[Senate Report 105-282]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 519
105th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 105-282
_______________________________________________________________________
RHINOCEROS AND TIGER CONSERVATION ACT OF 1998
_______
July 31, 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. 361]
The Committee on Environment and Public Works, to which was
referred the bill (S. 361) to amend the Endangered Species Act
of 1973 to prohibit the sale, import, and export of products
labeled as containing endangered species, and for other
purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon
with an amendment and with an amendment to the title, and
recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass.
General Statement and Background
Rhinoceroses and tigers have very little in common. They
are classified under different orders in zoological taxonomy,
with the tiger in the order of Carnivora, and the rhino in the
order of Perissodactyla. The tiger is a carnivore and a top-
level predator, while the rhino is an herbivore, and an
ungulate, or hooved animal. Tigers are one of the fastest and
most wide roaming land mammals on the planet; rhinos forage
within comparatively limited ranges of habitat.
Rhinos and tigers share, however, three vital facts that
will have a direct bearing on the likelihood of their survival.
They are some of the most critically endangered species on the
planet. Fewer than 7,500 tigers survive in the world today, and
of the eight subspecies that have been identified, three are
extinct. Another subspecies in South China is on the brink of
extinction, with a population of about 20 animals. Rhinos
number between 11,000 and 13,500, with two species in Africa
and three in Asia. Two of the Asian species are on the verge of
extinction, with the Javan rhino having less than 100
individuals, and the Sumatran rhino having less than 500.
The reason for their recent declines, and the primary
immediate threat to the survival of each is the same--poaching.
Habitat loss is another threat to the survival of both species,
although this loss has been ameliorated to some extent by the
establishment of reserves for these species in the range
countries of both Africa and Asia. An additional threat facing
the tiger is the loss of prey species.
Lastly, the primary reason for poaching is also the same:
parts of both rhinos and tigers are used in traditional Asian
medicines. Tiger bone is used to treat ailments such as
rheumatism and arthritis. Rhino horn is used to treat delirium,
convulsions and other illnesses. Tigers are poached in addition
for their skins, and rhinos are also poached for use of their
horn in making dagger handles in Yemen and Oman.
It is in this context that Congress passed the Rhinoceros
and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994 (the Act). This Act
established a program to provide financial assistance for
projects for the conservation of rhinos and tigers in the
countries whose activities directly or indirectly affect the
species, and for the Secretariat of the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora (CITES). The Act established a separate account in the
General Treasury known as the ``Rhinoceros and Tiger
Conservation Fund'' to receive funds appropriated by Congress.
Since its enactment, Congress has appropriated $1 million for
the Act, with $200,000 in 1996, and $400,000 in each of 1997
and 1998.
At least once a year, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(the Service) sends a request for proposals to government and
non-government organizations around the world that are
interested in the conservation of rhinos and tigers. Since
1996, 40 proposals have been funded for projects in 10 range
countries in Africa and Asia. Of this total, 7 projects were in
Africa and 33 in Asia; 15 projects related to rhinos, 14
projects related to tigers, and 11 projects related to both
species. The Service has disbursed or obligated a total of
$756,352, with individual projects averaging just under
$19,000. Some of these projects have provided equipment and
training for anti-poaching efforts, including basic necessities
such as clothing and radios for communication.
All the witnesses at the hearing on July 7, 1998 before the
committee noted that the projects funded under the Act have
provided important assistance to rhino and tiger conservation
efforts, but emphasized that additional efforts are necessary
in order to better protect these species. First, all the
witnesses advocated adequate funding for, as well as
reauthorization of, the Act. Second, witnesses advocated
specific initiatives to address continued poaching of rhinos
and tigers, by reducing the supply and availability of rhino
and tiger parts from the marketplace.
Despite recent efforts by the Parties to CITES to reduce
ongoing trade of traditional Asian medicine containing rhino
and tiger parts, several studies by Traffic North America (part
of Traffic Network, a joint program of the World Wildlife Fund
and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature
(IUCN)) have indicated that little progress has been made in
actually curbing this trade, and that demand for these
medicines remains high in markets in Asia and the United
States. In one study conducted by Traffic North America, 110
shops in the Chinatowns of seven different cities across North
America (Atlanta, Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco,
Seattle, Toronto, and Vancouver) were surveyed, and 43 percent
offered to sell medicine containing or claiming to contain
tiger parts, while 15 percent offered to sell medicine
containing or claiming to contain rhino parts. Within the shops
surveyed, at least 31 different types of medicines containing
or claiming to contain rhino or tiger parts, produced by as
many as 34 different manufacturers, were found. Furthermore,
this study concluded that the availability of these products
has increased in the last five years. Another study conducted
by the Wildlife Conservation Society found that 67 percent of
the Asian herbal shops and supermarkets visited in New York
City's Chinese communities sold traditional Asian medicines
containing or claiming to contain tiger parts, generally
ranging in price from $2 to $8.
CITES prohibits the commercial trade of all species of
rhino and the tiger, as well as any parts or products of these
species. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) lists all species of
rhino, except the white rhinoceros population of southern
Africa, and the tiger, as endangered, and also prohibits trade
in these species. However, these laws do not allow for the
interdiction of products that are labeled or advertised as
containing substances derived from rhinos or tigers, without
evidence that the products in fact contain these substances.
Such evidence, at best, would be extremely difficult,
expensive, and time-consuming to acquire, and at worst, would
be impossible to acquire.
In light of the precarious status of the species, the
success of the Act, and the need for further efforts to address
poaching and the continuing demand for traditional Asian
medicine containing rhino and tiger parts, the bill focuses on
three major elements: prohibit the sale, import, or export of
products that contain, or are labeled or advertised as
containing, rhino and tiger parts, in an effort to reduce the
demand for, and supply of, those products in the United States;
initiate a public outreach program throughout the United States
to complement the prohibitions in this bill; and reauthorize
the Act, to bolster support for the Act, and for rhino and
tiger conservation generally.
Objectives of the Legislation
S. 361 amends the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of
1994 to prohibit the sale, importation, and exportation of
products intended for human consumption or application
containing, or labeled or advertised as containing, any
substance derived from any species of rhinoceros or tiger. The
bill also establishes an educational outreach program for the
conservation of rhinoceros and tiger species, and reauthorizes
the Act through fiscal year 2002.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short Title
This section provides that the bill may be cited as the
``Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1998.''
Section 2. Findings
This section provides the findings of Congress. The
populations of all but one species of rhinoceros, and the
tiger, have significantly declined in recent years and continue
to decline. Except for the white rhinoceros in southern Africa,
all of these species are listed as endangered under the
Endangered Species Act, and all rhino and tiger species are
listed on Appendix I of CITES. The Parties to CITES have
adopted one resolution each relating to tigers and rhinoceros,
urging Parties to implement legislation to reduce illegal trade
in parts and products of these species. The Parties have also
adopted resolutions relating to the trade in readily
recognizable parts and products of species, and trade in
traditional medicines, recommending that Parties ensure that
their legislation controls trade in those parts and
derivatives, and in medicines purporting to contain them.
A primary cause of the decline in the populations of tiger
and most rhinoceros species is poaching for use of their parts
and products in traditional medicines. Currently, there are
insufficient legal mechanisms enabling the Service to interdict
products that are labeled as containing substances derived from
rhinoceros or tiger species and to prosecute the merchandisers
for sale or display of those products. Legislation is required
to ensure that products containing tiger parts or rhinoceros
parts are prohibited from importation into, or exportation
from, the United States, and that efforts are made to educate
persons regarding alternatives for traditional medicines, the
illegality of products containing tiger and rhino parts, and
the need to conserve rhino and tiger species.
Section 3. Purposes of the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of
1994
This section amends section 3 of the Act, which identifies
the purposes of the Act. Specifically the section adds a new
purpose to the Act, providing that one purpose of the Act is to
prohibit the sale, importation, and exportation of products
intended for human consumption or application containing, or
labeled or advertised as containing, any substance derived from
any species of rhinoceros or tiger.
Section 4. Definition of person
This section amends section 4 of the Act, by adding a
definition of ``person.'' A person means an individual,
corporation, partnership, trust, association, or other private
entity; an officer, employee, agent, department, or
instrumentality of the Federal government, any State,
municipality, or political subdivision of State, or any foreign
government; a State, municipality, or political subdivision of
a State; or any other entity subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States. This definition is the same as that in the
Endangered Species Act.
Section 5. Prohibition on sale, importation, or exportation of products
labeled as rhinoceros or tiger products
This section adds a new section 7 to the Act. New section
7(a) states that a person shall not sell, import, or export, or
attempt to sell, import, or export, any product, item, or
substance intended for human consumption or application
containing, or labeled or advertised as containing, any
substance derived from any species of rhinoceros or tiger.
Products, items, or substances intended for human consumption
or application are those that can be ingested internally or
applied externally, including pills, drinks, lotions, and
ointments.
The prohibition of products, items or substances labeled or
advertised as containing rhino or tiger parts was intended to
avoid prohibiting products that may attempt to associate
themselves with rhinos or tigers as symbols, without
representing to actually contain rhino or tiger parts. The
tiger in particular holds great symbolism in many cultures,
including here in the United States. For example, two major
sports teams (the Cincinnati Bengals and the Detroit Tigers),
four major universities (Princeton, Clemson, Auburn, and
Louisiana State), and more than 250 companies, including
Fortune 500 companies such as Exxon and Kellogg, use the tiger
as a mascot or marketing symbol. At the same time, the
prohibition is intended to reach products that may not
necessarily be labeled or marked as containing rhino or tiger
parts, but that are represented through advertising, orally or
in writing, to an individual or larger group, as containing
rhino or tiger parts. This includes includes acts of informing,
announcing, apprising or otherwise communicating, by any means
whatsoever, including any oral, written, or graphic statement,
to an individual or to the general public, that a product, item
or substance contains rhino or tiger parts.
New section 7(b) provides both criminal and civil penalties
for a violation of the Act. A person engaged in business as an
importer, exporter, or distributor that knowingly violates
subsection (a) shall be fined under the Title 18 of the U.S.
Code, imprisoned not more than six months, or both. A person
that knowingly violates subsection (a), and a person engaged in
business as an importer, exporter, or distributor that violates
subsection (a), may be assessed a civil penalty of not more
than $12,000 for each violation. Civil penalties shall be
assessed, and may be collected, in the same manner as under the
ESA. ``Importers'' and ``exporters'' are terms used in the ESA
and are intended to have the same meaning in this Act. The
class of persons included in the term ``distributor'' includes
any individual, partnership, association, or other legal
relationship that stands between the manufacturer and the
retail seller in purchases, or contracts for sale of products,
items or substances. This includes wholesalers or other middle-
men serving between the suppliers or manufacturers and the
retailers and commercial users.
New section 7(c) provides that any product, item, or
substance sold, imported, or exported, or attempted to be sold,
imported, or exported, in violation of this section, or any
regulations issued thereunder, shall be subject to seizure and
forfeiture to the United States. New section 7(d) provides that
the Secretary shall issue appropriate regulations, after
consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary
of Health and Human Services, and the United States Trade
Representative. New section 7(e) provides that the Secretary,
the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Coast Guard shall
enforce this section in the manner in which the Secretaries
enforce section 11(e) of the ESA. This provision is intended to
apply to administrative and judicial procedures under this
section, including procedures for forfeiture and seizure of
products, items and substances pursuant to new section 7(c) of
the Act. Under new section 7(f), amounts received as penalties,
fines, or forfeiture of property under this section shall be
used in accordance with Section 6(d) of the Lacey Act
Amendments of 1981. This is intended to allow moneys received
to go to the payment of rewards and other authorized uses by
the Service.
Section 6. Educational outreach program
This section establishes a new section 8 in the Act,
providing that, not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this bill, the Secretary shall develop and
implement an educational outreach program in the United States
for the conservation of rhinoceros and tiger species. Guidance
must be published in the Federal Register. The program shall
provide for the publication and dissemination of information
regarding: laws protecting rhinos and tigers, in particular
laws prohibiting trade in products containing, or labeled as
containing, rhino or tiger parts; the use of traditional
medicines that contain rhino and tiger parts, health risks
associated with their use, and available alternatives; and the
status of rhinos and tigers and the reasons for protecting
them. The Secretary is encouraged to use existing
administrative initiatives in developing and implementing this
program.
Section 7. Authorization of appropriations.
This section reauthorizes the Act through fiscal year 2002,
at the current level of $10 million annually.
Hearings
The Committee on the Environment and Public Works held a
hearing on S. 361 on July 7, 1998. Testimony was received from
Mr. John Rogers, Deputy Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; Ms. Ginette Hemley, Vice President for Species
Conservation, World Wildlife Fund; Mr. Wayne Pacelle, Senior
Vice President, The Humane Society of the United States, and
Ms. Kristin Vehrs, Deputy Director, American Zoo and Aquarium
Association. Written testimony was submitted by Senator
Jeffords.
Legislative History
On February 26, 1997, Senator Jeffords introduced S. 361,
which was referred to the Committee on Environment and Public
Works. On Wednesday, July 22, 1998, the committee held a
business meeting to consider the bill. Senator Chafee offered
an amendment in the form of a substitute, and Senator Baucus
offered a second degree amendment, both of which were adopted
by voice vote. S. 361, as amended, was favorably reported by
the committee by voice vote.
Regulatory Impact Statement
In compliance with section 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the committee makes this
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. The bill prohibits the sale,
import and export of products, items, or substances containing,
or labeled or advertised as containing, rhino or tiger parts.
These prohibitions would facilitate enforcement of prohibitions
that already exist under other laws. The bill does not directly
impose any private sector mandates for the same reason.
Cost of Legislation
Section 403 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
Control Act requires that a statement of the cost of the
reported bill, prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, be
included in the report. That statement follows:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, July 23, 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. 361, the Rhinoceros
and Tiger Conservation Act of 1998.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Deborah
Reis (for Federal costs), who can be reached at 226-2860, and
Marjorie Miller (for the State and local impact), who can be
reached at 225-3220, and Leslie Frymier (for private-sector
impact), who can be reached at 226-2940.
Sincerely,
June E. O'Neill,
Director.
------
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
S. 361, Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1998, as
ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Environmental and
Public Works on July 22, 1998
Summary
Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO
estimates that enacting S. 361 would result in additional
discretionary spending of $12 million over the 2001-2003
period. The legislation could affect direct spending and
governmental revenues by imposing new civil and criminal
penalties; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would apply. CBO
estimates, however, that any such effects would be minimal. S.
361 does not contain any intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
and would have no impact on the budgets of State, local, or
tribal governments.
S. 361 would prohibit any person from selling, importing,
or exporting products containing (or labeled as containing) any
substance derived from rhinoceroses or tigers. S. 361 would
establish both criminal and civil penalties to be imposed on
anyone who violates the prohibition. The bill's provisions
relating to the use of proceeds from fines and penalties would
be similar to those of the Lacey Act, which currently prohibits
sales, imports, and other transactions involving endangered
species. The bill would direct the Secretaries of the Interior,
the Treasury, and Transportation to enforce the legislation in
the same manner as they enforce the Endangered Species Act of
1973. Section 6 would direct the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) to develop and implement an
educational outreach program in the United States for the
conservation of rhinoceros and tiger species.
Finally, S. 361 would reauthorize, through fiscal year
2002, annual appropriations to the Rhinoceros and Tiger
Conservation Fund at the existing authorization level of up to
$10 million. The current authorizations expire after fiscal
year 2000. The Secretary of the Interior uses this fund
primarily to help finance research and conservation programs
overseas. From its inception in 1994, the fund has received
appropriations totaling $1 million.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government
The authorizations specified by section 6 are the same as
the current authorization level but are significantly higher
than the $200,000 to $400,000 that has been appropriated in
each of the last few years. For purposes of this estimate, CBO
assumes that the entire amounts authorized by the bill will be
appropriated for each fiscal year through 2002. Outlay
estimates are based on historical spending patterns for this
program. The estimated impact on discretionary spending 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:
Authorization Level\1\...................................... *\2\ 10 10 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays........................................... *\2\ 1 4 6 6 3
Proposed Changes:
Authorization Level......................................... 0 0 0 10 10 10
Estimated Outlays........................................... 0 0 0 1 4 7
Spending Under S. 361:
Authorization Level\1\...................................... *\2\ 10 10 10 10 10
Estimated Outlays........................................... *\2\ 1 4 7 10 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 1998 level is the amount appropriated for that year. The 1999 and 2000 levels are the amounts authorized
under current law.
\2\. Less than $500,000.
In addition to the discretionary costs shown in the above
table, the bill also could affect governmental receipts
(revenues) from civil and criminal fines. The direction of any
change, however, is uncertain. On the one hand, revenues could
increase if the sale and export of prohibited (or falsely
labeled) items does not change and Federal enforcement agencies
are able to collect more fines under the broader language of
the bill. On the other hand, revenues could fall if the bill
induces some sellers and importers to curtail their activities.
In either event, CBO estimates that any increases or decreases
in revenues would be less than $500,000 annually. Moreover,
such changes would be offset by decreases or increases in
direct spending from the crime victims fund (where criminal
fines are deposited) or the resource management account of the
USFWS (where civil fines and are deposited and spent).
Pay-as-you-go considerations
The Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act
specifies pay-as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting
direct spending or receipts. Although enacting S. 361 would
affect both direct spending and receipts, CBO estimates that
the amounts involved would be less than $500,000 annually.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact
S. 361 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in UMRA because the bill would impose no
new enforceable duties. The bill's prohibition on the sale,
import, or export of certain products containing or claiming to
contain any substance derived from rhinoceroses or tigers would
facilitate the enforcement of existing prohibitions on such
activities. The bill also would have no impact on the budgets
of State, local, or tribal governments.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Deborah Reis (226-2860);
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Marjorie Miller
(225-3220); Impact on the Private Sector: Lesley Frymier (226-
2940).
Estimate approved by: Paul N. Van de Water, 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 proposed to be
omitted is enclosed in [black brackets], new matter is printed
in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown
in roman:
------
United States Code
Title 16--Conservation
Chapter 73--Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation
* * * * * * *
Sec. 5301. Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
(1) The world's rhinoceros population is declining
at an alarming rate, a 90 percent decline since 1970.
(2) All 5 subspecies of tiger are currently
threatened with extinction in the wild, with
approximately 5,000 to 6,000 tigers remaining
worldwide.
(3) All rhinoceros species have been listed on
Appendix I of CITES since 1977.
(4) All tiger subspecies have been listed on
Appendix I of CITES since 1987.
(5) The tiger and all rhinoceros species, except
the southern subspecies of white rhinoceros, are listed
as endangered species under the Endangered Species Act
of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
(6) In 1987, the parties to CITES adopted a
resolution that urged all parties to establish a
moratorium on the sale and trade in rhinoceros products
(other than legally taken trophies), to destroy
government stockpiles of rhinoceros horn, and to exert
pressure on countries continuing to allow trade in
rhinoceros products.
(7) Prohibition on Sale, Importation, or
Exportation of Products Labeled as Rhinoceros or Tiger
Products._
(a) Prohibition.--A person shall not sell,
import, or export, or attempt to sell, import,
or export, any product, item, or substance
intended for human consumption or application
containing, or labeled or advertised as
containing, any substance derived from any
species of rhinoceros or tiger.
(b) Penalties.--
(1) Criminal penalty.--A person
engaged in business as an importer,
exporter, or distributor that knowingly
violates subsection (a) shall be fined
under title 18, United States Code,
imprisoned not more than 6 months, or
both.
(2) Civil penalties.--
(A) In general.--A person
that knowingly violates
subsection (a), and a person
engaged in business as an
importer, exporter, or
distributor that violates
subsection (a), may be assessed
a civil penalty by the
Secretary of not more than
$12,000 for each violation.
(B) Manner of assessment
and collection.--A civil
penalty under this paragraph
shall be assessed, and may be
collected, in the manner in
which a civil penalty under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973
may be assessed and collected
under section 11(a) of that Act
(16 U.S.C. 1540(a)).
(c) Products, Items, and Substances.--Any
product, item, or substance sold, imported, or
exported, or attempted to be sold, imported, or
exported, in violation of this section or any
regulation issued under this section shall be
subject to seizure and forfeiture to the United
States.
(d) Regulations.--After consultation with
the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of
Health and Human Services, and the United
States Trade Representative, the Secretary
shall issue such regulations as are appropriate
to carry out this section.
(e) Enforcement.--The Secretary, the
Secretary of the Treasury, and the Secretary of
the department in which the Coast Guard is
operating shall enforce this section in the
manner in which the Secretaries carry out
enforcement activities under section 11(e) of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C.
1540(e)).
(f) Use of Penalty Amounts.--Amounts
received as penalties, fines, or forfeiture of
property under this section shall be used in
accordance with section 6(d) of the Lacey Act
Amendments of 1981 (16 U.S.C. 3375(d)).
(8) Educational Outreach Program._
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this section,
the Secretary shall develop and implement an
educational outreach program in the United
States for the conservation of rhinoceros and
tiger species.
(b) Guidelines.--The Secretary shall
publish in the Federal Register guidelines for
the program.
(c) Contents.--Under the program, the
Secretary shall publish and disseminate
information regarding--
(1) laws protecting rhinoceros and
tiger species, in particular laws
prohibiting trade in products
containing, or labeled as containing,
their parts;
(2) use of traditional medicines
that contain parts or products of
rhinoceros and tiger species, health
risks associated with their use, and
available alternatives to the
medicines; and
(3) the status of rhinoceros and
tiger species and the reasons for
protecting the species.
[(7)] (9) On September 7, 1993, under section 1978
of title 22 the Secretary certified that the People's
Republic of China and Taiwan were engaged in trade of
rhinoceros parts and tiger parts that diminished the
effectiveness of an international conservation program
for that endangered species.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 5306. Authorization of appropriations.
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Fund
$10,000,000 for each of fiscal years [1996, 1997, 1998, 1999,
and 2000] 1996 through 2002 to carry out this chapter, to
remain available until expended.
* * * * * * *