Pub Date : 2023-04-03DOI: 10.1080/13880292.2023.2236438
Hira Jaleel
{"title":"Justice for Animals: Our Collective Responsibility","authors":"Hira Jaleel","doi":"10.1080/13880292.2023.2236438","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2023.2236438","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":52446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88507559","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-03DOI: 10.1080/13880292.2023.2229637
V. Boilevin, A. Crosta, S.J. Hennige
Abstract Demand for totoaba swim bladders has created a transnational illicit supply chain network. Organised crime groups are instrumental in this process, impacting Mexico at social, environmental, economic, and political levels. There are five main points within the supply chain: the poachers in the Upper Gulf of California, the Mexican illegal traders, the Chinese illegal traders in Mexico, illegal traders and retailers in China and Hong Kong, and the consumers and investors located primarily in China. Illegal fishers in Mexico use gillnets to capture totoaba, leading to bycatch and decline of the critically endangered vaquita. There have been significant conservation efforts by the local and international communities to reduce this bycatch, but these have been unsuccessful in addressing the continued trafficking of totoaba and the decline of the vaquita. Here we highlight the complexity of the totoaba supply chain and argue that totoaba illegal trade has to be viewed as organised environmental crime rather than as a conservation issue. A particularly enforceable point in the chain is through the Chinese organised crime group in Mexico, which is a crucial link to onward trafficking through ports and airports. While recent efforts have been made with regard to totoaba seizures and prosecutions, to dismantle the supply chain, strong transnational collaboration is needed at multiple levels, and in particular between Mexico, the USA, and China. Graphical abstract Totoaba illegal supply chain from Mexico to consumer countries. In the Upper Gulf of California, Mexico, illegal fishers poach totoaba for organised crime groups (OCG) or ‘totoaba cartels’, consisting of Mexican criminals and Chinese traffickers in Mexico. Totoaba swim bladders are smuggled via transit countries to consumer destinations of China (the main destination), the United States, and Hong Kong. Circles depict the five main levels of the supply chain. The dotted circle indicates a point in the supply chain where disruption would be effective in impacting the larger supply chain.
{"title":"Addressing Illegal Transnational Trade of Totoaba and Its Role in the Possible Extinction of the Vaquita","authors":"V. Boilevin, A. Crosta, S.J. Hennige","doi":"10.1080/13880292.2023.2229637","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2023.2229637","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Demand for totoaba swim bladders has created a transnational illicit supply chain network. Organised crime groups are instrumental in this process, impacting Mexico at social, environmental, economic, and political levels. There are five main points within the supply chain: the poachers in the Upper Gulf of California, the Mexican illegal traders, the Chinese illegal traders in Mexico, illegal traders and retailers in China and Hong Kong, and the consumers and investors located primarily in China. Illegal fishers in Mexico use gillnets to capture totoaba, leading to bycatch and decline of the critically endangered vaquita. There have been significant conservation efforts by the local and international communities to reduce this bycatch, but these have been unsuccessful in addressing the continued trafficking of totoaba and the decline of the vaquita. Here we highlight the complexity of the totoaba supply chain and argue that totoaba illegal trade has to be viewed as organised environmental crime rather than as a conservation issue. A particularly enforceable point in the chain is through the Chinese organised crime group in Mexico, which is a crucial link to onward trafficking through ports and airports. While recent efforts have been made with regard to totoaba seizures and prosecutions, to dismantle the supply chain, strong transnational collaboration is needed at multiple levels, and in particular between Mexico, the USA, and China. Graphical abstract Totoaba illegal supply chain from Mexico to consumer countries. In the Upper Gulf of California, Mexico, illegal fishers poach totoaba for organised crime groups (OCG) or ‘totoaba cartels’, consisting of Mexican criminals and Chinese traffickers in Mexico. Totoaba swim bladders are smuggled via transit countries to consumer destinations of China (the main destination), the United States, and Hong Kong. Circles depict the five main levels of the supply chain. The dotted circle indicates a point in the supply chain where disruption would be effective in impacting the larger supply chain.","PeriodicalId":52446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88305258","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-03DOI: 10.1080/13880292.2023.2229628
Veerle Platvoet
Abstract The concept of animal rights is highly topical in animal legal scholarship. There is much debate on whether or not animals can and do hold rights, although there does seem to be consensus that animals currently do not have such legal rights that would grant them any foundational protection in the way that human rights do for humans. This article challenges that assumption through a discussion on the legal rights of wild animals under the European Union (EU) Habitats Directive. The article establishes a theoretical framework on animal rights and analyses the Habitats Directive according to the rights framework. It subsequently argues that preliminary fundamental legal rights for certain wild animals can be found in EU conservation law. However, through a discussion on the scope and objective of the Habitats Directive, the article finds that the legal rights that are found are not grounded in the interests of the animals themselves. Instead, the preliminary fundamental animal rights are a by-product of the anthropocentric value of biodiversity and do not support a rights-based approach to animal rights. The article concludes with a discussion on the interpretation that follows from these findings and how an instrument such as the Habitats Directive could implement rights-based wild animal rights.
{"title":"Wild Things: Animal Rights in EU Conservation Law","authors":"Veerle Platvoet","doi":"10.1080/13880292.2023.2229628","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2023.2229628","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The concept of animal rights is highly topical in animal legal scholarship. There is much debate on whether or not animals can and do hold rights, although there does seem to be consensus that animals currently do not have such legal rights that would grant them any foundational protection in the way that human rights do for humans. This article challenges that assumption through a discussion on the legal rights of wild animals under the European Union (EU) Habitats Directive. The article establishes a theoretical framework on animal rights and analyses the Habitats Directive according to the rights framework. It subsequently argues that preliminary fundamental legal rights for certain wild animals can be found in EU conservation law. However, through a discussion on the scope and objective of the Habitats Directive, the article finds that the legal rights that are found are not grounded in the interests of the animals themselves. Instead, the preliminary fundamental animal rights are a by-product of the anthropocentric value of biodiversity and do not support a rights-based approach to animal rights. The article concludes with a discussion on the interpretation that follows from these findings and how an instrument such as the Habitats Directive could implement rights-based wild animal rights.","PeriodicalId":52446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86358632","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-03DOI: 10.1080/13880292.2023.2235193
Daniel W. Dylan
[This book calls] for us to tap into a deep imagination about how things could be otherwise, to allow for the possibility of establishing new conceptions of justice that might provide freer ways for us to be in relationships with other animals and each other. Abolition, after all, is no more utopian than the view that through more prisons we will create less crime, or the view that animal confinement is a necessary feature of human thriving. There is no reason to accept on faith that our punitive impulses are protecting animals better than a new, more imaginative framework yet to be fully fleshed out. We call on scholars to imagine beyond carceral logics, and to take the next step of developing a research agenda to make concrete what that might look like
{"title":"Carceral Logics: Human Incarceration and Animal Captivity","authors":"Daniel W. Dylan","doi":"10.1080/13880292.2023.2235193","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2023.2235193","url":null,"abstract":"[This book calls] for us to tap into a deep imagination about how things could be otherwise, to allow for the possibility of establishing new conceptions of justice that might provide freer ways for us to be in relationships with other animals and each other. Abolition, after all, is no more utopian than the view that through more prisons we will create less crime, or the view that animal confinement is a necessary feature of human thriving. There is no reason to accept on faith that our punitive impulses are protecting animals better than a new, more imaginative framework yet to be fully fleshed out. We call on scholars to imagine beyond carceral logics, and to take the next step of developing a research agenda to make concrete what that might look like","PeriodicalId":52446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89865643","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-03DOI: 10.1080/13880292.2023.2237281
C. Bury
Abstract Wetlands are disappearing faster than any other ecosystem. Germany has one of the world’s highest rates of wetland losses. From a legal perspective, the significant extent of these degradations since 1976 is symptomatic of the inadequate incorporation of the Ramsar Convention into the German legal system. This article argues that the actual assessment of the requirement of a transformative act for the domestic applicability and enforceability of an international treaty is based not only on constitutional criteria, but also on a normative understanding that responsible government agencies have of a particular treaty at any given point in time. This article addresses the impact of persisting traditional notions of normativity under international law on the currently limited application and enforceability of the Ramsar Convention in Germany. Ultimately, the article contends that there is an urgent need for parliament to become involved in implementing the Ramsar Convention, not least to restore credibility when reminding other states about the treaty’s importance.
{"title":"Lost in Translation? Why Outdated Notions of Normativity in International Law Explain Germany’s Failure to Give Effect to the Ramsar Convention of 1971","authors":"C. Bury","doi":"10.1080/13880292.2023.2237281","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2023.2237281","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Wetlands are disappearing faster than any other ecosystem. Germany has one of the world’s highest rates of wetland losses. From a legal perspective, the significant extent of these degradations since 1976 is symptomatic of the inadequate incorporation of the Ramsar Convention into the German legal system. This article argues that the actual assessment of the requirement of a transformative act for the domestic applicability and enforceability of an international treaty is based not only on constitutional criteria, but also on a normative understanding that responsible government agencies have of a particular treaty at any given point in time. This article addresses the impact of persisting traditional notions of normativity under international law on the currently limited application and enforceability of the Ramsar Convention in Germany. Ultimately, the article contends that there is an urgent need for parliament to become involved in implementing the Ramsar Convention, not least to restore credibility when reminding other states about the treaty’s importance.","PeriodicalId":52446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76264971","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/13880292.2023.2235165
Cebuan Bliss
{"title":"Guilty Pigs: The Weird and Wonderful History of Animal Law","authors":"Cebuan Bliss","doi":"10.1080/13880292.2023.2235165","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2023.2235165","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":52446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91016787","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/13880292.2023.2217616
W. Lubbe, R. Alberts, Jacquelyn P. Robinson, I. Rushworth, SA Jeanetta Selier, Li Tanneback, Sam M. Ferreira
Abstract Culling of certain species remains a sensitive topic. This is especially true when considering the culling of so-called sentient animals like elephants. This article builds on a previous paper published in this Journal and aims to both agree and disagree with some of the arguments raised. Primarily this article raises concerns about what was termed the potential illegality of elephant culling in South African law. In doing so, a summary of the arguments not contested and also those contested is presented; a discussion of the ‘legality’ of culling is presented; the exclusion of conservation imperatives from the original paper is examined; a legal synopsis of welfare and rights within the South African Constitution is presented; and finally concluding remarks is made together with thoughts on future research.
{"title":"‘Could Culling of Elephants be Considered Inhumane and Illegal in South African Law?’: A Response and Further Thoughts","authors":"W. Lubbe, R. Alberts, Jacquelyn P. Robinson, I. Rushworth, SA Jeanetta Selier, Li Tanneback, Sam M. Ferreira","doi":"10.1080/13880292.2023.2217616","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2023.2217616","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Culling of certain species remains a sensitive topic. This is especially true when considering the culling of so-called sentient animals like elephants. This article builds on a previous paper published in this Journal and aims to both agree and disagree with some of the arguments raised. Primarily this article raises concerns about what was termed the potential illegality of elephant culling in South African law. In doing so, a summary of the arguments not contested and also those contested is presented; a discussion of the ‘legality’ of culling is presented; the exclusion of conservation imperatives from the original paper is examined; a legal synopsis of welfare and rights within the South African Constitution is presented; and finally concluding remarks is made together with thoughts on future research.","PeriodicalId":52446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84918755","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/13880292.2023.2235167
Dr John Pearson
A role for human rights in the protection of the environment has become a widely accepted concept and reflects our increasing awareness of the reliance of individuals upon both their local and global environments.1 Challenging the validity of this connection—highlighting that it ignores inherent conflicts between environmental exploitation and protection and individual human rights protection—is therefore a brave and undoubtedly contested proposition. This proposition is one from which MarieCatherine Petersmann has not shied away. When Environmental Protection and Human Rights Collide addresses the presumption that human rights and environmental protection are comfortable bedfellows and that their aims are unquestionably aligned. Petersmann critiques this position by revealing the complex strategies used by regional courts to adjudicate and mediate the conflicts between these two fields in order for the two to co-exist in case law. There is certainly scholarship that addresses the inherent anthropocentrism of framing environmental protection as a human rights issue,2 and voluminous work extolling the virtues of this approach and its utility broadly or in specific case studies.3 Despite this, few would deny the benefits of capitalising on any gains in environmental protection that could be achieved through the application of human rights law. Petersmann ably addresses a gap in the literature regarding how we have reached the point at which this is accepted as an ostensibly comfortable interplay between two fields of law that, although seemingly aligned, in fact often collide. In Chapter 1, Petersmann traces the progression from legal protection of the environment. First this maps the move from law being focused upon preserving a ‘pristine wilderness’ to a ‘human environment’ and then also from a disconnected pair of legal fields, human rights and environmental law, to a point of integration between the two. This culminates in Petersmann identifying the ways in which this synergy between human rights and environmental protection has been most commonly framed. She argues that there exists a spectrum of anthropocentrism upon which these framings exist (p 55). This spectrum allows for focus upon the interplay of economic concerns, the ecosystem, conservation, and human health. Thus, Petersmann incorporates varied and sometimes conflicting aims, in spite of a perceived overarching synergy between environmental protection and human rights. The chapter effectively outlines the inherent conflicts upon which the arguments in the rest of the book are based.
{"title":"When Environmental Protection and Human Rights Collide: The Politics of Conflict Management by Regional Courts","authors":"Dr John Pearson","doi":"10.1080/13880292.2023.2235167","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2023.2235167","url":null,"abstract":"A role for human rights in the protection of the environment has become a widely accepted concept and reflects our increasing awareness of the reliance of individuals upon both their local and global environments.1 Challenging the validity of this connection—highlighting that it ignores inherent conflicts between environmental exploitation and protection and individual human rights protection—is therefore a brave and undoubtedly contested proposition. This proposition is one from which MarieCatherine Petersmann has not shied away. When Environmental Protection and Human Rights Collide addresses the presumption that human rights and environmental protection are comfortable bedfellows and that their aims are unquestionably aligned. Petersmann critiques this position by revealing the complex strategies used by regional courts to adjudicate and mediate the conflicts between these two fields in order for the two to co-exist in case law. There is certainly scholarship that addresses the inherent anthropocentrism of framing environmental protection as a human rights issue,2 and voluminous work extolling the virtues of this approach and its utility broadly or in specific case studies.3 Despite this, few would deny the benefits of capitalising on any gains in environmental protection that could be achieved through the application of human rights law. Petersmann ably addresses a gap in the literature regarding how we have reached the point at which this is accepted as an ostensibly comfortable interplay between two fields of law that, although seemingly aligned, in fact often collide. In Chapter 1, Petersmann traces the progression from legal protection of the environment. First this maps the move from law being focused upon preserving a ‘pristine wilderness’ to a ‘human environment’ and then also from a disconnected pair of legal fields, human rights and environmental law, to a point of integration between the two. This culminates in Petersmann identifying the ways in which this synergy between human rights and environmental protection has been most commonly framed. She argues that there exists a spectrum of anthropocentrism upon which these framings exist (p 55). This spectrum allows for focus upon the interplay of economic concerns, the ecosystem, conservation, and human health. Thus, Petersmann incorporates varied and sometimes conflicting aims, in spite of a perceived overarching synergy between environmental protection and human rights. The chapter effectively outlines the inherent conflicts upon which the arguments in the rest of the book are based.","PeriodicalId":52446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76021377","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/13880292.2023.2217614
Christopher Serenari, Elena C. Rubino
Abstract Natural resource institutions have embraced a deliberative turn to improve how they solve management problems and promote peacebuilding with and among stakeholders. However, actors who would rather not help decide, understand, evaluate, or implement decisions, or, at least not be dictated to in that regard, pose challenges to democratic governance arrangements. Such an inclination can be prevalent among landowner segments and befuddle efforts to safeguard state trust resources such as wildlife. Specifically, landowners’ decision to self-govern can be problematic for wildlife disease management because voluntarism is critical to curbing the negative effects of disease. Researchers suggest that different types of legitimacy play an important role in explaining obedience, interest, or realized engagement or collaboration. We studied which types of legitimacy drive Texas landowners living in the midst of the deadly and highly infectious chronic wasting disease (CWD) to disengage with state-led disease governance that aims to protect deer, elk, and moose populations. Our survey of 481 landowners revealed that a pathway towards landowner willingness to engage CWD management in Texas requires top-down and bottom-up alignment with conceptions of ideological and consequential legitimacy. Given the results of our study, an evolution in contemporary CWD governance would require elements of both socially constructed instrumentally- and value-rational norms (i.e., CWD management in the right way and for the right reasons) to carve a space for political legitimacy at different levels, with aims of rendering voluntarism to benefit the common good culturally normative.
{"title":"Legitimacy and Wildlife Disease: Should Chronic Wasting Disease be Managed without Government?","authors":"Christopher Serenari, Elena C. Rubino","doi":"10.1080/13880292.2023.2217614","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2023.2217614","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Natural resource institutions have embraced a deliberative turn to improve how they solve management problems and promote peacebuilding with and among stakeholders. However, actors who would rather not help decide, understand, evaluate, or implement decisions, or, at least not be dictated to in that regard, pose challenges to democratic governance arrangements. Such an inclination can be prevalent among landowner segments and befuddle efforts to safeguard state trust resources such as wildlife. Specifically, landowners’ decision to self-govern can be problematic for wildlife disease management because voluntarism is critical to curbing the negative effects of disease. Researchers suggest that different types of legitimacy play an important role in explaining obedience, interest, or realized engagement or collaboration. We studied which types of legitimacy drive Texas landowners living in the midst of the deadly and highly infectious chronic wasting disease (CWD) to disengage with state-led disease governance that aims to protect deer, elk, and moose populations. Our survey of 481 landowners revealed that a pathway towards landowner willingness to engage CWD management in Texas requires top-down and bottom-up alignment with conceptions of ideological and consequential legitimacy. Given the results of our study, an evolution in contemporary CWD governance would require elements of both socially constructed instrumentally- and value-rational norms (i.e., CWD management in the right way and for the right reasons) to carve a space for political legitimacy at different levels, with aims of rendering voluntarism to benefit the common good culturally normative.","PeriodicalId":52446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74086166","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/13880292.2023.2217615
C. Cox, Luke Hauser
Abstract The United Kingdom, with the introduction of the Ivory Act 2018, is at the forefront of elephant protection, and it is hoped that governmental commitments, made in the 25 Year Environment Plan, will see increased protection for other species at risk due to the illegal wildlife trade. However, one species that currently falls outside of the regulation of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) can be directly linked to the ivory trade: the mammoth. The woolly mammoth became extinct more than 10,000 years ago, but the genus Mammuthus, since its appearance in Africa c.5 ma, was one of the most successful megafaunal groups, radiating into 10 species and found across the Northern Hemisphere from Siberia to Crete. As the world warms and the permafrost melts, mammoth tusks are being uncovered across the Northern Hemisphere, particularly in Siberia’s Republic of Sakha (Yakutia). There are close similarities between the tusks of elephants and mammoths, leading conservationists to fear that the increase in “ice ivory” heralds a new threat to elephants and our wider understanding of the “woolly” mammoth and its world.
{"title":"Ice Ivory to White Gold: Links Between the Illegal Ivory Trade and the Trade in Geocultural Artifacts","authors":"C. Cox, Luke Hauser","doi":"10.1080/13880292.2023.2217615","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2023.2217615","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The United Kingdom, with the introduction of the Ivory Act 2018, is at the forefront of elephant protection, and it is hoped that governmental commitments, made in the 25 Year Environment Plan, will see increased protection for other species at risk due to the illegal wildlife trade. However, one species that currently falls outside of the regulation of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) can be directly linked to the ivory trade: the mammoth. The woolly mammoth became extinct more than 10,000 years ago, but the genus Mammuthus, since its appearance in Africa c.5 ma, was one of the most successful megafaunal groups, radiating into 10 species and found across the Northern Hemisphere from Siberia to Crete. As the world warms and the permafrost melts, mammoth tusks are being uncovered across the Northern Hemisphere, particularly in Siberia’s Republic of Sakha (Yakutia). There are close similarities between the tusks of elephants and mammoths, leading conservationists to fear that the increase in “ice ivory” heralds a new threat to elephants and our wider understanding of the “woolly” mammoth and its world.","PeriodicalId":52446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83897381","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：