--- begin forwarded text


X-Sent-via: StarNet http://www.azstarnet.com/
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 12:27:41 -0700
From: Wildlife Damage Review <[log in to unmask]>
To: action alerts-to post <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: wildlife collection in parks and monuments, cont.
Sender: [log in to unmask]

Dear Wildlife Damage Review members, the following was sent to us from
an anonymous person with the National Park Service. This is a hot issue
that started out as a localized request and is now becoming a national
issue. Please do pass this on to your local media and encourage them to
investigate this issue and do a story. Thanks, Nancy Zierenberg, WDR

Here is an update on eagles in Wupatki for Wildlife Damage Review.
Thank
you for posting the previous message.  It really helped raise the
profile
of the issue.

"On Thursday, November 25th, 1999, the Los Angeles Times reported that
Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt has decided to allow Hopi
Indians
to take eaglets next spring from the only golden eagle nest in the
Wupatki National Monument in Arizona.  Up until now, neither the Hopi,
nor any other Indian tribe, has been allowed to take eagles from any
area of the national park system under an Eagle Protection Act permit.

The LA Times article shows that Babbitt intends to go even further.
Babbitt appears to advocate allowing the take of any  non-listed animals
from any national park system area as long as such take falls under the
very broad category of  Indian religious practice.  All national parks
and monuments are now closed by law and National Park Service (NPS)
regulation to the taking of animals except for some limited research
purposes that support the NPS preservation mission.  So Secretary
Babbitt
has charged his solicitors to craft an opinion supporting his planned
action.  The Department of the Interior is also working on a new
regulation to allow the take of animals from parks for religious
purposes.

This is a radical about-face for the NPS which determined in 1983 that
the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA)  of 1978 did not
overturn the laws and rules that protect animals and plants in parks.
The Federal courts, including the Supreme Court,  have agreed that
AIRFA
is quite limited in scope and does not overturn Federal laws and  agency
rules that govern lands and protect animals.    Many in the NPS rank and
file are upset about the Department's intent  to sacrifice the parks on
the altar of political expediency.  Is the Endangered Species Act next?
What about Wilderness?  Does AIRFA exempt religious practitioners from
the prohibitions of these laws?

We say to the Secretary: 'What you are about to do will fundamentally
alter the national park system as we know it, after 105 years of
history,
starting with the ban on hunting in Yellowstone in 1894.  If the nation
wishes to open parks to religious taking of animals, it is up to
Congress.  Congress alone may reconcile the perceived conflict between
AIRFA and the NPS mission to manage parks as sanctuaries for wildlife.'

Meanwhile, the Secretary has not even prepared an environmental impact
statement to consider the effects of his proposed action or the
alternatives to it. Quite a legacy for a Secretary whose term ends in a
year!  Those who care about the integrity of our parks and their
wildlife
will challenge you every step of the way.  Sacrificing America's
national
parks will become an issue that the Gore campaign must answer for in
2000."

--- end forwarded text


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Rex L. Bavousett
Photographer
University of Iowa
Our old name:  University Relations - Publications
Our new name:  University Communications & Outreach - Publications
100 OPL, Iowa City, IA 52242

http://www.uiowa.edu/~urpubs/
mailto:[log in to unmask]
voice: 319 384-0053
fax: 319 384-0055
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
For SC email list T-and-C, send: GET TERMS-AND-CONDITIONS.CURRENT
to [log in to unmask]