DOCSLIB.ORG

Invasive Species: Major Laws and the Role of Selected Federal Agencies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Invasive Species: Major Laws and the Role of Selected Federal Agencies Invasive Species: Major Laws and the Role of Selected Federal Agencies Renée Johnson Specialist in Agricultural Policy R. Eliot Crafton Analyst in Natural Resources Policy Harold F. Upton Analyst in Natural Resources Policy January 17, 2017 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R43258 Invasive Species: Major Laws and the Role of Selected Federal Agencies Summary An “invasive” species (alternatively known as an alien, exotic, injurious, introduced or naturalized, non-native, nonindigenous, nuisance, or noxious species) refers to an animal or plant that is introduced into an environment where it is not native. The introduction of invasive species to the United States—whether deliberate or unintentional—from around the globe can pose a significant threat to native animal and plant communities, and may result in extinctions of native animals and plants, species disruptions as native and non-native species compete for limited resources, reduced biodiversity, and altered terrestrial or aquatic habitats. This can result in a range of economic, ecologic, and cultural losses, including reduced agricultural output from U.S. farms and ranches; degradation of U.S. waterways, coastal areas, national parks, and forests; and altered urban, suburban, and rural landscapes. It is estimated that 50,000 non-native species have been introduced to the United States. The potential economic costs associated with nonindigenous plant and animal species are estimated at more than $100 billion annually in the United States. A few examples of the types of damages attributed to non-native invasive species in the United States are as follows. Burmese pythons are multiplying in south Florida, becoming a top carnivore and killing large numbers of native species of reptiles, birds, and mammals. Zebra and quagga mussels from Eastern Europe are clogging intakes for urban water supplies and nuclear power plants in the Great Lakes and the Mississippi basin. The light brown apple moth, a native pest of Australia, has been detected in California and is causing damage to a wide range of plant species and commercial fruit and vegetable crops. Leafy spurge is lowering the forage value of western grazing land, and reducing overall land values. In the United States, numerous federal and interagency efforts share responsibilities regarding invasive species. Among the federal agencies involved are the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior, Transportation, and others, including the Environmental Protection Agency and the Executive Office of the President. Of these, three Departments—Agriculture, Commerce, and Interior—play a major role by co-chairing the National Invasive Species Council (NISC). Created by Executive Order 13112 in 1999, NISC provides high-level interdepartmental coordination of federal invasive species actions and works with other federal and nonfederal groups to address invasive species issues at the national level. In FY2016, the U.S. government spent an estimated $2.3 billion across a range of federal agencies and activities in an effort to prevent, control, and eradicate invasive species domestically. Activities at the Department of Agriculture accounted for the bulk of available federal funding, nearly $1.2 billion (53% of total available funds). Activities at the Department of Homeland Security, comprised of mostly border protection and security activities, accounted for about $0.8 billion (33% of total funding). The remainder of federal funding, about $0.3 billion (about 14% of total funding) covers activities across a range of agencies at the Departments of Interior, Commerce, and Defense, and other independent agencies. Despite efforts to achieve high-level interdepartmental coordination, comprehensive legislation on the treatment of invasive species has never been enacted, and no single law provides coordination among federal agencies. Instead, the current legal framework is largely governed by a patchwork of laws, regulations, policies, and programs. Some laws are tailored to individual species or narrowly focused on what is affected by the species. Other laws have a broader intended purpose and may only peripherally address invasive species. Some laws, although they do not directly address invasive species control or prevention, may limit such introductions. Congressional Research Service Invasive Species: Major Laws and the Role of Selected Federal Agencies Contents Estimated Economic Costs .............................................................................................................. 2 Selected Federal Laws and Directives ............................................................................................. 5 Federal Laws ............................................................................................................................. 6 Organic Administration Act ................................................................................................ 7 Lacey Act ............................................................................................................................ 7 Virus-Serum-Toxin Act ....................................................................................................... 8 Animal Damage Control Act .............................................................................................. 9 Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act ................................................................. 9 Federal Seed Act ............................................................................................................... 10 National Environmental Policy Act .................................................................................. 10 Endangered Species Act ..................................................................................................... 11 Federal Noxious Weed Act................................................................................................. 11 Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act .............................................. 12 Federal Land Policy and Management Act ....................................................................... 12 Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act ................................................................................ 12 International Forestry Cooperation Act............................................................................. 13 Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act ........................................ 13 National Invasive Species Act .......................................................................................... 14 Alien Species Prevention and Enforcement Act ............................................................... 14 Wild Bird Conservation Act .............................................................................................. 15 Hawaii Tropical Forest Recovery Act ............................................................................... 15 Plant Protection Act .......................................................................................................... 15 Animal Health Protection Act ........................................................................................... 16 Noxious Weed Control and Eradication Act ..................................................................... 17 Federal Directive ..................................................................................................................... 17 Executive Order 13112 on Invasive Species ..................................................................... 17 Selected Federal Agencies ............................................................................................................. 18 Interagency Efforts .................................................................................................................. 19 National Invasive Species Council ................................................................................... 19 Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force .............................................................................. 21 Federal Interagency Committee for Management of Noxious and Exotic Weeds ............ 21 Invasive Terrestrial Animals and Pathogens ..................................................................... 22 Department of Agriculture ...................................................................................................... 22 Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service .................................................................... 22 Farm Service Agency ........................................................................................................ 24 Foreign Agricultural Service ............................................................................................. 24 Forest Service ................................................................................................................... 24 Research, Education, and Economics Agencies ................................................................ 26 Natural Resources Conservation Service .......................................................................... 27 Department of Commerce ....................................................................................................... 28 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration .......................................................... 28 Department of Defense ..........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Environmental Legislation
    Warm Up Radium has a half-life of 1500 years. How long will it take for 250kg of Radium to decay down to less than 10kg? Name that Legislation! Review Sets a time table for phasing out ozone- depleting substances. Montreal Protocol Sets goal of creating “fishable, swimmable” waterways by setting water quality standards. Clean Water Act • Protects all marine mammals, including cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises), pinnipeds (seals and sea lions), sirenians (manatees and dugongs), sea otters, and polar bears w/in waters of USA Marine Mammal Protection Act Requires mining companies to put funds into escrow to assure land reclamation after mining has ceased. Surface Mining Reclamation and Control Act Regulates manufacture and use of pesticides. Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Provides for conservation of species that are endangered or threatened throughout all or a significant portion of their range, and conservation of ecosystems on which they depend Endangered Species Act Established Superfund for emergency response and remediation of toxic sites. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act Superfund = toxic site that gov. cleans up for public safety • AKA Brownfield Established air quality standards for primary and secondary pollutants. Clean Air Act Agreement among 150 nations to reduce greenhouse gases. Kyoto Protocol Established the EPA and requires Environmental Impact Statements for major federal construction projects. National Environmental Policy Act Governs the disposal of solid waste and hazardous materials RCRA → Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Law that bans trafficking in illegal wildlife. In 2008, the act was amended to include plants and plant products such as timber and paper…first ban on trade in illegally sourced wood products.
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting Florida's Waters And
    PROTECTING FLORIDA’S WATERS AND WILDLIFE THROUGH THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: WHITE PAPER Jason Totoiu, Everglades Law Center Paul Boudreaux, Stetson University College of Law Richard Hamann, University of Florida, Levin College of Law Richard Grosso, Nova Southeastern University, Shepard Broad Law Center Laurie Macdonald, Defenders of Wildlife Daniel Rohlf, Lewis and Clark Law School Presented and Discussed at Everglades Coalition Conference Miami, Florida January 12, 2013 First Revision February 21, 2013 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This paper explores the relationship between wildlife law, water law and water management, specifically with respect to the U.S. Endangered Species Act (“ESA” or “Act”) and implications for restoration of America’s Everglades. Many of the over 60 federally listed species in south Florida are considered wetland dependent from Everglade snail kites, to wood storks, panthers and manatees, and are affected throughout all or a part of their life cycle by water management decisions. Species nesting on Florida beaches, such as shore birds and sea turtles, are suffering the consequences of rising waters along the coastline due to climate change. Water management decisions and the implementation, or lack thereof, of programs affecting water regimes, water quantity and water quality, can have serious impacts on the survival and recovery of imperiled species, as well as on preventing the decline of those currently considered stable. The ESA and other wildlife protection laws can help save and recover not only imperiled wildlife, but may also serve as important tools in the preservation and restoration of ecosystems on which these species depend within the Greater Everglades Ecoregion. The first section of the paper lays out the Background and Legislative History of the ESA followed by explanations of the major provisions of the Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Grape Insects +6134
    Ann. Rev. Entomo! 1976. 22:355-76 Copyright © 1976 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved GRAPE INSECTS +6134 Alexandre Bournier Chaire de Zoologie, Ecole Nationale Superieure Agronornique, 9 Place Viala, 34060 Montpellier-Cedex, France The world's vineyards cover 10 million hectares and produce 250 million hectolitres of wine, 70 million hundredweight of table grapes, 9 million hundredweight of dried grapes, and 2.5 million hundredweight of concentrate. Thus, both in terms of quantities produced and the value of its products, the vine constitutes a particularly important cultivation. THE HOST PLANT AND ITS CULTIVATION The original area of distribution of the genus Vitis was broken up by the separation of the continents; although numerous species developed, Vitis vinifera has been cultivated from the beginning for its fruit and wine producing qualities (43, 75, 184). This cultivation commenced in Transcaucasia about 6000 B.C. Subsequent human migration spread its cultivation, at firstaround the Mediterranean coast; the Roman conquest led to the plant's progressive establishment in Europe, almost to its present extent. Much later, the WesternEuropeans planted the grape vine wherever cultiva­ tion was possible, i.e. throughout the temperate and warm temperate regions of the by NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY on 02/01/10. For personal use only. world: North America, particularly California;South America,North Africa, South Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1977.22:355-376. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org Africa, Australia, etc. Since the commencement of vine cultivation, man has attempted to increase its production, both in terms of quality and quantity, by various means including selection of mutations or hybridization.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Habitat Fragmentation and Disturbance on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functions
    Effects of habitat fragmentation and disturbance on biodiversity and ecosystem functions Inauguraldissertation der Philosophisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Universität Bern vorgelegt von Christof Schüepp von Eschlikon TG Leiter der Arbeit: Prof. Dr. M. H. Entling Institut für Ökologie und Evolution | downloaded: 13.3.2017 Von der Philosophisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät angenommen. Bern, 14. Mai 2013 Der Dekan: Prof. Dr. S. Decurtins Originaldokument gespeichert auf dem Webserver der Universitätsbibliothek Bern Dieses Werk ist unter einem https://doi.org/10.7892/boris.54819 Creative Commons Namensnennung-Keine kommerzielle Nutzung-Keine Bearbeitung 2.5 Schweiz Lizenzvertrag lizenziert. Um die Lizenz anzusehen, gehen Sie bitte zu http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ch/ oder schicken Sie einen Brief an Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California 94105, USA. source: Effects of habitat fragmentation and disturbance on biodiversity and ecosystem functions Creative Commons Licence Urheberrechtlicher Hinweis Dieses Dokument steht unter einer Lizenz der Creative Commons Namensnennung- Keine kommerzielle Nutzung-Keine Bearbeitung 2.5 Schweiz. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ch/ Sie dürfen: dieses Werk vervielfältigen, verbreiten und öffentlich zugänglich machen Zu den folgenden Bedingungen: Namensnennung. Sie müssen den Namen des Autors/Rechteinhabers in der von ihm festgelegten Weise nennen (wodurch aber nicht der Eindruck entstehen darf, Sie oder die Nutzung des Werkes durch Sie würden entlohnt). Keine kommerzielle Nutzung. Dieses Werk darf nicht für kommerzielle Zwecke verwendet werden. Keine Bearbeitung. Dieses Werk darf nicht bearbeitet oder in anderer Weise verändert werden. Im Falle einer Verbreitung müssen Sie anderen die Lizenzbedingungen, unter welche dieses Werk fällt, mitteilen. Jede der vorgenannten Bedingungen kann aufgehoben werden, sofern Sie die Einwilligung des Rechteinhabers dazu erhalten.
    [Show full text]
  • Roots of Endangered Species Conservation
    1 Roots of Endangered Species Conservation 1.1 Introduction Most. Americans. know. of. the. Endangered. Species. Act,. many. admire. its. objectives,. and. some. are. aware. of. some. of. its. successes,. especially. with. respect.to.once.nearly.extinct.but.now.relatively.common.and.iconic.species. such.as.the.bald.eagle.(Haliaeetus leucocephalus),.American.bison.(Bison bison),. and. American. alligator. (Alligator mississippiensis).. Some. others. conversely. know.of.the.act.in.a.negative.sense—one.more.government.regulation.that. increases.the.cost.of.developing.land,.building.infrastructure,.or.otherwise. carrying.out.the.economic.business.of.our.land..Talk.to.these.Americans.and. the.conversation.will.likely.turn.to.the.snail.darter.(Percina tanasi),.north- ern.spotted.owl.(Strix occidentalis caurina),.or—more.recently—the.polar.bear. (Ursus maritimus);.that.is,.it.will.turn.to.species.whose.conservation.is.per- ceived.to.stand.in.the.way.of.“progress.”.Yet,.some.other.Americans.view.the. act.with.frustration,.pointing.to.species.such.as.the.whooping.crane.(Grus americana). pictured. on. the. cover. or. California. condor. (Gymnogyps califor- nianus),.which.despite.decades.of.protection.and.costly.conservation.effort. under.the.act.have.yet.to.show.promising.rebounds.in.their.population. 1.2 Purpose and Objectives of This Book Few. Americans,. regardless. of. whether. they. see. themselves. as. defend- ers.or.as.victims.of.the.Endangered.Species.Act,.really.understand.the.act,. the.science.that.underlies.the.objectives.of.the.act,.or.how.the.act.has.been. implemented. in. the. nearly. four. decades. since. its. initial. promulgation. in. 1973..Such.understanding.has.long.been.the.province.of.a.cadre.of.profes- sional.
    [Show full text]
  • Museum Property Handbook (411 DM Volume I) Appendix A
    Museum Property Handbook (411 DM Volume I) Appendix A APPENDIX A: MANDATES AND STANDARDS FOR MUSEUM PROPERTY COLLECTIONS MANAGEMENT A. DEFINITION OF MUSEUM PROPERTY 1. Departmental Definition a. Museum property is personal property acquired according to some rational scheme and preserved, studied, or interpreted for public benefit. Museum property includes objects selected to represent archeology, art, ethnography, history, documents, botany, zoology, paleontology, geology, and environmental samples. Elements, fragments, and components of structures are considered museum objects if they are no longer a part of the original structure.(410 DM 114-60.100n) b. Museum property is defined by the bureau and/or unit Scope of Collection Statement. c. Museum property may be distinguished from other kinds of property if it is maintained for public benefit (e.g., reference and exhibit) and meets one or more of the following characteristics. These characteristics are not considered exclusive. (1) Identified by the bureau or unit mission. (2) Works commissioned by the bureau. (3) Generated by research, resources, management or exploration. (4) From Federal or Indian Land. (5) Likely to increase in value. (6) Associated with a significant event, resource, or person. (7) Significant due to age (e.g., over 50 years). (8) Rare (e.g., one of a kind). Release Date: A:1 New Museum Property Handbook (411 DM Volume I) Appendix A NOTE: You may have museum property even though you have no museums. 2. Location of Museum Property Museum property may be located in visitor centers or museum exhibits, in cabinets and on shelves in storage areas, in administrative offices, and on loan to other institutions for storage or exhibit purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • RESEARCH REPORT 2OO9-2O1O DIVISION of HEALTH SCIENCES Research Report 2OO9-2O1O DIVISION of HEALTH SCIENCES
    RESEARCH REPORT 2OO9-2O1O DIVISION OF HEALTH SCIENCES RESEARCH REPORT 2OO9-2O1O DIVISION OF HEALTH SCIENCES Cover photo: Divisional winners of some of New Zealand’s most prestigious science awards in 2009 and 2010. From left to right: Professor Frank Griffin, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, 2010 Pickering Medal, Royal Society of New Zealand, Professor Warren Tate, Department of Biochemistry, 2010 Rutherford Medal, Royal Society of New Zealand, Professor Allan Herbison, Department of Physiology, 2009 Liley Medal, HRC. Professor Richie Poulton, Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Research Unit, 2010 Dame Joan Metge Medal, Royal Society of New Zealand, Absent: Professor Stephen Robertson, Department of Women’s and Children’s Health. 2010 Liley Medal, HRC. Division of HEALTH sCiEnCEs 1 FROM THE PRO-VICE-CHANCELLOR Tënä koutou kätoa. It is a great pleasure to present this report of the research activities of the Division of Health Sciences at the University of Otago for 2009-2010. The Division has an enviable reputation for research excellence and innovation and the achievements reported here reflect this. Our research helps to save lives and reduce suffering, and addresses health inequalities in New Zealand and around the world. The Division has had another two very successful years, as measured by the award of competitive research grants, by publications in highly esteemed journals, and by awards for distinction in research. Our researchers secured over $136 million in external research grants in 2009 and 2010 – a considerable achievement in what has become an increasingly competitive funding environment. The number of research outputs has continued to increase annually with many articles appearing in the world’s most prestigious journals.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera: Tortricidae: Tortricinae) and Evolutionary Correlates of Novel Secondary Sexual Structures
    Zootaxa 3729 (1): 001–062 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Monograph ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2013 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3729.1.1 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:CA0C1355-FF3E-4C67-8F48-544B2166AF2A ZOOTAXA 3729 Phylogeny of the tribe Archipini (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae: Tortricinae) and evolutionary correlates of novel secondary sexual structures JASON J. DOMBROSKIE1,2,3 & FELIX A. H. SPERLING2 1Cornell University, Comstock Hall, Department of Entomology, Ithaca, NY, USA, 14853-2601. E-mail: [email protected] 2Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada, T6G 2E9 3Corresponding author Magnolia Press Auckland, New Zealand Accepted by J. Brown: 2 Sept. 2013; published: 25 Oct. 2013 Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 JASON J. DOMBROSKIE & FELIX A. H. SPERLING Phylogeny of the tribe Archipini (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae: Tortricinae) and evolutionary correlates of novel secondary sexual structures (Zootaxa 3729) 62 pp.; 30 cm. 25 Oct. 2013 ISBN 978-1-77557-288-6 (paperback) ISBN 978-1-77557-289-3 (Online edition) FIRST PUBLISHED IN 2013 BY Magnolia Press P.O. Box 41-383 Auckland 1346 New Zealand e-mail: [email protected] http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ © 2013 Magnolia Press 2 · Zootaxa 3729 (1) © 2013 Magnolia Press DOMBROSKIE & SPERLING Table of contents Abstract . 3 Material and methods . 6 Results . 18 Discussion . 23 Conclusions . 33 Acknowledgements . 33 Literature cited . 34 APPENDIX 1. 38 APPENDIX 2. 44 Additional References for Appendices 1 & 2 . 49 APPENDIX 3. 51 APPENDIX 4. 52 APPENDIX 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Administrative Code Between the Dates of October 1, 2020 Through December 31, 2020 (Supp
    3 A.A.C. 4 Supp. 20-4 December 31, 2020 Title 3 TITLE 3. AGRICULTURE CHAPTER 4. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE - PLANT SERVICES DIVISION The table of contents on the first page contains quick links to the referenced page numbers in this Chapter. Refer to the notes at the end of a Section to learn about the history of a rule as it was published in the Arizona Administrative Register. Sections, Parts, Exhibits, Tables or Appendices codified in this supplement. The list provided contains quick links to the updated rules. This Chapter contains rule Sections that were filed to be codified in the Arizona Administrative Code between the dates of October 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020 (Supp. 20-4). Table 1. Fee Schedule ......................................................47 Questions about these rules? Contact: Name: Brian McGrew Address: Department of Agriculture 1688 W. Adams St. Phoenix, AZ 85007 Telephone: (602) 542-3228 Fax: (602) 542-1004 E-mail: [email protected] Website: https://agriculture.az.gov/plantsproduce/industrial- hemp-program The release of this Chapter in Supp. 20-4 replaces Supp. 20-3, 1-50 pages Please note that the Chapter you are about to replace may have rules still in effect after the publication date of this supplement. Therefore, all superseded material should be retained in a separate binder and archived for future reference. i PREFACE Under Arizona law, the Department of State, Office of the Secretary of State (Office), accepts state agency rule filings and is the publisher of Arizona rules. The Office of the Secretary of State does not interpret or enforce rules in the Administrative Code.
    [Show full text]
  • Arthropod Pests
    IAEA-TECDOC-1082 XA9950282--W6 Irradiationa as quarantine treatmentof arthropod pests Proceedings finala of Research Co-ordination Meeting organizedthe by Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture and held Honolulu,in Hawaii, November3-7 1997 INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY /A> 30- 22 199y Ma 9 J> The originating Section of this publication in the IAEA was: Food and Environmental Protection Section International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramer Strasse 5 0 10 x Bo P.O. A-1400 Vienna, Austria The IAEA does not normally maintain stocks of reports in this series However, copies of these reports on microfiche or in electronic form can be obtained from IMS Clearinghouse International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramer Strasse5 P.O.Box 100 A-1400 Vienna, Austria E-mail: CHOUSE® IAEA.ORG URL: http //www laea org/programmes/mis/inis.htm Orders shoul accompaniee db prepaymeny db f Austriao t n Schillings 100,- in the form of a cheque or in the form of IAEA microfiche service coupons which may be ordered separately from the INIS Clearinghouse IRRADIATIO QUARANTINA S NA E TREATMENF TO ARTHROPOD PESTS IAEA, VIENNA, 1999 IAEA-TECDOC-1082 ISSN 1011-4289 ©IAEA, 1999 Printe IAEe th AustriAn y i d b a May 1999 FOREWORD Fresh horticultural produce from tropical and sub-tropical areas often harbours insects and mites and are quarantined by importing countries. Such commodities cannot gain access to countries which have strict quarantine regulations suc Australias ha , Japan Zealanw Ne , d e Uniteth d dan State f Americo s a unless treaten approvea y b d d method/proceduro t e eliminate such pests.
    [Show full text]
  • The Insufficiency of the Musical Instrument Passport Program Under
    The John Marshall Law Review Volume 48 | Issue 2 Article 4 Winter 2015 The nsI ufficiency of the Musical Instrument Passport Program Under CITES and the Lacey Act: The eedN for a Centralized Wood Title Certification System for Manufactured Wood Products and Wooden Musical Instruments, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 495 (2015) Joseph Furlett Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.jmls.edu/lawreview Part of the Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, Environmental Law Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons, International Trade Law Commons, and the Transnational Law Commons Recommended Citation Joseph Furlett, The nI sufficiency of the Musical Instrument Passport Program Under CITES and the Lacey Act: The eN ed for a Centralized Wood Title Certification System for Manufactured Wood Products and Wooden Musical Instruments, 48 J. Marshall L. Rev. 495 (2015) http://repository.jmls.edu/lawreview/vol48/iss2/4 This Comments is brought to you for free and open access by The oJ hn Marshall Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in The oJ hn Marshall Law Review by an authorized administrator of The oJ hn Marshall Institutional Repository. THE INSUFFICIENCY OF THE MUSICAL INSTRUMENT PASSPORT PROGRAM UNDER CITES AND THE LACEY ACT: THE NEED FOR A CENTRALIZED WOOD TITLE AND CERTIFICATION SYSTEM FOR MANUFACTURED WOOD PRODUCTS AND WOODEN MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS JOSEPH FURLETT1 I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. 496 II. BACKGROUND .............................................................................. 496 A. The Lacey Act ................................................................ 497 B. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) ............................. 499 C. CITES ............................................................................ 500 D. The Musical Instrument Passport System .................. 501 E. How the Lacey Act, CITES, and the ESA Impact Musical Instruments ..................................................... 503 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Review 12-04 December 2012
    The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation Technical Review 12-04 December 2012 1 The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation The Wildlife Society and The Boone and Crockett Club Technical Review 12-04 - December 2012 Citation Organ, J.F., V. Geist, S.P. Mahoney, S. Williams, P.R. Krausman, G.R. Batcheller, T.A. Decker, R. Carmichael, P. Nanjappa, R. Regan, R.A. Medellin, R. Cantu, R.E. McCabe, S. Craven, G.M. Vecellio, and D.J. Decker. 2012. The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. The Wildlife Society Technical Review 12-04. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. Series Edited by Theodore A. Bookhout Copy Edit and Design Terra Rentz (AWB®), Managing Editor, The Wildlife Society Lisa Moore, Associate Editor, The Wildlife Society Maja Smith, Graphic Designer, MajaDesign, Inc. Cover Images Front cover, clockwise from upper left: 1) Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) kittens removed from den for marking and data collection as part of a long-term research study. Credit: John F. Organ; 2) A mixed flock of ducks and geese fly from a wetland area. Credit: Steve Hillebrand/USFWS; 3) A researcher attaches a radio transmitter to a short-horned lizard (Phrynosoma hernandesi) in Colorado’s Pawnee National Grassland. Credit: Laura Martin; 4) Rifle hunter Ron Jolly admires a mature white-tailed buck harvested by his wife on the family’s farm in Alabama. Credit: Tes Randle Jolly; 5) Caribou running along a northern peninsula of Newfoundland are part of a herd compositional survey. Credit: John F. Organ; 6) Wildlife veterinarian Lisa Wolfe assesses a captive mule deer during studies of density dependence in Colorado.
    [Show full text]