Lacey Act — Wildlife & Plant Trafficking

The Lacey Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 3371–3378) is America's oldest and broadest wildlife protection law — and since a 2008 amendment, it also covers plants and plant products including timber. Originally enacted in 1900, the Lacey Act makes it a federal crime to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any fish, wildlife, or plant that was taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any federal, state, tribal, or foreign law. This "violation of underlying law" structure is what makes the Lacey Act uniquely powerful: it turns any state poaching violation, any foreign illegal logging law, or any tribal fishing regulation into a basis for federal prosecution. Penalties range up to $250,000 in fines and 5 years in prison for felony trafficking, plus forfeiture of the contraband and the equipment used to take it. The Lacey Act is the backbone of federal wildlife law enforcement and, since 2008, the primary federal tool against the $100+ billion global illegal timber trade.

Current Law (2026)

Legal Authority

• 16 U.S.C. § 3371 — Definitions (defines key terms: "fish or wildlife" includes all wild animals; "plant" covers any member of the plant kingdom taken from the wild; "import" means bringing into any U.S. port; "person" includes individuals, corporations, and partnerships — broad definitions that maximize coverage)
• 16 U.S.C. § 3372 — Prohibited acts (makes it unlawful to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any fish, wildlife, or plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any federal, state, Indian tribal, or foreign law; also prohibits false labeling and making false records of wildlife transactions)
• 16 U.S.C. § 3373 — Penalties and sanctions (criminal penalties for knowing violations: felony up to $250,000 and 5 years for trafficking worth $350+; misdemeanor up to $100,000 and 1 year for knowing transport; civil penalties up to $10,000; permits may be suspended or revoked)
• 16 U.S.C. § 3374 — Forfeiture (fish, wildlife, plants, and vessels/vehicles/equipment used in violations may be forfeited to the United States, even if the owner did not personally participate in the violation)
• 16 U.S.C. § 3375 — Enforcement (Secretary of Interior, Secretary of Commerce, and Secretary of Treasury must enforce; may use staff and facilities from other federal, state, and tribal agencies)
• 16 U.S.C. § 3376 — Administration (authorizes regulations; requires plant importers to file declarations identifying genus, species, country of harvest, quantity, and value)
• 16 U.S.C. § 3377 — Exceptions (certain fishing activities governed by international fisheries treaties are exempt from § 3372(a) prohibitions; limited exception for transport through the U.S. without commercial activity)
• 16 U.S.C. § 3378 — Miscellaneous provisions (states and Indian tribes retain authority to make and enforce their own wildlife laws as long as they don't conflict with the Act; federal Lacey Act enforcement supplements, not preempts, state conservation law)

How It Works

The "underlying law" structure is the Lacey Act's defining feature. The Act doesn't independently define what's legal or illegal to take — it piggybacks on every other wildlife and plant law at every level of government. If a fish was caught in violation of a state fishing regulation, transporting it across state lines violates the Lacey Act. If timber was harvested in violation of a foreign country's forestry laws, importing it into the United States violates the Lacey Act. This structure gives the Lacey Act extraordinary reach without requiring Congress to enumerate every protected species or prohibited practice.

The 2008 plant amendment transformed the Lacey Act from a wildlife-only statute into the primary federal weapon against illegal logging and plant trafficking. It extended the Act's prohibitions to all plants and plant products — including timber, wood products, paper, and even furniture made from illegally harvested wood. Importers of plants and plant products must file a declaration identifying the genus, species, country of harvest, quantity, and value. The amendment created the "due care" defense for plant trafficking: a person is not criminally liable for purchasing illegally sourced plant material if they exercised due care to determine the legality of the source. This was the world's first law requiring legal sourcing verification for timber imports.

Felony trafficking (knowing violation involving sale or purchase of fish, wildlife, or plants worth more than $350) carries up to $250,000 and 5 years. Misdemeanor transport (knowing transport or shipment in violation) carries up to $100,000 and 1 year. Civil penalties (up to $10,000 per violation) are available even without criminal intent — if you should have known the items were illegally sourced. The "knowing" standard for criminal liability means you must have known either that the underlying law was being violated or that you were dealing in wildlife taken in violation of law — not necessarily that you knew every detail of the violation.

Forfeiture is automatic. Any fish, wildlife, or plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of the Act is subject to forfeiture — along with any vessel, vehicle, aircraft, or equipment used in the violation. Forfeiture doesn't require a criminal conviction; it can proceed in a civil proceeding against the property itself.

International enforcement is a major focus. The Lacey Act's application to foreign law violations means that importing products of illegal foreign hunting, fishing, or logging violates federal law. This has been used to combat elephant ivory trafficking (underlying CITES violations), illegal tropical timber imports, and the trade in illegally caught seafood. The 2008 plant amendment specifically targeted the estimated $10–30 billion annual trade in illegally harvested timber.

How It Affects You

State Variations

Implementing Regulations

• 50 CFR Part 14 — Importation, exportation, and transportation of wildlife (permits, marking, inspection, CITES implementation, Lacey Act declaration requirements)

• 50 CFR Part 16 — Injurious Wildlife: implements Section 42 of the Lacey Act (18 U.S.C. § 42), which prohibits the importation, transportation, and acquisition of live specimens of species listed as "injurious" to the health and welfare of humans, agriculture, horticulture, forestry, wildlife, or wildlife resources of the United States. Unlike the Lacey Act's "underlying violation" mechanism (which targets illegal take), the injurious wildlife provisions are forward-looking — FWS uses them to block the importation of species that could cause ecological harm if they escape or are released in the United States:

  • § 16.11 — Injurious live wild mammals: lists specific mammal species whose importation is prohibited without a permit, including all species of flying foxes/fruit bats (genus Pteropus), mongooses and meerkats, European rabbits, and multicolored Asian lady beetles; the key practical example is the prohibition on flying foxes, which FWS added to prevent the establishment of bat populations that could spread diseases or damage fruit crops
  • § 16.12 — Injurious wild birds: prohibits importation of pink starlings (Sturnus roseus) and dioch (weaver finches); these species were listed based on evidence of crop damage in their native ranges
  • § 16.13 — Injurious fish, mollusks, and crustaceans: a particularly significant provision listing aquatic invasive species; includes Asian carp species (silver carp, bighead carp, black carp, grass carp) — the invasive fish threatening the Great Lakes ecosystem — and various snakeheads, walking catfish, certain tilapia species, and brown tree snakes; importation of these species is prohibited except for scientific research or zoological exhibition
  • § 16.14 — Injurious amphibians: prohibits importation of the Mexican axolotl (Ambystoma mexicanum) and other listed amphibians; the prohibition on salamander species was expanded in response to the chytrid fungus threat to North American salamander populations
  • § 16.15 — Injurious reptiles: prohibits importation of four species of large constrictors — Burmese pythons (Python molurus bivittatus), reticulated pythons, Northern African pythons, and Southern African pythons — in response to the established Burmese python population in the Florida Everglades; the Lacey Act injurious listing was the primary federal tool used to prevent expansion of the Florida python problem to new states
  • § 16.22 — Injurious wildlife permits: FWS may issue permits allowing importation of listed species for scientific research, zoological exhibitions, or other purposes that FWS determines serve the public interest and can be conducted with adequate safeguards against escape

  The injurious wildlife provisions have been the subject of significant litigation over geographic scope. In United States Association of Reptile Keepers v. Zinke (2017), the D.C. Circuit held that "transportation" under 18 U.S.C. § 42 covers interstate commerce within the United States — meaning listed species (like Burmese pythons) cannot be transported across state lines even within the continental U.S. This interpretation significantly expanded the scope of the prohibition beyond importation. However, the listing process itself is slow — FWS must conduct a formal rulemaking to add species to the injurious list, and legal challenges often focus on whether FWS adequately considered the economic impacts of a listing. The snakehead fish listing took years; the Burmese python listing faced industry opposition. More recently, FWS has used the injurious wildlife provisions to target certain ornamental fish and reptile species linked to established invasive populations.

• 7 CFR Part 355 — APHIS regulations for plant import declarations (Lacey Act plant amendment — import declaration requirements for plants and plant products)

• 7 CFR Part 357 — Control of Illegally Taken Plants (4 sections — APHIS regulations implementing the Lacey Act's civil prohibition on the importation, transportation, sale, receipt, acquisition, and purchase of plants taken, possessed, or sold in violation of law; Part 357 is the enforcement-facing companion to the plant import declaration requirements in Part 355):

  • § 357.1 — Purpose and scope: it is unlawful to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase in interstate or foreign commerce any plant or plant product taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any federal, tribal, state, or foreign law that protects plants; it is also unlawful to possess or transport any plant in the U.S. in violation of state or tribal law; false records, false labels, and false identification documents for plants in interstate or foreign commerce are separately prohibited — the record-falsification prohibition targets schemes to launder illegally sourced wood, plant specimens, or plant-based products through fraudulent paperwork
  • § 357.2 — Definitions: "artificial selection" includes breeding, cloning, or genetic modification; "commercial scale" means production volume consistent with normal business activity (the threshold distinguishes commercial trafficking from incidental personal use); "plant" has the full Lacey Act meaning — any member of the plant kingdom, wild or cultivated, including timber, roots, seeds, and plant products; the definitions are drafted to prevent evasion through processing or transformation of the illegally taken plant material
  • § 357.3 — Declaration requirement: any person importing a plant into the United States must file a declaration with CBP at the time of importation; the declaration must identify: (a) the scientific name (genus and species) of the plant; (b) the value of the plant; (c) the quantity with unit of measure; and (d) the country from which the plant was taken; for plant products (manufactured goods containing plant material such as furniture, paper, musical instruments), the declaration must also list all plant species used in the product and the country of harvest for each — this multi-species disclosure requirement is what makes enforcement effective for complex manufactured goods like hardwood furniture or composite wood panels
  • § 357.4 — Exceptions from the declaration requirement: plant material used purely as packaging (to hold, support, protect, or carry another item) is exempt unless the packaging itself is the article being imported; plant parts that constitute no more than 5% of each individual product's total weight and no more than 5% of the total value of the shipment are also exempt — this de minimis threshold prevents declaration burdens on trivial incidental plant content in manufactured goods; species listed in CITES Appendix II or III are subject to separate CITES permit requirements that may impose additional documentation beyond the Lacey Act declaration

  Part 357 functions as the APHIS enforcement framework for what 16 U.S.C. § 3373(a)(2) prohibits in the civil forfeiture and penalty context for plants. The declaration requirement (§ 357.3) is the primary compliance obligation for importers of wood products, furniture, paper, musical instruments, and other plant-based goods — and the species-level disclosure for manufactured products has driven major supply chain due diligence investment in the timber and furniture industries. Criminal prosecution for knowing violations of the Lacey Act plant provisions is handled by DOJ under 16 U.S.C. § 3373(d); Part 357 governs the APHIS administrative enforcement and declaration compliance side.

Pending Legislation

No standalone Lacey Act reform bills have been introduced in the 119th Congress. Related wildlife and conservation provisions appear in broader legislation — see Fish and Wildlife Federal Law and Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Recent Developments

Lacey Act enforcement has targeted several high-profile cases: the Gibson Guitar case (2011-2012, involving importation of illegally harvested Madagascar ebony and Indian rosewood) established that the 2008 plant amendment has real teeth. Lumber Liquidators paid a $13.2 million penalty in 2016 for importing illegally sourced hardwood flooring from China made with Russian timber harvested in violation of Russian law. Enforcement against illegal seafood imports — particularly Chinese-origin shrimp, Vietnamese catfish, and Russian crab — has been a growing priority. The intersection of the Lacey Act with CITES enforcement (for endangered species) and the ESA (for threatened and endangered species) creates a layered federal enforcement framework that addresses wildlife trafficking from multiple angles. See also Marine Mammal Protection Act for related protections.

• Russian crab and conflict seafood enforcement (2022-2025): Following Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. banned Russian seafood imports (Executive Order 14068). U.S. Customs and CBP used Lacey Act and tariff enforcement tools against transshipment schemes — where Russian crab was processed in China and relabeled as "Product of China" to evade the import ban. Several major seafood importers faced Lacey Act charges for importing Russian crab under false declarations. The Russian crab ban has driven up prices for king crab and snow crab in the U.S. (Russia supplied approximately 40% of global king crab before 2022).
• Deforestation supply chain and corporate liability: The EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR; application postponed to December 30, 2026 for large operators and June 30, 2027 for micro/small enterprises by Regulation (EU) 2025/2650) — requiring that commodities (cattle, soy, palm oil, coffee, cocoa, wood) entering the EU not be linked to recent deforestation — has created parallel compliance pressures to the Lacey Act for companies with global supply chains. U.S. companies selling to EU buyers must now meet both Lacey Act (illegal logging prohibition) and EUDR (deforestation-free certification) requirements. The convergence is prompting supply chain technology investment (satellite monitoring, blockchain provenance tracking) for forest-risk commodities.
• Antarctic specimen trafficking: Any Antarctic native mammal, bird, plant, or invertebrate taken without a permit under the Antarctic Conservation Act and then imported into the U.S. or transported in commerce is also subject to Lacey Act liability — the ACA violation is the "underlying law" that triggers concurrent Lacey Act enforcement. This dual-law structure makes unauthorized import of Antarctic wildlife a particularly serious federal offense.
• Trafficking in marine reptile and mammal products: Lacey Act enforcement against illegal trade in sea turtle products, shark fins, and marine mammal products has continued. Shark fin importation — while regulated by NOAA — is prosecuted through both the Lacey Act (when fins are taken in violation of foreign law) and the Shark Conservation Act. CBP has increasingly used X-ray imaging and species identification technology to detect mislabeled or falsely declared wildlife products at ports of entry.
• Trump DOJ enforcement priorities and wildlife: The Trump DOJ's general de-emphasis on environmental enforcement has reduced Lacey Act prosecution rates for civil cases. Criminal enforcement (requiring willfulness) has been maintained for significant smuggling cases. The FWS's Law Enforcement division — which investigates Lacey Act wildlife violations — has been subject to staffing pressures; fewer agents mean fewer investigations. International cooperation on CITES enforcement remains active through the State Department and U.S. wildlife law enforcement attachés.