A friend of mine hunted leopard in Tanzania with Adam Clements in July. His trophy shipment was handled by D&H. Trophies arrived in the US on December 23, 2014.

He just got home from DSC and received a cryptic letter from USFWS earlier in the week indicating that it was a "formal warning that the shipment of wildlife that you imported on December 23, 2014 . . . was in violation of the following: CITES required information on CITES documents The period of validity of a CITES Permit must meet the requirements of the Convention." Then down in a comments box on the paperwork there is a note that reads: "CITES permit issued for longer time than allowable per the convention. Warning letter issued to importer."

As near as I can interpret, CITES import permits have a limited shelf life, and his was obtained too early (or his shipment was made too late) such that by the time the trophy arrived in the US the permit had essentially expired.

Has anyone else here received a letter like this? Suggestions for next steps?

http://www.fws.gov/internation...nted-trophy-2013.pdf


Check expiration dates on your
import and export permits before
having the trophy shipped to you.
You could lose your trophy if it
enters the United States after
your permits have expired. Import
permits are valid for one year, and
export permits for six months, as
required by CITES. If the import
permit expires before the trophy
is imported, you need to apply for
a new permit. Return the original
unused permit, a newly completed
renewal application form 3-200-52
(http://1.usa.gov/OidCEE), and the
processing fee. Allow at least 30
days for processing.

quote:

A friend of mine hunted leopard in Tanzania with Adam Clements in July. His trophy shipment was handled by D&H. Trophies arrived in the US on December 23, 2014.

Delivery of trophies within a time frame of 5 months is pretty good service on the outfitter's part.

What was the expiry date on the import licence?

What was the expiry date on the import licence?


I don't know - I haven't seen it yet. From the USFWS letter, it sounds like it was prior to December 23, but until I've seen the license itself I won't know for sure.

The letter indicates it's a "warning" - I'm pretty sure his trophy has already been delivered to the taxidermist, so we're just trying to get a sense of how serious this is. If anyone else has ever gone through this, I'd be interested in hearing from them.

I guess I didn't ask the right question and apologise for that....... The most obvious reason to me is that the permit expired before the import but thinking about it, if that were the case then I'd guess they'd have seized it or at least withheld it.

Reading your original post again, it could be that whoever issued the import permit gave it too long a validity and if that's the case then I'd see it as more of a problem for the issuing officer than for your friend. - I do note however they say it was imported in violation of the CITES convention and that could possibly mean he's in violation of the Lacey Act and that is a big deal.

Might be worth having a lawyer call them and find out what the problem is and what implications it might have.

Why does one have to apply so far ahead for a CITES permit??

We get ours when we know our shipment is coming.

I very much doubt that the TZ Game Dept. would allow the trophy to be exported on an expired CITES permit in the first place and given that all trophies are flown out, highly unlikely that the expiry date falls while the crates are in transit.

Assuming the dice rolled awkwardly, it would be foul play by some obnoxious bastard at USF&W (no shortage of that kind) to block a trophy for a permit that expired while in transit.

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:
Assuming the dice rolled awkwardly, it would be foul play by some obnoxious bastard at USF&W (no shortage of that kind) to block a trophy for a permit that expired while in transit.

Never know! I had a CITES shipment from Namibia that was getting down to the wire and my shipper was quite concerned about that very thing. Also it seems from above that the shipment was not seized or withheld but delivered to the taxidermist. To be frank, sending a simple warning letter is exactly what I can imagine USFWS doing in the event of a permit expiring during transit. I don't think this is serious at all....but more a heads up. Of course, check it out, but don't lose sleep if your stuff already made it to the taxidermist.

Saeed --- I'm shocked, absolutely shocked that you don't nave to suffer dealing with the beaurocratic nitwits that we do here in the USA - just shocked especially since you probably aren't very well connected - you aren't are you

I also had a potential problem with my CITES permit for my leopard. I got mine as late as I could for my hunt in Zim figuring it shouldn't take more than 1- months to receive it. Early the next year I was told the Zim government hadn't issued the appropriate paperwork that Decemeber and probably woulnd't until the following December which would have been passed the expiration date on my Permit

I called the appropriate office was told I could apply for a new Permit with the warning that if they issued a new Permit the old one would useless and if the leopard skin arrived before the new one was valid the skin would be seized.

I decided to "let it ride" hoping that Adam could find a way around the problem on the Zim end - he did and it all ended well.

Good luck with yours - I'm sure Adam will do all he can.

quote:

Originally posted by DB Bill:
Saeed --- I'm shocked, absolutely shocked that you don't nave to suffer dealing with the beaurocratic nitwits that we do here in the USA - just shocked especially since you probably aren't very well connected - you aren't are you

I also had a potential problem with my CITES permit for my leopard. I got mine as late as I could for my hunt in Zim figuring it shouldn't take more than 1- months to receive it. Early the next year I was told the Zim government hadn't issued the appropriate paperwork that Decemeber and probably woulnd't until the following December which would have been passed the expiration date on my Permit

I called the appropriate office was told I could apply for a new Permit with the warning that if they issued a new Permit the old one would useless and if the leopard skin arrived before the new one was valid the skin would be seized.

I decided to "let it ride" hoping that Adam could find a way around the problem on the Zim end - he did and it all ended well.

Good luck with yours - I'm sure Adam will do all he can.

Funny enough, all our government departments are required to operate efficiently.

In every department, at the counters are signs that inform the visitor that any time they are not satisfied with the service they are getting, one can go directly to the head of the department.

We are very proud of the efficiency they provide.

Take the passport department for example.

One walks in with his old passport, pays the fees, and walks out with a brand new one.

This is what a customs broker is for. They should be handling this and not worrying the client.

USF&W have been very difficult on animals taken in (for example) "The '13 season" that includes dates Jan-March of '14.

It's a ridiculous battle that I have seen fought over three different Leopard. Clients ultimately won, but why F&W don't just learn is beyond me.

Not sure what his issue is, but I am sure there is probably a bureaucratic way out of it.

Get a good customs broker for shipments like this. Maybe (hopefully) he has one and they have not addressed the issue yet.

To close the loop on this. . . .

The customs broker (D&L) got involved immediately and it appears "resolved" - at least we have an understanding of what happened now. The letter was sent to the hunter because technically he's the "importer" and legally responsible even though he hired a customs broker to handle the importation.

The issue was with the export permit issued by the Tanzania Wildlife Department. The export permit is supposed to show a 6 month expiration date. The Tanzanian authorities incorrectly listed a 1 year expiration date.

The trophies were exported within the 6 month period (actually within 1 month of the issuance of the permit), so one would think this is completely moot.

And in fact is it essentially moot. Despite the "Warning Letter" to the hunter, the trophy was allowed to be imported and is presently with the taxidermist.

Why USF&W felt the need to scare the crap out of the poor hunter by issuing him a "Warning Letter" when the error was merely a clerical one and committed by the Tanzania Wildlife Department and not the hunter is the mystery.

Adam Clements and the folks at D&L acted quickly to get to the bottom of this issue and confirm that this is merely unwarranted harassment of a hunter by USF&W for something he has no control over (and which is meaningless in any event). They've brought the issue to the attention of the authorities in Dar es Salaam.

I used D&L in 2012 to handle my elephant and other trophies from Zimbabwe.

They did an excellent job and I would use them again. Had some issues with the Zim shipper that they handled well.

They are based in the Chicago area and I recommend them.

I would suggest that he get a lawyer immediately, and have as little contact with them as possible. I would not trust anything they told me. They do not try to help people they try to make examples of them.

I waited to apply for permits with USF&W until the animals were in the salt. And, then I used a good, well-established Customs broker. No problem on leopard and elephant in 2013. The ele worried me, but it was not an issue. It's here.

quote:

Originally posted by BuffNut:
To close the loop on this. . . .

The customs broker (D&L) got involved immediately and it appears "resolved" - at least we have an understanding of what happened now. The letter was sent to the hunter because technically he's the "importer" and legally responsible even though he hired a customs broker to handle the importation.

The issue was with the export permit issued by the Tanzania Wildlife Department. The export permit is supposed to show a 6 month expiration date. The Tanzanian authorities incorrectly listed a 1 year expiration date.

The trophies were exported within the 6 month period (actually within 1 month of the issuance of the permit), so one would think this is completely moot.

And in fact is it essentially moot. Despite the "Warning Letter" to the hunter, the trophy was allowed to be imported and is presently with the taxidermist.

Why USF&W felt the need to scare the crap out of the poor hunter by issuing him a "Warning Letter" when the error was merely a clerical one and committed by the Tanzania Wildlife Department and not the hunter is the mystery.

Adam Clements and the folks at D&L acted quickly to get to the bottom of this issue and confirm that this is merely unwarranted harassment of a hunter by USF&W for something he has no control over (and which is meaningless in any event). They've brought the issue to the attention of the authorities in Dar es Salaam.

Buffnut you actually answered your questions with your second sentence "The letter was sent to the hunter because technically he's the "importer" and legally responsible even though he hired a customs broker to handle the importation". Under most law there is no defense for ignorance. The hunter is responsible for the export permit whether he had any input to its issuing or not and quite rightly the USF&W have followed due process by issuing a warning that the leopard trophy ended up being imported in breach of the CITES Convention.

While it may seem heavy handed over what most here perceive as a minor technical breach which the hunter or anyone should not have been bothered with, the people at the USF&W can/should apply the law based on what information they have which in this case was an incorrectly issue permit. They obviously did make a call that it was likely an inadvertent breach caused by the issuer of the permit and released the trophy, but they at least are vigilant and doing their job. When government departments start interpreting the law to suit individuals (money would likely come into the picture here) or their own agenda, then we have got a problem.

quote:

While it may seem heavy handed over what most here perceive as a minor technical breach which the hunter or anyone should not have been bothered with, the people at the USF&W can/should apply the law based on what information they have which in this case was an incorrectly issue permit. They obviously did make a call that it was likely an inadvertent breach caused by the issuer of the permit and released the trophy, but they at least are vigilant and doing their job. When government departments start interpreting the law to suit individuals (money would likely come into the picture here) or their own agenda, then we have got a problem.

I generally agree with this, but not completely.

In this case the error was committed by the Tanzania Wildlife Department. USF&W knew this.

The error was insignificant. The export permit was issued in December 2014. It should have had a May 2015 expiration date. The permit listed a December 2015 expiration.

The trophy was exported in December 2014 - the same month the permit was issued, and well within the actual 6 month period permitted by CITES.

The Tanzanian Wildlife Department put an incorrect expiration date on the permit but the trophy was exported timely.

I would call that a "fart in a windstorm." A meaningless and extremely technical violation if it's a violation at all, which I suspect is debatable. My guess is that the treaty requires the trophy to be exported within 6 months of issuance of the export permit, not that the paperwork state an accurate export deadline.

The real problem with this situation is why USF&W thought it was necessary to issue the warning letter at all. The hunter has no control over what date the exporter puts on the export permit - the hunter isn't involved in that and has no opportunity to ensure it's done correctly. What goal is USF&W accomplishing by issuing a warning letter to the hunter?

There's a concept called "prosecutorial discretion." Law enforcement officers and prosecutors use it every day. This is why police officers don't stop every driver who exceeds the speed limit by 5 mph. Could they? Yes, of course. If you exceed the speed limit by 1 mph you're violating the law and can be prosecuted. That doesn't mean you should be.

USF&W is simply harassing this hunter for no reason. He wasn't responsible for the incorrect date, he couldn't have had any impact on it, and sending him a scary letter telling him he's violated the law - especially since it doesn't make it clear that they aren't coming for his trophy - was simply uncalled for.

quote:

USF&W is simply harassing this hunter for no reason. He wasn't responsible for the incorrect date, he couldn't have had any impact on it, and sending him a scary letter telling him he's violated the law - especially since it doesn't make it clear that they aren't coming for his trophy - was simply uncalled for.

Precisely !!

Eagle,
This is precisely why you give your Customs broker a limited Power of Attorney and you never hear about how the sausage gets made.