A Comparative Analysis of Wildlife Trafficking in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom

Outline Purpose Purpose Methodology Methodology Findings Findings Australia Australia NZ NZ UK UK Discussion Discussion

Purpose This study adopts a comparative approach incorporating illegal trade data obtained from the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) online trade database. This study adopts a comparative approach incorporating illegal trade data obtained from the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) online trade database. This will further understanding of the geographic differences, which can then inform efforts to improve policy intervention and prevention strategies. This will further understanding of the geographic differences, which can then inform efforts to improve policy intervention and prevention strategies.

Methodology CITES-listed species CITES-listed species Incidents not totals (individual specimens or weight) Incidents not totals (individual specimens or weight) Reported to the Secretariat Reported to the Secretariat

Methodology All 178 countries All 178 countries The source ‘I’ for illegal The source ‘I’ for illegal Whilst the illegal wildlife was probably confiscated or seized, the CITES data does not give this kind of information Whilst the illegal wildlife was probably confiscated or seized, the CITES data does not give this kind of information The intention is to gain insight into the species targeted and geographic patterns as well as the type of products that are being smuggled The intention is to gain insight into the species targeted and geographic patterns as well as the type of products that are being smuggled

Findings

Findings

Findings

Findings

Findings

Findings

Findings

Findings

Findings

Findings

Findings

Findings

Findings

Discussion Not possible to determine if the trends witnessed are due to increased or decreased enforcements efforts, an increase or decrease in illegal activity or some combination Not possible to determine if the trends witnessed are due to increased or decreased enforcements efforts, an increase or decrease in illegal activity or some combination It does highlight the following: It does highlight the following:

Discussion Australia Australia Essentially no export of live wildlife Essentially no export of live wildlife CITES permits for imports too CITES permits for imports too Harsh penalties Harsh penalties NZ NZ Controlled imports and exports Controlled imports and exports Relatively harsh penalties Relatively harsh penalties UK UK Controlled imports and exports Controlled imports and exports Moderate penalties Moderate penalties

Further Studies NZ has the highest imports NZ has the highest imports Because WEG detects more or if more is occurring? Because WEG detects more or if more is occurring? Australia’s success Australia’s success Convictions and the use of the range of penalties Convictions and the use of the range of penalties Trade of marine species and corals Trade of marine species and corals ‘Unknown’ importer and exporter ‘Unknown’ importer and exporter Overseas territories as a means of laundering or smuggling Overseas territories as a means of laundering or smuggling