PrintProtect America's Wildlife Act
The method of using aircraft to control Alaska's predatory wolves is the most effective means to an end. Federal legislation to ban a state-exclusive wildlife management tool is opposed by the hunting and conservation community.
Protect America's Wildlife Act (PAW) H.R. 3663:
Introduced in first session of the 110th Congress, and opposed by 25 AWCP members, this legislation bill proposes to eliminate Alaska's predator control program which ensures the security of the food sources on which Native and rural Alaskans have survived for hundreds of years. An overabundance of predatory Arctic Grey Wolves threatens these Alaskans' food supply, and the state's science and abundance-based program ensures their food security, while maintaining a healthy, viable, and reproductive population of wolves.
This federal incursion into traditional State management of fish and wildlife would ban the elimination of predatory wolves from aircraft. Airplanes are the only efficient means of carrying out this necessary, science-based predator control practice. The system ensures that the moose, caribou, and other wildlife populations on which wolves prey, remain at levels sufficient to feed the thousands of Native and rural Alaskans who depend on the food source for survival.
Bear Viscera; ‘Bear Protection Act of 2008'
Bear poaching and interstate trafficking in their gall bladders is already illegal under the Lacey Act. This legislation would divert resources away from state and federal enforcement agencies.
Bear Viscera; ‘Bear Protection Act of 2008' H.R. 5534:
As with the PAW legislation, this federal incursion into traditional State management of fish and wildlife would prohibit the importation, exportation, and interstate trade of bear viscera and items, products, or substances containing, or labeled or advertised as containing, bear viscera, and for other purposes. Federal intervention is unneeded these types of wildlife management decisions are best handled at the state level.
March 2008 - At the urging of the Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation, a letter signed by twenty-two organizations representing millions of sportsmen was sent to Rep. Nick Rahall, Chairman and Rep. Don Young, Ranking Member of the House Natural Resources Committee, strongly opposing H.R. 5534, the supposed ‘Bear Protection Act of 2008'. The letter, which was introduced into a hearing by former Caucus Chairman, Don Young (R-AK), requested that the committee oppose the bill and give no further legislative attention to it. Read the letter to Chairman Rahall
Read the CSF Press Release
Polar Bears; ESA Listing and Importation of Trophies
Despite opposition from the hunting community, on May 14, 2008, the Department of the Interior listed all polar bear populations as ‘Threatened' under the Endangered Species Act effectively freezing any importation into the U.S. of polar bear trophies already harvested by hunters with no mechanism to retrieve those hides, skulls and mounts stranded in Canada and elsewhere. CSF, Safari Club International and other sportsmen's groups are taking the lead to retrieve those trophies for sportsmen who've invested tens-of-thousands of dollars for the hunt of a lifetime. Read the DOI Press Release
History
April 2008 - Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate's Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) and member of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus, presented a sportsmen's group letter during a Committee Hearing that opposed the listing of the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The letter was signed by twenty national hunting organizations, members of the American Wildlife Conservation Partnership (AWCP). Read the AWCP Letter
The sportsmen's letter points out that, through sound conservation and management practices, the estimated polar bear population has rebounded to three times the level of the population in the 1960s and ‘70s. The letter concludes, "An import ban arising from an ESA/MMPA listing will not reduce polar bear mortality in Canada, will harm current successful polar bear conservation and management, and will harm cash-strapped native communities in Canada. For all these reasons, the undersigned sporting and conservation groups oppose a polar bear import ban."
In his opening statement, Senator Inhofe said, "The fact that we have had two hearings on a single listing decision reinforces my belief that listing the polar bear is not about protecting the bear........ I worry that we have spent, and will continue to spend, too much time and money examining a healthy species and manufacturing ways to predict its demise, when there are hundreds of species legitimately on the list that need these scarce department resources. "
December 2007 - Language that would have limited the importation of polar bear trophies was removed from the ‘omnibus' appropriations bill in December of 2007. The language would have gutted funds, generated by hunting, for science-based polar bear research and management.
The language was opposed by the hunting community and conservation agencies along with the leadership and members of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus. A letter signed by those groups was sent to all House and Senate Members and emphasized that an import ban would harm polar bear conservation and management in Canada. A ban would do nothing to reduce the number of polar bears harvested in Canada and would severely harm the economic well-being of the native communities that must live with the polar bear on a day-to-day basis.
This is not the first time that the sportsmen's community has asked leaders of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus to stand in opposition to animal rights efforts to ban the importation of legally hunted polar bear trophies. In the summer of 2007, the House of Representatives voted 242-188 against an amendment that attempted to withhold funds for the issuance of US import permits for sport-hunted polar bears from viable populations in Canada.
POLAR BEARS: MYTHS vs. FACTS
USAID Hunting Conservation Programs
Language that threatened to deny funding for African conservation programs supported by hunting appeared in the ‘omnibus' spending bill passed by both houses. Thanks to the efforts of the CSC, the language was modified. USAID Hunting Conservation Programs: Originally, anti-hunting language in the omnibus spending bill concerning wildlife conservation programs for Africa, that incorporate regulated, licensed hunting programs stated that "The Committee is concerned about reports that USAID (U.S. Agency for International Development) directly and indirectly supports recreational, sport and trophy hunting in its assistance programs in Africa. The committee directs USAID to provide no funds to programs that support or promote recreation, sport, or trophy hunting as a conservation tool."
Members of the CSC and a wide ranging number of hunting and conservation partners brought the issue to the forefront and the language was modified in the omnibus spending package signed by the President. Although the language was modified, it needs to be cautiously monitored as to how it will be employed. The language in the omnibus bill reads "USAID shall consult with the Appropriations Committees on its conservation programs in Africa involving hunting."
After a compromise on language that threatened to deny funding for African conservation programs supported by hunting appeared in the ‘omnibus' spending bill passed by both houses was reached, Sportsmen's Caucus leaders in the both the House and Senate entered their remarks into the Congressional Record. Rep. Dan Boren's (D-OK) remarks stated that the benefit to Africa through the USAID conservation projects "...significantly reduces poaching, and creates incentives for local inhabitants to perpetuate biodiversity on hundreds of millions of acres..."
"In twenty-three African countries that allow licensed, regulated hunting, approximately 18,500 hunters generate over $200 million annually in remote rural areas."Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) said "Tourist hunting has proven to be a valuable tool to conserve wildlife and habitat and has contributed to the survival of the African elephant, white and black rhino, leopard, markhor, argali and other species." "...hunting organizations ...have a vested interest in promoting the welfare of wildlife and they provide countless resources that eliminate human suffering and improve livelihoods in remote areas of the world by conserving wildlife, growing local economies, and reducing poverty."
Jeff Crane, President of the Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation and a former Professional Hunter in Africa said, "I have seen first-hand the contributions that hunters' dollars make to the propagation of many species and to tribal economies. The CSF and the Caucus will be vigilant on this issue."
