https://www.usnews.com/news/us...rd-can-proceed-judge



Lawsuit Over Politically 'Slanted' Trump Wildlife Board Can Proceed: U.S. Judge

Sept. 23, 2019, at 11:05 a.m.

U.S. News & World Report
Lawsuit Over Politically 'Slanted' Trump Wildlife Board Can Proceed: U.S. Judge



BY JONATHAN STEMPEL

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A federal judge has rejected the Trump administration's bid to dismiss a lawsuit by animal rights groups seeking to dissolve a wildlife advisory board they said was stacked with politically connected donors and pro-hunting enthusiasts.

U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan in Manhattan said on Monday that the administration has not shown that its International Wildlife Conservation Council served the public interest, having justified it with "boilerplate" language rather than the required "reasoned explanation."

She said the plaintiffs could try to prove that the 17-person board was not "fairly balanced" to incorporate different points of view, reflecting what they called its lack of scientists, economists and wildlife conservation experts.

A spokesman for U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman in Manhattan, whose office defended the government, declined to comment.

The lawsuit was filed in August 2018 by the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Center for Biological Diversity, the Humane Society of the United States, and Humane Society International.

These groups said the wildlife board created in November 2017 by then-Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke was "slanted" to promote "trophy hunting" and the importing of body parts from "imperiled species" such as African elephants, lions and rhinos.

They also said the board violated a federal law curbing White House use of "secretive" advisory panels to set national policy, and caused harm by forcing them to divert resources to monitoring the board.

"The Trump administration has provided no reason for creating a trophy hunting council, stacking it with big game profiteers and operating it behind closed doors," the groups' lawyers from Democracy Forward said. "We will press forward in our efforts to shut down this illegal committee for good."

In seeking a dismissal, the administration had said the groups lacked standing to sue, having suffered at most a setback to their "abstract social interests," and could not litigate what was essentially a policy disagreement.

Nathan dismissed one claim involving a recordkeeping issue.


Zinke resigned as interior secretary last December. He had said the wildlife board would advise on the benefits of recreational hunting, including "boosting economies and creating hundreds of jobs to enhancing wildlife conservation."

U.S. President Donald Trump's adult sons are trophy hunters.

The case is Natural Resources Defense Council et al v Zinke et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 18-06903.

https://biologicaldiversity.or...-council-2019-09-23/



For Immediate Release, September 23, 2019

Contact:

Contact: Tanya Sanerib, (206) 379-7363, tsanerib@biologicaldiversity.org

Court Rejects Trump Administration Efforts to Shield Unlawful Trophy-hunting Council

NEW YORK— A federal district court in New York this morning rejected the Trump administration’s efforts to dismiss a lawsuit challenging the Department of the Interior’s International Wildlife Conservation Council, an advisory body composed primarily of trophy-hunting profiteers and firearm manufacturers.

“The court’s ruling is a clear rejection of the government’s attempt to shield the trophy hunting council it created illegally, stacking it with big game profiteers and holding meetings behind closed doors,” said Democracy Forward Senior Counsel Travis Annatoyn. “IWCC members are already benefiting from the Trump administration's rush to declare open season on the world's lions, rhinos and other imperiled species, and we will press forward in our efforts to shut down this illegal committee for good."

Democracy Forward is representing the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Center for Biological Diversity, the Humane Society of the United States, and Humane Society International in the lawsuit.

“With a million species threatened with extinction, many within decades, the Trump administration’s devotion to this council is shameful,” said Zak Smith, international wildlife conservation director at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). “The court’s ruling allows us to continue challenging the illegal creation and operation of the IWCC and advance the cause of endangered species that desperately need protection, not bullets.”

Federal law requires government advisory panels to be in the public interest, fairly balanced, and protected against improper influence by special interests. In a nearly full denial of the administration’s motion to dismiss, the court agreed that plaintiffs had stated legally valid arguments, including the argument that “[The administration] did not provide a reasoned explanation for the Council's creation.”

“We think this thrill-kill council is illegal, and this ruling will allow us to air the majority of our concerns,” said Tanya Sanerib, international legal director for the Center for Biological Diversity. “If we’re going to protect elephants and other imperiled wildlife, trophy hunters can’t be the Trump administration’s only advisors on foreign trophy hunting policy.”

The court also found that the case could proceed to address concerns regarding the unfair membership of the council; the secret meetings of the council; and its failure to provide certain information to the public.

“We are pleased that Judge Nathan has rejected the federal government’s attempt to keep us out of court to debate the merits of letting the trophy hunting industry advise FWS on international wildlife trade policy,” said Anna Frostic, managing wildlife attorney for the Humane Society of the United States. “We look forward to advancing our legal arguments as to why the IWCC violates federal law and is contrary to endangered species conservation.”

Former Department of the Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke created the IWCC in November 2017 with a mission of promoting the benefits of international trophy hunting. Trump's Interior Department rejected all nominations from conservation, public-interest or science groups, and instead stacked the council with friendly political donors, firearm manufacturers, and advocates for trophy hunting, many of whom stand to benefit.

Recent reports revealed that John Jackson — a member of the IWCC — represents hunters who the Department of the Interior permitted to import a lion and a black rhino killed in Tanzania and Namibia respectively. In a congressional hearing on July 18, Chairman Jared Huffman of the House Natural Resources Committee’s Subcommittee on Water, Oceans, and Wildlife referred to the IWCC as a “sham advisory committee” and noted that “clearly the administration doesn’t consider itself bound by the Federal Advisory Committee Act.”

quote:

Judge Alison Nathan

..........

So they can stack it with anti’s? Right

Just take it to the supreme court if need be. Some of our federal judges are also members of the deep state.

Just to play the Devil’s advocate in a friendly forum...I tried hard to get on that board. As a hunter, conversationist, and practicing large animal veterinarian...I thought I had a unique CV and could provide a valuable perspective and credibility. And while I did at least make one shortlist...I ultimately was not selected to serve.

When I look at the members that were selected, just between us friends, I can see the basis for the suit. Just saying...

I guess I don't get it. This "council" has no authority. They can't take any action to do anything.

Do I misunderstand the situation?

Who are the members of the board and what are their qualifications?

The council was to advise Zinke and thus I thought it had been disbanded with his resignation. And there were/are some good folks on it. Bill Brewster, an ex-congressman from OK, was the chair and a good man. John Jackson and Chris Hudson were other good members. I have the whole list in my office but not there now. I will just say though that there were a few highly questionable folks on there and it was heavily skewed with people who were conflicted.

But as Larry states...they had zero authority.

Do a search here. The whole list was post d here when formed. At the time I said they were asking for this trouble with some of the names.

The idea was to advice/ propose new regs for Zinke’s Department of Interior for public comment, adoption, and publishing. The Council could not draft regulations. Simply, make suggestions.