American Bison nearly extinct in 1800s – now thriving. Then, bison burgers.
Some issues in the debate:
Numerous studies refute this MYTH.
If deer weren’t hunted they would starve.
What do we learn from keeping wild animals in captivity?
Should wild animals be kept in captivity to
entertain or educate humans?
Official hunting seasons were set up in the early 1700s and over the next 100 years we
saw the emergence of state fish and game departments, license requirements and
Colonists had to fight off animal predators –
Conservationists Animal Welfarists
wild animals by
◦ Many are hunters.
◦ Ethical battle continues
First federal wildlife law
◦ Lacey Act of 1900 (p. 33)
Many funded conservation efforts with
…provide strong financial incentives to
increase the consumption of wildlife.
Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act
Created a fund raised through taxes on the sale of
firearms and materials. To qualify for the
money, states must use hunting revenues only for
state fish and wildlife programs.
So if NY is to receive federal funding under this Act, NY
cannot use license fees for any other purpose than
administration of En Con’s Fish and Wildlife Division.
Minimum Hunting Age
Minors under the age of 12 may not obtain a
hunting license or hunt wildlife.
Under New York State Environmental Conservation Law
(section 11-0523), people are not required to obtain a
permit to trap on their own property, or on the property
someone of else who has given them written
permission to trap.
Trapping on public lands or other private property requires
a wildlife control permit, which is obtained from
the Department of Environmental Protection.
State wildlife agencies are in competition with
each other for federal funds, and the only way
a state can raise the ceiling on its potential
federal funding is to increase the number of
people it licenses to hunt.
◦ This raises incentives to increase # of animals
available to hunt.
Millions of acres in national wildlife refuges and wetlands
Migratory bird conservation
National fish hatcheries, resource & field offices
Enforces many federal wildlife laws
USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)
USFWS works with U.S. Customs & Border
Protection and the USDA to monitor shipments
of protected plants and animals.
Wildlife Services of the USDA
◦ Controls wildlife that can damage
agriculture, property, natural resources and
threaten public safety
(1) Protecting human interests
(2) Preserving endangered species
West Nile virus
Chlamydiosis (respiratory disease in tropical
Histoplasmosis (lung disease)
Salmonellosis (intestinal illness)
CDC reports 7,258
cases of animal
rabies in U.S.
◦ Wild animals 93% of
Wildlife problems reported by each state - 2001
◦ Example North Carolina and Canadian Geese
◦ Techniques recommended by Wildlife Service of USDA
In choosing a control technique, WS specialists consider the
biological and legal status of the target species and potential
nontarget species, local environmental conditions and possible
environmental impacts, and the practicality of available control
The Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act of 1971 (Public Law
92-195) required the protection, management, and control of
wild free-roaming horses and burros on public land. Congress
declared that wild free-roaming horses and burros are living
symbols of the historic and pioneer spirit of the west; they
contribute to the diversity of life forms within the Nation and
enrich the lives of the American people; and these horses and
burros are fast disappearing from the American scene. It is the
policy of Congress that wild free-roaming horses and burros
shall be protected from capture, branding, harassment, or death;
and to accomplish this they are to be considered in the area
where they are presently found, as an integral part of the natural
system of the public lands.
This law states; The Secretary of the Interior shall manage wild free-roaming
horses and burros in a manner that is designed to achieve and maintain a thriving
natural ecological balance on public lands. It also states, if an over population
exists on a given area of the public lands and action is necessary to remove
excess animals, he shall immediately remove excess animals from the range so as
to achieve appropriate management levels. … all excess animals … removed so as
to restore a thriving natural ecological balance to the range, and to protect the
range from the deterioration associated with over-population.
Since the passage of the act to 2007 approx. 235,00 wild horses and burros
have been adopted to private individuals. Even with this high number of
adoptions, it has been decided that public lands can only sustain 28,849 wild
horses and burros in total. At the end of 2003 the wild horse and burro
population on the open range was 37,186.
The Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act of 1971
For the year 2005, the Bureau of Land
Management's annual budget for the Wild
Horse and Burro Program was approximately
$40 million dollars. Half of this money was
allocated for the care and feeding of the
animals in captivity.
Save the Mustangs video
There are different degrees of violation with the law. The most
punishable offenses are trafficking, and any act of knowingly "taking"
(which includes harming, wounding, or killing) an endangered species.
The penalties for these violations can be a maximum fine of up to
$50,000 or imprisonment for one year, or both, and civil penalties of up
to $25,000 per violation, may be assessed. Lists of violations and exact
fines are available through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
One provision of this law is that no penalty may be imposed if, by a
preponderance of the evidence that the act was in self defense. The law
also eliminates criminal penalties for accidentally killing listed species
during farming and ranching activities.
In addition to fines or imprisonment, a license, permit, or other
agreement issued by a Federal Agency that authorized an individual to
import or export fish, wildlife, or plants may be revoked, suspended or
modified. Any federal hunting or fishing permits that were issued to a
person who violates the ESA can be canceled or suspended for up to a
1990s – reintroduced to western U.S. – moved from Canada
2000 – population recovered
1967 – gray and red wolves endangered
Endangered Species Act (ESA): wolves
throughout the Lower 48 United States are
listed as endangered except in
Montana, Idaho and portions of
Oregon, Washington and Utah where they
have been delisted through congressional
action. Currently, the delisting of wolves in
Wyoming has been approved in principle by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In
Minnesota wolves are listed as threatened. In
Alaska, wolves are not listed under the ESA.
◦ Source: Defenders of Wildlife
The CITES appendices list thousands of animals from all over the world for which trade
is prohibited. Of major concern: Asian and African elephants and primates.
Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species (CITES)
Valued for hides, bones, & penises in Asia. Federal law allows the possession of captive-bred tigers,
but only if this enhances the survival of the species. It is illegal to kill tigers for profit or sell their
parts, meat or hide in interstate commerce. It is not illegal to donate the animals.
With a rough estimate of 5,000
tigers in captivity, the United States
likely ranks second behind China as
the country with the single largest
Although the United States has no
large scale, commercial captive
breeding operations, all of the tigers
in the U.S. are held in captivity.
Unfortunately, U.S. laws and
regulations governing the keeping of
these tigers are not adequate to
foreclose the possibility that parts or
derivatives from these animals could
enter illegal trade.
At the state level, laws and
regulations governing the keeping of
tigers in private possession vary
• 28 states have laws banning
the possession of tigers in private
• 17 states allow for the keeping of
tigers by individuals but require
a state permit or registration
(Iowa, Oregon, and Washington have
recently instituted bans on private
possession of tigers, but also have
systems in place to regulate the
tigers that were grandfathered in
prior to enactment of those bans.);
• 8 states have no laws on the
The United States has a strong
legal framework at the federal
level governing international
trade in tigers or their parts
through the Endangered
Species Act, the Lacey Act, and
the Criminal Code.
◦ The Lacey Act combats trafficking
in ―illegal‖ wildlife, fish, and
The Rhino and Tiger
Conservation Act, as amended
in 1998,further prohibits any
domestic sale of tiger parts, as
well as the sale of any
products labeled or advertised
to contain tiger parts.
Through the Animal Welfare
Act, the Captive Wildlife
Safety Act, and the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
registration and permit
system for captive-bred
wildlife, the United States
also has a federal legal
framework governing the
interstate movement of
captive tigers; rules for the
sale, trade, or exhibition of
live tigers; and conditions
for their confinement.
All of these laws and regulations,
however, have exceptions or
exemptions that mean, in practical
terms, that the majority of private
owners of tigers in the United States
need only to keep records of tigers
While such records must be made
available upon request, federal agencies
charged with implementing these laws
and regulations do not have a mandate
to maintain a current inventory of how
many tigers may be in the
country, where they are, who possesses
them, when they die, or how they are
N.Y. ENVTL. CONSERV. §11-0512 - Envtl. Conserv.
Possession, sale, barter, transfer, exchange and import of wild animals as pets
Hunting and fishing rates are important to
the USFWS and state agencies because fees
collected (licenses, tags, permits) fund
wildlife related programs.
◦ See Tables 3.7 and 3.8.
Federal law allows hunting and fishing on
national wildlife refuges if it is determined that
protected wildlife will not be jeopardized.
Non-targeted species such as dogs and cats, rabbits, river
otters, geese, ducks, hawks, owls, eagles, bears are captured in these body-
gripping traps at – refuges.
Trapping is used as a control method on
Captive hunts, also known as ―canned hunts,‖ are the very opposite of fair
chase. Shooters at captive hunts pay to kill animals—even endangered species—
trapped behind fences.
New York - Canned hunts of mammals are
legal except that "big game non-native
animals" cannot be tied, hobbled, staked or
attached to a stationary object or "confined in
a box, pen, cage or similar container of 10 or
less contiguous acres from which there is no
means for such mammal to escape". The
animal also cannot be released in front of the
person who will be shooting or spearing it.
N.Y. Envt. Con. Laws§11-1904(1)(A)(1)-(3).
A bill that would have banned canned hunts in New York was passed by the state legislature but was vetoed by then Gov.
George Pataki in 2003. Several subsequent attempts to ban canned hunts in New York have also failed including a bill this
past session, Assembly Bill 6788 This bill would have amended the current law and make it illegal to hunt big game non-
native animals that are "in a fenced or other area" from where there is no means of escape. It would eliminate canned hunts
of big game non-native mammals in New York state.
Illegal in NY
Started in Texas http://live-shot.com/
Dog and Cat Fur Protection Act of 2000
HSUS Undercover Investigation
The facts on fur labeling
Congress enacted the Fur Products Labeling Act in 1951 in
response to rampant false advertising and false labeling of
animal fur garments.
The Fur Products Labeling Act requires that animal fur
products be labeled with the name of the species used, the
manufacturer, country of origin, and other information and
prohibits the sale and advertising of fur products that have
been falsely or deceptively advertised.
Violations of the Fur Products Labeling Act carry up to a
$5,000 fine and up to a year in prison.
The Federal Trade Commission is tasked with enforcing
the Fur Products Labeling Act and protecting consumers
2010- Congress passed and President Obama signed the Truth in Fur Labeling Act to strengthen the
Fur Products Labeling Act and close a loophole that previously allowed some fur trimmed garments to
be sold without labels (IF VALUED AT $150 OR LESS). The new law will help prevent false advertising
by requiring retailers to affix clear labels to the garments themselves.
Truth in Fur Labeling Act
HSUS Files False Advertising Suit Against Retailers for Deceptive Labeling