[accmemberdiscussion] Fwd: [SAOVA_South] Animal Rights Activists Lose Lynx Lawsuit in Maine
- From: Djsdosido@xxxxxxx
- To: accmemberdiscussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 19:17:20 EDT
Donna & the Dosido Gang
Remlap, Alabama
Visit me at _www.doublenickellife.blogspot.com_
(http://www.doublenickellife.blogspot.com/) and help support the Alabama
Canine Coalition by
shopping/searching through _http://www.goodsearch.com_
(http://www.goodsearch.com/)
and _http://www.igive.com_ (http://www.igive.com/)
Every year of dog love is worth seven years of the human stuff. (Michael
Rosen)
____________________________________
From: saova_south@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: saova_south@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 10/26/2010 8:10:34 P.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: [SAOVA_South] Animal Rights Activists Lose Lynx Lawsuit in Maine
A SAOVA message to sportsmen, pet owners and farmers concerned about
protecting their traditions, avocations and livelihoods from anti-hunting,
anti-breeding, animal guardianship advocates. Forwarding and cross posting,
with
attribution, encouraged.
Dear SAOVA friends,
The following article was written by George Smith for Down East: The Web
site of Maine, _www.downeast.com_ (http://www.downeast.com/) , providing an
excellent recap of the precedent-setting appeals court decision last week
upholding the 2009 ruling by Judge John Woodcock, Jr., against animal
rights groups’ Canada lynx lawsuit.
Susan Wolf
Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance - http://saova.org
Issue lobbying and working to identify and elect supportive legislators
saova@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Visit SAOVA News http://saovanews.blogspot.com/
Animal Rights Activists Lose Lynx Lawsuit in Maine
Submitted by George Smith on Tue, 10/26/2010 - 10:26am.
Animal rights activists have lost their latest battle to stop hunting and
trapping in Maine. On October 20 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First
Circuit in Boston affirmed a 2009 decision by Judge John Woodcock, Jr.,
dismissing the animal rights groups’ Canada lynx lawsuit.
This decision provides a very important national precedent. It’s been a
long trail getting to this point, but here’s a quick summary:
On November 10, 2009, Judge Woodcock of the Federal District Court in
Bangor denied a request from the Animal Welfare Institute of Idaho and the
Wildlife Institute of Maine for a permanent injunction against the state of
Maine to stop hunting and trapping in order to protect Canada lynx.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service designated the lynx as a threatened
species under the Endangered Species Act on March 24, 2000. But it has been
illegal to hunt or trap lynx in Maine since 1967.
The most important thing for you to know is this: Maine probably has more
lynx today than ever, an estimated total exceeding 1,000 animals. As far as
Maine officials are concerned, Canada lynx are neither threatened nor
endangered. They are doing well here.
Maine is on the southern end of the range for Canada lynx that are
plentiful to our north in Quebec — so plentiful that they are hunted and
trapped
there. The lynx population here rises and falls along with the population
of the animal’s principle prey: snowshoe hares.
Along with the excellent work of Maine Assistant Attorneys General Chris
Taub and Nancy Macirowski, the testimony of Dr. Ken Elowe of Maine’s
Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (IF&W) was the decisive factor in
convincing Judge Woodcock that the lawsuit had no merit.
Twice in the last three years, animal rights groups have used the ESA’s
lynx listing to seek declaratory relief and injunctions in federal court
against Maine laws and regulations.
The first lawsuit, Animal Protection Institute v. Martin, resulted in an
October 4, 2007, Consent Decree in which IF&W made a commitment to new
regulations restricting the type, size, and placement of traps in Maine. IF&W
paid $140,000 in attorney’s fees to API as part of that settlement.
Much to the state’s surprise, a similarly-named animal rights group, The
Animal Welfare Institute, along with the Wildlife Alliance of Maine — led by
people who were a party to the earlier consent decree — filed another
lawsuit on August 11, 2008, seeking the same injunctive relief and charging
that IF&W was violating the ESA by allowing trapping practices that result in
the capture of some lynx.
On November 26, 2008, Judge Woodcock issued a fifty-page order on AWI’s
motion for preliminary injunction, granting the motion in part and denying it
in part. The Court ordered the state to “immediately take all action
necessary to avoid the trapping of Canada lynx in Conibear traps.”
IF&W acted swiftly and adopted an emergency rule on December 4, 2008,
imposing additional limitations on the way Conibear traps can be set in
Wildlife Management Districts 1 – 11.
Unfortunately, within two weeks of the emergency order, two Canada lynx
were found dead as a result of encounters with Conibear traps, and AWI moved
for an emergency temporary restraining order.
That is the order that Judge Woodcock rejected on November 10, 2009. In
mid-April and late June of that year, the Judge hosted six days of hearings
on this matter. AWI specifically was asking that leghold and Conibear traps
be prohibited on land where lynx are present.
The state (Office of the Attorney General) and IF&W defended against the
suit with support from a group of interveners consisting of sportsmen’s and
trapper’s organizations. At the national level the U.S. Sportsmen’s
Alliance has been very involved in defending against all of these lawsuits,
and
at the state level, the Maine Trappers Association has been in the lead.
The animal rights groups immediately appealed Woodcock’s November 10,
2009, decision to the First Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals.
After hearing arguments in early September, that Court issued on October
20, 2010, a unanimous affirmation of Woodcock’s entire decision that
rejected the latest attempt by animal rights activists to stop hunting and
trapping in Maine’s north woods. The decision sets a very important precedent
for
similar lawsuits across the country.
“This decision will make it harder in the future for the animal fanatics
to use the federal ESA to attack trapping, hunting, or any other activity
that could result in a threatened or endangered species being taken
incidentally,” reported Skip Trask, lobbyist for the Maine Trappers
Association and
an important participant in Maine’s defense against the lawsuit.
Judge Woodcock’s decision plainly states that those who sue to stop
trapping and hunting must prove not only that an occasional protected animal
is
taken, but that “irreparable harm” would be caused to the entire population
of protected animals.
In other words, the most important aspect of the judge’s decision is that
the take of individual members of a reasonably numerous protected species
does not necessarily meet the ESA requirement of irreparable harm. He also
found that the occasional catch of lynx in Maine foothold traps, from which
they are normally released without harm, did not constitute irreparable
harm.
The judge was right. In the seven-year period from 1999 to 2006, during
which thirty lynx were caught in foothold traps, IF&W was able to assess just
under half, and only one had an injury that required veterinary treatment.
None of the thirty died as a result of being captured in the trap.
In 2007 and 2008, eight lynx were caught in foothold traps. IF&W assessed
five of them. Two sustained no injuries, and the others had only minor skin
lacerations. In fact, IF&W offered evidence that some lynx repeatedly
visit traps for food despite being repeatedly trapped.
The Court of Appeals concluded its decision with critical comments about
the animal rights groups, noting that actions they agreed to in their first
lawsuit they argued against in their second lawsuit. “AWI’s bait and
switch tactics in the courts are to be deplored, not rewarded,” wrote the
Court.
While establishing an important precedent, this decision is unlikely to
deter the constant filing of lawsuits under the Endangered Species Act. This
is simply another chapter — albeit an important one — in this particular
war, while we wait for Congress to amend the Act and limit these abuses of
the legal system.
_http://www.downeast.com/georges-outdoor-news/2010/october/activists-lawsuit
-maine_
(http://www.downeast.com/georges-outdoor-news/2010/october/activists-lawsuit-maine)
_http://tinyurl.com/334w57f_ (http://tinyurl.com/334w57f)
The message above was posted to North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia,
Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Louisiana and Texas
residents by the Sportsmen's and Animal Owners' Voting Alliance (SAOVA).
SAOVA is a nonpartisan volunteer group working to protect Americans from
the legislative and political threats of radical animal rightists. It is the
only national organization fighting this struggle for both sportsmen and
animal owners, natural allies, in these arenas. Visit our website at
http://saova.org for this program's goals, methodology and list signup details.
To unsubscribe from this list, exercise that option at
http://mailman.montana.com/mailman/listinfo/saova_south
SAOVA
PO Box 612, Spencer NC 28159
SAOVA_South mailing list
SAOVA_South@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.montana.com/mailman/listinfo/saova_south
Other related posts:
- » [accmemberdiscussion] Fwd: [SAOVA_South] Animal Rights Activists Lose Lynx Lawsuit in Maine - Djsdosido
