https://safariclub.org/sci-opp...appropriations-bill/

ADVOCACY, CONSERVATION, FEDERAL, INTERNATIONAL Jul 27, 2021
SCI Opposes Section 436 of Interior Appropriations Bill

SCI Opposes Section 436 of Interior Appropriations Bill

Safari Club International (SCI) strongly opposes the inclusion of Section 436 of the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act 2022, which is now set for a vote in the U.S. House of Representatives this week. If the bill passes with Section 436 included, it will be sent to the U.S. Senate with a blanket funding ban on the import of a sport hunted elephant or lion from Tanzania, Zimbabwe, or Zambia. This ban will have a devastating impact on species conservation and African communities. We need your help in ensuring this bill does not become law – contact your Representative today and urge them to OPPOSE the inclusion of Section 436 in H.R. 4372, the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.

Well-regulated international hunting is vital to wildlife conservation, maintaining biodiversity, and habitat protection in southern Africa. Hunting programs generate revenues to fund the wildlife conservation programs of range nations, provide communities with direct and indirect economic incentives and employment, and generate resources for anti-poaching and human-wildlife conflict mitigation.

SCI, along with 20 other organizations representing millions of American sportsmen and women, sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Republican Leader McCarthy detailing the detrimental impact this legislation will have on these countries. By effectively banning trophy imports, Section 436 of the Interior Appropriations ignores the overwhelming scientific research documenting the benefits of hunting for wildlife and rural people, and the African voice in opposition to the measure coming from both government authorities and community stakeholders. The vast majority of wild African animals live in the countries where they are hunted and have seen substantial population growth, largely thanks to the resources provided by hunting.

In response to this destructive language, Representative Jeff Duncan of South Carolina has introduced an amendment to Section 436 of the Interior Appropriations Bill, completely striking the funding ban language. SCI strongly urges all members of Congress to support this amendment and remove Section 436.

An effective ban on trophy imports is a misguided attempt to dictate the management of African wildlife, a right which inherently belongs to Africans. Congress must understand the realities of conservation on the ground in Africa, and therefore strike Section 436. As SCI works for hunting and conservation, we will continue to stand for African leadership, fight for science-based legislation, and be First for Hunters around the world.

I wrote my Senator opposing such nonsense. Won't matter to him, he's a Pelosi love child. LDK

The house will most likely pass this. The senate will have to stop it.

https://www.americanhunter.org...-appropriations-bill


SCI Opposes Passage of Section 436 of Interior Appropriations Bill

by American Hunter Staff - Tuesday, August 3, 2021

SCI Opposes Passage of Section 436 of Interior Appropriations Bill


Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a large package of appropriations bills before recessing for the remainder of summer. Safari Club International (SCI) strongly opposes the inclusion of Section 436 in the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act 2022. If signed into law, Section 436 would ban the importation of sport hunted elephants or lions from Tanzania, Zimbabwe, or Zambia.

The language in Section 436 fails to differentiate illegal poaching in African range countries from legal, regulated hunting by Americans abroad. These countries have strict regulations in place to protect these iconic species, as they are home to some of the world’s largest populations of lions and elephants.

There is no question that this ban will have detrimental impacts on species conservation and the livelihoods of rural African communities. Regulated hunting provides irreplaceable funding for conservation, biodiversity, and habitat protection in southern Africa and, without it, these wildlife species, and the communities of Africans who live with them, are put at tremendous risk. The travel and tourism industry will also suffer from the harmful and senseless elements of Section 436, even as African nations struggle to recover from the financial shock caused by COVID-19.

Section 436 is an outright attack on the right of African nations to effectively manage their own wildlife. SCI was joined by 21 other hunting organizations in expressing deep disappointment with legislators for blatantly ignoring the benefits of well-regulated international hunting to conservation.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and her conference willfully ignored a strong letter written by the Zambian and Zimbabwean Ambassadors to the United States which effectively outlines how Section 436 is an attack on African sovereignty and the effective conservation tactics of African range countries. The letter notes that “in fact, many anti-poaching operations are specifically funded by safari operators who are responsible for managing vast areas of wildlife habitat.” Additionally, “export and import of legally harvested wildlife is already properly regulated at the national level by these countries’ wildlife management authorities, internationally by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), and domestically by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).”

Former SCI Legislator of the Year Jeff Duncan (R-SC-3) fought to remove this harmful language by introducing an amendment to strike Section 436 from the bill. Rep. Duncan’s amendment was voted on “en bloc” along with 40 other amendments. Although some lawmakers sided with proven conservation strategies, the bloc of amendments failed (232 – 192).

To vote for a bill containing anti-hunting language and then vote against an amendment correcting this misguided proposal after reading fact driven arguments directly from African governments proves the lack of concern that House Democrats have for sustaining African wildlife population growth and supporting struggling rural populations.

Now more than ever, hunters must prevent Section 436 from becoming law to protect Africa’s wildlife and hunting rights. “Safari Club International is invested in exposing the harmful implications of Section 436 so that we can continue to contribute to healthy wildlife in those range countries, and defend the African communities that depend on the hunting ecosystem,” said SCI CEO W. Laird Hamberlin. “It is imperative that members of Congress understand the harsh realities of intruding on African rights and passing a defacto ban with an utter lack of scientific basis. Our goal as a country should be to uplift developing countries facing hardships due to COVID-19, instead of inflicting further harm.”

For more information on this bill package, visit safariclub.org/.

What are the odds this will be stripped out of the bill in the senate now that the Democraps are in charge?

https://www.fieldandstream.com...life-trade-petition/


“The Whole Shebang”: Petition Calls for Ban of Imported Wildlife and Animal Parts

The U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance has blasted a move that would forbid hunters from bringing home game meat from international trips

BY KEN PERROTTE | UPDATED AUG 7, 2021 2:12 AM

HUNTING CONSERVATION


On August 3, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) and Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) sent a petition to the Secretary of the Interior and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) that uses the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic to justify a ban on the importation of all wild mammals and almost all birds—including all parts, such as hides and horns—into the United States. The proposed ban would apply to mammals and birds that are properly processed in accordance with established regulations.

The petition argues that “pandemics caused by zoonoses—infectious diseases that jump from animals to people—are entirely preventable. However, the Service will only succeed in ensuring U.S. wildlife trade is not injurious to human beings and wildlife if it develops a proactive approach to restricting wildlife trade. At the very least, the Service should halt trade in known reservoir and host species—mammals and birds—and establish a system to trace the remaining wildlife trade.”


“This is a ridiculous petition bordering on hysteria by radical animal-rights organizations,” says Bruce Tague, vice president of government affairs for the Sportsmen’s Alliance. “The Sportsmen’s Alliance will fight this petition, whose only goal is to advance an extreme agenda by stoking fears around COVID-19 every step of the way…What CBD and NRDC don’t tell you is that these bans will cripple rural Africa, destroy decades of conservation work in range countries, and will result in the loss of biodiversity when fertile habitat is turned into crop fields or pasture for livestock because wildlife will no longer have value.”

Cyrus Baird, former government relations manager for Safari Club International, recently warned in The Hunting Wire that that all hunters should be concerned and active in opposition to any proposed bans.

“Typically, you will see anti-hunting advocates and uninformed lawmakers focus on a handful of African species in their attacks—the ‘Big Five’—which consists of elephant, Cape buffalo, African lion, white and black rhinoceros, and African leopard,” Baird says. “Proponents of bans target these species because they generally exist in lower numbers (with the exception of buffalo) and are at higher risk from poaching.”


The new petition significantly broadens that effort. The Sportsmen’s Alliance points out that, unlike state or federal legislation subject to debate and vote, the petition asks the Secretary of the Interior and the head of the USFWS to use their authority under the Lacey Act, Endangered Species Act, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora treaty to unilaterally ban the import of all wild mammals and birds (with a narrow exception for parrots), as well as animal parts. Such bans could create a comprehensive, burdensome, chain of custody for any animal or part imported for research, zoos, or aquariums (fish are included in the proposed chain of custody requirements).

Recent efforts at the state level to ban imports, mainly from Africa, have had mixed legislative results. California Senate Bill 175, which would have banned the importation of 11 African species, failed. In Connecticut, however, Senate Bill 925 banning the import, sale, or transfer of six African species passed and was signed into law in June. Section 436 of a U.S. House of Representatives Resolution 4372, which is still under consideration, would prevent the import of taxidermy from legally hunted elephants or lions from Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe by prohibiting funds to be used for permitting. While section 436 does not ban Americans from hunting in those countries, it prevents the Department of the Interior from using any appropriated money to issue an import permit.


The United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service regulates the importation of animals and animal-derived materials and has already developed COVID-19-related prevention measures.

“This petition is just another example of the animal-rights movement stopping at nothing to end any human-animal relationship,” added Tague. “They’ve been working for years at the state level to ban the import of African game. The House Appropriations Bill contains language that would accomplish the same goal and now they’re trying at the federal bureaucratic level to achieve their goals. This time they are not limiting themselves to African game — it is the whole shebang — all wild mammals and birds”

Safari Club International - SCI
4d ·
SCI Advocacy: Appropriations Update, Section 436.
Last week, the Senate passed a continuing resolution for the budget, extending the appropriations deadline to March 11.
What does this mean for hunting and conservation? The House and Senate passed two separate appropriations bills, which negotiations have not resolved yet. Included in the House version was Section 436, which would prohibit the use of funds to process import permits for lions and elephants from Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe - an effective trophy ban.
The inclusion of Section 436 is in direct opposition to the testimony of African governments and communities, overwhelming scientific evidence, and proven conservation practices.
SCI is fighting to ensure this language does not make it into the final bill in March - stay tuned for more updates! #StandWithSCI #FirstForHunters

While I continue to write my congressmen and senator's the response that I receive covers any thing but what I was writing about.

I am thinking that there is a disconnect some where and my letters turn to voo doo when they hit the mail box and they have a difficult time determine what I am writing about. That is my take from the responses I receive.

My wife called it something else when she receives her letter from them.

Why doesn’t that surprise me
Until we have R majority in Congress and R president it’s very uphill battle

quote:

Originally posted by boarkiller:
Why doesn’t that surprise me
Until we have R majority in Congress and R president it’s very uphill battle

BK

Republican/Democratic makes no difference. Politicians only concern themselves with activities that either help them get re-elected or enriched themselves.

Support for international sport hunting whether good for conservation or not, from a politician just isn’t a reality anymore.

They listen to fringe groups as long as they are in vogue, LBGTQ, BLM, cross dressing athletes etc.

No politician will support something that only has 10-15,000 participants, nationally. Hell, they wouldn’t support it if all 15,000 were their constituents. Not enough of us to get anyone elected, anywhere.

And you’re right Steve but at least R would not propose it, I would hope so

I heard this failed

quote:

I heard this failed

As it should. Good news for once.

https://safariclub.org/sci-sup...K79rwx9u58OjuQ-MIybo


ADVOCACY, FEDERAL Mar 11, 2022

SCI Supports Congress’ Decision to Remove Section 436 from the 2022 Appropriations Package

Thanks to strong and consistent opposition from Safari Club International (SCI), members of Congress, and African wildlife officials, the 2022 appropriations package has successfully passed through the legislative process without Section 436 included, which would have banned the importation into the U.S of sport-hunted elephants or lions from Tanzania, Zimbabwe, and Zambia.

Now, this finalized legislation is headed to President Biden’s desk for signature. Until today, the bill was still pending before the Senate, so its final language was not assured. SCI refrained from reporting this victory until all steps of the process played out, since every step represented a possibility that the bill would see more changes or be derailed entirely.

Had the Section 436 language remained in the bill as the anti-hunting activists wanted, this provision would have kneecapped hunting incentives in southern Africa. That in turn would have significantly reducing funding for conservation projects, biodiversity enhancement initiatives, and habitat protection in the region. Some of the world’s largest populations of lions and elephants that inhabit that part of the continent would have been more vulnerable to poachers, unemployment, and deadly human-wildlife conflicts as a result.

Leading up to the decision in Congress to strip this anti-hunting language, SCI members and our supporters made our voices heard in the halls of Congress by:

Generating 2,199 individual letters from advocates to their members of Congress, urging them to oppose Section 436.
Sending a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Republican Leader McCarthy from SCI and 21 other hunting organizations, detailing strong opposition to Section 436 for blatantly ignoring the conservation benefits of well-regulated international hunting.
Working with Representative Jeff Duncan of South Carolina to introduce an amendment to strike Section 436 from the funding bill, which SCI also called on all members of Congress to support.
The voices and contributions of Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Richard Shelby (R-AL) were especially important as they spearheaded efforts to remove this harmful language from the bill. Their dedication to protecting America’s hunting heritage has not gone unnoticed by SCI and our members, and we congratulate them on their successful leadership.

African government and community representatives also played a distinguished role in the campaign to strike this anti-conservation language by testifying in front of the House of Representatives and directly contacting lawmakers’ offices. Notably, Ambassadors of nations within the Southern African Development Community, Ambassador Tadeous Tafipenyika Chifamba of the Republic of Zimbabwe, and Ambassador Lazarous Kapambwe of the Republic of Zambia sent a letter directly to Speaker Pelosi and Leader McCarthy voicing their concern about the damages an import ban would have on their respective countries and the region writ large.

“I’d like to speak on behalf of SCI members, our friends across Southern Africa, and hunters the world over when I say that we are thrilled with Congress’ decision to eliminate Section 436’s anti-hunting language from the appropriations package. There are still many fights on the horizon that are equally important in protecting African wildlife conservation and the global freedom to hunt, but today we should acknowledge and celebrate the difference hunters can make when we work together to achieve a common goal.” said SCI CEO Laird Hamberlin.