Unc WW,
Appreciate your assistance to escalate these points to the Fed Assoc for their consideration in their Exco meeting as they see fit.
Certainly there are more points than these that they may be able to highlight with their resources available.

To all sifus and readers, appreciate your comments and feedback
I suggest
Write to your MP with my suggested writeup below or write your own as you wish.
Amed/Add/Delete as you see fit if you do use this.
Dear YB ......

I write with great concern with the passage of the Wild Life Conservation Bill 2010 in Parliament through the 1st reading.
While I applaud the general increase in penalties for offences under the Bill for activities negatively affecting the threatened species, there is no distinction for specie that are not threatened. With the all encompassing intent (clarified with Perhilitan) of the definition of wildlife in the Bill , all wildlife short of domesticated animals (as governed under the Animals Act); the same severe penalties are applicable.
No appreciable attempt at distinction is apparent in the Bill.
The over zealousness is compounded by the following (though not exhaustive) examples
(1)opaque licensing criteria,
(2)unreasonable conditions that impinge on trade practices,
(3)carrying of arms during enforcement activities
(4)non distinction of severity of offence (eg an expired license is treated same as a suspected poacher and criminal procedures under police custody are applicable).

(1)Licensing
Criteria for approval are variable and without prior knowlege.
There is no specific requirements for approver to provide reasons for rejections.
Additional conditions may be attached at any time at the discretion of approver.
ref (Part 3, Chapter 2, clauses 12-25)
Recommendation -
Specific provision in the Bill for approval criteria to be priorly published
Rejection reasons to be specifically provided for in the Bill for timely and appropriate appeal.

(2)Selling only to licensed purchasers.
Undesirable as it distorts the market and encourages a monopoly.
Adds to the bureaucracy and cost of production of the EBN trade (1 of 6 identified for growth) with high econmic impact as outlined in the 2010 M'sia budget.
There's sufficient authority within the Bill for enforcement without the need for additional for bureaucratic licensing especially in light of the opaque criteria as pointed out earlier.
ref (Part 4, clause 41)
Recommendation -
Clause to be removed

(3)Armed enforcement officers
Apart from actions against poachers in wildlife habitat who are more often than are armed and mobile there is little justification for arming the officers in general.
Arming officers is disproportionate to threat faced by the officers in the course of their duties.
As recent events has shown, omissions and neglect may have fatal consequences to human life.
ref (Part 2, clause 8)
Recommendation -
Specific limitation to anti poaching activities in the wild.

(4)Power of arrest to the nearest police station
Disproportionate to the offence as even failure to renew ones license will be an offence under the Act and liable to arrest and criminal procedure applicable.
ref (Part 8, clause 93)
Recommendation -
Lawyer's counsel required as to the appropriate rephrasing reflective of offence.
(Suggest Feds assoc engaged lawyer for the purpose)