Showing posts with label conservation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conservation. Show all posts

Thursday, July 31, 2008

State Conservation and Fish and Game Organizations


ALABAMA

ALASKA

ARIZONA

ARKANSAS

CALIFORNIA

COLORADO

CONNECTICUT

DELAWARE

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

FLORIDA

GEORGIA

HAWAII

IDAHO

ILLINOIS

INDIANA

IOWA

KANSAS

KENTUCKY

LOUISIANA

MAINE

MARYLAND

MASSACHUSETTS

MICHIGAN

MINNESOTA

MISSISSIPPI

MISSOURI

MONTANA

NEBRASKA

NEVADA

NEW HAMPSHIRE

NEW JERSEY

NEW MEXICO

NEW YORK

NORTH DAKOTA

OHIO

OKLAHOMA

OREGON

PENNSYLVANIA

RHODE ISLAND

SOUTH CAROLINA

SOUTH DAKOTA

TENNESSEE

TEXAS

UTAH

VERMONT

VIRGINIA

WASHINGTON

WEST VIRGINIA

WISCONSIN

WYOMING

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

Pittsburgh Perrigrines and CliCKS

This picture was taken on the Gulf Tower in Pittsburgh, PA and was on the front page of The Pittsburgh Post Gazette! What is really unique here is that the company that I work for is CliCKS and the article here is all about conservation of Perrigrine Falcons.

Falcon Conservation Nesting Box!

I always knew the money we were spending for those custom boxes was worth every penny!!!!

A little bit of guerrilla marketing for CliCKS a little bit of conservation for some ChiCKS!!!

Monday, May 14, 2007

In the Crosshairs, SCI-First for Hunters 5/14/07

SCI - First For Hunters

In the Crosshairs -- e-news from SCI's Washington Office

The latest and hottest news on federal, state, and international
political and conservation events
May 14, 2007

Namibia Update

Last week SCI brought you a story about leopard trophies from Namibia being confiscated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service because they were tagged incorrectly. According to the TJ Safari Weekly Newsletter, the Namibia Professional Hunting Association jumped right in to set things straight. They released the following statement: ‘It came to the fore that U.S. Fish and Wildlife had confiscated two separate leopard skins exported by Namibia due to the apparent use of incorrect identification tags. The Ministry of Environment and Tourism has been making use of the current tagging system for the past fifteen 15 years. Those leopards exported with the old tags will still be accepted. MET has now submitted a new tag for approval by U.S. Fish and Wildlife. In the event of your clients leopard trophy being confiscated during the interim period, please advise The Ministry of Environment and Tourism (Elly Hamunyela) immediately to assist you with the issue.’" For any further questions, you can contact NAPHA directly at napha@mweb.com.na . (Source: TJ Safari)

SCI Victorious in Alaska Federal Subsistence Hearing

Safari Club International is victorious in the latest battle over Alaska’s Federal Subsistence program. On May 10, 2007, the Federal Subsistence Board voted unanimously to designate 30 percent of the seats on every Regional Advisory Council to representatives of the recreational and commercial hunting and fishing interests. The decision was made at a special public hearing to determine how to balance the membership of the councils in order to provide representation from groups other than subsistence users. This balance was mandated by previous court rulings and the Federal Advisory Committee Act. SCI has been fighting this battle with the Federal Subsistence Board for nine years, ensuring that the recreational hunting and fishing community has been represented. Anna Seidman, SCI's Chief Litigation Counsel testified at the hearing, explaining that the only way the recreational hunting community could attain true representation on these councils is by the participation by sport hunters who share the interests of the sport hunting community.

Migratory Birds Funded


“Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthornecelebrated International Migratory Bird Day by announcing nearly $3.9 million in federal grants to aid neotropical migratory bird conservation in the United States, Canada and 14 Latin American and Caribbean countries. The Interior Department's U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will provide the grants to conservation partnerships in those countries. Partners will, in turn, match those funds with nearly $18 million that will be used to conduct research, monitoring, and management programs for migratory bird populations, as well as related outreach and education. There are 341 species of Neotropical migratory birds that breed in the United States and Canada and winter in Latin America. Examples of these birds include species of plovers, terns, hawks, cranes, warblers and sparrows. Many of these birds are presently in decline, and several species are protected as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act. The Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 2000 established the matching grants program to fund projects promoting the conservation of Neotropical migratory birds in the United States, Canada, Latin America, and the Caribbean. Appropriations began in 2002 and the money is to be used to protect, research, monitor and manage bird populations and habitat, as well as to conduct law enforcement and community outreach and education. By law, at least 75 percent of the money goes to projects in Latin America, the Caribbean, and Canada while the remaining 25 percent can go to projects in the United States.” (Source: USFWS)


SAFARI Magazine Wins Media Achievement Award

SAFARI Magazine, Safari Club International's flagship publication, has won a Diamond Statue of Distinction in the Spring 2007 Media Achievement Awards competition. The magazine was chosen from among over 1,600 entries, with only the top five percent recognized as award winners. This competition raises the bar of excellence. Entries are judged on a point system by award-winning, highly qualified professionals in the communications industry.


Two New Websites Focus on Wildlife

The Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies has launched two new websites dedicated to wildlife. The www.wildlifeactionplans.org website provides detailed information on the state wildlife action plans and partnerships forming to ensure their implementation, and the revamped www.teaming.com will be the online home for the Teaming with Wildlife coalition and provide information on the need for new and greater funding to prevent wildlife from becoming endangered. Any questions or comments can be directed to teaming@fishwildlife.org . (Source: AFWA)

Opportunity For All

“The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and Shane Mahoney, a renowned wildlife biologist from Newfoundland, have created a DVD entitled "Opportunity for All." The DVD tells the story of the North American Model for Wildlife Conservation and spreads the remarkable story that is the basis for our conservation ethic. It's a story we all should know and one that all hunters and anglers can take great pride in. Bulk orders of 50 DVDs or more can be purchased by contacting Jennie Wright at 1-800-225-5355 or jwright@rmef.org . The cost for 50 or more is $6.00 per DVD, plus shipping. Orders of fewer than 50 DVDs are $11.99 each, plus shipping and can be purchased by calling the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation's membership services at 1-800-225-5355 or going online at www.elkfoundation.org ” (Source: RMEF / Outdoor Wire)

Florida Gators

“Florida wildlife officials may be on the verge of allowing rural and suburban homeowners who find alligators less than four feet long on their property to capture and kill them rather than pay a licensed trapper. Individuals would have to call the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission for approval to kill alligators on their land. This also gives officials the opportunity to talk callers out of killing the gators themselves. Wildlife officials have yet to determine how homeowners would be allowed to kill or capture small alligators.” (Source: Outdoor Wire)

Friday, May 11, 2007

Kalahari Trophy Hunting in Namibia with Ultispan Hunting




Michael Duvenhage from Ultispan Hunting has asked me to share with our readers his great website and it is my pleasure! Of course in July we are hoping to turn Michael into a full fledged advertiser of huntinglife.com and in the mean time go check out his site! The Kalahari sounds hot but very interesting! Finding all of the great hunting information on his website can be a bit of a challenge but the hunting looks amazing!

Please go check them out!!!

Karisia Walking Safari


Those of you who know me understand my strong commitment to conservation and to hunting! While this safari does not allow hunting on its property, it is providing strong conservation and a safe haven to the animals in Kenya on 3000 acres of land! Go check them out at www.karisia.com.

They shared with me that they would welcome hunting in Kenya but would not be offering safaris to the public.

Wednesday, May 09, 2007

African Indaba


The following series of articles that were published and more to come in the next week were republished compliments of African Indaba Newsletter! Gerhard Damm is a conservation champion and is the editor of the Newsletter. Please go check out their site and read everything you can from the archives! The information provided is free of charge and is written by some of the greatest men in conservation today! Read it, learn it and share it with as many people as you can!

Hunters Shoot Themselves in the Foot

Republished Courtesy of African Indaba Newletter

Hunters Shoot Themselves in the Foot
By Ian Parker

I know all about shooting myself in the foot. As a young soldier, I did it. Coming off sentry duty I unloaded my ·303, counting nine rounds out of the ten-shot magazine. The tenth seemed to be missing, so I worked the bolt several times to no avail.
“Why do you do that so many times?” asked a comrade sitting by the fire.
“For safety,” I had replied and, thinking that the tenth round must have fallen to the ground during the initial unloading, I pulled the trigger. The tenth round had been hiding in the magazine all along and entered the chamber on the bolt’s last movement. There was a loud bang and as the muzzle was resting on my foot – well, the rest is history. As I said, I know all about shooting myself in the foot.

I know about hunting too. As a warden assigned to game control and then a contractor undertaking large-scale culling across East Africa, I have probably hunted more than most. I appreciate that little of this was for my personal enjoyment and, while on occasion the activity was unquestionably exciting, my over-riding emotional state was little different to that when, as a beef producer, I slaughter a steer. Done of necessity, there is no pleasure in the act.
Don’t get me wrong … I do enjoy light bird shooting, though again, satisfaction in pulling off a difficult shot notwithstanding, there is no pleasure in actual killing. Similarly, I fish and, in my mind fishing is a form of hunting. In both bird shooting and fishing I only take quarry that I enjoy eating. Pleasure from both activities arises from the environments where they take place and, overwhelmingly, from the company in which they are undertaken. An evening stroll out of camp with a couple of companions, to return with a brace or two of francolin or guineafowl, or a quiet evening’s casting over forest pools and landing a three-quarter pound trout, are experiences to be treasured.

Others might want more ‘body’ to their hunting and, relishing a quotient of adrenalin and danger, want larger quarry. With that I have no quarrel. I certainly understand that the difference between me taking a couple guineafowl and someone else stalking a bushbuck – or a buffalo for that matter - is slight and relative.

The satisfactions derived are personal. Hunting, as I comprehend it, is a private undertaking both in the compulsions that lead to it and in its rewards. One way or another, it is not a ‘spectator sport’ – which is why films about hunting fall so short of the mark and do more damage than good to the hunter’s reputation.

The philosophical arguments for and against hunting are ancient, interminable and largely pointless. Hunting may be cruel, it may be atavistic, it may satiate drives that aesthetes preferred didn’t exist: I’ll not dispute the charges (though this is no concession to verity or otherwise). What surely counts is that throughout civilization’s history, wild animals have been conserved so that they can be hunted. Whatever the flaws in pro-hunting arguments, that fact is indisputable.

The most common and widespread reason resulting in successful conservation across time and cultures, has been to sustain hunting. Other reasons have been successful locally – but none as generally effective as the measures taken to provide hunters with quarry. In view of this success, it is profoundly stupid to turn against it. That, for me, is the strongest case for hunting.
Yet the manner in which hunting in Africa is widely conducted contradicts its own supporters’ claims of it being a sport. It is the hunters who say that they get no enjoyment from the actual act of killing, and that the sport lies in outwitting wary quarry through skill, cunning and physical endeavor.

When animals are shot from vehicles – and let’s face it, many are – then the only enjoyment has to be the act of killing, for driving up to them in vehicles calls for no skill or physical endeavor. When animals are reared as domesticants then taken into the bush to be shot, that, too, undermines the hunters’ stated cases. As I have written in these pages before, hunting big dangerous animals is, like mountaineering, a fit man’s sport. Elderly, over-weight, unfit people who, at best, can only waddle short distances cannot hunt. They are no doubt the reason why so many animals in Africa are shot from vehicles.

In similar vein, the obsession with trophy quality seems to override what hunters claim is the rationale for hunting. There was a time when hunting involved endurance, tracking, getting up to potential quarry, then turning it down, possibly going home with nothing, because the trophies did not come up to the hunter’s standard. Even those opposed to hunting acknowledged the endeavor and admired it.

The reward for that sort of hunting was intensely personal: as I said earlier, hunting is not a spectator sport. Yet the extra inch of horn that is now such a competitive element – particularly in America – is difficult to divorce from public display.

I am well aware of all the economic arguments that favor the short cuts and the ‘tupa nyuma’ style of hunting so prevalent today. Safari hunting is a business, the customer is always right and has to be satisfied. All these factors shape what is happening in Africa. It is disturbing, however, that so few hunters are addressing the fundamental issues and tackling them head-on.

My point: I believe that hunting can produce effective conservation and that this is a powerful argument in its favor. Yet hunters shoot themselves in the foot when they fail to abide by the ‘ethics’ and arguments through which they justify themselves. If, in the end, hunting loses ground in Africa, then this failure will have contributed in large measure to that loss.

Trophy Hunting: The Professional Hunter's Dilemma

Republished Courtesy of African Indaba Newletter


Trophy Hunting: The Professional Hunter’s Dilemma
By Stewart Dorrington, President, and Peter Butland, President-Elect of the Professional Hunters' Association of South Africa (PHASA)

The Hunter
The hunter’s desire for a trophy, a memento of the hunt, a reminder of the sweet and the bitter of past hunts, is as old as mankind itself. From the rock art of ancient man, adorning the walls of his cave, to the heads and horns lining the walls of the modern trophy room, trophies have served to give immortality to the hunted animal.

For some, a photograph will suffice, a private reminder of a personal experience, or a small item, used daily, made from the hide or horn of a fondly remembered animal. A bag of biltong, personally made and slowly savored by the hunter, piece by piece through the long hunting off-season, while not conventionally seen as a trophy, is certainly a memento of the hunt.
For others, the animal lives on through the art of the taxidermist, to be enjoyed by the hunter and shared with those back home, those who do not have the privilege of visiting far places and seeing at first hand the living wonders of the natural world. Such hunters will remember for each trophy, each stalk, each shot and each follow up. Eyes will light up in the retelling and the sharing of each tale.

For others still, there are systems in place whereby they plan their hunting lives, working their way through lists of species and sub-species, recording their progress and earning credits as they do so, and setting goals for the future.

And for yet others, the trophy is no longer a memento of the hunt. It has become an end in itself. It has become tangible evidence of of an achievement. It is part of the constant challenge thrown out from man to man to compete, to measure one against the other, to achieve perceived success and to demonstrate dominance.

Cultural background has an inevitable influence on the hunter’s trophy expectations and his hunting motivations.

“Is it old?” may be a question to pass some hunters’ lips. Worn down tips, thick, gnarled bases or bosses, cracked and green with fighting and rubbing are the attributes of a mature animal, which is approaching the natural end of its life cycle.

Broken or malformed horns are fine. “That is nature,” the hunter will say.
“Is it bigger than Karl’s?” may be the first concern of others. As Pop said to Hemingway, “It’s impossible not to be competitive. Spoils everything, though.” Husbands and wives, friends and brothers have all had relationships strained and hunts soured by the insidious competitive spirit of man being allowed to intrude on the hunt to the exclusion of appreciation of the multi-facetted wonders which make up a holistic hunting experience.

The Professional Hunter
The professional hunter will in time face a wide spectrum of these desires.
It is not for him to be judgmental about the motivations of his hunting clients. They are products of their upbringing, of their cultures, of the world in which they live and of the pressures under which they are placed, or place themselves. And were it not for them in their totality, with all their good and all their bad, with all their strengths and all their weaknesses, he would not be a professional hunter. There would be no hunting profession.
It is the professional hunter’s job to do his very best to meet his clients’ expectations. He must empathize with his clients, seek to understand their cultural backgrounds and meet their reasonable expectations. He must meet his clients’ material needs and see to their safekeeping. He must try to open their eyes to the beauties of the natural world, sharing with the client his knowledge and understanding of that world. He must guide them in the hunt as best he possibly can, in accordance with his, the professional hunters, value system.

The Dilemma
And this is where the professional hunter’s dilemma arises. What should be the guiding principles upon which his value system is based?

Great strides have been made in nature conservation in Southern Africa in recent decades. Scientific, social and economic principles have been applied to the benefit of wild life and the environment. Increasing wildlife numbers have been widely, but not universally, matched by improved trophy quality. Successes in habitat restoration, the rebirth of biodiversity in previously devastated areas and the reintroduction and conservation of wildlife should be honored and respected by every professional hunter. That respect should underpin his value system.

A genuine, informed and applied concern for the well being of the wildlife in his hunting area will, therefore, be a good starting point. Over time it will make a difference. It will make a difference to wildlife, the environment, to the clients’ respect for him as a person and for the profession in which he operates. But does the professional hunter have the luxury of time?
A soundly based ethical code of hunting is an essential further element of the professional hunter’s value system. But does he have the strength of character to impose it on a strong willed client with his own, perhaps very different, hunting ethic and ambition?
In their heart of hearts, most professional hunters know what it is that should form the basis of their value systems. But the pressures of the modern world intrude on all aspects of life. The influence of these pressures in the hunting field can and does lead to corruption. Competition among peers and the desire to see their names in the record book are real temptations to professional hunters too.

There is widespread concern that in many parts of the world the record books are compromising much of what hunting is all about. African hunting – with its wide variety of species – is particularly affected. The record books and award programs have turned an individualistic pastime into an occasionally fierce competition. Fair chase, hunting traditions and sound conservation principles often fall by the wayside.

Far too many visiting hunters have only limited time available and yet they want to hunt a long “shopping list of trophy animals”. And many hunters want record trophies – in the “top ten”, wherever possible. These expectations are simply unrealistic, but they put the professional hunter under extreme pressure. Importantly too, it’s the professional hunter’s reputation, which is at stake. What does he do, if the visiting hunter's objectives are nothing short of high scoring record trophies and if the client insists on unfair chase methods to achieve his goals? If he disregards the client’s wishes, an unfavorable hunt report may be the result. And unfavorable news travel fast in the hunting world. Is it reasonable to expect a professional hunter or outfitter to put his business success at stake?

For an outfitter and professional hunter, the economic dilemma is augmented by the enormous market power vested into the record books by international hunting associations. Professional hunting associations and individual professional hunters have been critical of the present recording and award procedures and its system-immanent abuses. Unfortunately, the hunting associations have not to date addressed the issues on an internationally coordinated, industry wide basis.

There is only one way to change this situation – hunting associations must look for a solution which adequately considers the interests of all, and importantly also those of biodiversity conservation. Sustainable trophy hunting requires that game populations be managed according to biological principles – and not those dictated by the figures of a scoring system. Killing a high scoring, yet immature buffalo bull has serious implications on sustainability. This applies not only to buffalo, but to all game in general.

Last but not least a word about hunting ethics. It is generally said that ethics are valid in the eye of the beholder only. What is ethically acceptable hunting practice in one culture or on one continent may be unethical in another. But let us not forget that hunting ethics are the result of thousands of years of hunting traditions – they change and evolve with the times, but one thing is for sure, their origin and purpose is in one key factor called sustainability.

The Challenge
We would like to issue a challenge for all hunters and in particular for the international hunting associations. Although this challenge emanates from Africa, we are sure that it applies to all continents. The challenge is to decide what is right and what is wrong and to determine what your own personal value system should and will be. The real challenge then will be to stand by what you believe is right. And if alone, it is a challenge to strive to stand steadfast and to lead steadfastly by example. Let us analyze the conflicting demands, emotions and beliefs; let us get the scientific evidence and most importantly, let us arrive at solutions which will benefit wildlife!

Of course the challenge points towards the international hunting associations and their members, but significantly, it also addresses the professional hunters and guides here in Africa and around the world.

We, as the professionals in the hunting field, need to show our visiting hunters what hunting is really about. That the fulfillment in hunting is not found in inches and points, but in a holistic, participative experience in natural surroundings. Anything else lessens the value of the experience. A trophy obtained easily is not well remembered nor cherished, whereas the one that has been hard earned will always be respected and cherished, as will the memory of the hunt and the animal.

There are a good number of highly dedicated professional hunters who are conducting their safaris, (and hunting clients who hunt), in this way. There are those professionals who refuse unacceptable demands and turn their backs on the money There are those who are seeking a different way to evaluate trophies, to achieve desired ends and to avoid undesirable results.
On one thing we can all agree. We wish to preserve our hunting heritage for posterity. To do so we all need to ask ourselves where we as hunters stand in meeting the challenge.

Predator Conservation and Hunting in Kenya

Republished Courtesy of African Indaba Newsletter

Predator Conservation and Hunting in Kenya
By Dr. Stephanie S. Romañach

Human-wildlife conflict is one of major reasons why predators are declining in number throughout Africa. Predators are often killed in response to attacks on livestock, and sometimes are killed preemptively as a perceived threat.

In Kenya, wildlife has very little, if any, value to most of its citizens. As a result, wildlife population numbers have been decreasing over the last three decades, with recorded declines of 40 - 90% for most species. The beginning of the steep population declines coincided with Kenya’s ban on trophy hunting in 1977.

Wildlife in Kenya is owned by the government, not by landowners. Some East and southern African countries have devolved full user rights of wildlife to its citizens, allowing people to profit from wildlife on their land. These profits serve as financial incentives for wildlife conservation on privately- and, in some cases, on communally-owned land. In recent years these incentives have led to major increases in the amount of land used for wildlife in South Africa and Namibia, and, on a smaller scale, in Botswana and Zambia.

The Laikipia plateau in central Kenya represents a stronghold for wildlife conservation. The region is not formally protected, but holds high densities of wildlife mixed with livestock, and some agriculture. Wildlife populations are increasing, including significant populations of cheetahs, lions, leopards, hyenas, and endangered African wild dogs. But livestock densities are high, and there are increasing incidences of conflict between people and predators over livestock.

In 2005, I completed a survey of Kenyans in the Laikipia region to explore potential means of promoting coexistence between people and predators. I gained the help of a few assistants to conduct interviews in the multiple native languages used in the communal lands. We completed 416 one-on-one interviews with community members and commercial ranchers to learn about their attitudes toward predators, policies for lethal control when livestock are attacked, and prospects for coexistence.

Livestock losses to predators are high in the region; 53% of interviewees reported livestock losses to predators the previous year. Commercial ranchers were willing to tolerate losses of between 4 - 8 head of stock before killing the responsible predator, and community members were unwilling to lose more than one head of stock.

We asked interviewees how their tolerance for predators could be improved, and the two most common responses we received were to give value to predators through ecotourism and through trophy hunting. Photographic tourism has been successful in the region, and interest remains high among overseas visitors to experience Kenya’s wildlife and human cultures (e.g., Masaai).

Much of Laikipia is gifted with healthy wildlife populations, though this is not the case for the entire region, and not for most of Kenya’s unprotected areas. Areas without easily viewable densities of wildlife (e.g., in heavily grazed livestock areas) may not be able to attract photographic tourists. Another problem with relying on ecotourism alone to provide financial incentive for conservation is that photographic tourists tend to avoid travelling to areas experiencing political instability, as experienced by Kenya following terrorist bombings in past years.

When we asked for thoughts on legalizing trophy hunting in Kenya, older community members tended to be in favour of trophy hunting, mentioning benefits brought through employment. Younger community members were split in their views. For example, respondents involved in ecotourism were concerned that trophy hunting would kill all wildlife and leave nothing to show photographic tourists. One important finding was that reinstating trophy hunting was not considered an ethical issue, contrary to beliefs by groups trying to keep the ban on trophy hunting.

Locals’ concerns about the possible impacts of hunting on wildlife populations suggest lack of knowledge of current practices in neighbouring countries, including quota systems with very low offtakes from wildlife populations. This kind of misconception is perhaps not surprising given that hunting has been banned for 30-years, was poorly-regulated in the past, and is maligned by misinformation in the Kenya press. Such concerns might be assuaged by raising awareness of the low impact of trophy hunting on wildlife populations, and of the importance of hunting to conservation in other African countries.

Trophy hunting has been successful in creating incentives for wildlife conservation on communal lands in countries such as Namibia, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe. In Namibia, for example, vast areas of community lands are being converted into wildlife conservancies, due largely to the potential financial benefits available from wildlife via trophy hunting.
There are problems associated with the trophy hunting industry in Africa, which not only tarnish the image of the industry, but are also commonly used by animal rights groups in Kenya to lobby for support for retention of the ban on hunting. However, one of the major problems with the hunting industry is one that is also common to ecotourism; there is a need for improvement in revenue sharing from hunting such that benefits reach community members living with wildlife.

The ability to derive income from wildlife can improve prospects for wildlife conservation. Currently, this is not an option in Kenya because wildlife belongs to the state. My findings stress the potential for allocating user rights over wildlife to local citizens as a means for benefits to offset losses from human-wildlife conflict. These findings are timely because they coincide with Kenya’s wildlife policy review. A draft of the new policy has been created and includes these ideas. The proposed policy will be put to vote, possibly by June 2007.
I have presented the results from my interviews twice in Kenya in attempts to let Kenyans know about options for deriving benefits from wildlife, and to provide examples of the workings of the trophy hunting industry elsewhere in Africa. Wildlife policy makers should be urged to consider options for Kenya’s citizens to benefit from wildlife, thus providing incentives for conservation.

Detailed findings from this study are published in the April 2007 edition of Oryx - The International Journal of Conservation under the title ‘Determinants of attitudes towards predators in central Kenya and suggestions for increasing tolerance in livestock dominated landscapes’.


The Rowland Ward Guild of Field Sportsmen

Republished Courtesy of African Indaba Newsletter

The Rowland Ward Guild of Field Sportsmen
By Peter Flack, Chairman, Rowland Ward

www.rowlandwards.com

“To hunt is a privilege not a right. The Rowland Ward Guild of Field Sportsmen brings together likeminded field sportsmen who believe in maintaining and upholding a Code of Ethics in Field Sports, who hope to encourage and actively guide and teach the youth, who regard as a priority the improvement of the environment and who want to conduct the sport with great care and consideration in order to preserve the sport for those that follow.”

Let me say at the outset, that I am not one of those people who can say, “If I had to live my life over, I would do it exactly the same”. Quite simply, I have made far too many mistakes (many of which I deeply regret) to make such a statement. The same goes for my hunting life and, I confess that I have both done things, sometimes in the heat of the moment which, in retrospect, I should not have done, and have also omitted to do things which I should have done. For example, especially when I was younger, I took shots at game that I should never have tried and I unnecessarily wounded some wonderful animals. I can also remember, I am ashamed to say, more than one wounded animal which escaped me. In the early pre-dawn darkness these animals sometimes march through my mind’s eye and, when they do, sleep is not something that follows. As such, I don’t want to appear holier than thou and as if I wash in cold water Omo each night. I don’t.

Nevertheless, I do want to ask you this, when you first watched the infamous “canned lion” video that those two ugly characters, Cooke and MacDonald, effectively combined to produce, what was your reaction? Anger? Embarrassment? Frustration that, as a hunter, you were, once again, unfairly tarred with the same brush as those in the video who were also described as hunters even though there was clearly no hunting of any kind involved? Killing, yes. Shooting, yes. But definitely no hunting! Certainly, my feelings changed to bewilderment as most of the hunting associations to which I belonged failed to deal with the matter swiftly and in a clear and unequivocal manner.

The Professional Hunters Association of South Africa (“PHASA”) seemed to take forever to disassociate themselves, and then only half heartedly, from the incidents portrayed in the video, and the rumor quickly circulated that the reason behind their tardy and ineffectual conduct was that MacDonald was not the only member to have engaged in such conduct in the past. I did not know whether to believe the rumors or not.

What did you think when the news was first published in a national newspaper that a member of the executive committee of a national hunting association was alleged to have imported elephant tusks illegally into the country? Then there was the case of senior members of an international hunting organization being accused of “hunting” elephant from a helicopter in Mozambique. There’s that misuse of the word again.

I hunted with a senior African professional hunter who told me how he had recently refunded the safari costs to a member of the executive committee of a major international hunting organization to which I belong. After hunting for a grand total of three days without success, he insisted that the professional hunter hire local villagers to drive the game to him. When the professional hunter refused, the committee member threw a temper tantrum along with various items of crockery and cutlery.

I know it is guilt by association but I felt ashamed that I belonged to the same body as this spoilt, unethical, little brat. What makes the matter even worse, is that although the facts of the incident were widely known, the individual went on to hold even higher office in the organization. What sort of message did this send to other members, to youngsters, to beginners? Was there one set of rules for politically well connected members and another set for the rest?

Certain of our local hunting institutions are no better and I know of one where the political infighting became so severe that telephones were tapped, meeting rooms bugged and the funds of the body misused to provide sheltered and unnecessary employment for certain sad sacks who were unable to make a living in the private sector.

And what about those people who drive through the veld blazing away at animals from the back of a bakkie? Or those who sit in well concealed hides at waterholes or overlooking well established game paths? The whole sorry point of this sad diatribe is that all the people involved are called hunters by the outside world and, in particular, the media. I know that I think the same as many millions of genuine hunters out there. We know our passion, our pursuit, is under threat from animal rightists and others. We know that these organizations are working hard to win the hearts and minds of many urbanites, in particular, using horrible examples such as those described above to do so. We know that if they win here in South Africa it will be the death knell for the hunting and conservation efforts in our country which has seen land under wildlife in private hands grow to cover nearly three times the area of all provincial and national parks combined. And this area continues to grow at the rate of approximately 500,000 ha p a.

Since the 1950s, we have seen our population of Bontebok recover from as low as 19 in number to a healthy huntable population of over 3 500. Similarly, white rhino have recovered from as few as 28 to nearly 12 000, Cape mountain zebra from about 11 to some 1 100, black wildebeest from about 34 to over 22 000. It will not escape the reader that those animals that have been hunted most assiduously have recovered best! It has, in fact, been empirically established that hunting has been the primary cause behind these major conservation success stories. And yet, the unethical, disgusting behavior of a few shameless individuals chips away and damages the fabric of all this good work and many other conservation initiatives based on sustainable and consumptive utilization.

So what can we the ordinary hunters do about the threats to our sport and the conservation and other industries which it supports? I remember shortly after the “canned lion” video was first shown on T.V., discussing the matter with a member of PHASA’s executive committee. I said that I thought that the first genuinely ethical hunting organization to be established would suck members away from the organizations described at the beginning of this article like a hot and thirsty man drinking a cold drink through a straw.

Shortly afterwards, I learnt that Robin Halse, doyen of the Eastern Cape hunting fraternity, and Rodney Kretzschmar, one of South Africa’s leading taxidermists, had made an attempt to convert PHASA into such an institution. They failed. They based their attempts on a set of guidelines produced by Robin, the late Steve Smith (who in his lifetime was a well-respected professional hunter and originator of the Uncle Stevie Award for the professional hunter who produced the best trophy in South Africa), and Chappie Sparks, a well-known Eastern Cape hunter.

The aims and objectives which these four eminent sportsmen wanted to achieve were the following:
Aims and objectives
1. To maintain, uphold and propagate by example a Code of Ethics in Field Sports which has been handed down over many generations.
2. To actively encourage, guide and teach the youth interested in field sports in the knowledge that they, the sportsmen of the future, will carry on the tradition.
3. To regard as a priority the conservation and improvement of the environment by both fellow sportsmen and owners of the land and make every effort to influence both the public and the authorities in these matters.
4. To conduct the sport with great care and consideration in order to preserve the sport for those that follow.”

The Code of Conduct which they wanted to institute in order to help give effect to these aims is set out below:
Code of Conduct
1. That at all times a member will extend every courtesy, privilege and assistance to a fellow field sportsman.
2. All hunting be conducted only during the hours of daylight.
3. That no creature be hunted for sport in an enclosed area of such size that such creature is not self-sufficient.
4. That no shooting take place from, or within a short distance of a vehicle, nor the use of vehicles to drive game.
5. That only firearms of such power and caliber that are capable of killing game quickly and efficiently at practical ranges be employed.
6. That all forms of competition in the field between Sportsmen whilst hunting and fishing be avoided.
7. That no creature be killed for sport, that is deemed to be immature, breeding or dependant and cannot, by virtue of its trophy or flesh, be fully utilized.
8. That every effort is made to respect and safeguard the property of the landowner.
9. That a landowner-member extent every courtesy, comfort and assistance possible to a member who hunts or fishes on his property.
10. That a Professional Hunter/Guide-member makes sure that his clients understand, and are fully aware of the Guild’s code of Ethics and Standards that will be upheld during the course of any hunt.
11. That a Sportsman respects with understanding, the attitudes, feelings and principles of those that do not engage in activities of Field sport.
12. That a Sportsman should conduct his sport with due regard to his own physical capabilities, recognize his limitations and responsibility to his companions or assistants.
13. The Guild recognizes that ‘culling’, ‘cropping’, ‘trapping’, ‘capture’ and vermin control are a necessary part of game management as long as they are conducted with consideration and humane treatment of the wildlife involved. However, at no time can these activities be regarded in the context of Field Sports.”

But the Code is to be a living set of rules and as is stated in the membership application form:
“The interpretation and implementation of a Code of Conduct and the standards a Sportsman sets will depend on each individual Sportsman’s conscientious behavior, and whilst many traditional manners must be upheld, many present day practices should be examined and evaluated. Above all it must be accepted that it is a privilege to hunt, not a right. To this end, therefore, the Guild considers that certain broad rules governing the conduct of Field Sport should be observed, and that it is irrelevant whether some of these basic rules are, or are not legally applied by current laws of the land.”

After Steve Smith’s untimely death in a motor vehicle accident, the Halse family acquired from his estate the rights to the world famous Rowland Ward’s Records of Big Game, housed in Rowland Ward Publications. The business is currently managed by Robin’s daughter, Jane, from the company’s offices in Houghton, Johannesburg and, together, due to popular pressure, they have decided to lend the name and weight of the Rowland Ward organization to the establishment of just the type of hunting and conservation organization so urgently needed in South Africa, in particular, and Africa, in general.

In response to the appeal from many hunters, Rowland Ward has published membership application forms to Rowland Ward’s Guild of Field Sportsmen. Of course, the Guild is currently in its infancy and much will depend on how many serious, honest and ethical hunters are prepared to put their money where their mouths are. I have no doubt that the response will be overwhelming. The Guild starts life with a number of advantages. Unlike so many other hunting organizations, it is untainted by any scandal. It is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards. It has the world famous Rowland Ward brand name to help market membership in the Guild. It has the offices and permanent staff of Rowland Ward to initiate the administration of the organization and it has credible leadership in the form of Robin Halse.

The initial membership benefits include a Guild tie or cap, special offers on Rowland Ward books and a bi-annual magazine which, knowing Rowland Ward Publications as I do, is sure to be of a high standard, if for no other reason than it will start with a wide, international circulation which is sure to appeal to advertisers. In due course, once the Record Book is made available via the internet, which is scheduled for later this year, Guild members will have access to it at much reduced rates.

The Guild is clearly not for everyone. In my discussions with Robin Halse he made it crystal clear that the Code of Conduct is central to and contains the pillars upon which the Guild is to be built. Unlike many ethical codes, which appear to be honored more in their breach than in obedience thereto, the Code of Conduct is to be firmly policed and upheld and the Guild will not shy away from terminating memberships where there are material breaches of the Code. In fact, each member is obliged to sign a form indemnifying the Guild from legal proceedings in the event he is sanctioned for misbehavior.

What it is not, as yet, is an accredited hunting association which South African hunters and sports shooters are now obliged to join in terms of the Firearms Control Act. As such, the Guild membership must be seen as a necessary adjunct to membership of such a body.
In my opinion however, the formation of something like a Guild of Field Sportsman is long overdue. Genuine hunters want and need an association based on honest, ethical and fair rules and regulations, impartially and fairly policed by a decent body of men, openly and democratically elected by their peers. Built on this foundation - and there are few if any organizations which can grow and prosper over the long term if they are built on any other type of foundation – the Guild can offer a home to those who genuinely have hunting at heart and who want to be able to hold their heads up high and proudly proclaim that they are not only hunters but hunters who belong to an organization with impeccable, authentic and traditional hunting roots, which not only upholds our ancient sport and profession but which stands for all that is good and right in this regard. And if this sounds idealistic, well, then so be it.

The vision is there. It is for those like minded individuals who have been hankering for such a body and who share these views to step forward. It will be for those individuals to provide the flesh and blood and funds to clothe the bare bones set out by Robin, Steve and Chappie. To my mind, all new ideas have a proper time and place in which they should be launched and the time and place for the Guild is now. If you are a genuine, ethical hunter who shares the aims and objectives of the Guild, please join - the African continent needs you.

For a membership application form for the Rowland Ward’s Guild of Field Sportsmen please contact Jane Halse janehalse@rowlandward.com


Boone and Crockett Club: Fair Chase and Conservation SInce 1887

Republished Courtesy of African Indaba


Boone and Crockett Club:
Fair Chase and Conservation Since 1887
By Jack Reneau, Director Big Game Records, Boone and Crockett Club

The Mission of the Boone and Crockett Club
It is the policy of the Boone and Crockett Club to promote the guardianship and provident management of big game and associated wildlife in North America and to maintain the highest standards of Fair Chase and sportsmanship in all aspects of big game hunting, in order that this resource of all the people may survive and prosper in its natural habitats. Consistent with this objective, the Club supports the use and enjoyment of our wildlife heritage to the fullest extent by this and future generations of mankind.

Formation of the Boone and Crockett Club
Theodore Roosevelt, a dedicated sportsman and visionary, founded the Boone and Crockett Club in 1887. In 1883, Roosevelt, an avid hunter, outdoorsman, and explorer returned from his ranching days in North Dakota with a mission. He had witnessed first-hand the negative affect on big game populations from unchecked exploitation. He called a meeting of several of his friends who shared his passion for the outdoors. One of these gentleman hunters, George Bird Grinnell, described this gathering as “an association of men bound together by their interest in game and fish, to take charge of all matters pertaining to the enactment and carrying out of laws on the subject.” Successful men of science, business, industry, politics, and public service, had joined together out of their common concern for dwindling wildlife populations and irresponsible land use, to conserve wild resources for the future. Because of the dedication of these respected leaders and riflemen hunters, this meeting eventually resulted in the foundation for the greatest conservation revolution in the history of mankind and the survival of our hunting heritage.

B&C First for Conservation
When Roosevelt took office in 1901 the contemporary thinking on natural resource matters was that of “protection” and “preservation.” Through his discussions with Grinnell “conservation” became the keynote of his administration. The word soon appeared in dictionaries defined as “prudent use without waste.” Roosevelt’s administration produced a federal natural resource program that was balanced between economic development and aesthetic preservation, setting aside and protecting 150 million acres of national forests. In seven years, more progress was made in natural resource management than the nation had seen in a century, or has seen since.

Throughout the 20th century, Roosevelt and the hunter-conservationists of the Boone and Crockett Club continued to make significant contributions to wildlife and environmental welfare. Some of these early accomplishments of Club members include:

• The establishment of game laws, the enforcement of hunting seasons and bag limits;
• The abolishment of market hunting practices;
• The protection of Yellowstone National Park and the establishment of Glacier and Denali National Parks;
• The establishment of the National Park Service, National Forest Service, and the National Wildlife Refuge System;
• Passing of the 1894 and 1900 Lacey Acts, Federal Aid to Wildlife Restoration
(Pittman-Robertson) Act, the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, Migratory Bird Act of
1913, the Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act of 1934, and the Cooperative Wildlife Research
Unit Program.
Boone and Crockett Club Members were so effective that their conservation history, commissioned to be written in 1960, was so nearly a complete history of the conservation movement that it was expanded to include non-Club related items. This history was detailed in James B. Trefethen’s book, An American Crusade for Wildlife, which has been accepted as a landmark text for conservation.

The Rules of Fair Chase

In a land of abundance, free-spirited pioneers and outdoorsmen were naturally resistant to change, new laws, and limits. Early European law mandated that all wildlife belonged to the crown; therefore, American pioneers shunned anything that resembled old-world restrictions.
As indicated in Roosevelt’s master plan, a set of guidelines had to be established. An ethical code of conduct for all sportsmen was required. If wildlife was to survive, and for “conservation” (wise use) to prevail over “preservation” (non-use) sportsmen must lead the charge. With the leadership of Roosevelt, the Boone and Crockett Club’s “Fair Chase” tenants encouraged laws in the states and provinces to maintain sport hunting at a high level of sportsmanship and ethical action. This “Fair Chase” code directly engaged the hunters’ conscience to enjoy hunting in an ethical fashion. Born from these efforts were the concept of public stewardship and the realization that wildlife did indeed belong to the people.
Throughout its existence, the Boone and Crockett Club never skirted thorny issues. Changing the culture and thinking of the American sportsmen, was perhaps, one of the most difficult, yet significant, accomplishments of the Club. The Club’s Fair Chase statement provided the foundation for hunter ethics, as we know them today. The public image of the hunter was raised to that of a sportsman – one who can kill, yet protect and nurture what is taken.

They Belong to All

One of the early challenges facing the Club, and a successful launch of the conservation movement was the disconnect that existed between citizens and wildlife. This disconnect was held over from the old days of European rule – no public ownership of wildlife. To bring the public into the realization that wildlife in the “new country” did indeed belong to them and was in their care, the Club went into action with two major initiatives – the protection of Yellowstone National Park and the establishment of the National Collection of Heads and Horns.

From the Club’s first formal meetings a plan was initiated to save Yellowstone National Park (the Nation’s first national park) from poachers, mining and timber speculators, and the Northern Pacific Railroad, which was lobbying to gain a right of way west, through the Park. “Resolve that a committee of 5 be appointed by the chair to promote useful and proper legislation toward the enlargement and better Government of Yellowstone.” A single resolution, in a single sentence, but it marked the beginning of the Boone and Crockett Club’s conservation crusade.

Through a series of exposé editorials in Club member, George Bird Grinnell’s Forest and Stream magazine, the public was drawn into the cause. The dramatic telling of a bison-poaching incident within the pages of Forest and Stream was a national sensation that focused public attention and outcry on the serious plight of Yellowstone. Sportsmen, nature lovers, and those who planed to someday visit the Park finally said, “No more.” In 1894 the Yellowstone Protection Act (Lacey Act of 1894) was pushed through Congress by Club Member, Senator John F. Lacey. The laws gave Yellowstone the staff, funding, protection, enforcement, and penalties for violations it needed to be maintained as pristine national treasure for all people.

The National Collection of Heads and Horns was another brainchild of the Club. It was a trophy exhibit opened for public display in 1922 at the Bronx Zoo in New York City, in cooperation with the New York Zoological Society (also founded and directed by several B&C Members) and the Bronx Zoo, of which Club member, William T. Hornaday was its first Director. The inscription over the entrance to the exhibit read “In Memory of the Vanishing Big Game of the World.” The display sparked public interest in big game animals, elevated the concept of public stewardship of wildlife, and created the momentum needed to launch a conservation and recovery effort that saved many of these great animals, and hunting itself from extinction.

Once the positive effects of the conservation movement began to pay dividends, the plight of big game animals was no longer as much of a concern. Interest in the collection had waned and the building, which housed the trophies, became used for storage space. After a burglary in 1974 the Club rescued what remained of the collection and found a temporary home for them at the national headquarters of the National Rifle Association in Washington, D.C. In 1981 the collection was permanently moved to the Buffalo Bill Historical Center in Cody, Wyoming, where it resides today as a testimonial to the success of the North American Model of Conservation.

Why Keep Records
The grave condition our big game species were in at the turn of the century had many responsible sportsmen wondering if these great animals would decline to the point of Audubon’s bighorn sheep, and the eastern and Merriam’s elk – extinction. Certain species of animal and bird life were vanishing and before it was too late, a biological record of their historic range and mere existence was needed. The Boone and Crockett Club again accepted the challenge.

When the Club’s Executive Committee appointed Theodore Roosevelt, Casper Whitney, and Archibald Rogers to the Club’s first Records Committee in 1902 it wasn’t to develop a scoring system for bragging rights, endorsements or what fees to charge for the taking of a trophy. Their goal was a system to record biological, harvest, and location data on the vanishing big game animals of North America.

With the publishing of the first edition of Records of North American Big Game in 1932, the Club set in motion a system that would continue to elevate our native big game species to an even higher plane of public stewardship. A by-product of this book was an increased interest in trophy hunting, which subsequently motivates more hunters to become interested in the conservation movement.

Records-keeping activities enabled the Club to promote its doctrine of ethical hunting by accepting only those trophies taken under “Fair Chase.” Through prestige received from the success and acceptance of the Records Book, the Boone and Crockett Club had the ability to forge a new understanding of species biology and the need for the management of big game species.

When it was reported that the Club would reject cougar trophies entry into the records book from states that offered a bounty for them, the result led to cougar being elevated to the status of a big game animal. This allowed the cougar both management and protection such a classification warranted. This same awareness and recognition became available to other species such as the Central Canada barren ground caribou found in the Northwest Territories. The declaration of a separate records book category allowed caribou from parts of Northwest Territories to become eligible for funding and management from the government. These territories received a vital boost to their economies from the sale of licenses, tags, and a new interest in these great animals.

In Quebec, when complaints were received from hunters about the practices of caribou outfitters and guides, the Boone and Crockett Club contacted Quebec’s Game and Fish Department. If questionable hunting practices continued, the Quebec-Labrador caribou would no longer be accepted for the Records Book. As a result, ethical, Fair Chase hunting became the norm rather than the exception.

Into The Second Century
Throughout its history the Boone and Crockett Club has supported science, research, and education. In recognition of the Club’s 100th anniversary, Club members committed to expand this purpose by purchasing the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Ranch (TRM) in 1986. This 6,600-acre working cattle ranch is located on Montana’s Rocky Mountain Front adjoining the Bob Marshall Wilderness and other privately owned ranches. This region encompasses prime wildlife wintering grounds. Here, habitat research and land management practices present an example to community ranchers demonstrating that diversified populations of big game, even predators like grizzly bear and cougar can be compatible with profits from ranching.
Open to the public each fall, the TRM Ranch, through a Block Management agreement with the State of Montana, allows people of all ages to hunt on the Ranch; however, special emphasis is given to youth hunters who must be accompanied by an adult mentor. Hunting traditions will be preserved in the future through hunter/mentor opportunities like those who enjoy the privilege of participating in Fair Chase hunting, in natural, well managed environments.
In 2001, the Boone and Crockett Club constructed the Elmer E. Rasmussen Wildlife Conservation Education Center on the Ranch. This Center serves as the headquarters for the Lee and Penny Anderson Conservation Education programs. Using the TRM Ranch as an outdoor classroom, the Club’s K-12 Education Program helps students and teachers build lasting awareness, understanding, and appreciation for the living and non-living components of our natural world. Through the Conservation Across Boundaries (CAB) program, teachers from across the country are invited to participate in workshops where wildlife and habitat conservation curriculum models are taught benefiting both teachers and their students.

New Knowledge
History has proven there is no better investment in the future than knowledge through education. In keeping with the Boone and Crockett legacy of leadership, the Club launched a pilot program in 1993. This program funds the research of university graduate students who have chosen wildlife or natural resources as their life’s work. The first B&C Endowed Professorship Chair found its home at the epicenter of today’s resource challenges – the Rocky Mountain West. Here, at the University of Montana in Missoula, the Boone and Crockett Professor of Wildlife Conservation plays a central role in the Club’s Conservation Program. The Professor teaches, guides graduate student research, and offers public service in the fields of wildlife conservation and ecosystem management for sustainable development. By focusing on education at the highest level, the Club insures that investments made today will continues to pay dividends for decades as these students advance in their careers.
In 2005, success of this program in Montana was replicated at Texas A&M University when a second chair was endowed. The focus of this program is the impact of state and federal environmental regulations on private lands and wildlife populations; the potential of consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife resource use on landowner income; and public perceptions of private land stewardship and resource conservation. Other endowed professorships are planned at other universities throughout the U.S.

For more information about the Boone & Crockett Club and the many activities it is involved in, call +1-406-542-1888 for a free copy of the general Boone & Crockett Club brochure, and visit the Boone & Crockett Club website at: http://www.booneandcrockettclub.com/.

Thursday, May 03, 2007

The Sportsmen's Voice!!!!


Thank you to:
The Congressional Spotsmen's Foundation
For allowing HuntingLife.com to republish this newsletter for your enjoyment!

May 3, 2007
Volume 5, Issue 9



Refuge Partners Release Report Detailing Budget Problems

The National Wildlife Refuge System stands to lose 20 percent of its workforce and leave more than half of its refuges operating at a loss in the next five years unless Congress increases its budget, according to a report released by the Cooperative Alliance for Refuge Enhancement (CARE), of which the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation is a member. The report documents how the chronic under-funding of the nation’s refuge system is impacting not only infrastructure maintenance, but also staffing, hours of access and hunting and fishing programs.

Rep. Ron Kind (D-WI), one of the leaders of the Congressional Wildlife Refuge Caucus and Co-Chair of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus, is asking the Natural Resources Committee to hold a hearing on the refuge system's budget woes. "Refuges virtually touch every congressional district in the nation, so everyone has a purpose for doing a better job of protecting them," Kind said.

Ads Reinforce Connection Between Legislation and Hunting and Fishing
An ad campaign aimed at continued awareness of the connection between legislation and hunting and fishing has been launched by the Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation. The ads feature messages such as, “The future of hunting and fishing is also in politics - on the streets of Washington, D.C.”

Similar ads focused on state legislation have also been developed for the National Assembly of Sportsmen’s Caucuses. With the 2008 elections looming, it is important for sportsmen to make the connection between the actions of their elected officials and their enjoyment of hunting and fishing. In 2004, sportsmen and women had a likely voter rate of 80% and a majority said they considered it essential that a candidate share their views on hunting and fishing issues. High resolution copies of the ads can be downloaded through the CSF website.



Wildlife Violators Compact Legislation Introduced in Ohio
Ohio Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus Co-Chair Representative Bob Latta (R-Bowling Green) recently introduced HB 153, legislation that would permit the Ohio Department of Natural Resource’s Division of Wildlife to enter into the National Wildlife Violators Compact. “Protecting Ohio’s wildlife from poachers and others who would violate the hunting and fishing regulations is crucial if we wish to continue having wildlife in Ohio,” stated Latta.

Currently 26 states are members of the compact which links a state’s database of individuals who have violated that state’s hunting and fishing regulations resulting in a suspended or revoked license to a national database in order to prevent the violators from moving from state to state and committing the same crime.

Michigan Working to Make Hunting/Fishing License Voter Registration Easier
Michigan Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus Co-Chairs Senators Michelle McManus (R-Lake Leelanau), Bruce Patterson (R-Canton), and Michael Prusi (D-Ishpeming) have introduced a pair of bills, SB 438 & 439, to make registering to vote even easier for sportsmen in the Wolverine State. The legislation would require that resident hunting, fishing or fur harvesters licenses include a voter registration section which would serve as the application to vote if signed.

Tax Credit and Wildlife Cruelty Bills Introduced in New York

New York Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus Co-Chair Sen. Elizabeth Little (R-Queensbury) has introduced legislation which would allow landowners of 25 or more contiguous acres to receive a 25 percent tax credit on their real estate taxes if they place the land in a forestry stewardship or habitat conservation agreement with the state. The land must be deemed valuable to fish and wildlife habitat, including hunting, fishing, trapping and wildlife viewing-related recreation.

The National Assembly of Sportsmen's Caucuses is keeping an eye on legislation introduced in the Empire State that would extend the coverage of the state’s felony animal cruelty law to cover wildlife. The legislation is not currently written to affect lawful hunting or trapping licensed by the Department of Environmental Conservation, but NASC has observed similar legislation in other sportsmen’s caucus states where the written legislation has not been clear on how it might impact hunting.

From Utah to Vermont, Sportsmen’s Caucuses Take to the Range
State legislators around the country have been turning in their ties and jackets for shooting vests, taking a day off from voting to break clays and introduce their colleagues to recreational shooting and hunting. The outreach opportunities have been cited as great ways to remind them of what they are working to protect and promote as members of state sportsmen’s caucuses.

In Utah, National Wild Turkey Federation state president Jon Leonard provided one-on-one mentoring to Utah Caucus Co-Chair Senator Allen Christensen (R-North Ogden) by introducing him to the joys of turkey hunting. In July, the NWTF chapter will assist in organizing an event for the newly formed Utah Sportsmen’s Legislative Caucus.

Members of the Illinois Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus members gathered for the 15th Annual Dinner and Auction, which was sponsored by a National Assembly of Sportsmen's Caucuses partner, the National Shooting Sports Foundation. “As more and more state legislatures attempt to pass stringent gun-control measures, such as recent proposals in Illinois to ban assault weapons, it is incumbent upon industry to support those state representatives who support us," said NSSF senior vice president and general counsel Lawrence Keane. "Through active participation in sportsmen's caucuses around the country, we help to accomplish this mission."

In Georgia, more than a dozen legislators shot skeet alongside officials with the Governor’s office and partner hunting organizations including the Heritage and Wildlife Conservation Foundation, Georgia Chapter Safari Club International, and Quality Deer Management Association in the Georgia Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus shoot. The professional shooting instructors at the Tom Lowe Shooting Grounds had two legislators who had never shot before hitting skeet in no time and left them very excited about going back again.

Approximately 30 members of the Vermont Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus turned out to a shoot hosted by the Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs and National Rifle Association, a partner of the NASC. Many of the legislators in attendance had little or no shooting experience, something that volunteer instructors quickly remedied. By the end of the day, all shooters left behind a trap field full of busted clays. Caucus Co-Chair Rep. Steven Adams (R-Hartland) noted, ”It was ironic that the same day lawmakers in neighboring states were debating gun control, legislators in Vermont were practicing muzzle control.”

The leadership of the Missouri Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus rounded up more than 50 members of the General Assembly to take part in their annual day at the range and recruited the Missouri Department of Conservation staff to assist legislators with limited shooting experience. The legislators enjoyed their time on the trap, skeet and 5 stand fields before heading back to cast votes that afternoon.

In Florida, nineteen members of the Legislators' Sportsmen’s Caucus gathered to enjoy a low country boil and celebrate hunting, shooting and fishing in the Sunshine State. More than three dozen staffers and Caucus supporters also attended the event, the second dinner hosted by the Caucus this session. Back in March, a dozen members of the Caucus met for a Wild Game Cookout. Caucus Co-chair Rep. Baxter Troutman (R-Winter Haven) stated, “The freshmen members, and even some of the more veteran members of the legislature, are really starting to understand the value of the Sportsmen’s Caucus, and these informal dinners give them a great chance to relax and enjoy each other’s company, while at the same time understand the value of Florida sportsmen’s activities to our economy.”



The Sportsman's Link to Congress and State Capitols
Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation and National Assembly of Sportsmen's Caucuses
110 North Carolina Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20003