Fed's: We're here to confiscate your 150 year old dead seagull

[Maine-ah]

"According to Tutone, Robert Rothe and Eric Holmes, agents from the Department of Interior, went to Cappy's Thursday to confiscate a mounted seagull she purchased more than 20 years ago. The gull was mounted in 1854 and is under glass in a gilt frame hanging, appropriately enough, in the Crow's Nest — the upstairs dining room." (snip)

The common seagull, a scavenger thought of by many as the East Coast's vulture, spends nearly all of the year in coastal Maine. Still, they are considered migratory birds. "I'm still not clear whether seagulls are considered an endangered species," Tutone said.

Tutone said the agents did not care that "this piece of history is 150 years old and was mounted when there was a bounty on sea gulls. They want me to take the bird out of the frame and turn it over to them … It is so old it will fall apart and be just a collection of feathers."

Tutone, who purchased the gull at a sea captain's auction more than two decades ago, said she is sadden and disappointed to be forced to have the bird removed from her establishment. She also feels, to some extent, it is a waste of taxpayers' money for agents to worry about confiscating antique birds when there must be more serious issues to deal with.





http://www.villagesoup.com/Community/story.cfm?storyid=...

[booley]

1. And you know

that cons are going to see this story and say "See, that's why we should get rid of the endangered species act"

[mike_c]

2. I'll sleep better tonight knowing those guys are on the job....

Sheesh.

[acmavm]

3. I wonder if these gull confiscating morons think that they really

accomplished something?

[bigluckyfeet]

6. I Just feel

So SafE!

[Homer Wells]

4. Why are they doing this, and under what authority?`

[Maine-ah]

5. fucked if I know, all the info is in the article at the link.

some customer called it into the feds. I can't even believe they bothered with this.

[HereSince1628]

7. I suspect it's under the International Migratory Bird Treaty.

Probably from a complaint by a disgruntled customer. Lots of people now object to dead animals on display.

[Maine-ah]

9. it does have to do with the Mirgratory Bird

however, all they are doing, is taking it, documenting it, and putting it in a museum. Once that thing is out of the frame it's most likely going to fall apart, it's 150 years old, and was dead and mounted b/f the law went into effect, it should be grandfathered. They should have just left 'em alone. That was also not the only dead animal mounted in the place, and if the customer had a problem with that, then they could have found somewhere else to eat.

[HereSince1628]

13. In general, it takes a special permit to have a specimen

protected under either the MBA or CITES.

[Maine-ah]

14. then they should allow them to get the permit, if

that is what's required. They are going to destroy it when they take it out of the frame.

[HereSince1628]

18. Yes, well, to law enforcement, it's about not having the permit

not about the specimen. And it's really not about the importance or beauty of the mounted specimen.

The honest truth is that 1) specimens of gulls are a dime a dozen in ornithological collections because the birds nest in colonies and have been easy targets; 2) the probable truth is in an era of molecular biology many university biology/zoology departments have no more respect for such specimens or interest in their preservation. Many of these departments have sacrificed their collections to meet the space requirements for lab workspace and equipment thatbrings in a lot more overhead dollars to the institution.

[Homer Wells]

15. If this is the case,

then I think they should immediately arrange to have this specimen donated to a local museum or naturalist society; perhaps even the Smithsonian.

This is a piece of history, and not just some bird that has been illegally destroyed for display. There Was no IMBT at the time of this particular birds demise.

[Maine-ah]

16. that's what the feds are doing.

but they're taking it from the frame, it's going to get destroyed most likely in the process.

I'd be surprised if they didn't already have at least one of these kicking around anyway.

[jimshoes]

8. First they came for the stuffed seagulls

next they'll come for your wooden Indians. Then they'll take your chia pet. Seriously though, maybe they found out that there was a hidden jewel inside the bird, or something valuable along those lines and just wanted to take the carcass to get at the loot.

[Maine-ah]

12. LOL, don't touch the giant Indian,

they'd have a fight on their hands.
OR the Paul Bunyan statue.

[Warpy]

10. I hope they have contacted a lawyer

because that mounted seagull falls into the same category as scrimshaw from the same period: illegal now, legal then and now an antique.

Alternatively, call one of the pricey auction houses in NYC and have it appraised. Tell Uncle Sugar he can have it when he pays fair market value for it.

In other words, the law is on their side in this one. They just need to use it.

[Generic Other]

11. Why did they ever want to do this to a seagull?

And who'd want to hang it up? Ick.

[radfringe]

17. who are the feds?

Did she get their names/phone number? they might be interested in the ORYX horns my knuckledragging neighbor has mounted on a tree

it use to be the whole head, but two years in PA rain and snow destroyed the rest of it leaving only the antlers

would love to see the feds pay him a visit to confiscate the horns

[peacefreak]

19. I am so proud my tax dollars are so well spent.

Are these the same folks who removed the koi from the China Rose in Freeport & Brunswick? Way to go, guys

[MethuenProgressive]

20. Taxidermy? What about the mounted ducks, fish, and bucks?

Seagulls ain't migratoy. Not since McDonalds.

[mtnester]

21. Jayzus, when did I walk into bizarro world?

And when can I leave it?