The growing demand throughout the world for wildlife and wildlife parts and products has created a market in which commercial exploitation has threatened certain wildlife populations. The oriental medicine trade, for example, has created an illicit market in bear gall bladders, rhinoceros horns, and parts of other threatened and endangered species. The United States is the world’s largest wildlife trading country, importing an average of $773 million and exporting about $256 million in such trade each year since 1989. Although the full extent of illegal trade is not known, the value of illegal wildlife trade into and out of the United States is estimated to be between $100 million and $250 million annually. The mission of the Department of the Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is to conserve and enhance fish and wildlife populations and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. Enforcing and administering laws and treaties governing the importation and exportation of fish and wildlife species, the animals’ parts, and products made from the animals or their parts is an important and necessary means by which FWS carries out its mission. The FWS Division of Law Enforcement, through its wildlife inspection program established in 1975, helps ensure that wildlife shipments entering or leaving the United States comply with wildlife trade laws and treaties. The FWS Division of Law Enforcement, headquartered in Arlington, Virginia, provides general direction and develops policy for the seven FWS regions that oversee the wildlife inspection program. Each regional office is administered by a Regional Director, who is responsible for all of FWS’ activities within an assigned geographical area and who manages the inspection program with the help of an Assistant Regional Director for Law Enforcement. Trade in wildlife and wildlife parts and products generally involves shipments that consist of packages, crates, or other containers that are (1) transported by air, sea, and land carriers; (2) carried by individuals; or (3) delivered through the mail. To carry out its responsibilities to monitor trade in wildlife and intercept illegal shipments of federally protected wildlife, the Division of Law Enforcement maintains a force of 74 wildlife inspectors, whose duties include (1) examining documentation that accompanies shipments, (2) physically inspecting the contents of shipments, (3) properly handling seized property, (4) occasionally handling certain aspects of the violation investigation process, and (5) fulfilling administrative duties associated with the inspection and clearance of wildlife imports and exports. FWS inspectors are stationed at 11 designated ports of entry and at 14 of the over 300 nondesignated (border or special) ports located throughout the United States and its territories where wildlife shipments occur. By designating certain ports of entry for the importation and exportation of wildlife, FWS has attempted to concentrate wildlife shipments at a few locations to enable more efficient and effective service. The majority of wildlife shipments are processed through the 11 designated ports. Wildlife shipments processed through any of the nondesignated ports must meet certain criteria or be accompanied by a special FWS permit. FWS’ data show that nationwide, an average of almost 77,000 shipments were processed annually during the past 5 fiscal years. The FWS regions and the location of FWS wildlife inspectors at both designated and nondesignated ports are shown in figure 1.1. The Division of Law Enforcement also employs a force of about 225 special agents who are criminal investigators responsible for protecting domestic and international fish, wildlife, and plant resources. They maintain liaison with all mutually interested federal, state, and local enforcement authorities and investigate suspected violations of federal wildlife laws. As part of their broad responsibilities, these agents work closely with wildlife inspectors in enforcing and administering federal laws and international treaties governing the importation and exportation of wildlife and wildlife parts and products. The agents are located in field offices throughout each FWS region. In addition to its field inspectors and special agents, the Division of Law Enforcement maintains a desk officer for inspections in its Branch of Investigations. This desk officer is responsible for, among other things, (1) monitoring international wildlife trade to determine trends and (2) representing FWS in interagency negotiations and discussions to develop strategies for coordinated enforcement of FWS-administered laws and regulations. Funding for FWS’ wildlife inspection program is derived from two primary sources—annual appropriations and license and inspection fees collected from wildlife importers and exporters. Import-export licenses, which currently cost $125 annually, generated over $270,000 in fiscal year 1993. Persons who import or export less than $25,000 in wildlife annually, common carriers and museums that import or export wildlife for research or educational purposes, and certain others are exempt from the licensing requirements. The approximately 2,165 holders of import-export licenses must also pay a $25 inspection fee for each shipment that is imported or exported at a designated port of entry. These fees generated about $1.98 million in fiscal year 1993. Appropriations and user fees for the wildlife inspection program for fiscal years 1989 through 1993 are shown in table 1.1. As can be seen, in constant dollars over the 5-year period, appropriations have risen over 235 percent—partially as a result of moneys provided by the Congress for specific purposes, such as establishing designated ports in Portland, Oregon, and Baltimore, Maryland, and reestablishing a full-time wildlife inspector position in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. User fees have remained relatively stable during this period. FWS relies on the cooperation of other federal agencies in fulfilling its mission of monitoring wildlife trade. The Department of the Treasury’s Customs Service is the primary agency responsible for the inspection and clearance of goods imported into the United States. In this capacity, the Customs Service is the first line of defense against illegal wildlife shipments. Before it clears a wildlife shipment at a designated port where an FWS wildlife inspector is present, Customs refers the shipment to FWS for inspection and clearance. At ports that do not have FWS inspectors, Customs inspectors can clear wildlife shipments or take other appropriate action. FWS also works closely with and coordinates its activities with other federal agencies that have jurisdiction at ports of entry. These agencies include the Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), which is primarily responsible for inspecting shipments of plants and animals entering or leaving the United States and preventing the introduction of pests and plant and animal diseases into the United States; the Department of Commerce’s National Marine Fisheries Service, which is responsible for protecting certain marine mammals under the Marine Mammal Protection Act and other laws regulating the importation of marine wildlife; the Department of Justice’s Immigration and Naturalization Service, which is primarily responsible for enforcing the immigration laws of the United States; and the Department of Transportation’s Coast Guard, which works with other agencies to (1) enforce the laws that pertain to the protection of living and nonliving resources and (2) suppress smuggling and illicit drug trafficking on the high seas. FWS relies on the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544), and the Lacey Act, as amended (18 U.S.C. 42; 16 U.S.C. 3371-3378), as the primary domestic legislation to control wildlife imports and exports. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) is the major international agreement for the control of trade in wildlife and plants. In the United States, CITES is implemented through the Endangered Species Act. The United States also has treaties with four countries for the protection of migratory birds. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 703-712), which implemented these treaties, prohibits the importation of migratory birds captured or killed illegally in their country of origin. (See app. I for a brief description of these and related laws.) As discussed earlier in this chapter, FWS special agents work very closely with the wildife inspectors to enforce and administer federal laws and treaties governing the importation and exportation of wildlife and wildlife parts and products. In 1991, we reported on law enforcement activities conducted in six FWS regions by special agents. Our report stated that because the Division of Law Enforcement did not have reliable information on the effectiveness of its special agents’ enforcement efforts or the magnitude of suspected crimes against wildlife that were not being investigated, it had not fared well in the allocation of substantial increases in FWS’ overall staffing and funding. As a result, the Division’s special agents, who are responsible for investigating cases involving (1) large-scale selling or commercialization of wildlife and wildlife parts, (2) crimes against threatened or endangered species, (3) illegal importation of wildlife for commercial purposes, and (4) illegal taking of migratory birds, were unable—because of a lack of sufficient resources—to perform their basic responsibilities. To be better able to periodically assess the extent of crime against wildlife and justify its funding and staffing needs and ensure that its special agents are able to perform their basic responsibilities, we recommended that FWS record (1) all instances of suspected violations coming to its attention, including those that may not be investigated; (2) the agency’s handling of suspected violations; and (3) the outcomes of the investigations. We also recommended that FWS then use this information to (1) periodically assess the extent of suspected crimes against wildlife, (2) provide realistic estimates of staff and funds needed to adequately address the problem, and (3) include the estimates in annual budget requests. Although the agency agreed that it needed to improve its documentation of crimes against wildlife, FWS disagreed that better documentation of reported violations would provide meaningful data to justify increased funding or staffing for law enforcement.