Amazing, What A Small Club Can Do!

[goshawkr]

I am way more worried by the fact that USFWS bureaucrats are regulating something that they understand nothing about.
I had a CITES person ask me how my bird could possibly cross the Canadian border if I did not transport it.

I am also more worried about animal rights morons who outnumber us managing to outmaneuver us making this discussion irrelevant.

I agree that those are concerns. Where they fall in the overall prioritization is up for debate. And I can think of some more pressing issues than the ones we are currently discussing, but I am pleased to hear they are being addressed. I will be even more pleased if they are successfully litigated, which is an entirely different matter than drumming up some papers and filing them in federal court.

However, it really is a pretty big deal that the US FWS and your state wildlife department are telling you to surrender your 4th amendment rights to parade around with a glorified chicken on your arm. Especially since congress explicitly told the US FWS they were not allowed to do so in the language of the MBTA.

Now to be perfectly fair on this issue many states are clear in that an inspection is not the same as a search, and must be done at the convenience and pleasure of the permittee. My state is one them that has been very extreme about this. However, this is not always well respected by the agents performing those searches. And there have been threats that if you do not submit to them you can expect your next permit renewal to be denied. During that time period I previously mentioned when there was a rash of inspections, there was a case where a falconer in California asked the agent if they had a warrant when he grew tired of the inspection that was going on. The agent said no, and the falconer told the agent to hit the streets and the agent left without any argument.

[rkumetz]

I agree that those are concerns. Where they fall in the overall prioritization is up for debate. And I can think of some more pressing issues than the ones we are currently discussing, but I am pleased to hear they are being addressed. I will be even more pleased if they are successfully litigated, which is an entirely different matter than drumming up some papers and filing them in federal court.

However, it really is a pretty big deal that the US FWS and your state wildlife department are telling you to surrender your 4th amendment rights to parade around with a glorified chicken on your arm. Especially since congress explicitly told the US FWS they were not allowed to do so in the language of the MBTA.

Now to be perfectly fair on this issue many states are clear in that an inspection is not the same as a search, and must be done at the convenience and pleasure of the permittee. My state is one them that has been very extreme about this. However, this is not always well respected by the agents performing those searches. And there have been threats that if you do not submit to them you can expect your next permit renewal to be denied. During that time period I previously mentioned when there was a rash of inspections, there was a case where a falconer in California asked the agent if they had a warrant when he grew tired of the inspection that was going on. The agent said no, and the falconer told the agent to hit the streets and the agent left without any argument.

Geoff,
I know you are savvy enough to realize this is more about abuse of power than falconry regs. Falconers are not the only ones victimized by that sort of crap. Just go make a fuss at an airline gate because of some legitimate gripe and see how quickly they decide you are a security threat. As long as those around us are happy letting government grow in hopes of protecting them from every threat both real and perceived it will continue. They didn't pay attention to the part about a government large enough to protect you from everything also being able to relieve you of your rights.

[Peregrinus]

Damn those Koch brothers! Heh. The whole video will be out soon...

https://www.facebook.com/PacificLega...U1NzE0NDA3MzU/

[Peregrinus]

You can dodge and weave all ya want. You can bring up the 'Public Trust Doctrine', or Ron Clarke's testimony, or 'darn that AFC they're just meddling in local politics', or any of the tired old arguments that have been coughed up for years. We've heard it all. But it's real simple. 4th Amendment. You're either for it, or against it.

[rkumetz]

You can dodge and weave all ya want. You can bring up the 'Public Trust Doctrine', or Ron Clarke's testimony, or 'darn that AFC they're just meddling in local politics', or any of the tired old arguments that have been coughed up for years. We've heard it all. But it's real simple. 4th Amendment. You're either for it, or against it.

Back to the divisive "you are either with us or against us" strategy I see. That is working just swell in congress so I am not surprised that continues to be the AFC mantra.

Winston Churchill said "If a man is 25 and not a liberal he has no heart. If he is 45 and not a conservative he has no brain". When I got to a certain age I realized that many of my grandfather's seemingly silly sayings had value. Confrontation is rarely an effective long term strategy and picking your battles avoids wasting ammunition you may need later.

There are ALWAYS gray areas and forcing the people who see them to be on the other side because they don't agree with you 100% is a tactical blunder of enormous proportions. There are not enough of us (falconers) for us to appear fragmented to the outside world and not end up being crushed by other interests.

I would think that one interested in philosophy would already know all of that. 😁

[goshawkr]

I know you are savvy enough to realize this is more about abuse of power than falconry regs.

It is indeed about abuse of power. It is about the abuse of power codified within the falconry regs.

The actual MBTA, as passed by congress, expressly prohibits the USFWS from engaging in warrantless inspections of permittees, yet their regulations require it. How is that not an abuse of power?

Winston Churchill said "If a man is 25 and not a liberal he has no heart. If he is 45 and not a conservative he has no brain".

I laugh at this quote all the time, living in the Liberal Left Coast and seeing so many brainless 45+ year olds walking around. Especially since I followed this exact evolution myself, although at a younger age of transition. But I digress......

When you buy an air line ticket you are subject to a certain set of rules and restrictions. Flying on an airline is not a right. Same with driving a car. It also is not a right and you can be subject to any number of reasons for being stopped and searched. Our permits also subject us to certain restrictions.

Flying on an airline is not a right, but access to buy an airline ticket is a right. The driving a car argument gets a little fuzzy, but only just a bit. Everyone has the right to acquire a drivers license. And everyone has the right to acquire a falconry license/permit.

As you pointed out, there are a lot of areas of modern life with restrictions tied to them. However, the constitution has set forth several restrictions that cannot and shall not be trodden upon. We are speaking about two at the moment. Various government agencies have tried to make the argument that you voluntarily relinquish rights to do an activity, and the courts have been crystal clear that this is not allowed.

Having said that, there are many on this forum who were not falconers when Operation Falcon was initiated by USFW. Many here have not had the pleasure of armed federal agent coming to search your residence for no better reason than you held a falcon on a federal permit. We should all have a healthy wariness of this agency that insists on overseeing our sport. They have proven they are capable overreach and excessive abuse of power.

I am curious what government agencies you know of that have not proven capable of overreach and excessive abuse of power.

The inspection requirements in the regulations are effectively handing this agency, with a demonstrable and recent history of overreach and abuse of their power, a loaded cocked gun and sticking your face in front of the barrel.

[rkumetz]

As you pointed out, there are a lot of areas of modern life with restrictions tied to them. However, the constitution has set forth several restrictions that cannot and shall not be trodden upon. We are speaking about two at the moment. Various government agencies have tried to make the argument that you voluntarily relinquish rights to do an activity, and the courts have been crystal clear that this is not allowed.

I am curious what government agencies you know of that have not proven capable of overreach and excessive abuse of power.

Given that the courts have been clear that this is not allowed, it would seem more prudent to present that case law to the agencies in question and handle abuses on a case by case basis.

It is much easier to make a case for a violation of one's constitutional rights when an agency has abused its power and stepped across constitutional boundaries than to deal in hypothetical
situations. Americans are not easy to get excited about hypothetical anything. They require Youtube videos with dramatic footage. Then they start tweeting and all that sort of crap and
before long you have the electronic version of the villagers with the pitchforks and torches.

On the other hand litigating just to thump one's chest and make some point about looking out for everyone's rights might backfire.

I am not naive. I am fully aware that there are some in government who abuse their power. I regularly have to deal with an FAA security geek who introduces himself as "Special Agent (name omitted to protect the stupid)" instead of "John Doe" etc. You immediately know when you deal with someone like that you are dealing with someone who is stoned on his own power or perceived power and yes, he does abuse it whenever he has a chance. He also gets pissed off when you call your congressional delegation. In his words "I really hate getting calls from congressional offices". On the other giving him a wedgie by stepping on his ego too hard or unnecessarily is not likely to be productive. Where I am I going with this? Fighting a war because you expect a skirmish may not be prudent. Wait until you need to fight and when practical try to be diplomatic. I haven't always been this way. I used to be motivated to go head to head whenever I perceived some injustice. I have simply learned that you need to pick your battles.

Am I comfortable with individuals or organizations engaging USFWS and other agencies in a dialog about how the regs may overstep those constitutional boundaries as well as being unnecessary to enforce the spirit of the law? Absolutely.

Am I comfortable with them becoming confrontational and claiming to do it for all falconers? No. I am not and I hope they don't try to help me fix the regs in my state.

And yes, I am tremendously offended by the implication that if I don't agree with their strategy that I am not a staunch defender of my and others' constitutional rights. That
more than anything raised my hackles.

We have talked about a lot of this stuff and I think you know where I stand.