9.908 — DISTURBING WILDLIFE HABITS

Violations of "Statute 9.908" results in an Class A Misdemeanor

---

(a) Definitions

Disturbing Wildlife Habitats refers to any action or conduct that intentionally or recklessly disrupts, damages, or destroys ecosystems critical to the survival and well-being of protected or endangered wildlife species. This offense includes, but is not limited to, disrupting breeding grounds, destroying nests or burrows, damaging food sources, or altering natural landscapes in a way that endangers wildlife populations or their habitats.

(b) Elements

To establish the offense of disturbing wildlife habitats, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the following elements:

1. The defendant intentionally or recklessly engaged in an activity that disrupted or damaged a wildlife habitat, including but not limited to activities like:

   1. Destroying vegetation critical to local wildlife.

   2. Damaging or disturbing nesting sites, dens, or burrows.

   3. Altering the landscape in a manner that harms the habitat (e.g., diverting water sources, draining wetlands).

2. The activity took place in a designated wildlife habitat, or in an area known to be critical to the protection or preservation of wildlife, especially protected or endangered species.

3. The defendant’s actions resulted in harm or significant disruption to the natural environment or local wildlife, including:

   1. Disturbance of wildlife during critical periods such as breeding or migration.

   2. Negative impacts on food sources or shelter for animals.

   3. Long-term damage to the habitat that could negatively affect biodiversity or the survival of wildlife in the area.

4. The defendant was not authorized by law (e.g., permits or legal exemptions) to perform the activity that led to the disturbance.

(c) Defenses

Defenses against a charge of disturbing wildlife habitats may include:

1. Lack of Knowledge or Intent: The defendant did not know that their actions would cause harm to the wildlife habitat, and the disturbance was unintentional. The defendant may argue that they were unaware of the protected status of the area or species involved.

2. Authorized Activity: The defendant can prove they had proper authorization or a permit to engage in the activity that allegedly disturbed the habitat (e.g., conducting legal development, environmental management, or research activities).

3. Emergency Situation: The defendant's actions were necessary due to an emergency situation that required intervention in the habitat, such as preventing a greater environmental disaster or protecting human life.

4. Minimal Impact: The defendant can demonstrate that their actions had a negligible or temporary effect on the habitat and did not result in significant harm to wildlife or the ecosystem.

(d) Aggravating Factors

The court may consider the following aggravating factors when determining the severity of the offense:

1. Intentional Harm: The defendant intentionally harmed the habitat or wildlife, such as by deliberately destroying breeding grounds or critical resources to disrupt or eliminate a specific species.

2. Repeat Offender: The defendant has a history of violating environmental laws or engaging in activities that harm wildlife or ecosystems, showing a pattern of disregard for conservation efforts.

3. Endangered Species: The disturbance affected an endangered or threatened species, causing greater potential harm to their population or long-term survival. Large-Scale Damage: The defendant’s actions resulted in widespread or significant damage to the habitat, such as large-scale deforestation, destruction of wetlands, or disruption of a major wildlife migration corridor.

4. Commercial or Financial Motive: The defendant’s actions were driven by a commercial or financial incentive that prioritized profit over environmental protection, such as illegal logging, poaching, or land development.