[House Report 112-691]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
112th Congress Rept. 112-691
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session Part 1
======================================================================
TO AMEND TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE, TO PROHIBIT THE IMPORTATION OF
VARIOUS INJURIOUS SPECIES OF CONSTRICTOR SNAKES
_______
September 28, 2012.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Smith of Texas, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 511]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 511) to amend title 18, United States Code, to
prohibit the importation of various injurious species of
constrictor snakes, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill
as amended do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
The Amendment.................................................... 1
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 2
Background and Need for the Legislation.......................... 2
Hearings......................................................... 4
Committee Consideration.......................................... 4
Committee Votes.................................................. 4
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 5
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................ 5
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................ 5
Performance Goals and Objectives................................. 7
Advisory on Earmarks............................................. 7
Section-by-Section Analysis...................................... 7
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 8
The Amendment
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. IMPORTATION OR SHIPMENT OF INJURIOUS SPECIES.
(a) Inclusion of Certain Constrictor Snakes as Injurious Species.--
Section 42(a)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended in the
first sentence by inserting after ``polymorpha;'' the following: ``of
the Indian python of the species Python molurus, including the Burmese
python of the species Python molurus bivittatus; of the reticulated
python of the species Broghammerus reticulatus or Python reticulatus;
of the Northern African python of the species Python sebae; of the
Southern African python of the species Python natalensis; of the boa
constrictor of the species Boa constrictor; of the yellow anaconda of
the species Eunectes notaeus; of the DeSchauensee's anaconda of the
species Eunectes deschauenseei; of the green anaconda of the species
Eunectes murinus; of the Beni anaconda of the species Eunectes
beniensis;''.
(b) Requirement That Violation Be Committed Knowingly.--Section 42(b)
of such title is amended by striking ``Whoever violates'' and inserting
``Whoever knowingly violates''.
(c) Exemption for Certain Entities Importing or Shipping Certain
Species.--Section 42 of such title is amended by inserting after
subsection (c) the following:
``(d)(1) Subsection (a)(1) shall not apply to a State fish and
wildlife agency or an exhibitor in the case of the importation or
shipment of--
``(A) the Indian python of the species Python molurus,
including the Burmese python of the species Python molurus
bivittatus;
``(B) the reticulated python of the species Broghammerus
reticulatus or Python reticulatus;
``(C) the Northern African python of the species Python
sebae;
``(D) the Southern African python of the species Python
natalensis;
``(E) the boa constrictor of the species Boa constrictor;
``(F) the yellow anaconda of the species Eunectes notaeus;
``(G) the DeSchauensee's anaconda of the species Eunectes
deschauenseei;
``(H) the green anaconda of the species Eunectes murinus; or
``(I) the Beni anaconda of the species Eunectes beniensis.
``(2) For purposes of this subsection--
``(A) the term `exhibitor' has the meaning given such term in
section 1.1 of title 9, Code of Federal Regulations (as in
effect on January 1, 2012); and
``(B) the term `State fish and wildlife agency' has the
meaning given such term in section 80.1 of title 50, Code of
Federal Regulations (as in effect on January 1, 2012).''.
Purpose and Summary
H.R. 511 amends the Federal criminal code to expand the
prohibition against the importation or shipment into the United
States, or its territories and possessions, of any injurious
animals to include the Indian python of the species Python
molurus bivittatus, the reticulated python of the species
Broghammerus reticulatus or Python reticulatus, the Northern
African python of the species Python sebae, the Southern
African python of the species Python natalensis, the boa
constricter of the species Boa constrictor, the yellow anaconda
of the species Eunectes notaeus, the DeSchauensee's anaconda of
the species Eunectes deschauenseei, the green anaconda of the
species Eunectes murinus, and the Beni anaconda of the species
Eunectes beniensis. The bill exempts State fish and wildlife
agencies and exhibitors in cases of importation or shipment of
certain species of snakes.
Background and Need for the Legislation
The purpose of H.R. 511 is to amend section 42 of Title 18
of the United States Code to include species of pythons and boa
constrictors as injurious animals that cannot be imported into
or shipped within the United States. Section 42 currently
prohibits the importation or interstate shipment of certain
injurious animals. The species added by H.R. 511 include the
Indian python, the reticulated python, the Northern African
python, the Southern African python, the Boa constrictor, the
yellow anaconda, the DeSchauensee's anaconda, the green
anaconda, and the Beni anaconda.
Pythons are often imported into the United States for use
as exotic pets. Coincidentally, many of these animals are kept
as pets in the State of Florida. According to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, approximately 99,000 Burmese pythons were
imported to the United States between 1996 and 2006 (compared
to only 17,000 between 1970 and 1995). The State of Florida has
taken some steps to limit the number of potentially dangerous
animals, such as pythons, sold within its borders. In 2005, the
State of Florida's Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
created an invasive animals management section. One of their
key recommendations led to a new Florida rule limiting commerce
in ``reptiles of concern'' including the world's five largest
non-venomous snakes, including the Burmese python. These
animals were selected as most threatening because of their
large size and extreme predatory natures.
The State of Florida requires exotic pet owners to pay $100
annual possession permits and the animals must be identified
via implanted microchip. Despite these efforts to limit and
track these potentially dangerous snakes, Burmese pythons have
been reported in Florida's wilds. In fact, Burmese pythons are
now thoroughly established in South Florida's natural wildlife
areas, such as Everglades National Park, and already number
from several thousands to more than 180,000. Uncertainty
remains regarding their actual population. The introduction of
invasive pest animals has primarily been through the pet trade.
Many ``pet'' snakes like the Burmese python escape from their
enclosures or are released by their owners after they get too
big or too expensive to handle.
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced on January 17,
2012, that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had finalized a
rule that bans the importation and interstate transport of four
nonnative constrictor snakes, including the Burmese python, the
yellow anaconda, and the northern and southern African
python.\1\ H.R. 511 includes these four species and five
additional threatening species.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\http://us.vocuspr.com/Newsroom/
Query.aspx?SiteName=FWS&Entity=PRAsset&SF_PRAss
et_PRAssetID_EQ=129313&XSL=PressRelease&Cache=True.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to a 2009 U.S. Geological Survey report, which
established a risk assessment for these nine large species of
snakes, ``[t]he giant constrictors differ in the degree to
which they are presently in the pet trade. In the last 30
years, over 1 million of these snakes have been imported into
the United States, of which about 60 percent were Boa
Constrictors. Other important imports are Indian Pythons
( 300,000), Reticulated Pythons ( 150,000), Northern/Southern
African pythons ( 33,000), and Green Anacondas ( 13,000). The
least traded species among those documented is the Yellow
Anaconda, which has been imported in small numbers (<2000), but
this species has still turned up at several localities in or
near Big Cypress National Preserve, Florida. These totals are
documented imports, to which must be added an unknown number of
imports not ascribed to any particular python species, and
sales of domestically produced giant constrictors. Domestic
production is undocumented, but believed to be greatest for
Reticulated and Burmese Pythons. For Burmese Pythons in
particular, the domestic production is judged to be as large as
or larger than importation.''\2\ The report also noted that the
only probable way these species become established in the
United States is through the pet trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2009/1202/pdf/OF09-1202.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In July 2009, a 9-foot pet Burmese python escaped its
aquarium encasement inside of a home and strangled a 2-year-old
girl in her bedroom. In October 2011, workers captured a 16-
foot python that had swallowed a 76-pound deer. According to
media reports, at least 13 other people have been killed by
``pet'' pythons since 1980.
The release or escape of these animals can have disastrous
effect on both animals and humans alike. On February 7, 2012,
the Orlando Sentinel reported ``native mammal species are
disappearing--or are already gone--from areas in the River of
Grass infested by the giant Southeast Asian snakes. Sightings
of bobcats were down more than 87 percent from a decade
earlier; deer sightings fell 94 percent; raccoon and opossum
sightings plunged 99 percent; and marsh rabbits and foxes
simply weren't found. The snakes also are devouring other
animals, from birds to alligators.''\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/os-ed-everglades-
python-invasion-020712-2012
0206,0,2152090.story.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearings
The Committee on the Judiciary held no hearings on H.R.
511.
Committee Consideration
On February 28, 2012, the Committee met in open session and
ordered the bill H.R. 511 favorably reported with an amendment,
by voice vote, a quorum being present.
Committee Votes
In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that there
was one recorded votes during the Committee's consideration of
H.R. 511.
1. An amendment to change the requisite knowledge to be
proven for conviction of the crime. Amendment #2 by Mr. Gohmert
(R-TX) failed 11-17.
ROLLCALL NO. 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ayes Nays Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Smith, Chairman............................................. X
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................
Mr. Coble....................................................... X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................
Mr. Goodlatte................................................... X
Mr. Lungren..................................................... X
Mr. Chabot...................................................... X
Mr. Issa........................................................
Mr. Pence.......................................................
Mr. Forbes......................................................
Mr. King........................................................ X
Mr. Franks...................................................... X
Mr. Gohmert..................................................... X
Mr. Jordan...................................................... X
Mr. Poe......................................................... X
Mr. Chaffetz.................................................... X
Mr. Griffin..................................................... X
Mr. Marino......................................................
Mr. Gowdy....................................................... X
Mr. Ross........................................................ X
Ms. Adams....................................................... X
Mr. Quayle...................................................... X
Mr. Amodei......................................................
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member................................ X
Mr. Berman...................................................... X
Mr. Nadler......................................................
Mr. Scott....................................................... X
Mr. Watt........................................................ X
Ms. Lofgren..................................................... X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters...................................................... X
Mr. Cohen....................................................... X
Mr. Johnson, Jr.................................................
Mr. Pierluisi................................................... X
Mr. Quigley..................................................... X
Ms. Chu......................................................... X
Mr. Deutch...................................................... X
Ms. Sanchez..................................................... X
Mr. Polis.......................................................
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 11 17
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee Oversight Findings
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that the
findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the
descriptive portions of this report.
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives is inapplicable because this legislation does
not provide new budgetary authority or increased tax
expenditures.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth, with
respect to the bill, H.R. 511, the following estimate and
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, March 14, 2012.
Hon. Lamar Smith, Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 511, a bill to
amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit the importation
of various injurious species of constrictor snakes.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them.
Sincerely,
Douglas W. Elmendorf,
Director.
Enclosure
cc:
Honorable John Conyers, Jr.
Ranking Member
H.R. 511--a bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit the
importation of various injurious species of constrictor snakes.
As ordered reported by the House Committee on the Judiciary
on February 28, 2012.
H.R. 511 would make it a Federal crime to import or ship
certain snakes into the United States; the bill would exempt
state fish and wildlife agencies and exhibitors from its
provisions. Because the legislation would establish a new
offense, the government would be able to pursue cases that it
otherwise would not be able to prosecute. We expect that H.R.
511 would apply to a relatively small number of offenders, so
any increase in costs for law enforcement, court proceedings,
or prison operations would not be significant. Any such costs
would be subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 511 would have no
significant cost to the Federal Government. Enacting the bill
could affect direct spending and revenues; therefore, pay-as-
you-go procedures apply.
Because those prosecuted and convicted under H.R. 511 could
be subject to criminal fines, the Federal Government might
collect additional fines if the legislation is enacted.
Criminal fines are recorded as revenues, deposited in the Crime
Victims Fund, and later spent. CBO expects that any additional
revenues and direct spending would not be significant because
of the small number of cases likely to be affected.
Under H.R. 511, entities such as zoos would need permits to
import or transport the affected species of snakes. Based on
information provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS), which issues permits for such activities, CBO
estimates that enacting the bill could result in an increase in
offsetting collections (for permits) and associated spending.
We estimate that such increases would be minimal, however, and
would offset each other in most years, resulting in no
significant net cost.
By prohibiting the importation and interstate transport of
several species of python, anaconda, and boa constrictor
without a permit from USFWS, the bill would impose
intergovernmental and private-sector mandates as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). State fish and wildlife
agencies and entities that exhibit those species to the public
for compensation would be exempt from the prohibition.
The cost to public and private entities that need and are
eligible for permits, such as medical facilities or research
centers, would be the expense of obtaining those permits. Fees
for private entities would be $25 or $100 depending on the
activity being authorized. (USFWS regulations prohibit the
agency from charging permit fees to state, local, or tribal
entities.) The cost of the mandate to entities who would not be
eligible for a permit, including private importers, breeders,
retailers, shippers, and owners of those snakes, would be the
forgone net income from no longer being able to sell or
transport the animals across state lines. According to the
USFWS, exporting those species of snakes would be allowed;
however, only from ports designated by the USFWS.
Based on information about the cost of permits from the
USFWS and information gathered from individuals in the industry
about the value of shipments, sales, and imports of species
covered by the legislation, CBO estimates that the direct costs
of the mandates would fall below the annual thresholds
established in UMRA for intergovernmental and private-sector
mandates ($73 million and $146 million in 2012, respectively,
adjusted annually for inflation).
Performance Goals and Objectives
The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, H.R.
511 amends the Federal criminal code to expand the prohibition
against the importation into or shipment within the United
States, or its territories and possessions, of any injurious
animals to include additional species of snakes.
Advisory on Earmarks
In accordance with clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, H.R. 511 does not contain any
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff
benefits as defined in clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of Rule XXI.
Section-by-Section Analysis
The following discussion describes the bill as reported by
the Committee.
Sec. 1: Importation or Shipment of Injurious Species
Section 1 prohibits the importation and shipment of various
injurious species of constrictor snakes.
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 italics, existing law in which no change
is proposed is shown in roman):
TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE
* * * * * * *
PART I--CRIMES
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 3--ANIMALS, BIRDS, FISH, AND PLANTS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 42. Importation or shipment of injurious mammals, birds, fish
(including mollusks and crustacea), amphibia, and
reptiles; permits, specimens for museums;
regulations
(a)(1) The importation into the United States, any
territory of the United States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any possession of the United
States, or any shipment between the continental United States,
the District of Columbia, Hawaii, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, or any possession of the United States, of the mongoose
of the species Herpestes auropunctatus; of the species of so-
called ``flying foxes'' or fruit bats of the genus Pteropus; of
the zebra mussel of the species Dreissena polymorpha; of the
Indian python of the species Python molurus, including the
Burmese python of the species Python molurus bivittatus; of the
reticulated python of the species Broghammerus reticulatus or
Python reticulatus; of the Northern African python of the
species Python sebae; of the Southern African python of the
species Python natalensis; of the boa constrictor of the
species Boa constrictor; of the yellow anaconda of the species
Eunectes notaeus; of the DeSchauensee's anaconda of the species
Eunectes deschauenseei; of the green anaconda of the species
Eunectes murinus; of the Beni anaconda of the species Eunectes
beniensis; of the bighead carp of the species
Hypophthalmichthys nobilis; and such other species of wild
mammals, wild birds, fish (including mollusks and crustacea),
amphibians, reptiles, brown tree snakes, or the offspring or
eggs of any of the foregoing which the Secretary of the
Interior may prescribe by regulation to be injurious to human
beings, to the interests of agriculture, horticulture,
forestry, or to wildlife or the wildlife resources of the
United States, is hereby prohibited. All such prohibited
mammals, birds, fish (including mollusks and crustacea),
amphibians, and reptiles, and the eggs or offspring therefrom,
shall be promptly exported or destroyed at the expense of the
importer or consignee. Nothing in this section shall be
construed to repeal or modify any provision of the Public
Health Service Act or Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
Also, this section shall not authorize any action with respect
to the importation of any plant pest as defined in the Federal
Plant Pest Act, insofar as such importation is subject to
regulation under that Act.
* * * * * * *
(b) [Whoever violates] Whoever knowingly violates this
section, or any regulation issued pursuant thereto, shall be
fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months,
or both.
* * * * * * *
(d)(1) Subsection (a)(1) shall not apply to a State fish
and wildlife agency or an exhibitor in the case of the
importation or shipment of--
(A) the Indian python of the species Python
molurus, including the Burmese python of the species
Python molurus bivittatus;
(B) the reticulated python of the species
Broghammerus reticulatus or Python reticulatus;
(C) the Northern African python of the species
Python sebae;
(D) the Southern African python of the species
Python natalensis;
(E) the boa constrictor of the species Boa
constrictor;
(F) the yellow anaconda of the species Eunectes
notaeus;
(G) the DeSchauensee's anaconda of the species
Eunectes deschauenseei;
(H) the green anaconda of the species Eunectes
murinus; or
(I) the Beni anaconda of the species Eunectes
beniensis.
(2) For purposes of this subsection--
(A) the term ``exhibitor'' has the meaning given
such term in section 1.1 of title 9, Code of Federal
Regulations (as in effect on January 1, 2012); and
(B) the term ``State fish and wildlife agency'' has
the meaning given such term in section 80.1 of title
50, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on
January 1, 2012).
* * * * * * *