Search

Public policy addressing biodiversity loss is most likely to be effective when it is informed by appropriate evidence and considers potential unintended consequences. We evaluate key evidence relating to the Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill that was discussed in the UK Parliament between 2022 and 2024. We characterize the UK's role in international hunting trophy trade by analyzing CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) trade data for 2000–2021 and 2015–2021. For CITES‐listed species imported to/exported from the UK as hunting trophies in these periods we use data from the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species to determine whether hunting designated as "trophy hunting" is (i) likely a major threat contributing to species being of elevated conservation concern, (ii) likely or possibly causing localized declines, or (iii) not a threat. We then use the Red List to determine whether such hunting provides, or potentially provides, benefits for species and/or people. Finally, we evaluate the UK Government's impact assessment of the bill. In 2000–2021 an estimated 3494 hunting trophies from 73 CITES‐listed species and subspecies were exported to the UK involving an estimated 2549 whole organism equivalents (WOEs), that is, individual animals. Imports involved 158.86 ± 66.53 (mean ± SD) trophies/year (115.83 ± 32.27 WOEs/year). In 2015–2021, 79% of imports were from countries where populations of the hunted species are stable, increasing, or abundant. Legal hunting for trophies is not a major threat to any of the species or subspecies imported to the UK, but likely or possibly represents a local threat to some populations of eight species. This hunting does, or could potentially, benefit 20 species and subspecies, and people. Among other concerns, the impact assessment failed to adequately consider the costs and benefits to local communities in countries where such hunting occurs. Informed by these analyses we discuss alternative regulatory options. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the policy direction for pangolin conservation in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). The current prohibitionist approach may not be optimal for conserving the species, as it fails to consider diverse and adaptive management approaches. The article suggests that restricting policy options for pangolins in CITES may hinder optimal national policies and proposes that formal domestic use and/or trade of pangolins could contribute to their conservation under appropriate governance conditions. The authors recommend recognizing the need for context-specific solutions and not removing potential tools for pangolin conservation. [Extracted from the article]

The link between unsustainable harvest of species for the wildlife trade and extinction is clear in some cases, but little is known about the number of species across taxonomic groups that have gone extinct because of trade-related factors, or future risks for traded species. We conducted a rapid review of published articles and species assessments on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species with the aim of recording examples of extinctions that were attributed to trade. Wefound reports of extinctions linked, at least in part, to wildlife trade for 511 unique taxa. These include 294 reports of global extinctions, 25 extinctions in the wild, and 192 local extinctions. The majority of global/in the wild extinctions linked to trade (230) involved ray-finned fishes, primarily due to predation by introduced commercial species. Seventy-one of the 175 reported local extinctions of animal taxa linked to trade were mammals. Twenty-two global/in the wild extinctions and 16 local extinctions of plants were reportedly linked to trade. One fungal species was reported locally extinct due to over-harvesting for trade. Furthermore, 340 species were reported to be near-extinct linked to trade, 269 of which were animals, including several highprofile megafauna. Extinctions were linked to direct harvesting and/or indirect threats such as bycatch or invasive species introduced for trade, but often it was not possible to determine the relative role of trade-related threats in extinctions. Our results highlight the need for better data collection on trade-related extinction risk to understand its impacts and to inform more effective wildlife trade policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Unsustainable exploitation of wild species represents a serious threat to biodiversity and to the livelihoods of local communities and Indigenous peoples. However, managed, sustainable use has the potential to forestall extinctions, aid recovery, and meet human needs. We analyzed species-level data for 30,923 species from 13 taxonomic groups on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species to investigate patterns of intentional biological resource use. Forty percent of species (10,098 of 25,009 species from 10 data-sufficient taxonomic groups) were used. The main purposes of use were pets, display animals, horticulture, and human consumption. Intentional use is currently contributing to elevated extinction risk for 28-29% of threatened or near threatened (NT) species (2752-2848 of 9753 species). Intentional use also affected 16% of all species used (1597-1631 of 10,098). However, 72% of used species (7291 of 10,098) were least concern, of which nearly half (3469) also had stable or improving population trends. The remainder were not documented as threatened by biological resource use, including at least 172 threatened or NT species with stable or improving populations. About one-third of species that had use documented as a threat had no targeted species management actions to directly address this threat. To improve use-related red-list data, we suggest small amendments to the relevant classification schemes and required supporting documentation. Our findings on the prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use, and variation across taxa, can inform international policy making, including the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species., (© 2021 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology.)