April, 01 2010, 11:08am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Josh Mogerman, NRDC, 312-651-7909 / Sutton Eaves, David Suzuki Foundation, 778-829-3265
Border Bears in Danger: New Research Shows Excessive Grizzly Hunting in Canada
Provincial statistics show how trophy hunting is threatening imperiled U.S. bears and jeopardizing one of the world’s last safe havens for grizzlies
VANCOUVER and CHICAGO
The number of grizzly bears killed in
British Columbia is regularly exceeding the provincial government's own
limits on bear kills - largely because of trophy hunting, according to
new research released on the first day of the hunting season in B.C. The
report from
the David Suzuki Foundation and NRDC notes that the death toll
affects populations on both sides of the national border, as many bears
move between protected areas in the United States and parts of B.C.,
where bears are not protected from trophy hunters, even in provincial
parks.
"Grizzly bears will only remain in the U.S. and Canada if we
reduce rates of human-caused mortality," said Louisa Willcox, Senior
Wildlife Advocate with the Natural Resources Defense Council. "The
future of this globally iconic species depends on the types of decisions
we make today about whether they can be hunted for trophy, and how we
manage the lands they live in."
In a report
released today by the David Suzuki Foundation and Natural Resources
Defense Council, statistics show that the B.C. government's limits on
human-caused grizzly deaths were exceeded in 63 % of local grizzly bear
populations (called Grizzly Bear Population Units) at least once over a
five-year period. In some cases, the number of grizzlies - which no
longer exist or are at risk of extinction in parts of the world - killed
by humans was more than double the number deemed allowable by the
government.
"Held up against the government's own estimates of what is
sustainable, the number of grizzlies being killed in British Columbia's
regions is excessive," said Dr. Faisal Moola, director of science and
terrestrial conservation at the David Suzuki Foundation. "What's even
more concerning is that our research shows this over killing is
happening year after year in many parts of B.C., and nothing is being
done to stop it."
The B.C. government sets limits each year on how many grizzly
bears can be killed by humans. This limit, along with a population
estimate, is used by government wildlife managers to figure out how many
grizzly bears can be taken by hunters without adversely impacting the
health of local populations.
Using government figures, the report compares the actual
number of bears killed by humans to the allowable human-caused mortality
limits set by the government between 2004 and 2008. In many parts of
the province, including the transboundary Flathead region, allowable
kill limits were exceeded year after year. Trophy hunting, which
accounts for 88 per cent of all human-case grizzly deaths in B.C., was
largely to blame. Excessive human-caused bear mortality along the
US/Canada border poses a risk to the future of the threatened grizzly in
the lower 48 states, which rely on bear populations in Canada for
survival.
British Columbia is one of the last safe havens for grizzlies
in North America, although the bears are increasingly threatened by
human activity such as resource extraction and trophy hunting. Early
findings from the report released in February identified more than 60
provincial parks where grizzly bears are being hunted for trophy.
In the report, DSF
and NRDC call on the B.C. government to close existing loopholes in the
Wildlife Act that allows for grizzlies to be shot by trophy hunters in
B.C.'s parks, and to establish large no-kill zones where hunting is
prohibited and bears can live unthreatened. Their recommendations have
been endorsed by grizzly bear experts from the United States and Canada,
who sent a letter to B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell today urging him to
act on the report's findings.
"Canadians can learn a lot from the history of bear
management in Yellowstone and Glacier National Parks. The ban on hunting
in the parks has been essential to maintaining grizzlies in these last
strongholds for grizzlies in the lower 48 states," Willcox said.
Grizzly bears in the United States are listed under the
federal Endangered Species Act, which means they are protected from
trophy hunting and other threats. Before grizzlies were listed as
endangered in 1975, the bears had nearly disappeared from the lower 48
states. Conversely, threatened grizzlies in BC receive no legal
protection under Canada's Species at Risk Act.
Nearly 80 per cent of British Columbians oppose trophy
hunting, according to public opinion polling. More than 50,000 people in
Canada and the United States have written to Premier Gordon Campbell
and Environment Minister Barry Penner, calling on the government to end
the trophy hunting of bears in BC.
NRDC works to safeguard the earth--its people, its plants and animals, and the natural systems on which all life depends. We combine the power of more than three million members and online activists with the expertise of some 700 scientists, lawyers, and policy advocates across the globe to ensure the rights of all people to the air, the water, and the wild.
(212) 727-2700LATEST NEWS
Listen Live: US Supreme Court Hears Outrageous Argument That Trump Is Above the Law
"The American people deserve a Supreme Court that does not hesitate to declare that no one is above the law, including a former president," said one campaigner.
Apr 25, 2024
After months of delay, the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday will hear oral arguments in a closely watched case on whether former President Donald Trump should be immune from criminal charges stemming from his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss—an argument that legal experts say is both absurd and dangerous.
Listen live to the oral arguments, which are set to begin at 10:00 am ET:
Thursday's proceedings mark the high court's final argument of its current term, and pro-democracy campaigners are calling on the justices to quickly reject the former president's sweeping immunity claim so he can face trial on federal election subversion charges before his November rematch with President Joe Biden.
As Bloomberg's Greg Stohr noted earlier this week, Thursday's oral arguments give "Special Counsel Jack Smith only a narrow window to put the former president in front of a Washington jury before voters go to the polls on November 5."
"With the trial on hold until the high court rules," Stohr added, "Smith needs a clear-cut victory, and he needs it quickly."
Sean Eldridge, founder and president of the progressive advocacy group Stand Up America, said in a statement Thursday that "the Supreme Court's right-wing majority has already handed Trump a temporary victory by stalling this case for months, allowing him to delay accountability for his criminal attempts to cling to power."
"With so much at stake for our democracy, the Supreme Court should rule swiftly and decisively in this case," said Eldridge. "Accountability delayed could mean accountability denied."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Grand Jury Indicts Top Trump Aides, 11 Arizona Republicans Over 'Fake Electors' Scheme
Had it succeeded, said the state's attorney general, the scheme would have "deprived Arizona's voters of their right to have their votes counted for their chosen president."
Apr 25, 2024
A grand jury in Arizona on Wednesday charged seven aides to Donald Trump and nearly a dozen Republican officials over a "fake electors" scheme in the state that aimed to keep the former president in power after his 2020 loss to President Joe Biden.
Trump, who is currently facing nearly 90 charges across four criminal cases as he runs for another White House term, was described as "unindicted co-conspirator 1" in the 58-page indictment, which was announced by Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes.
"The people of Arizona elected President Biden," Mayes, a Democrat, said Wednesday. "Unwilling to accept this fact, the defendants charged by the state grand jury allegedly schemed to prevent the lawful transfer of the presidency. Whatever their reasoning was, the plot to violate the law must be answered for."
The indictment names former Arizona Republican Party Chair Kelli Ward, sitting state Republican Sens. Jake Hoffman and Anthony Kern, former U.S. Senate candidate Jim Lamon, and seven others as the "fake electors" who sought to declare Trump the rightful winner of the state's presidential contest.
The names of other individuals indicted by the state grand jury are redacted, but the document's descriptions make clear that former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, and top Trump legal strategist Boris Epshteyn are among those facing felony charges—including fraud, forgery, and conspiracy.
"In Arizona, defendants, unindicted coconspirators, and others pressured the three groups of election officials responsible for certifying election results to encourage them to change the election results," the document reads. "Discussions about using the Republican electors to change the outcome of the election began as early as November 4, 2020. Those plans evolved during November based on memos drafted by [an attorney for the Trump campaign, Kenneth Chesebro]."
Mayes said Wednesday that had the fake elector scheme succeeded, it would have "deprived Arizona's voters of their right to have their votes counted for their chosen president."
"It effectively would have made their right to vote meaningless," said Mayes.
A state grand jury, made up of everyday, regular Arizonans, has handed down felony indictments in the ongoing investigation into the fake elector scheme in Arizona. pic.twitter.com/Nu8GcD4ZqJ
— AZ Attorney General Kris Mayes (@AZAGMayes) April 24, 2024
Alex Gulotta, state director of All Voting Is Local Action Arizona, said Wednesday that "the indictment of the eleven fake electors is one of the first steps required in holding these election deniers accountable for their alleged attempts to take power away from voters by disrupting our free and fair elections."
"Arizonans deserve to trust the election officials responsible for administering our elections and preserving our democracy," said Gulotta, "and this is a positive step forward as we continue to strengthen the foundations of our democracy and restore faith in our elections."
The Arizona Republicreported Wednesday that "several of the Arizona electors have previously claimed they were merely offering Congress a backup plan, though nothing in the documents they sent to Congress and the National Archives backs up that assertion."
"The indictment includes several statements the false electors made on social media that contradict those claims," the newspaper observed.
Jenny Guzman, director of Common Cause's Arizona program, said the indictment "marks the start of a new chapter for the fake elector scheme that has plagued Arizona."
"Arizonans are still dealing with the fallout from the false electors and the Big Lie about the 2020 elections," said Guzman. "We are relieved that the investigation by Attorney General Mayes has concluded and Arizonans can now know that what comes next is accountability. These efforts by these fake electors to undermine the will of Arizona’s voters have had implications far beyond their failed attempt to overthrow the 2020 election."
"This indictment can reassure all Arizonans that if anyone, regardless of their political affiliation, attempts to undermine their vote, consequences will follow," Guzman added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Watchdog Urges FEC to Investigate Trump Campaign Over Scheme for Legal Fees
"By not disclosing the vendors that actually provided legal services, the Trump-affiliated committees effectively blocked the public from knowing which attorneys and firms are being paid—and how much."
Apr 24, 2024
A campaign finance watchdog on Wednesday filed a Federal Election Commission complaint accusing former President Donald Trump's 2024 campaign, affiliated political groups, and an accounting firm of violating U.S. law in a scheme "seemingly designed to obscure the true recipients of a noteworthy portion of Trump's legal bills."
The Washington, D.C.-based Campaign Legal Center (CLC) said that "evidence appears to show an illegal arrangement between several Trump-affiliated committees and a compliance firm named Red Curve Solutions that is designed to obscure the identities of those providing legal services and how much they are being paid."
"Voters have a right to know how the presidential campaigns and other committees supporting presidential candidates spend their money."
CLC alleges that the Trump campaign, Trump's political action committee (PAC) Save America, and three affiliated organizations "violated federal reporting requirements based on a scheme in which the committees reportedly paid over $7.2 million—described as 'reimbursement for legal' costs or expenses"—to Red Curve.
The watchdog also said that Red Curve appears to be "making or facilitating illegal contributions that violate either federal contribution limits or the prohibition on corporate contributions."
According to CLC:
Red Curve is a domestic limited liability company that offers compliance and FEC reporting services but does not appear to offer any legal services. It is managed by Bradley Crate, who also serves as the treasurer for each of the five Trump-affiliated committees concerned in this complaint, as well as over 200 other federal committees.
According to filings with the FEC, Red Curve appears to have been fronting legal costs for Trump since at least December 2022, with Trump-affiliated committees repaying the company later. This arrangement appears to violate FEC rules that require campaigns to disclose not only the entity being reimbursed (here, Red Curve) but also the underlying vendor. By not disclosing the vendors that actually provided legal services, the Trump-affiliated committees effectively blocked the public from knowing which attorneys and firms are being paid—and how much they are being paid—through this arrangement.
"Voters have a right to know how the presidential campaigns and other committees supporting presidential candidates spend their money," CLC senior director of campaign finance Erin Chlopak said in a statement. "When campaigns and committees obscure that information from the public, not only do they make it difficult to determine if the law has been violated, but they deny voters the ability to make an informed choice when casting a ballot."
"The steps taken by the Trump campaign, its affiliated committees, and Red Curve Solutions concealed information about how campaign funds were used to pay former President Trump's legal expenditures, including the amounts and ultimate recipients of these expenditures—and the FEC must investigate immediately," Chlopak added.
Trump—who is the presumptive 2024 GOP presidential nominee—faces 91 federal and state felony charges related to his role in the January 6 insurrection and his organization's business practices. He is currently on trial in New York for allegedly falsifying business records related to hush money payments to cover up sex scandals during the 2016 election cycle. The twice-impeached former president has been open about his use of campaign donations to pay his legal costs.
The new CLC filing comes a day after the watchdog filed separate FEC complaints urging investigations into a pair of Trump-affiliated "scam PACs," which "pretend to fundraise for major candidates or issues while secretly diverting almost all of their donors' money back into fundraising or the fraudsters' own pockets."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular