Home>Articles>Trophy Hunting, African Animal Product Importation Ban Bill To Be Heard In Assembly Committee

Assemblyman Henry Stern. (Kevin Sanders for California Globe)

Trophy Hunting, African Animal Product Importation Ban Bill To Be Heard In Assembly Committee

‘California is trying to legislate people from doing a hobby that supports conservation in Africa’

By Evan Symon, August 4, 2020 6:30 am

This week, the Assembly Committee on Water, Parks, and Wildlife is due to have a hearing over a bill that would effectively end wildlife trafficking into California.

A trophy hunt, wild animal importation ban

Senate Bill 1175, authored by Senator Henry Stern (D-Canoga Park), would require the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) to create a list of wild animals that would not be permitted to be imported or transported within the the state. The DFW would also be able to stop transportation of any animal that could be carrying a disease or illness to protect Californian citizens, wildlife, and agriculture and would only allow transport to continue after rigorous testing.

SB 1175, also known as the Iconic African Species Protection Act, would specifically go after African plant and animal importation by banning dead animal parts or products of any African animal from being imported into the state. For those in the live animal business, any animal that is classified as an invasive species or has zoonotic diseases would be illegal to own or sell.

If violated, fines and confiscations would be enacted, with being between $5,000 and $40,000 per violation.

Senator Stern authored the bill to fight against the exotic and wildlife trade, specifically targeting the end of trophy hunting animals such as lions and elephants. Other supporters have also called into reason the cruelty of the trafficking and trophy hunt industries, as well as how fees paid for such hunts or transport costs don’t always g to conservation efforts. The federal government approving trophy hunts and importation of trophies also spurred some support for a state ban.

“It’s time to wake up and realize that we’re in the middle of a mass extinction event,” explained Senator Stern. “We need to stop the brutal trade in exotic and endangered wildlife once and for all. Whether it’s a pangolin being sold for faulty medicine, a white Bengal tiger being enslaved for entertainment, or a black rhino ‘trophy’ used to satisfy some misguided hunter‘s ego, California must put an end to wildlife trafficking.”

Support in the legislature is high, with some Republicans crossing the aisle in support of SB 1175. Tellingly, the Senate vote on the bill in late June passed by a large majority, 29-8 with 3 abstentions.

Opponents of bill note that ban would lead to less conservation funding in Africa

Opponents of the bill have noted that the ban puts a strain on conservation efforts due to extra money paid in hunts to keep hunting areas in Africa open and animals protected by anti-poaching squads. Many also have said that trophy animals such as lions and elephants can also be pests in many African countries, destroying livestock and crops, accelerating the need for paid conservation through hunts and the importation of trophies and other related products from hunts.

“These hunts are 100% legal,” explained Terry Fernandez, a Miami lawyer who has defended two trophy hunters in U.S. courts. “You have the Sierra Club and PETA being 100% against this, but the costs of these hunts go for conservation, preservation, and fueling an industry in Africa.

“If it’s made illegal in California, it won’t change all that much. You can still import everything into the states, you can still do hunts, and if you can’t bring it into California, people can move out.

“What California is doing is trying to legislate people from doing a hobby that supports conservation in Africa. And just like what happened with Walter Palmer killing the lion 5 years ago, it’s being blown up as a moral and ethical issue despite it already being  part of the equation.

“Also, don’t forget, lions win some of those hunts too. They’re risking their lives for a sport.”

A similar bill by Senator Stern 2 years ago, SB 1487, was vetoed by former Governor Jerry Brown for “unenforcability” reasoning. A number of successful bills in 2019, including a ban on selling fur, a similar bill in New York meeting success, and the need for zoonotic disease laws following the COVID-19 outbreak, raised the prominence of SB 1175 this year, leading for many supporters to hope for a passage and signing by Governor Newsom this session.

SB 1175 is due to be heard in Assembly Committee hearings this week.

Evan Symon
Spread the news:
RELATED ARTICLES
Filter by
Post Page
Highlight Articles National Governor Legislature
Sort by

USC to Allow International Students to Take Free In-Person Class to Keep Visa

USC’s ongoing scandals read like a soap opera
July 10, 2020 2:12 pm

8

U-Haul Names Top Growth States of 2019… and Inadvertently Identifies States People are Fleeing

Southeast states entice DIY movers yet again
January 21, 2020 5:04 pm

8

RECAP: AB 1254, All But Ending Bobcat Hunting In California

Very few hunting permits would be allowed under AB 1254.
September 26, 2019 7:46 pm

8

7 thoughts on “Trophy Hunting, African Animal Product Importation Ban Bill To Be Heard In Assembly Committee

  1. SB 1175 passed out of committee today on a vote of 8:3 (with 3 abstentions).
    VOTING “AYE” – Eduardo Garcia, chair (D); Kansen Chu (D), Laura Friedman, (D), Cristina Garcia (D), Todd Gloria (D), Ash Kalra (D), Marc Levine (D)
    VOTING “NO” – Megan Dahl (R), Steven Choi, (R), Devon Mathis (R)
    ABSTAINING – Frank Bigelow (R), Blanca Rubio (D), Rudy Salas (D)

    The bill now goes to Assembly Appropriations. If successful there, then to the Assembly floor.

    EMAIL PATTERN FOR ALL MEMBERS: assemblymember.lastname@assembly.ca.gov

  2. A recent open letter by 50 black leaders of millions of Africans, asking foreign celebrities to stop interfering with trophy hunting, Masego Madzwamuse, the chief executive of non-profit the Southern African Trust, said in (the) statement: “At a time when there is a global focus on righting social inequity and injustice, it’s unfortunate that the (anti-trophy hunting) campaigns these celebrities are supporting seek to deny rural black Africans the right to sustainably manage their wildlife on their land … Rural communities live with the cost of managing wildlife every day, their voice matters. When we say black lives matter, we must mean all black lives, everywhere.”
    Where all of the trophy hunting takes place that you see in photos, wildlife numbers are rising, thanks to hunters fees. In South Africa alone, game farms, supported by hunting, cover forty million acres of natural habitat. Without hunting, that vast area would be put to the cow and the plough. The wildlife will be gone.
    Africa shakes its head….at California’s blatant eco-colonialism.

  3. Good proposal. Trophy hunting revenues barely ever reach the locals it purports to support. In the overall tourism revenue picture, trophy hunting is a tiny drop. To suggest that it would have such a huge impact is BS. And touting some letter signed by Safari Club sponsored corrupt African leaders doesn’t change that one bit.

    1. Typical arrogance of rich, ignorant foreigners to call indigenous black African leaders “corrupt” when those leaders point out the real importance of hunting income in Africa. Hunter income is vital to many poor rural people.
      The income from hunters supports 40 million acres of game farms in South Africa alone , containing about 10 million wild animals where there were only half a million fifty years ago. Those farmers are locals. The animals, whose numbers are INCREASING, are raised in natural bush, so trillions of other non-hunted animals, birds, plants and trees are also conserved. In other places like Namibia, local communities who conserve their wildlife sell a few to hunters, so they look after their wild animals as an important resource. The same goes for buffer concessions around the reserves. Otherwise it would all be farms and cattle ranches. Hunting is therefore good for wildlife conservation and supports millions of impoverished people for whom even a little income makes a huge difference.
      The IUCN and CITES, the only true international scientifically based expert organisations in this argument, both recognise the importance of regulated trophy hunting for wildlife. National Geographic and charities have supporters to attract.
      I understand anti-hunters mean well, but they are dealing with their own feelings, not the realities of Africa.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *