81 



The Chairman. Thank you. You know, I can agree with you 100 

 percent on your presentation. Hopefully, you will write articles for 

 this magazine so that the people understand what is happening. As 

 I said earlier, the breakdown between the agency and the people 

 is very serious, and I am not convinced in my own mind that there 

 was not a little cowboy involved in here. I have been around this 

 business a long time, and I could sense that. And, you know, they 

 have got the right. They have got so-called the Government on 

 their side. 



But, you know, the fence that they burned down, the house that 

 they burned down, the relations they burned down is dramatically, 

 I think, exposed in this case. And I am not going to argue this case 

 again, but I am going to suggest one other thing, George. A real 

 lawbreaker in game will continue to break the law. The poacher 

 who is in the business of poaching will continue to poach. But to 

 the hunter who really takes this seriously to his heart, it is an 

 emotional thing that is part of — you know, I hate to say it, because 

 I believe in it: it is part of your quasi-religion. To have, then, your- 

 self impugned by a Government agency accusing when you know 

 full good and well to your knowledge that you are innocent, that 

 is devastating. Like you say, most of them do not go back. Then, 

 we lose them, lose the dollars. We lose their participation, and they 

 lose faith in the Government. That is the biggest thing. 



Steve? 



Mr. Reiger. Sir, I just wanted to add that I've worked with Fed- 

 eral agents. In fact, I helped ferret out the schedule of the last 

 great outlaw in our area at some risk to myself, a man who was 

 shooting between 3,000 and 5,000 ducks a season and selling them. 

 I helped the local Federal agent make this bust. But what sickens 

 me is the dozen to 15 letters I receive each year from readers who 

 are just bewildered. They have been caught in a situation they 

 don't understand. They were guests at a hunt, and they feel so hu- 

 miliated that they just have to tell me, a perfect stranger, that they 

 are giving hunting up. 



The Chairman. That is right. And you can understand that feel- 

 ing, because they have been, their whole life has been impugned 

 by an agency. Now, if they had knowledge of it, that is a different 

 story, and they are knowledgeably breaking the law. But most of 

 the time, this is not the case, and we will find that on those review 

 cases. A lot of them were thrown out. 



Steve, you are up. I do thank you for waiting so patiently. 



STATEMENT OF STEPHEN S. BOYNTON, VICE PRESIDENT AND 

 GENERAL COUNSEL, HENKE AND ASSOCIATES, LTD., VI- 

 ENNA, VIRGINIA 



Mr. BOYNTON. Mr. Chairman, I am not unmindful of the hour, 

 and I will be as brief as possible. 



My name is Stephen S. Boynton; I am an attorney in private 

 practice in Washington, D.C., and vice president and general coun- 

 sel of the conservation consulting firm of Henke and Associates. I 

 cannot tell you how much I appreciate the opportunity to appear 

 before this Committee today. Congress has not looked at this issue 

 since 1985, when there were oversight hearings. And sadly, nothing 

 of a positive nature has developed regarding that issue since that 



