimate outcome here? It has gotten to the point that everyone, at one time or another, has run afoul of federal, state, or local laws, and doesn't even know it. We have become a nation of lawbreakers, through no direct action of our own. And as the politicians pontificate over the need for ever-increasing regulation of our lives, what will our reaction be?
"So," I asked "J", "if you can't hold any more petting zoo parties until you get that license, what are you going to do about the one coming up next Friday?"
"J" thought for a moment, and then replied with a grin, "I guess I'll be out there having the petting zoo."
We all laughed. Both with "J" and at the absurd law. That was our response. I have to wonder what the legislators would do if, the next time they rant about how "there oughta be a law", we reacted not with fuming and bluster, but with gales of laughter. They'd probably pass a law banning that, too.
Oh well, at least I have a large arms cache... ;0)
That said, I would not be surprised to learn there has been a lot of "empire building" going on within the regulatory agencies; and that the agencies have begun stretching definitions of what falls under their jurisdiction.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one 'makes' them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted -- and you create a nation of law-breakers -- and then you cash in on the guilt."
It probably kept about 100 government employees busy for a decade writing, proofing, analyzing, rewriting, suggesting, evaluating, discussing, approving and printing those regulations about petting zoo's.
You would not want them to be on the soup line now would you?
That would increase the unemployment rate. And we have to keep the economy moving forward!
How 'bout claiming the animals pet the guests?...kinda like therapy...no, then you'd need a therapy license.
How 'bout claiming you're just giving God's little creatures a place to live?.....no, no, then you need a permit for high density housing.
I've got it!....
How 'bout if you house the little creatures in miniature mosques! Yes! A mini-Muslim Menagerie!
Let the feds deal with that!
you're right...."if it only saves the life of one hampster..."
you get the government you deserve
The most abused section of the Constitution. By claiming your activity may affect a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend that is involved in interstate commerce, that makes you involved in interstate commerse. So, the federal givernment assumes some power over you that it was never meant to have.
Maybe thats the destiny of political man -- to become a cute, fuzzy, helpless thing in need of every protection and accomodation that it requests via the ballot.
If you dare walk upright and are a user of tools, the GODverment views you as a resource to be mined.
Civilization is the suffocating accumulation of armor that envelops man as he slowly forgets he was once capable of conquering barbarism, naked, with raw, righteous fury.
I don't really have anything to say, I just wanted a copy of that quote. Thanks!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.