Tuskless ele trophy exemption?

14 January 2016, 18:57

MJines

I am afraid that the USFWS's view is based less on the trophies (or solid science or conservation principles for that matter) and more on the fact that elephant, tusked or untusked/bulls or cows, are being shot. I think an exemption would have virtually no chance of being approved. IMHO.

14 January 2016, 21:45

Bwanamich

More chance then a reversal of current blanket status?

14 January 2016, 22:59

boarkiller

Nothing will change for better unless we get friendlier administration
My Mom used to say " It's like throwing pea onto a wall and trying to make it stick "
USFWS anyone?

" Until the day breaks and the nights shadows flee away " Big ivory for my pillow and 2.5% of Neanderthal DNA flowing thru my veins.
When I'm ready to go, pack a bag of gunpowder up my ass and strike a fire to my pecker, until I squeal like a boar.
Yours truly , Milan The Boarkiller - World according to Milan
PS I have big boar on my floor...but it ain't dead, just scared to move...

Man should be happy and in good humor until the day he dies...
Only fools hope to live forever
“ Hávamál”

15 January 2016, 04:32

ledvm

quote:
Originally posted by boarkiller:
Nothing will change for better unless we get friendlier administration
My Mom used to say " It's like throwing pea onto a wall and trying to make it stick "
USFWS anyone?

Milan,
You are 100% correct! And Hillary due to the Clinton Foundation will be worse on this subject than Obama.

If Hillary wins...it is over for ele & lion.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
J. Lane Easter, DVM

A born Texan has instilled in his system a mind-set of no retreat or no surrender. I wish everyone the world over had the dominating spirit that motivates Texans.– Billy Clayton, Speaker of the Texas House

No state commands such fierce pride and loyalty. Lesser mortals are pitied for their misfortune in not being born in Texas.— Queen Elizabeth II on her visit to Texas in May, 1991.

15 January 2016, 04:38

376 steyr

Is the answer to the elephant ban to have copies made of the tusk so that they can be brought home?

15 January 2016, 04:48

MJines

Just take lots of measurements and pictures. I would not hassle with trying to have molds made and shipped over.

15 January 2016, 04:54

Rhys

I've been away from AR for a while. Last I knew there was a restriction on importing elephant trophies from certain countries. Is this still the case, or was it made into a blanket prohibition by USFW?

15 January 2016, 05:19

MJines

It is a trophy prohibition, but that includes any elephant trophies, bull or cow, such as leather, feet, ears, bracelets, etc., not just tusks.

15 January 2016, 06:35

crbutler

The recent change was a total prohibition from Zimbabwe and Tanzania that was new.

One can still legally import to the US from South Africa, Namibia, and Botswana (although Botswana closed itself.)

The USFWS has apparently relented on having items from an elephant that was legally hunted exported(leather, etc.) as long as it is legal to import the trophy.

Its my understanding that tuskless are culls and are not part of a nation's CITES quota, and therefore not exportable at all. The export business is not really about ivory per se, but rather a treaty agreed upon limit of sustainable hunting. Therefore, I would really doubt that it is something that one would have much luck fighting to overturn with USFWS- but if one would be willing to pay "trophy" rates for a tuskless and have it taken out of the CITES quota, I would assume that its hide, feet, etc. could be exported as long as one can legally export elephant from the country in question.

15 January 2016, 10:32

Bwanamich

The whole prohibition of ele trophies, etc was motivated in response to the poaching crisis - at least that was how the various recent bans were motivated to the general public.

Too many poached elephants meant that even trophy hunting for elephants (in certain countries)was creating loopholes for poached ivory to continue being traded. The bans were/are meant to close that loophole. Ele poaching is all about the ivory.

So if tuskless hunting was allowed to be regulated and nurtured to partially fill the vacuum created by the bans to the trophy hunts, it would have NO impact on ivory poaching but still allow much needed revenue to flow? The market would dictate the hunt price and I think most hunters would still want to bring back home some tuskless trophy? Using CITES set quotas would ensure it's sustainable and anyways, removing tuskless genes is arguably a desired long term conservation result??

Why would USFWS oppose such activity?

15 January 2016, 11:49

Barry Groulx

The average person will not discriminate between "hunting" and "poaching" and the antis know and capitalize on that. F&W listens to them, and not the biologists on the ground in Africa. Hillary will indeed be worse, because at least she has a pair, but the Clinton Initiative will spell the end for elephants.

quote:
Originally posted by Bwanamich:
The whole prohibition of ele trophies, etc was motivated in response to the poaching crisis - at least that was how the various recent bans were motivated to the general public.

Too many poached elephants meant that even trophy hunting for elephants (in certain countries)was creating loopholes for poached ivory to continue being traded. The bans were/are meant to close that loophole. Ele poaching is all about the ivory.

So if tuskless hunting was allowed to be regulated and nurtured to partially fill the vacuum created by the bans to the trophy hunts, it would have NO impact on ivory poaching but still allow much needed revenue to flow? The market would dictate the hunt price and I think most hunters would still want to bring back home some tuskless trophy? Using CITES set quotas would ensure it's sustainable and anyways, removing tuskless genes is arguably a desired long term conservation result??

Why would USFWS oppose such activity?

15 January 2016, 18:09

MJines

quote:
Originally posted by Bwanamich:

The whole prohibition of ele trophies, etc was motivated in response to the poaching crisis . . .

Your whole premise is incorrect. The eyewash used to justify the action was poaching . . . the motivation was to stop elephant hunting. That is why sound science and recognized conservation principles do not matter . . . and that is why the USFWS will never carve out tuskless and treat them differently.

15 January 2016, 21:14

ledvm

I am afraid Mike is correct. USF&WS is being used like a political pawn at the moment. Nothing will change at all until after November 1, 2016.

15 January 2016, 21:31

AilsaWheels

quote:
Originally posted by ledvm:
I am afraid Mike is correct. USF&WS is being used like a political pawn at the moment. Nothing will change at all until after November 1, 2016.

I wouldn't hold my breath for anything happening after the election, even if a Republican is voted into office. No new president is going to be willing to use their precious political capital to fight USFW's regulations. The only chance to get the USFW's regulations revoked is when the POTUS is a lame duck. That will be either three or seven years after this election if we are lucky.

15 January 2016, 21:37

ledvm

quote:
Originally posted by AilsaWheels:
quote:
Originally posted by ledvm:
I am afraid Mike is correct. USF&WS is being used like a political pawn at the moment. Nothing will change at all until after November 1, 2016.

I wouldn't hold my breath for anything happening after the election, even if a Republican is voted into office. No new president is going to be willing to use their precious political capital to fight USFW's regulations. The only chance to get the USFW's regulations revoked is when the POTUS is a lame duck. That will be either three or seven years after this election if we are lucky.

Not if the correct candidate is elected.

quote:
Originally posted by ********:
Ledvm,

I wanted to take a moment to thank you for the incredibly nice post you wrote about me. My brother Don and I are both big hunters and 2A guys. We have both been reading this forum for years albeit I have always kept some anonymity. Anyway i came across your post and just wanted to shoot you a PM to say thank you for the nice words. We are going to win this thing and it will be a great for all of us in the shooting/hunting community.

I truly hope our paths cross at some point! Thanks again!

Eric Trump

15 January 2016, 21:39

MJines

quote:
Originally posted by AilsaWheels:
quote:
Originally posted by ledvm:
I am afraid Mike is correct. USF&WS is being used like a political pawn at the moment. Nothing will change at all until after November 1, 2016.

I wouldn't hold my breath for anything happening after the election, even if a Republican is voted into office. No new president is going to be willing to use their precious political capital to fight USFW's regulations. The only chance to get the USFW's regulations revoked is when the POTUS is a lame duck. That will be either three or seven years after this election if we are lucky.

I am afraid that is correct . . . particularly on something involving an issue like lion and elephant hunting that (1) impacts a handful of people, and (2) is emotionally charged publicly.

15 January 2016, 21:45

ledvm

quote:
Originally posted by MJines:
quote:
Originally posted by AilsaWheels:
quote:
Originally posted by ledvm:
I am afraid Mike is correct. USF&WS is being used like a political pawn at the moment. Nothing will change at all until after November 1, 2016.

I wouldn't hold my breath for anything happening after the election, even if a Republican is voted into office. No new president is going to be willing to use their precious political capital to fight USFW's regulations. The only chance to get the USFW's regulations revoked is when the POTUS is a lame duck. That will be either three or seven years after this election if we are lucky.

I am afraid that is correct . . . particularly on something involving an issue like lion and elephant hunting that (1) impacts a handful of people, and (2) is emotionally charged publicly.

you are correct Mike...there is only one choice for POTUS who is likely to throw the brakes of the USF&WS soon after taking office.

15 January 2016, 22:49

AilsaWheels

ledvm,

Nothing personal, but is it wise posting pm's on a public forum. If you have permission to do so, I apologize and retract my comment.

Hope your correct on your assumption, but I still wouldn't hold my breath. If Trump wins and revokes the elephant and lion regulations issued by USFW, I will be happy to buy your dinner at DSC.

16 January 2016, 00:45

ledvm

quote:
Originally posted by AilsaWheels:
ledvm,

Nothing personal, but is it wise posting pm's on a public forum. If you have permission to do so, I apologize and retract my comment.

Hope your correct on your assumption, but I still wouldn't hold my breath. If Trump wins and revokes the elephant and lion regulations issued by USFW, I will be happy to buy your dinner at DSC.

If Donald Trump gets elected...he will appoint a hunting friendly Secretary of the Interior...I have that on good word.

It really takes NO political capital to reverse USF&WS...as it is under direct executive branch control.

I don't think Eric is going to mind me plugging for his Dad...if he does...I am sure he will reprimand me himself. I redacted his username.