A Brief Overview of the Lacey Act as it Applies to American Hunters Who Hunt in Africa:



The Lacey Act provides that it is unlawful for any person to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any wildlife taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law, treaty, or regulation of the United States or in violation of any foreign law whether in interstate or foreign commerce. Violation of this federal act can result in civil penalties up to $10,000 per each violation or maximum criminal sanctions of $20,000 in fines and/or up to five years imprisonment. All animals taken in violation of the Act are subject to forfeiture as well as all vessels, vehicles, aircraft, and other equipment used to aid in the importing, exporting, transporting, selling, receiving, acquiring, or purchasing of wildlife in a criminal violation of this chapter for which a felony conviction is obtained where the owner should have known of the illegal transgression.





There are two basic elements that must be occur before a violation of the Lacey Act can be proved:



It is unlawful for any person:



(1) to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase

(2) any wildlife taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law, treaty, or regulation of the United States or of any State or in violation of any foreign law.



So, a Lacey Act violation must involve the illegal taking, possession, transport or sale of an animal and the import, export, sale, receipt, acquisition or purchase of that illegally taken animal.



There are two types of penalties applied under the Lacey Act. One is criminal and the other is civil.



The main legal issue that separates the two is one of whether (a) you knowingly engaged in the illegal activity (a criminal offense) or, (b) in the exercise of due care, you should have known that the activity was illegal (a civil offense).



Obviously, the determination of whether a violation of the Lacey Act occurred will depend on the facts of each case.



If you read on the internet that ABC Safaris is suspected of conducting illegal hunts in Zimbabwe and you go on a safari with them and import your hunting trophies, have you knowingly violated the Lacey Act? If it is just unsubstantiated rumors on the internet, then I would argue that you haven�t knowingly taken animals in violation foreign law. But has your knowledge of these rumors put you on notice that you now are required to exercise due care and determine whether ABC Safaris is conducting illegal hunts? Probably yes. How does one go about exercising due care? I would think that written confirmation from the Zimbabwe wildlife authorities that ABC Safaris� activities in Zimbabwe are legal would be hard evidence of your exercise of due care. From a practical point-of-view, how difficult is that going to be to acquire?



What if you read a Zimbabwe newspaper article on the internet that says ABC Safaris is suspected of illegal hunting in Zimbabwe? What kind of duty do you now have to determine whether ABC Safaris� activities are legal? Certainly, one would think that a newspaper article is more credible than internet rumors.



Would you gain any protection if you added a clause to the safari contract whereby the outfitter confirmed that all hunting activities would be conducted in accordance with all local laws and regulations? Maybe of some help if you didn�t have any other notice of potential illegal activities. Probably of no help, if you knew or, through the exercise of due care, could have determined that illegal activities were being conducted by the operator.



As you can see, it is a slippery slope. How many of us have ever asked to see the PH�s license, yet alone the operator�s license or any documentation supporting his right to hunt on a particular concession?











A link to a good website Lacey Act



Regards,



Terry

Terry

Quote:

---

Would you gain any protection if you added a clause to the safari contract whereby the outfitter confirmed that all hunting activities would be conducted in accordance with all local laws and regulations?

---

Interesting. I have a friend who ask a Safari Co. that is hunting in Zim that exact question.

"Why would you ask us about this? If you don't trust us than why are you giving us all of this money for your hunt?"

He decided he didn't trust them and didn't give them all of the money for the hunt.

Steve,



There was a 1988 amendment to the Lacey Act that made the providing of guide or outfitting services on an illegal hunt a violation of the Act.



Most African outfitters are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US. However, an outfitter which is an American company would be subject to the jurisdiction of the US. I didn't see any case law, but it would be my bet that if an African outfitter came to the US (such as coming to SCI Safari Show) then the US would have jurisdiction over that outfitter and could arrest him.



Regards,



Terry

So if a US citizen books a hunt in Botswana or RSA (for example), but with a company such as ABC Safaris who have also been conducting hunts on illegally seized in Zim, is he in contravention of the act?

Steve,

NO, as long as his hunt with ABC Safaris in BOT or RSA is legal.

You can't violate Lacey Act by just booking with or hunting with an outfitter who has performed illegal hunts.

The hunter has to knowingly (or should have known, had he exercised due care) take an animal illegally AND then import it into the US.

Regards,

Terry