Bill Overview
Title: Combating Wildlife Trafficking Financing and Proceeds Study Act
Description: This bill requires the Department of the Treasury and the Fish and Wildlife Service to jointly study the illicit financing of and other matters related to wildlife trafficking, including the national security implications and the use of online platforms to facilitate wildlife trafficking.
Sponsors: Rep. Dean, Madeleine [D-PA-4]
Target Audience
Population: People working in and affected by wildlife conservation and trafficking efforts
Estimated Size: 50000
- The legislation primarily focuses on studying the financial underpinnings of wildlife trafficking, targeting entities involved in combating this issue.
- Individuals working in environmental protection, wildlife conservation, and law enforcement related to wildlife trafficking will be directly impacted.
- The study may impact policy-making and regulations, affecting entities and people involved in legal and illegal wildlife trade.
- Local communities dependent on wildlife conservation for tourism may see indirect benefits.
- Decision-makers in online platforms might be affected if their platforms are studied for misuse in trafficking.
Reasoning
- The policy appears to have a focused and narrow target group, primarily involving professionals working directly with wildlife conservation and law enforcement related to wildlife trafficking.
- With a population estimate of about 50,000 affected individuals in the US, this implies a careful selection of communities or professions that interact with this realm.
- The impact on wider communities, such as those involved in online platforms or benefitting indirectly from wildlife tourism, might be minimal but should not be ignored.
- This policy involves a low direct cost, indicating that while the immediate wellbeing of individuals directly concerned (like those in law enforcement or conservation) might not see a direct increase, the long-term benefits including regulatory effects could have significant nationwide implications.
- Scoring the commonness of each profile ensures a mix of variety, wherein the direct and indirect influence of this policy is considered.
Simulated Interviews
Wildlife Conservationist (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The study could offer more resources to our work, which is often underfunded.
- Positive long-term impact anticipated if the study leads to more comprehensive laws.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Law Enforcement Officer (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Additional studies might stretch our limited resources but could also identify new ways to tackle trafficking.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Software Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The incorporation of tech into wildlife trafficking studies can illuminate how online platforms are misused.
- Might increase government scrutiny on tech companies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Online Platform Security Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our platform might have to face more stringent checks and balances, which is necessary.
- I've seen firsthand how trafficking operations use online channels.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Retired Park Ranger (St. Louis, MO)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've battled poaching during my career, and if this study can prevent future crimes, it's worth it.
- Concerned about missing boots on the ground due to funds shifted towards studies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Wildlife NGO Volunteer (Denver, CO)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy has potential if it includes actionable findings and real-world applications.
- I hope it can lead to better corporate engagement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Tourism Business Owner (Miami, FL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Preserving local wildlife is key to keeping our business sustainable.
- I see the benefit for future investment, albeit indirectly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Student in Environmental Science (Chicago, IL)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might give more direction to my future career path.
- I hope it results in increased funding for internships and scholarships.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Wildlife Lawyer (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The findings could bolster cases against traffickers and shape note-worthy policies.
- Expect an uptick in workload.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Policy Analyst (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's exciting that more data could drive reforms and effective policies.
- I anticipate that the scope might widen if results are impactful.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The study is crucial for understanding and possibly mitigating wildlife trafficking as a national security issue.
- Collaboration between the Treasury and Fish and Wildlife Services is key, highlighting inter-agency cooperation.
- Potential findings might influence future regulatory or legislative actions impacting online platforms used for illegal trafficking.
- Budget implications are minimal and mostly affect inter-departmental resource allocation.