[House Report 108-269]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
108th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 108-269
======================================================================
CAPTIVE WILDLIFE SAFETY ACT
_______
September 11, 2003.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Pombo, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 1006]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 1006) to amend the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 to
further the conservation of certain wildlife species, having
considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment
and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Captive Wildlife Safety Act''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF PROHIBITED WILDLIFE SPECIES.
Section 2 of the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 (16 U.S.C. 3371) is
amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (g) through (j) as
subsections (h) through (k), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following:
``(g) Prohibited Wildlife Species.--The term `prohibited wildlife
species' means any lion, tiger, leopard, cheetah, jaguar, or cougar
species, or any hybrid of a lion species and tiger species.''.
SEC. 3. PROHIBITED ACTS.
(a) In General.--Section 3 of the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 (16
U.S.C. 3372) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``, or''
at the end and inserting a semicolon;
(ii) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ``or''
after the semicolon at the end; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) any live animal of a prohibited wildlife
species (subject to subsection (e));'';
(B) in paragraph (3)(B), by inserting ``or'' after
the semicolon at the end; and
(C) in paragraph (4), by striking ``paragraphs (1)
through (4)'' and inserting ``paragraphs (1) through
(3)''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Nonapplicability of Prohibited Wildlife Species Offense.--
``(1) In general.--Subsection (a)(2)(C) does not apply to
importation, exportation, transportation, sale, receipt,
acquisition, or purchase of an animal of a prohibited wildlife
species, by a person that, under regulations prescribed under
paragraph (3), is described in paragraph (2) with respect to
that species.
``(2) Persons described.--A person is described in this
paragraph, if--
``(A) the person has expertise, knowledge, and
experience with respect to the care of that species in
captivity; and
``(B) the person--
``(i) is licensed and inspected by the Animal
and Plant Health Inspection Service with
respect to that species;
``(ii) is a State college, university, or
agency, State-licensed wildlife rehabilitator,
or State-licensed veterinarian;
``(iii) is an accredited wildlife sanctuary
that cares for prohibited wildlife species; or
``(iv) has custody of the animal solely for
the purpose of transporting the animal to a
person described in this paragraph with respect
to the species.
``(3) Regulations.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this subsection, the Secretary, in consultation
with the heads of other relevant Federal agencies, shall
promulgate regulations describing the persons described in
paragraph (2).
``(4) State authority.--Nothing in this subsection preempts
or supersedes the authority of a State to regulate wildlife
species within that State.''.
(b) Application.--Section 3(a)(2)(C) of the Lacey Act Amendments of
1981 (as added by subsection (a)(1)(A)(iii)) shall apply beginning on
the effective date of regulations promulgated under section 3(e)(3) of
that Act (as added by subsection (a)(2)).
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of H.R. 1006 is to amend the Lacey Act
Amendment of 1981 to further the conservation of certain
wildlife species.
Background and Need for Legislation
In 1900, Congress enacted legislation to support the
efforts of states to protect their game animals and birds by
prohibiting the interstate shipment of wildlife killed in
violation of state or territorial law. This was the first
federal law ever to address wildlife protection nationwide.
Since that time, the Lacey Act has been amended several times
with the most significant changes occurring with the Lacey Act
Amendments of 1981. Today, the Lacey Act makes it unlawful to
import, export, transport, sell, buy, or possess fish, wildlife
or plants taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation
of any federal, state, foreign or Native American tribal law,
treaty or regulation. The Lacey Act covers all fish and
wildlife and their parts or products and plants covered by the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora. This law makes trafficking in virtually any
illegally acquired wildlife a federal crime. It is also illegal
to mislabel wildlife shipments, bring injurious species into
the country and import live wildlife under inhumane conditions.
Those who knowingly violate the Lacey Act face maximum
penalties of up to five years in prison and fines as high as
$250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for organizations.
There is no universal tracking system for big cats held in
captivity. It is estimated that there are between 30,000 and
40,000 exotic animals living in the United States. Of this
total, some 12,000 are tigers, which is greater than the number
of wild tigers living in their native habitat. While about 500
of these captive tigers are maintained by zoological
institutions, the rest are privately owned by individuals.
Ownership of exotic animals is not limited to tigers; the list
also includes other large cats. Ownership of these species is
largely facilitated by hundreds of web sites that market exotic
animals as pets with prices starting as low as $300.
Home care of an exotic animal can be extremely difficult
because few veterinarians are qualified or willing to treat
privately-owned large cats. In addition, because many large
cats are purchased as appealing cubs, they are often abandoned
after they reach 300 pounds. At this size, cats can consume at
least 20 pounds of meat a day and they become dangerous. The
placement of these unwanted animals is difficult because most
zoos are unwilling to take them due to space and genetic
diversity concerns and few sanctuary facilities exist. The net
result is that many of these animals are abandoned, euthanized,
or harvested for their pelts and meat.
Both the American Veterinary Medical Association and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture have launched information
campaigns detailing the inherent personal and public risks and
animal welfare issues concerning exotic pet ownership.
This legislation would amend the Lacey Act Amendments of
1981 to incorporate under its ``prohibited wildlife species''
designation any live lions, tigers, leopards, cheetahs, jaguars
and cougars. The proposal stipulates that this prohibition
shall not apply to a list of entities including: licensed,
registered or federally inspected zoos, circus, research
facilities or aquariums; any person accredited by the American
Sanctuary Association or Association of Sanctuaries; any state
college, university or agency, state-licensed wildlife
rehabilitator, or state-licensed veterinarian and individuals
transporting a wildlife animal to an exempted entity.
Committee Action
H.R. 1006 was introduced on February 27, 2003, by
Congressman Howard ``Buck'' McKeon (R-CA). The legislation was
referred to the Committee on Resources, and within the
Committee to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation,
Wildlife and Oceans. On June 12, 2003, the Subcommittee on
Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans held a hearing on
the measure. On July 15, 2003, the full Resources Committee met
to consider the bill. The Subcommittee on Fisheries
Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans was discharged from further
consideration of the bill by unanimous consent. Congressman
Wayne T. Gilchrest (R-MD) offered an amendment in the nature of
a substitute that added hybrids of lions and tigers to the list
of prohibited wildlife species and established criteria that a
person must have expertise, knowledge, experience and is
licensed and inspected by the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service with respect to the care of large cats to
obtain an exemption. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.
The bill, as amended, was then ordered favorably reported to
the House of Representatives by voice vote.
Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations
Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Resources' oversight findings and recommendations
are reflected in the body of this report.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution of the United
States grants Congress the authority to enact this bill.
Compliance With House Rule XIII
1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the
Rules of the House of Representatives requires an estimate and
a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be
incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B)
of that Rule provides that this requirement does not apply when
the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted
cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2)
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this
bill does not contain any new budget authority, credit
authority, or an increase or decrease in tax expenditures.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, enactment of this
bill ``could increase direct spending and revenues, but we
estimate that any such changes would be minimal and largely
offsetting.''
3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. This bill does
not authorize funding and, therefore, clause 3(c)(4) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives does not
apply.
4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause
3(c) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives
and section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the
Committee has received the following cost estimate for this
bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, August 28, 2003.
Hon. Richard Pombo,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1006, the Captive
Wildlife Safety Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Megan
Carroll.
Sincerely,
Douglas Holtz-Eakin,
Director.
Enclosure.
H.R. 1006--Captive Wildlife Safety Act
Summary: H.R. 1006 would amend current law to prohibit
interstate and foreign trade of certain species of animals. CBO
estimates that implementing the bill would cost about $4
million annually, assuming appropriation of the necessary
amounts. The bill could increase direct spending and revenues,
but we estimate that any such changes would be minimal and
largely offsetting.
H.R. 1006 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no
costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
The bill would impose a private-sector mandate, but CBO
estimates that the direct costs of the mandate would fall well
below the annual threshold established in UMRA ($117 million in
2003, adjusted annually for inflation) in any of the next five
years.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 1006 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--
--------------------------------------------
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated authorization level...................................... 4 4 4 4 4
Estimated outlays.................................................. 4 4 4 4 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis of estimate: H.R. 1006 would amend current law to
make it illegal to import, export, transport, sell, receive,
acquire, or purchase species of lion, tiger, leopard, cheetah,
jaguar, cougar, and certain hybrids. Violators of the proposed
prohibition on interstate and foreign trade of such animals
would be subject to criminal and civil penalties. The bill
specifies certain types of individuals and institutions that
would be exempted from the proposed prohibition.
Based on information from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS), CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1006
would cost about $4 million annually, assuming appropriation of
the necessary amounts. That amount includes $3.5 million for
additional staff to conduct the kinds of inspections and
investigations that the bill would require and up to $500,000
for administrative costs to issue permits to individuals and
institutions that would be exempted from the proposed
prohibition.
H.R. 1006 could increase revenues from civil and criminal
fines. Based on information from the USFWS and the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service about the relatively small
number of cases likely to occur, however, CBO estimates that
any such increase would be less than $500,000 annually.
Moreover, such changes would be fully offset by 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 are deposited and used for rewards to
informers and for other program costs).
Estimated impact on state, local, and tribal governments:
H.R. 1006 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in
UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal
governments.
Estimated impact on the private sector: H.R. 1006 would
require individuals who participate in interstate or foreign
import, export, transport, sale, receipt, acquisition, or
purchase of any live lion, tiger, leopard, cheetah, jaguar, or
cougar, or any hybrid of a lion species and tiger species to
have expertise, knowledge, and experience with respect to the
care of that species and to be licensed and inspected by the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), be an
accredited wildlife sanctuary, or have custody of the animal
solely for the purpose of transporting the animal to an
exempted individual. Under current law, interstate and foreign
trade of certain cats listed under the bill is prohibited.
Information provided by APHIS and representatives of wildlife
sanctuary associations indicates that there would be no
significant activity in new licensing or accreditations as a
result of the bill. In addition, CBO estimates that the costs
to transporters to comply with the mandate would not be
substantial. Thus, CBO estimates that the costs of the mandate
to the private sector would fall well below the annual
threshold established in UMRA ($117 million in 2003, adjusted
annually for inflation).
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Megan Carroll. Impact
on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Marjorie Miller.
Impact on the Private Sector: Cecil McPherson.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Compliance With Public Law 104-4
This bill contains no unfunded mandates.
Preemption of State, Local or Tribal Law
This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or
tribal law.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, 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):
LACEY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1981
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Act:
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g) Prohibited Wildlife Species.--The term ``prohibited
wildlife species'' means any lion, tiger, leopard, cheetah,
jaguar, or cougar species, or any hybrid of a lion species and
tiger species.
[(g)] (h) The term ``Secretary'' means, except as otherwise
provided in the Act, the Secretary of the Interior or the
Secretary of Commerce, as program responsibilities are vested
pursuant to the provisions of Reorganization Plan Numbered 4 of
1970 (84 Stat. 2090); except that with respect to the
provisions of this Act which pertain to the importation or
exportation of plants the term means the Secretary of
Agriculture.
[(h)] (i) The term ``State'' means any of the several States,
the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the
Virgin Islands, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa,
and any other territory, commonwealth, or possession of the
United States.
[(i)] (j) The term ``taken'' means captured, killed, or
collected.
[(j)] (k) The term ``transport'' means to move, convey,
carry, or ship by any means, or to deliver or receive for the
purpose of movement, conveyance, carriage, or shipment.
SEC. 3. PROHIBITED ACTS.
(a) Offenses Other Than Marking Offenses.--It is unlawful for
any person--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(2) to import, export, transport, sell, receive,
acquire, or purchase in interstate or foreign
commerce--
(A) any fish or wildlife taken, possessed,
transported, or sold in violation of any law or
regulation of any State or in violation of any
foreign law[, or];
(B) any plant taken, possessed, transported,
or sold in violation of any law or regulation
of any State; or
(C) any live animal of a prohibited wildlife
species (subject to subsection (e));
(3) within the special maritime and territorial
jurisdiction of the United States (as defined in
section 7 of title 18, United States Code)--
(A) * * *
(B) to possess any plant taken, possessed,
transported, or sold in violation of any law or
regulation of any State; or
(4) to attempt to commit any act described in
[paragraphs (1) through (4)] paragraphs (1) through
(3).
* * * * * * *
(e) Nonapplicability of Prohibited Wildlife Species
Offense.--
(1) In general.--Subsection (a)(2)(C) does not apply
to importation, exportation, transportation, sale,
receipt, acquisition, or purchase of an animal of a
prohibited wildlife species, by a person that, under
regulations prescribed under paragraph (3), is
described in paragraph (2) with respect to that
species.
(2) Persons described.--A person is described in this
paragraph, if--
(A) the person has expertise, knowledge, and
experience with respect to the care of that
species in captivity; and
(B) the person--
(i) is licensed and inspected by the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service with respect to that species;
(ii) is a State college, university,
or agency, State-licensed wildlife
rehabilitator, or State-licensed
veterinarian;
(iii) is an accredited wildlife
sanctuary that cares for prohibited
wildlife species; or
(iv) has custody of the animal solely
for the purpose of transporting the
animal to a person described in this
paragraph with respect to the species.
(3) Regulations.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary, in
consultation with the heads of other relevant Federal
agencies, shall promulgate regulations describing the
persons described in paragraph (2).
(4) State authority.--Nothing in this subsection
preempts or supersedes the authority of a State to
regulate wildlife species within that State.
* * * * * * *