https://www.humanesociety.org/..._post_033121_id12183



Press Release March 30, 2021

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must turn over trophy hunting and wildlife import data to the public

Humane Society International wins major FOIA case



WASHINGTON—After five years, a federal judge in the District of Columbia ruled last night that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service can no longer withhold valuable wildlife trade data—such as tracking the imports of at-risk species killed by trophy hunters—into the U.S. The ruling to make that information available resulted from a lawsuit filed by Humane Society International in 2016.

LEMIS data, which stands for “Law Enforcement Management Information System,” is a source that tracks every import and export of wildlife into and out of the United States. This includes hunting trophies like those of imperiled giraffes and leopards; live animals like birds and reptiles imported for the exotic pet trade; monkeys used for experiments at research facilities; and animal skins such as those from snakes and lions. Organizations like the Humane Society of the United States and Humane Society International use this data to track trends in wildlife trade, petition the government for increased domestic and international protections for species threatened by international trade, and hold the government accountable for its actions.

“The Fish and Wildlife Service should have never removed access to this information and has been unlawfully withholding imperative data that impacts wildlife, conservation and global health. Transparency and justice prevailed this week,” said Laura Smythe, a staff attorney for the Humane Society of the United States, representing Humane Society International. “The United States is the world’s largest importer of both legal and illegal wildlife parts and products, and it is critical that the public has access to the full picture of the role our country plays in this destructive industry.”

Transparency is critical as scientists and the public are acknowledging the link between the wildlife trade and the threat of future global pandemics. The full extent to which the wildlife trade contributes to the spread of diseases is still unknown—but this information is crucial to solving those missing links and preventing future outbreaks.

Humane Society International has used LEMIS data to petition the Fish and Wildlife Service for Endangered Species Act protections of species such as African elephants and giraffes, which are at extreme risk of extinction from trophy hunting and trade in their parts. Humane Society International also used the data to petition for Endangered Species Act protections for pangolins. Access to this data allows Humane Society International to measure the United States’ demand for imperiled wildlife products such as pangolin scales and identify where increased protections are urgently needed.

Humane Society International also needs this information to work towards increased global protections for these and many more animals through CITES—an international agreement that regulates trade in imperiled species. The data is critical to knowing the role the United States plays in the destructive trophy hunting industry.

https://blog.humanesociety.org...ry-farmed-birds.html



Breaking: U.S. courts issue four wins over 48 hours against trophy hunting, state-funded wildlife killing, fur and cage confinement of factory-farmed birds

By Kitty Block and Sara Amundson
March 31, 2021

Breaking: U.S. courts issue four wins over 48 hours against trophy hunting, state-funded wildlife killing, fur and cage confinement of factory-farmed birds
On Monday, a federal judge in the District of Columbia ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service can no longer withhold critical data on U.S. imports of hunting trophies and other wildlife parts and products from the public. Photo by Bill Gozansky/Alamy


Animals are on a winning streak. Over just the last two days, we’ve had four terrific victories in U.S. federal courts that pave the way for progress for millions of animals. These include wildlife in the United States and overseas most often targeted by trophy hunters, animals in the fur industry, and farm animals confined in cruel cages on factory farms.

These wins are important. Many of them confront policies made by federal and state agencies that are harmful to animals and the environment and force these agencies to act with greater transparency toward the American public and the spending of their taxpayer dollars. It is also heartening to see our courts issue rulings that are in tune with the vast majority of Americans who express a clear distaste for practices like factory farming and trophy hunting, and unnecessary commodities like fur.

Following are more details on the individual cases:

USFWS blackout of trophy hunting data: On Monday, a federal judge in the District of Columbia ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service can no longer withhold critical data on U.S. imports of hunting trophies and other wildlife parts and products from the public. HSI filed the case in 2016, after the Fish and Wildlife Service suddenly began redacting huge swaths of data in response to public records requests, leaving the American public in the dark on the role that the U.S. plays in global trophy hunting and the wildlife trade. Following Monday’s decision, the agency will have to turn over the records, which we rely heavily on to petition for increased protections for species on the brink of extinction, such as African elephants, giraffes and pangolins. The U.S imports more animal trophies than any other country, and it is a leading destination for trafficked wildlife body parts.
San Francisco’s history-making fur ban: On Tuesday afternoon, a federal court dismissed the fur industry’s legal challenge to San Francisco’s pathbreaking ordinance banning fur product sales. The HSUS had intervened to defend the ordinance and successfully dismissed the fur industry’s challenge to the ban last summer, but the industry sought to keep the case alive by tacking on new (and equally meritless) legal arguments. Yesterday’s opinion not only shuts the door on this case, it also builds on a growing body of precedent affirming the right of cities and states around the country to prohibit the local sale of fur and other cruel animal products. HSUS attorneys partnered with pro bono counsel from Riley Safer Holmes & Cancila on the case.
Colorado’s state-sponsored wildlife carnage: Also on Tuesday, a Colorado federal judge ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service failed to consider the environmental impacts of spending millions of taxpayer dollars on cruel wildlife killing experiments conducted by Colorado Parks and Wildlife. Colorado set out to kill hundreds of mountain lions and dozens of black bears in a scientifically unsupported attempt to boost local mule deer populations to benefit trophy hunters. In the past few years, Colorado drastically increased its hunting quotas to implement the experiment, leading to an all-out slaughter of the state’s mountain lion population. Federal Wildlife Services agents were also deployed to kill animals using extremely cruel methods such as traps, snares and hounds. Killing mountain lions, especially at these high rates, causes increased conflicts with humans, pets and livestock. Yesterday’s ruling will halt the use of federal taxpayer dollars – which account for more than 75% of the program’s funding – to pay for this state-sponsored slaughter.
USDA’s dangerous bird flu response plan: We reported yesterday on another important win, this time in a federal court in California, in our lawsuit against USDA’s dangerous bird flu response plan, which essentially subsidizes intensive confinement practices at factory farms. The court refused a USDA attempt to dismiss the case and gave our lawsuit the green light to proceed.
These are phenomenal victories against special interests with deep pockets who spend millions of dollars each year attempting to stop the progress we make for animals, so they can continue their exploitative practices. They would not be possible without the expertise and talent of our in-house team of lawyers, who, working with leading law firms and coalition partners, are on the job every day. As we celebrate these victories today, we applaud them for their hard work and for their commitment to protecting animals from those who seek to hurt them.

Hmm perfect storm of terrorism against hunters now that a terrorist group has our information.

quote:

Originally posted by Big Wonderful Wyoming:
Hmm perfect storm of terrorism against hunters now that a terrorist group has our information.

Glad I haven’t imported anything in 6-7 years.....

I guess I'll find out what they're going to do.

Oh, well. It was a great hunt and I'll look at that cat an smile for a lot of years.

Jeremy

quote:

Killing mountain lions, especially at these high rates, causes increased conflicts with humans, pets and livestock

Someone please explain this contrary logic to me. I was always under the impression that NOT taking out more mountain lions would cause increased conflict with humans, pets and livestock. Pure and total BS!

quote:

Originally posted by Use Enough Gun:

quote:

Killing mountain lions, especially at these high rates, causes increased conflicts with humans, pets and livestock

Someone please explain this contrary logic to me. I was always under the impression that NOT taking out more mountain lions would cause increased conflict with humans, pets and livestock. Pure and total BS!

Logic?

What logic from the senile, stupid, brainless do goodness?

I’ll be looking forward to meet these pine cone eaters

quote:

Originally posted by Use Enough Gun:

quote:

Killing mountain lions, especially at these high rates, causes increased conflicts with humans, pets and livestock

Someone please explain this contrary logic to me. I was always under the impression that NOT taking out more mountain lions would cause increased conflict with humans, pets and livestock. Pure and total BS!

There is no logic. They would rather see species go extinct or make them only viewable in zoos than to see you or I hunt them and they will lie all day long in order to make that happen.

Don't waste your time looking for logic in the illogical. The only thing we can do is provide more evidence than them to people other than ourselves but to this point it doesn't seem we have done a very good job at that.

quote:

Originally posted by AXEL19:

quote:

Originally posted by Use Enough Gun:

quote:

Killing mountain lions, especially at these high rates, causes increased conflicts with humans, pets and livestock

Someone please explain this contrary logic to me. I was always under the impression that NOT taking out more mountain lions would cause increased conflict with humans, pets and livestock. Pure and total BS!

There is no logic. They would rather see species go extinct or make them only viewable in zoos than to see you or I hunt them and they will lie all day long in order to make that happen.

Don't waste your time looking for logic in the illogical. The only thing we can do is provide more evidence than them to people other than ourselves but to this point it doesn't seem we have done a very good job at that.

These same idiots want to close zoos!

Democrats gain power and look how fast this crap happens......


.

I'm guessing the current administration won't appeal this ruling. I hope I'm wrong but I have little faith in Democraps doing the right thing.

quote:

Originally posted by Use Enough Gun:

quote:

Killing mountain lions, especially at these high rates, causes increased conflicts with humans, pets and livestock

Someone please explain this contrary logic to me. I was always under the impression that NOT taking out more mountain lions would cause increased conflict with humans, pets and livestock. Pure and total BS!

I do think the sportsman and (DSC - SCI) organizations in California, needs to take the state of California to court every time the California game fish and parks hires a contractor or have their personal kill a problem mountain lion, bear, bob cat or any other animal that is protected by the state. If there is not a legal hunting season on the animal that is killed, there needs to be a court case holding the state to the laws on the books.

Why has no one sued California over its state Endangered Spices Act (whatever it is called) is not preempted by the Fed Endangered Species Act and subsequent regulatory scheme?

The bottom line children is our newly elected federal government and our liberal court system can screw up an anvil with a powder puff.

This decision, See here, applies only to the names of commercial businesses that import and export wildlife.

In 2019, HSI lost its case, See here, seeking the names of individual importers and exporters of wildlife. USFWS redacts that information pursuant to exceptions protecting private personal information and law enforcement records.

If that is what they must do, why not have PETA/HSUS turn over all data regarding their contributors. Fair is fair.

This doesn't list the donors because HSUS is a 503c3 non-profit. However, it does show where the money goes. Much of it goes to fundraising and big salaries.

2019 Form 990

Seriously though, if one does want to keep hunting, is there an avenue to protect one's identity from the next "loss" (imposed)?

Can one create a trust or other vehicle, that can import legally hunted trophies, without fear of being named / "shamed" by the anti's?

quote:

Originally posted by John Richardson:
This doesn't list the donors because HSUS is a 503c3 non-profit. However, it does show where the money goes. Much of it goes to fundraising and big salaries.

2019 Form 990

Holy shit.


Every cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket. - Eric Hoffer



See Exhibit A above...

quote:

Originally posted by John Richardson:
This doesn't list the donors because HSUS is a 503c3 non-profit. However, it does show where the money goes. Much of it goes to fundraising and big salaries.

2019 Form 990

If one takes the time to review the filing in its entirety, one will find that they included a PARTIALLY completed Schedule B. This lists major donors. Names, addresses, etc. are excluded for some reason. I am not sure why as they appear to be required to file Schedule B .

Perhaps one day this might be used to extend the statute of limitations for this organization.

HSUS is a money grab. They operate zero animal shelters. They co-oped the "Humane Society" part of the Humane Society of America's name to garner name recognition, even though they have no association. HSA actually does what they claim, run animal shelters. HSUS raises money to try and shut down ANY use of animals.
The HSUS, PETA, ALF, World Wildlife Fund, APSCA, Animal Legal Defense Fund, and many other "animal rights" groups, want to end hunting, close zoos, eliminate ALL livestock markets, truly end the consumptive use of any animal for any reason. Oh yeah, no more pets either. Very few of these groups do anything more than raise money to lobby for "animal rights". They prey on the emotional reaction of well meaning people to scam them into sending money.
The only way to combat them is to spread the word and be good ambassadors for true conservation.

Why does anybody here object to the American People knowing how many animals, and what kind, were imported?

The Court already ruled previously that the names of individuals importing their own trophies were properly redacted, this concerns commercial importers.

Who was SCI representing after hunters were in the clear?

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
Why does anybody here object to the American People knowing how many animals, and what kind, were imported?

The Court already ruled previously that the names of individuals importing their own trophies were properly redacted, this concerns commercial importers.

Who was SCI representing after hunters were in the clear?

Respectfully, I think you are missing the point. It is pretty clear to me what the opposition wants to do with this information. They want to harass the hunters .

It is simply a way to target people.

I will tell you that SCI was instrumental in keeping several names private.

I’m afraid they may file FOIA requests, which may be granted prior to the opportunity of review by objection.

This is becoming the Wild West, but not that one from cool Westerns.

However, what happened to Hillary’s servers and Hunter’s laptop?

I don’t mean fir this to be a PF post, but...

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
Why does anybody here object to the American People knowing how many animals, and what kind, were imported?

The Court already ruled previously that the names of individuals importing their own trophies were properly redacted, this concerns commercial importers.

Who was SCI representing after hunters were in the clear?

Respectfully, I think you are missing the point. It is pretty clear to me what the opposition wants to do with this information. They want to harass the hunters .

It is simply a way to target people.

I will tell you that SCI was instrumental in keeping several names private.

Indeed they were.

Jeff

quote:

Originally posted by DCS Member:
I’m afraid they may file FOIA requests, which may be granted prior to the opportunity of review by objection.

This is becoming the Wild West, but not that one from cool Westerns.

However, what happened to Hillary’s servers and Hunter’s laptop?

I don’t mean fir this to be a PF post, but...

If we want to keep hunting...people have got to quit thinking of Democrats as benign. Whether you like the Republican or not...they are ALWAYS the better option.

To Larry's point, how can we/hunter, pro-actively take steps to protect ourselves vs future harassments?

*PLEASE NOTE: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has received Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for information related to the import and export of wildlife specimens and flora into and out of the United States contained in the Law Enforcement Management Information System (LEMIS) database. Information contained in LEMIS comes from data collected on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Declaration for Importation or Exportation of Fish and Wildlife (Form 3-177). The Service has prepared a notice to provide businesses (submitters) who have submitted information on Form 3-177 with an opportunity to review the information subject to potential disclosure under the FOIA and object to such disclosure. Click the links below to review the Notice and read instructions on how to object. All objections are due by June 1, 2021.
Notice link: https://www.fws.gov/irm/bpim/foia.html
Notice (PDF): https://www.fws.gov/irm/bpim/d..._stored_in_LEMIS.pdf

Interesting. Businessmen are entitled to protect their trade secrets.

Brining this back up, as just got notice from counsel @ JFK that there is indeed a FOIA notice coming in the coming couple of days - with response required by 1 June, to a large number of US celebrities and businesses. Name & Shame campaign.

quote:

Originally posted by Orvar:
To Larry's point, how can we/hunter, pro-actively take steps to protect ourselves vs future harassments?

Harassment is a crime and a tort. Get the names of the persons doing the harassment and file criminal charges and law suits against them.

Who knows? It might give them pause to reconsider their actions.