[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 116 (Wednesday, July 29, 2009)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2083-E2084]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       INTRODUCTION OF THE PROTECT AMERICA'S WILDLIFE ACT OF 2009

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. GEORGE MILLER

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 29, 2009

  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today to 
introduce the Protect America's Wildlife (PAW) Act. This legislation is 
a narrowly crafted amendment to the Airborne Hunting Act, which has 
been on the books for decades.
  Simply put, the PAW Act will stop the unnecessary and unscientific 
air assault on wolves and other wildlife that is occurring in Alaska, 
and it will prevent other states from following Alaska's lead.
  In 1971, as a response to public outcry over airborne wolf hunting in 
Alaska, Congress took decisive action by passing the Airborne Hunting 
Act. The law was a direct result of the national outcry over brutal and 
needless wolf hunting conducted by airplane in Alaska, brought to the 
public's attention by a television documentary.
  At the time, Congress recognized that this unsportsmanlike practice 
should only be used in extreme situations--as in the defense of humans, 
livestock, and wildlife--which is why the Airborne Hunting Act banned 
the practice and made narrow exceptions for those extreme situations.
  The Congressional Record reflects that these exceptions, and in 
particular the wildlife exception, were not intended as a carte-blanche 
to the states. In the 92nd Congress, the House Committee on Merchant 
Marine and Fisheries prepared a report on ``Shooting Animals From 
Aircraft'' that clearly articulated that the states should not 
``utilize or permit the utilization of aircraft to achieve a balance in 
wildlife, which should be left to nature or to other more sportsmanlike 
hunting practices.''
  Unfortunately, the State of Alaska has spent the last several years 
defying congressional intent. The state is granting permits to 
individuals who are harassing and shooting wolves and other wildlife 
from planes to artificially boost game species, even though the state 
has no credible scientific evidence to show that the relevant prey 
populations are actually at risk.
  Hundreds of scientists, the esteemed American Society of 
Mammalogists, and wildlife managers in Alaska have all spoken out 
against the State's airborne ``predator control'' programs as 
unnecessary, unscientific, and in violation of the clear objective of 
the Airborne Hunting Act. In addition, I recently received a letter, 
which I will enter into the record, from nine former Alaska Board of 
Game members that strongly supports the PAW Act and notes that 
``Alaska's current predator control programs . . . clearly circumvent 
the federal Airborne Hunting Act (AHA) of 1972.''
  Wolves are now being shot from airplanes on more than 60,000 square 
miles of Alaska, including federal lands administered by the Bureau of 
Land Management and on lands adjacent to several national parks, 
preserves, and national wildlife refuges. This past spring, state 
employees targeted wolves that were known to den inside the Yukon 
Charley Rivers National Preserve, and which were part of a long-term 
National Park Service study.
  Let me be very clear: the exceptions that Congress provided in the 
Airborne Hunting Act gave states the right to use an extreme measure in 
extreme circumstances. But instead, the state of Alaska has exploited 
that exception and violated the intent of the law. Since 2003, more 
than 1,000 wolves have been killed through these practices. The state's 
program of hunting predators from the air has spiraled out of control; 
it is unscientific and goes far beyond any recognizable form of 
legitimate wildlife management.
  Proponents of these practices will say that the state's program is 
run for the benefit of those who rely upon moose and caribou for food. 
But the reality is that the state continues to allow moose and caribou 
hunting by out-of-state hunters and non-local resident hunters, in the 
same regions they claim airborne wolf hunting is needed to boost moose 
and caribou populations.
  One final note on the pressing need for this legislation. Now that 
wolves in the Northern Rockies have been removed from the endangered 
species list, there is a threat that other states may attempt to misuse 
the same exception that Alaska has misused, to hunt wolves in the lower 
48 states from airplanes in order to boost game populations.
  The Protect America's Wildlife Act, which I am introducing today, is 
carefully and narrowly crafted. It specifically addresses the ongoing 
misuse of the wildlife management provision as I outlined above, while 
maintaining the ability of states to address legitimate biological 
emergencies in the wild, as Congress intended.
  Specifically, this legislation:
  Clarifies the conditions under which states can use airplanes and 
helicopters to kill wolves and other predators. For example, they may 
still be used to address legitimate biological emergencies in prey 
populations;
  Requires states to provide a scientific foundation for their use of 
the wildlife management exception as part of the report to the 
Department of the Interior which they are already required to submit; 
and
  Maintains the ability of states to use aerial gunning to protect 
land, water, wildlife, livestock, domesticated animals, human life, or 
crops.
  I urge my fellow Members of Congress to take a stand for wildlife and 
for proper use of our wildlife laws by supporting the Protect America's 
Wildlife Act.
                                                    July 14, 2009.
     Re The Protect America's Wildlife Act

       Dear Representative Miller: As former members of the Alaska 
     Board of Game, we endorse the modest but crucial changes to 
     the Federal Airborne Hunting Act (16 USC 742j1) contained in 
     the Protect America's Wildlife Act, which you are sponsoring 
     in the U.S. House of Representatives.
       The Alaska Board of Game (hereafter Board) is a seven 
     member citizen board appointed by Alaska's governor and 
     confirmed by the state legislature. The Board promulgates 
     Alaska's hunting and trapping regulations and establishes 
     wildlife policies including those for predator control.
       The Protect America's Wildlife Act is largely a response to 
     Alaska's current predator control programs, which clearly 
     circumvent the federal Airborne Hunting Act (AHA) of 1972. 
     The legislation would clarify the intent of the AHA so that 
     the exception that allows a state to authorize the use of 
     aircraft to shoot wildlife must be based on the finding of a 
     biological emergency and not used to increase prey 
     populations just to meet increasing hunter demand. It further

[[Page E2084]]

     provides that when a state authorizes aircraft shooting under 
     the exception, it must be supported by adequate scientific 
     data and the shooting must be conducted by government 
     personnel only.
       The Protect America's Wildlife Act is in conformance with 
     the laws that Alaskan voters passed by initiative in 1996 and 
     2000. The state legislature reversed the will of the people 
     both times.
       Extensive wolf control is being conducted in Alaska at 
     present. Aerial predator control is now occurring on more 
     than 60,000 square miles of Alaska--the largest predator 
     control program since statehood. Since 2003, more than 1,000 
     wolves have been killed by private hunters through shooting 
     directly from airplanes or from the land and shoot practice. 
     This past spring, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game 
     killed 84 wolves in 5 days in eastern Alaska. In March, the 
     Board reauthorized aerial predator control for five more 
     years and has eased the regulations further by allowing 
     private aerial gunning teams to now use helicopters to kill 
     wolves.
       Many Alaskans object to using state personnel for ongoing 
     airborne wolf control as a standard game management tool 
     unless there is a serious biological problem. And even more 
     strongly object to the use of private pilots for these 
     activities because of the long, well documented history of 
     abuses and violations of the AHA.
       We also note that the long, detailed history of predator 
     control in Alaska and elsewhere clearly demonstrates that 
     control is often poorly supported by sound science, ignores 
     other options, and often becomes institutionalized and 
     perpetual. The Protect America's Wildlife Act would help curb 
     these problems by restricting lethal control programs to 
     those that are well justified and truly necessary. We are 
     aware that other control options are available and effective 
     including non-lethal control and habitat management.
       In summary, we strongly support The Protect America's 
     Wildlife Act and believe that it would improve the management 
     of wildlife in Alaska as well as settle some longstanding, 
     controversial issues related to predator control.
           Sincerely,
                               Former Alaska Board of Game Members
         Vic Van Ballenberghe, Joel Bennett, Leo Keeler, Tom 
           Meacham, George Matz, R.T. Skip Wallen, Bruce Baker, 
           Nicole Whittington-Evans, Jack Lentfer.

                          ____________________