Issue Type: Wildlife

Wildlife

Bill to ban the import, export and re-export of hunting trophies of animals belonging to species at risk resubmitted, inspired by HSI/Europe campaign

Humane Society International / Europe

HSI

BRUSSELS —The issue of trophy hunting is back on the Italian political agenda with the new presentation by Hon. Michela Vittoria Brambilla of a bill aimed at banning the import, export and re-export, to and from Italy, of hunting trophies obtained from animals who are protected by CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species).

A bill on the same issue was presented in 2021 by members of the Five Star Movement, with support from Humane Society International/Europe who is currently leading an EU-wide initiative to ban certain hunting trophy imports and exports to and from Europe. The initiative of Hon. Brambilla—the first to pick up the baton in this struggle—is back on the agenda of this new legislature, despite it often being ignored by politicians. This initiative follows the Parliament resolution calling for an EU-wide ban on the import of hunting trophies of species protected by CITES.

Hon. Brambilla, who served as president of the Parliamentary Intergroup for Animal Rights during the 18th legislature and is still president of the Italian League for the Defense of Animals and the Environment, presented the bill during the first parliamentary session on Oct. 13, 2022.

According to CITES data, in the five-year period from 2014 to 2020, the European Union, the world’s second-largest importer of hunting trophies after the United States, imported more than 20,000 hunting trophies of animals belonging to 79 internationally protected species. Trade data shows that 427 trophies were imported into Italy from animals such as hippos, elephants, lions, leopard, polar bears, and a critically endangered black rhinoceros.

It is still legal to import hunting trophies of protected species, even if they are endangered. This bill to put an end to these imports meets with vast support of the Italian population. Polls show that 86% of Italians surveyed are against trophy hunting of all wild animals and 74% are in favor of banning the import of hunting trophies into Italy. Moreover, the #NotInMyWorld petition launched by HSI/Europe in Italy has already collected more than 42,000 signatures.

Hon. Brambilla, president of the Italian League for the Defense of Animals and the Environment, said: “In Panama from November 14 to 25, 184 CITES member countries will consider 52 proposals to increase or decrease protection measures for 600 species of wild animals and plants. It is essential that Italy plays its part here. At the national level and on its own, our country can already do a lot for threatened species, such as banning the import, export and re-export of hunting trophies from animals like tigers, rhinos and hippos. This practice is largely unknown by Italians, but is not as marginal as one might think. Not only because of the numbers, which are significant in a context of near-extinction of many endangered animal populations, but because of the very nature of trophy hunting, which sacrifices an invaluable heritage to the entertainment of hunters. I will work with the utmost conviction on gathering the broad support in Parliament to this bill.”

Martina Pluda, HSI/Europe’s director for Italy, said: “It is intolerable and irresponsible for our country to still be involved today in this type of colonial practices, which are cruel and threatening the future of so many species. As trophy hunting is a competition, the animals targeted are those who have the most impressive physical characteristics—the thick mane, long tusks and developed horns—of adult individuals in full reproductive age and often holding the functions of guide and protection. Therefore, they are critical to the survival and genetic integrity of that species. A ban on the import, export and re-export of hunting trophies of protected species in multiple EU member states would effectively help stop the killing of these animals. It is time for the Italian government to act responsibly, as other European countries are already doing and as the European Parliament has called for. We thank Congresswoman Brambilla for her political commitment to this cause.”

The opposition to trophy hunting is growing fast and is crystalized in many initiatives in Europe:

  • The Belgian Federal Parliament unanimously passed a resolution demanding that the government immediately stop authorizing trophy import permits of species protected under certain international trade regulations.
  • This year, in addition to Italy, the governments of Spain and Poland are actively considering policy options to ban the import and export of certain hunting trophies supported by strong public opinion polls; based on a 2021 representative survey, the majority of citizens in each country support a hunting trophy import ban.
  • Prior to these developments, the Netherlands and France pioneered this paradigm shift in Europe. In 2015, France implemented a ban on the import of lion-hunting trophies. In the same year, the Dutch government adopted a decision to ban the trophy imports of over 200 species, which was implemented in 2016.
  • A recent policy statement signed by approximately 170 conservation and animal protection non-governmental organizations from around the globe is also calling for an urgent end to trophy hunting. Several of these organizations are from key source countries for hunting trophies.

ENDS

Media contact: Adeline Fischer, senior communications manager: +4917631063219; afischer@hsi.org  

Humane Society International / Global

Phase out the captivity of elephants and protect wildlife from roadside zoos in Canada

“Country delegates are justifiably angry and frustrated by the disruptive and disrespectful behaviour of pro-whaling nations at this IWC.” - Humane Society International

Humane Society International / Europe

Minke whale
Alamy 

POROTOŽ, Slovenia—On the final day of the International Whaling Commission meeting in Slovenia, pro-conservation countries including Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, India and Mexico united in calling for an urgent review of voting rules to prevent pro-whaling countries holding votes to ransom with their non-attendance, thereby breaking the quorum required for votes to take place.

At yesterday’s meeting, Antigua and Barbuda, Cambodia, Iceland, Kiribati, Laos, Morocco and St. Lucia amongst others, failed to be present in the room to prevent a vote on the creation of a South Atlantic Whale Sanctuary. Negotiations earlier in the week had suggested that a sufficient number of countries had intended to vote in favour of the sanctuary had it gone ahead. A summary of country views expressed today can be found below.

Rebecca Regnery, senior director for wildlife at Humane Society International, said from the meeting: “Country delegates are justifiably angry and frustrated by the disruptive and disrespectful behavior of pro-whaling nations at this IWC. The world’s only international whale protection organisation is being held ransom by a handful of countries that merely need to step outside of the room in order to stand in the way of progress. Clearly a shake-up of IWC rules is needed. The need to protect whales is far too urgent for these kind of games. Delegates from Latin American countries, including Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay that proposed the sanctuary are palpably furious here at IWC at the use of such undemocratic tactics and vow to continue fighting for the whales. Although the sanctuary was not approved, we remain hopeful because efforts to undermine the ban on commercial whaling were unsuccessful and a resolution to address the issue of plastics in the oceans was adopted by consensus.”

The Buenos Aires Group countries from Latin America called for the IWC to take a firmer stance to stop what is “an offense to our countries.” They said the IWC was “being held hostage with its hands tied,” and that “kicking the can down the road is what pro-whaling countries do every time they disagree with something they don’t want.” The Buenos Aires Group noted that the proposal most likely would have been adopted if country delegates had not left the room and stressed that it remains committed to the conservation of whales and the marine environment and pursuit of a sanctuary to protect whales in the South Atlantic Ocean.

Australia expressed its deep disappointment and said that events “directly undermined the good faith governance of the IWC” and that the “poor behaviour” was exploiting the uncertainty in the Rules of Procedure. Australia called on the IWC to ensure that this undermining cannot happen again, and to agree a new ROP on this as an order of first business at the next IWC in Peru in 2024 to ensure that proper governance can be maintained. In addition to Australia, support for the Sanctuary proposal was also expressed on the floor by India and the United Kingdom amongst others.

In spite of multiple attempts—some blatant and some subtle—to undermine the moratorium on commercial whaling, it remained intact at the end of this meeting. The adoption by consensus of the Marine Plastics Resolution to provide IWC support for international negotiations on a global plastics treaty, and the endorsement of the whale welfare tool to assess the condition of whales who are stranded or otherwise suffering, are further proof that the IWC continues to focus on conservation of whales rather than returning to its whaling roots.

HSI’s whale experts at the IWC meeting are available for interviews.

ENDS

Media contact: Wendy Higgins, Director of International Media: whiggins@hsi.org

Frasers Group—including House of Fraser, FLANNELS and Sports Direct—announces commitment to stop purchasing fur

Humane Society International / United Kingdom

Jillian Cooper/iStock.com 

LONDON­—Frasers Group, owner of House of Fraser department stores, as well as luxury retail chain Flannels and retail brands including Sports Direct, has announced it has immediately informed its suppliers it will stop purchasing fur products, a move that will take effect on shop shelves this coming season (Autumn/Winter 2023). The commitment was announced by Frasers Group Chief Executive Michael Murray at the company’s annual general meeting on 19 October, and follows discussions with animal protection organisation Humane Society International/UK.

Announcing what it describes as its “long-term commitment” away from fur, the Group will work with HSI/UK to phase out as soon as possible its existing inventory of garments containing fur. It also pledged further updates on progress towards a date from which consumers can be assured Frasers Group’s stores will be free of fur. Frasers Group has over 1,500 stores globally, including fashion retailers such as FLANNELS, House of Fraser, Sports Direct, Cruise and 18 Montrose.

Humane Society International/UK, which worked with Frasers Group bosses to announce the policy, attended the meeting to hear the announcement to shareholders. Claire Bass, HSI/UK’s executive director, said: “We are pleased to have been able to work alongside Frasers Group and applaud it for taking the important decision to stop purchasing fur. By making this commitment to a fur-free future, Frasers Group are showing that it is a company in tune with the vast majority of the British public who believe that animals should not suffer in the name of fashion. Frasers Group’s decision is another critical milestone in the fur-free revolution underway in the UK, and brings us another big step closer to a Fur Free Britain. We look forward to continuing to work with the company to set an end date for its inventory phase out period, to enable consumers to be confident of when Frasers Group will be fully fur-free.” 

Frasers Group is the latest in a long line of luxury retailers and international designers that have turned their backs on fur in recent years, including Farfetch, Net-a-Porter, Canada Goose, Burberry, Chanel, Gucci and Prada. The announcement signifies the accelerating decline of the fur trade and adds further pressure to the few remaining fashion brands that continue to sell fur to follow suit.

Answering a question put by Bass at the meeting, Murray commented: “Frasers Group is committed to a future without fur. The Group’s intention is to stop purchasing fur products from its partners starting with orders for the coming season. The business will be issuing letters to all of its suppliers requesting no fur products are supplied to the Group.”

Group Board Chair David Daly thanked HSI/UK at the meeting for its support in helping the company reach this decision.

Humane Society International/UK works to end the fur trade globally and leads the #FurFreeBritain campaign for a UK fur imports and sales ban. National opinion polling carried out in April 2022 revealed that 77% of Britons think the government should ban the import of products, such as fur, where production methods are banned in the UK. More than one million signatures have so far been amassed for the #FurFreeBritain petition calling on the UK to ban the sale of cruel animal fur.

Fur facts:

  • More than 100 million animals are killed for their fur every year worldwide. The vast majority (around 95%) spend their entire lives confined in small, barren cages unable to act out their most basic behaviours such as running, digging and, in the case of mink, swimming.
  • Fur farming has been banned in the UK since 2003, however almost £1 billion of fur has been imported into the country since then, from countries including China, Finland and Poland.
  • The UK was the first country in the world to ban fur farming and 18 other European countries have now followed suit, including Ireland, France, Italy and most recently in September 2022, Latvia.

Reference in this article to any specific commercial product or service, or the use of any brand, trade, firm or corporation name is for the information of the public only, and does not constitute or imply endorsement by HSI/UK or any of its affiliates of the product or service, or its producer or provider, and should not be construed or relied upon, under any circumstances, by implication or otherwise, as investment advice.  Links and access by hypertext to other websites is provided as a convenience only and does not indicate or imply any endorsement with respect to any of the content on such website nor any of the views expressed thereon.

ENDS

Media contact: Sally Ivens: sivens@hsi.org

“The IWC can be a powerful force in our fight for plastic-free oceans, which would benefit all marine life,” Humane Society International

Humane Society International / Europe

 

David Olsen/Alamy Stock photo

PORTOROŽ, Slovenia—Nations gathered at the 68th International Whaling Commission meeting in Slovenia have unanimously adopted a proposal to provide critical IWC support for international negotiations on a global plastics treaty. The treaty would tackle the serious threats to whales, dolphins and porpoises (as well as other marine animals) posed by plastics, including entanglement and ingestion, both of which can lead to injury and death. The proposal was put forward by the European Union, the United Kingdom, the United States, South Korea, Panama and India. 

Dr Madison Miketa, Humane Society International’s wildlife scientist, said: “Every year thousands of cetaceans are injured or killed by marine plastic pollution, whether it’s ingestion of marine debris, accumulation of micro-plastics, or entanglement in abandoned or lost fishing gear, which is also known as ghost gear. It is prolific and can remain in the ocean for hundreds of years, resulting in untold suffering and death. Marine debris can be mistaken as prey. For example, sperm whales mistake undulating plastic in the water for squid. So it’s really good news for whales that the IWC has adopted the EU’s resolution to support international negotiations on a global plastics treaty. The IWC can be a powerful force in our fight for plastic-free oceans, which would benefit all marine life.”  

Some 13 million tonnes of plastic is estimated to enter the oceans each year, affecting approximately 68% of cetacean species. There are documented cases of plastic ingestion in at least 57 out of the 90 known cetacean species (63.3%) and ingestion of plastic has been recorded in all marine turtle species, and nearly half of all surveyed seabird and marine mammal species. Individuals who are not killed directly by ingestion of or entanglement in plastics, can still suffer secondary impacts such as malnutrition, restricted mobility and reduced reproduction or growth. 

HSI’s whale experts at the IWC meeting are available for interviews.  

ENDS 

Media contact: Wendy Higgins, Director of International Media: whiggins@hsi.org  

 

Humane Society International / Europe

Cecil the lion
Brent Stapelkamp Cecil the lion.

BRUSSELS—Marking the sixth anniversary of the killing of Cecil the lion by an American trophy hunter, animal and nature protection NGOs, members of the European Parliament, and conservation experts from South Africa, Zimbabwe and Kenya are calling on the EU to ban the import of hunting trophies. In a webinar, Humane Society International/Europe discussed a new analysis of trade data revealing that the European Union is the world’s second biggest hunting trophy importer after the United States, importing nearly 15,000 hunting trophies of 73 internationally protected species between 2014 and 2018.

The issue of trophy hunting has become increasingly controversial over the past decade not simply for the animal cruelty, but also due to concerns about the biodiversity crisis. Momentum is growing to take action to curb hunting trophy imports. France banned the import of lion trophies in 2015 and the Netherlands banned trophy imports of over 200 species in 2016. In Germany two political parties (Greens and Left) have included a trophy import ban in their party manifestos.

The webinar, held in collaboration with the European Parliament’s interest group MEPs for Wildlife, Humane Society International/Europe, Born Free Foundation, Eurogroup for Animals and Pro Wildlife, explored how trophy hunting places unsustainable pressure on endangered and other imperiled species, and whether this practice really does make a significant contribution to wildlife conservation as claimed by its proponents.

German MEP Manuela Ripa (Greens/EFA), who hosted the event, said:

“It is crucial that Members of the European Parliament address the issue of the killing of wild animals, endangered or otherwise, purely for the purpose of procuring trophies to hang on their walls. Especially in the wake of the EU Biodiversity Strategy it is important to consider the impact that European citizens travelling to far-flung destinations solely to shoot and bring home animal body parts may be having on wild animal populations elsewhere around the world. Instead of having tightly regulated trophy hunting, I pledge for tightly regulated ‘photo hunting, which  would have a bigger benefit for species, support ecosystems and the communities involved. I strongly urge the European Commission to address the issue of trophy hunting in its upcoming evaluation of the EU Action Plan against Wildlife Trafficking.”

Dr Joanna Swabe, Humane Society International/Europe’s senior director of public affairs, noted:

“The shocking role of European citizens in global trophy hunting should not be underestimated. Humane Society International’s new EU Trophy Hunting by the Numbers report reveals that shockingly the EU imported nearly 15,000 hunting trophies from 73 species between 2014 and 2018, despite them being protected under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). It is shameful that the EU is the world’s second largest importer of hunting trophies, bringing in almost 3,000 trophies every year, including African lions and elephants, black rhinos, leopards, zebra, cheetahs, lynx and polar bears. Germany, Spain and Denmark account for 52% of all imported trophies, and the trade data shows that trophy import numbers have actually steadily increased by almost 40% during the period studied despite opinion polls showing that the vast majority of EU citizens oppose the gratuitous practice of killing wild animals for pleasure, display and bragging rights.  The only way we should be shooting wild and endangered animals is with cameras, not guns or arrows.”

Dr Mark Jones, head of policy for the Born Free Foundation, added:

“Born Free is ethically opposed to the hunting or killing of any animal for sport or pleasure. We also challenge the claims made by proponents of trophy hunting that it delivers significant conservation and community benefits, or that it positively contributes to the sustainable use of wildlife. Studies have consistently shown that trophy hunting does not provide a significant source of income to rural people, and certainly pales in comparison to other wildlife-related activities such as ecotourism. The killing of animals by trophy hunters also causes immeasurable animal suffering, and negatively impacts wildlife conservation by removing individual animals that are key to their populations. The trophy hunting industry is wracked by corruption, with excessive quotas being set that are often exceeded. We urge European nations to take action to stop their citizens jetting off to exotic locations to kill and imperil wild animals elsewhere in the world.”

Reineke Hameleers, CEO at Eurogroup for Animals, said:

“The trophy hunting practice of primarily removing the largest and most physically impressive animal specimens, puts species conservation in jeopardy, disrupts social herd structures and weakens gene pools of species that are already threatened. In a time of global biodiversity crisis, it is urgent for the EU and Member States to acknowledge that it is irresponsible to allow rich elites to shoot endangered species for pure pleasure, and finally ban the import of hunting trophies. We need to move away from the unethical consumption of wildlife and look at how the EU can instead encourage and reward investment in wildlife so that concrete and significant benefits can be achieved by local communities through its non-consumptive and ecologically sustainable use. Wild animals should be worth more to these communities alive than dead.”

Daniela Freyer, co-founder of Pro Wildlife, added:

“Germany has the dubious honour of being the top importing nation for hunting trophies in the European Union. It is sickening that a very small minority of my fellow German citizens still enjoy travelling to faraway places to kill animals for fun, pose with their dead bodies for tasteless selfies and hang their body parts on the walls back home. Trophy hunting is not only cruel and unnecessary, but it also poses a significant risk to wildlife conservation and biodiversity. The majority of EU citizens, including Germans, are opposed to the unethical practice of killing wild animals for trophies. It is time for Germany and other EU Member States to act and prohibit the import of hunting trophies.”

Facts

  • Trophy Hunting: Conservation Tool, or a Threat to Wildlife? was organised by MEPs for Wildlife in collaboration with Humane Society International/Europe, Pro Wildlife, Born Free Foundation and Eurogroup for Animals on 30th June 2021 with the participation of the following speakers and panelists:
  • Dr Audrey Delsink, wildlife director, Humane Society International/Africa
  • Paula Kahumbu, wildlife conservationist and CEO, WildlifeDirect; Rolex National Geographic Explorer of the Year
  • Lenin Tinashe Chisaira, environment lawyer and director, Advocates4Earth, Zimbabwe
  • Miet van Looy, International Relations Officer – CITES and EU Wildlife Trade Regulations,DG Environment, European Commission
  • Dr David Scallan – secretary general, European Federation for Hunting and Conservation (FACE)
  • Opinion poll results demonstrate that the vast majority of EU citizens (over 80%) oppose trophy hunting and want to end trophy imports.
  • HSI/Europe’s Trophy Hunting by the Numbers report reveals that Germany, Spain, Denmark, Austria, Sweden, France, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia are the top trophy importing EU Member States, with Namibia, South Africa, Canada, Russia, Argentina, Kyrgyzstan and the US representing the top exporting countries to the EU. Spain, Poland, Hungary, Germany and the Czech Republic are the top importers of captive lion trophies. EU trophy import statistics for individual animals (2014-2018), include:
    • 3,119 Hartmann’s mountain zebra.
    • 1,751 Chacma baboon.
    • 1,415 American black bear.
    • 1,056 brown bear.
    • 952 African elephant.
    • 889 African lion (of which 660 were captive-bred lions in South Africa).
    • 839 African leopard.
    • 794 hippopotamus.
    • 480 caracal.
    • 415 red lechwe.
    • 297 cheetah – the EU is the largest importer of cheetah trophies in the world.
    • 65 polar bears
    • Six critically endangered black rhinos.

Watch a recording of the webinar.

ENDS

Media Contact: Wendy Higgins: whiggins@hsi.org

Humane Society International / Europe

Vanessa Mignon

BRUSSELS—Humane Society International/Europe, Pro Wildlife, Born Free Foundation, Eurogroup for Animals and Pan African Sanctuary Alliance today presented a new report at an event at the European Parliament, which was hosted by German MEP Manuela Ripa ÖDP, Greens/EFA. The report highlights how the recreational killing of threatened and protected animals for trophies undermines the EU’s efforts to meet its ambitions to better protect wildlife and halt biodiversity loss. The NGOs are calling on the EU to take action to ban the import of hunting trophies from threatened and protected species. Just last week the European Parliament passed a resolution also calling for an EU wide import ban of hunting trophies from species protected under the CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species) treaty. 

Dr. Joanna Swabe, senior director of public affairs for Humane Society International/Europe, says: “In its Biodiversity Strategy to 2030, the European Commission loudly trumpets its goal of halting global biodiversity loss, yet the EU continues to be the second largest importer of hunting trophies in the world. It is only a tiny minority of wealthy European citizens who choose to travel to other countries to kill endangered and threatened species for their own twisted pleasure. Their trophy hunting poses a completely unnecessary and additional threat to biodiversity. Many wildlife populations across the globe are already under pressure from habitat loss and degradation, climate change, over-exploitation and poaching, they really don’t need a bunch of ego ists stalking them with high-powered rifles or bows just so they can hang their body parts on the walls of their homes as proof of their hunting prowess. The EU must take action to halt these vile imports.” 

Dr. Mark Jones, head of policy for the Born Free Foundation, adds: “It is high time that the EU reconsiders its policy towards consumptive wildlife use, of which trophy hunting is an egregious example. Each year, hundreds of thousands of wild animals suffer and die at the hands of wealthy hunters for ‘trophies’ to skin, stuff, and hang on a wall. Not only does wildlife have an intrinsic value, but wild animals, such as giraffes, elephants, polar bears and rhinos, are ultimately worth more alive than dead. Many of these trophies are imported into EU countries. We believe that the EU should be looking at how it can encourage and reward investment in protecting wildlife, and explore the benefits that can be gained by local communities through its non-consumptive and ecologically sustainable use.” 

Dr. Mona Schweizer of Pro Wildlife adds: “The trophy hunting industry is always quick to claim that their activities help poor indigenous communities in Africa and elsewhere. Yet, there is ample evidence that little money trickles down to individual local community members or households. There are limited job opportunities for locals working for trophy hunting outfitters, which are usually operated by white, foreign business owners. In major exporting countries such as South Africa and Namibia trophy hunting largely takes place on private farms. Any benefits there may be from trophy hunting are not distributed equally. Few people in communities where trophy hunting programmes are operated profit from them. Indeed, trophy hunting even perpetuates wealth inequalities. The European Commission should stop taking industry claims about supporting livelihoods at face value and consider who really benefits from this bloodsport? It’s neither local communities nor wildlife! ” 

Reineke Hameleers, CEO of Eurogroup for Animals, says: “There is strong public support for banning hunting trophies imports. It is no wonder that there has already been movement in a number of Member States with regard to halting the import of hunting trophies from threatened and endangered species. Earlier this year, the Belgian Federal Parliament unanimously passed a resolution demanding that the government immediately stop authorising trophy import permits of species protected under certain international trade regulations. If the responsible Minister takes action, she will be following in the footsteps of the Netherlands, which used the same legal path to ban hunting trophy imports from over 200 species back in 2016. Last week, the European Parliament adopted a Resolution that includes a call for the Commission and Member States to take ‘immediate effective action in the framework of its commitments outlined in the EU biodiversity strategy to ban the import of hunting trophies derived from CITES-listed species’. The long-awaited revision of the EU Action Plan against Wildlife Trafficking should provide an ideal opportunity for them to do so.” 

Background: 

  • Trophies from at least 15,000 internationally protected mammals from 73 CITES-listed species have been legally imported to the EU during the period 2014-2018 and there has been an increase of nearly 40% of trophy imports during this period. If you add other taxa and species that aren’t afforded international protection, the true number is far higher. 
  • The top five EU Member States to import mammalian hunting trophies were Germany, Spain, Denmark, Austria and Sweden. 
  • At present, the EU legal requirement for hunting trophies to be accompanied by import permits relates only to species in Annex A of the EU Wildlife Trade Regulation and six additional species listed in Annex B, namely the African elephant, common hippopotamus, African lion, southern white rhinoceros, polar bear and Argali sheep. 
  • Legally obtained hunting trophies of the species covered by these rules can only be imported into the EU after a Member State has issued an import permit and verified that such imports have been legally acquired and will not be detrimental to the conservation of the species . There is no transparent process for the issuance of such permits and non-detriment findings. Hunting trophies of all other species are exempted from this rule. 
  • The International Union for the Conservation of Nature’s World Commission on Environmental Law Ethics Specialist Group calls for an end to hunting trophy imports under ethical, ecological and legal reasons. 
  • The Belgian Federal Parliament unanimously passed a resolution demanding that the government immediately stop authorising trophy import permits of species protected under certain international trade regulations. 
  • This year, the governments of Italy, Spain and Poland are actively considering policy options to ban the import and export of certain hunting trophies supported by strong public opinion polls; based on a 2021 representative survey, the majority of citizens in each country support a hunting trophy import ban. 
  • Prior to these developments, the Netherlands and France pioneered this paradigm shift in Europe. In 2015, France implemented a ban on the import of lion hunting trophies. In the same year, the Dutch government adopted a decision to ban the trophy imports of over 200 species, which came into force in 2016. 
  • A recent policy statement signed by around 170 conservation and animal protection non-governmental organisations from around the globe is also calling for an urgent end to trophy hunting. Several of these organisations are from key source countries for hunting trophies. 

ENDS

Media contact: Adeline Fischer: +4917631063219; afischer@hsi.org  

Humane Society International / Global

Hippopotamus with Cattle Egret on back, in reeds at edge of River Nile at Murchison Falls National Park, Uganda

WASHINGTON—The 19th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora—known as CITES—will meet November 14-25 in Panama City, Panama, where delegates from the 184 member countries will consider 52 proposals to increase or decrease protections for 600 species of wild animals and plants. Key issues on the table include increasing protections for hippos, elephants, glass frogs and sharks, and amending annual leopard trophy export quotas.

Humane Society International experts will be attending the meeting to lobby countries to support proposals that could help ensure species are not pushed further toward the brink of extinction by overexploitation through international trade in their parts and products. The HSI delegation will be available for comment throughout the proceedings.

Key species listing and other proposals to be discussed include:

Hippos: Ten African countries propose to include the common hippopotamus in Appendix I of CITES, which would effectively prohibit international commercial trade in hippo parts and products. Hippos are threatened by habitat loss and fragmentation, poaching for their meat and ivory, and they continue to be targeted for commercial trade in ivory, skins and trophies, including by poachers. Current legal and illegal exploitation levels are predicted to lead to wild population declines, indicating the need to enact a higher level of protection for this species. HSI released an undercover investigation earlier this year into the robust sale of hippo parts in the U.S.

Adam Peyman, director of wildlife programs for HSI, said: “Hippos are an iconic African species, yet the scale of the international trade in their parts and products such as tusks, teeth, skins, skulls and trophies is shocking. We urge CITES Parties to adopt this proposal to ensure that this commercial trade ends. This pointless industry of selling animal parts, along with other threats facing hippos, is pushing these incredible animals to the brink of extinction.”

Glass frogs: Fourteen countries in Central and South America are proposing to include the family of glass frogs in Appendix II of CITES. Twelve members of this family are highly threatened, but it is nearly impossible to distinguish them from other, less threatened species, indicating the need to enact protection for all glass frogs. Listing them on Appendix II of the Convention would provide crucial monitoring and put measures in place to help ensure that future trade is legal and sustainable.

Grettel Delgadillo, deputy director, HSI Latin America, said: “Glass frogs, with their translucent skin, are an amazing family of species. Sadly that is what has attracted the attention of the pet traders, who will go as far as smuggling live frogs out of Central and South America to sell them. It is crucial that CITES Parties adopt this proposal to stem the illegal trade in these incredible frogs and put in place critical monitoring of legal trade to prevent overexploitation by the pet industry.”

Sharks: There are three proposals to list families of sharks and related species on Appendix II. The proposals are to list requiem sharks, hammerhead sharks and guitarfishes, which are related to sharks. All of these species have low reproductive output and several species in each species group are highly endangered. Fins are the primary products in trade derived from the endangered members of these families. As these fins are practically indistinguishable from those of other species, their families should be included in Appendix II so that international trade can be monitored to ensure it is sustainable and legal.

Rebecca Regnery, senior director of wildlife for HSI, said: “Several shark and guitarfish species have seen declines in their wild populations of up to 70-90%. It is unconscionable that trade in fins from these imperiled families is not monitored to ensure its legality or sustainability, especially since upward of 100 million sharks are killed each year for their fins. We urge CITES Parties to adopt the proposals to list requiem sharks, hammerheads and guitarfishes on Appendix II before it is too late.”

Leopard trophy hunting quotas: Although the leopard is threatened with extinction and trophy hunting is one of the major threats to its survival, CITES Parties have set export quotas for 12 countries that allow for the annual export of up to 2,648 leopard trophies or skins. These controversial export quotas are not based on science. Furthermore, trophy hunting has been shown to cause population declines. Two countries with such quotas, Kenya and Malawi, are asking for their quotas to be removed, while Ethiopia is asking for its annual quota to be reduced from 500 to 20 leopards. However, this leaves leopards in the remaining nine countries in the crosshairs, including two countries (Tanzania and Zimbabwe) with an outrageous annual export quota of 500 leopards each.

Southern white rhino and African elephant proposals: HSI is urging countries to oppose a dangerous proposal that would reduce CITES protection for southern white rhinos in Namibia, which are under severe threat due to poaching for rhino horn. If adopted, the proposal would ease control over international trade in hunting trophies of the species. In addition, HSI is supporting a proposal to increase CITES protection of African elephants in Botswana, Namibia, Zimbabwe and South Africa, which would increase regulation of international trade in hunting trophies. Given the serious and long-lasting impacts of trophy hunting on species survival, it is imperative that member countries restrict the trade world-wide in hunting trophies of species listed under this Convention.

Sarah Veatch, director of wildlife policy for HSI, said: “CITES is the international oversight authority for trade between member countries in hunting trophies of leopards, elephants, rhinos, lions and others. As highly sought-after trophies, it is imperative that members take a precautionary approach here. Quotas based on outdated data, unreliable data or inaccurate methods are unacceptable and should be invalidated. CITES Parties have the opportunity to give these species the necessary protections and oversight to avoid overexploitation, and we urge them act with prudence before we reach a point of no return.”

Members of the Humane Society International delegation to CITES include:

  • Jeff Flocken, HSI president
  • Rebecca Regnery, HSI senior director wildlife, U.S.
  • Madison Miketa, HSI wildlife scientist, U.S.
  • Sarah Veatch, HSI director, wildlife policy, U.S.
  • Sophie Nazeri, HSI wildlife program coordinator, U.S.
  • Grettel Delgadillo, deputy director, HSI/Latin America, Costa Rica
  • Lawrence Chlebek, marine biologist, HSI Australia
  • Mai Nguyen, wildlife program manager, HSI in Viet Nam

ENDS

Media contact: Rodi Rosensweig, senior principal strategist media relations, rrosensweig@humanesociety.org, 202-809-8711

Humane Society International / Europe

Hippo
Imagebroker/Alamy

STRASBOURG, France—Today, the European Parliament adopted a resolution unequivocal in its demands regarding the European Union’s objectives for the upcoming meeting of the parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species.

While Parliament is making clear statements about eliminating the scourge of wildlife trafficking, closing the loopholes in the EU wildlife trade regulations and ending the imports of hunting trophies from CITES-listed species, Humane Society International/Europe has concerns as to whether the European Commission and the Member States will pay heed to the Parliament’s demands.

In November, representatives of the countries that have signed the CITES treaty will meet in Panama for the 19th meeting of the parties. At COP19, they will decide whether an array of threatened and endangered species, including the common hippopotamus, African elephants, requiem sharks and glass frogs, should be given stronger, or weaker, international protection from overexploitation for commercial trade. Humane Society International/Europe is deeply concerned that the Commission has already recommended that the EU should not support a proposal from 10 African range states to transfer the common hippo to CITES Appendix I, which would prohibit all commercial international trade in hippo parts and products and throw a lifeline to this imperilled species. In addition, the Commission has recommended that the EU abstain on the proposal from 14 CITES Parties to list glass frogs on Appendix II, which would provide crucial protections and trade monitoring of these imperilled amphibians.

Dr Joanna Swabe, senior director of public affairs for Humane Society International/Europe, says: “We are delighted that MEPs have adopted such a strong resolution in advance of the CITES COP19 meeting, recognizing the persistent threat posed to wildlife by international trade. Given that the EU is a highly influential bloc in CITES decision-making, they are often in the position to make or break decisions. Failure to support the hippo, glass frogs and other proposals put forward by range States, who are seeking to gain much-needed extra protection for their endemic species whose survival is threatened by overexploitation for commercial trade, may push them further towards the brink of extinction. It is unconscionable for the EU not to support such proposals given its own loudly trumpeted biodiversity strategy commitments to do all it can to halt global biodiversity decline.”

In addition to demonstrating its support for various CITES proposals, the European Parliament’s resolution recognizes that the EU’s role in the global fight against wildlife trafficking needs further strengthening. MEPs echo Humane Society International’s call for the Commission to take action to close the loopholes in the existing EU wildlife trade regulations by delivering a legislative proposal to criminalize the import, export, sale, acquisition or purchase of wild species that are taken, possessed, transported or sold in violation of the law of the country of origin.

HSI also welcomes the European Parliament’s call for urgent action to be taken to prohibit the import of hunting trophies derived from CITES-listed species. The EU is the world’s second largest importer of hunting trophies behind the United States. EU law continues to allow hunters to import trophies from threatened species, many of which are protected internationally through CITES and the EU Wildlife Trade Regulations and Habitats Directive.

Liam Slattery, Humane Society International/Europe’s trophy hunting campaign director, said: “The European Parliament’s call for urgent action to curb the import of CITES-listed species hunting trophies is a move supported by a clear majority of the public across member states. The Netherlands and France have already implemented bans on certain species of trophy. The Belgian Federal Parliament has passed a unanimous resolution demanding the government stop authorising trophy import permits. And the Environment Ministry in Germany has expressed an intention to restrict import of hunting trophies from protected animal species. With other Member States also actively considering proposals to limit or prohibit trophy imports, the Commission must display leadership on this issue in line with such measures, and the EU’s own biodiversity strategy.”

Facts:

  • HSI strongly urges the EU to support the CITES COP19 Proposal 1 to list the common hippo on Appendix I. Wild hippo populations are declining or unknown in 65% of countries they inhabit. Hippo ivory is popular among consumers and nearly 80,000 hippo products—nearly all wild sourced—were imported in the most recent decade for which data are available. Poaching and trafficking are a primary threat to hippos, and the illegal trade is often intermingled with legal trade. Further, the current levels of offtake—both legal and illegal—are predicted to result in future declines in wild hippo populations. This indicates the need to curtail international commercial trade in this species due to conservation concerns and the risk of promoting the illegal killing and trade. The EU contributes to the exploitation of hippos—nearly 800 hippo trophies were imported by EU Member States between 2014 and 2018.
  • HSI strongly urges the EU to support the CITES COP19 proposal to list glass frogs on Appendix II. Half of the species in this family are threatened with extinction, and individuals of highly threatened species are indistinguishable from others, necessitating the inclusion of the entire family in Appendix II. As the males of many of these frog species actively defend clutches of eggs, removal of males results in depredation of entire clutches, causing high mortality rates. Further, glass frogs have become increasingly popular in the international pet trade, and much of the trade happens illegally. Listing the family on Appendix II would bring much-needed monitoring of international commercial trade and help to stem illegal trade in these species.
  • HSI strongly urges the EU to support all of the proposals to add or increase protection for reptile and amphibian species. There are 21 of these covering 239 species which includes 53 turtle species. All these vulnerable species face threats including overexploitation for international trade. It is alarming that the Commission is not recommending support for many of these proposals from range states seeking assistance from importing countries including EU countries in controlling trade to ensure wild populations are not decimated.
  • Between 2014 and 2018, the EU imported nearly 15,000 hunting trophies—around eight per day—of 73 internationally protected species.
  • The number of trophies coming into the EU increased by 40% in five years, despite opinion polls indicating that the vast majority of EU citizens surveyed are clearly against trophy hunting and would like to see an end to this brutal industry.

ENDS

Media contact: Cassie Bodin-Duval, international coordinator media relations: cbodinduval@hsi.org ; +32 (0) 469 149 469

Moves to lift global ban on commercial whaling a major concern, says Humane Society International

Humane Society International / United Kingdom

HSI Humpback Whale, Kenai Fjords National Park, Alaska.

LONDON—Ahead of the upcoming 68th meeting of the International Whaling Commission which begins on 13th October in Slovenia, animal protection and conservation non-profit Humane Society International warns that the very future of the IWC and the global moratorium on commercial whaling could be in jeopardy.

The global economic crisis, the pandemic and the exit of Japan―a whaling nation and formerly a major IWC funder―have created a serious budgetary emergency at the IWC. Efforts to reduce costs, including selling the IWC Secretariat headquarters in Cambridge, have stalled. The financial survival of the IWC as the only international body that focuses on cetacean conservation hangs in the balance at a time when almost half of the world’s known species, subspecies and subpopulations of cetaceans, are listed as Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable. The negotiations to balance the budget will be critical for the future of whales.

Rebecca Regnery, senior wildlife director at Humane Society International, said: “Whales face myriad threats from human activities including whale hunting; fisheries bycatch; chemical, plastic and noise pollution; ship strikes; habitat loss and the urgent climate crisis. If the IWC were to collapse now, everything it has done to establish and maintain the global whaling moratorium, the Southern Ocean sanctuary and multiple other scientific and conservation work would also collapse. The framework the IWC has provided for global cetacean conservation and management would disappear, leaving these ocean giants even more vulnerable in increasingly challenging and hostile seas.”

The threat to the IWC’s vital work, and even the global moratorium on commercial whaling, are at further risk because the IWC is considering allowing voting rights for nations even if they have failed to pay their membership fees, a move that would largely benefit pro-whaling countries. While the proposal aims to assist countries hit hard by the pandemic, many of which rely on tourism, it could tip the balance on some key pro-whaling draft resolutions including one by Antigua and Barbuda to lift the commercial whaling ban.

Regnery says: “The global moratorium on commercial whaling, which has spared the lives of hundreds of thousands of cetaceans and been instrumental in pulling many species back from the brink of extinction, is in very real danger. Scrapping the moratorium is what Japan has been pushing for since it was first adopted in 1982. Ironically, although Japan has withdrawn from the IWC, its pro-whaling influence is as menacing as ever via country allies beholden to Japan that continue to push its dangerous agenda. This year, if many more pro-whaling nations are allowed to vote, it could be the beginning of the end for global whale protection. So we are urging all whale-friendly countries to assemble at the IWC ready to fight once again to save the whales.”

Other top IWC priorities for Humane Society International include:

  • A marine plastic pollution draft resolution by the European Union that, if adopted, will provide critical IWC support for international negotiations on a global plastics treaty to tackle the serious threats to cetaceans including entanglement and ingestion, both of which can also lead to strandings and death.
  • A proposal to establish a South Atlantic Whale Sanctuary by Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay. The IWC has considered this proposal many times at past meetings, but it has consistently been blocked by pro-whaling nations. However, due to climate change and the biodiversity crisis, establishment of this sanctuary is increasingly important for the continued survival of marine mammals and our oceans.
  • A food security proposal by Gambia, Guinea, Cambodia, Antigua and Barbuda, countries very closely aligned with Japan. None of these countries provide any evidence that they rely on whale meat for subsistence or national food security. Conversely, whales kept alive in the ocean may provide financial and therefore food security and poverty alleviation to communities reliant on whale watching income, as well as contributing to healthy fish stocks as marine ecosystem managers.
  • A newly developed Cetacean Welfare Assessment Tool which will be presented at the meeting. We foresee this tool being extremely useful for our work and others for assessing welfare threats and solutions.
  • The fate of Greenland hunts, especially of killer whales which are in need of a full population assessment, harbour porpoises which may be overhunted especially when combined with the threat of bycatch, and narwhals which are being excessively hunted causing changes to life history and population dynamics. The North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission has recommended a zero-hunting quota stating that narwhals in Greenland are at “high risk of extirpation of the stocks if harvest at any level continues.” The 2022 hunting quota for narwhals in Greenland is 50. Atlantic white-sided dolphins are also hunted in high numbers in Greenland, Norway, Newfoundland, Canada and the Faroe Islands (where direct take is especially high and has occurred without a full assessment).

ENDS

Media contact: Wendy Higgins, director of international media for HSI/UK: whiggins@hsi.org

Notes

Of the 90 species, 12 subspecies and 28 subpopulations of cetaceans that have been identified and assessed to date, 22 are listed as Critically Endangered, 22 as Endangered and 16 as Vulnerable.

Learn More Button Inserter