Local news is reporting the hunt Knowlton bought may be cancelled by DSC if USFW denies import.

What a bloody sad situation we are in!

Everyone is screaming for "conservation" while their actions are in the exact opposite direction!

USFWS at most merely hinted that they would approve the permit back before the auction took place. Had they guaranteed it from the beginning, the price may have been much higher. Once again it seems the USFWS works against its stated purpose. In protest, Knowlton should buy a place in Canada, export the animal there, then publicly note how the USFWS not only cost Namibia money for conservation but also benefitted some Canadian province or territory in the form of property taxes that COULD HAVE accrued to a US state. Hunters should publicly vote with their feet on this importability issue.

with the current black rhino poaching that is on going in Namibia now.

Plus the outfitter who guided a client to shoot the only female black rhino in one park/reserve this year.

I think Namibia is having some difficulties, in curtailing poaching and when outfitters/PH can not tell the difference between a female and male rhino, maybe hunting should be stopped for review and further training.

Namibian black rhino hunt may be cancelled
Posted by News Desk in Hunting, News and the News Desk post series. — 11 Comments ↓

Posted: November 17, 2014

EXTRACT FROM THE FOLLOWING THIRD PARTY SOURCE: Written by Emily Schmall for Associated Press

The Texas hunting club that auctioned off a permit to shoot an endangered black rhinoceros in Africa said it will cancel if the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service denies the winning bidder’s request to bring the dead animal back to the U.S. as a trophy.
© US Fish and Wildlife Service/Wikimedia

© US Fish and Wildlife Service/Wikimedia

Corey Knowlton bid US$350 000 at a January auction that the Dallas Safari Club billed as a fundraising effort to save the endangered species. Last spring, he applied for a permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that would enable him to import the rhino’s body following the hunt in Namibia. But he’s still waiting to hear back.

The agency is applying extra scrutiny to Knowlton’s request because of the rise in poaching, said spokesman Gavin Shire.

If the permit is denied, the safari club plans to refund Knowlton’s money that was pledged to a rhino conservation fund in the southwestern African country.

“Most people that have an animal mounted, it’s their memory of their experience,” said Ben Carter, the safari club’s executive director. “It’s not always, ‘Look at what I’ve shot.’ When they look at it, they remember everything. That’s what he bid the money on, that opportunity.”

The wildlife agency began taking public comment on the permit application this month and has already heard from many of the groups that fervently opposed the auction.

The safari club has defended the planned hunt, noting that auction proceeds would go to a trust fund administered by the Namibian government to help boost the black rhino population.

The wildlife service expects to make a decision after the public comment period ends on 8 December 2014, taking into account the state of the herd in Namibia, where 1 800 of the world’s 4 880 black rhinos live. The agency also is examining exactly how the auction funds would be administered.

Last year, the service granted a permit to import a sport-hunted black rhino taken in Namibia in 2009, but increased poaching since then may impact whether any more are approved, said Shire.

Each year, the Namibian government issues five black rhino hunting permits that fund efforts to protect the species. The program includes habitat improvement, hiring game scouts to monitor the rhinos, and removing the animals’ horns to reduce their appeal to poachers. ”The aim is to re-invest these financial resources back to conservation, protected area management and rural community development,” said Kenneth Uiseb, Namibia’s director of wildlife monitoring and research.

But opponents of the auction say the programs are not worthwhile if they entail the killing of any endangered animal. “Kill it to save it is not only cruel, it’s not conservation,” said Jeff Flocken, the North American regional director for the International Fund for Animal Welfare. “If black rhinos and other dwindling species are to have a future, people must be encouraged to value animals for their inherent worth alive, not their price tag when they are dead.”

The safari club has said the hunt will involve one of five black rhinos selected by a committee and approved by the Namibian government. The five are to be older males that can’t reproduce.

Namibia sold another hunting permit for US$200 000 directly to Michael Luzich, a Las Vegas investment manager who is also seeking a permit to bring the trophy into the U.S., according to Shire.

But Luzich has received far less scrutiny than Knowlton, who said in January he hired full-time security because he received death threats after his name was leaked on the internet.

Knowlton lives in Royse City, about 30 miles from Dallas, and leads international hunting trips for a Virginia-based company, The Hunting Consortium. He has killed more than 120 species, including the so-called big five in Africa — a lion, a leopard, an elephant, a Cape buffalo and a rhinoceros, according to the company’s website.

He did not return messages left by The Associated Press for this story, but told Dallas television station WFAA in January that he believed the hunt would be managed well.

“I’m a hunter,” Knowlton told WFAA. “I want to experience a black rhino. I want to be intimately involved with a black rhino.”

I am shocked that DSC sold this without the permit in place.

Larry, there was no way to secure an import permit before the sale.

quote:

Originally posted by Richard T. Cheatham:
Larry, there was no way to secure an import permit before the sale.

Then It makes perfect sense.

so obama vetoes a black rhino hunt - i'll bet he'd approve a white hunt

http://www.news24.com/Green/Ne...horns-rhino-20141117



Namibia dehorns rhino
2014-11-17 20:51



Windhoek - Namibian environmental authorities embarking on a de-horning exercise for black rhino have already spotted three carcasses left behind by poachers, an official said on Monday.

The removal of the horns of live animals in remote areas started about a month ago in a bid to save Namibia's black rhino population from the hands of poachers.

"Since the start of the de-horning exercise, progress has been made but we are not done yet," environment ministry spokesperson Romeo Muyunda told a Sapa correspondent on Monday.

Muyunda declined to reveal how many black rhino have been de-horned so far due to the sensitivity of the matter.

During the de-horning operation, air-tracking teams spotted three black rhino carcasses in the area last week while looking for live animals to be darted for horn removal.

The discovery of the three carcasses without their horns brings the total of poached rhinos in Namibia to 18 this year so far. Three of the 18 animals were white rhino shot and killed on a commercial farm.

After virtually no incidents for over a decade, rhino poaching in Namibia has increased since 2009, with officially 26, mostly black, rhino poached so far.

Environment and Tourism Minister Uahekua Herunga called for "lifelong sentences for poachers" last week, at a hand over of 30 newly built houses for staff of Namibia's world famous Etosha National Park.

Namibia is home to about 1800 black rhino, which mostly live outside nature parks in the scenic north western areas of Kaokoland and Damaraland.

Earlier this year three Chinese nationals were arrested at Namibia's Hosea Kutako International Airport 40kmeast of Windhoek with 14 rhino horns in their possession.

They were remanded in custody and bail was refused in the Windhoek high court.

- SAPA

quote:

The wildlife agency began taking public comment on the permit application this month and has already heard from many of the groups that fervently opposed the auction.

Why does an Government agency that approves permits need public comment?

http://www.fws.gov/internation...o-import-permit.html



The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service is currently evaluating two applications requesting authorization to import a sport-hunted black rhino trophy. On November 6, 2014, the Service published a receipt of the applications (a requirement under the Endangered Species Act) in the Federal Register, initiating a 30-day public comment period. Comments must be received on or before December 8, 2014. To view the Federal Register notice, click here.

Requests for copies of applications or materials related to the applications should be sent to DMAFR@fws.gov. Comments on the applications should also be sent to DMAFR@fws.gov. Please include the Federal Register notice publication date, the PRT-number, and the name of the applicant in your request or comment submission.

October 29, 2013 - USFWS Statement on Dallas Safari Club Auction

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

What criteria must be met for the Service to consider issuing a permit for the import of a black rhino hunting trophy from Namibia?
How many import permits has the United States issued for black rhino sport-hunted trophies?
Why did the Service issue a permit for the import of a black rhino sport-hunted trophy in March 2013?
Is the Service concerned that the issuance of the first permit will prompt a flood of additional applications?
Did the Service receive public comments prior to issuing an import permit for the black rhino taken in Namibia in 2009?
How does the hunting of post-reproductive male black rhinos enhance the survival of a population?
What measures are in place to ensure that hunting trophies won’t enter into the illegal trade?
What protections are afforded to foreign species under the ESA?
What protections are afforded to species that are listed in Appendix I of CITES?
Does the United States issue permits for the import of other sport-hunted trophies from endangered species?
What actions were agreed upon at the recent CITES meeting that will curtail illegal trade in rhino horn?


Q: What criteria must be met for the Service to consider issuing a permit for the import of a black rhino hunting trophy from Namibia?

A: The black rhino is listed in Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and as endangered under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA). Before an import permit can be issued for a CITES Appendix-I species, the Service must determine that the import will not be detrimental to the survival of the species. For a species classified as endangered under the ESA, the Service must determine that allowing the import will enhance the species’ survival. The ESA also requires that any federally authorized activity may not jeopardize the continued survival of the species. To make these findings, the Service looks at the biology and overall management program for the species. Factors we consider include: the biological needs of the species, possible threats to the populations, current population estimates, management plans, legal protection (for sport-hunted trophies this includes hunting regulations and any applicable quotas), local community involvement, and, if any funds are generated by the import, how funds are used for conservation. Obtaining the information on a country’s management program may entail a lengthy consultative process between the country of export and the Service.

Q: How many import permits has the United States issued for black rhino sport-hunted trophies?

A: In March 2013, the Service issued one permit for the import of a sport-hunted black rhinoceros. That is the only permit that has been issued to date.

Q: Why did the Service issue a permit for the import of a black rhino sport-hunted trophy in March 2013?

A: In 2003, Namibia instituted the “Black Rhino Conservation Strategy for Namibia” with very specific management goals in the areas of range expansion, biological management, protection, policy and legislative framework, capacity-building and sustainability. As part of this strategy, Namibia authorized an annual harvest of five post-reproductive male black rhinos. The removal of limited numbers of males has been shown to stimulate population growth in some areas. Removing specific individuals from a population can result in reduced male fighting, shorter calving intervals, and reduced juvenile mortality. All known black rhinos in Namibia are ear-notched to assist in identification and monitoring. This ear-notching system makes it possible for the Namibian Government to select specific individuals for culling based on age, reproductive status, and other factors that may contribute to the overall health of the population.

Further, the Namibian government requires a significant contribution to the Game Products Trust Fund (GPTF) for any sport hunting of black rhino to ensure that revenue is directed towards conservation. Money accrued from trophy hunting of black rhinos has been used to fund annual black rhino counts, improved rhino crime investigation and prosecution, and to ensure the traceability of all rhino horn owned by Namibia.

The permit issued in March 2013 applied to a black rhino taken in Namibia in 2009 in accordance with a scientifically-based selection process within Namibia’s national strategy and with significant funds ($175,000) directed to the GPTF. We found that the importation of that sport-hunted black rhino trophy did enhance the survival of the species. However, the issuance of that permit does not guarantee the issuance of future permits for the import of black rhino sport-hunted trophies from Namibia or elsewhere. The review of any future applications will be based on the eligibility of the applicant, biological data of the specific black rhino being hunted, as well as any new information available at the time the application is received.

Q: Is the Service concerned that the issuance of the first permit will prompt a flood of additional applications?

A: The Service has only received two applications to date, one for a rhino taken in Namibia, which we have now issued, and one from South Africa, which we are evaluating. While we anticipate receiving additional applications now that we have issued the first permit, the Service could only issue up to 10 import permits annually (five each for Namibia and South Africa), since this would be the maximum number of exports that could be made under South Africa’s and Namibia’s CITES-approved quota. However, we have not determined whether imports from South Africa would meet the requirements for import under the ESA.

In addition, while we have now issued one permit for an import from Namibia, we have not determined that all such imports could be authorized. For each application submitted, the Service would need to review the specific facts and determine on a case-by-case basis if additional imports from Namibia could be authorized.

Q: Did the Service receive public comments prior to issuing an import permit for the black rhino taken in Namibia in 2009?

A: When the Service published receipt of the application (a requirement under the Endangered Species Act), we received several comments that supported the import of this black rhino trophy from Namibia.

The World Wildlife Fund (WWF), which has worked in Namibia for over 20 years and has provided technical support and assistance to Namibia’s Ministry of Environment and Tourism on a range of programmatic issues and species conservation activities, including monitoring black rhino populations; expansion of rhino range to wildlife conservancies organized and overseen by local communities; and development of a National Black Rhino Management Plan, supported the import of the trophy.

We also received positive comments from the Namibian Association of Community-Based Natural Resource Management Support Organization, a national body of 14 non-government organizations (NGOs) and the University of Namibia, as well as the Texas Wildlife Association, Safari Club International (SCI), Conservation Force, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Hunting and Conservation Organizations coalition, and the National Rifle Association (NRA).

We did not receive any comments in opposition.

Q: How does the hunting of post-reproductive male black rhinos enhance the survival of a population?

A: Black rhinos are very territorial. The removal of post-reproductive males can reduce competition with younger bulls, potentially providing those younger bulls with a greater opportunity to reproduce.

Q: What measures are in place to ensure that hunting trophies won’t enter into the illegal trade?

A: In the United States, CITES-implementing regulations (50 CFR 23.55) clearly state that an Appendix I sport-hunted trophy may only be used for non-commercial purposes. Selling such a trophy after import constitutes a violation of the Endangered Species Act. Sale in international or interstate commerce would violate the wildlife trafficking provisions of the Lacey Act. ESA violations carry a maximum penalty of one year in prison and a $100,000 fine; conviction under the Lacey Act is punishable by a prison term of up to 5 years and a $250,000 fine. Furthermore, the CITES requirements for black rhino trophies require that all parts of the trophy be marked with identifying information; these requirements are incorporated into the U.S. CITES regulations.

Q: What protections are afforded to foreign species under the ESA?

A: In general, whether it is a native or foreign species, the ESA prohibits the import, export, interstate commerce or foreign commerce of any listed species, including its parts or products, without a permit. The take prohibition, including harassment, applies as well. (Generally accepted animal husbandry practices, such as veterinarian care and other activities outlined in the Service definition of “harassment”, are not considered "take.")

Q: What protections are afforded to species that are listed in Appendix I of CITES?

A: In a large part, CITES prohibits international trade in specimens of Appendix-I species except when the purpose of the import is not commercial, for instance for scientific research. In these exceptional cases, trade may take place provided it is authorized by the granting of both an import permit and an export permit (or re-export certificate).

Q: Does the United States issue permits for the import of other sport-hunted trophies from endangered species?

A: The Service has found that the import of trophies from bontebok, an endangered antelope from South Africa, benefits the species by supporting the overall species management program established by the South African Government. The Service routinely issues import permit for sport-hunted bontebok. If we can determine that the import will enhance the survival of the species, and not jeopardize the continued existence of the species, the Service could issue import permits for sport-hunted trophies of other endangered species. Under the Endangered Species Act, otherwise prohibited activities, including import, export, take, and interstate or foreign commerce, may be permitted if the Service finds that the activity will enhance the propagation or survival of the affected species and is determined to be consistent with the purpose of the ESA. The Service would look at the overall management program for a species in each country. Factors considered include: the biological needs of the species, possible threats to the populations, current population estimates, quotas, management plans, legal protection, local community involvement, and use of hunting fees for conservation. Obtaining the information on management programs may entail a lengthy collaborative process between the country of export and the Service.

Q: What actions were agreed upon at the recent CITES meeting that will curtail illegal trade in rhino horn?

A: The 16th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES took place March 3rd Bangkok, Thailand. At this meeting, CITES member countries agreed to a series of decisions that call for specific actions by both rhino range States and consumer countries to more effectively combat poaching and illegal rhino horn trade, including country-specific, time- bound actions with particular focus on Mozambique and Vietnam. The affected countries are required to report to the CITES Secretariat on their actions to comply with these decisions. The Secretariat is then required to report to the CITES Standing Committee, which in turn is to consider the progress being made, or lack thereof, and determine whether any further actions should be taken, including compliance measures that might be applied to countries that fail to take appropriate action.

quote:

Corey Knowlton bid US$350 000 at a January auction that the Dallas Safari Club billed as a fundraising effort to save the endangered species. Last spring, he applied for a permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that would enable him to import the rhino’s body following the hunt in Namibia. But he’s still waiting to hear back.

The agency is applying extra scrutiny to Knowlton’s request because of the rise in poaching, said spokesman Gavin Shire.

If the permit is denied, the safari club plans to refund Knowlton’s money that was pledged to a rhino conservation fund in the southwestern African country.

“Most people that have an animal mounted, it’s their memory of their experience,” said Ben Carter, the safari club’s executive director. “It’s not always, ‘Look at what I’ve shot.’ When they look at it, they remember everything. That’s what he bid the money on, that opportunity.”

If its all about the hunting experience and the conservation benefits, then as long as the hunting permit is legitimate the hunt should go ahead regardless of the trophy import permit status. Otherwise it becomes all about the trophy...

quote:

Originally posted by JabaliHunter:

quote:

Corey Knowlton bid US$350 000 at a January auction that the Dallas Safari Club billed as a fundraising effort to save the endangered species. Last spring, he applied for a permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that would enable him to import the rhino’s body following the hunt in Namibia. But he’s still waiting to hear back.

The agency is applying extra scrutiny to Knowlton’s request because of the rise in poaching, said spokesman Gavin Shire.

If the permit is denied, the safari club plans to refund Knowlton’s money that was pledged to a rhino conservation fund in the southwestern African country.

“Most people that have an animal mounted, it’s their memory of their experience,” said Ben Carter, the safari club’s executive director. “It’s not always, ‘Look at what I’ve shot.’ When they look at it, they remember everything. That’s what he bid the money on, that opportunity.”

If its all about the hunting experience and the conservation benefits, then as long as the hunting permit is legitimate the hunt should go ahead regardless of the trophy import permit status. Otherwise it becomes all about the trophy...

Sorry but that is nonsense. The money was paid on the understanding the import permit would be approved (assuming the hunt went as planned)... if the permit isn't approved it flies in the face of what Namibia is trying to achieve ... get the maximum return for the excess rhinos so that the money can be used to protect them. No import permit will undermine this whole process!!!!!!! No trophy - less return.

Antis will have everyone believe that it is all about the trophy - but we know that it isnt. If it was all about the trophy we would get someone else to climb the mountain/get eaten by mosquitos/sleep on the tundra/etc and just pay for the trophy too be delivered.

Isn't the whole idea of CITES is to control the ILLEGAL trade of species?

Isn't it up to the exporting country to get CITES permits for the animals they are allowed to sell?

If the above is correct, then why is the USF&W refusing to issue an import permit for an animal that has a CITES permit?

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

If the above is correct, then why is the USF&W refusing to issue an import permit for an animal that has a CITES permit?

Matt
Your last post cut to my core.
Unfortunately though,that does seem to be the case, not just the world, but every aspect of our lives here in America in some shape, form or fashion.
Why is it that some people think it's their job in life to control others?
I have enough trouble just handling my own, let alone anyone else's.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

If the above is correct, then why is the USF&W refusing to issue an import permit for an animal that has a CITES permit?

I have NO love for USFWS...in fact I was a plaintiff in a (winning!) suit against USFWS in recent years. Still am on another issue actually. Nonetheless, and understand that I am not trying to come off as overly patriotic, I AM going to be the one here who says "good luck getting a leopard or elephant or rhino into Australia"...ALSO A CITES COUNTRY! It's easy to bash the US for being a "global policeman", and yes they are playing that role on this issue for sure, but at least Americans can still bring their cats home..and their elephants...and their white rhino. I don't believe any of this is (or has been for a long time) possible in Oz.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:
Sorry but that is nonsense. The money was paid on the understanding the import permit would be approved (assuming the hunt went as planned).

I agree that the USFWS should approve the permit, and probably should have pre-approved it to maximize the auction return, but it was certainly NOT a guarantee that the permit would be granted. Initial readings of the auction details might have tried to imply that it was a strong possibility (I believe USFWS had at the time just approved a separate black rhino permit so things were looking good) but it was certainly not a foregone conclusion.

quote:

Originally posted by tendrams:

I have NO love for USFWS...in fact I was a plaintiff in a (winning!) suit against USFWS in recent years. Still am on another issue actually. Nonetheless, and understand that I am not trying to come off as overly patriotic, I AM going to be the one here who says "good luck getting a leopard or elephant or rhino into Australia"...ALSO A CITES COUNTRY! It's easy to bash the US for being a "global policeman", and yes they are playing that role on this issue for sure, but at least Americans can still bring their cats home..and their elephants...and their white rhino. I don't believe any of this is (or has been for a long time) possible in Oz.

Hey guys - lighten up, it was a joke. And yes Australia is 'world police' on CITES matters too - least with lion and spotted cats and apparently soon-to-be captive-bred lion.

By the same token we are World Police too, in that we have troops on the ground right now in Iraq and planes dropping bombs in Iraq and Syria.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:
Sorry but that is nonsense. The money was paid on the understanding the import permit would be approved (assuming the hunt went as planned)... if the permit isn't approved it flies in the face of what Namibia is trying to achieve ... get the maximum return for the excess rhinos so that the money can be used to protect them. No import permit will undermine this whole process!!!!!!! No trophy - less return.

Antis will have everyone believe that it is all about the trophy - but we know that it isnt. If it was all about the trophy we would get someone else to climb the mountain/get eaten by mosquitos/sleep on the tundra/etc and just pay for the trophy too be delivered.

Ok, if that is correct then fine. I was under the impression that it was clear at the auction that that a USFW import permit would have to be applied for, in which case even if he thought this would be a formality, caveat emptor. Hope he gets it sorted though.

quote:

Originally posted by JabaliHunter:

Ok, if that is correct then fine. I was under the impression that it was clear at the auction that that a USFW import permit would have to be applied for, in which case even if he thought this would be a formality, caveat emptor. Hope he gets it sorted though.

Well yes it still has to be applied for after the hunt and yes they could change their mind and reject it. But the 'pre-approval' was a joint thing between USFWS and the Namibian govt (or something like that) - to take an animal from a specific breeding program. If USFWS reject the application it is also a rejection of that Namibian conservation effort.

Maybe I am wrong and there was no 'understanding' or pre-approval?

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by JabaliHunter:

Ok, if that is correct then fine. I was under the impression that it was clear at the auction that that a USFW import permit would have to be applied for, in which case even if he thought this would be a formality, caveat emptor. Hope he gets it sorted though.

Well yes it still has to be applied for after the hunt and yes they could change their mind and reject it. But the 'pre-approval' was a joint thing between USFWS and the Namibian govt (or something like that) - to take an animal from a specific breeding program. If USFWS reject the application it is also a rejection of that Namibian conservation effort.

Maybe I am wrong and there was no 'understanding' or pre-approval?

No, Matt, you are not wrong.

Karl

quote:

Originally posted by K Evans:
No, Matt, you are not wrong.

Karl

Show me where there was a guarantee of approval. It simply does not exist. There was only a pretty strong belief that the USFWS WOULD approve the DSC permit as they had just very recently approved one from a hunt taking place a few years before. There may have been winks or hints or implications but one of the issues I had with this hunt from day 1 was that the USFWS had NOT given a guarantee which could have very dramatically increased the final price paid for the hunt and therefore the amount of money making its way to Namibian conservation. USFWS is not going back on its word here, but they are still the USFWS and I have a dozen or so different reasons to dislike them aside from this event.