Humane Society of the United States Howls about Wolves

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is howling about the new wolf management initiatives and recent delisting action.

Wayne Pacelle, CEO of the animal rights organization HSUS, blogged recently that: “Of course we saw some setbacks and tragedies in 2011, too, such as removing federal protections for wolves in the lower 48 states…” Among the leaders in that removal of the federal protection for numerous problem wolves was the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation (USSAF).

While Idaho and Montana established wolf hunting seasons in 2011, thousands of miles to the east, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service finally agreed —under pressure from many sides— to delist the Western Great Lakes region gray wolf from the Endangered Species Act.

Wolf populations have far exceeded recovery goals in that region. For example, Michigan’s Department of Natural Resources estimates that nearly 700 gray wolves were roaming the state in 2011(www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153–256417–,00.html).

The delisting did not come easy. It took the USSAF and other groups to threaten to sue the Service if Western Great Lakes region wolves were not delisted and returned to state management.

Joining the USSAF in this HSUS defeat are the Wisconsin Bear Hunters Association, Dairyland Committee of Safari Club International Chapters of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Hunters Rights Coalition, Whitetails of Wisconsin, and Wisconsin Firearms Owners, Rangers, Clubs, and Educators, Inc.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

Help Defeat the Iowa Ban on Traditional Ammunition for Dove Season

Iowa Firearms Coalition

Iowa --(Ammoland.com)- Iowa Firearms Coalition, and your friends at NRA, have been working hard at the Capitol this session already!

As you may have read in Iowa media outlets we are working diligently to overturn the ban on traditional ammunition that was slipped in as an amendment last session by the Natrual Resources Commission.

We are working hard on defending your rights and you can help us out by taking action here!

The Commission has taken a page straight out of the anti-hunting extremist groups’ playbook to deter hunting through traditional ammunition bans.

Anti-conservation fanatics failed at the federal level after the EPA rejected their lead-ban petition and have now placed their focus on Iowa knowing that doves are the most popular and abundant game bird hunted in America. This traditional ammunition ban is designed to price hunters out of the market and keep them from taking part in traversing Iowa’s fields and forests after the historic dove hunting legislation passed this year.

The Commission did not cite any relevant scientific studies showing negative effects of traditional ammunition when proposing this amendment last session, and has simply jumped in the political bed with anti-hunting extremists.

Just look at what Iowa’s DNR Director, Roger Lande, had to say about the ban in the Commission’s press release: “There will be a number of hunters who will be opposed to this decision, but at the end of the day, this action by the commission will help protect Iowa’s environment and wildlife from the adverse affects of lead.”

Dove populations are doing better than ever all while the vast majority of states allow traditional ammunition for dove hunting.

This amendment is the same position the Commission took earlier this year when it attempted to ban the use of lead shot on numerous state and federal wildlife areas across Iowa and said that they would “begin limiting the use of lead for all hunting and fishing on all public areas.” The Commission is blatantly subverting the will of the legislature, where the state House debated the lead issue and overwhelmingly rejected it.

Also, the Iowa DNR has a section on its website titled “Get the Lead Out” which has language eerily similar to the Center for Biological Diversity (“Get the Lead Out”) campaign – and yes, this is a propaganda piece written by the group that petitioned the EPA to ban all lead and traditional ammunition in America!

The Commission’s first attempt at a traditional ammunition ban last session was defeated with Governor Terry Branstad’s help, but this amendment has made their intentions clear. They intend to keep trying until they can get something to stick and once they do they will take this ban across the board.

Please help us take action on this by clicking here. By taking time to make your voice heard we can once again overcome yet another attack on your rights here in Iowa!

Also, please consider becoming a member today. Iowa Firearms Coalition is the only Iowa-based Second Amendment organization whose leadership is completely focused on your defending and advancing your Second Amendment rights. Help join the fight today and know that 100% of your investment goes directly to the cause by clicking here!

Defending your Second Amendment rights in Iowa,

About Iowa Firearms Coalition:
The mission of the Iowa Firearms Coalition is to be THE firearms rights organization in Iowa, representing Second Amendment concerns for all firearms owners in the state. We will staunchly defend the rights of hunters and sportsmen as well as the rights of all Iowans to defend themselves and their loved ones. We seek to partner with other like-minded organizations to increase our effectiveness in accomplishing these goals. Visit: www.iowafc.org

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- A recent USA Today full-page ad went straight for the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) jugular vein and decried the multimillion dollar fund raising and animal rights organization for only giving one percent of the millions of dollars it rakes in annually to actual animal shelters.

The ad, straight from an HSUS playbook with a sad looking puppy centered on the page, was sponsored by HumaneforPets.com.

That site is a subsidiary of Center for Consumer Freedom, also the owner of the HumaneWatch.org website. This is an organization that has been diligently working for years to, as they say “expose the HSUS as a fraud”.

Ad exposes the HSUS as a fraud

The Center for Consumer Freedom and HumaneforPets.com also placed the advertisement on a prominent billboard in New York City. Similar advertising messages appeared in The Washington Post, The New York Times, Variety, and the Washington, DC edition of The Wall Street Journal. There’s no doubt that the November 30, 2011 ads in national newspapers caught the attention of many, including HSUS president Wayne Pacelle.

Of course, Pacelle and the HSUS came out swinging over the bad publicity. Odd though, HSUS never denied the statement in the ad that HSUS raised more than $131 million in 2010 yet only passed one percent of that amount to animal shelters.

In his November 30 blog, (http://hsus.typepad.com/wayne/2011/11/rick-berman-scam.html), Pacelle takes a direct stab at the head of the Washington, DC-based Center for Consumer Freedom’s Richard (Rick) Berman.

Interesting Pacelle comments (and the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance interpretations) include:

• “He (Berman) runs “charitable” organizations, like the Center for Consumer Freedom (which fights the HSUS)… yet his groups don’t feed one animal…” notes Pacelle in the direct attack.

USSA – However, nothing in Berman’s literature ever said he feeds or houses animals. Berman’s newly formed group will reportedly help house and fund animal shelters. Animal shelters, and the feeding dogs and cats, are also not listed activities reported in the 2010 IRS form 990 filed by the HSUS. Education and research are listed as HSUS activities.

• “He’s (Berman) got the mansion in McLean, Va., and the Bentley in the driveway as the spoils, with his accountant wife standing by to tally the profits,” quipped Pacelle. HSUS actually ran a picture of the guy’s home in what can only be construed as an act of desperation to show a lucrative lifestyle.

USSA – The HSUS certainly knows much about lucrative. The 2010 HSUS IRS form 990 reports that the HSUS spent more than $5.5 million on office expenses in 2010 and more than $3.5 million on travel during the 12 month period. Read it yourself at http://www.humanesociety.org/assets/pdfs/financials/2010-form-990.pdf.

• Another Pacelle quote was “now, this Beltway con artist (Pacelle referring to Richard Berman) –who has probably spent as much time as anyone in recent years fighting against animal welfare–has formed a new supposed animal welfare charity. He’s calling it the “Humane Society for Shelter Pets,” blasts Pacelle.

USSA – The HSUS lobbies against the agriculture industry, hunting, trapping, dog breeders, pet stores and numerous other groups. Their lobbying efforts cost lots of money. In 2010, for example, HSUS reported spending more than $13.5 with a fundraising consultant and more than $10 million on marketing efforts to promote HSUS and its programs. More than $1.7 million was spent on legal fees by the HSUS that year alone.

• “In addition to our own full agenda of helping animals through education, advocacy, and direct care, the HSUS gives millions to other organizations. In the last five years, the HSUS has given more than $43 million in grants to other animal organizations,” reports Pacelle.

USSA – Now, the math means with annual HSUS donations received during those five years of approximately $100 million or more, the $43 million came out of a $500 million-plus cash pool at HSUS. In other words, they spent far less than 10 percent of their income helping other animal organizations.

• Finally, Pacelle’s blog questions Berman’s expenditures: “According to the most recently available federal tax filings for Berman, the Center for Consumer Freedom devoted massive financial resources—almost $1 million in 2010—to attacking animal charities, and spent an estimated $131,572 to oppose animal welfare legislation and ballot initiatives in 6 states,” Pacelle toots.

USSA – The HSUS should understand what massive really means. When you again look at the HSUS 2010 IRS 990 report, the group received more than $131 million (most from donations) and reported spending only about $4 million on program expenses. That is a real eye opener.

Those HSUS dollars and this Pacelle attack make Richard Berman out to be a real David, and his stone has struck a very BIG Goliath head.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

Note: Below is an open letter from Rick Berman, owner of Berman and Company (a public affairs firm) and executive director of the Center for Consumer Freedom (which runs HumaneWatch).

Letters to the AmmoLand Editor: Got something on your mind? Let us know and you can see it here.

USA --(Ammoland.com)- USA Today once did a feature on me titled “Got a Nasty Fight? Here’s Your Man.” I was flattered, fancying myself a kind of bare-knuckle-brawling advocate for free-market issues.

But I realized last week that when it comes to “nasty,” I’m a novice. If you really want to learn something about how to wage a nasty (and I mean vicious) battle, look no further than Wayne Pacelle, CEO of The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).

In the past his organization has hired people to stalk and photograph me at my home, hired unemployed journalists to write hit pieces about me, filed erroneous and failed ethics complaints, and he has made reams of false and libelous claims about my organization’s motives and our funders. But recently he’s taken his personal brand of intimidation and harassment to a whole new level.

Last week a new animal advocacy group called the Humane Society for Shelter Pets (HSSP) jumped onto the scene with a high-profile advertising campaign asking people to give to their local pet shelters instead of to national groups that give the impression of helping shelters, but don’t pass more than a pittance of the money along. I’m proud to say that my firm, Berman and Company, helped get this excellent group off the ground by providing substantial pro bono PR and operational services. The group is managed by two long-time animal advocates, Jeff Douglas, who has 30 years of experience promoting veterinarians, and Diana Culp, the former director of education for Humane Society of the United States who now works at a local animal shelter. The group’s Board of Directors is chaired by Debbie Price, Director of Education and Policy at one of the nation’s largest non-profit groups.

You’d think that this venerable team coming together in an organization devoted to encouraging funding local pet shelters wouldn’t be controversial. Unfortunately for the group, Wayne Pacelle does not like competition. He was apoplectic at the notion that people would forego giving to his behemoth organization in favor of local shelters and irate that a pet shelter group was pointing out that HSUS — despite more than 85 percent of the animals in their ads being dogs and cats — gives only 1 percent of the money it raises to local pet shelters.

Rather than respond directly to HSSP’s concerns, Mr. Pacelle has lashed out wildly against me, my firm, and the non-profits my firm manages, writing on his blog:

In forming his new group, [Rick Berman] hasn’t come out and said he likes cruelty. He’s hoping you forgot his efforts to defend sealing, puppy mills, and other forms of abuse. But today, by saying all animal welfare money should go to animal shelters, he’s saying that no money should go to combat puppy mills, animal fighting ventures, factory farms, captive hunts, the exotic animal trade, the fur trade, or other animal welfare problems.

First of all, HSSP isn’t my group. While my firm has in the past established a number of non-profits (most of which are 15-20 years old) to educate the public on free-market issues, this group is different. My firm simply wanted to help this shelter organization get off the ground and so we donated over 1,000 hours of our time to its efforts. Check its 990’s (publicly available tax returns). Wayne Pacelle is simply trying to change the conversation.

Also, no matter how many times Wayne Pacelle claims that I or any organization affiliated with me defends or is funded by cock fighters, etc., won’t make it true. I don’t defend animal abusers, but one of my firm’s managed non-profits does defend farmers. As far as I’m concerned, farmers are not animal abusers.

As has been said to Mr. Pacelle in the cease and desist that was sent to him and his Board of Directors, the allegations related to sealers, puppy millers, cock fighters, etc., are entirely false. Neither I, nor any Berman and Company-managed organization gets money from any of these groups, nor do we defend them. Mr. Pacelle is aware that he is making false and defamatory statements against me, my firm and its non-profit clients, and yet he continues to do so with a wanton disregard for the truth. And frankly, by doing so he puts HSUS in legal peril. (Ironically, the only known animal abuser in the mix here is actually a partner of Pacelle and HSUS: Convicted dogfighting kingpin Michael Vick. Pacelle has even said that Vick “would do a good job as a pet owner.”)

Finally, not I, nor any of the organizations managed by my firm have ever said that “no money should go to combat puppy mills, animal fighting ventures, factory farms, captive hunts, the exotic animal trade, the fur trade, or other animal welfare problems.” What we are saying is that donors should be clear about where their money is going. If people want to support HSUS’s animal-rights (as distinct from animal-welfare), anti-meat agenda, then by all means do so.

But 71 percent of the public believes that HSUS is an umbrella group for local shelters and HSUS actively perpetuates this confusion by running emotionally manipulative advertising campaigns in which 85 percent of the images are of dogs and cats. HSUS is using its largess to purposefully confuse people about what it does and where its money goes. I thought it was worth my firm’s time to donate our help to an organization that would set the record straight about HSUS and encourage people to give local. That type of “record setting” is what this firm does every day over a wide range of issues.

This new organization does not collect money from the public and, like I said, much of my firm’s work has been pro bono. So all of Wayne’s wailing that there is some personal enrichment on my end is bogus. Any inquiry from the IRS about our work has been answered completely and allowed us to remain in good standing.

Since HSSP launched, it has been welcomed warmly by the shelter community, with over 500 shelters signing on immediately to the HSSP mission of educating the public. Pacelle on the other hand has gone nuclear to keep people from hearing the truth about HSUS’s deceptive advertising campaign.

In fact, HSUS has done so many terrible things in the last week that I have to enumerate them in bullet format:

• HSUS is harassing and intimidating HSSP’s co-director Didi Culp at her place of work. Because she used to work for them, they are most threatened by what she has to say. They have gone so far as to file baseless ethics complaints against her in order to intimidate her into silence.
• HSUS is reaching out to its network of animal rights bloggers to repeat the false and defamatory claims about me across the internet, even going so far as to use information about my children and family. These bloggers are also encouraging people to file false claims against HSSP with the Federal Trade Commission.
• HSUS and their animal rights minions have started several websites attacking me and people on my staff, both current and former.
• Following the HSSP launch, one of the websites managed by my firm was mysteriously hacked and modified to include a virus. I can’t say for certain that this is HSUS or someone in the broader animal rights community, but it’s a mighty coincidence.
• Pacelle has referred to me publicly as a “con man” and the “king of charity fraud” among other libelous statements. Furthermore, he keeps referring to me as a tobacco lobbyist and alleging that I tell people that “smoking is fine,” despite knowing full well that I haven’t done any work on tobacco issues in over a decade—and when I did it was related to retaining separated smoking sections in restaurants. I never told anyone that “smoking is fine” with regard to the health impact.
• Pacelle’s favorite scurrilous claim is that I pocket the “lion’s share” of “90 percent of funds that wash through [my] other misnamed ‘charities.’” First of all, Mr. Pacelle is getting cute with the word “charities” here. The organizations that Berman and Company manages are non-profit groups and trade associations that educate the public about various issues. This is a typical Wayne Pacelle straw man. Second, Berman and Company doesn’t “wash” the money, it bills the money for services rendered. And it’s nonsense that the “lion’s share” goes to me. Like any business, the money goes to pay the staff’s salaries, keep the lights on, pay for advertising, etc…

And that’s Wayne Pacelle’s whole game. Rather than fight about the facts or ideas, he strips every position I’ve ever taken of its nuance and presents it out of context. So when he says that I “defend drunk driving” and “fight MADD,” the truth is that the Berman and Company-managed American Beverage Institute (ABI) has legitimate disagreements with MADD over policy issues. And on many of those issues, the founder of MADD—who I worked with for years—is in agreement with ABI.

Unfortunately for Wayne, people will be distracted by this personal attack approach for only so long. Eventually he’ll have to answer for his organization’s dishonest advertising and fundraising campaigns and explain to the American public why he gets them to give HSUS money with pictures of sad dogs and cats, but gives 1 penny on the dollar to local shelters. And if I were him, I would stop telling reporters that HSUS’s TV ads contain a disclaimer that HSUS isn’t associated with local pet shelters. We looked at all of their ads over the past two years, and over 90 percent of them don’t have a disclaimer on them. And the ones that do require a magnifying glass to understand.

The Humane Society for Shelter Pets is an exciting new organization with important goals. At the end of the day, this new group is going to succeed in getting the word out about the importance of giving to your local shelter and the American public is going to realize that HSUS is altogether different from local humane societies—despite its best efforts at brand confusion. So no matter how nasty Wayne and HSUS get, they won’t stop me from being proud of my contribution to this excellent new organization and he won’t be able to stop its leadership from excelling. And that’s all that matters.

Anti-Hunting BEAR Group Receives Pants on Fire Liar Award

AmmoLand Gun News

New Jersey --(Ammoland.com)- Today, December 8th 2011, the New Jersey Star Ledger News Paper featured a story calling out a small group of radical New Jersey Animal Rights activist for a blatantly lying to show support for their cause.

The BEAR Group, who’s website continued to claim that they have the support of 99% of New Jersey residents, received the papers “Pants On Fire” award for lying.

From the article:

“Our ruling

A black bear advocacy group claimed on its website that 99 percent of New Jersey voters oppose hunting.

That number is way off. The organization acknowledges it’s wrong, but late in the afternoon on Dec. 7, more than a day after PolitiFact New Jersey initially contacted the group, the statement was still on the website — even after Jones said a webmaster would be notified to change it.

The statement drops to the ridiculous level for that reason, earning a Pants on Fire!”

Read the story here: http://tiny.cc/by8i1

National Animal Interest Alliance

Trenton, NJ --(Ammoland.com)- A bill with vague language, unenforceable, and burdensome.

New Jersey bill A1083/S1182 has passed the Assembly and now moves to the full Senate for a vote. The next Senate quorum is scheduled for December 8. Immediate communication to your State Senator is critical to stop this overly vague, burdensome bill from becoming law. See bill here.

The New Jersey Senate Economic Growth Committee statement is here.

This bill would make it easier to convict someone of animal cruelty than it would to convict them of cruelty to a child.

The language of the bill is vague in defining “minimum care.” Too much is left to the eye of the beholder, who may have little or no knowledge about animal husbandry which is appropriate to the individual situation.

This bill would be complaint driven, which allows for innocent individuals to be targeted by nasty neighbors [or animal rights groups] and who would then have to defend themselves against cruelty accusations.

Compare the language in the bill with existing law regarding children.

9:6-1. Cruelty to a child shall consist in any of the following acts: (a) inflicting unnecessarily severe corporal punishment upon a child; (b) inflicting upon a child unnecessary suffering or pain, either mental or physical; (c) habitually tormenting, vexing or afflicting a child; (d) any willful act of ommission or commision whereby unnecessary pain and suffering, whether mental or physical, is caused or permitted to be inflicted on a child; (e) or exposing a child to unnecessary hardship, fatigue or mental or physical strains that may tend to injure the healthy or physical or moral well-being of such child.

Neglect of a child shall consist in any of the following acts, by anyone having the custody or control of the child: (a) willfully failing to provide proper and sufficient food, clothing, maintenance, regular school education as required by law, medical attendance or surgical treatment, and a clean and proper home, or (b) failure to do or permit to be done any act necessary for the child’s physical or moral well-being.

Please send a message to your State Senator about A1083/ S1182.

Protect your pets…Join NAIA Trust today!

About:
The Mission of NAIA is to promote the welfare of animals, to strengthen the human-animal bond, and safeguard the rights of responsible animal owners and professionals through research, public education and sound public policy. Visit: www.naiaonline.org

Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation

MISSOULA, Mont. --(Ammoland.com)- The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals today heard arguments from both sides of a lawsuit alleging that Congress acted unconstitutionally when it removed wolves from the endangered species list and cleared the way for wolf hunting seasons now underway in Idaho and Montana.

An attorney representing the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and other conservation groups presented oral arguments supporting the Congressional action, wolf delisting and science-based, state-regulated management and control of wolf populations.

The court is expected to issue its ruling soon.

“We’re hopeful for a quick and favorable ruling, especially since a lower court already ruled against the plaintiffs–a coalition of animal rights and environmental activist groups,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO.

“Our opponents don’t seem to care that in some areas, elk calf survival rates are now too low to sustain herds for the future. We support a more balanced approach to conservation.”

Today’s hearing was held in a Pasadena, Calif., courtroom. RMEF and Safari Club International led two different groups granted intervenor status in the case. An attorney representing their collective position was given seven minutes to present arguments.

Key facts of the case include:

• Wolves were relocated from Canada to Idaho, Montana and Wyoming in 1994 as a “nonessential, experimental population” under the Endangered Species Act.
• The wolf population in each state passed stated recovery goals some 10 years ago.
• Current wolf populations across the three states are known to exceed 1,700 animals, and in many areas are out of balance with biological and cultural tolerances.
• Conservation has succeeded in America because of science-based, state-regulated management and control of wild species, including predators. All evidence suggests this system also would work well for wolves.
• Litigious animal rights and environmental activist groups have managed to keep wolves under full federal protections for much of the past decade.
• RMEF was among the first groups to call on Congress for a legislative remedy.
• In April 2011, Congress passed a measure that delisted wolves in parts of the West.
• Congress did not, as plaintiffs claim, violate “separation of powers” when it partially delisted wolves. In today’s hearing, attorneys presented ample legal precedents supporting the Congressional action. RMEF joined the other conservation groups in asking the appellate court to uphold the favorable ruling issued in August by U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy in Missoula, Mont.

Allen said, “If they lose this decision, plaintiffs could take their case to the U.S. Supreme Court. But I’m hoping that a Congressional act, two courtroom defeats and an American public that is clearly tired of all this legal wrangling will encourage our opponents to give up–and cede responsible wolf management and control to conservation professionals in each state. But we’ll have to wait and see.”

RMEF continues to fight wolf lawsuits and support delisting legislation at both federal and state levels.

About the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:
RMEF is leading a conservation initiative that has protected or enhanced habitat on over 6 million acres–an area larger than Yellowstone, Grand Canyon, Glacier, Yosemite, Rocky Mountain and Great Smoky Mountains national parks combined. RMEF also is a strong voice for hunters in access, wildlife management and conservation policy issues. RMEF members, partners and volunteers, working together as Team Elk, are making a difference all across elk country. Join us at www.rmef.org or 800-CALL ELK.

Congress Hears Testimony on Lawsuit Reform To Prevent Animal & Environmental Group Lawsuit Profiteering

Boone and Crockett Club

MISSOULA, Mont.--(Ammoland.com)- In testimony before a Congressional committee, Boone and Crockett Club president emeritus Lowell E. Baier told committee members that H.R. 1996, the Government Savings Litigation Act, will help America’s fish, wildlife and natural resources agencies do their jobs.

The legislation will benefit conservation and sound wildlife management by bringing fairness, transparency and accountability to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA).

EAJA is an historic law that allows plaintiffs to recover attorney fees and other expenses from the federal government when they prevail in lawsuits against the government. It was intended for retirees, veterans, small businesses–average citizens who need help finding and paying for a lawyer to correct errors in their earned benefits or to remedy mistaken penalties imposed by federal agencies.

In recent years, animal rights and environmental advocacy groups began using lawsuits to protest lawful decisions that they happen to oppose. The groups use EAJA to recoup their legal costs. The most frequent abuses include suing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other agencies on minor procedural decisions, then collecting settlements and EAJA reimbursements.

These private groups are collecting taxpayer dollars and consuming agency resources that could have gone toward wildlife management and conservation programs.

And it’s a trend resulting in judges, rather than conservation professionals, shaping the future of wildlife in America.

The U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law held an Oct. 11 hearing on H.R. 1996. Conservation, agriculture and livestock interests attended to urge passage.

Baier said, “We are resolute that we will not tread on EAJA’s historic purpose. But we need to put ‘equal’ back into the Equal Access to Justice Act by requiring everyone to meet the same eligibility standards.”

Currently, individuals are eligible to use EAJA if their net worth does not exceed $2 million. Businesses are eligible provided their net worth does not exceed $7 million.

“H.R. 1996 would extend these same eligibility requirements to nonprofit organizations. As EAJA stands today, special interest groups are eligible to recoup legal fees regardless of their net worth. That’s an inequity that needs repair,” said Baier. “To be clear, this measure will not prevent litigation. It relieves taxpayers of paying the legal bills of big-business animal rights and environmental advocacy groups.”

H.R. 1996 would make EAJA consistent with the 205 other federal fee shifting statutes, all of which limit 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organizations to the same eligibility requirements that apply to private citizens and small businesses.

Baier said, “The Congressional Research Service in 2009 determined that EAJA was an anomaly in this regard. That’s a glaring privilege for nonprofit groups that is the antithesis of equality and fairness.”

Federal oversight and accounting of EAJA payouts are virtually absent. Total costs are unknown. One attorney tracking the issue estimates 12 animal rights and environmental advocacy groups alone filed over 3,300 lawsuits and recovered more than $37 million in EAJA funds over the past decade. Boone and Crockett research shows EAJA actual costs exceeding $50 million per year from litigation by the top 20 environmental litigants.

H.R. 1996 requires reporting exact costs.

He explained that when EAJA was enacted in 1980, it required an annual report of the number of cases processed and total attorney fees reimbursed. That reporting ended in 1995. H.R. 1996 reinstates EAJA reporting requirements, beginning with an audit of prior unreported years.

Baier added that EAJA also has hidden costs such as conservation agency personnel time spent reviewing procedures, defending complaints and often re-doing entire processes.

H.R. 1996 was introduced by Rep. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming. Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming introduced a companion version in the U.S. Senate. The bills together share the title Government Litigation Savings Act.

Boone and Crockett Club is joined in its support for the Government Litigation Savings Act by 37 member organizations of the American Wildlife Conservation Partners, the largest network of fish and wildlife conservation groups in the country. Together the groups represent some 8 million sportsmen and conservationists.

The coalition signed on following a 2010 Boone and Crockett Club investigation of federal statutes that enable ongoing litigation at a high cost to wildlife conservation and management. Baier, a Maryland-based attorney, led the effort. His preliminary findings are reported in two articles available free at www.boone-crockett.org. Baier also employed two full-time attorneys to research EAJA’s initial Congressional intent, its judicial interpretation and application, abuses, loopholes and possible remedies.

About the Boone and Crockett Club
Founded by Theodore Roosevelt in 1887, the Boone and Crockett Club promotes guardianship and visionary management of big game and associated wildlife in North America. The Club maintains the highest standards of fair-chase sportsmanship and habitat stewardship. Member accomplishments include enlarging and protecting Yellowstone and establishing Glacier and Denali national parks, founding the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service and National Wildlife Refuge System, fostering the Pittman-Robertson and Lacey Acts, creating the Federal Duck Stamp program, and developing the cornerstones of modern game laws. The Boone and Crockett Club is headquartered in Missoula, Mont. For details, visit www.boone-crockett.org.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- While most rational folks realize that most of what you see in Hollywood movies is make believe or far from normal, the Humane Society of the United States sees things a little differently.

In fact, the animal rights group recently generated a news release based on the movie “Contagion.” Not so harmful, it seems, until you read the twisted HSUS “facts.”

The movie is a story about a lethal virus that spreads worldwide and kills most everything in its path.

Humane Society quickly takes a stab at farming in the first lines of its release, pointing out that current agricultural and industrial farm practices creates the perfect storm for Bird Flu.

Then, HSUS medically explains Swine flu can come from pig farms. Then, for a group that strongly promotes shelters and providing stables with overhead cover for horses and livestock, it reverses itself and says open areas permit sunlight and that UV rays can kill viruses found in farming areas.

They can’t have it both ways, now.

Then HSUS puts an ultimate spin on the “Contagion” movie and tries to attach itself to the movie while championing the science-fiction flick as a way to promote animal rights. Of course, all the “witches brew” that HSUS touts in the release becomes very clear when you follow the Hollywood link on the site—it takes you to an HSUS donation point. The group is collecting funds to “save” farm animals.

Makes you wonder whether HSUS’ movie critique is about diseases—or dollars.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- The Humane Society of the United States is pushing yet another deer contraceptive program in a national park that will cost U.S. taxpayers more than $170,000.

The plan is being pushed by three U.S. Representatives.

The misinformed trio recently sent a letter to U.S. Department of the Interior Secretary Ken Salazar requesting that the National Park Service (NPS) consider a contraception project to control deer populations in Rock Creek Park. Ironically, the HSUS touts this as a pilot project, offers to cover only half the expense, and then claims great successes in other deer and horse contraceptive programs.

How can it be a pilot test program if they claim to have done it before? And just how “humane” is this type of program?

The contraception delivery requires one-shot from a special firearm that could harm the animal and definitely punches a hole in the target animal’s skin. That open wound could be a source for infestation or result in the development of maggots living in the animal after flies lay eggs at the site. Not good.

The NPS supports an alternative plan that uses archers to remove the surplus deer, bring the herd under control for FREE, and save many tax dollars. NPS information indicates that there are approximately 200 whitetail deer in the park and the only thing currently controlling their deer population is cars. The park covers approximately 1,700 acres.

HSUS has offered to only pay half of the $340,000-plus estimated expense that the project will cost.

“What really strikes us as calculating is that this 100-million-dollar-a-year-fundraising behemoth is only willing to pay a portion of the bill and put the rest on you and I,” said Bud Pidgeon, USSA president and CEO.

“Especially since hunters are willing to effectively take care of the problem and pay for the right to help.”

In this time of budget cuts and economic woes, the NPS has a chance to earn funds by charging a bowhunting permit and letting hunters do what they do best—control overpopulated deer herds.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

Georgia Department of Natural Resources

SOCIAL CIRCLE, Ga. --(Ammoland.com)- The largest, most successful wildlife conservation program in the world, the Federal Wildlife Restoration Program, is fueled by hunters.

Over the past 70 years, hunters nationwide have contributed more than $6.8 billion dollars to wildlife conservation efforts. In Georgia alone, since 1939, hunters have contributed more than $145 million for wildlife conservation in Georgia.

“The Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Program is the most successful wildlife conservation program in the world and serves as a financial cornerstone to the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. It benefits all wildlife species, conserves and restores habitat and helps enhance wildlife conservation through research,” said Alex Coley, Wildlife Resources Division Game Management assistant chief and Federal Aid Coordinator.

“Through this program, America’s hunters continue to provide the most substantial source of funding for wildlife conservation and management in the United States.”

The program was established through the Pittman-Robertson Act in 1937. Through lobbying efforts in Congress, America’s hunters created this act as a way to fund conservation and management of the nation’s wildlife. Wildlife Restoration funds are accumulated from excise taxes on firearms, ammunition and archery equipment. This excise tax is levied at the manufacturer’s level, collected by the Federal government, and distributed to state wildlife agencies to fund wildlife conservation and management programs. The amount of money each state agency annually receives is determined by the number of paid hunting licenses and the land area of the state.

The Wildlife Resources Division uses Wildlife Restoration funds for various types of programs, including restoring habitat and improving wildlife populations, conducting research, monitoring wildlife populations, operating more than one million acres of wildlife management areas that benefit a diversity of wildlife species and provide wildlife-related recreational opportunities, providing information to landowners on how to manage their property for various species, conducting hunter education classes and building and maintaining public shooting ranges.

For more information on the Federal Wildlife Restoration Program, visit the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service website at http://www.fws.gov/southeast/federalaid/ . For more information on wildlife management practices in Georgia, visit the Wildlife Resources Division website at www.georgiawildlife.com , contact a local Game Management office or call (770) 918-6416.

HSUS Sets Sights on Co-Opting Religions

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- It seems that the most dangerous and well-funded group within the animal rights lobby, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is again trying to reposition itself to seem mainstream.

That transformation is a new “Faith Outreach” effort. Yes, HSUS is attempting to align itself with religions.

This path closely follows the animal rights group’s programs that have thrust its tentacles into school systems and young student minds around the nation. Churches should definitely beware.

The programs championed by HSUS outreach efforts include articles promoting a connection between animal rights and the congregations of the Unitarian Universalists and the United Church of Christ. And the HSUS furthers the connecting efforts by pushing pro-animal-rights statements attributed to the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, the Seventh Day Adventist Church, the Episcopal Church and others religious affiliations.

Seems nearly any sermon can be twisted as promoting animal rights.

These twists could have been far from the intent of the speaker or presenter when the materials were spoken or presented. This doesn’t matter to HSUS.

Real eyebrows are raised, however, when you discover the HSUS’s St. Francis Day in a Box project.

A $15 toolkit promoting the animal rights philosophy includes: the Chronicles of Narnia; Animal Protection Ministries: A Guide for Churches; Eating Mercifully; the CAFO Reader: The Tragedy of Industrial Animal Factories (a stab at farming); and many others. These animal rights agenda packets are sold to churches, or congregation members, to raise funds for HSUS.

While this propaganda intertwines religion and animal rights as connected crusading causes, there is an obvious lack of religious tolerance in the missing mention of St. Hubertus, the patron Saint of Hunters. And of course the “toolkit” includes envelopes and instructions on how to collect funds in the names of pets, animals and wildlife, and then send those funds directly to HSUS.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

The fanaticism of our adversaries and the encouragement of a complicit and supportive media are hard at work gnawing away, inch-by-inch, at our freedoms to fish, hunt and practice conservation.

Conservation Corner w/ Anthony P. Mauro, Sr

USA --(Ammoland.com)- It is said that parents are the bones on which children gnaw to sharpen their teeth.

And it is my experience that we who fish, hunt, and practice conservation, make allowances for our wayward adversaries to do the same.

I speak specifically of our acceptance of the encroachments of animal rights extremism and the damaging actions of preservationists.

It is not the divine doctrine of “turning the other cheek” that leads us to accommodate our aggressors, or some different form of benevolence; the cause is indifference.

This indulgence is a peculiar aspect of our humanity. That we would allow any extremist, not just those who practice the religion of animal rights or preservation, to execute a campaign to alter our way of life without the slightest measure of our own rebellion seems contrary to survival instinct.

What peculiar aspect of the human psyche allows us to be indifferent to losing the things we love; such as fishing, hunting, healthy forests and waters?

Has our discomfort with acknowledging fanaticism caused us to over-medicate with doses of denial?

It is a rare gravestone that is inscribed with the words “This man died while allowing others to gnaw at the edges of the things he treasured, until their progress consumed his very heart.” It is a rare inscription indeed, but one that could be found far and wide if kind dedications to the dearly departed were replaced with honest ones.

You may be asking yourself, “Why the fuss, Mauro? What is the point of all this?” And I would respond, “I hear the calling of a modern day Paul Revere. He cries, the gnawing is coming, the gnawing is coming… it approaches the heart of the things we treasure!”

The question to be answered is whether we will respond with a revolution similar to that inspired by the warnings of Revere, or will we deal with these encroachments with our usual indifference? Will we begrudgingly accept the gnawing of fanatics who would deprive us of our freedom to enjoy the things we value or will we respond with a call to arms?

In 1775 the colonists responded to the loss of their freedoms (taxation without representation) with a call to arms. The odds of success were stacked against them. They had everything to lose in a battle to keep the Kingdom of Great Briton from gnawing at their valued way of life; their farms, homes, businesses, wealth, and even the state of their well-being. They accepted the charge of treason that came with uprising, along with the consequence – execution.

On the other hand, to protect our freedoms to fish, hunt and practice conservation we put none of our creature comforts, or our very lives, at risk.

After all, what great sacrifice is there in writing a letter, sending an email, or making a phone call?

We certainly do not imperil our homes, businesses or the security of our families, nor is it remotely entertained as a treasonous act. It looks to me that the greatest danger is a insufferable attack of separation anxiety between us and the nattering TV.

The fanaticism of our adversaries and the encouragement of a complicit and supportive media are hard at work gnawing away, inch-by-inch, at our freedoms to fish, hunt and practice conservation. They industriously invest in New Jersey’s political machine, while pandering to public prejudices, promoting half-truths, and inventing propaganda as if they were based on scientific principle instead of an acute form of neurosis. Their fervor prevents them from understanding that their actions subvert the good that conservation does for our natural environment.

Indifference is a disease that afflicts all of us but it is the chronic kind that is the cause our undoing. There are times and things that are worthy of our indifference but it is counterproductive to wholly rely on it as a rule-of-thumb. The medicine devised to heal indifference is quantities of involvement. We can begin with a small dose and sign up to the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance “Action Alert” email system. These alerts contain state-of-affairs alerts about fishing, hunting and conservation in New Jersey, and actions we can take to protect and advance these things we love.

Just ask to be added to the NJOA “Action Alert” by emailing me directly: apmaurosr@njoutdooralliance.org. Or ask others to join by forwarding my email address.

Consider the “Action Alert” a modern day version of Paul Revere, and yes, “The gnawing is coming, the gnawing is coming…”

Color The Green Movement Blue

About:
Anthony P. Mauro, Sr, (also known as “Ant” to friends and associates) is Chairman and co-founder of the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance.

In addition to NJOA, Ant’s commitment to the principles of sustainable use of natural resources and stewardship for the environment helped to found the New Jersey Angling & Hunting Conservation Caucus. The NJAHC is the first outdoor caucus of its kind in New Jersey and is designed to educate opinion leaders and policy makers of the principles of conservation and the benefits that confer to the state’s wildlife and ecology.

A lifelong resident of New Jersey, Ant is an international big game hunter and avid conservationist. He has authored two books on conservation and hunting, including “Color The Green Movement Blue“.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- Last week, the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance and its Sporting Dog Defense Coalition alerted Oklahoma sportsmen to a proposed local ordinance that would have prohibited most sporting dog owners in Tulsa from keeping more than three dogs.

This brought up a good point for sporting dog owners, and all sportsmen for that matter, to consider: Local laws and ordinances can be just as dangerous, if not more dangerous, than legislation being considered in your state’s capitol.

Local laws passed by your city council, county commissioners, or trustees have the same effect as a state law. The only difference is that a local law applies only to a specific area of the state like a city or a county. Simply put, if your local government passes a law that says you can’t do something, then you can’t do it. This makes local laws just as dangerous to sportsmen and sporting dog owners as state laws.

On top of that, local laws are often passed with few people knowing they were even being considered. Local lawmakers often have shorter legislative processes, are quicker to pass laws as a knee jerk reaction to isolated events, and aren’t as widely covered by the media as state issues. All of this means sportsmen have fewer chances to know what is going on and are given less opportunity to provide input.

So what can you do to make sure your local officials don’t pass laws taking away your rights?

Follow these tips:

• Stay informed. Make sure you are keeping an eye on what your local lawmakers are doing so you will know if they are considering something that might take away your rights. This can be as easy as reading your local newspaper and/or attending a few city council or county commissioner meetings.
• Educate local lawmakers like you would your state representatives. Take some time to meet with your local lawmakers and get to know them. Invite them to a club meeting, a club event, or a field trial. Give them information on sporting dogs and let them know that dog related ordinances, even if well intended, could potentially hurt responsible dog owners like you. If they know you as the knowledgeable “hunting dog guy” they are much more likely to turn to you when these issues arise.

Attacks on your rights as sportsmen and sporting dog owners can come from all levels – federal, state, and local. Sportsmen must be ready to fight to keep those rights at all levels of government.

As always, if you are faced with the threat of your rights being taken away, USSA is here to help.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- If you are looking for future hunting opportunities, you might take a look at some odd recommendations by an unlikely source– PETA.

On the groups’ website are their lists of common pests that hunters can –or do—pursue.

On this PETA pest and problem species list are: beavers, geese, deer, raccoons, bears, coyotes, ducks, prairie dogs, mountain lions, foxes, and wolves.

Ok, most state game departments do not recognize most of those species as pests, but someone forgot to tell PETA. In fact only prairie dogs make the standard recognized pest species. One right answer out of a dozen guesses by PETA is not very accurate.

And if you are looking for a place to hunt, PETA also notes that “… hunting is permitted in many wildlife refuges, national forests, and state parks, and on other public lands.” Thanks, PETA, for helping hunters everywhere plan great summer, or future, hunt.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

Safari Club Internationa

Washington, D.C. –-(Ammoland.com)- Safari Club International (SCI) moved forward today in its fight to represent hunters in the constitutional challenge to wolf delisting legislation.

The motion filed today by SCI, together with the National Rifle Association (NRA), asks Judge Donald Molloy of the U.S. District Court for Montana to reconsider his decision to exclude SCI and NRA from the latest lawsuit over the status of the wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains.

After Congress passed a law directing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to reissue the 2009 rule delisting the wolves of Montana, Idaho and portions of Oregon, Utah and Washington, two groups of plaintiffs brought suit, challenging the constitutionality of the new legislation. Judge Molloy denied intervention to the suit to all applicants, including the states of Idaho and Montana as well as non-governmental groups such as SCI and NRA. The judge decided that the federal government would adequately represent the interests of all.

Today, SCI and NRA asked the court to reconsider its intervention ruling. SCI and NRA presented the court with evidence that the government could not sufficiently represent their interests, in the form of unique and essential arguments that were absent from the government’s own briefing. SCI and NRA intend to use these arguments in defense of the constitutionality of the wolf delisting law.

“SCI is committed to representing our members and the hunting community generally in this latest challenge to wolf delisting,” said SCI President Kevin Anderson. “With our long and consistent history in wolf litigation and our knowledge of federal and environmental law, we deserve a seat at the table to help defend Congress’ efforts to end the prolonged and unnecessary battle to recognize wolf recovery and return the species to state management.”

Contact: Nelson Freeman, Media@safariclub.org

Safari Club International – First For Hunters is the leader in protecting the freedom to hunt and in promoting wildlife conservation worldwide. SCI’s approximately 200 Chapters represent all 50 of the United States as well as 106 other countries. SCI’s proactive leadership in a host of cooperative wildlife conservation, outdoor education and humanitarian programs, with the SCI Foundation and other conservation groups, research institutions and government agencies, empowers sportsmen to be contributing community members and participants in sound wildlife management and conservation. Visit the home page www.safariclub.org or call (520) 620-1220 for more information.

About the Hunters’ Defense Fund:
Safari Club International Hunters’ Defense Fund supports the important advocacy, conservation and legal work keeping hunters afield and promoting hunting worldwide. Donations to the Hunters’ Defense Fund have a direct impact on our freedom to hunt, wildlife conservation policy and important legislative, regulatory and legal issues. DONATE NOW: www.safariclub.org/hunterdefense

Becoming an SCI Member:
Joining Safari Club International is the best way to be an advocate for continuing our hunting heritage and supporting worldwide sustainable use conservation, wildlife education and humanitarian services. JOIN NOW: www.safariclub.org/Join.

National Wild Turkey Federation

EDGEFIELD, S.C. --(Ammoland.com)- As part of the NWTF’s commitment to representing the interests of our members, conservationists and hunters, the NWTF signed on to a letter supporting the Government Litigation Savings Act.

If passed, the Government Litigation Savings Act will close a legal loophole that enables nonprofit groups to file frivolous lawsuits against our natural resource agencies.

Defending against these lawsuits drains natural resource agencies of millions of dollars and diverts agency personnel from their true mission: conserving America’s land, water and wildlife resources.

The Government Litigation Savings Act would help our state agencies focus their manpower, and the funds our nation’s hunters generate through license sales and excise taxes on firearms and ammunition, on managing and conserving our natural resources.

This legislation will face stiff opposition from the very influential trial lawyer lobby and has little chance of being approved by the current Congress.

However, supporting this legislation, regardless of its chance of becoming law, is one of the many ways the NWTF works to conserve wild turkeys and other wildlife, preserve our hunting heritage and protect our nation’s valuable resources for future generations.

[Editor's Note: The National Shooting Sports Foundation's Larry Keane recently updated NSSF members as follows: "The non-profit watchdog group Humanewatch.org has gone on the offensive with two full page advertisements running in the LA Times, educating the public that the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) gives less than one percent of its budget to local animal shelters. Last year, Humanewatch issued a challenge to Humane Society of the United States CEO Wayne Pacelle: "Share just half of HSUS's income with hands-on pet shelters, and we'll shut this website down for good." A year later...it looks like Humanewatch still has a job." The following has been published at Humanewatch.org in response to a LA Times editorial defending HSUS, which is a rabid anti-hunting group.]

HumaneWatch.org

Washington, D.C. – -(Ammoland.com)- If you’re hearing from HumaneWatch for the first time today because you saw an editorial that criticized us in today’s Los Angeles Times, welcome!

It seems our hard-hitting national ads, including a recent one in the Times, have struck a nerve.

Tinseltown is fast becoming the Humane Society of the United States’s power center, so we’re not surprised to learn that its leaders apparently persuaded the Times to take a closer look at our campaign to keep them honest.

The Times Editorial Board told its readers two important facts about the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). Commenting on our recent ads in the paper, they wrote:

One of the current ads features a photo of dogs looking wide-eyed in shock under the caption “SURPRISED to hear the Humane Society of the United States shares only 1 percent of your donations with local pet shelters?” The ad goes on to state that the Humane Society “is NOT your local animal shelter.

The ad is true on both counts.

Too few Americans are aware of HSUS’s misplaced priorities and the Times’ reiteration of our central message is an important step in educating more Americans about HSUS’s deception. But alas, the newspaper’s editors couldn’t stop there. They go on to write:

But [the ad is] also misleading. The Humane Society has never claimed that its mission is to fund local animal shelters… While some people may mistakenly believe that the Humane Society of the United States does the same job local humane societies do, it should not surprise anyone who has looked at the organization’s website that only a small percentage of its money goes to local shelters.

Here we disagree—strongly.

There is an important distinction between HSUS’s claims and public perception. Although the Humane Society of the United States never explicitly claims to support local hands-on pet shelters, it does go out of its way to perpetuate the myth that its primary focus is helping homeless dogs and cats. The result? Robust national polling shows that 71 percent of Americans believe HSUS is an umbrella organization for the nation’s hands-on pet shelters.

It’s frustrating to see the Los Angeles Times papering over HSUS’s intentional public misrepresentation of its own mission. Whether you love us or hate us, we encourage you to make up your own mind about this wealthy animal rights group.

Just take the Times’ own challenge and visit HSUS’s website. Three of the four primary images on its home page today feature dogs and cats. Better yet, take a look at HSUS’s fundraising page. It’s wall-to-wall pets. Now try to find HSUS’s disclaimer explaining that it doesn’t fund local shelters. Can you find it? Good luck.

For the record, though, here are a few things today’s editorial didn’t tell you.

1. The Times suggests that we are “dragging shelter pets into the fight” over HSUS’s duplicity. But it’s HSUS that has been throwing shelters (and their furry charges) under the bus for years, mainly by poaching unsuspecting donors from their communities. The State Humane Association of California has already publicly complained about similar misbehavior by the ASPCA, so this problem is certainly on shelters’ collective radar screens. (HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle’s response has been to suggest that the Association should fire its employees who are pointing out the truth.)

• The Times observed that a public affairs firm with which HumaneWatch’s parent organization contracts for services runs another organization that questions some policies of MADD. Today’s editorial blurs an important distinction, in the way an unscrupulous commentator might hold one attorney responsible for the way another lawyer in the same firm defends his clients. That organization and this one are separate, although the management firm in question provides services to both.

The Los Angeles Times concludes:

If [HumaneWatch.org] don’t like the Humane Society’s positions, they are entitled, of course, to make their case. But don’t drag shelter pets into the fight.

It is the Humane Society of the United States—not us—who is guilty of dragging dogs and cats into this debate. We’ve tirelessly engaged the HSUS toe-to-toe on numerous issues affecting companion (and other) animals. We’re happy to debate the group’s leaders on the merits of their proposals, but we refuse to allow them to cloud the debate by falsely insinuating that it has the moral authority of representing the nation’s struggling animal shelters.

About:
HumaneWatch.org is a project of the Center for Consumer Freedom, a nonprofit watchdog group supported by a unique combination of consumers and American businesses. Visit: www.humanewatch.org

Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation

MISSOULA, Mont. --(Ammoland.com)- U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy will decide whether Congress acted within Constitutional bounds when it delisted wolves in parts of the West.

The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation has filed notice of its intent to appeal any decision that adversely affects states’ rights to manage fully recovered wolf populations.

Molloy is expected to hear arguments soon from animal rights groups and environmental extremists who sued to challenge the legality of Congress’ recent action.

An unfavorable ruling could stop wolf management hunts planned for fall in Idaho and Montana–even though elk calf survival rates in some areas are already too low to sustain herds for the future.

“We are protecting our right to appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals any decision that results in another setback for conservation and science-based wildlife management,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO.

“Our notice of intent to appeal includes a motion to stay any unfavorable outcome pending our appeal process.”

As he did with other conservation groups, Molloy recently denied an RMEF motion to intervene in the lawsuit. At least two groups filed a second motion asking the judge to reconsider. RMEF opted for a different response.

“We’re hoping for the best but preparing for the worst,” explained Allen. “A decision could go either way because the laws being challenged leave too much to interpretation. This built-in gray area is the inherent problem with federal rulemaking on wildlife that is not endangered or threatened. All the science shows that wolves are recovered. But as long as the federal government is involved, there will be more lawsuits and, potentially, more unfavorable rulings. The new motion we filed prepares us for that scenario.”

“We will continue to fight until all states, from the Rockies to the Great Lakes, have true state management authority unfettered with federal oversight,” he added.

About the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:
Snowy peaks, dark timber basins and grassy meadows. RMEF is leading an elk country initiative that has conserved or enhanced habitat on over 5.7 million acres, a land area equivalent to a swath three miles wide and stretching along the entire Continental Divide from Canada to Mexico. RMEF also works to open, secure and improve public access for hunting, fishing and other recreation. Get involved at www.rmef.org or 800-CALL ELK.

National Animal Interest Alliance

Pacific Northwest --(Ammoland.com)- If you follow agriculture at all, it has been hard to miss the brilliant work and great success of the Pacific Northwest’s egg producers this past legislative season.

Most notably their guidance in crafting Washington SB 5487 and Oregon SB 805: two nearly-identical bills codifying the best in modern agricultural practices for egg laying hens, while creating unified high standards between the two neighboring states.

These new standards represent a best of both worlds scenario for egg-laying hens and consumers alike. Under them, hens will have the ability to fully extend their wings, move around, and engage in normal behaviors (scratching, perching, laying eggs in privacy, etc.), while living in an environment that is safer and cleaner than both cage free facilities and older conventional cage systems – something that is important for the health of hens as well as the public.

They also represent a major victory for sound animal husbandry practices and the animal welfare ethic, as these reforms were pushed not by outside advocacy groups, but egg producers themselves. This becomes most obvious when the end goals are taken into consideration: the most modern and efficient egg farms in the country, coupled with greatly improved animal welfare standards and a minimal impact upon the price of eggs for consumers.

This is a win-win scenario if I’ve ever seen it; the kind of decisive, innovative action that makes us proud to support animal agriculture, and something we hope to see even more of in the future.

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and other animal rights groups are absolutely livid with the egg producers of Oregon and Washington, and I can’t blame them – after all, when an industry sets its standards this high, it becomes much more difficult to run an effective fundraising or legislative campaign against them.

Nevertheless, HSUS and company have promised ballot initiatives in both states demanding de-facto cage free housing before the new facilities can be built. If and when that happens, you can count on us to keep the public informed on this issue – to battle distortion with fact, misconception with reality, and to support the people who truly understand and care for animals.

Sincerely,

About:
The Mission of National Animal Interest Alliance is to promote the welfare of animals, to strengthen the human-animal bond, and safeguard the rights of responsible animal owners and professionals through research, public education and sound public policy. Visit: www.naiaonline.org

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- While the latest round of the wolf protection versus wolf hunting issue went to scientific wildlife managers in Montana and Idaho by a repeal of the federal threatened species protection status, it seems HSUS hasn’t been listening.

Currently on the HSUS website is a plea for supporters to write letters to urge federal officials to save wolves from hunters —and to donate dollars.

The text states: “If these wolves were delisted, the states of Montana and Idaho would allow widespread hunting in a manner that could reduce the current struggling population of wolves by over 75% and decimate the species.”

Montana’s Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department indicate more than 500 wolves live in that state, and wolves have been drastically lowering elk herds. And since wolves in Idaho and Montana were removed from the federally protected species list, both states have been working to establish a wolf hunting season.

Thus, this fall it will be hunters’ turn to spend money on wolves-make that wolf tags – to help restore a balance between them and other important wildlfe species.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- Last week the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance alerted New York sporting dog owners to two bills that would create unnecessary new regulations for sporting dog owners.

This week it is more of the same in the New York legislature.

Assembly Bill 8146, sponsored by Assemblyman Steve Katz (R- Mohegan Lake), would require newly defined “backyard breeders” to obtain an annual breeder permit and adhere to the same standards of care and inspection requirements that apply to the state’s regulated pet dealers.

A “backyard breeder” is defined as anyone who breeds one female dog for compensation.

Under the bill, these breeders are required to obtain an annual $150 permit before they are allowed to breed any dog. They must also comply with the care, housing, and inspection requirements meant for commercial pet dealers that are already contained in current law.

“This bill forces regulations that are designed for commercial pet dealers onto sporting dog kennels, hobby breeders, and individual dog owners,” said Evan Heusinkveld, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance director of state services. “There is simply no justification for applying this type of regulation to these dog owners.”

Take Action! New York sportsmen should contact their state legislators and ask that they oppose Assembly Bill 8146. Tell them sporting dog owners should not be required to obtain a new costly annual permit and comply with new regulations simply because they may breed and sell one dog in a year. To find your state assembly person’s phone number and other contact information, use the USSA Legislative Action Center at www.ussportsmen.org/lac.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

Big Game Forever

Missoula, Montana --(Ammoland.com)- Big Game Forever (BGF) announced it has filed a motion in federal court to defend the recent Congressional Action to remove wolves from the Endangered Species List.

The joint motion filed by attorneys for Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Mule Deer Foundation, Wild Sheep Foundation, Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife (SFW), Montana SFW, Idaho SFW, Arizona SFW and Big Game Forever is in response to challenges to the constitutionality of the recent congressional action to allow for wolf management in Idaho and Montana.

With recovery of wolf populations, procedural impediments have been consistently applied in an attempt to prevent state management of wolves.

“It is time for state wildlife agencies to be able to manage wolves, along with other species, in balance and with responsibility,” explains Roger Blackner of Idaho SFW. “Montanans strongly feel that a return to common sense conservation is the best way to protect the future of all wildlife species,” indicates Bill Merrill of Montana SFW.

“Unmanaged wolves behave differently from managed wolves,” suggests Byron Bateman of Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife. Bateman continues, “recent attacks on horses, dogs and other livestock on people’s property show how important it is to begin to address the unnecessary damage to wildlife and livestock resources by unmanaged wolf populations.”

Ongoing anti-management litigation must be ended to return wolf numbers to agreed upon levels to avoid irreversible damage to big game herds.

The two most recent lawsuits filed by several anti-delisting organizations challenge the constitutionality of recent congressional delisting decisions.

“Overruling the clear intent of Congress places the courts in an untenable position that can only be remedied by more comprehensive Congressional action,” explains Ryan Benson from Big Game Forever. Benson continues, “repeated lawsuits to indefinitely prevent needed management of a recovered species creates unintended consequences that ultimately are not good for species that remain endangered.”

While Congress continues to explore additional delisting actions, Big Game Forever will continue to work with the other partner groups to support the right of states to take the primary role in managing and protecting increasingly problematic wolf populations in the states of the West and Midwest.

About Big Game Forever:
The founders of Big Game Forever include leading wildlife conservation groups and Sportsmen from across North America. American Sportsmen invest $1.5 billion annually for habitat, wildlife conservation and sensitive species. That is nearly 10 times the amount invested by the non-sportsmen taxpayer. We are the original conservationists. Sadly, anti-sportsmen special interest groups want to argue that sportsmen are the enemy of conservation. Visit: www.biggameforever.org

Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation

MISSOULA, Mont. --(Ammoland.com)- Animal rights groups are challenging in federal court the constitutionality of Congress’ recent delisting of wolves in parts of the West.

Judge Donald Molloy in Missoula, Mont., will consider the challenge, and the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation has filed a motion to intervene in support of the delisting.

If the motion is granted, Judge Molloy will consider RMEF positions in his decision.

“We are resolute in our argument that individual states, not the federal government, are best qualified to manage recovered species,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO.

“This latest in a long line of frivolous lawsuits over wolves could delay science-based wolf management again in 2011 and cause further conservation problems into the future. Elk, deer and moose herds in some areas are in serious trouble right now.”

He added, “We were concerned when the delisting bill went through Congress that wolf management would be left open to further legal challenges. Now those fears are reality. It is critical that we defend the legislation or the future of wildlife management could implode in more legal maneuvering and litigation. This is not what the ESA (Endangered Species Act) was designed to do, but it’s what the ESA has been reduced to today.”

Research shows elk calf survival rates in some areas of Idaho, Montana and Wyoming are now too low to sustain herds for the future. At the same time, Allen added, wolf populations across the northern Rockies are likely higher than commonly reported estimates.

“Animal rights groups and some media are still using the 2008 wolf population estimate of 1,700 for the northern Rockies as if no population growth is occurring. But wolves reproduce by as much as 25 percent each year. Simple math shows it’s possible there could be more than 3,000 wolves in the northern Rockies by the end of 2011–almost double the number we usually see in the news,” he said.

Controlling wolf populations via state-regulated hunting would help, but animal rights and environmental extremist groups continue to use lawsuits to delay or stop the hunts.

“RMEF will vigorously defend the delisting because it’s time to let states manage wolves as they do with all other wildlife. There is no real science that disputes the fact that gray wolves are recovered and there is no compelling reason why states cannot manage wolf populations,” said Allen.

He added, “There are recovered wolf populations in the Great Lakes states that have yet to be delisted as well. This debate is bigger than just the Rocky Mountains.”

About the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:
Snowy peaks, dark timber basins and grassy meadows. RMEF is leading an elk country initiative that has conserved or enhanced habitat on over 5.9 million acres–a land area equivalent to a swath three miles wide and stretching along the entire Continental Divide from Canada to Mexico. RMEF also works to open, secure and improve public access for hunting, fishing and other recreation. Get involved at www.rmef.org or 800-CALL ELK.

Boone and Crockett Club

MISSOULA, Mont.--(Ammoland.com)- Legislation to be introduced in Congress could axe what has amounted to federal subsidies for environmental extremist and animal rights groups making big business out of suing the U.S. government.

The legislation, a House Resolution and companion version in the Senate titled Government Litigation Savings Act, would amend the existing Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA).

Though well intended, abuses of EAJA have escalated into a serious conservation issue with long-term consequences. Costs of defending unnecessary lawsuits against federal agencies such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are an increasing drain on conservation funding and agency personnel today.

The Government Litigation Savings Act was prompted by a coalition (member list below) of wildlife, agriculture, energy, mining and other resource-based groups led by Boone and Crockett Club.

Club President Ben Wallace said, “We take very seriously the fact that taxpayer money and sportsmen-generated funding intended to support conservation are being wasted. We thank Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) and Representative Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) for introducing a bill that offers hope for reforming EAJA back to its original purpose–and relief for the most successful wildlife conservation system in the world.”

Lawmakers held a press conference at noon 5/25/11 (ET) to announce the legislation.

The coalition formed following a Boone and Crockett Club investigation of federal statutes that enable ongoing litigation at a high cost to wildlife and the American taxpayer. Club President Emeritus Lowell E. Baier, a Maryland-based attorney, led the effort over the past year. His preliminary findings are reported in two articles available free at www.boone-crockett.org. Baier also employed two full-time attorneys to research EAJA’s initial Congressional intent, its judicial interpretation and application, abuses, loopholes and possible remedies by Congress.

EAJA was written to reimburse legal costs incurred by private citizens and small business that successfully sue federal agencies for non-compliance with federal law and regulation. Recipients were to include private citizens whose net worth was less than $2 million, and for-profit organizations with net worth of less than $7 million. Non-profit 501(c)(3) organizations were totally exempt from these limits. However, America’s two largest animal rights groups, with 2009 combined net assets exceeding $209.6 million and cash balances exceeding $44.5 million, now enjoy significant subsidies through EAJA by taking advantage of their exemption loophole.

For example: In 2008, an animal rights group won a legal ruling regarding wolves and petitioned a federal court in Missoula, Mont., for $388,370 in attorney fees. The judge awarded $263,099, which was based on an hourly rate of $300–even though the EAJA limit is $125 per hour.

In 2007, the same plaintiff was awarded $280,000 following a similar case in the Great Lakes area.

The defendant in both cases was the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, whose budget–regardless of whether it’s spent on wildlife or lawyers–is financed by a combination of sportsmen fees and tax dollars.

Taxpayers bear all EAJA reimbursements to plaintiffs.

Indirect costs are considerable, too. Nearly all resource management proposals are now subject to ever-higher hidden fees as federal agencies spend more and more time and resources on elaborate environmental impact statements and other attempts to “suit proof” their decision-making processes. In some cases, where the intent of the lawsuit is to stop a proposed federal action, the delays and costs to a federal agency can derail time sensitive projects even if the eventual court ruling goes against the plaintiffs.

Coalition members (to date) endorsing the Government Litigation Savings Act:

• American Farm Bureau Federation
• American Sheep Industry
• Archery Trade Association
• Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
• Bighorn Mountain Coalition
• Boone and Crockett Club
• Bowhunting Preservation Alliance
• Campfire Club of America
• Catch-a-Dream Foundation
• Coalition of Arizona/New Mexico Counties
• Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation
• Dairy Producers of New Mexico
• Dallas Safari Club
• Delta Waterfowl Foundation
• Family Farm Alliance
• Hawaii Cattlemen’s Association
• Houston Safari Club
• Idaho Farm Bureau
• Idaho State ATV Association
• Intermountain Forest Association
• Masters of Foxhounds Association of America
• Montana Logging Association
• Montana Wood Products Association
• Mule Deer Foundation
• National Association of Conservation Districts
• National Association of Forest Service Retirees
• National Cattlemen’s Beef Association
• National Farmers Union
• National Rifle Association
• National Shooting Sports Foundation
• National Trappers Association
• National Union of Land and Water Rights
• New Mexico Cattlegrowers Association
• New Mexico Federal Lands Council
• New Mexico Wool Growers Inc.
• North American Bear Foundation
• North American Grouse Partnership
• Oregon Cattlemen’s Association
• Orion-the-Hunters’ Institute
• Pheasants Forever/Quail Forever
• Pope and Young Club
• Public Lands Council
• Quality Deer Management Association
• Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation
• Ruffed Grouse Society
• Safari Club International
• Sixtieth Legislature of the State of Wyoming
• South Dakota Department of Agriculture
• Stewards of the Sequoia
• Sustainable Forest Action Coalition
• Texas Wildlife Association
• The Society of American Foresters
• Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership
• Tread Lightly!
• U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance
• United States Cattlemen Association
• Utah Cattlemen’s Association
• Western Business Roundtable
• Western Institute for the Study of the Environment
• Western Legacy Alliance
• Wild Sheep Foundation
• Wildlife Forever
• Wildlife Management Institute
• Women in Timber
• Wyoming Association of Conservation Districts
• Wyoming Farm Bureau

About the Boone and Crockett Club
Founded by Theodore Roosevelt in 1887, the Boone and Crockett Club promotes guardianship and visionary management of big game and associated wildlife in North America. The Club maintains the highest standards of fair-chase sportsmanship and habitat stewardship. Member accomplishments include enlarging and protecting Yellowstone and establishing Glacier and Denali national parks, founding the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service and National Wildlife Refuge System, fostering the Pittman-Robertson and Lacey Acts, creating the Federal Duck Stamp program, and developing the cornerstones of modern game laws. The Boone and Crockett Club is headquartered in Missoula, Mont. For details, visit www.boone-crockett.org.

Safari Club Internationa

Washington, DC –-(Ammoland.com)- Safari Club International (SCI) filed a joint motion with the National Rifle Association (NRA) asking the federal court in Montana for leave to participate in the latest in the long line of legal challenges to wolf delisting.

Several animal rights groups filed two new court cases on May 5th challenging the constitutionality of the recently passed law that directed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to delist the wolves of Montana, Idaho and portions of Oregon, Utah and Washington State.

“Safari Club International has been a consistent force in the courts to defend the removal of wolves from the endangered species list,” said SCI President Kevin Anderson. “Congress has also recently stepped forward to stop the endless litigation pursued by animal right organizations and now they are attempting to circumvent the will of Congress. SCI will continue to defend the delisting of recovered wolf populations throughout the U.S. until the management is returned to state wildlife agencies.”

The two new cases claim that the federal law violates the separation of powers clause of the Constitution. Both cases were assigned to Judge Donald Molloy, the same judge who, in 2010, ruled that the delisting of the Northern Rocky Mountain wolves violated the Endangered Species Act.

SCI moved to intervene in the latest cases, explaining to the court how SCI members plan to participate in the upcoming wolf harvests in Montana and Idaho, how they hunt and enjoy elk, deer and moose in those states and how wolves are decimating wild game populations as well as the hunting economy. Many SCI members submitted their sworn declarations to assist SCI in demonstrating our interest in the outcome of this lawsuit.

About the Hunters’ Defense Fund:
Safari Club International Hunters’ Defense Fund supports the important advocacy, conservation and legal work keeping hunters afield and promoting hunting worldwide. Donations to the Hunters’ Defense Fund have a direct impact on our freedom to hunt, wildlife conservation policy and important legislative, regulatory and legal issues. DONATE NOW: http://www.hunterdefensefund.org/

Becoming an SCI Member:
Joining Safari Club International is the best way to be an advocate for continuing our hunting heritage and supporting worldwide sustainable use conservation, wildlife education and humanitarian services. JOIN NOW: www.safariclub.org/Join.

Safari Club International — First For Hunters is the leader in protecting the freedom to hunt and in promoting wildlife conservation worldwide. SCI’s approximately 200 Chapters represent all 50 of the United States as well as 106 other countries. SCI’s proactive leadership in a host of cooperative wildlife conservation, outdoor education and humanitarian programs, with the SCI Foundation and other conservation groups, research institutions and government agencies, empowers sportsmen to be contributing community members and participants in sound wildlife management and conservation. Visit the home page http://www.safariclub.org/ or call (520) 620-1220 for more information.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- With the recent news that California’s West Hollywood city council is ordering the city’s attorney to draft an ordinance prohibiting the sale of fur products within the city, PETA was quick to release news that it is encouraging its followers to create more Fur-Free cities by organizing protests around the US.

The group encourages members to target outside of fur salons and other businesses that sell furs.

Odd, but in the same news release seeking attention-of-the-outrageous kind, the group lashes out about laying chickens in cages, declawing cats, and calls for “banning the retail sale of dogs and cats in pet stores.”

The group goes on to uphold West Hollywood as a place that’s known for its kindness to animals. West Hollywooders shouldn’t get too comfortable with their latest friend though.

It might soon see its steakhouses and other restaurants there that serve meat on the list of protest sites for PETA.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

AmmoLand Gun News

Dallas, TX - -(Ammoland.com)- Last week, President Obama came to my home state of Texas calling for immigration reform.

He should have also rallied citizens for tort reform, which is a hot issue right now around the country and in Texas politics in particular.

I’ve deferred (or better, repackaged) Part 2 of my article on bullies to oppose some real-life legal bullies — those sue-happy individuals (serial litigants) who tie up and abuse our court systems and civil rights to oppress and take from their victims (defendants).

These corrupt plaintiffs often initiate frivolous lawsuits because they know most defendants will settle out of court rather than endure the expenses of a trial. The Point of Law website says that “well over 90 percent of cases settle out of court before a final legal resolution” — a fact that serial litigants are counting on.

Black’s Law Dictionary says a tort is a “private or civil law wrong or injury, other than breach of contract, for which the court will provide a remedy in the form of an action for damages.” Tort law, therefore, is a body of law created through judges and by legislatures that is applied by courts in civil cases dealing with torts. (The term “tort” has its origin from the Latin term torquere, meaning “twist, twisted or wrong.”)

As in most states across our union, Texas is in a battle for tort reform because of the serial litigants who take legal action for issues like getting too many kernels in their movie popcorn or not having toilet paper in a restaurant bathroom.

[Animal Rights Groups have used this scam to force their twisted ideals on Hunters and Fish & Game Agencies: See Animal Rights Lawsuits Hurting Wildlife Funding , or Anti Conservation Groups Sue to Stop New Jersey Bear Hunt ]

The travesty of these cases and the need for tort reform is bottled up in the fact that defendants are subpoenaed to court and, even when they win their cases, have to pay the tens of thousands (and often hundreds of thousands) of dollars it cost to defend themselves against outrageous and often bizarre accusations. And if they choose to settle out of court, because it cost less than the legal fees to go to court, they still get the shaft.

I know firsthand because I, too, have been the victim of these frivolous lawsuits.

For example, in the 1980s, I had a family restaurant in Newport Beach, Calif. On average, I would encounter one frivolous lawsuit a month.

One such case was two women who got into a fight in the ladies’ restroom. They sued me, saying someone should have been in there to break it up! (Yes, that is a true story — frivolous and completely ridiculous.) It cost me $2,000 to pay each plaintiff to drop the complaint, which was cheaper than fighting the lawsuit.

Another frivolous lawsuit happened in Dallas, where the plaintiffs were demanding $175,000 in compensation. After talking to my attorney, he advised me that we could easily win the lawsuit, but it would cost me about $250,000 to fight it.

So, I just paid the $175,000 to save $75,000 in legal fees. It was very frustrating to have to hand over the money just in order to settle a ridiculous lawsuit that had no merit.

If you’ve fallen prey to the same type of crazy lawsuits, have no fear — loser-pays tort reform is here!

What loser-pays tort reform is all about is forcing these serial litigants to pay for the defendants’ legal fees if they lose their case. Last Monday, May 9, the Texas House approved House Bill 274, which requires plaintiffs to do just that. This week, the Texas Senate will hear arguments to determine whether the bill deserves its final approval.

Gov. Rick Perry was correct when he said in a press release last week, “This legislation will also protect Texas jobs and stimulate economic opportunity by relieving Texans and employers of the costs and burdens created by frivolous and drawn-out lawsuits.”

This legislation would make the legal system less of a drag on the economy as well as less of a weapon for pilfering wealth. In addition, judges would be further restricted from taking advantage of their sworn duties by unilaterally legislating from the bench in areas that haven’t first been approved by the state legislature. Mostly, this legislation will cut down on bogus lawsuits and discourage unfounded and groundless litigation.

I’m opposed to limiting anyone’s civil rights, liberties or due process, and loser-pays tort reform will not do that. But in a greedy, sue-happy nation like ours, such legal change is definitely overdue in every state. Frivolous lawsuits are tying up the entire U.S. legal system, hurting our economy and costing jobs everywhere.

If Texas passes loser-pays tort reform, which I encourage all legislatures to do, then the Lone Star State will join Alaska, Oklahoma and Oregon in applying this true English (Prevailing Party) Rule to many civil lawsuits.

Texas resident Mark Whittington, who also writes about state issues for the Yahoo! Contributor Network, echoes well why tort reform hasn’t been passed in other states: “… one reason that loser pays has not been more widely enacted in the United States is that the American bar is very powerful and jealously defends what … is a lucrative industry. Contingency fee lawyers can make a considerable amount of money in filing legal actions, even if sometimes the cases are weak.”

I can’t roundhouse every junk lawsuit out of Texas or your state, but there is something we all can do to stand up to the trial lawyers and serial litigants. We can support loser-pays tort reform.

Like in Austin, representatives in your state’s legislature are undoubtedly working right now to make tort reform a reality — but they can’t do it alone. They need to hear from you. Call your representatives and senators, and ask them to help us round up the trial lawyers and lottery litigants by supporting loser-pays tort reform.

For more information and to sign a petition in favor of loser pays tort reform, go to Americans for Job Security website (www.savejobs.org/stop_the_frivolous_lawsuits.php).

Chuck Norris

COPYRIGHT 2011 CHUCK NORRIS

About Chuck Norris:Action hero and Second Amendment activist, Chuck Norris is one of the most enduringly popular actors in the world. He has starred in more than 20 major motion pictures. His television series “Walker, Texas Ranger,” which completed its run in April 2001 after eight full seasons, is the most successful Saturday night series on CBS since “Gunsmoke.”In 2006, he added the title of columnist to his illustrious list of credits with the launch of his popular Internet column. Now Chuck is a regular contributor to AmmoLand, click the following link to See more of Chuck Norris on AmmoLand Shooting Sports News.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- Legislation that would allow searches of homes of the owners of sporting dog breeders without probable cause, or even a search warrant, is one step closer to becoming law.

House Bill 1451, the so-called “puppy mill” bill introduced by Rep. Senfronia Thompson (D- Houston), has been assigned to the Senate Committee on Criminal Justice. No hearing dates have been set.

Texas sportsmen and sporting dog owners must act now to protect the future of sporting dogs within the state. USSA will alert sportsmen and sporting dog owners once the bill has been scheduled for a hearing.

The bill, which was recently forced through the House of Representatives with little opportunity for public input, is a serious threat to the existence of sporting dog kennels and hobby breeders. House Bill 1451 does the following:

Classifies sporting dog kennels or hobby breeders who have 11 female dogs, this could be one liter, that have not been spayed to be classified the same as a huge commercial dealer if they sell just two dogs.

Charges kennel license fees likely to be at least $1,300 per kennel even for hobby breeders who hardly ever sell dogs.
Creates an unelected commission to create kennel construction requirements, record keeping requirements and other expensive red tape that hobby breeders cannot afford because their primary purpose is not to sell dogs.
Allows for unannounced inspections of kennels and the homes of their owners if they keep their kennel records on a computer inside their house.

Allows for the inspection of records within a home without any suspicion of wrong doing or even a search warrant.

Threatens to drive sporting dog kennels and hobby breeders out of business because they do not have the commercial revenue to offset high fees, and expensive regulations.

Discloses personal information about dog breeders to the public by creating a public directory containing information on all registered breeders.

That is why the US Sportsmen’s Alliance along with the Masters of Foxhounds Association, American Kennel Club (AKC), American Brittany Club, Texas Wildlife Association, Texas Dog Hunters Association, and the United Kennel Club (UKC) oppose House Bill 1451. Click here to see a full list of local, state, and national organizations already opposing House Bill 1451.

“Treating hobby breeders the same as commercial operators is like treating the neighborhood lemonade stand the same as the Wal-Mart Super Center,” said Jeremy Rine, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance associate director of state services. “It makes no sense. And it is not fair because no one has shown that sporting dog kennels are abusive. The cost of this bill is abusive, however, to sportsmen because it will result in kennels being run out of existence.”

Take Action! Texas sportsmen should call their state senators today and ask them to oppose House Bill 1451. Tell them the bill unjustly treats sporting dog and hobby breeders as large commercial breeders, allows for warrantless searches of homes, and creates unnecessary, costly new regulations that could put many of these breeders out of existence.

To find your state senator’s contact information, visit the USSA Legislative Action Center at www.ussportsmen.org/LAC.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

Sportsmen Win Major Courtroom Battle Protecting Hunting on Public Lands

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- Federal Judge James S. Gwin has ruled in favor of sportsmen by denying a lawsuit aimed at closing hunting on dozens of units of the 100 million acre National Wildlife Refuge System.

This long running case began in 2003 when the Fund for Animals, which later merged with the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), filed a lawsuit to stop hunting on 39 refuges.

The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation (USSAF), along with other organizations, intervened on behalf of sportsmen. Anti hunting groups later expanded the lawsuit to include more 50 refuges.

Judge Gwin’s ruling stops HSUS’ attempt at using the National Environmental Policy Act to close hunting on these refuges.

In making the decision the judge noted that “Plaintiffs, however, are not entitled to an inviolate sanctuary for their preferred uses – Congress has determined that, to the extent possible, hunters, fishers, observers, photographers, and educators must share the refuges.”

The judge’s ruling relied heavily on language in the 1997 Refuge Improvement Act, championed by the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance, which made hunting, fishing and other wildlife oriented activities priority uses on refuge units. The Act also mandated hunting and fishing activities be “facilitated”. It is unknown at this time if HSUS will appeal the ruling.

“The majority of refuges were created to be open to hunting but relentless attacks by anti-hunting groups forced Congress to spell it out in law,” said Rob Sexton, USSAF vice president for government affairs.

“Now, the courts have once again ruled that hunting is a priority use of refuge land wherever and whenever compatible with wildlife management.”

The U.S. Sportsmen’s Legal Defense Fund (SLDF), the legal arm of the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation, has worked since the beginning of this case to defend the rights of hunters and has collaborated with other groups including Safari Club International (SCI). Together, the SLDF and SCI are co-counsels and also represent Ducks Unlimited, the National Rifle Association, Izzak Walton League, Delta Waterfowl Foundation, and California Waterfowl Association.

National Wildlife Refuges provide excellent opportunities for sportsmen to pursue waterfowl, big game, furbearers, and much more. Hunting is a popular public activity on refuge land and a practical means of maintaining optimal wildlife populations.

The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 empowered the Fish and Wildlife Service to open refuges to hunting when compatible with the purposes for which the refuges were established. In 1997, National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act went a step further. It ensures that refuges are managed for wildlife conservation and that hunting and fishing are priority public uses on refuge units.

The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation is responsible for public education, legal defense and research. Its mission is accomplished through several distinct programs, coordinated to provide the most complete defense capability possible For more information about the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation and its work, call (614) 888-4868 or visit its website, www.ussafoundation.org

Safari Club Internationa

Washington, DC --(Ammoland.com)- In a ruling issued today, Safari Club International (SCI) claimed a major victory in a lawsuit that has threatened hunting on National Wildlife Refuges since it was filed in 2003.

Judge Gwin of the Ohio federal district court today issued a ruling in favor of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and SCI to protect our public lands and keep them open for hunting.

The Fund for Animals sued to challenge hunting on 37 refuges throughout the National Wildlife Refuge system, claiming that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) had not completed a sufficient environmental analysis of the impact of hunting on these refuges. SCI immediately joined as an intervenor in the case on behalf of the FWS in order to help defend the hunting opportunities that exist on the refuges.

In 2006, the case saw a setback, when a D.C. federal district court ruled in the Plaintiffs’ favor, sending the matter back to the FWS to conduct additional environmental review. The case then expanded to include additional refuges that had been opened to hunting since the case began, and Plaintiffs amended their original claims in an attempt to stop hunting on almost 70 refuges throughout the country.

After the FWS complied with the court order to conduct additional environmental review, the case returned to court for its examination of the agency’s revised efforts. Once again, SCI’s litigators aggressively defended the agency’s compliance, this time meeting with success. Judge Gwin issued a resounding ruling in favor of the FWS and SCI, leaving no room for question about the Fund for Animals’ failure to substantiate its challenge against refuge hunting.

“This is a long overdue victory for SCI and our litigation team’s efforts to protect the freedom to hunt and keep our public lands open for hunting,” said SCI President Larry Rudolph. “It is clear that the facts were on our side in this case. I commend Judge Gwin for his decision and believe that SCI’s participation in this case proves once again that we truly are First for Hunters.”

SCI was joined in its intervention by U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation, Ducks Unlimited, Delta Waterfowl Foundation, the California Waterfowl Association, and Izaak Walton League of America.

About the Hunters’ Defense Fund:
Safari Club International Hunters’ Defense Fund supports the important advocacy, conservation and legal work keeping hunters afield and promoting hunting worldwide. Donations to the Hunters’ Defense Fund have a direct impact on our freedom to hunt, wildlife conservation policy and important legislative, regulatory and legal issues. DONATE NOW: www.safariclub.org/hunterdefense

Becoming an SCI Member:
Joining Safari Club International is the best way to be an advocate for continuing our hunting heritage and supporting worldwide sustainable use conservation, wildlife education and humanitarian services. JOIN NOW: www.safariclub.org/Join.

Safari Club International – First For Hunters is the leader in protecting the freedom to hunt and in promoting wildlife conservation worldwide. SCI’s approximately 200 Chapters represent all 50 of the United States as well as 106 other countries. SCI’s proactive leadership in a host of cooperative wildlife conservation, outdoor education and humanitarian programs, with the SCI Foundation and other conservation groups, research institutions and government agencies, empowers sportsmen to be contributing community members and participants in sound wildlife management and conservation. Visit the home page www.safariclub.org or call (520) 620-1220 for more information.

NRA News

Fairfax, VA --(Ammoland.com)- NRA-News is a valued partner that continues to cover breaking gun rights news with a new and improved short video format in the “NRA News Minute” videos.

Cam Edwards talks to Bob Parsons, CEO of GoDaddy.com, about the controversy over a video of Bob shooting and killing an elephant while in Zimbabwe Africa.

To view the current firearms or gun rights news video, please click above:

Read More on these topics:

• PETA Uses First Lady in Anti-Fur Ad Without Permission
• Is PETA Killing Pets for the Donation Money?
• PETA Killed a Shocking 94 Percent of Adoptable Pets in 2010

About:
Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. Four million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and to advocate enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the military. Visit: www.nra.org

National Rifle Association

FAIRFAX, Va. --(Ammoland.com)- This week, U.S. Representative Don Young (R-Alaska) refused an award from the Humane Society of the United States. As we have frequently reported, despite their innocuous sounding name, the HSUS is the most radical animal “rights” organization in the country.

They are extremely anti-hunting and anti-gun.

According to a press release on Rep. Young’s official site, he was to receive the award for his work on behalf of wildlife in 2010.

The release notes that HSUS takes credit for the good work done by local humane societies, but does not own, operate, or directly control a single animal shelter in the entire country, despite a $100 million budget.

“HSUS are hypocrites, plain and simple, and I will not join them by accepting this award,” said Rep. Young, explaining his refusal of the award.

“Local animal shelters and humane societies do excellent work by caring for neglected and homeless animals, and through their spaying and neutering programs. This organization, however, has absolutely nothing to do with animal welfare.

Instead they prey on the emotions of big-hearted Americans. They flash images of abused animals on our television screens to raise money that will eventually go to pay their salaries and pensions, not to helping better the lives of these animals. They run anti-hunting and anti-trapping campaigns and are of the same cloth as PETA and other extremist organizations. I can only guess that I was to receive this award due to my support of the Wildlife Without Borders program, which develops wildlife management and conservation efforts to maintain global species diversity. That program is true conservation; what this group wants is preservation.

To accept this award would be supporting their manipulative ways and misguided agenda, and I want no part of that.”

Bravo, Congressman Young.

About:
Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. Four million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and to advocate enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the military. Visit: www.nra.org

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- A recently released report for 2010 shows that the country’s most outrageous animal rights group euthanized the majority of pets in their care.

According to the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, in 2010 PETA euthanized 79% of the total cats, dogs and other companion animals in their care.

An astonishing 97% of cats and 88% of dogs were put to sleep by the group during 2010.

Of the 1553 cats received by the animal rights group, over 97% of them were surrendered by their owners to PETA. Similarly, of the 792 dogs received, 90% of them were surrendered by their owners.

While this sounds like something completely out of character for a group which believes that animals are equal to humans, this is not the first time PETA has killed the majority of animals given to its care. In 2006, PETA reportedly destroyed most of the animals surrendered by owners to the organization, and in 2007 two PETA employees were charged with animal cruelty for allegedly tossing garbage bags full of euthanized cats and dogs into a dumpster. And is consistent with last year’s 95.8% of pets killed.

See the full 2010 report:

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- House Bills 998, 1451, and 2116 would enact severe restrictions on sporting dog owners and could force many respectable sporting dog kennels and breeders out of existence.

House Bill 998: Texas dog owners, and sportsmen nationwide, are already aware that this is a very dangerous bill.

In fact, the bill received such a strong outpouring of opposition following its introduction that Fox News and many local news outlets all carried the story. The measure, introduced by Rep. Ruth McClendon (D- San Antonio), would require owners of unneutered male dogs weighing 20 or more pounds, that are not restrained at all times, to carry a minimum $100,000 insurance liability policy. It was recently assigned to the House Committee on Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence.

House Bill 2116: This bill, introduced Rep. Garnet Coleman (D- Houston), would severely restrict an owner’s ability to keep their dog outdoors. The bill would prohibit all tethering of dogs while unattended. In addition, the bill would require all outdoor housing enclosures to have a minimum of 150 square feet of space for each dog.

It would also classify many sporting dog owners as “commercial breeders,” subjecting them to costly new regulations including housing, exercise, veterinary care, grooming, transportation, and more.

House Bill 1451: This legislation, introduced by Rep. Senfronia Thompson (D- Houston), would create a “commercial breeder” definition identical to that in HB 2116.

It would require “commercial breeders” to be licensed, inspected, and regulated by the Commission of Licensing and Regulation. The bill would require this Commission to enact costly new regulations for dog owners including strict housing guidelines, exercise requirements, mandatory veterinary exams, and many other requirements.

HB 1451 will be heard before the House Licensing and Administrative Procedures Committee this coming Tuesday, March 15th. Click here for more information on the hearing.

Take Action! Texas sportsmen should contact their state representatives and ask them to oppose HB 998, HB 1451, and HB 2116. Tell them these bills could force many responsible sporting dog breeders out of existence. To find your state representative’s contact information, please visit the USSA Legislative Action Center at www.ussportsmen.org/LAC.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

Boone and Crockett Club

MISSOULA, Mont.--(Ammoland.com)- Legal defense costs are an increasing drain on conservation funding today.

Alarmed by the trend, the Boone and Crockett Club has launched a new examination of federal statutes that enable ongoing litigation at a high cost to wildlife and the American taxpayer.

The Club’s primary concern is the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), which reimburses organizations that successfully sue federal agencies for non-compliance with federal law.

Although well intended, abuses of EAJA are escalating into a modern conservation issue with potentially severe long-term consequences.

“”The Club was and is deeply involved in designing and now protecting the economic engines that drive conservation in America,” said Ben Wallace, president of Boone and Crockett Club, “Since the 1880s, we’ve been the guardian of the most successful wildlife conservation system in the world. It’s a system that depends on funding, and we take very seriously the fact that money and other resources intended to support conservation are being diverted elsewhere.””

Past Club President Lowell E. Baier is leading the ongoing investigation and his preliminary findings were reported in a two-article series published in Boone and Crockett’s magazine, “Fair Chase.”

The articles, complete with detailed background and statistics, are now available free to the public at www.boone-crockett.org

EAJA was written to reimburse legal costs incurred by small nonprofit organizations along with for-profit organizations with net worth of less than $7 million.

However, America’s two largest animal rights groups have filed numerous cases under EAJA even though their 2009 combined net assets exceeded $209.6 million and cash balances exceeded $44.5 million.

Another abuse uncovered by Baier: In 2008, an animal rights group won a legal ruling regarding wolves and petitioned a federal court in Missoula, Mont., for $388,370 in attorney fees. The judge awarded $263,099, which was based on an hourly rate of $300 —even though the federal limit is $125 per hour.

In 2007, the same litigant was awarded $280,000 following a similar case in the Great Lakes area.

The defendant in both cases was the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, whose budget —regardless of whether it’s spent on wildlife or lawyers—is financed by a combination of sportsmen fees and tax dollars.

Taxpayers bear all EAJA reimbursements to plaintiffs.
Indirect costs are considerable, too. Nearly all resource management proposals are now subject to ever-higher hidden fees as federal agencies spend more and more time and resources on elaborate environmental impact statements and other attempts to “suit proof” their decision-making processes. In some cases, where the intent of the lawsuit is to stop a proposed federal action, the delays and costs to a federal agency can derail time sensitive projects even if the eventual court ruling goes against the plaintiffs.

Along with wildlife, other public land- and water-based resource agencies that deal with energy, timber, agriculture, livestock and fisheries also are increasingly impacted by legal actions taken under the provisions of EAJA.

EAJA clearly encourages frequent legal challenges by some nonprofits that are, in reality, “big business.”

These organizations are literally making their living by suing a variety of government agencies.

Does EAJA, especially its payments to successful litigants with no reciprocal penalties for losses in court, still make sense today?

Baier’s preliminary study finds that EAJA needs intensive review. Appropriate modifications could help make laws that are more effective, efficient and resistant to courts deciding wildlife management policies via taxpayer subsidized lawsuits.

The Boone and Crockett Club will continue studying this problem. Government Affairs and Conservation Policy committees will examine the results and make recommendations to the board of directors for a final decision on course of action.

Secret World Inside the Animal Rights Agenda

About the Boone and Crockett Club
Founded by Theodore Roosevelt in 1887, the Boone and Crockett Club promotes guardianship and visionary management of big game and associated wildlife in North America. The Club maintains the highest standards of fair-chase sportsmanship and habitat stewardship. Member accomplishments include enlarging and protecting Yellowstone and establishing Glacier and Denali national parks, founding the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service and National Wildlife Refuge System, fostering the Pittman-Robertson and Lacey Acts, creating the Federal Duck Stamp program, and developing the cornerstones of modern game laws. The Boone and Crockett Club is headquartered in Missoula, Mont. For details, visit www.boone-crockett.org.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- A constitutional amendment has been proposed in Missouri that would help prevent anti-hunting groups from attacking hunting, fishing and trapping at the ballot box.

Take Action! Missouri sportsmen are urged to contact their legislators and ask them to support House Joint Resolution 15.

Tell them the amendment will help protect conservation and science based wildlife management.

House Joint Resolution 15, introduced by Representative Don Ruzicka (R- Mt. Vernon), would require a two-thirds majority vote to pass any ballot issue dealing with the harvest of fish, wildlife, or forest resources. Currently, ballot initiatives in the state only require a simple majority of the vote to pass.

For the amendment to take effect it must first pass both chambers of the legislature and then be approved by voters.

Anti-hunting groups often turn to the ballot box when they are unable to sway lawmakers into passing anti-hunting, fishing, and trapping measures. These ballot campaigns often use emotional rhetoric instead of scientific facts and cost millions of dollars to defend against.

“This amendment would go a long way toward protecting Missouri sportsmen from anti-hunting attacks at the ballot box,” said Evan Heusinkveld, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance director of state services. “Sportsmen should ask their legislators to help protect hunting and science based wildlife management in the state by supporting this amendment.”

To find your state legislators’ contact information, please visit www.ussportsmen.org/LAC.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- A bill introduced in Texas would require sporting dog owners to purchase liability insurance for many of their dogs.

Take Action! Texas sportsmen should contact their state representatives today and ask them to oppose House Bill 998.

Tell them the bill will create a financial hardship for many responsible sporting dog owners.

House Bill 998, introduced by Rep. Ruth McClendon (D- San Antonio), would require owners of unneutered male dogs weighing 20 or more pounds, that are not restrained at all times, to carry a minimum $100,000 insurance liability policy.

A dog is only considered restrained if it is either kept in an enclosure or kept on a leash under the immediate control of a person at all times.

Failing to purchase the insurance would be a class C misdemeanor.

Under the bill, many sporting dog owners will be forced to buy the insurance policy, neuter their dog, or face criminal charges. In addition, a large number of sporting dog breeds weigh more than 20 pounds and would be considered “unrestrained” under the bill’s definition when hunting, training, or field trialing. Even a securely tethered dog would be considered unrestrained by this bill.

“It is completely unreasonable to require a dog owner who wants take their dog hunting or to even play fetch in an unfenced back yard to require them to purchase liability insurance to do so,” said Jeremy Rine, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance associate director of state services.

“In addition to being costly for dog owners, this bill sets an arbitrary weight threshold – what happens if you have a dog that regularly fluctuates between 19 and 20 pounds? This bill is unnecessary and unreasonable and should be opposed by all dog owners alike.”

To find your state representative’s contact information, please visit www.ussportsmen.org/LAC.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

G.W. Exotic Animal Park

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Oklahoma --(Ammoland.com)- The animal rights group PETA may be stepping into some hot water in the Sooner state.

The director of an Oklahoma animal park claims to have evidence that PETA used a former employee as a spy in order to give the park a black eye.

Joe Schreibvogel, the director of G.W. Exotic Animal Park, indicated he has a taped confession that proves PETA paid the employee to essentially act as a spy.

Schreibvogel says the employee used an external hard drive to copy files from the park’s main computer and that he used a camera to take pictures that might be embarrassing. That camera was allegedly purchased for the employee by PETA.

The County Sheriff’s office is currently investigating the claims and whether any laws related to downloading of information were violated. As of press time, no arrests have been made or charges filed.

In quotes to the media, Schreibvogel states, “If they make it look like they’re rescuing our animals then more money goes to PETA.”

He also maintains that the park has received high marks over the last few years with all required state and federal inspections.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.

Attention All States: Prepare to be Sued Over Lack of Wolves

U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance

Columbus, OH --(Ammoland.com)- Last week, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) filed a notice of intent to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) if the Service does not create a new nationwide wolf recovery plan.

The CBD filed the notice after the FWS did not respond to an earlier petition filed by the group. In the petition, CBD requested that the FWS create a wolf recovery plan for the lower 48 states.  (AmmoLand Reported on this Plan to force Wolves on the USA in July of 2010)

Specifically, the Center requested that wolves be introduced or their populations bolstered in “at least seven interconnected regions” throughout the continental U.S. This would include: “1) the Pacific Northwest, including the Olympic and Cascade Mountains, 2) the Great Basin, including portions of California, Nevada, and Utah, 3) the southern Rocky Mountains, 4) the northern Rocky Mountains, 5) the Great Plains, 6) the Midwest, and 7) New England.” Basically all of the USA.

The FWS has 60 days to respond before the Center can file a lawsuit.

“Wolves in the Western Great Lakes and Northern Rocky Mountains regions have already far exceeded recovery goals and have become an increasing threat to people and domestic and wild animals,” said Rob Sexton, U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation vice president for government affairs. “The reintroduction of more wolves would not be in anyone’s best interest.”

Earlier this year, the USSAF filed a petition with the Service requesting that it remove the wolves in the Western Great Lakes region from the Endangered Species List. This would return management to state wildlife agencies. Recently, the Service issued a press release stating that it intends to seek comments on a schedule that would allow it to delist wolves in the region by the end of 2011.

In the press release, the FWS noted that “wolves continue to exceed recovery goals and are no longer threatened with extinction.”

Previous efforts to delist recovered wolf populations have been reversed as a result of lawsuits filed by animal rights groups. In those cases, the reversals did not question nor overturn the findings by the FWS that wolves have met recovery plan objectives but dealt with technical legal issues.

About:
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. Visit www.ussportsmen.org.