Consultation on controls on the import and export of hunting trophies

Stephen Wiggins Article, Speaking Out 4 Comments

Update: IWB’s submission: IWB – Consultation Response and Call for Evidence, Updated 12 December 2019

 

The United Kingdom Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) has opened the “Consultation on controls on the import and export of hunting trophies” (opened 2 November 2019, closing on 25 January 2020).

The consultation is in two parts – both open to on-line completion, plus submission before the deadline via postal mail, or e-mail:

in writing to: Trophy Hunting Team, Seacole building, 2 Marsham Street, London, SW1P 4DF;

or by emailing [email protected]

 

Part One –  Consultation on controls on the import and export of hunting trophies

Download Guidance (PDF): Hunting Trophy Consultation Document

On-line Submission: Consultation

Four options are included in this consultation for consideration. They are:

a. Option one: A ban on the import and export of hunting trophies from certain species;

b. Option two: Stricter requirements for clear benefits to conservation and local communities to be demonstrated before hunting trophies from certain species are permitted to enter or leave the UK;

c. Option three: A ban on all hunting trophies entering or leaving the UK;

d. Option four: Do nothing – continue to apply current controls based on internationally agreed rules.

The options do not need to be considered as exclusive. Options may be combined, for example hunting trophies from a limited number of species may be prohibited entirely, with strict import requirements being adopted for others. We would be interested in hearing your views on these options, including suggestions for modification or refinement.”

 

Part Two – Call for evidence on the scale and impacts of the import and export of hunting trophies

Download Guidance (PDF): Hunting Trophy Evidence Document

On-line submission: Call for Evidence

 

It is important for individuals to at the very least express their views to Part 1 , as no doubt this consultation will be subject to intense lobbying from all sides of the trophy hunting debate.

 

Further Reading

Boris Johnson accused of hypocrisy over trophy hunting ban,” The Times (pay wall), 11 January 2020

Trophy Hunting letter to The Times (pay wall), 11 January 2020

Can Africa’s last lions be saved from human greed? Trophy hunting threatens to silence the prides,” Cyril Christo, The Hill, 10 January 2020

Brit trophy hunting firm sells ‘magical’ trips to kill reindeer before Christmas,” The Mirror, 15 December 2019 – (Hendry, Ramsay & Waters – “Scotland’s Premier Sporting Agency)

No place for trophy hunting in the sixth extinction,” Ross Harvey, Daily Maverick (Conservation Action Trust), 3 December 2019

UK GOVT BAN ON TROPHY HUNTING IMPORTS PUBLIC CONSULTATION LAUNCHED,” Pieter Kat (LionAid), Change.org, 2 November 2019

 

 

 

 

Comments 4

  1. Pingback: 2019 Review – International Wildlife Bond

  2. John Cain

    Make the animals a profitable enough venture. Soon they will be breed to the point they will no longer be endangered. All the while the rich can pay to hunt them. This would fund their re-emerging into the wild.
    FYI the Pierce David deer was thought to be exterminated hundreds of years ago. It was kept alive int the Emperor of China’s hunting preserve.
    Capitalism to the rescue.

    1. Post
      Author
      Stephen Wiggins

      Make the animals a profitable enough venture. Soon they will be breed to the point they will no longer be endangered. All the while the rich can pay to hunt them. This would fund their re-emerging into the wild.” But animals in such commercial breeding ventures you advocate are often exploited for pure profit, noting to do with conservation of the wild species whatsoever. One only has to look at the captive/canned lion hunting/lion bone trade to see the abhorrent “profitable” horror show.

      FYI the Pierce David deer was thought to be exterminated hundreds of years ago. It was kept alive in [t] the Emperor of China’s hunting preserve. Capitalism to the rescue.” Regardless of your illuminating historical example, such “capitalism”/exploitation of wildlife is not a panacea………some species do not have a natural development in such breeding facilities – eg. captive bred lions lack the skills (hunting, natural pride dynamics etc.) to be released into the wild without considerable risk, not to mention the genetic issues and potential cross contamination of wild species by such releases.

      Your views are somewhat simplistic in reality for many endangered species, eg. the African lion is still hunted by “rich” people/commercially exploited as you espouse etc. and still the wild species is in decline. Outdated “capitalism” when applied to such species has not worked and is not working now.

      By the way, it would seem excessive hunting caused the demise of the Père David’s deer in the wild in the first place (which doesn’t really help support any pro-hunting stance as a panacea, just how hunters managed to stop themselves from sending a species to complete extinction – same as the near collapse of wild rhino population at the approach of the 1900s – FYI due to over-hunting and poaching, with as few at 50 wild White rhino at the turn of the century):

      Due to hunting and land reclamation, the demography of the Père David’s deer became even smaller. By 1939, the last of the wild species were shot and killed” – Zhou, K. 2007. Chinese Milu’s prosperity, decline and protection. In: J. Xia (ed.), The International Symposium on the 20th Anniversary of Milu Returning Home, pp. 15-19. Beijing Press, Beijing, China – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Père_David%27s_deer

      South African populations of black and white rhinos (subspecies C. s. simum), both of which had been nearly extinct in the year 1900 due to uncontrolled hunting….” – Taylor et al., 2017 – https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320716307583

Leave a Reply