HUNTERS - BELOW IS A COPY OF THE LETTER I RECEIVED THIS MORNING FROM JACK JACKSON OF CONSERVATION FORCE! I urge you to read it, act on it, and pass it on to as many people in the hunting world as you possibly can!! Please give what you can, as the very continuation of hunting as we know it, is at stake!!!

Thank you,
Aaron Neilson


June 26, 2009

RE: Offense Campaign Strategy and Need


Dear Supporter,

Since January, Conservation Force has filed 19 federal complaints, many containing four to five separate legal claims, from San Francisco to Washington, D.C. We may need to double that number before the year is out. There is nothing in American conservation history that matches it, nor is there ever again likely to be an equal. It is the most direct, definitive, important fight to save international hunting and related conservation that has ever taken place and on a scale never before imagined.
The creeping losses of hunting have been staggering and are now undeniable. They can’t lie to us anymore. Such a massive loss of hunting on so many fronts without the very best fight we can make is not an option.
So, what is all of this about? An unwritten U.S. policy has evolved against using hunting as a conservation tool. The practices growing out of that policy fly in the face of the modern concept of sustainable use and all it stands for. This is the fourth Administration to knowingly refuse to issue enhancement permits even for the best, most renowned conservation projects in the world. Not one permit.
That is not all. Port inspectors and Interior Department Solicitors have adopted an attitude that trophy importation is unfavored trade that should be suppressed. Today trophies are seized whenever there is the smallest clerical mistake without any consideration of the value of the trophy, or of the benefits of the trade. There is an increasing trend towards seizure and forfeiture in defiance of protective legislation passed by Congress, such as the innocent owner defense and proportionality tests. They treat hunters like criminals and trophies as forbidden “contraband.” This is all unrelated to the legality of the hunt or the authenticity of the trophy and demonstrates absolute contempt for the underlying conservation benefits of the hunting. It has taken far too long to discern the enormity of the problem and the impact it is having on hunters, hunting and everything related to and dependant on hunting. It must be stopped now, not tomorrow.
In another policy against hunting, in September 2007 the wholly independent USF&WS International Affairs section codified 100 pages of internal CITES regulations of which many parts were first suggested by animal rights organizations averse to all “recreational hunting.” The Service represented that they were merely implementing longstanding CITES resolutions, but instead they codified regulations that defy CITES resolutions intended to further hunting. We are challenging those regulations head on in the seizure cases across America.
One of those regulations now mandates that the USF&WS make its own biological and management findings before accepting CITES quotas adopted by the 177 nations at Conferences of the Parties or exporting countries’ findings. This is proving to be a far greater barrier to imports and a burden on foreign programs and hunters than some might think. Those USF&WS divisions have an attitude that trophy import applications are “a low priority,” that it is “disfavored trade that normally should not be permitted,” and that they are “a regulatory branch of the Service, not a public service or a unit with such management concerns.” The custom and practice is to stall, delay and discourage such permits. It is a policy against hunting and hunting-based conservation that we can no longer afford to ignore. These regulations are nails in our coffin.
One of the startling wake-up calls was the polar bear listing. Our government expressly stated that it could not take into account the conservation benefits of the Canadian hunting program and, worse, could not even consider the “efficacy” of the listing. Then, when we tried to save the trophies trapped in Canada, the Oakland Federal Judge held that she had considered the hunters’ interest in their trophies already taken but accorded it no weight. (I will argue that before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals sitting in Alaska on August 5.) The government lawyers argued and the Oakland Judge pronounced that the hunters merely needed to apply for enhancement permits under a different provision of the MMPA. Well, we filed those permits for the very best possible population and they were outright denied. That necessitated a third polar bear suit. This is not about just the polar bear. Hunting has been wholly removed from the conservation equation when it has proven most important, and with it, the personal interest of hunters has been wholly disregarded. We can’t let this precedent go unchallenged. It is clear that no one will act for us.
All our options have failed and we have no time for hesitation. We must reverse the momentum against hunting as a conservation tool to hold on to what we have. All other options have been exhausted. Some battles have already been lost before we went on the offensive, such as the importation of cheetah and the millions of dollars of seized trophies that have been forfeited. It is time to apply the force of law before the largely unwritten policies and practices become more imbedded.
We did not pick the time as this offensive is the last resort, but we are smartly picking the cases and issues as we have had “smart” conservation projects in the past.
So what is so important about the markhor suit? I’ll never hunt straight-horned markhor, neither will most of you, but it is the best test case. Believe me, if we can’t win that suit, we can’t win any. For more reasons than can be listed here, it is the most perfect case. Decades of work and strategic planning have determined that this is the best case to demonstrate the grievances. International Affairs of USF&WS has undeniably admitted in the Federal Register that the ESA is obstructing the program, that it is hunting-based and hunting has caused a “significant increase” in the markhor population (more than 20-fold) and the program warrants special trophy import treatment (import permits). It is the most renowned, award-winning, hunting-based sustainable use program in the modern world – probably ever. Naseer Tareen and STEP have joined us in the suit. Naseer heads the regional IUCN Sustainable Use Specialist Group and the Society for Torghar Environmental Protection (STEP) which operates the Torghar Hills program that filed the downlisting petition. This is as much a breakthrough as when we were able to get the Inuvialuit Game Council to join in the polar bear suit and when we represented Mongolia and Tajikistan in the argali suit in the past.
While the markhor (and wood bison) is the best possible hope for legal enforcement of ESA enhancement permits and all that could mean, the elephant suits are the best to challenge the adverse attitude towards import of CITES Appendix I listed species. The delay and denial of elephant import permits is because International Affairs insists upon making its own biological findings while contradictorily treating such permits as low priority. Both violate the written stipulation to the elephant suit we won in the 1990s. In Mozambique they took 10 years to process the permits and could not make a non-detriment finding when it was only two trophies per year even though those two were in a project area developed by CAMPFIRE leaders to emulate that program. There was no action in four years on applications for the Niassa Reserve, which is one of the most promising programs in the world.
We’ve had to send a notice of intent to sue because of the delay in processing Tanzania permit applications. It has the second largest elephant population in the world, but for the second consecutive year permit applications are too low a priority for the USF&WS to make all the self-imposed biological findings until after the hunting season is over. We were only going to sue for Mozambique, but that case has been allotted to the Chief Judge that heard the 1990s elephant suit and the stipulation the Service is now ignoring that it would not behave like this again. In July, when we file the Tanzania and Zambia elephant suits, they will be allotted as related cases to that same judge who should take a dim view of the violation of the stipulation in his earlier case. We are also working diligently to downlist the elephant of Mozambique, Tanzania and Zambia to Appendix II with an annotation that it is for trophy hunting trade only – then no import permits will be necessary at all. That CoP is scheduled for next March. In the meantime, we will be using these elephant to overturn the Service’s illegal CITES scientific review requirements codified in September 2007 that apply to all Appendix I species.
The same smart selection is being made with the seizure cases. We are filing court claims when the trophy owners are innocent of any wrongdoing, such as when an airline loses the CITES documents and when the exporting government makes a clerical or technical mistake. Until now, trophies were routinely forfeited in those cases.
The litigation blitz is costing Conservation Force $13,000 per month for paralegal assistants and $3-4,000 per month in court-related out-of-pocket expenses. Believe me, we run a tight ship because this will get bigger with motions and interventions before it gets better. If we don’t do enough, the losses are likely to be forever.
Simultaneously, we are dealing effectively with other crises as they arise. We are doing all we can to prevent the African lion from being listed on Appendix I of CITES, to maintain argali hunting, particularly in Mongolia, to facilitate ownership and conservation of listed exotics in Texas, and to protect the right to travel with firearms. These are the most pressing crises of the moment and we are on top of it all.
No half-hearted commitments, no flinching. It is time to be a force to be reckoned with; the force of the law. Contributing to Conservation Force right now is one of the most important things you will ever do. It is showdown time. One of the most definitive times in history. You will not see anything like it again. Please help.


Thank you,

John J. Jackson, III
President, Conservation Force

My PH was telling me that wild hunting in Africa is coming to an end. We might be the last generation.

So does that mean we should all stop trying???

Of course not. The current administration with it's left wing influences can only bode ill for hunting.

Aaron, I have heard not so good things from who I think is a reliable source about John. I have a friend who he is representing $5000.00 up front. Too early to tell on that case and I could be wrong. Before I would send anyone money I would need a bunch of details on this org.

I do not believe that is what JohnHunt was getting at in the least.

We definitely all should be trying anything and everything possible to keep the sport alive.

There is however such a concept as reality.

I have been hearing thru various sources, some of which I feel are very knowledgable, and the basic concensus is that 2010 is going to be the pivotal year as far as the future of hunting is concerned in many places around the world.

Yes people need to be writing/calling/sending telegrams, whatever to their elected officials and making their wishes known.

Hunters and fishermen should be using their voting power and discussing these issues with their friends and neighbors and getting politicians that back measures that endanger hunting and fishing, out of office.

But even with all that we, hunters can do as a group, the odds are stacked against us on many fronts.

The real anti hunting forces, HSUS, Green Peace et al, have had a couple of decades now to spread their message rather covertly in many cases, and in the case of HSUS, they have gained a huge following of people, that in many cases are unaware of the organizations real objectives.

More troubling than that following is the fact that the HSUS has developed real power within our countries political system on practically all levels, from city/county/state, all the way to national level.

While this is doom and gloom, and many will not agree with it, I do really believe that hunting as we know it today, will be a thing of history in the next 5 years, and that those of us 30 years old and older, are the last generation of hunters in the broad sense of the term.

I do not believe that hunting will completely die out, world wide, but I do believe that what will be looked upon and allowed will be radically different than what we know today.

This is all just my opinion, and I hope I am 100% wrong.

Jeff - All I can say is this! Please show me anyone who is fighting for the rights of international hunting more than Conservation Force?? I too have heard some of the rumors about John and the rife between him and SCI. SCI is apparently upset that John has supposedly taken credit for some things they claim to have accomplished, etc. I of course don't know all the facts, but WHO THE HELL CARES???? Are we concerned with the Issues at hand, or who should get the glory?? Jeff I am on the insider's e-mail list for Conservation Force. I am copied on all the countless number of letters, lawsuits, motions and filings made by John and Conservation Force! Regardless of whether everything he does is agreed upon by all, at least he is doing it!! I mean this with the sincerest emotion. If you saw everything that I see from him, NO ONE would question his sincerity, his work ethic, and his tireless effort put forth to help protect our precious sport!! Please take my word for it, GIVE GENEROUSLY!!

You mention that you have a friend that is "representing $5,000.00 up front", I don't quite follow????

Thanks,
Aaron

Cites permit ran out 3 days before the shipment arrived because of the hunting company. Customs seized leopard. My friend hired John he is an attorney right? $5000.00.
Aaron, I hear good thing about you. I will take your word he is one of the good guys. I still would like to know more about the org.

quote:

Originally posted by jeff h:
Cites permit ran out 3 days before the shipment arrived because of the hunting company. Customs seized leopard. My friend hired John he is an attorney right? $5000.00.

What is the problem?

They seized the leopard skin and were going to destroy it. My friend appealed and they denied his appeal. Hired John I don't know what has happen other than he has a $5000.00 retainer.

Jeff - Your are correct, he is an attorney and often represents such cases!

Here is a link to the "projects" page at www.conservationforce.org http://www.conservationforce.org/projects.html

In 2003 I shot a Big Polar Bear in the Gulf of Boothia, an area that was scheduled next on the list for importation until all the Polar Bear crap started. I was one of about 14 guys who had bears from that location, trying to get them back into the U.S. John has worked tirelessly on our behalf for several years now, and honestly has never asked for a single dime as direct payment. Of course they have asked for donations, just as the letter above indicates, but never once has he asked for payment directly related to my case! Unfortunately I think we will continue to lose, but he continues to file motions and suits, and I continue to get the SAME lame rejection letters from the USFWS in response to his motions, etc.

I understand speculation, and I appreciate different opinions. I can only comment on my personal experiences over the past 5-6 years with Mr. Jackson, they have all been positive.

Correct me if I am wrong ...

It seems to me the core issues or problems which are mounting are essentially within the USA and not in Africa.

African hunting seems to be just fine in relative terms, the issues maily relate to the importing of trophies.

The other problem that will become a core issue into the future is the exporting of hunting weapons on aircraft, that will be a big problem into the future IMHO

Unfortunately a large proportion of USA chaps took a gamble collectively and voted in the Obama crowd, you are reaping the results and I dont know how you can turn it around as they will chip away at your rights and push their socialistic ideas upon you more and more and this will also effect your rights as individuals to hunt, export guns, and import trophies

You need some bright ideas to turn the ship around

Cheers, Peter

Good summary, Peter. I'm getting a bit long in the tooth and my safariing days are drawing to a close, but I'd sure like to see the situation continue, as African hunting is a unique experience and I hope access to that destination remains available for a long time to come.

Peter - You're right about one thing, these problems too often originate in the LIBERAL U.S.! But make no mistake, as seen with Lion hunting in Botswana and now the closing of hunting in the Botswana-Delta areas, just as an example, this is not just a PROBLEM in the U.S. Give an inch and they will take a mile! Africa promises to be the BIGGEST loser of all, if these CITES up-listings are allowed to happen.

AAron

My personal thoughts are that the main issues with Africa are with the BIG CATS and of course Elephant to some degree ... CATS have become a problem mostly since the SA Canned Lion fiaso surfaced some years ago and that is focusing criticism from some quarters on these species. It will be a problem into the future.

Ele are a separate issue with some cause for concern, but as their numbers are increasing dramtically rather than decrease, I dont think it will be a big problem, albeit there are concerns in some countries.

Plains game and cape buff will not be a problem, in fact some countries whom in the past were a bit shy have now realised the business potential with hunting wild life

I am generally very optimistic, although one or two Southern Africa countries might be of concern !!

I am heading for a (three month) personal vacation/trip to Southern Africa in the next three weeks or so, I can report back after with a more informed opinion possibly !!

Cheers, Peter

Balla - You are again correct, the biggest problem is with the cats, lion in particular. But like I said before, give an inch and watch them take a mile!! That's what worries me most!

If someone is complaining about having to pay a lawyer a retainer (especially one as low as $5K), then they're more likely to be the sort of person who will stiff a lawyer on a bill. There's nothing wrong about JJ asking for a small retainer from someone he has likely never met before.

John Jackson has been a tireless advocate for all of us. I have personally had two major issues with U.S. F&W the last couple of years. The first was the confication of several leopard trophies from Namibia because USF&W suddenly decided they didn't like the locking tags Namibia was using. Mine was one of them. Jackson handled this situation for us all, pro bono, through is Conservation Force organization. He was successful, with all of these leopards returned. (Namibia has changed their tags to be in compliance with USF&W's desires.)

Jackson is also an attorney, trying to make a living, and he cannot handle all cases for free, nor should he. I gather that he tried to make a distinction between an individual problem and a situation that could have larger implications for hunters in general. Expiration of a permit seems more of an individual issue, and probably should be handled on a case-by-case basis. Last year Donna and I had Botswana ivory seized because USF&W thought they had been "in transit" in South Africa for too long, and they wanted to see "in transit" CITES permits. I paid Mr. Jackson $5000 to do the legwork (and paperwork) on this, and he was successful in getting our tusks released (which I consider a miracle). He will not be successful with every attempt; an expired permit, no matter whose fault, is a problem. But I do believe that John Jackson is one of the best friends we hunters have, and I simply have no idea how he is able to do so much for all of us, truly for so little . . .
Regards, Craig

As always, I bow to Craig's wisdom. I was an independent contractor who produced SCI's publications from 1983 to 1999, and John Jackson stood tall above most of the club's presidents during my tenure -- especially in the legislative arena. His Conservation Force -- and SCI -- are all we have fighting for hunters on the international level. Both need to be supported.

Bill Quimby

quote:

Originally posted by billrquimby:
As always, I bow to Craig's wisdom. I was an independent contractor who produced SCI's publications from 1983 to 1999, and John Jackson stood tall above most of the club's presidents during my tenure -- especially in the legislative arena. His Conservation Force -- and SCI -- are all we have fighting for hunters on the international level. Both need to be supported.

Bill Quimby

I stand corrected. Thanks for the info!