The grizzly bear translocate plan was cheered by left-wing eco groups and is widely opposed by locals

By Yael Halon Fox News

Published March 30, 2024 5:00pm EDT

https://www.foxnews.com/media/bidens-grizzly-bear-relocation-plan-poses-real-danger-families-livestock-cattle-producer-warns

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Flipboard
• Comments
• Print
• Email

https://static.foxnews.com/static/orion/html/video/iframe/vod.html?v=20240327202910#uid=fnc-embed-1&url=www.foxnews.com%2Fmedia%2Fbidens-grizzly-bear-relocation-plan-poses-real-danger-families-livestock-cattle-producer-warns

Washington cattle producer Neil Kayser: Grizzly bear relocation is a danger to our families and livestock

Washington cattle producer Neil Kayser discusses the Biden administration’s aims to relocate the bears to the state on ‘The Ingraham Angle.’

The Biden administration’s plan to relocate grizzly bear populations to rural parts of Washington State will have a devastating impact on agriculture and livestock in the region while posing a significant danger to local communities, a fifth generation cattle producer warned.

Residents of Washington State are doubling down on their concerns surrounding the federal government’s plan to translocate grizzly bears, an apex predator, to the federally-managed North Cascades National Park, after the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service declared the strategy their preferred plan for grizzly bear management in the region.

BIDEN ADMIN ACCELERATES PLAN TO UNLEASH GRIZZLY BEARS NEAR RURAL COMMUNITY OVER WIDESPREAD LOCAL OPPOSITION

An adult grizzly bear walks through a campground and picnic area on June 27, 2013 in Lake Louise, Alberta, Canada, within Banff National Park. (George Rose/Getty Images)

The North Cascades National Park borders rural communities in northern Washington State. If approved, the plan would not only put the livelihoods of locals at risk, but it will pose a serious danger to families who live in the area, Neil Kayser, member of the Washington Cattleman’s Association and longtime cattle producer, told Laura Ingraham on Monday.

“There’s a real danger of our livestock …of the people that are working and living in this area that they’re going to bring the bears into. It’s a real threat and danger to our families,” Kayser said on “The Ingraham Angle.”

Despite widespread opposition, the government’s relocation proposal was accelerated last week with the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service publishing a final environmental impact statement listing the translocation of grizzly bears from other ecosystems with an “experimental population designation” as their ideal management strategy.

BIDEN ADMIN BACKS OFF PROTECTIONS FOR APEX PREDATOR, ANGERING ENVIRONMENTALISTS

“Designation of grizzly bears released into the U.S. portion of the [North Cascades Ecosystem] as a [nonessential experimental population] would provide authorized agencies with greater management flexibility should conflict situations arise,” the agencies wrote in the filing. “Any management actions would be consistent with the overall goal of establishing and conserving the NEP while promoting social tolerance and human safety.”

“The designation allows for the advancement of recovery objectives by providing an opportunity to reestablish a population within the ecosystem,” they added. “The proposed geographic extent for the grizzly bear … includes all of Washington state except an exclusion area around the Selkirk Ecosystem grizzly bear recovery where a population of bears currently exists.”

The National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service further wrote in their environmental impact statement that its proposal is expected to improve social tolerance of grizzly bears, and even increase public visitation and recreation in North Cascades National Park “as visitors seek to experience grizzly bears in their native habitat.”

Kayser believes the agencies are far too optimistic, telling “The Ingraham Angle” that the grizzly bear management strategy should not be dictated by “federal bureaucrats” and should have included the input of local stakeholders and organizations.

Coastal brown bear, also known as Grizzly Bear, Ursus Arcos, female and cubs. South Central Alaska. United States of America. (Education Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

“I’m not a wildlife biologist, but I also believe that anything that gets hungry is going to eat something. And if there’s no wildlife there to eat, it’s going to be the livestock, it’s going to be the pets, the dogs and cats,” he said. “It’s going to harass the people that are hiking and walking in this area, that vacation there. It does not need to be done by a federal bureaucrat, it needs to be done by the Washington State [Department of] Fish and Wildlife and the local communities.”

“Nobody asked to house these bears in Portland or Seattle,” Kayser added. “They’re putting them in on our landscape that we try to make a living on to provide food and fiber and energy for the American consumer.”

Addressing the potential impact of the proposal on local communities, livestock and farms, the agencies wrote that they will allow people to injure or kill a grizzly bear that is threatening a person’s life or is in the act of attacking livestock, including working dogs on private land, under certain conditions.

The Biden administration first proposed the translocation plan in late September, Under the proposal, the federal government would release up to seven grizzly bears annually into the North Cascades ecosystem over the course of the next five to 10 years. The proposal was cheered by left-wing eco groups but criticized by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), which represents cattle ranchers and local lawmakers, including Rep. Dan Newhouse, R-Wash.

Hiker on Sahale Arm Trail, Cascade Pass, North Cascades National Park, Washington. (Greg Vaughn /VW PICS/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

LOCAL RESIDENTS EXPLODE AT BIDEN OFFICIALS OVER PLAN TO RELEASE GRIZZLY BEARS NEAR THEIR COMMUNITIES 

At a contentious public comment session in northern Washington in November, Newhouse dismissed the plan as “dangerous” and lacking in “common sense.”

An estimated 200 residents participated in the comment session hosted by federal officials to hear feedback regarding the proposal to release grizzly bears in a nearby forest area. (Courtesy of Rep. Dan Newhouse)

Kayser said despite the “challenges” facing cattlemen today from environmental activists, he will continue to uphold his family legacy and has no plans of relocating.

“We’ve been here for five generations. And we’ve endured a lot of things. We’re going to support our industry and our way of life,” he told Ingraham.

The federal government’s overarching goal under its plan is to establish a grizzly bear population of roughly 200 bears in the coming decades.

Editorial: A welcome return of grizzlies to North Cascades

Over the past decade, Netflix has hosted a number of impactful films and series that have changed the way many of us think, eat, and behave. 

by CHARLOTTE POINTING

MARCH 25, 2024

https://vegnews.com/vegan-news/netflix-driving-plant-based-shift-timeline

---

2,686 Likes    

It’s hard to imagine a time when you couldn’t just open Netflix and have access to hundreds of movies, sitcoms, drama series, and hard-hitting documentaries. But actually, the streaming site has only really been a big part of our lives since the early 2010s. Weird, right? It started as a DVD service in the late 1990s, before pivoting to streaming in 2007, three years later it launched its first stream-only plan. And the rest, as they say, is history.

Now, Netflix is such a big part of our day-to-day lives that it can influence everything from what songs we listen to (queue Kate Bush’s Running Up That Hill) to what clothes we wear (thanks Bridgerton for the Regency revival) to which issues we care about. The global streaming giant is packed with impactful climate crisis-, diet-, and animal welfare-related content, and it’s had a big effect on how many of us see the world.

In fact, we would go so far as to say that Netflix—which boasts more than 80 million subscribers in the US and Canada alone—has played (and still is playing) a key role in making plant-based diets and ethical consumerism mainstream.

Over the last 10 years, it has hosted some of the most hard-hitting exposés on the food industry (Cowspiracy and What the Health are just two examples) and helped to inspire many people around the world (including famous names) to change their eating habits for good. It has also changed how countless people see animals in the entertainment industry (looking at you, Blackfish) and made more of us want to reach for plant-based, whole foods over processed products (Live to 100: Secrets of the Blue Zones is just one recent example).

To help demonstrate just how much Netflix has helped turn us all into more conscious consumers over the last decade, we put together a timeline of some of its biggest releases to date and unpacked the impact each has had (and continues to have) on viewers around the world.

Netflix

2013: ’Blackfish’ exposes Seaworld, causes profits to plummet

Thanks to Netflix, now, when millions of people think of SeaWorld they also think of Blackfish, the harrowing documentary that tells the tragic story of Tilikum, the former orca star of SeaWorld’s Shamu shows, and the people that he killed, including his trainer Dawn Brancheau. The film lifts the veil behind the marine entertainment industry to show the suffering and torment of captive animals in the industry and the catastrophic consequences it can have.

As a result of the film’s release, SeaWorld’s stock prices plummeted, ticket sales fell, and major travel companies pulled their partnerships with the theme park. Eighteen orcas still remain at three of SeaWorld’s parks, but the company announced an end to its orca breeding program in 2015 following relentless campaigning from animal-rights activists.

Netflix

2015: ’Cowspiracy’ showcases shocking truths about animal agriculture’s environmental impact 

In 2014, we named Cowspiracy: The Sustainability Secret—which demonstrates animal agriculture’s detrimental impact on the environment—as our movie of the year, and the following year, it made it to Netflix. At the time, we called the film “as enlightening as An Inconvenient Truth and as impactful as Blackfish,” and noted that it “clearly demonstrates why you are not truly an environmentalist if you still consume meat and dairy products.”

Since then, the documentary has encouraged countless individuals to reexamine their dietary habits (including actor Richa Moorjani—find our interview with her here!). In early 2024, a global survey from the vegan dating app Veggly revealed that Cowspiracy remains one of the most effective vegan documentaries to date.

2016: ’Forks Over Knives’ discloses link between diet and disease

Forks Over Knives has been on and off Netflix for quite a few years now, but some records show that after it was released in 2011, it was re-added to the platform in 2016. Before 2018’s What the Health (more on that momentarily), the provocative and controversial film moved the science-backed link between animal-heavy diets and chronic disease closer to the mainstream conversation on health for the first time.

“Forks Over Knives introduced the general public to the idea that food wasn’t just some modest force,” Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine President Neal Barnard, MD, who features in the film, said in a statement. “It wasn’t just going to bring your cholesterol down a little bit or something like that. It was something revolutionary that could empower you to change your life dramatically.”

2017: ‘What the Health’ inspires another new wave of vegans

In 2017, the vegan movement was really starting to pick up some speed. It was even capturing the attention of celebrities, and that was largely down to What the Health’s arrival on Netflix. Like Forks Over Knives, the film—backed by vegan actor Joaquin Phoenix—dives deep into the reality of the link between animal-heavy diets and disease, as well as the relationship between the billion-dollar health, pharmaceutical, and meat industries.

Celebrities who Tweeted about the film at the time included Ne-Yo, Moby, Shay Mitchell, and Nathalie Emmanuel. In fact, the film arguably changed Lewis Hamilton’s life. The Formula One star is now a vocal vegan and ethical investor, and What the Health was a big part of his journey. “Going to watch What the Health tonight,” he wrote on Snapchat back in 2017. “I’m on a mission to go vegan, people. Animal cruelty, global warming, and our personal health is at stake.”

Netflix

2017: ‘Okja’ breaks hearts everywhere, Google searches for ‘vegan’ surge

Okja follows the heart-breaking (fictional) story of a young girl named Mija and a super pig named Okja. In simple terms, the film—which draws comparisons with the real-life meat industry—follows Mija as she fights for Okja to be returned home after he is taken by a giant corporation for the meat industry.

The Netflix movie pulled on heartstrings all over the world and encouraged many to give up meat for good. Jon Ronson, who co-wrote the movie with Bong Joon-ho (who also turned vegan during production), told GQ back in 2018: “Oh, [there were] so many people [who were impacted]. So many stories. I remember getting an email right before the film came out saying, ‘There are people all around the world who don’t realize they’re about to become vegetarians.’”

“I read that Google searches for ‘vegan’ went up 58 percent after Okja,” he added (GQ clarified it was 65 percent). “I have no f***ing idea if they carried on that lifestyle, but the impact is definitely there.”

Netflix

2019: ‘The Game Changers’ proves that meat isn’t essential for muscle

In 2019, The Game Changers became one of the most talked-about shows on Netflix. The groundbreaking documentary followed Special Forces trainer James Wilks and the stories of several elite athletes who were at peak fitness and performance, all on a plant-based diet.

Hamilton featured in the film, alongside martial arts star Jackie Chan, NBA player Chris Paul, tennis champion Novak Djokovic, and former professional bodybuilder Arnold Schwarzenegger. The film inspired many to rethink their relationship with meat, including Roger Whiteside, CEO of British bakery chain Greggs (famed, in part, for its vegan sausage roll, top bodybuilder Kai Greene, cyclist Chris Froome, and actor Hafþór Júlíus Björnsson.

Damian Soong, CEO and co-founder of vegan nutrition Form Nutrition, believes that The Game Changers—a film that positioned plant-based nutrition as optimal for performance—was the natural next step in the vegan documentary world. “The previous documentaries in some ways paved the way for this. There is now a greater acceptance and awareness of climate change, and the impact of industrial farming, and the press around meat means it’s very much in the public consciousness,” he told the Telegraph in 2019.

Netflix

2021: ‘Seaspiracy’ lifts the veil on the industrialized fishing industry, brands make big changes

Until 2021, most of Netflix’s hard-hitting exposés had focused on animal agriculture on land, but Seapiracy took us into the water and unveiled some of the horrors going on in the world’s oceans. The film documented the industrialized fishing industry and the harm that the world’s appetite for mass-produced fish is doing to marine life and the planet.

The impact was significant. After its release, one Hong Kong store announced it would phase out fish products, and Dutch food brand Schouten announced it was launching vegan fish sticks in response to growing demand for more fish-free products. “We have noticed that the Netflix documentary Seaspiracy has made a big impression on people and has contributed to a growing awareness of the importance of plant-based alternatives to fish,” Schouten Product Manager Annemiek Vervoort said at the time. “This will further increase the demand for fish substitutes.”

Netflix

2023: ‘Live to 100: Secrets of the Blue Zones’ encourages people to eat more plants for a longer life

Live to 100: Secrets of the Blue Zones, a four-part series that follows explorer Dan Buettner around the world’s longevity hotspots (or Blue Zones), hit Netflix last August. The series demonstrated that people in Okinawa, Japan, Sardinia, Italy, Ikaria, Greece, Nicoya, Costa Rica, and Loma Linda, California all seem to live longer, healthier lives than people in the US, and they have much in common, including that they eat a predominantly plant-based diet.

The series was one of the most talked-about series of the fall, gripping social media and dominating headlines for weeks after its release. According to the Daily Mail, several viewers “vowed to overhaul their lives” after watching.

Netflix

2023: ‘Chicken Run: The Dawn of the Nugget’ shines a light on fast-food cruelty 

Two decades after the first Chicken Run, Chicken Run: The Dawn of the Nugget was released on Netflix. It follows the same group of chickens as the first film, as they attempt to break into a factory farm to save their fellow birds from becoming nuggets for the fast food industry.

The film—watched nearly 12 million times in its first week of release—was intended to make people think. “We want the film to be engaging and entertaining and a great ride, mostly,” director Sam Fell, who reportedly went vegan during filming, said. “But yes, if you come away and you think a little bit more like a chicken by the end of it, then that’s not a bad thing.”

Netflix

2024: ‘You Are What You Eat: A Twin Experiment’ champions a whole food, plant-based diet

Netflix kicked off 2024 with yet another plant-based hit. You Are What You Eat: A Twin Experiment followed a groundbreaking twin study from Stanford Medicine, which seemed to offer up the closest to definitive proof we have so far that a whole food, plant-based diet really is the best for our health.

The series—which also delved into the realities of the meat industry’s environmental and animal welfare impact—inspired multiple headlines, debates, reviews, and TikTok videos, some of which boast hundreds of thousands of views. It is eye-opening, at times jaw-dropping, and without a doubt, inspiring. You can find our biggest takeaways from the film here.

For more on documentaries, read:

• The 18 Best Vegan Documentaries to Start Streaming Now  
• Joaquin Phoenix and Rooney Mara Will Pay You to Watch a Documentary About Factory Farming
• The Veganuary Campaign Celebrates 10 Years With a Documentary

Clare Mulroy

USA TODAY

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2024/03/29/rarest-animal-in-the-world/72867145007

AD

1:24

SKIP

https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.630.1_en.html#goog_350796540

Americans celebrated the 50th anniversary of the Endangered Species Act late last year, serving as a reminder of the 1,662 domestic and 638 foreign species it protects. The act is credited with saving 99% of listed species from extinction.

But, other species remain on the brink of extinction in the U.S. and around the globe. Heat, drought and rising seas brought on by climate change are threatening many species’ habitats. Rhinos, which are among the most endangered land animals, face near-unlivable climate change-related rising temperatures in southern Africa, a recent study found.

What is the rarest animal in the world?

The vaquita is the rarest animal in the world and the rarest marine mammal. These porpoises swim in the Gulf of California and were only discovered in 1958, according to the World Wildlife Fund. They are on the brink of extinction, in part, because of the use of gillnets in illegal fishing operations, which often unintentionally trap marine mammals. 

There are only about 10 vaquita remaining.

But there are still signs of hope – conservationists in northern Mexico spotted a vaquita calf swimming next to its mother in Sept. 2023, a promising sign of population growth. 

Two species of rhinos are contenders for the title of rarest land mammal for different reasons. The Javan rhino is the “most threatened of the five rhino species” when it comes to poaching, according to the WWF. Only about 70 reside in the Ujung Kulon National Park in Java, Indonesia. But the Sumatran rhino, the wooly rhino’s closest living descendent, is threatened due to habitat loss. Remaining Sumatran rhinos live in “small, fragmented non-viable populations,” with low chances of finding each other to mate.

New study:Rising temperatures from climate change could threaten rhinos

What are the most endangered animals?

Here are the top 10 species in the “critically endangered” category based on population size estimates from the WWF: 

1. Vaquita: 10 
2. Sumatran rhino: 40
3. Javan Rhino: 70
4. Amur Leopards: More than 84 
5. Cross River Gorilla: 200-300
6. Saola: Less than 750
7. Tapanuli orangutan: 800
8. Yangtze finless porpoise: 1,000-1,800
9. Sumatran elephants: 2,400-2,800
10. Sunda tiger: 5,574

Others on the critically endangered list include the African forest elephant, black rhinos, Bornean orangutans, eastern lowland gorillas, hawksbill turtles, Sumatran orangutans, Sumatran rhinos and western lowland gorillas.

What is the rarest fish in the world?

The Devils Hole pupfish are the rarest fish in the world. Last year, scientists counted just 175 of them swimming in a deep cavernous pool in the Death Valley National Park in Nevada. But the population has held steady in recent years, even reaching 236 during one fall count when food was more abundant. In 2013, there were only 35 fish.

https://cm.usatoday.com/article-body/inline-desktop_032624_USATBAU24

These fish, who get their name from the way they “frolic about,” live an isolated life and share no common ancestry with any other species. They have one of the smallest, most distinctive habitats in the world, according to Smithsonian Magazine.

The bodybuilder used to eat 500g of animal protein daily to fuel his muscles before turning plant-based

https://www.ladbible.com/news/health/identical-twins-diet-challenge-vegan-meat-986902-20240326

Charisa Bossinakis

Published May 1, 2023, 07:22:00 GMT+1Last updated Mar 31, 2024, 10:18:01 GMT+1

Paul Kerton is paving the way for bodybuilders by claiming you don’t need to eat meat to be ‘manly’.

The 49-year-old fitness guru hit back at data compiled by Australian National University (ANU), where most men claimed that going plant-based threatened their masculinity.

Yes, really.

But with guns the size of Texas and abs that could cut a cake, Paul is breaking the gender stereotype since turning vegan.

SWNS

The bodybuilder used to eat 500g of animal protein daily to fuel his muscles – the equivalent of four chicken breasts.

“People say meat makes you ‘manly’. I don’t think it does,” Paul said.

“We did have to eat animals to survive.

“Now we don’t.”

“I didn’t want to be the cause of my own death”

The personal trainer and nutritionist from Norwich, Norfolk, made the lifestyle change after his partner Gemma switched to a vegan diet to help with her autoimmune disease called Hashimoto’s thyroiditis.

Paul immediately saw the health benefits too.

“I feel amazing now. I got into the best shape of my life. You can be big and strong and ‘manly’ and be healthy and fit, and we don’t have to eat animals,” he said.

Paul added: “I didn’t want to be the cause of my own death. It’s a cheat code for fat loss. I quickly lost the taste for it [meat].”

SWNS

Aside from improving his physique, Paul also noticed he has less joint pain.

Rather than eating 500g of meat a day, he now consumes 200g of legumes, wholegrain, vegetables, nuts and seeds.

His former breakfast consisted of egg whites and oatmeal, followed by eight meals of chicken breasts, white pasta and broccoli for lunch and dinner.

But now, Paul indulges in porridge, berries, flax meal and dates for breakfast and chickpea curry for lunch.

As for the dinner menu, Paul usually has creamy vegan tempeh bacon pasta with roasted Mediterranean vegetables and Kalamata olives.

“I feel amazing now”

He also lifts weights for an hour a day and says he feels better than he did in his 30s.

Now, Paul claims he has better eyesight and feels much more energised, calling it ‘the best decision of his life’.

He wants to spread the word in the fitness community, but his work is cut out of him.

Paul said: “There is a stereotype of the ‘angry vegan’. I have compassion for people but once you see what animals go through to end on your plates it hurts.

“I can’t believe I was complicit.”

‘Hundreds of millions will die in minutes’ if nuclear war breaks out in Russia or China

Markhor trophy hunting fetches $181,000 in GB

‘Where is the line?’: KGW investigates ODFW program that sanctions killing of elk for property damage

Vermont Tones Down an Animal Rights Overhaul of Its Wildlife Board After Hunter Pushback

BY 

KITTY BLOCK AND SARA AMUNDSON

SHARE https://www.humanesociety.org/blog/us-fish-wildlife-service-stronger-endangered-species-protections-african-elephants

With the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s newly finalized rule on African elephant imports under the Endangered Species Act, the agency is beginning to address the outsized role the U.S. plays in elephant population declines.

Alamy Stock Photo

Today, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service finalized critical trade protections for African elephants. Serious threats such as poaching, habitat encroachment and climate change continue to imperil this endangered species; African elephants have suffered a severe population decline over the last 100 years. 

The new rule under the Endangered Species Act seeks to increase scrutiny over trade in live elephants, like those imported for zoos and captive settings, and their parts, including trophies imported from trophy hunting expeditions. The rule does so by strengthening the standard of proof necessary to claim that the taking of an animal trophy benefits the survival of the species. This includes a more rigorous assessment of the population and habitat status of elephant populations abroad, as well as the capacity of foreign governments to manage them for conservation. 

The U.S. is one of the world’s largest markets and transit points for elephants and their products. For years, we have been fighting for stronger trade protections for African elephants, and we are encouraged to see the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service begin to address the outsized role the U.S. plays in elephant population declines. 

African elephants are complex, family-centered animals, important within their ecosystems and cherished by people in their range countries and all over the world. And yet for years they have faced the threat of extinction. They are prime targets for both legal and illegal killings—whether it be poaching for their ivory tusks, trophy hunting for bragging rights and a macabre souvenir, or retaliatory killing as shrinking habitats increase human-elephant conflicts. The continental population of African elephants has drastically declined over the past three generations (~85 years): African savanna elephants have lost 60% of their population, while the African forest elephant has lost over 80%, becoming critically endangered in 2020, a trend likely to continue and (we fear) be irreversible.

Despite the extinction crisis that African elephants face, U.S. regulations on elephant imports have been too lenient. The U.S. imports more hunting trophies than any other country in the world, accounting for almost 25% of global trade in elephant hunting trophies between 2014 and 2018. This legal trade exacerbates preexisting pressure on elephant populations from the illegal wildlife trade—a $20 billion illicit worldwide industry to which the U.S. also contributes that pushes many animals, including elephants, to the brink of extinction.

The newly issued final rule greatly improves protections by: 

• only allowing imports of live elephants or their trophies or skins, with certain limited exceptions, from African countries designated in Category One under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), meaning the country has national legislation that is believed generally to meet the requirements to adequately implement CITES rules and regulations. 
• keeping Botswana and Zambia, major destinations for trophy hunters off the list, which will effectively eliminate elephant hunting trophy imports from those countries.
• requiring that substantial evidence be submitted by exporting countries annually that certifies their elephant populations are biologically sustainable and sufficiently large.  
• requiring that the exporting government has the capacity to obtain sound scientific data on elephant populations, has the legal capacity to manage them for conservation, and follows the rule of law; and that it can provide assurances that viable habitat is secure and not decreasing or degraded. 
• requiring that, for live elephants, the exporting country must submit assurance that the imported elephants are not pregnant, were legally taken, and that family units were kept intact.
• requiring that funds derived from trophy hunting are used significantly for elephant conservation. 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is responsible for ensuring that live African elephant and elephant trophy imports promote the conservation of the species and enhance the survival of the species in the wild—a verification process that results in what’s called an “enhancement finding.” With this new regulation, the U.S. is finally instating some of the stronger trade requirements that African elephants have so desperately needed, making it harder for trophy hunters to import their hunting spoils and for captive wildlife facilities such as zoos to bring animals taken from the wild into the U.S. for exhibition.

We have long argued that a more formalized and stringent process for the consideration of any import permits is essential for conservation and legal compliance. Under the previous regulations, most of the countries exporting trophies to the U.S. consistently failed to provide convincing science-based evidence in support of their hunting quotas and reliable information on trophy hunting revenues.

We have also long argued that taking elephants from the wild for placement in captivity is not humane. Captive facilities are not suited to house and care for elephants, who in the wild can roam dozens of miles each day with their tightly knit herds, nor can they maintain them in healthful and humane conditions. In captivity, these social and intellectually complex creatures often develop physical and psychological problems, including foot disorders, arthritis, weight issues, neurotic behaviors, and reproductive difficulties Some captive elephants have been documented rejecting or even killing their own infants. Others have attacked or killed other elephants with whom they are housed. These problems do not tend to occur in the wild.  

In the humane world we envision, the one we’re working toward, there is no place for trophy hunting and the import of live wild elephants for captivity. These archaic practices can no longer be tolerated, and there is no place for trophy hunting as a means of funding local conservation efforts. Instead, the slaughter of charismatic and imperiled animals should be replaced by sustainable development initiatives, such as responsible ecotourism, an enterprise that keeps animals alive for their own sake and for ours. Until that vision becomes a reality, we support and celebrate steps to increase protections for elephants. These stronger regulations will mitigate extreme harms to elephants, their families and their closely bonded herds, and help prevent the species from teetering on the edge of extinction.

We will continue to work with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to make sure this rule is strongly enforced. These animals deserve nothing less.

Sara Amundson is president of the Humane Society Legislative Fund.  

Protecting Wildlife , Banning Trophy Hunting