PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 3, 2015
African Elephant Conservation and Legal Ivory Possession Act of 2015
This bill reauthorizes the African Elephant Conservation Act (AECA) through FY2020.
Ivory may be imported or exported under the AECA and the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) if: (1) the raw ivory or worked ivory is solely for a museum; (2) it was lawfully importable into the United States on February 24, 2014, regardless of when it was acquired; or (3) the worked ivory was previously lawfully possessed in the United States.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The Department of the Interior may station one U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service law enforcement officer in the primary U.S. diplomatic or consular post in each African country that has significant population of African elephants to assist local wildlife rangers in protecting the elephants and facilitating the apprehension of individuals who illegally kill them or assist in killing them.
Interior must certify a finding that a county is a significant transit or destination point for illegal ivory trade and report the certification to the President for the purposes of the Pelly Amendment to the Fishermen's Protective Act of 1967. The Pelly Amendment authorizes the President to embargo wildlife products when the Interior certifies that a country is engaging in trade or certain actions that diminishes the effectiveness of an international agreement for the conservation of endangered or threatened species.
This bill authorizes under the AECA and ESA: (1) the possession, sale, delivery, receipt, shipment, or transportation of African elephant ivory that has been lawfully imported or crafted in the United States, and (2) the importation of a sport-hunted African elephant trophy if the country in which the elephant was taken had elephants that are listed on Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) at the time the trophy was taken.
People & committees
Rep. Young, Don [R-AK-At Large] · R–AK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.697 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.697 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.697 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.697 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.