Laura Allen – Page 2 – Animal Law Coalition

Why is it so hard for President Trump to flatly forbid trophy hunting imports?

BY
DELCIANNA WINDERS
(First printed in the NEW YORK DAILY NEWS, Friday, March 9, 2018, 12:16 PM)

It’s been three years since the world erupted in outrage when Cecil the lion was selfishly and ineptly hunted down by Minnesota dentist Walter Palmer. The callous killing of Cecil threw a harsh spotlight on the slaughtering of animals for their body parts — “trophies” — so they can be stuffed and hung up on walls in macabre tableaux mounted by insecure men. (Yes, it’s almost exclusively men who participate in this so-called sport.) It’s time for our government to stop being complicit in this indefensible horror.

Earlier this week, the Trump administration announced that the import of body parts of African elephants shot for sport could be allowed on a case-by-case basis. This news came only a few months after the President spoke out against the practice and put the decision on hold. Back in November, President Trump tweeted, “Big-game trophy decision will be announced next week but will be very hard pressed to change my mind that this horror show in any way helps conservation of Elephants or any other animal.”

He was right then and if he meant it, he needs to direct his agency, the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), to do its job and protect wildlife, not trophy hunters.

Importing elephant “trophies” is currently illegal unless a government agency allows an exception to the law that is supposed to protect endangered species, and there is no legitimate basis for allowing the body parts of imperiled animals to be imported into our country.

New reports detail Cecil’s last hours. According to the forthcoming book “Lion Hearted: The Life and Death of Cecil & the Future of Africa’s Iconic Cats,” By biologist Andrew Loveridge, after deliberately luring him outside the confines of a national park in order to skirt regulations, Palmer shot Cecil with his first steel arrow but missed his vital organs and major arteries. The majestic lion suffered for 10 to 12 excruciatingly painful hours before finally being “dispatched” with a second arrow from a compound bow.

Public condemnation of trophy hunting remains strong. It’s a cowardly pastime that is all about the perverse need to nab and slaughter the biggest and the “best.” It’s about gleefully posing for twisted selfies with lifeless bodies. It’s about bragging rights, as if blasting a complacent animal with high-powered weaponry were some sort of achievement.

We must ask ourselves, what is the psychology of someone who spends tens of thousands of dollars to travel to another country just to kill? When their motive is the thrill of the kill and they have a complete disregard for another’s life and take perverted pleasure in displaying heads of animals minding their own business, this indicates to the rest of us a very deeply disturbed psyche.

Trying to spin these kills as “conservation” is absurd. The animals are supposed to be protected by international treaty and the federal Endangered Species Act. Killing them or importing their body parts is strictly prohibited. There is one exception — when doing so would help “enhance the propagation or survival of the affected species.”

As the Supreme Court recognized, this exception is meant to apply under “extremely narrow circumstances.” And yet, through an outrageous pay-to-play policy, the FWS has let the exception become the rule.

Pressured by groups like Safari Club International and the National Rifle Association, the FWS now issues dozens of permits every year authorizing trophy imports. Instead of limiting permits to those cases that truly help species, as the law requires, the agency hands them out like candy to just about anyone claiming to make a donation toward conservation.

Never mind that the donations are nothing but collateral to the cruel hunting, are often paltry, and go to countries where there is no assurance that they will actually be used for conservation. Never mind that FWS often doesn’t even follow up to make sure that the promised donations are even made, let alone that they end up where they were supposed to. Never mind that killing elephants or lions — members of complex social groups — directly undermines conservation while also destroying families.

As ethicist Marc Bekoff says, “It’s time to put away the guns . . . and figure out how to live in peaceful coexistence with the fascinating animals with whom we’re supposed to share our most magnificent planet.”

The FWS would do well to take that message to heart, charged as it is by Congress with protecting these animals.

Winders is the PETA Foundation’s vice president and deputy general counsel for captive animal law enforcement and a visiting scholar at the Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University.

Trump to Allow Import of Elephant and Lion Trophies

The Trump Administration has quietly authorized the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to issue permits for imports of trophies taken from elephants. This after Trump called the practice of hunting elephants for their trophies a “horror show”. President Barack Obama’s administration had banned import of trophies taken from elephants Zimbabwe and Zambia in particular. The new FWS Memo effectively withdraws the Obama era ban.

African elephants are designated under the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §1531, et seq. (ESA). An “enhance[ment]” finding is necessary under ESA to allow any hunting of a designated species. This is a finding that hunting a designated species will “enhance the propagation or survival of the affected species” or is for scientific purposes consistent with the conservation purpose of the ESA”. 16 U.S.C. §§1538(a), 1539(a)(1)(A). The new memo effectively withdraws the Obama era findings that hunting African elephants in the wild will not enhance their survival. FWS will now issue permits on an undefined “case-by-case” basis to hunters and others who want to import parts or trophies from elephants hunted down in the wild.

That is not all….The Trump Administration has also lifted the ban on importing hunted lions. Effective January 22, 2016 FWS under President Obama reacted to the dramatic decline of lions in the wild by designating two subspecies under ESA. The new rules effectively protected all remaining lions from trophy hunting. In its new memo FWS has withdrawn all previous findings that hunting lions does not “enhance” their survival in the wild. Permits to import lion trophies are now available from FWS.

Say No to Outsourcing AWA Inspections

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) plans to outsource to private parties the inspections required for operations regulated by the Animal Welfare Act, including puppy mills, animal exhibitions, and animal research labs. These private parties are likely to have close ties to these industries. That means these places will be largely left to self-policing. This plan will enrich private contractors and leave the animals in worse jeopardy. APHIS already provided very few inspectors for the thousands of animals trapped in mills, exhibits and research labs.

What You Can Do

Go here to submit comments by no later than March 21. Let APHIS know that (1) Third party inspection and certification programs mean industry self-policing and reduced accountability and transparency, (2) Third party oversight in the past has failed, leaving the public and animals vulnerable to industry abuses, (3) Third party inspections jeopardize the safety and welfare of animals required to be protected by APHIS under the Animal Welfare Act.

New Jersey’s New Law to Protect Pets

New Jersey’s new care requirements for dogs and other pets and service animals has already proven an effective tool for animal control and law enforcement trying to save animals from exposure to bad weather and inhumane tethering. The new law signed August 7, 2017 amends Title 4, Chapter 19 of New Jersey statutes and provides:

Weather

a. No dog, domestic companion animal, or service animal may be exposed to “adverse environmental conditions” for more than 30 minutes unless the animal has continuous access to shelter which means an enclosed, insulated structure with a solid roof, walls and floor with an opening no larger than to allow the animal to enter and exit comfortably, provide shade, and keep the animal at a normal body temperature.

(“Adverse environmental conditions” means (1) when the ambient temperature is 32 degrees F or below, or there are other conditions, such as wind, rain, snow, ice, sleet, or hail, such that a person should reasonably know would pose an adverse risk to the health or safety of the animal, based on the animal’s size, age, physical condition, or thickness of the animal’s hair or fur; or (2) when the temperature is 90 degrees F or above, or the animal is exposed to direct sunlight or hot pavement, such that a person should reasonably know would pose an adverse risk to the health or safety of the animal, based on the animal’s size, age, physical condition, or thickness of thickness of the animal’s fur.)

b. In the event of an evacuation order, it is now illegal not to make every effort to take pets to a safe location. They may not be left indoors unattended or tied up outside.

Proper Shelter

c. All dogs and other pets and service animals must have access to proper shelter regardless of the weather. If the animal is not in the house, he or she must have access to a structure that (1) has ventilation, (2) allows the animal to remain dry and maintain a normal body temperature, (3) allows access to clean, nonfrozen water, (4) provides exposure to natural or artificial light according to a regular cycle of day and night, (5) has sufficient space so that the animal can easily turn around in a full circle and lie down on the animal’s side with limbs outstretched, and (6) has at least three inches of empty space above the head of the animal when the animal is in a normal sitting or standing position in the shelter;

The shelter must be maintained in a manner to minimize the accumulation of any waste, other debris, precipitation, or other moisture inside, surrounding, and underneath the shelter, and to provide reasonable protection from flooding. The shelter must remain upright at all times and be soundly constructed to prevent the sagging or collapse and with no sharp points or edges.

Crawl spaces, areas under a vehicle, structures made with pressure treated wood, cardboard, or other materials easily degraded by the elements won’t comply. And no wire or chain link flooring or really any flooring with openings that allow a paw or hoof to fall through.

These shelter requirements do not apply to breeders, kennels, pet shops, shelters or pounds.

Tethering Restrictions

Those laws that have time limits on tethering dogs have in some cases proven difficult if not impossible to enforce. California’s 3 hour limit on tethering is an example. In this New Jersey law, persons are prohibited from tethering dogs from 11 p.m. until 5 a.m. outside and must allow the dog to move 15 feet in any one direction. There are exceptions if the person is outside with the dog or can see the dog at all times. The new law also prohibits tethering outside in adverse weather conditions for more than 30 minutes. Any dog tethered more than 30 minutes must have access to clean non frozen water.

There is also a ban on tethering nursing females and puppies less than four months old.

There are restrictions on the types of collar and tethers that can be used, a ban on tethering with other dogs or on vacant lots or in abandoned buildings.

The new law does not apply to breeders and there are other exceptions.

What You Can Do

The new law requires municipalities or cities to educate the public about the new law. Your help is invaluable in protecting dogs and other pets from weather and inhumane tethering. If you see a potential violation, note the date, time and location; write down the details, and take photos or video. Then call animal control, NJ SPCA or the police. Follow up if the situation is not fixed. There is no provision allowing a concerned citizen to rescuer to take an animal held in violation of these laws. But the authorities may do so if they have a reasonable suspicion the animal is at risk of imminent harm. There are otherwise provisions for corrective warnings, fines, seizure pursuant to a warrant and the like.