What year was the use of jungle cock banned ???

[Lerouxagain]

Hi, I have old single hook streamers on cards by many makers that have jungle cock on them and all of a sudden they switched over to the painted eye on a thin feather or plastic jungle cock . There must be a fly tier who can answer this question ,it seems that the ban took place in the 1940's or 50's . Can some one tell me if that is true . Thanks. Dan

[bluesjay]

Hi Guys, I bought a half neck from Reed Tackle in 1965. I still have some of it plus some others I Ebayed.

Jay Edwards

[narcodog]

I pretty sure it was 1971-73.

[cwfly]

According to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, (CITES), it was listed in 1975.

[6tUc05]

The USE was never banned. It was the IMPORTATION AND SALE of capes/feathers from wild killed birds that was banned (under the US Endangered and Threatened Species Act [ETSA}). The sale of domestic bred and raised capes/feathers was never affected AS LONG AS YOU HAD PROOF (documentation) THAT IT/THEY WAS/WERE FROM A DOMESTICALLY RAISED BIRD(S)! It is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that has responsibility for enforcement of the ETSA. (IUCN is an Internationally agreed upon listing of protected species found around the world. To the best of my knowledge, CITES has NO regulatory authority.) If my memory does not fail me, the ETSA was passed on 1972. Any materials from endangered or threatened species that had been acquired PRIOR to passage of ETSA were "Grandfathered", i.e., were exempted from any and all regulations established by the ACT.

[mer]

6tUc05 Good stuff. As with any law, the "words" are important, aren't they?

[cwfly]

Yes, the words are important. In this case the words of the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service and CITES. CITES is an international convention with, yes, regulatory authority by agreement over trade. Yes, regulatory authority.
In this case it is administered in the United States, a party to the Treaty, by the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service. The following excerpts are not from my imagination - they are from the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service.




My research wholly fails to find any “Endangered and Threatened Species Act.” I am aware of the “Endangered Species Act of 1973”, referred to as “ESA.” It is codified at 16 U.S.C. [United States Code] Sec. 1531, et. Seq.
ESA provides funding to the States and is used, in part, to carry out the responsibilities of the United States under CITES.

[6tUc05]

None of my comments were from my, or any other, "imagination". I was personally involved up "to my eyeballs" in the drafting and passage of said legislation. In The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), which set of documents lists the "nitty-grittty" language of ALL Federal Regulations, and is the ultimate resource for such regulations, and which is printed verbatim as originally published in final form in the Federal Register, it was originally titled Endangered and Threatened Species Act for Plants and Animals, which lengthy ORIGINAL TITLE was shortened to Endangered and Threatened Species Act and whose acronym became ESA.Those of us involved with said legislation never referenced USC. There is a specific Volume Number of "the CODE" (CFR) for every Federal entity who has any Regulatory Authority of any kind. In this case, for the US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, THE entity in the US that has responsibility for enforcement, the designated Volume number is 50, and the specific citation is 50 CFR 17. As noted in your citation, enforcement of CITES is the responsibility of each signatory country; NOT CITES. CITES (CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE OF ENDANGERED SPECIES is simply an International COMMITTEE, or, synonymously, CONVENTION. REGULATORY authority the responsibility of each signatory country. See the first sentence in the second paragraph of your first citation, "...to carry out the treaty."

[6tUc05]

Yes, words are extremely important! The 'difficult' part is the proper, and correct, interpretation! It is this 'difficulty' that is responsible for the existence of our Court systems.

[cwfly]

I respectfully submit that you are in error – again. And this will be my final post on this topic. Whatever you think the Act might have been called originally, here is the original text when passed and taken directly from the United States Congress website. The law in question was and has always been called the Endangered Species Act of 1973. I would freely confess error – as we say in court – if you would be so kind as to post an image of the original text of the Act you claim existed with the name you ascribed to it.


The people who draft the federal legislation are members of Congress and their staffs. The statutes, when passed by both houses and signed into law by the President are then codified in the United States Code, not in the CFR. Thereafter, if authorized, agencies draft federal regulations consistent with the purpose and policy of the Act. No Act = No Regulation. Regulations, if they exist, and not statutes, are found in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
Bank robbery violates one or more provisions of the United States Code; it is enforceable because Congress (and the President by signing the Bill into law), and not some agency employee, says so. If you are indicted for bank robbery by a Federal Grand Jury, the indictment will refer to a violation of the United States Code (somewhere in Title 18 if I recall). The indictment will not reference some agency regulation in the CFR.
In July 2012, the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service published its Identification Guide for Wildlife Law Enforcement No. 14. It was authored by Pepper W. Trail of the National Fish and Wildlife Forensics Laboratory. It is a really wonderful publication, fully illustrated with color photographs of birds, feathers (and flies) titled Identification Guide to Decorative Feathers of Pheasants, Chickens, Turkeys and Related Birds. I encourage everyone to check it out.
The entire publication can be found at this link:
https://www.fws.gov/lab/idnotes/_Pheasa ... _final.pdf

At the end of the publication, on page 83 is a “complete list of protected pheasants and related birds. The bird we call Jungle Cock is the Gallus Sonneratii, or Gray Junglefowl is shown on page 11. According to the “complete list” of this USF&W enforcement guide, Jungle Cock, or Gallus Sonneratii is protected by CITES Appendix II, but is not listed in the ESA (Environmental Species Act of 1973).


And also at the end is a quiz that calls upon the reader to identify the feathers used on a number of flies. Good quiz.

[6tUc05]

Here is some info for your edification.
"» Laws & Policies » Endangered Species Act » A History of the Endangered Species Act of 1973

Endangered Species Act »
Regulations and Policies
Federal Register Notices

Endangered Species Act | A History of the Endangered Species Act of 1973
Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus). Credit: Tom Koerner/USFWS.

Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus).

Photo credit: Tom Koerner/USFWS

Congress passed the Endangered Species Preservation Act in 1966, providing a means for listing native animal species as endangered and giving them limited protection. The Departments of Interior, Agriculture, and Defense were to seek to protect listed species, and, insofar as consistent with their primary purposes, preserve the habitats of such species. The Act also authorized the Service to acquire land as habitat for endangered species. In 1969, Congress amended the Act to provide additional protection to species in danger of "worldwide extinction" by prohibiting their importation and subsequent sale in the United States. This Act called for an international meeting to adopt a convention to conserve endangered species. One amendment to the Act changed its title to the Endangered Species Conservation Act.

A 1973 conference in Washington, D.C. led 80 nations to sign the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which monitors, and in some cases, restricts international commerce in plant and animal species believed to be harmed by trade.

Later that year, Congress passed the Endangered Species Act (ESA). It

defined "endangered" and "threatened" [section 3];
made plants and all invertebrates eligible for protection [section 3];
applied broad "take" prohibitions to all endangered animal species and allowed the prohibitions to apply to threatened animal species by special regulation [section 9];
required federal agencies to use their authorities to conserve listed species and consult on "may affect" actions [section 7];
prohibited federal agencies from authorizing, funding, or carrying out any action that would jeopardize a listed species or destroy or modify its "critical habitat" [section 7];
made matching funds available to states with cooperative agreements [section 6];
provided funding authority for land acquisition for foreign species [section 8]; and
implemented CITES protection in the United States [section 8].

Additionally: "The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) is the codification of the general and permanent regulations published in the Federal Register by the executive departments and agencies of the federal government of the United States. The CFR is divided into 50 titles that represent broad areas subject to federal regulation. "

Moreover, FINAL bills such as this are passed (become Acts) ONLY AFTER extensive public review and comment, with those comments often resulting insignificant changes from the Original Draft.

As I noted,I was PERSONALLY involved! Were you?

CASE CLOSED!!

[bearbutt]

Photo credit: Tom Koerner/USFWS

Where's the photo? Or at least a link to the source of your quotation? That would help clear this up, perhaps?

bb

[cwfly]

A good friend, fellow forum member and someone who knows more, or as much about feathers as almost anyone else I know has very kindly educated me on the fact that I am wrong about the date when the ban on wild Jungle Cock feather importation began. Mea Culpa, and what follows should be the accurate answer. The history of this ban is fully outlined in an article in the May, 1971 issue of Audubon magazine, authored by Elizabeth Lane and Stephen Hartgen titled, Jungle Cocks, Trout Flies and Smugglers (at 38).
On January 3, 1967 the Indian government announced a total ban on exports of Jungle Cock feathers and through the International Council of Bird Preservation asked the English and Americans to help enforce the ban. Eventually the United States agreed and on March 30, 1969 the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, using the Lacey Act of 1900 as its authority, announced a ban on the import of Gray Junglefowl and the British later followed.
It was in July of 1969 that one Edward Bass, an agriculture inspector at Customs in New York came across Jungle Cock necks secreted in a shipment of Gamecock necks bound for Herters in Minnesota. The agents checked records and found Herters had many shipments of “Gamecock necks” coming from the same area in India. So the agents waited and on September 6, 1969 a shipment of “Gamecock” necks arrived at the port in Newark bound for Herters. Inside, the agents found 510 Jungle Cock necks. The shipment was closed and sent on to Herters to be signed for and accepted; the same was done with a second shipment.
Cutting to the chase, Herters, after accepting the shipments was indicted by a Federal Grand Jury in Minnesota and charged with six counts of smuggling and violations of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 545, 542, and 371. The case was United States v. Herter’s Inc., 4-70 Crim. 193. George Herter pled guilty to two counts, was fined the maximum amount of $15,000 on January 29, 1971. That was the end of the case and this is the end of my synopsis.

[jim royston]

The jungle cock capes that are currently freely available are domestically produced birds?

[bearbutt]

The jungle cock capes that are currently freely available are domestically produced birds?

In theory, they are. But unless they have a CITES certificate, or unless they have proof of being raised domestically, they will be suspect--especially the birds being sold on eBay via Estonia. The certification process can be found here:

https://cites.org/eng/prog/Permit_system

Shortly after the UK/US bans were announced in 1969 a UK producer "Fisherman's Feathers" in Leiscestershire started raising JC, and their necks were available and legal--. But it's a grey area for any bird that doesn't have documentation of the source. If in doubt, I'd suggest you check with your local USFWS officer--.

bb

[6tUc05]

My reference is "https://www.fws.gov/endangered/laws-pol ... story.html". The photo adds nothing as it is a "standard" photo of a drumming male Sage Grouse.

As I have not purchased a cape in several years, my personal knowledge is dated. However, not too many years ago there was a lady in the Great Lakes region who was successfully raising them and selling their capes, as was a gentleman in Maine. Most of the capes available today are coming from Estonia, where there were a couple of breeders, and a few from English breeders. The Estonian capes were quite reasonable compared to the US and English capes.You can readily find them by Googling them. I have purchased a couple from Estonia and been completely satisfied with their quality; and, had absolutely no importation problems. They came through "regular mail".

The Bureau of Sports Fisheries and Wildlife is a small 'OFFICE" within The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and is not very often referred to. It is the parent Agency (USFWS) that is the typical citation.

[6tUc05]

To follow up to bb's post, given my own personal knowledge of some of the "activity" of the Enforcement arm of the USFWS, I would venture that the Estonian sources are legit. I base this on the fact that I feel certain that the USFWS is fully aware of these entities and their capes coming into the US. They have been advertising on eBay for way too long for them to not know about them. They have "eyes" everywhere! As an example, back in the 1970's the largest wholesale gun distributor in Texas (Houston) got busted over a very rare mid-eastern Mountain sheep mount he had in his trophy room. This particular sub-species was (is) on the CITES list. It was the "friend" (who "came along") of a guest at a social event that this dealer and his wife held at their home who suspected that the mount was "illegal", and turned him in! It took the Feds two years to get a FINAL scientifically certified determination that it was, indeed, a mount of the listed sub-species. I am familiar with several other similar instances where the Feds have made cases. The one cited above by cwfly about Herter's downfall is another good example of their "eyes".

[bamboo rodley]

A good read on precious feathers and the market surrounding them is The Feather Thief. Worth reading if you haven’t already.