The Lacey Act: Conservation Crimes

Image related with this article: The Lacey Act: Conservation Crimes
Title 16 of the United States Code is broadly directed at conservation. While most provisions are unrelated to criminal activity, The Lacey Act, codified in 16 U.S.C. §§3371-3378, provides for the control of illegally taken fish and wildlife. This chapter defines prohibited acts, penalties, enforcement measures, and exceptions for certain activities.

Title 16 of the United States Code is broadly directed at conservation. While most provisions are unrelated to criminal activity, The Lacey Act, codified in 16 U.S.C. §§3371-3378, provides for the control of illegally taken fish and wildlife. This chapter defines prohibited acts, penalties, enforcement measures, and exceptions for certain activities.

16 U.S.C. §3372 details the illegal acts criminalized under The Lacey Act. Primarily, this section is directed at prohibiting the import, export, transport, sale, or acquisition of any plant, fish, or wildlife that was illegally taken, transported, possessed, or sold. It is unlawful to transport these specimens in interstate commerce. The Lacey Act also prohibits the transport of any fish or wildlife unless the package is clearly marked and compliant with federal regulations. To further encourage compliance with federal law, the Act criminalized false labeling as well. The statute goes beyond the specimens themselves, encompassing the sale and purchase of guiding, outfitting, other services, or hunting or fishing permits in order to obtain illegal fish or wildlife.

In the case of United States v. Delph, 371 F. App'x 63 (11th Cir. 2010), the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a conviction for a Lacey Act violation. In Delph, evidence indicated that Delph had an agreement to dive for lobsters, and knowingly harvested an illegal number of lobsters while personally participating in the diving activities. T the Court found that a reasonable jury could have convicted the defendant for his joint purpose with the other divers in illegally harvesting the lobsters, thus violating the Lacey Act.

The penalties for a Lacey Act violation are listed in 16 U.S.C. §3373. The Act provides for both civil and criminal penalties. Most Lacey Act violations incur civil penalties. These can result in fines of up to $10,000 for each violation. Violations involving improper plant declarations or improper marking or labeling, so long as the package is not falsely labeled, are only subject to up to $250 in fines. On the criminal side, any sort of transport or possession of illegal specimens, or specimens illegally obtained with a market value greater than $350 is punishable by up to $20,000 in fines and up to 5 years in prison if the offender knew that the fish, wildlife, or plants were acquired through illegal means. The same punishment applies to any offender importing, exporting, possessing, or transporting prohibited wildlife species. Each violation of the Lacey Act is treated individually. If the offender knowingly engages in the conduct and should have known that the specimens were obtained illegally, the offender faces a fine of up to $10,000 and up to one year in prison. For offenses involving only false labeling or improper plant declarations, the maximum punishment is one year in prison. This section also gives the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, or the Secretary of Agriculture the authority to suspend, modify, or cancel any relevant Federal hunting or fishing license, permit, or stamp. Additionally, any fish, plant, or wildlife connected to a Lacey Act violation is subject to forfeiture to the United States government.

The Lacey Act provides three key exceptions under 16 U.S.C. §3377. First, activities regulated by a plan under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, codified in 16 U.S.C. §1801 et seq., are exempt from the prohibitions on import, export, transport, and possession. The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act is directed at regulating marine fisheries and preventing overfishing. Additionally, the Lacey Act exempts activities regulated by Tuna Convention Acts and the harvesting of other highly migratory species. Finally, the Act creates an exception for interstate shipment of fish, wildlife, or plants through “Indian Country,” which is defined as including all land within the limits of any Native American reservation and related allotments or titles, when the specimens can be legally possessed in their final destination.

If you have a Federal Criminal case, a State Criminal case, a Municipal Case or a Family Law case in the Northern District of Alabama, Middle District of Alabama, Southern District of Alabama, or any federal jurisdiction in the Eleventh Circuit, including Alabama, Florida, and Georgia, contact Joe Ingram or Joe Ingram Law LLC at 205-335-2640. Get Relief * Get Results.

articles

latest news & insights

1 / 9
David Eugene Files and the Interplay of Ethics and Jurisdiction

David Eugene Files and the Interplay of Ethics and Jurisdiction

In a case that made its way to the highest level of the state court system, the Alabama Supreme Court recently presided over an appeal beginning in Walker County. This case, Ex parte David Eugene Files, centers around a Rule 32 petition for postconviction relief. Files’ petition was dismissed by the Walker circuit court, with the dismissal being affirmed by the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals.

read articles
Sufficiency of Evidence: Reviewing the Admissibility and Application of Evidence Through US v. Mapson

Sufficiency of Evidence: Reviewing the Admissibility and Application of Evidence Through US v. Mapson

In a decision that affirms the admissibility and sufficiency of several distinct types of evidence, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently presided over an appeal that found its roots in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.

read articles
Are Courts Always Free to Divide Property in a Divorce?

Are Courts Always Free to Divide Property in a Divorce?

How courts divide real property in a divorce. Learn more from Ingram Law, LLC.

read articles
Till Death Do Us Part: Marital Property Division on Behalf of an Estate

Till Death Do Us Part: Marital Property Division on Behalf of an Estate

In a case that demonstrates the limits of alimony awards, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently heard the case of Larry Shearry v. Christy Spivey, as personal representative of the Estate of Charlotte Shearry.

read articles
Fultondale Alabama Municipal Courts: Charges, Penalties, and Why You Should Seek an Attorney

Fultondale Alabama Municipal Courts: Charges, Penalties, and Why You Should Seek an Attorney

You are driving home late between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 3:00 a.m. You get pulled over because the police officer states you are driving over the line, driving too slow, have a head light out or you have a taillight out.

read articles
latest-news

The Crime of Stalking in Alabama

Another category of criminal offense in Alabama is stalking. Covered by Article 5, stalking includes offenses for stalking in the first and second degree, aggravated stalking in the first and second degree, and electronic stalking in the first and second degree.

read articles
Navigating the Division of Marital Property: Lessons from Barbara Brown v. Ernest Brown

Navigating the Division of Marital Property: Lessons from Barbara Brown v. Ernest Brown

In a case that demonstrates the intricacies of equitable division of marital property, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently presided over an appeal from the Jefferson Circuit Court in Jefferson County. The case of Barbara Brown v. Ernest Brown illustrates the importance of maintaining a clear record on appeal and emphasizes the necessity of full disclosure when dividing marital assets.

read articles
Navigating Legal Challenges; Brett Yeiter’s Fight Against a Death Sentence

Navigating Legal Challenges; Brett Yeiter’s Fight Against a Death Sentence

In a case illustrating the tumultuous and complicated proceedings for challenging a death sentence, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals recently heard the appeal of Brett Richard Yeiter v. State of Alabama, stemming from Escambia County. Yeiter’s case underscores the critical need to adhere to procedural requirements, especially in cases involving severe sentences.

read articles
latest-news

Trademark Infringement: Causes of Action Under the Lanham Act

Federal trademark law is primarily governed by the Lanham Trademark Act, also referred to as the Trademark Act of 1946. The Lanham Act, codified in 15 U.S.C. §§1051 to 1127, covers a wide range of trademark issues including registration, maintenance, protection, and the creation of a federal cause of action for trademark infringement.

read articles

schedule a consultation

Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo
Ingram Law Logo

Your path to get the right compensation starts here.