https://www.huffingtonpost.com...4812e4b0fd5c73cb950a



Dozens Of Lion Trophy Permits Issued To Hunters As Trump Rolls Back Import Hurdles


Many of the permits were issued to those with ties to Republicans and a major trophy hunting group.

By Nick Visser


The federal government has issued more than three dozen permits allowing hunters to import lion trophies from two African nations since 2016, according to copies of the applications obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request.

The documents, obtained by the group Friends of Animals, provide insight into the often secretive permitting process to import threatened or endangered species killed abroad during luxury hunting trips. Thirty-three Americans were issued permits to import 38 lion trophies between 2016 and 2018, at least half of whom have donated to Republican lawmakers or are affiliated with the hunting lobby Safari Club International.

It’s unclear how many permit applications are currently before the agency or how many were issued in past years. The Fish and Wildlife Service did not respond to a request for comment.

The news comes just months after the Trump administration quietly began allowing more trophy hunting imports of lion and elephant parts from several African nations, saying it would review permits on a “case-by-case” basis as long as hunters demonstrate their actions to contribute to long-term conservation. The Fish and Wildlife Service also reversed an Obama-era ban on the importation of such trophies from Zimbabwe and Zambia last November, saying sport hunting would “enhance the survival of the species in the wild.”

Environmental groups filed a lawsuit against the move in March, saying the new FWS guidelines were unlawful and in violation of the Endangered Species Act.

Conservationists have long argued against the notion that hunting helps vulnerable species.

“If African wildlife is to survive the next few decades in their homelands, these elephants, lions and other animals ― coveted by hunters for their strength and beauty ― must be worth more alive than dead,’’ Priscilla Feral, president of Friends of Animals, said in a statement. “That means safeguarding habitat along with photographic safaris and ecotourism must outpace blood-drenched trophy hunting expeditions. Trophy hunting must expire and collapse from its own dead weight.”



Several people who received the permits have links to Republican fundraising efforts, according to Friends of Animals. Steven Chancellor, an Indiana businessman given a permit for a lion killed in 2016, raised more than $1 million for Republican lawmakers at an event that same year featuring then-candidate Donald Trump. Chancellor was recently appointed to Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke’s new advisory board created to update federal rules for animal trophy imports alongside many other prominent hunters.

The Associated Press said that Chancellor is an avid hunter himself, logging nearly 500 kills by 2015 according to Safari Club member records obtained by the Humane Society. That total included at least 18 lions, half a dozen elephants and two rhinos.

Other approved permits went to hunters including Philip Glass, a Texas rancher and Trump donor who took a $100,000 trophy safari in Zimbabwe that was filmed in a documentary, and Kent Greenawalt, who has donated around $100,000 to Republican candidates and committees.

While the FWS used to make its determinations about animal trophy permits public, new guidelines mandate interested parties file Freedom of Information Act requests to see the details of each application, The New York Times reported in March.

The Trump administration also proposed dramatic changes to the Endangered Species Act last week.

https://friendsofanimals.org/n...osened-restrictions/



Hunters with ties to Trump allowed to import trophies of threatened African lions under loosened restrictions

Posted by Meghan McIntire on 07/24/2018


More than three dozen permits were issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to U.S. hunters to bring back lion parts – known as trophies – from Zimbabwe and Zambia between 2016-2018. More than half of the hunters who received the permits have donated to Republicans or are connected to the Safari Club International.
The permits show that the current administration, not only has loosened restrictions on lion hunting, but is rewarding supporters.

Included on the list of 33 hunters who received a total of 38 lion trophy permits is Indiana resident Steven Chancellor, who raised more than $1 million for Republican candidates at a fundraiser at his home headlined by Trump in 2016. Chancellor, who has contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republicans candidates and committees, was appointed by Trump’s Department of Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke to its newly created International Wildlife Conservation Council (IWCC), which is tasked with removing barriers to the importation of trophy hunted animals, reversing suspensions and bans on trade of wildlife, and advising the agency on the benefits of international hunting, among other things. (Zinke, who is currently under investigation by the DOI’s inspector general in a conflict of interest probe, received $10,000 from the Safari Club for his 2016 congressional campaign.) Chancellor received the permit to import lion parts from a July 2016 hunt in Zimbabwe, according to the information which was obtained by Friends of Animals through a Freedom of Information request to FWS.

Virginia resident Kent Greenawalt, who has donated more than $100,000 to Republican candidates and committees and $5,400 to Trump, received two permits for lion trophies, one for a hunt in Zambia in 2017 and another for a lion killed in Zimbabwe in 2016. Other big GOP donors who received permits were Thomas Whaley of Marshall, Texas, and Justin Hedgecock of Gallatin Gateway, Montana.

Philip Glass, a Texas rancher who is the focus of the film “Trophy” that depicts his $100,000 lion killing safari exploits in Zimbabwe and who donated $800 to Trump, also is among the U.S. hunters who received permits. More than 85 percent of the hunters receiving permits were represented by attorneys from Conservation Force, a pro-hunting organization whose president, John Jackson, was also appointed to the IWCC. Conservation Force has also sponsored studies used by FWS to support trophy hunting.

“If African wildlife is to survive the next few decades in their homelands, these elephants, lions and other animals — coveted by hunters for their strength and beauty — must be worth more alive than dead,’’ said Friends of Animals President Priscilla Feral. “That means safeguarding habitat along with photographic safaris and ecotourism must outpace blood-drenched trophy hunting expeditions. Trophy hunting must expire and collapse from its own dead weight. Let’s press for an administration that stops catering to an industry that has actually been in decline with a dwindling number of hunters.”

In 2015, the killing of Cecil the lion in Zimbabwe by U.S. dentist Walter Palmer spurred outrage. Cecil had been the subject of an Oxford University study by biologist Andrew Loveridge.
A few months later, FWS under the Obama administration placed two African lion subspecies under ESA protection; the Panthera leo melanochaita, located in eastern and southern Africa, was listed as threatened and the Panthera leo leo, located in western and central Africa, was listed as endangered. A subsequent finding by FWS under the Obama administration led to further restrictions, including a ban of the import of lion trophies from Zimbabwe and any lion killed in enclosed parks (known as canned hunting) as well as a requirement that FWS issue permits only for hunts of the Panthera leo melanochaita that were proven to be part of a well-managed national conservation program in the country where the lions were killed. The Trump administration has since loosened the restrictions, now allowing hunters to import lions killed in Zimbabwe and issuing permits in all countries on a case-by-case basis. While there still has to be a finding by FWS that the lion hunting will enhance their survivability, the issuing of permits on a case-by-case basis excludes the public and conservation experts from commenting on the findings before the permit is issued.

The African wild lion population has plunged more than 40 percent in the past 20 years, according to the African Wildlife Foundation. There are only about 20,000 in the wild and Friends of Animals maintains that killing animals doesn’t help conservation of the species. Americans make up the greatest number of trophy hunters traveling to Africa for the kills and while trophy hunters promulgate the notion that without them there would be no money for conservation, in truth, there is no evidence to support that. However, there is growing scientific evidence that legal sport-hunting actually reduces the overall chance that these species can continue to survive in the wild. Legalized hunting falsely suggests that funds are being used to ensure the protection of wild populations and that the variety of species are recovering. Trophy hunting also reinforces the notion that the body parts of these majestic animals, often the subject of poaching, are a valuable market commodity and even the listing of a species as threatened doesn’t protect them from trophy hunters.

Research by Montana State University conservation biologist Scott Creel found that when Zambia issued a three-year moratorium on hunting, the lion population stopped declining and began to grow with more cubs being raised, according to The Guardian.

Friends of Animals has proposed legislation in New York and Connecticut to stop the importation of African lion trophies, as well as elephant, leopard and black and white rhino parts. Similar legislation has also been introduced in California and in 2015 the state of Washington passed a ballot measure that prohibits the sale and distribution of products made from lions, elephants, rhinos, tigers, leopards and other endangered species. A federal bill has also been introduced that would amend ESA to prohibit the taking of any endangered or threatened species in the U.S. as a trophy and the importation of any such trophy. Friends of Animals has also filed a lawsuit against FWS regarding the lifting of a ban on elephant trophy hunting.

“At a time when lions, elephants and other African wildlife is most threatened with extinction in the wild, this administration has actually ratcheted up the false narrative that hunting can somehow save them. Killing endangered animals so their remains can be hung as a ‘trophy’ in someone’s house or office is not going to save these species,’’ said Friends of Animals Wildlife Law Program Assistant Legal Director Jennifer Best. “It is time to open our eyes and accept the overwhelming evidence that trophy hunting is detrimental to the animals and their populations. This is why Friends of Animals filed a lawsuit challenging the government’s existing, pro-hunting policy. It is time to value these animals as living beings worthy of protection in their native habitat and stop turning a blind eye to the real evidence indicating trophy hunting must end.”

The data received by FoA shows that the greatest number of permits issued went to hunters from Texas whose residents received a dozen total.
Whaley of Marshall, Texas, who has given thousands of dollars to Republican candidates and the Republican National Committee, received two permits for lion hunts. Whaley received the permits for hunts in 2018 and 2017 and he also received a permit to import an elephant trophy from Zimbabwe in 2017. Thomas Zulim of Hockley Texas, also a GOP donor, received two permits for lion trophies for hunts in Zimbabwe in 2016 and 2017.The other Texas hunters who obtained permits are Glass, Fred Rich, Amanda Henson, Robert Hixon, Daniel Welker, Mark Pease, Jason Webster, Fred Rich, Jeffrey Smithers, Oscar Taunton and Cooper Ribman, a teenager who received the Dallas Safari Club 2018 Young Hunter Award. Ribman’s permit was paid for by his Dallas Safari Club sponsor, Trevo Ahlberg, a major GOP donor, who owns a payday loan company and is a big game hunter.

Stephen Crooks of Stanton, Michigan and Lawrence Patrick Rudolph of Paradise Valley, Arizona also received two permits for lion trophies.
The others who received permits were Dan Huber of Sulfer Springs, West Virginia; Stephen Crooks, of Stanton, Michigan; Dan Ongna, of Stevens Point, Wisconsin; William Katen, of Patchogue, New York; Richard Bodkin of Remsendburg, New York; Anthony Turiello of Santa Cruz, California; David Asai of Farmville, Virginia; John Wilson of Parkville, Missouri; Jon Dagel of Florence, South Dakota; Kelly Keithly of Yuma, Arizona; Timothy Haley of Palo Alto, California; Eric Rau of Union, Missouri; Andrew Cook of Honeoye Falls, New York and James Horrocks of Highland, Utah.

I swear man... seeing these loons post peoples' names pisses me off... it is an outright call for harassment. There should be some sort of HIPPA-like protection for information - unless you have a VALID reason to see the information, you don't have a right to see it. The internet age has doomed privacy.

But I hope this means a guy I know in Alaska is one step closer to getting his tusks...

Is it legal to give out peoples name in this way?

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Is it legal to give out peoples name in this way?

Especially the ones under 18 years old. Didn't think they could legally disclose information on minors.

Some pf the ARA have been trying to get information on a lot of us for a long time. Unless one went to great lengths to protect themselves, personal information was disclosed in many cases.

I believe names can be released under The Freedom of Information Act.

Documents which are "personnel and medical and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6).

This exemption protects the privacy interests of individuals by allowing an agency to withhold personal data kept in government files. Keep in mind that by the plain terms of the statute, only individuals can have privacy interests. By definition, corporations and other "legal persons" can have no privacy rights under the Exemption 6 because there can be no objective expectation attaching against an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Occasionally, agencies or business submitters of information will assert Exemption 6 when, in fact, the proper analysis should sound under Exemption 4.

(a) The Supreme Court has reviewed the application of this exemption. It noted: First, in evaluating whether a request for information lies within the scope of a FOIA exemption, such as Exemption 6, that bars disclosure when it would amount to an invasion of privacy that is to some degree 'unwarranted, 'a court must balance the public interest in disclosure against the interest Congress intended the [e]xemption to protect."

Department of Defense v. F.L.R.A., 114 S.Ct. 1006, 1012 (1994).

(b) The Court continued:

Second, the only relevant "public interest in disclosure" to be weighed in this balance is the extent to which disclosure would serve the "core purpose of the FOIA," which is "contribut[ing] significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government. Id.

In other words, the requested materials must in some way illuminate "what the government is 'up to'" in order to justify disclosure. A request for information from the government which illustrates what you neighbor, or business competitor, is "up to" will not meet the public interest balancing test under exemption 6. The exemption requires agencies to strike a balance between an individual's privacy interest and the public's right to know. However, since only a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy is a basis for withholding, there is a perceptible tilt in favor of disclosure in the exemption. "In the Act generally, and particularly under Exemption (6), there is a strong presumption in favor of disclosure." Local 598 v. Department of Army Corps of Engineers, 841 F.2d 1459, 1463 (9th. Cir. 1988) (emphasis added). In that case, the Ninth Circuit reviewed the context of applicable Exemption 6 case law:

The Freedom of Information Act embodies a strong policy of disclosure and places a duty to disclose on federal agencies. As the district court recognized, 'disclosure, not secrecy, is the dominant objective of the Act.' Department of the Air Force v. Rose, 425 U.S. 352, 361, 96 S.Ct. 1592, 1599, 48 L.Ed.2d 11 (1976). 'As a final and overriding guideline courts should always keep in mind the basic policy of the FOIA to encourage the maximum feasible public access to government information....' Nationwide Bldg. Maintenance, Inc. v. Sampson, 559 F.2d 704, 715 (D.C.Cir.1977). As a consequence, the listed exemptions to the normal disclosure rule are to be construed narrowly. See Rose, 425 U.S. at 361, 96 S.Ct. at 1599. This is particularly true of Exemption (6). Exemption (6) protects only against disclosure which amounts to a 'clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.' That strong language 'instructs us to 'tilt the balance [of disclosure interests against privacy interests] in favor of disclosure.'"

Id. (emphasis added), citing Washington Post Co. v. Department of Health and Human Servs., 690 F.2d 252, 261 (D.C.Cir.1982) (quoting Ditlow v. Shultz, 517 F.2d 166, 169 (D.C. Cir.1975)).

Moreover, the Privacy Act of 1974 regulates the disclosure of personal information about an individual. The FOIA and the Privacy Act partially overlap in this regard, but there is no real inconsistency. An individual seeking records about herself should cite both laws when making a request. This will ensure that the maximum amount of disclosable information will be released. Also remember that records which can be denied to an individual under the Privacy Act are not necessarily exempt under the FOIA.

I was glad to see the permits issued, but sad to see the names announced.
Both announcements were written with negative political emphasis and SCI emphasis.

That's the first time I've seen any reference to an approved elephant import permit from Zimbabwe post-2014 ban. Has anyone else heard of others?

It is my understanding that with the recent court ruling that each individual permit had to go through it's own 'finding' and the way the rules are written, a 'finding' is accessible to FoA requests.

quote:

Originally posted by nhoro:
That's the first time I've seen any reference to an approved elephant import permit from Zimbabwe post-2014 ban. Has anyone else heard of others?

I have a couple pending and I have not heard anything positive.

So are lion going to become importable again? If so, I know what I'm doing next year.

To me, it makes more sense to import elephants than lions. But what do I know.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
So are lion going to become importable again? If so, I know what I'm doing next year.

Well, I'm set for May 2019 already. Wasn't planning on an import - but I'll sure take it!

Another "correlation equals causation" argument from animal rights groups that masquerade as conservation organizations.

Big surprise many people who hunt lions are millionaires. Now I know why I will not get a lion.

Stupid insinuations because someone has money.

quote:

Originally posted by nhoro:
That's the first time I've seen any reference to an approved elephant import permit from Zimbabwe post-2014 ban. Has anyone else heard of others?

nhoro...approved doesn't mean a permit will be issued and yes, I've heard of others being approved.

quote:

Originally posted by Safari2:
I believe names can be released under The Freedom of Information Act.

All good and true, but why are these individuals being harassed when they have done nothing illegal?

They hunted, is that a crime now?

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Safari2:
I believe names can be released under The Freedom of Information Act.

All good and true, but why are these individuals being harassed when they have done nothing illegal?

They hunted, is that a crime now?

Welcome to liberal lunacy Saeed!!!

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
So are lion going to become importable again? If so, I know what I'm doing next year.

My hunter just got his import permit.

That is excellent news.

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
That is excellent news.

Quite a lengthy justification process.

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
That is excellent news.

Quite a lengthy justification process.

The fact is was successful says something about your operation

Well done.

Guys,

Just spoke to Laura du Plooy/Muchinga Adventures in Zambia. They have successfully shipped two lions this year from past years with no issues with US,F&G. As Andrew said the justification process is lengthy and applies to leopard as well as lion and hopefully elephant. This is the case by case justification we've been hearing about.

I think a word to the wise here for US citizens would be to make sure if you intend to import your trophies of lion, leopard or elephant that you make certain the the operation you book with has their justification in place.

Mark

What do you mean by Justification Mark?

Thanks,

Arjun

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
Guys,

Just spoke to Laura du Plooy/Muchinga Adventures in Zambia. They have successfully shipped two lions this year from past years with no issues with US,F&G. As Andrew said the justification process is lengthy and applies to leopard as well as lion and hopefully elephant. This is the case by case justification we've been hearing about.

I think a word to the wise here for US citizens would be to make sure if you intend to import your trophies of lion, leopard or elephant that you make certain the the operation you book with has their justification in place.

Mark

You are correct and the Lion permit issued was that the operator had a proven record of conservation.

Arjun,

My limited understanding is that US,F&G is looking at the area hunted as having sustainable populations of lion or whatever, that sport hunting will enhance the area and that the operator is showing good stewardship of the area. In Muchinga's case they submitted a 180 page document "Justifying" the hunting of cats and ele. If an operator does not have that your not going to be able to import your trophy. Andrew will have more detail on this than I.

Mark

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
Guys,

Just spoke to Laura du Plooy/Muchinga Adventures in Zambia. They have successfully shipped two lions this year from past years with no issues with US,F&G. As Andrew said the justification process is lengthy and applies to leopard as well as lion and hopefully elephant. This is the case by case justification we've been hearing about.

I think a word to the wise here for US citizens would be to make sure if you intend to import your trophies of lion, leopard or elephant that you make certain the the operation you book with has their justification in place.

Mark

I have a friend in country with them right now with a lion on bait

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
Guys,

Just spoke to Laura du Plooy/Muchinga Adventures in Zambia. They have successfully shipped two lions this year from past years with no issues with US,F&G. As Andrew said the justification process is lengthy and applies to leopard as well as lion and hopefully elephant. This is the case by case justification we've been hearing about.

I think a word to the wise here for US citizens would be to make sure if you intend to import your trophies of lion, leopard or elephant that you make certain the the operation you book with has their justification in place.

Mark

I have a friend in country with them right now with a lion on bait

Keep us posted!

http://www.santacruzsentinel.c...t-african-lion-parts



Former Pleasure Point homeowner sought permit to import African lion parts


By Matthew Renda, newsroom@santacruzsentinel.com, @MatthewCRenda on Twitter
POSTED: 08/23/18, 4:26 PM PDT | UPDATED: 1 DAY AGO

A former Pleasure Point home owner and CEO of a firefighting equipment company applied for a permit from the Trump administration to import parts of a lion he planned to hunt and kill in Africa, raising concerns about whether American appetites for trophy hunting are hurting endangered and threatened animals.

Anthony Turiello, CEO of San Carlos-based Rescue Air Systems, owned a home on 37th Avenue in Pleasure Point when he applied for a permit to bring back lion parts, known by hunters as trophies, through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. He sold his local house in November.


Turiello’s application is one of about 40 such permits obtained by Friends of Animals, an international wildlife advocacy organization, through a Freedom of Information Act request to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The nonprofit requested copies of the applications of hunters who were granted permits, but Fish and Wildlife would not confirm if Turiello was granted a permit.

The Sentinel obtained the permit application, dated Jan. 11, 2017, showing that Turiello intended to hunt a male African lion in July 2017 in Zambia, and bring back “all parts, including skin, skull, teeth, and claws.” African lions are listed by U.S. Fish and Wildlife as “threatened” animals, one step less critical than endangered.

Multiple phone calls to Turiello went unreturned as of press time.

While hunters must comply with regulations devised by each respective African country in which they pursue game, the U.S. can only control the import of trophies of animals it deems to be endangered or threatened. Individual states can also ban trophy imports; a bill is advancing through California’s Legislature that would ban hunters from bringing in new trophies of African lions, elephants, leopards, giraffes, and black rhinoceros and white rhinoceros.

The Obama administration tightly regulated the importation of big-game animal parts from Africa, but the Trump administration has been somewhat more permissive.

“We are required to make different determinations before issuing permits for different species depending on the how they are protected/regulated under U.S. law,” said Gavin Shire, spokesman for Fish and Wildlife. “For import of some species that are listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, we must be able to make a finding that the activity enhances the survival of the species.”


Hunters, particularly those interested in endangered big game species in Africa, make the case that hunting the animals assists in their conservation, as they say the high prices associated with obtaining hunting permits are used for various conservation efforts.

One of the more notable examples in recent memory involved Corey Knowlton, who paid $370,000 for a permit to hunt the critically-endangered black rhinoceros. While some decried his decision to kill such a rare animal, others point out that an infusion of money can help local governments fight poaching.

“Hunters and sportsmen are conservationists, which is why we’re so committed to sustainable-use hunting,” said Christopher E. Comer, Director of Conservation for the Safari Club International Foundation. “It provides value to animals that might otherwise be poisoned or poached in places like Africa.”

Comer said evidence indicates that animals in countries such as Kenya or Botswana, where there is a hunting ban, suffer from increased poaching and detrimental impacts to ecosystem health.

“On the other hand, in Namibia for example, carefully regulated hunting has led to increased populations of species such as rhinoceros and elephants,” Comer said.

Mike Harris, legal director for the Friends of Animals, says such arguments are nonsense.

“Hunting as a silver bullet to save animals is completely unsupported,” Harris said. “Anybody with any objectivity, whether it be scientists, university professors or economists, say hunting actually puts more pressure on these animals.”

Zambia, where Turiello intended to hunt, had a three-year ban on lion hunting from 2013 to 2015. Lion survival rates increased during that time, showing that trophy-hunting temporary bans “may be an effective tool for improving the sustainability of lion trophy hunting,” according to a study published in May in PLOS One, an academic journal.

Although the African lion population’s size and range has decreased, “it remains relatively widespread,” according to a 2015 Fish and Wildlife report that listed the subspecies as “threatened,” and not “endangered.” Nearly 17,700 African lions live in 68 protected areas across Africa, according to that report.

Harris said that government corruption means a lot of the money purportedly allocated to conservation efforts doesn’t reach its intended source. The money that trophy hunting generated, while seemingly large contributions, doesn’t go very far toward saving animals from organized crime rings that make millions off poached animal parts.

“What is required is massive international intervention to not only save these animals but to address the poverty rates in Africa,” Harris said.

In the meantime, hunters are contributing to the problem by creating a legal market that mirrors the black market, Harris said.

It’s why, he says, the Friends of Animals are intent on publishing the names of individual hunters who take advantage of the new Trump administration rules as they relate to trophy hunting.

The wildlife advocates also allege favoritism in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, noting several of the permit applicants revealed by the information requests are donors of President Trump or the Republican Party.

Turiello was not on any list reviewed by the Sentinel of donors for Trump or the Republican Party.

Shire, with Fish and Wildlife, refutes these allegations.

“Permits are issued in accordance with the law and our operating policies and procedures, and processed in the order in which they are received,” he said.