Mtn Director

[Saluqi]

I'm running for mtn director, I'd be happy to try and answer your questions.

[outhawkn]

Thanks Paul, this is going to be fun.....toungeout

All kidding aside, my two biggest issues are the private property issue?
My second issue, is the search. What are your views on it?

You may have covered this elsewhere, if so please direct me to it rather than retype if you like.

[Saluqi]

This what I posted in the private property thread:
http://www.nafex.net/showthread.php?t=8176&highlight=ownership


They are private property, doesn't matter if they are captive bred or wild caught, but there are stipulations. If you have any animal, whether it be a dog, cat, horse, snake, or hawk, if it is unhealthy and not receiving proper care from it's owner, then it can be taken away from you. Unlike a car where you can never add oil and beat in a public place with sledge hammer and no one will take it away for abusing it, you can't do that with an animal.


I posted this response on another thread:
http://www.nafex.net/showthread.php?t=8040&highlight=ownership&page=2



Hi Jeff,
I've been crunching through the NM regulations the last few weeks, updating them to include the new aspects of the federal regulations. In a meeting with LE last December the head of LE asked that we include ownership as part of the definition of falconry. Here is what I came up with, the definition has been approved by our state and George Allen.


19.35.8.7 DEFINITIONS:
A. “Falconry” shall mean the ownership, caring for, and training of raptors for the pursuit of wild game, and hunting wild game with raptors. Falconry includes the use of captive bred raptors and taking of raptors from the wild to use in the sport; and the ownership, caring for, training, and transporting raptors held for falconry.

I'm all for raptors being held as private property, just like owning a horse or a dog, the ownership can be taken away if you mistreat the animal. Unlike a TV or a car which you own, you can not abuse an animal expect that it will not be taken away from you. By the same token I'd guess like an aggressive dog that harms others, if your raptor attacks a person you may also lose it. I would vote in favor of raptors as private property.

[Saluqi]

This is from the new federal regs on inspections, page 59470 top of third column.

(9) Falconry facilities, raptors, equipment, and records inspections. Falconry bird(s), facilities, equipment, and records may be inspected only in the presence of the permittee, during business hours on any day of the week by State, tribal, or territorial officials.


This is from the question and answer section of the new federal regs, this can be found on page 59452, third column of text.

Issue. Federal authority under revised regulations.
• ‘‘The proposed rule offers little clarification on how enforcement might operate in the future. With additional regulatory and permitting burdens being
placed on the states, we assume that there is a potential for federal law enforcement to diminish. Even if the state-federal law enforcement of
migratory bird regulations is envisioned to remain the same, the rule should state this in clear language.’’ (State agency)
• ‘‘Does the FWS retain the authority to suspend or revoke falconry permits under 50 CFR. If not, this should be stated. Exactly what authority does the Service (LE) retain under the proposed regulations, i.e. with no Federal Permit. This should be clarified and stated in the regulations.’’
Response. We do not believe that the regulation change affects law enforcement substantially, or that there are additional regulatory or permitting burdens placed on the States, tribes, or territories. With one exception, Service enforcement of the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act, 16 U.S.C. 668-668d) are not affected by the regulations change. The exception is that, because the Service will no longer issue falconry permits, Service law enforcement officers will not have the authority to conduct inspections of falconers’ records and facilities, unless the Service officers also are delegated State law enforcement authority. The Service will not have authority to suspend or revoke permits issued by the States, tribes, or territories, but compliance with all provisions of these regulations remains under the purview of the Service, and falconry permittees are subject to Federal prosecution for failure to comply with the regulations.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ____________________________
In an ideal world, if I became a director I would work as hard as I could to have the possibility of inspections removed from the federal falconry regulations. Realistically we know that will never happen.

Under the new regulations only the state has the authority to perform inspections, the feds no longer have that authority, unless delegated by the state. The new regulations do nothing to state under what conditions an inspection is warranted, which leaves open the door for pop inspections. I can't speak for other states, but I know that in NM the only time an inspection will occur is if there is some probable cause. In my conversations with state LE they said the only time they have had cause to visit a falconers house is when they get a report from a neighbor saying that so and so has a hawk in a cage in their yard. In every instance, except one, these were non-falconers who somehow or another came into possession of a bird and stuck it in their chicken coop, so they weren't actually doing a falconry inspection. The head of LE told me that one time they went on one of these calls and arrived at the residence to find out the bird was being legally held by a licensed falconer, no harm no foul.

In terms of states that actually do these pop inspections I would hope that the state club was taking the initiative to find out what motivated the inspection, and seek to improve the relationship between the falconers and the LE department. I suppose at the NAFA level, if I were director and a state falconry association in my directorate requested that NAFA get involved because of unsolicited inspections, then I would put it up to the board and see if NAFA could look into the issue, which I'd guess would happen with the formation of a committee. How could NAFA help? Maybe with facts in hand a NAFA representative, perhaps myself or a DAL, could meet with the LE division of the state in question and work to improve the situation. I know a rather vague answer on my part, but there's not much that we as a group can do because allowing inspections is condition of our permit. I don't think there is a legal way to be a falconer and be guaranteed 100% immunity from inspections.

[sharptail]

Hi Paul,
I appreciate your realistic view. USFWS has gotten out of inspections in a timely fashion. The only way to stop illegal searches in falconry now, is the same path that was taken with the eyass peregrine take in Utah and with the hiring of Mr. Horn on the personal property issue....a legal one. With USFWS now out of the 'inspection' picture, individual states would now have to be challanged, splitting the total group support and potential sources of money to sue.

If all states had an attitude like you discribe with LE in NM, and it stayed that way, there would be little support for any action. For those who do not remember, there have been may falconry birds wrongfully siezed in the past, some that were taken off of eggs from breeding chambers, many of the siezed birds died of ill handling or neglect.

When one looks at the potential of some breeding raptor to make a profit, the likelyhood of law suits, increase dramitacly.

[Ron Clarke]

The only inspections I'm aware of in my state are the pre-licensing facilities visits. I had my first mews inspected over thirty years ago by a representative of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and have never been visited by either state or federal officials since. That seems to be the same experience other falconers here have had.

Help me understand the scale of the situation where you are. How often do "pop inspections" happen? Is this a common thing? Federal officials? State agents? Both? Are birds frequently confiscated? Under what circumstances have birds been taken away in the past? What has been the fate of those birds? How have affected falconers responded?

And here's something I've long wondered about: if federal and/or state wildlife law enforcement officials are so deeply concerned with making sure the laws and regulations on raptors are followed to the letter, why don't they go to every rodeo on the circuit in the western U.S. and bust people for all those illegal hawk, owl, and eagle feathers in their hatbands? For all I know, maybe they do this all the time. Just the same, I imagine the LE folks aren't exactly eager to tell some 275-pound bulldogger to hand over the feather in his hat and pay a fine for the privilege of doing so.

[sharptail]

The last 'pop in' inspection here in Wy. that I remember, was at Steve Jones facility, just after 'Op witch hunt'. If memory serves, it was shortly after he voiced oppisition, to police actions.

D. Jamieson in the past has told me a tale of wanting to take a peregrine he was hawking from his home in Reno into Calif. for a falconry meet and contacted state and federal autorities, seeking permission and recieved it. When he showed at the meet his falcon was confiscated by a federal agent and died in captivity. Dave sued and won and was given another peregrine some years later.

Mr. Dan has told me a tale a few times or a state agent showing up on a 'pop' basis and demanding all of the paperwork for his large breeding project. After consulting his attorney on the phone, they asked the agent to return the next day, when the attorney was present to oversee the proceedings. The attorney told the agent of the value of some of the falcons in the project and that he would be held accountable for any dammages and the inspection was called off.

I have had pop in visits on at least 2 occasions while living in oregon, by there game dept.. One was just prior to 'Op Falcon', seems they were looking for any sort of violations to include in Op FAlcon. After working a graveyard shift and getting home just after 6 am., I had just gone to bed when there was a knock at the door at 6:45 and 2 agents, one state and one federal demanded an inspection. We had nothing to hide so agreed. That was all they needed, and they started upstairs to the bedrooms and my wife objected and wanted to go up first and tidy up the bedroom, being somewhat embarrased, when she was shoved aside by the fed, and told "NO!, that is all right, I will go first". They found nothing but a messy house and I was not included in 'Op falcon', but not for lack of trying.

I am not privy to everything that triggered so called in inspections while living in oregon, but what I can tell you is that it was every falconer in the area in Oregon on the same day and happened more than just prior to Op falcon. As far as I know there were never any violations found with any of us.

When I moved to Wyo., I started my relationship with my local warden on the basis of the illegal nature of inspections, and we got along great. I told him that if there was ever any problem in reguard to my falconry to just give me a call and we would straighten it out. I did have one inspection by him, after moving, at the insistance head of LE, with his apoligies. He is a great guy and was a falconer, before working for Game and Fish.

All one has to do is look, there are plenty of horror stories out there.

[Flatwater Falconer]

The only inspections I'm aware of in my state are the pre-licensing facilities visits. I had my first mews inspected over thirty years ago by a representative of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and have never been visited by either state or federal officials since. That seems to be the same experience other falconers here have had.

I had one inspection of facilities and gear on getting my first permit. Haven't heard or seen and LE since then. Nebraska has traditionally had a good relationship with our game and parks people. They know we police ourselves pretty strongly too so maybe that helps.

[topgun]

OTHER THEN my 1st inspection I DID HAVE a game warden come by and check my mew because of someone who saw the bird in it so he said I OFFERED HIM MY PERMIT AND GAVE HIM INFORMATION without him requesting it he just figured anybody with my type of facility musy be liscened he gave me his personal cell and told me he would love to go on a hunt with me

[Saluqi]

In NM we don't even have a game warden do our facility/equipment inspection, it's done by a master falconer who acts as an agent of the state. I did have a pop in inspection once though. It just so happened that I was out hawking at the time and didn't find out about until two years after the fact. My neighbor told me one day that he helped an FBI agent get unstuck from our hill, it was a sheet of ice, I asked what the FBI agent was doing on our cul de sac and my neighbor said that he was there to check out my birds. Turns out it was a federal fish cop, never heard about it again.

[tyler1998]

We had a state warden from out of town inspect everyone's facilities a few months ago. He was convinced somebody was taking Gos eyasses illegally and selling them. To my knowledge he didn't find anything in his inspections. First pop inspection that I've heard of in Nevada since my sponcer became a falconer about 30 or 40 years ago. He was very polite and non-invasive.

[Tanner]

What was the nature of those inspections out of curiosity? Did they check out the mews? Enter the house?

[tyler1998]

What was the nature of those inspections out of curiosity? Did they check out the mews? Enter the house?

It was basically just like the original facilities inspection that you do when first applying for licenses. He wanted to see mews, weathering area, bath pan, leash, and the bird and band. In my condo he had to come through the front door to reach the back porch, but if I had been in a house with a yard, I'm sure he would have been fine just walking around the side of the house to see the setup in the back yard. He didn't insist on going anywhere, and just wanted to see the setup. His main focus was the bird itself and the band. The other falconers in my area had similar experiences.

He did mention he wanted to make sure I wasn't selling my passage kestrel, which makes me think he's a little out of touch, but other than that he seemed well intentioned.

[bluejack]

Thought you all might want to take a look at this.


http://www.naiatrust.org/images/spacer.gifhttp://www.naiatrust.org/images/article_logo.gif (http://www.naiatrust.org/index.htm)http://www.naiatrust.org/images/article_image.jpghttp://www.naiatrust.org/images/spacer.gifhttp://www.naiatrust.org/images/spacer.gifhttp://www.naiatrust.org/images/nav/nav_home2.gif (http://www.naiatrust.org/index.htm)http://www.naiatrust.org/images/nav/nav_about2.gif (http://www.naiatrust.org/about.htm)http://www.naiatrust.org/images/nav/nav_legislative_corner2.gif (http://www.naiatrust.org/gov/index.htm)http://www.naiatrust.org/images/nav/nav_legal_corner2.gif (http://www.naiatrust.org/legal/index.htm)http://www.naiatrust.org/images/nav/nav_resources2.gif (http://www.naiatrust.org/resources.htm)http://www.naiatrust.org/images/nav/nav_visit2.gif (http://naiaonline.org/)http://www.naiatrust.org/images/spacer.gifPivotal Florida ruling boosts pet owners' rights
More Info
(http://capwiz.com/naiatrust/utr/1/DBGXMTHXVY/LHVOMTIJLW/5384970811)
Almost a year and a half after NAIA Trust (http://capwiz.com/naiatrust/utr/1/DBGXMTHXVY/FZXHMTIJLX/5384970811) and two of its members sued Volusia County Florida over its new animal control ordinance, a federal judge has issued a key ruling permitting the case to go forward to trial.

The plaintiffs object to the licensing requirements of the county and assert that their rights to equal protection, due process and freedom from unreasonable searches are violated by the licensing requirements.

Plaintiffs have not made formal complete application for "hobby breeder" licenses because they allege they would be required to waive some of their federal and state constitutional rights in order to obtain such licenses, and they are not willing to do so.

The court found that, contrary to the county's arguments, because of the nature of the claims asserted by plaintiffs, plaintiffs have standing to pursue this case at this time. "... [A] denial of equal treatment is an actual injury even when the complainant is able to overcome the challenged barrier." Plaintiffs allege that they are being subjected to unequal treatment and that the county may not force them to waive their 4th Amendment rights as a condition of licensure. "...[T]he court finds that plaintiffs may pursue their claims even without having made a formal license application."

Patti Strand, National Director of NAIA Trust, said "This is what we've been waiting for and we feel very optimistic. Finally we can take the search and seizure issue, the mandatory spay/neuter issue, and all of our other concerns to trial.

Now the real fight begins. The goal is to stop the march of unconstitutional animal laws that empower the government and private groups to take our animals and sell them at a profit without just cause, or force us to perform life altering surgeries on our pets without due process. This is a battle that must be fought. The alternative is to allow our powerful opponents to prevail by outspending us and bleeding our resources while they usurp our constitutional rights.

Please join us in our fight and donate today (http://capwiz.com/naiatrust/utr/1/DBGXMTHXVY/KRDYMTIJLY/5384970811). We can not do it without your support.


For further information contact us at NAIA Trust (PattiStrand@NAIATrust.org)

If you received this link from a friend, click here (http://capwiz.com/naiatrust/utr/1/DBGXMTHXVY/ADJBMTIJLZ/5384970811%20right%20answers%20to%20these%20critic al%20questions%20should%20give%20pause%20to%20over zealous%20animal%20protection%20agencies%20everywh ere,%20and%20help%20put%20an%20end%20to%20the%20wi despread%20abuse%20of%20power%20we%20are%20witness ingPlease%20continue%20to%20support%20our%20effort s%20to%20bring%20justice%20for%20Ms.%20Willard%20a nd%20to%20protect%20all%20of%20us%20from%20future% 20unconstitutional%20evisceration%20of%20our%20lib erty.)to sign up for our alerts and articles.


NAIA Trust
Strengthening the human-animal bond and safeguarding the rights of responsible animal owners

[Saluqi]

I have had pop in visits on at least 2 occasions while living in oregon, by there game dept.. One was just prior to 'Op Falcon', seems they were looking for any sort of violations to include in Op FAlcon. After working a graveyard shift and getting home just after 6 am., I had just gone to bed when there was a knock at the door at 6:45 and 2 agents, one state and one federal demanded an inspection. We had nothing to hide so agreed. That was all they needed, and they started upstairs to the bedrooms and my wife objected and wanted to go up first and tidy up the bedroom, being somewhat embarrased, when she was shoved aside by the fed, and told "NO!, that is all right, I will go first". They found nothing but a messy house and I was not included in 'Op falcon', but not for lack of trying.




It was basically just like the original facilities inspection that you do when first applying for licenses. He wanted to see mews, weathering area, bath pan, leash, and the bird and band. In my condo he had to come through the front door to reach the back porch, but if I had been in a house with a yard, I'm sure he would have been fine just walking around the side of the house to see the setup in the back yard. He didn't insist on going anywhere, and just wanted to see the setup. His main focus was the bird itself and the band. The other falconers in my area had similar experiences.

He did mention he wanted to make sure I wasn't selling my passage kestrel, which makes me think he's a little out of touch, but other than that he seemed well intentioned.

One of the things about inspections is that a lot of folks don't know what the LE personal are allowed to inspect. Never allow them to enter your house unless they have a search warrant, have your records, or better yet a copy of your records, in a binder that you have easy access to. If an officer comes knocking grab the binder and show it to the officer on the hood of his car, then walk him around your mews without going through the house, if they are acting like they want to enter your house stand your ground at your door, but DO NOT touch the officer. They can't confiscate your birds unless they have a warrant. Don't offer anything, make them ask for it, be polite and courteous.

[wyodjm]

One of the things about inspections is that a lot of folks don't know what the LE personal are allowed to inspect. Never allow them to enter your house unless they have a search warrant, have your records, or better yet a copy of your records, in a binder that you have easy access to. If an officer comes knocking grab the binder and show it to the officer on the hood of his car, then walk him around your mews without going through the house, if they are acting like they want to enter your house stand your ground at your door, but DO NOT touch the officer. They can't confiscate your birds unless they have a warrant. Don't offer anything, make them ask for it, be polite and courteous.

If I may add, I keep a copy of all my falconry papers / records in a separate three ringed binder. I'd never give somone my originals. They may look at the originals to compare with the copies if they want, but the originals stay with me.

I've never been visited, but if I was and there were problems, I'd call my local state game warden to come over and be present, just to keep things honest.

Here are the federal regulations referencing the maintenance of records and inspections with regard to wildlife permits, which include falconry.


Title 50: Wildlife and Fisheries
PART 13—GENERAL PERMIT PROCEDURES

13.46 Maintenance of records.

From the date of issuance of the permit, the permittee shall maintain complete and accurate records of any taking, possession, transportation, sale, purchase, barter, exportation, or importation of plants obtained from the wild (excluding seeds) or wildlife pursuant to such permit. Such records shall be kept current and shall include names and addresses of persons with whom any plant obtained from the wild (excluding seeds) or wildlife has been purchased, sold, bartered, or otherwise transferred, and the date of such transaction, and such other information as may be required or appropriate. Such records shall be legibly written or reproducible in English and shall be maintained for five years from the date of expiration of the permit. Permittees who reside or are located in the United States and permittees conducting commercial activities in the United States who reside or are located outside the United States must maintain records at a location in the United States where the records are available for inspection.

13.47 Inspection requirement.

Any person holding a permit under this subchapter B shall allow the Director's agent to enter his premises at any reasonable hour to inspect any wildlife or plant held or to inspect, audit, or copy any permits, books, or records required to be kept by regulations of this subchapter B.

13.48 Compliance with conditions of permit.

Any person holding a permit under subchapter B and any person acting under authority of such permit must comply with all conditions of the permit and with all appllicable laws and regulations governing the permitted activity.

[jfseaman]

Having been at a meeting of the state game commission, it is obvious that a commission member who is a former USFWS agent and the head warden want this tool and it has made it's way into the abatement regulations of California.

It's simple.

This tool of intimidation and coercion must be removed from the regulations.

If LE suspect illegal activity then they must go through the same processes as for any other investigation, obtain a warrant and execute the warrant.

We are subject to more scrutiny that someone bringing a new baby home from the hospital. How twisted is that?

[Saluqi]

Having been at a meeting of the state game commission, it is obvious that a commission member who is a former USFWS agent and the head warden want this tool and it has made it's way into the abatement regulations of California.

It's simple.

This tool of intimidation and coercion must be removed from the regulations.

If LE suspect illegal activity then they must go through the same processes as for any other investigation, obtain a warrant and execute the warrant.

We are subject to more scrutiny that someone bringing a new baby home from the hospital. How twisted is that?

Hi Fred,

Can you clarify this statement for me, I'm a little slow and don't understand what you're talking about. Does CA really allow a member of the game commission to also head law enforcement? That just seems wrong to me.

What "tool of intimidation and coercion" are you talking about?

[Dutch]

The pink copy of the 3-186A form is labeled “PERMITTEE COPY”. Falconers supply the USFWS with the original and one copy and the state one copy of the same form. Therefore, I concluded my copies of each 3-186 pink form were mine for my personal records.
I never considered allowing a state or federal wildlife representative to duplicate or read my permittee copy. I use my copy and to fill out those yearend reports and to answer any questions, if needed. The idea that the inspection was conducted to monitor or evaluate my paperwork seemed ridiculous.
I’ve never met a state or federal wildlife enforcement agent that understood the law they were charged with enforcing.

J. Stoddart

[sharptail]

You are coming through clear here Fred. LE wants to emininate DUE PROCESS(getting a search warrent), when they suspect criminal activity, when they have no reason too, and have no evidence of wrong doing. When it comes to dealing with falconers, they want to leave the constitution and bill of right at the door. Wait until some gov't agency want to come and "inspect" there(LE's) home, see is they stand down and just take it?

I am not suprised that lawyers, doctors, professors, LE, polititions, the wealth and the like, don't get the abuse that the common 'working man'(not that the above don't work) does when it comes to falconry in general and and illegal searchs more specifically.

Hey Dan, I like your idea about calling some another branch of LE when being "inspected"(more correctly would be harassed). The problem that I have had happen here is the last time I called a state Game and Fish warden for assistance, I found that I was being recorded, and had become the target of his investigation and he attempted to bust me for crime commited against myself. Traditionally, the county sheriff is the protector of private rights, and next time I am inspected, that is who I intend to call. I think he will be more likely to listen to my claim of needing a warrent to search.

[sharptail]

The pink copy of the 3-186A form is labeled “PERMITTEE COPY”. Falconers supply the USFWS with the original and one copy and the state one copy of the same form. Therefore, I concluded my copies of each 3-186 pink form were mine for my personal records.
I never considered allowing a state or federal wildlife representative to duplicate or read my permittee copy. I use my copy and to fill out those yearend reports and to answer any questions, if needed. The idea that the inspection was conducted to monitor or evaluate my paperwork seemed ridiculous.
I’ve never met a state or federal wildlife enforcement agent that understood the law they were charged with enforcing.

J. StoddartHi Jack, some key words there, "MY PAPERWORK", something else protected in the BILL OF RIGHTS!

In addition, I have been informed that the #1 wildlife violation, with the most tickets issued, in this state is failure to sign state licenses. The signature is supposed to signify your willingness to comply with there regulation entirely, even if some of those so called regs. violate you personal right and freedoms. My signature is my personal property, as is your to you, and no one should be trying to tell me where I must place it. If I had a pile of money, I would take these things on in our legal system.

[Eragon]

In IL the inspections are Constitutional under the current regs. There is a section in our regs that say falconers can be inspected at any reasonable time. When we signed our permit there is a section that says that the permit is conditional on following all state and fed regs. So we signed a contract by signing our permit/application saying we agree to the inspections. So, by signing it we made it legal.

Don't get me wrong though, I think we should do away with that part of the regs and make them have to get warrants.

[sharptail]

In IL the inspections are Constitutional under the current regs. There is a section in our regs that say falconers can be inspected at any reasonable time. When we signed our permit there is a section that says that the permit is conditional on following all state and fed regs. So we signed a contract by signing our permit/application saying we agree to the inspections. So, by signing it we made it legal.

Don't get me wrong though, I think we should do away with that part of the regs and make them have to get warrants.

Your rights under the constitution are unalienable, that means that you cannot give them up, even if you want too. When there is a conflict between you rights under the constitution and any other lessor law, than the constitution and Bill of Right are the law in effect and not any that conflict with them. In this country still, all other laws are inferior to the constitution and bill of rights. It doesn't matter what crap law some public naysayer rams down our throats, today the constitution still stands.

[Saluqi]

You are coming through clear here Fred. LE wants to emininate DUE PROCESS(getting a search warrent), when they suspect criminal activity, when they have no reason too, and have no evidence of wrong doing. When it comes to dealing with falconers, they want to leave the constitution and bill of right at the door. Wait until some gov't agency want to come and "inspect" there(LE's) home, see is they stand down and just take it?

I am not suprised that lawyers, doctors, professors, LE, polititions, the wealth and the like, don't get the abuse that the common 'working man'(not that the above don't work) does when it comes to falconry in general and and illegal searchs more specifically.

Hey Dan, I like your idea about calling some another branch of LE when being "inspected"(more correctly would be harassed). The problem that I have had happen here is the last time I called a state Game and Fish warden for assistance, I found that I was being recorded, and had become the target of his investigation and he attempted to bust me for crime commited against myself. Traditionally, the county sheriff is the protector of private rights, and next time I am inspected, that is who I intend to call. I think he will be more likely to listen to my claim of needing a warrent to search.

Not sure I follow Jeff. If you want to be a falconer and don't want to be inspected then you ought not have gone through the trouble of becoming a legal falconer. If you didn't have a permit and no one knew you were flying birds, then you'd never run the risk of being inspected.

Seriously, what do you think a volunteer NAFA director could do to fight these inspections? Please tell me so that I may help the cause in the event that I get elected. I don't see this discussion going anywhere. I'm not a constitutional lawyer and won't pretend to know thing one about the constitutionality of the federal falconry inspection regulation. So unless an individual or an organization like NAFA is willing to come up with probably hundreds of thousands of dollars to fight a case through the courts, maybe to the level of the supreme court, then we as law abiding falconers will have to put up with it and be at the mercy of the whims of law enforcement.

[sharptail]

Not sure I follow Jeff. If you want to be a falconer and don't want to be inspected then you ought not have gone through the trouble of becoming a legal falconer. If you didn't have a permit and no one knew you were flying birds, then you'd never run the risk of being inspected.

Seriously, what do you think a volunteer NAFA director could do to fight these inspections? Please tell me so that I may help the cause in the event that I get elected. I don't see this discussion going anywhere. I'm not a constitutional lawyer and won't pretend to know thing one about the constitutionality of the federal falconry inspection regulation. So unless an individual or an organization like NAFA is willing to come up with probably hundreds of thousands of dollars to fight a case through the courts, maybe to the level of the supreme court, then we as law abiding falconers will have to put up with it and be at the mercy of the whims of law enforcement.

You are my choice for DAL because you recognize that this is a problem and ask what I would expect. Do I expect NAFA to immeitately sue USFWS? Not in the near future. I can think of a couple of other possible solutions, one that would eliminate the need, but those Ideas have not met with a lot of support either. One step at a time works for me, and having another director that openly recognizes this problem will move the club in a direction I and others would like to see it to go, to mend the split in the falconry community.

Odd, so very odd that you should be calling me an Outlaw for believing in, supporting and porclaming THE 'law of the land! I think it time for many of to revisit our roots and get a little perspective, the world changes very quickly and it can be difficult to remember where we have come from for watching where we are going.

[jfseaman]

Hi Fred,

Can you clarify this statement for me, I'm a little slow and don't understand what you're talking about. Does CA really allow a member of the game commission to also head law enforcement? That just seems wrong to me.

What "tool of intimidation and coercion" are you talking about?
A commission member is a former USFWS agent. Very chummy relationship with the chief FG warden/officer.

Snap inspections/mid-night inspections.

[outhawkn]

If I may add, I keep a copy of all my falconry papers / records in a separate three ringed binder. I'd never give somone my originals. They may look at the originals to compare with the copies if they want, but the originals stay with me.

I've never been visited, but if I was and there were problems, I'd call my local state game warden to come over and be present, just to keep things honest.

Here are the federal regulations referencing the maintenance of records and inspections with regard to wildlife permits, which include falconry.


Title 50: Wildlife and Fisheries
PART 13—GENERAL PERMIT PROCEDURES

13.46 Maintenance of records.

From the date of issuance of the permit, the permittee shall maintain complete and accurate records of any taking, possession, transportation, sale, purchase, barter, exportation, or importation of plants obtained from the wild (excluding seeds) or wildlife pursuant to such permit. Such records shall be kept current and shall include names and addresses of persons with whom any plant obtained from the wild (excluding seeds) or wildlife has been purchased, sold, bartered, or otherwise transferred, and the date of such transaction, and such other information as may be required or appropriate. Such records shall be legibly written or reproducible in English and shall be maintained for five years from the date of expiration of the permit. Permittees who reside or are located in the United States and permittees conducting commercial activities in the United States who reside or are located outside the United States must maintain records at a location in the United States where the records are available for inspection.

13.47 Inspection requirement.

Any person holding a permit under this subchapter B shall allow the Director's agent to enter his premises at any reasonable hour to inspect any wildlife or plant held or to inspect, audit, or copy any permits, books, or records required to be kept by regulations of this subchapter B.

13.48 Compliance with conditions of permit.

Any person holding a permit under subchapter B and any person acting under authority of such permit must comply with all conditions of the permit and with all appllicable laws and regulations governing the permitted activity.

You can also call 911 and request assistance from whatever officer arrives( then just ask them to witness the conversation), or even call your neighbor to witness