International wild animal

welfare and future directions

Stuart R. HarropStuart R. Harrop

Chair of Wildlife Management LawChair of Wildlife Management LawDurrell Durrell Institute of Conservation and EcologyInstitute of Conservation and Ecology

School of Anthropology and ConservationSchool of Anthropology and Conservation

University of KentUniversity of Kent

All Photos: © Stuart Harrop 2010 except

Mauritius Parakeet © 2010 Jim Groombridge

A preliminary note of humilityA preliminary note of humility --the UKthe UK has has

been slow to legally protect the welfare of been slow to legally protect the welfare of

wild animalswild animals

•Cetaceans- UK in the

vanguard of whale

killing in the last

century.

Steele v Rogers

(1912) 106 LT 79

•Rowley and Murphy

[1964] 1 All ER 50

•The Animals

(Scientific Procedures)

Act 1986

•Wild Mammals

(Protection) Act 1996

Can conservationistsCan conservationists find room for find room for

compassion?compassion?

Conservation- scientific pragmatismThe conservationist aims to preserve diversity in species and seldom

deals at the individual level

Welfare- ethics with science baseWelfare seeks to avoid unnecessary suffering in the individual

animal irrespective of its conservation status. Science informs

“suffering”. Ethics and science inform “unnecessary”.

Common Ground-from separate epistemological

perspectivesBoth approaches aim to secure that species live freely and naturally

in the “wild” state

Can conservationistsCan conservationists and and welfarists welfarists work work

together?together?

Confluences include:

• Welfare case for inhumanity of whaling and conservation case for moratorium

• Eradicating illegal bush-meat killing

Potential Conflicts include:

• Culling of protected or other species to maintain populations

• Culling required to resolve human-animal conflicts

• Culling required to maintain genetic integrity (hybridization)

• Recreational hunting to support conservation strategies through incentives

• Other invasive conservation techniques

The case for compassion in conservation The case for compassion in conservation --11

The dThe distinction between istinction between

domestic/farmed animals and wild domestic/farmed animals and wild

animalsanimals

•No comprehensive international law yet

for domestic/farmed animals but regional

advances in e.g. the European Union

•CITES effectively protects captive

animals in the custody of humans and

also when in a farmed or “ranched”

situation- mirrors the trend to protect

domestic/farmed animals under human

control

•Case for wild animal welfare in

conservation activities may be

strengthened by emphasizing increased captivity of or control over wild animals

The increasing case for compassion in The increasing case for compassion in

conservationconservation--2 2

Environmental change

•Climate change coupled

with habitat fragmentation

may force range changes

and reduce space for wild

animals to live freely

•Some ranges may be lost

requiring “zoo" conditions or

extinction

•Protected areas for

particularly large mammals

already mirror to an extent

farmed conditions

•More species potentially in

ex-situ “ranched”conditions?

The case for compassion in conservationThe case for compassion in conservation--33

•More human impacts on wild

animals generating

conservation v compassion

dilemmas:

�Hybridization of wild with domestics

�Alien Species

�The need/obsession for more conservation data

ConservationPractices

•Conservation

techniques for critically

endangered species

often mirror captive

management operations

for domestics in

agriculture

What is already in place?What is already in place?

--Hard and soft international conservation instruments that deal with

wild animal welfare-

Hard

•CITES- welfare extended to captive animals in trade, in transport and reception.

Also some aspects of welfare for ranched animals.

•International Whaling Commission- provisions relating to killing and secondary

killing methods for commercial whaling

•Incidental provisions- such as Article 8 Berne Convention- ban of “indiscriminate

means of capture and killing”

Soft

•International Agreements(s) on Humane Trapping- merely advance the status quo

for inhumane traps

•UN General Assembly World Charter for Nature 1983- “Every form of life is unique, warranting respect regardless of its worth to man…[we should] accord other

organisms such recognition [and] be guided by a moral code of action”

Regulatory developmentRegulatory development where to from where to from

here?here?-- 11

No international regulation directly tackles the relationship between welfare and conservation.

Ideal might be a protocol to CBD setting out minimum wild animal welfare standards for conservation activities

BUT:

•The CBD, although hard law, has a poor normative record

•It takes time to establish international law - 15 years from start to implementation

•The international arena is preoccupied with the economy and the abstract concept of “carbon”…despite the foundational position of species and ecosystems for all civilization…and the advice of John Lennon

Regulatory development: where to from Regulatory development: where to from

here?here?-- 22Options include:

1. Compassion-in-conservation protocol initiative through CBD

2. As secondary approach incorporate welfare requirements into CBD’s current target exercise

3. Use inter-convention / institutional networks such as GRASP

4. Expand/develop Compassion-in-conservation guidelines within major international, conservation NGO’s, the private sector and conservation funding agencies

5. Develop Guidelines for application within the conservation “industry”

6. Expand existing conventions such as CITES by the “back door”

Some principles in regulatory/guideline Some principles in regulatory/guideline

developmentdevelopment

•Welfare eradicates unnecessary suffering and alleviates necessary suffering: thus it is designed to compliment necessary agendas- (ranched species in CITES)

•Welfare is also the leader in some agendas (But did hunting ban in UK fully analyse role of culture, community and conservation incidents?)

•Must establish priorities- which ethic leads?

•Must facilitate right of challenge e.g. :

•welfare to challenge culling on basis of necessity,

•conservation to challenge hunting bans,

Some potential components of Some potential components of

regulatory/guideline developmentregulatory/guideline development

• The “CIA” - Compassion Impact Assessment of conservation (with quid-pro-quo: Conservation Impact Assessment of welfare oriented activities- e.g. hunting bans)

• Establish standards for capture methods, tracking, monitoring methods and other invasive techniques

• Minimum training requirements re: the above

• Apply ordinary standards of farm animal welfare to conservation operations that involve ranching and to intensive activities forextreme species recovery operations (e.g. Mauritius Parakeet)

• Establish test of necessity for projects/project methodologies (along lines of UK’s scientific procedures regulation)- does the project’s value merit the suffering?

• Open projects to pre-scrutiny by welfare experts