[Senate Report 105-222]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 432
105th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 105-222
_______________________________________________________________________
AFRICAN ELEPHANT CONSERVATION ACT REAUTHORIZATION
_______
June 25, 1998.--Ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Chafee, from the Committee on Environment and Public Works,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 627]
The Committee on Environment and Public Works, to which was
referred the bill (S. 627), to reauthorize the African Elephant
Conservation Act, having considered the same, reports favorably
thereon and recommends that the bill do pass.
General Statement
BACKGROUND
The African elephant (Loxdonta africana)--along with its
Asian counterpart (Elephas maximus), the largest land animal on
the planet--once inhabited most of the continent. However, the
population has declined over the centuries as a result of ivory
trade, habitat loss, human population expansion, and
desertification. By about 1600, the elephant was extirpated
from northern Africa, and since then, population decline and
habitat loss has continued throughout sub-Saharan Africa.
However, it wasn't until the 1970's and 1980's that elephant
populations declined precipitously, due primarily to poaching
for their ivory tusks. The numbers are stark: between 1979 and
1987, the population of African elephants plummeted from
approximately 1.3 million to less than 700,000. Since then, the
population has continued to decline, to approximately 540,000
elephants in 1996.
Responding to this decline, Congress enacted the African
Elephant Conservation Act (P.L. 100-478, 16 U.S.C. 4201 et
seq.) on October 7, 1988. This law provided a framework and
authority for the President to institute a moratorium on the
importation of ivory into the United States, and it established
a fund to provide financial assistance for projects for
research, conservation, management and protection of African
elephants.
Shortly after enactment of the law, on June 6, 1989,
President Bush prohibited the import of all ivory into the
United States. This action served, in large part, as the
impetus for the decision by the Parties to the Convention on
the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora (CITES) to place the African elephant on Appendix I,
which triggered a prohibition on all commercial trade in
products derived from the species. This international ban took
effect in January 1990. Almost immediately, the price of ivory,
trade in ivory, and poaching of elephants all decreased.
The African Elephant Conservation Act has provided funding
for 60 projects in 19 countries across Africa since its
enactment. In total, $6.8 million in Federal funds have been
obligated for these projects, matched by approximately $15.8
million in non-Federal funds. With more than 300 project
proposals totaling more than $240 million received by the
Secretary since enactment, demand far exceeds current funding.
Although the law provides that the Secretary may use three
percent of the Federal funds appropriated for administrative
costs, actual administrative costs are less than one percent.
These figures underscore the effectiveness, efficiency and
overall success of the law.
A primary reason for the law's success stems from its
emphasis on small grants that: can be awarded quickly; focus on
diverse, field-level conservation projects; emphasize
cooperation with the governments of range nations; and utilize
matching funds. The results in some areas have been dramatic.
For example, funding in 1990 for a project by the Central
African Republic and the World Wildlife Fund provided resources
to support the establishment of a reserve in that country. At
that time, in one area of the reserve, only carcasses were
evident; today, more than 2,000 elephants use the same area.
Funding for an anti-poaching program in Senegal has allowed a
genetically valuable population of elephants to increase after
years of decline. The financial assistance program has served
as a model for conservation of imperiled species overseas,
including the recently enacted Asian Elephant Conservation Act
of 1997 and the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994.
The moratorium on ivory imports into the United States
imposed under the Act, and the conservation projects funded by
the Act have taken on added importance in light of recent
actions by the Parties to CITES. Over U.S. opposition, the
Parties voted in June 1997 to downlist from Appendix I to
Appendix II elephant populations in Botswana, Namibia and
Zimbabwe, and to allow limited trade in certain products
derived from elephant populations in those countries. The
United States opposed the decision, believing that the
resumption of commercial trade in ivory would pose unacceptable
risks to elephant populations elewhere in the continent from
poaching and illegal trade.
Objectives and Summary of the Legislation
The bill reauthorizes the African Elephant Conservation Act
through 2002. Section 1 amends section 2306 of the African
Elephant Conservation Act by authorizing appropriations through
fiscal year 2002. The authorized level of appropriations
remains unchanged at $5 million each year.
Hearings
The Committee held a hearing on S. 627 on November 4, 1997.
Testimony was given by: Senator James M. Jeffords of Vermont;
Congressman Jim Saxton of the third district of New Jersey;
Marshall P. Jones, Assistant Director for International
Affairs, Fish and Wildlife Service; Ginette Hemley, Director
for International Wildlife Policy, World Wildlife Fund; Dr.
John W. Grandy, Senior Vice President, The Humane Society of
the United States; and Dr. Stuart A. Marks, Director for
Research and Community Development, Safari Club International.
Regulatory Impact
In compliance with section 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes an evaluation
of the regulatory impact of the reported bill. The reported
bill will have no regulatory impact. This bill will not have
any adverse impact on the personal privacy of individuals.
Mandates Assessment
In compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Public Law 104-4), the Committee finds that this bill would
impose no Federal intergovernmental unfunded mandates on State,
local, or tribal governments. All of its governmental
directives are imposed on Federal agencies. The bill does not
directly impose any private sector mandates.
Legislative History
S. 627 was introduced by Senator Jeffords and referred to
the Committee on Environment and Public Works on April 22,
1997. H.R. 39, the African Elephant Conservation
Reauthorization Act of 1997, was received from the House of
Representatives and referred to the Committee on April 24,
1997. On May 21, 1998, the Committee held a business meeting to
consider both bills. Both S. 627 and H.R. 39 were favorably
reported out of the Committee by voice vote.
Cost of Legislation
Section 403 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
Control Act requires that a statement of the cost of a reported
bill, prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, be included
in the report. That statement follows:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, May 29, 1998.
Hon. John H. Chafee, Chairman,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 627, the African
Elephant Conservation Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Deborah Reis,
who can be reached at 226-2860.
Sincerely,
June E. O'Neill,
Director.
------
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
S. 627, A bill to reauthorize the African Elephant
Conservation Act, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee
on Environment and Public Works on May 21, 1998.
Summary
S. 627 would reauthorize, through fiscal year 2002, annual
appropriations to the African Elephant Conservation Fund at the
existing authorization level of up to $5 million. The current
authorization expires on September 30, 1998. The Secretary of
the Interior uses this fund primarily to help finance research
and conservation programs overseas. From its inception in 1991
through 1997, the fund has spent a total of nearly $8 million
in appropriated and donated funds.
Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO
estimates that implementing S. 627 would result in additional
discretionary spending of $20 million over the 1999-2003
period. The legislation would not affect direct spending or
receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply.
S. 627 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates
as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would
not affect the budgets of State, local, or tribal governments.
Estimated Cost to the Federal Government
The authorization level specified by the bill is the same
as the current authorization but about $4 million higher than
annual appropriations have been since this program's inception.
For purposes of this estimate, CBO assumes that the entire
amounts authorized by S. 627 will be appropriated for each of
fiscal years 1999 through 2002. Outlay estimates are based on
historical spending patterns for this program. The estimated
budgetary impact is shown in the following table. The costs of
this legislation fall within budget function 300 (natural
resources and environment).
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Spending Under Current Law:
Budget Authority\1\......................................... 1 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays........................................... 1 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed Changes:
Authorization Level......................................... 0 5 5 5 5 0
Estimated Outlays........................................... 0 3 4 5 5 3
Spending Under S. 627:
Authorization Level\1\...................................... 1 5 5 5 5 0
Estimated Outlays........................................... 1 3 4 5 5 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\The 1998 level is the amount appropriated for that year.
Pay-As-You-Go Considerations: None.
Intergovernmental and Private-Sector Impact: S. 627
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would not affect the budgets of State,
local, or tribal governments.
Previous CBO Estimate: On April 17, 1997, CBO transmitted a
cost estimate for H.R. 39, the African Elephant Authorization
Act of 1997, as ordered reported by the House Committee on
Resources on April 16, 1997. The estimated costs of the two
bills are identical.
Estimate Prepared by: Deborah Reis (226-2860).
Estimate Approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Changes in Existing Law
In compliance with section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill
as reported are shown as follows: existing law as proposed to
be omitted is enclosed in [bold brackets]; new matter proposed
to be added to existing law is printed in italic; and existing
law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman.
United States Code--Title 16--Conservation
Chapter 62--African Elephant Conservation
Subchapter III--Miscellaneous
* * * * * * *
Sec. 4245. Authorization of appropriations
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Fund and to
the Secretary a total of not to exceed $5,000,000 for each of
[fiscal years 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998]
fiscal years 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002 to carry
out this chapter, to remain available until expended.