Subject: FWS update (fwd)

From: Thomas Kral <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995 16:39:50 -0700

Please read first them read my response which follows in next forwarded
message.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 23:32:09 -0500
From: [email-masked]
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email-masked]>
Subject: FWS update

To follow up on Thomas Kral's message, here's
the round-up of results from the various FWS prosecutions of
entomologists that I've been able to gather:

The "Butterfly Three" -- Richard Skalski, Thomas Kral, and
Marc Grinnell.

Information is from a memorandum from Special Agent John Mendoza
dated August 4, 1995:

  "On December 14, 1993, after three search warrants and
fifty-seven grand jury subpoenas, and after investigative leads
that went to Mexico, Germany, the Czech and Slovak Republics,
Canada, France, Spain, Italy, Australia, Japan, Brazil, and the
United Kingdom, as well as many states throughout the United
States, the defendants inthe case were indicted in an 85-page,
one count, nine-year conspiracy to violate the wildlife laws of
the United States..."

Skalski -- sentenced to five months in a work furlough prison
and fined $3,000, plus two years probation during which he
can't collect or enter parks or preserves

Kral -- three years probation and $3,000 fine, plus 300 hours of
community service, plus same restrictions

Grinnell -- same as Kral, but 100 hours of community service.

Of interest to collections and collectors involved in donations
of specimens, the 1837 butterfly specimens in the case were
officially valued by U.S. District Court Judge James Ware at
$50,000. The FSCA formula results in a value of only about
$10,000 for the same specimens.

John Kemner Jr.

Information is from a July 20, 1995 article in the Houston
Chronicle and an October 27, 1995 Associated Press article that
ran in the Gainesville Sun.

Kemner was indicted in July on charges that he violated the
Lacey Act. According to the Houston Chronicle article, he faced
more than 30 years in prison and more than $1 million in fines.

Last week, he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor and was fined $500
and three years' probation.

I think it would be highly interesting and enlightening to find
out how much the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Justice
Department spent in investigating and prosecuting these two
cases. That figure was not mentioned in Mendoza's 2 1/2 page
memo (which amounts to a press release) and I suspect it would
be a laborious process to dig it out of the Federal labyrinth.

It is also interesting to note the discrepancy in the severity of
the charges and the actual penalties imposed.

Kral is absolutely correct in pointing out that all collections in
the U.S. contain illegally obtained specimens. The FWS is aware of
this problem and, according to the permitting people I talked to early
in the year, are planning to address the problem. BUT IT IS NOT HIGH
ON THEIR PRIORITY LIST OF THINGS TO DO. If you think it IS important,
a friendly note from a bunch of us asking for action might help.

It is obvious from what occurred last year with FWS regulations that we
do wield some influence if we get our stuff together and act in concert.
Please recall that NOTHING has actually changed. Those regulations are
still in effect. I'd hate to think the entomological community exhausted
its moral outrage in one shot and lacks the interest and energy to
stick with a problem that isn't going to go away just because we ignore
it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Michael C. Thomas, Ph.D.                                                |
| Florida State Collection of Arthropods                                  |
| Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services                   |
| P.O. Box 147100                                                         |
| Gainesville, FL 32614-7100 U.S.A.                                       |
| email: [email-masked]    fax: (904) 955-2301    voice: (904) 372-3505   |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------|

---

From: Thomas Kral <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995 16:42:24 -0700

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995 16:36:51 -0700 (MST)
From: Thomas Kral <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: FWS update

Dr. Thomas' November 1 posting regarding what results he could get from
the various F&WL prosecutions of entomologists touch upon some extremely
important points.  The F&WL of course have presented their own points of
view which are deliberately lacking - infact what they intentionally
leave out really get at the crux of these investigations. In my sincere
attempt to be much more brief with my future postings, I will point out 3
major points, 2 of which I will discuss more of later, the third and most
important point address now.

1). The official value of the 1,837 seized specimens put at issue set by
the judge at $50,000 at the July 6 evidentiary hearing was a completely
arbitrary value as the "street value" - or what cash one could actually
get for these bugs if they were sold would be under $10,000 - and even
thats stretching it. HOWEVER the F&WL valued these same bugs at $170,000
initially which they claimed was a "conservative figure"; for the
evidentiary hearing they jacked it up to $350,000!!! - thats $190 per
bug! Maybe we should all sell our "valuable" bug collections and retire
to mansions on the French Riviera! Ludicrous valuations aside, this topic
is an all important one and takes us into the deep, dark, subversive
recesses of the motivations the F&WL had in hyping up and vigorously
prosecuting these cases in the first place - stay tuned!!!

2). EVERYBODY wants to know just how much taxpayers' money was spent in
this case, collector and journalist alike - brace yourself, it will be a
huge figure which the F&WL will NOT want to tell us. I think this money
would have been better spent on funding for grants, the National
Biological Survey, buying thousands of acres of rain-forest, anything but
the waste that this witch-hunt resulted in.  You can bet that this will
come to the attention of a U.S. Congress looking for places in which to
cut the Federal Budget - and the F&WL "Service" is front and center as a
target!!!

3). The above blunders help explain what happened to John Kemner.  It
really helps to put this on a time-line. Kemner was indicted on July 20
with the typical F&WL hype that he faced 30 years prison & a $1 million
fine. Then came that fateful August 1 morning in which the F&WL thought I
would get a harsh sentence which would have really aided their propaganda
campaign and "justify" their huge waste of time and money - but it
didn't. Instead the judge gave me probation, etc (detailed in my original
Oct 31 posting) - and don't blame the judge for this sentence, blame a
very incompetent prosecutor named Altschuler and an even worse F&WL agent
named Mendoza - I'll explain later. Reporters, whom have been in contact
with me earlier regarding the monumental outcome of my case, also were
following the Kemner case. I found out that a short time after my
sentence, the F&WL prosecutor in Texas suddenly approached Kemner's
public defender with a plea agreement for a petty misdemeanor - basically
to get rid of Kemner's case. Though you won't get the prosecutor or the
F&WL to admit it, clearly the outcome of my sentence had a SUDDEN AND
DRAMATIC EFFECT on the F&WL.  The actual sentencing usually comes a
couple months after the plea agreement, thus why the Oct 27 sentencing
which the F&WL nows wants to downplay.  By the way, I find it interesting
that Mendoza quietly contacts a few "bug organizations" about the outcome
of my case, yet the F&WL wishes to publicly hush things up (this is why
details were sketchy till my posting on the net) - want dramatic
evidence? Get a copy of the March\April 95 _Endangered Species Bulletin_
where I am the target of a big, flashy 3 page article with the usual hype
that I faced 5 years prison & $250K fine. Then look at the next issue
printed in Oct. 95 - NOTHING. The power of one event.

But other forces were at play. Regarding the Kemner case, there was a
prominent Smithsonian curator who among so many others, was extensively
involved in criminal activities with Kemner, literally ran for cover when
reporters tried to question him.  Now this person is no more a "criminal"
than you, me, Kemner, or anyone else but his career could have been
easily ruined from this publicity. Personally, I think entomologists have
it hard enough with low pay and very limited employment opportunities
without the hassles which the F&WL were giving everyone - yes folks,
important people are getting the message now.

I have seen the attempts by the ASC to work out solutions by "dialogue"
with the F&WL addressing these problems, of which NOTHING has actually
changed as pointed out by Dr. Thomas. "Dialogue" didn't work when
Brittish Prime minister Neville Chamberlain tried to "appease" Adolph
Hitler and it won't work with todays Eco-NAZI's either. Historically,
agressors have always been forced to the bargaining table only when some
major event puts them on the loosing side. The upheavals in Congress
coupled with the outcome of my sentencing is exactly that event, with the
F&WL afraid to make any false moves now with the "sword of Damocles"
dangling by a thread over its head.

In no way am I trying to put down the F&WL Service as a whole, nor do I
advocate lawlessness as we do need government, to a degree, to help us
function as a society; I only oppose those elements which are destructive
to our common good. Infact I suspect that dept. leaders like Interior
Secretary Bruce Babbit are not even fully aware just how much F&WL is
interferring with very important environmental programs like the National
Biological Survey; speaking of which has lots of people in it like Paul
Opler for example, who are themselves criminals... Oh my, another Clinton
cabinet dept. full of criminals - move over Whitewater, the reporters may
have something new. I don't think our current admin. is any worse than
its predecessors, instead my intent is to point out just how far reaching
all of this can (and may) get.

SOLUTION: With the mere stroke of a pen by Pres. Clinton or Hon. Bruce
Babbit, the permitting problems can be done away with; every illegal
specimen sitting in U.S. collections can be made legal and save science
and research a whole lot of grief. Future reforms to laws can be worked
out but first things first.  And I'm talking pardons and reforms for
everyone, not just for the terrified Smithsonian curator but little 14
year old Angela as well - please realize that without amateur support and
youth interest, entomology is doomed to wither away. Maybe animal rights
extremists like PETA, NABA, and other radicals thinks laws against bug
collecting are great - but not for everybody.  Just because someone is a
vegetarian doesn't mean everyone else has to be as well. I'm well aware
that many others who would otherwise support reform, have been afraid to
speak out against the F&WL for fear of reprisals or loosing government
grants, but in the present political climate, staying on the
"chearleading squad" for the F&WL is not going to get you any favors, so
you have nothing to loose, and everything to gain in the future with more
sensible laws.  It would be nice to show congress that agencies like the
F&WL Service don't always have to be adversarial to the public interest.
We will never have a better opportunity than the present to point out
present deficiencies in our laws and have them changed.

"When the government does something wrong, they have have the moral
responsibility to admit it."  - President Bill Clinton, October 3, 1995

Thank you,     Thomas W. Kral    e-mail:[email-masked]

---

From: Floyd Catchpole <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995 21:13:06 -0500

Hi Thomas;

I understand your anger at the FWS, however, what would interest me, and be a
valuable public service, would be for you to lay out, in clear and simple
language, with quotations from the legislative text, what the laws are.
 Please break this up into small bite size texts.

In this way, regular readers of the internet could learn what the laws are,
and thus be able to comment intelligently as to whether or not, and how, they
need to be changed.  Also, any misconceptions which are held by FWS people,
or you, would be laid out, and discussed until a clear understanding of the
interpretation of the law could be achieved, thus allowing enforcement to be
more consistent and even handed.

This would be a wonderfully beneficient public service.

Sincerely, Floyd Catchpole

---

From: Gregory <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 01:32:15 -0500

It also seems to me that the ornithological community (through the
recently-formed Ornithological Council -- a joint venture of the
Ornithological Societies of North America) has done a much better and more
credible job of working with the Fish and Wildlife Service on regulations
affecting the collecting of specimens than has the entomological community.
I think the latter would do well for itself by consulting with its
ornithological counterpart.

Alan Gregory

>Sincerely, Floyd Catchpole
*************************************************************************
Gregory                 "Let us begin. Let us restore the Earth. Let the
Penn State Hazleton       mountains talk, and the rivers run.
Hazleton PA 18201              Once more  and forever."
Internet: [email-masked]                      - David Brower
(717) 450-3188
PO Box 571
Conyngham PA 18219

---

From: Gregory <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 11:12:18 -0500

As a member of NABA almost from the beginning, I would not characterize the
organization as "extremist" in any way, or of being an "animal rights
organization."  NABA promotes conservation - of species and their habitats -
and advocates a non-consumptive way of lookiing at the natural world - in
this case butterflies, with binoculars and cameras.  It is that simple.  I
object to T. Kral characterizing this outstanding organization as any thing
other than what I have just described.  Mr Kral, while perhaps an excellent
collector of his "bugs," apparently knows little about the conservation
community.
Alan Gregory

>T. Kral writes:
>
>  And I'm talking pardons and reforms for
>>vegetarian doesn't mean everyone else has to be as well.
>
>
>        I am interested in finding out exactly how NABA are "animal rights
>extremists". I am a member of this organization and would not characterize
>them in this way at all, or am I wrong? Please educate me on this subject,
>or at least define what an "animal rights extremist" is.
>
>     BTW, I am a biologist who has collected and worked intensively with
>museum collections (mainly birds and mammals) and would not characterize
>myself as an animal rights extremist or someone who would belong to such a
>group.
>
>Take care,
>
>Alvaro Jaramillo
>Half Moon Bay, CA
>
>[email-masked]
>http://www.quake.net/~alvaro/index.html
>
>