American Falconry Conservancy

Accomplishments

Since its formation in 2002, the American Falconry Conservancy has accomplished a great deal.

1.    Through our efforts and the hard work of some Minnesota falconers, the best State in the Union for trapping passage goshawks was opened for non-resident raptor take.
2.    Through our efforts, South Dakota – an excellent State in the lower 48 for trapping gyrs – was opened for non-resident raptor take.
3.    Several years ago when no one was pursuing non-resident raptor take in closed States, we initiated the thrust with falconers in Colorado, Nebraska, and Montana, by communicating with the then current club Presidents, to open their doors to non-residents. Those and subsequent Presidents put the issue before their members who agreed to work on this noble goal. At present, Colorado and Nebraska have successfully included a non-resident take provision in their new regulations which are now in effect. In addition, Montana is finalizing the process of including a non-resident take provision in their regulations which should be finished this year. We have to thank a close and dear deceased friend, Chad Cyrus, amongst others, for making this happen.
4.    We have retained the finest legal counsel in the Country, William Horn, in wildlife law. He was previously Assistant Secretary for the Dept. of the Interior under President Reagan.
5.    We objected to the FWS’s inclusion of the authority to inspect falconers’ facilities when the Proposed Falconry Regulations were published. FWS took this objection to the Department of Justice, which state that when FWS gives up the permitting authority, they must give up the power for FWS to inspect. However, FWS included language in the regulations that requires States to assert the authority to conduct warrantless inspections.
6.    Through our legal counsel, we objected to the FWS stating in the Draft Environmental Assessment and the Proposed Propagation Regulations that our raptors are not our private property but remain the property of the State or the Federal government. They withdrew this position and Dr. George Allen of FWS retracted this stance and admitted that FWS was wrong and in fact our raptors, both wild and domestic bred, are indeed Private Property.
7.    Through our legal counsel, we objected to the FWS limiting the number of raptors we can possess in the Proposed Falconry Regulations. In the Final Falconry Regulations they removed restrictions on domestic bred birds and now we may possess as many as we are able to fly.
8.    We have assisted several States with comments on delisting peregrines.
9.    There are a variety of other issues that we have helped resolve with State and Federal agencies. One was an attempt by the U.S. Forest Service to prohibit take of eyass raptors in a federal park in Kentucky. Through well-connected individuals, we were able to prevent this from happening.
10.    We have helped some State falconry organizations in writing their proposed language for their falconry regulations.

You may ask, “What are you doing for me now?”
1.    Currently, we are working on a proposal to the Alaska Game Commission, with the input from Alaska falconers, to open their doors to non-resident raptor take. We sent Rob Sulski, Great Lakes Director, to Alaska to testify before the Commission in January 2012.
2.    We have been in communication with the North Dakota Game & Fish Department, as well as some North Dakota falconers, asking them to reconsider their proposed non-resident raptor take of 1 permit every other year. We are requesting that they provide the same take to non-residents as they provide to residents.
3.    We are working closely with Dan McCarron (the individual who originally accomplished eagle take in Wyoming) on expanding eagle take in depredation areas in Wyoming beyond the current 6 eagle take limit.
4.    We are working on normalizing peregrine take to a more sensible number that reflects biology rather than politics. Our legal counsel, Bill Horn, is petitioning FWS to expand peregrine take and to remove flyway council management of them. Since they are fully recovered, they should be treated the same as all other raptors.
5.    Those who have been confronted by law enforcement and accused of wrongdoing have sought our advice in legal matters. When it is discovered that law enforcement is overreaching their authority, we provide advice, court precedent, and, if needed, connect wronged falconers to legal counsel.
6.    We will petition FWS to expand waterfowl harvest by falconers to the same numbers gun hunters are able to harvest. Falconry has a daily bag limit of 3 migratory birds with a possession limit of 6, while gun hunters have a daily bag limit of 6 with a possession limit of 12.
7.    We are currently preparing our comments to FWS’s proposal Migratory Bird Permits; Definition of “Hybrid” Migratory Bird. Based on the 2004 Congressional MBTA Amendment, all hybrids are excluded from FWS management and authority regardless of a species’ origin. We are preparing our comment to assert that FWS is overstepping their authority and are unlawfully attempting to expand the MBTA beyond Congress’s intent.

You may ask, “What are you going to do for me in the future?”
1.    Once the new falconry regulations have been adopted by all the States that have a falconry program, we will petition FWS to remove the provision in the falconry regulations that require States to assert the power to conduct warrantless inspections after the permit has been issued to a falconer. This violates the 4th Amendment since it becomes a search after the issuance of the permit; in addition it demands that falconers supply self-incriminating evidence to their own detriment, which is arguably a 5th Amendment violation. We fully intend on demanding that this provision be removed.
2.    There are numerous provisions in the Federal regulations that are offensive to citizens’ rights and which are not asserted against citizens for any other activity in this country. We intend to incrementally remove these over time until our regulations reflect a sensible and constitutional approach to raptor management.
3.    We may never know what the future may hold. Law enforcement abuse, while not common, is always a concern. In addition, animal rights groups threaten our very existence as an art and sport. We must be vigilant and organized, ready to take action at a moment’s notice and this can only be done by an association of falconers dedicated to the proposition that falconry is a RIGHT, not privilege, to be practiced freely and without interference from anyone.

We would not have been able to accomplish our victories without the active support of our membership. In addition, we will not be able to continue our work without the support of a robust membership. It allows us to procure the legal representation to move forward expeditiously on matters that affect our right to practice our art and sport. We believe that actively maintaining open lines of communication with our membership is what has been responsible for our continued growth. We hope this trend continues unabated! We welcome your support as well.

Rev. 01262012