Opinion ID: 213533
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 14

Heading: The Existing Regulatory Scheme Does Balance and Advance Both of the Government's Compelling Interests in the Least Restrictive Manner and Neither of the Alternatives Proposed Satisfy the Government's Compelling Interest in Striking an Appropriate Balance Between its Two Compelling Interests of Protecting Bald Eagles and Preserving the Culture and Religion of Native American Tribes

Text: Unfortunately, the task before us is not as simple as identifying the compelling governmental interests and determining how well Congress' chosen means serve those interests. The two compelling governmental interests in this caseeagle protection and providing for the religious needs of members of federally-recognized tribesare, to at least some degree, in conflict. [6] As the Hardman court noted, there is a great deal of interplay between the two compelling interests and . . . the ultimate test is whether the balance between the two interests struck by the government is achieved by the least restrictive means available. 297 F.3d at 1134. Therefore, we must determine whether the possession ban exception for members of federally-recognized tribes adequately balances the two compelling interests against one another, and whether any of the proffered alternative schemes would also adequately strike such a balance, but would do so in a manner less restrictive of Wilgus' religious exercise. The district court considered two alternative means that the government could have chosen that might have been less restrictive of Wilgus' religious rights than the current regime: opening the Repository permitting process to all sincere practitioners of Native American religion, regardless of their tribal membership or lack thereof, and allowing tribal members who lawfully possess eagle parts to give those parts as gifts to non-tribal-members who are nevertheless sincere practitioners of Native American religion. Wilgus proffered the latter option, while the district court presented the former. [7] Our task, as outlined by the Hardman court, is to decide, based on the evidence adduced in the district court, whether either of these two proffered means adequately balance the government's two competing interests in a manner less restrictive to Wilgus' religious needs, and whether the evidence presented supports the government's chosen regulatory scheme as least restrictive. Before examining the three regulatory options before us, however, we should briefly restate the factual predicates underlying this examination, as developed on remand. First, while the numbers of bald and golden eagles in the wild is on the riseas the delisting of the bald eagle from the Endangered Species Act list atteststhis rise in eagle populations is not likely to translate into an equivalent increase in the numbers of eagle feathers and parts available for distribution from the Repository. Based on the evidence before it, the district court concluded that more eagles in the wild will not immediately translate into more feathers available for distribution at the Repository. Wilgus, 606 F.Supp.2d at 1322. The vast majority of deceased birds turned in to the Repository die from electrocution or collision with a vehicle. Id. at 1323. But those are the very causes of eagle mortality that conservationists have managed to reduce in recent years, leading in part to the rebound in eagle populations. Id. And while the Repository staff has made successful efforts to ensure that those who find eagle carcasses know where to send them, those very efforts to raise awareness have also led to an increase in applications for eagle parts from eligible Native Americans. Id. Taken together, this evidence shows that there is no significant untapped source of birds not already being sent to the Repository. Id. (quotation omitted). We must take the current level of supply of eagle parts, then, as a given. Second, the demand for eagle feathers and parts by tribal members for their religious practices already greatly outstrips the supply available through the Repository. As noted above, in 2004 the Repository received many more requests for eagle parts than it could accommodate. Even with the current restriction of permits to members of federally-recognized tribes, the waiting period to receive a whole bald eagle is two and one-half years; for a whole golden eagle it is three-and-a-half to four years; and a tribal worshipper seeking a whole immature golden eagle must wait four to four-and-one-half years. Id. at 1321. Loose feathers can be provided more quickly (though still after a wait of between three and six months), but in the words of the district court, the Repository system is already vulnerable to any significant increase in demand. Id. Third, the district court found it extremely difficult to estimate the number of non-Native American adherents of Native American religions that might be eager to sign up for permits. The government attempted to prove the number via a combination of census data and data from the General Social Survey (G.S.S.), but given that neither measure is designed to capture the kind of data necessary to answer the question at issue here, the district court was unconvinced by the estimates provided by the government's expert sociologist. Id. at 1319, 1329. Another government witness testified that no one has studied this question [of the number of non-Native American adherents of Native American religions] using a reliable statistical methodology. Id. at 1328 (quotation omitted). The district court also considered evidence of the numbers of practitioners of Afro-Caribbean religions who might also require eagle feathers, and noted that there may be as many as one million of such practitioners in the United States. Fourth, testimony by FWS agents before the district court revealed that there is a thriving black market for eagle feathers and parts. FWS Special Agent Kevin Ellis testified that the black market is driven by three factors. First, many individuals take part in the so-called powwow circuit, in which cash prizes are offered for the best performers of traditional Native American dances. The traditional garb for these dances frequently includes eagle feathers, and persons who kill eagles. . . for their feathers, approach winners of pow-wows and attempt to sell them feathers as they know cash for purchases is readily available. (Apl't App. at 87 [Affidavit of Kevin Ellis].) Second, [m]any Native Americans who would normally obtain feathers from legal sources. . . turn to the black market due to frustration in obtaining feathers legally (i.e. short supply and/or the multi year waiting list at the USFWS Eagle Repository). ( Id. ) Third, the black market is driven by collectors (mostly non Native Americans) who wish to own Native American cultural items. ( Id. ) Such collectors are often very well organized, and funded, and use `runners' who regularly visit Reservations to seek out items to purchase for many thousands of dollars. ( Id. at 88.) Finally, the district court heard testimony regarding some of the enforcement difficulties facing FWS agents. Eagle feathers that come legally from the Repository cannot be marked as legitimate, because to do so would destroy their religious value. Wilgus, 606 F.Supp.2d at 1324. Therefore, one of the few tools FWS has at its disposal to distinguish between lawful and unlawful possession is the distinction between members and non-members of federally-recognized tribes. [8]