SEOUL—Humane Society International/Korea and 346 South Korean academic and industry experts delivered a letter to the chair of National Assembly’s Health and Welfare Committee, Dong Kun Shin, urging the Korean government to pass bills promoting state-of-the-art science replacing animal testing.
Through a series of political forums to discuss these bills with authorities and wider stakeholders in the past few years, a general agreement has been established that South Korea is at a pivotal moment in advancing health and safety science without relying on animal models. To achieve this, the bills stipulate collaborative work between authorities by providing a basic plan every five years. In addition, a committee consisting of experts in alternative approaches to animal testing will be established pursuant to the Act.
One of the signatories of the letter, Professor Kyungmin Lim, at Ehwa University said: “As a researcher, I work closely with new method developers and end-users. I experience time and time again the need to have a legislation in Korea to support those scientists and a relevant network for collective efforts in developing and accepting alternative approaches to animal use.”
HSI/Korea’s director of government affairs, Borami Seo said: “There is an increasing interest in using modern technologies that are more predictive of human responses than animal models. Last May, ’Korea’s innovative strategic industry committee’ selected the cell-based human mimetic method organoid as an ‘innovative strategic technology’ and promised research and development support. We are witnessing an increasing demand for these technologies, and the PAAM Act and VAAM Act are exactly the bills that are crucial to ensure these research and development efforts lead to its regulatory uptake and industrial use in the field. Now is a critical time to pass this legislation.”
The course, led by HSI/Mexico, aims to empower and educate first responders and other authorities on animal welfare in cases of cruelty and disaster
Humane Society International / Mexico
HSI
TEPIC, Nayarit—This week, Humane Society International/Mexico conducted a training aimed at strengthening Nayarit’s response to animal cruelty and disaster situations. The event brought together 75 participants from a diverse group, including personnel from 911 emergency services, public prosecutors, municipal and state police, civil protection and firefighters and members of the Nayarit State Commission for the Protection of Fauna.
The comprehensive training covered a spectrum of crucial topics, including receiving reports of animal abuse and how to triage, assessing animal welfare based on the scientific model of the five domains, combatting dogfighting and including pets in disaster prevention plans.
“We want to take this opportunity to extend our congratulations to the General Prosecutor’s Office of Nayarit for the recent establishment of the Specialized Public Prosecutor’s Office for Domestic Animal Abuse Crimes,” said Claudia Edwards, program manager at Humane Society International/Mexico. “We’re grateful to see the prosecutor’s office prioritizing the safety and welfare of animals.”
A small evacuation drill was also carried out by the attendees with the guidance of civil protection and state firefighters.
#
Yulin authorities urged to ban Summer solstice dog meat event to protect public health and animal welfare
Humane Society International
Vshine
Chinese animal activists intervened to save the life of the last dog found alive at a dog meat shop in Yulin, Guangxi province, a month before the city’s summer solstice dog meat eating gets underway. The dog, named Lucky by his rescuers, was found chained up outside the shop, with a dog meat for sale sign in front of him. The Akita was the last dog of the day due scheduled for slaughter before the activists persuaded the shop keeper to give him up. There were obvious signs he had once been a pet dog and had therefore likely been stolen by dog thieves.
In light of China’s COVID-19 precautions, Chinese animal activists are urging Yulin authorities to ban the city’s annual June gathering for the so-called “Lychee and dog meat festival” for which the slaughter of dogs and cats for consumption increases. Launched in 2010 by dog meat traders to boost flagging sales, the event starts on June 21st and can attract thousands of visitors from across the province in southern China, who gather to eat dog meat stew and crispy dog meat at the city’s restaurants and stalls. Activists are appealing to local authorities to stop the mass public gathering from going ahead, to protect public health and animal welfare.
Liang Jia, a Guangxi activist, said: “The streets of Yulin are relatively quiet right now, and although you can see a few dog meat shops, stalls and dog slaughterhouses like normal, it’s nothing compared to how it will look in mid-June. While elsewhere in China, cities are in COVID-19 lockdown, it makes no sense for Yulin dog meat traders to be allowed to encourage visitors to travel across the province and into the city. As well as the appalling animal cruelty that will take place with thousands of dogs and cats bludgeoned to death, it’s an obvious public health risk. The Yulin authorities should be taking this seriously because it would be hugely embarrassing for the Yulin dog meat festival to become a super-spreader event.”
Most people in China don’t eat dogs, and even in Yulin, polls show that most citizens (72%) don’t regularly eat dog despite efforts by dog meat traders to promote it. Nationwide, there is significant Chinese opposition to the dog meat trade as concern for animal welfare grows. In 2020, China’s Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs made an official statement that dogs are companion animals and not “livestock” for eating. That same year, two major cities in mainland China – Shenzhen and Zhuhai – banned the consumption of dog and cat meat, a decision polling showed was supported by nearly 75% of Chinese citizens.
Dr Peter Li, China policy specialist for Humane Society International which supports the care of dogs rescued from China’s meat trade, said: “Lucky had a narrow escape because only one blowtorched dog carcass was left on sale at the shop, meaning he would have been next. But Lucky is just one of millions of dogs who suffer at the hands of dog traders across China, and one of thousands who end up in Yulin for the summer solstice event. His rescuers say he was super friendly, used to walking on a leash and happily jumped into the back of the activists’ car without hesitation, so it seems clear that he was once someone’s pet, and indeed many of the dogs killed for meat are pets stolen from back yards, outside shops and even from cars. COVID-19 precautions add another compelling reason to crack down on dog trade gatherings like this, in addition to the brutal cruelty and criminal activity.”
United Kingdom: Wendy Higgins, HSI director of international media: whiggins@hsi.org
Naturalist Chris Packham joins Humane Society International/UK in celebrating ban
Humane Society International / United Kingdom
CreativeNature_nl/iStock.com
LONDON—The public’s use of glue traps to catch mice and rats will be banned across England after a government-backed Private Members Bill received unanimous support during its third and final reading today in the House of Lords. The ban has been welcomed by animal charity Humane Society International/UK, which led the “Unstuck” campaign to end the public use of the “inhumane, indiscriminate and indefensible” glue boards, which immobilise the small mammals in strong adhesive in which they can suffocate, rip off skin and fur and break their limbs in desperate efforts to escape.
Despite their potential to cause prolonged and extreme animal suffering, glue traps are currently widely sold to the public in DIY and corner shops, as well as online, for as little as 99p. The traps also pose a serious risk to other species, with numerous reports each year of animals—including protected and endangered species like hedgehogs, wild birds and bats, and even pet cats—being caught and suffering often fatal injuries.
The legislation contains a limited exemption for so-called “pest” control operatives to apply to the Secretary of State for a licence to use a glue trap, which may be granted where there is “no other satisfactory solution” and where the action is required for “the purpose of preserving public health or safety”. The exemption mirrors that of the 2015 glue trap ban in New Zealand, where glue trap licences have fallen year on year since the ban’s introduction, with no approvals for use in 2021.
Claire Bass, executive director of Humane Society International/UK, said: “Glue traps are crude devices that cause horrific suffering to millions of animals. It is absolutely right that their public use will be banned, and we hope this will precipitate their removal from sale by retailers since it will be illegal for their customers to use them. It is immoral to subject small, sentient wildlife to being immobilised on these sticky boards, only to suffocate in the glue, die slowly of their injuries, or be ineptly killed by unprepared members of the public who resort to drowning or throwing them in the rubbish while still alive. The licensing regime for glue trap use by the ‘pest’ control industry will need to be strictly managed to ensure that these cruel products are no longer casually used with impunity.”
Once the Bill receives Royal Assent, the new law will make it an offence in England for a member of the public or any “pest” controller without a licence to set a glue trap to either deliberately or accidentally catch a rodent, with a fine and/or up to 51 weeks in prison. Discovering a glue trap but failing, without reasonable excuse, to ensure it is disabled will also constitute an offence.
Naturalist and campaigner Chris Packham, who supported HSI/UK’s Unstuck campaign, joined the charity in welcoming the ban, saying: “When wildlife, like mice and rats, are successful at living alongside humans, we label them ‘pests’ or ‘vermin’ and seem to think that’s a green light to completely disregard their welfare. Glue traps are a prime example of this. That attitude has to change. I commend HSI/UK on their Unstuck campaign victory and I’m delighted that cruel and unnecessary glue traps will now be taken out of public use, prompting a more compassionate and also effective approach to dealing with unwanted wildlife. This law is great news for mice and rats, but also for the many unintended victims who get stuck in the glue, such as delicate birds, grass snakes, frogs and hedgehogs.”
Conservative MP Jane Stevenson, who sponsored the Bill, said: “I am absolutely thrilled that my Glue Traps Bill has passed its Third Reading, meaning it will soon receive Royal Assent and become law. The banning of the use of glue traps by the general public is another step forward in the strengthening of animal welfare legislation in England, and I want to thank everyone involved in making this happen. The use of glue traps is cruel and barbaric, and has often led to animals not intended to be caught in these traps dying in the most inhumane way. Together with ministers at Defra and organisations such as HSI/UK, the RSPCA and others, I am pleased to have made a positive difference.”
HSI/UK advocates an ethical approach to wildlife management, addressing the root cause of problems through human behaviour change strategies and wildlife control and mitigation measures that are humane, with lethal interventions used only as a last resort to protect public health and safety. As well as being inhumane, killing animals like mice and rats typically does not offer a permanent solution to the problems their presence might cause, whereas measures such as removing food sources and blocking up access holes are effective in addressing such situations.
The ban will come into effect in England two years after receiving Royal Assent. In Scotland, the government made a commitment in January this year to ban glue traps following a review by the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission, and the Welsh government has also been seeking stakeholder views on a possible ban.
ENDS
Media contact: Wendy Higgins, director of international media: whiggins@hsi.org
Humane Society International / Indonesia
Ekky Bogor/AP Images for HSI
CENTRAL JAVA, Indonesia—A dog trafficker in Indonesia involved in the supply and slaughter of dogs for human consumption has been found guilty of breaking the law and sentenced to a record 17 months in jail. Despite a national government declaration that dogs are not considered food in Indonesia, this is only the country’s second conviction of a dog trafficker. Campaigners from the Dog Meat Free Indonesia coalition, which includes Humane Society International, hope it signals a new determination by the authorities to crack down on the cruel and dangerous trade.
The conviction of Guruh Tri Susilo follows a police interception last year of a truck carrying more than 50 terrified dogs as they arrived at a makeshift slaughterhouse in Sukoharjo. The owner of the slaughterhouse is awaiting trial, with a sentence reading expected at the end of April. The dogs had been trafficked from West Java on a grueling 365-mile journey, for which Guruh was found guilty of breaking Law 18 of 2009 chapter 89 regarding animal health and husbandry. The trade within which Guruh worked saw pet and roaming dogs stolen from the streets in West Java to meet demand in dog meat eating hotspots in Central Java. One such hotspot is the city of Solo where DMFI investigations in 2019 revealed that 13,700 dogs are slaughtered for meat each month.
Campaigners from DMFI, who attended the police interception at the slaughterhouse and took all surviving dogs into their care, welcomed the conviction for sending the strongest signal yet to dog traders across Indonesia that the dog meat business is illegal and will be punished. DMFI has been campaigning for years for a nationwide ban on the dangerous and illegal trade, slaughter and sale of dogs for human consumption.
Karin Franken, co-founder of Jakarta Animal Aid Network and national DMFI coordinator, said: “The DMFI applauds the authorities for bringing this case against Guruh to send a message to others operating in this illegal trade that they will be found and punished. However, for the law to truly act as a deterrent, we need longer jail times and for that we need a clear, unambiguous and strong nationwide ban on the dog meat trade so that prosecutors and judges can take the strongest possible action. We have raised these concerns with the Ministry of Agriculture and called for the revision of these laws so that people convicted of cases of animal cruelty like this one get the punishment they deserve to reflect the enormous suffering and harm as a result of their actions.”
Nationwide opinion polls conducted by Nielsen and commissioned by DMFI show that only a small minority of Indonesians (4.5%) ever consume dog meat, and 93% of all Indonesians support a ban. Despite this, over one million dogs are still illegally stolen, trafficked, slaughtered and sold for human consumption every year across Indonesia. Without a nationwide ban, the relevant laws and regulations that can be applied have weak penalties, and enforcement is rare, which enables the traders to continue to operate. DMFI campaigners warn that without stronger action at the local and national level, this cruel, profit-driven trade will continue to jeopardise not only the country’s international reputation, but also the health and safety of the entire country.
Lola Webber, director of campaigns to end dog meat for Humane Society International, a DMFI member group, said: “Seventeen months in an Indonesian jail is quite rightly going to be an unpleasant experience and it’s a groundbreaking sentence for such a crime in Indonesia. However, it pales into insignificance compared to the horrific brutality meted out to the thousands of dogs who will have died as a result of this trafficker’s actions. Neither does it reflect the enormous public health threat posed by the mass trafficking of dogs of unknown disease and vaccination status, undermining attempts to control rabies which is endemic across most of the country. We know that rabies-positive dogs are being brought into urban centres for this trade, and with so many dogs snatched from one area and trafficked to another hundreds of miles away, those agencies working hard to create vital herd immunity to rabies in local dog populations are fighting a losing battle. Only eight provinces in Indonesia hold rabies-free status, so without immediate and strong action, it is only a matter of time before more provinces face this deadly disease.”
In recognition of the grave risks to animal welfare and public health and safety, an ever-growing number of cities and regencies in Central Java have taken the matter into their own hands passing local regulations explicitly prohibiting the dog meat trade throughout their jurisdictions, including Sukoharjo and the Central Javan provincial capital of Semarang. Campaigners hope that this case will shine a light on the dog meat trade and encourage central, provincial, regency and city leaders to take stronger action,
Dog meat trade facts:
There are widely publicised reports directly linking the dog meat trade to rabies transmission in many parts of Asia where the dog meat trade operates, including Indonesia. Scientific reports have documented rabies-positive dogs being sold and slaughtered in markets in Indonesia, as well as in restaurants and slaughterhouses in China and Viet Nam.
Dog theft for the meat trade is a serious problem in Indonesia. Dog Meat Free Indonesia has interviewed many residents who have described their terrifying ordeal with armed traders stealing their pets at night. Despite the obvious law-breaking, thefts are rarely taken seriously by law enforcement, so the thieves often go unpunished.
Across Asia, opposition to the dog and cat meat trades is increasing, with an ever-growing number of countries and territories (Taiwan, Hong Kong, the Philippines, Thailand and two major cities in mainland China) banning the trade in and slaughter, sale and consumption of dogs. In September 2021, South Korea’s President Moon Jae-in suggested it could be time to consider a dog meat ban, and a government-initiated task force is currently considering the issue. President Elect Yoon Suk-yeol has also stated he would not oppose a dog meat ban provided there is social consensus.
The Dog Meat Free Indonesia campaign comprises Humane Society International, Animals Asia, FOUR PAWS, Animal Friends Jogja and Jakarta Animal Aid Network. Their campaign has received support from global and Indonesian superstars including a letter to President Joko Widodo in 2018 calling for action to end the country’s dog and cat meat trades signed by Simon Cowell, Sophia Latjuba, Yeslin Wang, Nadia Mulya, Lawrence Enzela, Cameron Diaz, Chelsea Islan, Ellen DeGeneres and Pierce Brosnan.
Lola Webber, Humane Society International’s End Dog Meat campaign director and Dog Meat Free Indonesia international coordinator: +6281337408768;Lwebber@hsi.org
Karin Franken, national coordinator Dog Meat Free Indonesia Coalition: +6282122487794; jaan_adopt@yahoo.com
Pups starving and dehydrated, some already dead on “truck from hell”
Humane Society International
Vshine
Dalian, CHINA—Chinese animal activists worked through the night with local police in the eastern Chinese province of Anhui to intercept a truck packed with 260 puppies and 22 adult dogs in such appalling conditions that one activist called it a “truck from hell.” The driver of the truck had taken the dogs—all destined to be sold for the meat or pet trade—on a gruelling 1,000 mile journey from Guizhou to Huainan before it was spotted on the highway by local activists. One activist called Teng, an anti-dog meat trade campaign volunteer for Humane Society International and its Chinese partner group, Vshine, quickly responded by alerting the police and coordinating local activists for a rescue effort.
When Teng reported the suspected illegal transport of live animals, the local police immediately despatched law enforcement officers to intercept the truck, forcing it to pull over on the side of the road. Teng reported that when the truck driver couldn’t provide the required documents to legally transport live animals across provincial borders, the dogs were confiscated into government custody where the activists were allowed to provide emergency care. The adult dogs had been due to be sold to a slaughterhouse for human consumption, while the puppies were intended to be sold as pets, although many were so sick by the time they were rescued they likely would also have ended up at the slaughterhouse.
Sadly, conditions were so dire that 12 of the puppies had died by the time the truck was intercepted, and a further 18 died soon after from parvovirus and distemper, both highly contagious diseases that cause severe illness and possible death in dogs. Many of the surviving puppies are suffering from dehydration, starvation and skin disease. One puppy in particular was covered in a painful skin condition leading to hair loss. He was in such a pitiful state, he immediately captured Teng’s heart and he offered to adopt him if he survived. The puppy—who he named Apple—was given emergency veterinary treatment but despite best efforts, he sadly passed away.
Teng said: “My heart sank when I spotted the truck on the highway that night. I knew it was going to be bad because there were so many dogs crammed inside, but I hadn’t expected there to be so many tiny puppies. They were all crying for our attention, covered in their own urine and faeces, and in really bad shape. It was disgusting what they endured, like a truck from hell for those poor dogs. I noticed little Apple right away because he had lost so much fur, and my heart just melted. I wanted to do everything I could to make it up to him so that he could forget his horrible ordeal, but his suffering had just been too much. I dread to think what would have happened to them all, and I’m so sad for all the ones like Apple who didn’t make it. We are grateful to the Huainan police who acted so swiftly to help save these dogs. We couldn’t have done it without them.”
The remaining dogs are now safe, receiving veterinary care, nutritious food, water and rest at nearby shelters. Once their quarantine period is over, they will be transported to Vshine’s shelter, which is funded by Humane Society International. The rescue comes just three months ahead of the mass slaughter of dogs and cats in Yulin, and is a timely reminder that suffering and death at the hands of the dog meat traders is the fate of millions of animals across China every year.
Dr Peter Li, HSI’s China policy specialist said: “This sad story is all too common in China, where hundreds of thousands of dogs and cats every month endure appalling suffering like this in order to make profit for the meat and pet trades. Chinese animal activists regularly alert police when trucks are identified, and in this case the Huainan police were exemplary in how they responded. It is my hope that more law enforcement agencies in China can act in the interests of public safety, public health and animal welfare like the Huainan police. The condition of these dogs was so terrible that it’s likely many more would have died before they reached their intended destination, and sickly puppies would probably have been sold for meat just like the adult dogs. Thank goodness for the Chinese animal activists and police who saved so many lives, and we are proud that that funding HSI provides can make such a difference to animals like this in such desperate circumstances.”
Facts about China’s dog meat trade:
Most people in China don’t eat dogs, in fact dog meat is only eaten infrequently by a small percentage of the Chinese population. A2016 survey found that more than half of Chinese citizens (51.7%) think the dog meat trade should be completely banned, and the majority (69.5%) have never eaten dog meat. (Poll conducted by Chinese polling company Horizon, and commissioned by Chinese group China Animal Welfare Association in collaboration with Humane Society International and Avaaz).
Even in Yulin (where the so-called dog meat “festival” takes place in June every year), a 2017 surveyconducted by Chinese state-registered charities and assisted by research staff from the Yulin Municipal Government, shows that most people (72%) don’t regularly eat dog despite efforts by dog meat traders to promote it.
In 2020, China’s Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs made an official statement that dogs are companion animals and not “livestock” for eating, and two major cities in mainland China—Shenzhen and Zhuhai—banned the consumption of dog and cat meat.
Media contact: Wendy Higgins, director of international media: whiggins@hsi.org
The Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment’s unlawful decision to permit the trophy hunting of 10 leopards, 150 elephants and 10 black rhinos to be reviewed
Humane Society International / Africa
Oliver de Ros/AP Images for HSI
CAPE TOWN—Today, the High Court of the Western Cape granted urgent interim relief pending the judgment of the interim interdict against the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment’s (DFFE) hunting and export quotas for leopard, black rhino and elephants.
The application for the hunting and export quotas was brought by animal protection organisation Humane Society International/Africa, and was based upon HSI/Africa’s argument that the DFFE failed to comply with the consultative process prescribed by the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act 10 of 2004 (NEMBA) when making the quota decision. HSI/Africa asserts that the relief provided, pending the judgment of the interim interdict, will provide opportunity to fully review the Minister’s Record of Decision by which these quota allocations were made.
NEMBA prescribes a specific and comprehensive consultative public participation process that must be undertaken prior to such a decision being taken.
HSI/Africa, during proceedings, argued that the 2022 trophy hunting quota, as issued by the DFFE’s Minister Barbara Creecy, was unlawful for the following reasons:
The DFFE announced the quotas on 25 February 2022 without consulting the public, which renders the decision invalid and unlawful;
The notice for the 2021 quota, which was purportedly deferred to 2022 by the DFFE, was in any event defective and thus rendered any quota decisions arising from that process invalid and unlawful;
The DFFE may not issue a quota for trophy hunting and export of elephant, black rhino or leopard without valid non-detriment findings.
In its 25 February 2022 press release, the DFFE argued that the hunting quotas allocated are based on the fact that “regulated and sustainable hunting is an important conservation tool in South Africa.” However, HSI/Africa’s 2022 Trophy Hunting by the Numbers Reportcontradicts this argument, confirming that 83% of trophies exported from South Africa are from captive-bred animals, non-native species or species such as caracal, baboons and honey badgers that are not subject to scientifically based management plans. Also, only 25% of native species exported as trophies are managed with a national conservation plan. Hunting animals in these circumstances cannot be understood to advance the conservation of biodiversity.
This month, Good Governance Africa released a report, authored by Dr Ross Harvey, entitled “Trophy Hunting in South Africa: Is it worth it? An evaluation of South Africa’s policy decision to elevate trophy hunting as a key conservation tool”. The report asserts that “the government’s apparent commitment to trophy hunting neither considers the opportunity costs associated with the practice nor its negative externalities”. Furthermore, it adds that whilst trophy hunting may generate some economic benefit, it is hardly enough to substantiate the overall harms that it does or to promote it as a conservation benefitting mechanism.
Tony Gerrans, executive director for Humane Society International/Africa says: “HSI has long sought engagement with the Department regarding the harm that trophy hunting causes—the damage to individual animals and to the conservation of threatened and endangered wildlife, as well as South Africa’s reputation as an ethical wildlife destination. Today’s granting of interim relief, pending the final judgment of Part A, is another step in making these harms public and ensuring they are given the necessary consideration in wildlife policy. As Good Governance’s new report demonstrates, the economic and conservation benefits of trophy hunting are materially overstated. It is not true to assert that without trophy hunting revenues, conservation in South Africa would be unfunded. More beneficial, transformational, long-term alternatives to the killing of threatened, vulnerable and endangered animals for fun already exist. Everyone has the right to have the environment protected for the benefit of present and future generations, through reasonable legislative and other measures that promote conservation.”
HSI/Africa will now await the final judgment on the interim interdict, which is expected in two weeks. The DFFE must make public the Minister’s Record of Decision that informed the quota announcement. Council will review all relevant documentation and a court will review the substantive matters basis of the quota of 10 vulnerable leopard, 150 endangered elephant and 10 critically endangered black rhino in 2022.
Species and Trophy Hunting facts:
The leopard is listed as ‘vulnerable’ on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species.
The African elephant is listed as ‘endangered’ on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
The black rhino is listed as ‘critically endangered’ on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
Astudy detailing South Africa’s role in the international trade in hunting trophies of mammal species listed under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) during the most recent five-year period for which data are available (2014-2018) demonstrated that:
South Africa is the second largest exporter of trophies of CITES-listed mammal species globally, exporting 16% of the global total of hunting trophies, 4,204 on average per year.
South Africa is the biggest exporter of CITES-listed mammal species in Africa. South Africa exported 50% more trophies than Africa’s second largest exporter Namibia, and more than three times that of Africa’s third largest exporter, Zimbabwe.
Between 2014 and 2018 South Africa exported:
574 African leopard trophies, or 115 per year on average. 98% of African leopard trophies exported from South Africa were wild source, while 2% were bred in captivity.
1,337 African elephant trophies, or 268 per year on average, virtually all wild sourced. 47% of the total were exported to the United States.
21 black rhino trophies, or five per year on average, all wild sourced.
About 83% of trophies exported are captive-bred animals or non-native species, and native species with neither a national conservation management plan nor adequate data on their wild populations or the impact of trophy hunting on them. This data challenges the assertion that trophy hunting is critical to in situ conservation.
The top five species exported as trophies from South Africa are African lion (mostly captive), chacma baboon, southern lechwe (captive, non-native), caracal and vervet monkey. The most common captive-source species exported from South Africa between 2014 – 2018 was the African lion, comprising 58% of the total number of captive-source trophies exported.
Most (90%) trophies exported from South Africa originated in South Africa.
68% of trophies exported from South Africa were from wild animals, while 32% were from captive animals –19% bred in captivity and 13% were born in captivity.
The top ten importing countries of South African wildlife trophies are:
Importing country
Percent of total
United States
54%
Spain
5%
Russia
4%
Denmark
3%
Canada
3%
Mexico
2%
Germany
2%
Hungary
2%
Sweden
2%
France
2%
ENDS
Media contact: Leozette Roode, HSI/Africa media and communications specialist: LRoode@hsi.org; +27 (0)71 360 1104
New poll shows 87% of British public want the Government to maintain or increase its level of action on animal protection, but bills to enshrine sentience and ban live exports are almost out of time, and sources suggest promised Animals Abroad Bill may be scrapped altogether
Humane Society International / United Kingdom
amadeusamse/Stock Photography
LONDON—Thirty-two of the UK’s leading animal protection organisations have written urgently to Prime Minister Boris Johnson to express alarm and opposition to reports that the Government has in mind to de-prioritise animal welfare and put at risk legislation to ban live exports, imports of hunting trophies, fur and foie gras, amongst other critical measures and manifesto commitments. The letter shares the results of a new YouGov poll, which affirms the strong public support for animal welfare, with almost two-thirds (63%) of respondents wanting the Government to increase its level of action on animal protection.
The letter is signed by CEOs from the UK’s leading animal protection organisations, including the RSPCA, Humane Society International/UK, Compassion in World Farming, and FOUR PAWS UK. It was sent the day after the Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill had its final Commons stages in Parliament, but was further delayed from becoming law by an amendment from 27 Conservative backbenchers, which was supported by the Government. The bill will now have to return to the House of Lords, with little time left this session. Animal sentience was the only piece of EU legislation that was not transposed when the UK formally left the EU on 1st January 2021.
In an opinion piece in The Daily Telegraph on 9th March, politics editor Christopher Hope reported on a conversation with a minister who told him there is likely to be “a bit more focus on what matters to our constituents and a bit less of the peripheral stuff. The party does care about [the environmental agenda] but it is a question of getting priorities right.”
Claire Bass, executive director of Humane Society International/UK, said:“The notion that animal welfare doesn’t matter to voters simply does not chime with public opinion. Even with all the other important government priorities at this time, including supporting Ukraine, almost 90% of Brits think the government should maintain or increase action for animals. Support is equally as strong (89%) amongst Conservative voters at the last election. The public want to see real progress for animals, including bans on imports of cruel fur and foie gras, so Number 10 will appear tone deaf if it waters down ambitions for animal welfare, or tries to quietly dispose of the promised Animals Abroad Bill. Reneging on manifesto commitments and promises from its 2021 Action Plan on Animal Welfare would be a betrayal of both animals and the British public.”
James West, senior policy manager at Compassion in World Farming, said: “We are disappointed not to see animal sentience once again enshrined in UK law by now, and trust that the Government will ensure the Sentience Bill quickly passes through Parliament. We are deeply concerned that numerous other legislative and policy pieces which the Government promised have not been delivered – are the high hopes generated by the Government’s Action Plan for Animal Welfare going to be shattered? We urge the Government to ensure that they give animal welfare the same importance that the majority of the British public does. In particular, we call for swift progress on legislation banning live exports and the sale or import of foie gras, as well as significant steps to End the Cage Age in farming.”
Introduced into the Commons in June 2021, the Kept Animals Bill hasn’t been seen in Parliament since 9th November. Campaigners stress that if the government is going to deliver a number of manifesto commitments such as a ban on live animal exports, they must ensure it is given time to become law as soon as possible.
Emma Slawinski, director of advocacy and policy at the RSPCA, said:“The Government promised the public that they would ban live exports, stop the illegal puppy trade and deliver animal sentience when they put these into their 2019 manifesto. This new polling shows the public desire to get these delivered has not diminished and as we approach the first anniversary of the Government’s animal welfare action plan we need to see a new resolve from the Government and urge them to deliver on their promises.”
Sonul Badiani-Hamment, UK country director at FOUR PAWS UK, said: “After years of Brexit stagnation, last year the Government brought forward an ambitious policy agenda with the Animal Welfare Action Plan. With promises of progressive legislation such as the fur, foie gras and trophy hunting import bans, the UK would finally be a global leader in animal welfare whilst delivering on the wishes of the overwhelming majority of the British public. To see them now backing away from their commitments in the face of political opposition by a small minority, is nothing short of cowardice.”
A change.org petition set up by Chris Packham urging the government ‘#DontBetrayAnimals suffering for fur and foie gras’ now stands at over 125,000 signatures since it was launched three weeks ago. The petition was set up after it was reported by the BBC that some cabinet ministers were opposed to the bans because they restrict personal choice, in spite of strong public support. A YouGov poll on 22/23rd February reveals 73% of the public back a fur import ban, including 59% of Conservative voters at the last election, who strongly support a ban, up almost 20% since a 2018 poll.
ENDS
Media contact: Mathilde Dorbessan, HSI/UK media and communications manager: +44 (0)7341 919874
Humane Society International / United Kingdom
BornFreeUSA/HSI/HSUS
LONDON—Amidst concerns that the UK government could be considering abandoning a ban on cruel fur imports, a shocking new undercover investigation exposing the cruelty of animal trapping in the United States, including for the fur trade, has been released by animal welfare and conservation non-profit, Born Free USA, in collaboration with Humane Society International.
An undercover investigator accompanied three trappers out in the field in the U.S. state of Iowa in November/December 2021, to witness how animals are trapped and killed for fur and recreation. Prior to that he had attended the National Trappers Association Convention in July and a state-sponsored “Trappers Education Course” in November. The investigation’s findings are harrowing and reveal the inherent cruelty of trapping.
Video and audio evidence captured includes:
Trapped raccoons being bludgeoned with a baseball bat causing protracted death.
A trapper standing on the neck of a raccoon after the animal has been beaten with a bat.
Animals being thrown in the back of a pickup truck after being bludgeoned but without confirmation of death. One raccoon was later found to still be alive and was hit multiple times again with the bat.
A dead fox in a leghold trap who had struggled so hard to free himself that his leg had snapped clean through. The fox had likely been killed by coyotes as he was unable to defend himself or run away.
The bloody toe of a coyote torn off and left in the jaws of a trap during the animal’s escape. The trapper added the toe to his grisly souvenir collection of other previously retrieved toes, displayed on his truck dashboard.
Photographic evidence of a dead cat among the bodies of wild animal trapping victims, demonstrating that traps are also dangerous and deadly to non-targeted animals, including companion animals.
A representative from the Department of Natural Resources volunteering information on loopholes in trapping law, and trainers on a state sponsored education course laughing as they talk about illegal practices.
Claire Bass, executive director of Humane Society International/UK, said: “This investigation provides a graphic account of the casual disregard for animal suffering that underpins the whole fur trade. As if it’s not enough to be caught for hours or even days in torturous traps that should belong only in horror films, the animals we filmed also endured protracted and violent deaths, being repeatedly bludgeoned and left to suffer, all to be skinned and sold for fur fashion. For as long as the UK continues to import and sell fur from animals caught in the wild or bred on factory fur farms, we remain complicit in this cruelty. I urge Boris Johnson to watch our video evidence to see for himself the abhorrent cruelty of the fur trade, and heed the enormous public support to ban fur. Britain must not be party to this nasty trade anymore.”
Will Travers OBE, co-founder and executive president of Born Free, said: “Trapped: Exposing the Violence of Trapping in the U.S. has two objectives: to document the reality of trapping, where sentient beings are brutally exploited, and lives are ended with such casual disregard and lack of compassion; and to accelerate measures to bring an end to this cruel practice and its associated activities – including selling the skins of trapped animals for profit.
As a species, we have done many things of which we can be justifiably proud. But not when it comes to trapping and the fur trade. This archaic throwback to the past is well beyond its sell-by date and is a stain on our humanity. It’s time we evolved. We implore lawmakers in the U.K., the U.S., and beyond, to take swift action to call time on trapping.”
This and previous investigations clearly demonstrate that trapping frequently involves extreme animal suffering. The cruelties exposed are in stark contrast to the PR claims of fur industry certification schemes such as Furmark, which promise that North American Wild Fur programs“prioritize the sustainability and welfare of all fur-bearing species”. Our evidence also completely undermines the fur trade’s claims that wild fur trapping is “subject to a comprehensive system of laws, regulations, checks and controls.”
Trapping animals for fur with leg hold traps has been banned in the UK for more than sixty years (as well as being banned or heavily restricted in 108 countries worldwide), and fur farming has been banned across the UK since 2003. Despite this, in a clear double standard, the UK has imported more than £850million of fur from countries including Finland, Italy, Poland, China and the United States. In the past decade (2011 to 2020) the UK has imported more than £20 million of fur (both farmed and trapped) from the U.S. according to the HMRC.
Banning fur imports commands enormous public support – latest YouGov polls show that 73% of Brits support a fur sales ban, with 74% of Conservative voters wanting to see the ban in place, up from 64% in 2018. Furthermore, 63% of Brits think the government should increase its level of action of animal protection. A ban had been set to be included in the upcoming Animals Abroad Bill, but following opposition from cabinet member Jacob Rees-Mogg and others, the government is believed to be considering abandoning it, along with a ban on imports of foie gras.
The UK government set out a clear ambition to be a ‘world leader in animal welfare’ with action on fur imports pledged in its Action Plan for Animal Welfare last year, and repeated ministerial statements confirming that post-Brexit the UK would be free to explore opportunities for a ban.
In the United States, BFUSA and HSI are calling on U.S. lawmakers to pass and implement the Refuge from Cruel Trapping Act which would ban trapping using body-gripping, leg-hold, snare and similar traps.
An increasing number of fashion designers and retailers are dropping fur cruelty. In the last few years alone Canada Goose, Oscar de la Renta, Valentino, Gucci, Burberry, Versace, Chanel, Prada and other high-profile brands have announced fur-free policies. In addition, major online fashion retail platforms Net-A-Porter, Farfetch and MyTheresa have adopted fur-free policies. In the United Kingdom, Harrods, Harvey Nichols, House of Fraser and Flannels are among the few remaining retailers to still sell fur, including wild trapped fur from North America, and House of Bruar and Etsy sell fur from raccoons trapped in the wild in the United States for products including hats and keychains. Canada Goose, which for years has trapped coyote fur at the centre of its brand, has now ended the purchase of new fur and will end manufacturing products with fur by the end of 2022. Other brands still using North American wild trapped fur (mainly coyote) are Parajumpers, Woolrich and Yves Salomon.**
* All figures, unless otherwise stated, are from YouGov Plc. Total sample size was 1,687 adults. Fieldwork was undertaken on 22-23 February 2022. The survey was carried out online. The figures have been weighted and are representative of all GB adults (aged 18+).
** While there is no suggestion that these brands obtain furs from this trapper or this State, the investigation demonstrates the kind of suffering animals caught for fur might typically endure.
Humane Society International / Europe
Waldo Swiegers/AP Images for HSI
BRUSSELS —Animal protection campaigners have urged the European Commission to increase its cooperation with the Vietnamese authorities to tackle the illegal trade in African wildlife species. At an online conference, hosted by the Belgian Green MEP Saskia Bricmont, a report from the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) was presented, which highlighted the significant role of Vietnamese wildlife crime networks operating in Africa. It explored the scale of illegal trade from Africa to Asia facilitated by such syndicates and its impact on Africa’s wildlife and those authorities mandated to protect it.
The panel debate, which included representatives from the Vietnamese CITES Management Authority, Vietnam Customs and Environmental Police, the European Commission and a Nigerian wildlife protection NGO, addressed the shared challenges faced by law enforcement authorities in Vietnam and Nigeria in disrupting transnational criminal networks trafficking wildlife from Africa to Asia. During the discussion, the panel looked at how Vietnam can further tackle its role in wildlife crime and sought to identify ways in which the EU could support Vietnam to achieve this, including through the provisions of the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA).
Belgian MEP Saskia Bricmont (Greens/EFA), who hosted the event, said:
“We are in the midst of a global biodiversity crisis. Urgent and concerted action is needed to clamp down on the trafficking of wildlife. The EU-Vietnam trade deal explicitly commits both Parties to adopting and implement appropriate effective measures to bring about a reduction of illegal trade in wildlife, such as awareness raising campaigns, monitoring and enforcement measures. I urge the European Commission to reach out to the Vietnamese government to offer both financial and technical assistance to help them combat the scourge of wildlife trafficking, which is pushing so many species towards the brink of extinction.”
Mary Rice, Executive Director of the Environmental Investigation Agency, said:
“Vietnam has made sterling efforts, such as revising its Penal Code to significantly penalise wildlife crime, to tackle the illegal wildlife trade in-country. However, Vietnam’s reputation is tarnished by the fact that it is the primary destination for illegal wildlife products sourced from across Africa and shipped by criminal networks directly or indirectly to meet the demand in Vietnam and beyond. These networks are accelerating the decline of Africa’s biodiversity and are exacerbating corruption and weak rule of law in many source and transit countries in the continent. It is unfortunate that the actions of a minority of Vietnamese citizens—and not to mention the complicity of EU citizens in this wildlife trafficking too—are sullying the country’s reputation and undermining their efforts to stamp out the illegal trade.”
Dr Joanna Swabe, senior director of public affairs for Humane Society International/Europe notes:
“The EU also needs to step up to help the African nations whose wildlife populations are being blighted by poachers and organised criminal networks seeking to profit from the illegal trade in endangered species, and most certainly needs to better penalise EU citizens who are involved in this heinous trade. For example, we have recently seen a case involving both Polish and Vietnamese nationals who have attempted to launder rhino hunting trophies imported legally into the EU into the Southeast Asian rhino horn trade. In addition to increasing European collaboration with and providing more support to the Vietnamese authorities, we also need to make sure that here in Europe wildlife crime does not pay. At present, this kind of crime is often viewed as being relatively low-risk and high income generating due primarily to the lack of severe penalties and low chances of being apprehended or prosecuted. We hope that the revision of the Environmental Crime Directive will help rectify this situation in the EU, as well as the updated EU Action Plan against Wildlife Trafficking providing greater resources and impetus for combating illegal wildlife trade.”
The event was organised by Humane Society International/Europe and the Environmental Investigation Agency. Speakers and panellists included:
Mrs. Ha Thi Tuyet Nga, director for Vietnam CITES MA
Mr. Jorge Rodriguez Romero, deputy head of unit at EU Commission for DG Environment
Ms. Linh Nguyen, wildlife campaigner for EIA UK
Mr. Wilson Ogoke, wildlife policy coordinator for Africa Nature Investors
Moderator: Ms. Judith Kirton-Darling, chair of the Domestic Advisory Group for the EU-Vietnam FTA
Background
Vietnam has made important progress in tackling wildlife crime, both in terms of improving as well as implementing relevant national legislation. For example, Vietnam’s revised Penal Code, which came into effect on 1st January 2018, significantly increases penalties for wildlife crime. There have also been a large number of cases resulting in deterrent penalties imposed on individuals convicted for wildlife crime offences.
Despite this, a review of wildlife seizures originating from Africa made at seaports in Vietnam since 2018 highlighted that, not a single ivory and pangolin scale seizure at seaports in Vietnam has resulted in arrests, prosecutions or convictions, suggesting that investigations have been inadequate. Between 2018-21, the seized ivory and pangolin scales represent at least 2,200 dead elephants and 36,000 pangolins and provide yet more evidence that organised criminal syndicates continue to exploit Vietnam as a hub for illegal wildlife trade. Vietnam has also made several attempts to communicate with South African enforcement authorities in the interest of cooperating to crack down on illegal wildlife trade, but most of these have been unanswered.
According to EIA seizure data, since 2015, Nigeria has become the primary African country implicated in ivory and pangolin scale smuggling incidents destined for Vietnam with seizures of at least 18 tonnes and 68 tonnes respectively. 2020 saw a drop in ivory and other wildlife seizures due to the global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic yet since 2021, approximately 17 tonnes of ivory and pangolin scales have been seized either leaving Nigeria bound for Vietnam or in Vietnam arriving from Nigeria, clearly demonstrating the ongoing illicit trade corridor.
The Trade and Sustainable Development chapter of the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA), which recently entered into force, includes a number of important provisions relating to wildlife protection. These provisions should allow the EU to assist Vietnam with reducing the demand for wildlife products and increasing the Vietnamese government’s enforcement capacity with the training and tools it needs to tackle the scourge of wildlife trafficking.
In December 2021, the European Commission adopted a legislative proposal to revise the existing Environmental Crime Directive.
The existing EU Action Plan against Wildlife Trafficking is currently being reviewed and a revised version is anticipated to be published by the European Commission by the summer of 2022.
