Press release from International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), 21 August 2024:
Wildlife criminals: Public want them punished, but they routinely get off scot-free, study shows
Criminals who inflict immense suffering on wild animals, such as beating to death, poisoning, or smuggling across borders illegally, are evading justice and penalties in the UK, according to new research.
This is despite new poll findings showing that 97 percent of the respondents believed those who torture wild animals should be punished.
The report ‘System set to fail – prosecuting wildlife crime’ was commissioned by the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) from criminologists at Nottingham Trent University (now at Anglia Ruskin University (ARU)) and the University of Gloucestershire. It extensively documents first-hand accounts of those working on the front line of wildlife crime, providing a bleak overview of why so many cases do not result in prosecution.
It revealed cases were often unsuccessful due to a lack of resources, training, inconsistent approaches to gathering evidence, and the absence of a centralised recording system for wildlife crime.
In addition, a poll carried out by YouGov has shown that there is overwhelming support for wildlife crime to be taken seriously. Specifically, it found:
- 97% of people believed that those who torture wild animals should be punished.
- 92% of people were in support of the government setting up a formal reporting system to record wildlife crime.
- Over 80% of people thought that people who illegally trafficked wild animals (81%) or tortured them (85%) should be given a prison sentence.
- 63% thought that the government should be doing more to tackle wildlife crime.
“Britain’s wildlife is in trouble. This research tells the demoralising tales of enforcers often fighting losing battles against criminals enjoying a lucrative free-for-all to exploit wildlife for greed. It’s a system set to fail”, Catherine Bell, Director of International Policy, IFAW said. “Wildlife crime presents low risk – high reward opportunities to organised gangs, who are often linked to drugs, firearms and other violent offences.”
“If the new government wants to signal their commitment to protecting nature, then this is a golden opportunity”, Bell added.
Police, legal experts and NGOs cite wildlife crime’s ‘non-notifiable’ status as a major source of its inequality under the law. This means incidents do not have to be reported by the police to the Home Office which would use them to compile national crime statistics. As a result, such statistics are hidden in violence, suspicious circumstances offences and anti-social behaviour incidents, preventing clear oversight of the situation.
“Research consistently shows wildlife crime doesn’t get the priority or the resources it deserves. Instead, we have a system reliant on the diligence and dedication of individual enforcement staff. We need better systems in place to provide the necessary support to investigate and prosecute these crimes,” Dr Angus Nurse, research lead and Professor of Law and Environmental Justice at ARU said.
Wildlife crimes occur under a veil of secrecy often in remote places, so overstretched police forces have difficulty allocating resources to investigate and prosecute them. Plus, in June, the Metropolitan Police’s wildlife crime unit was scaled back, with the unit’s detectives being redeployed.
To tackle the problem IFAW is calling on the new government to show that they are committed to taking wildlife crime seriously in the first 100 days of government by introducing new measures. These include:
- Making wildlife crime a ‘notifiable’ offence.
- Mandatory early legal training in wildlife crime.
- Mandatory sentencing and prosecution guidelines.
- Better guidance and support on the evidence needed for wildlife crime prosecutions.
- Greater multi-agency collaboration.
- Raised awareness of wildlife crime across forces.
- Commitment to the National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU) funding from the government.
IFAW has launched a petition calling on the new Labour Government to consider and implement these measures. To sign it, please visit the IFAW website here.
ENDS
The report can be read/downloaded here:
Raptor Persecution UK 
I am firmly of the opinion that a big problem in the UK is that many of the most influential lawmakers are largely landowners who, whatever they say publicly, do not want to pass laws that would legitimately stop wildlife crime, i.e. remove loopholes in existing legislation, establish genuinely punitive minimum punishment thresholds and clear guidance on at what levels of crime each punishment threshold is reached.
The judiciary is largely made up of people who are either members of, or aspire to be members of, the peer group that owns and runs shooting estates, hunting packs etc, so they look for reasons to exclude evidence that would lead to successful prosecutions. I also firmly believe that the same applies to prosecutorial teams.
As for the police, it must be so dispiriting being part of a wildlife crime unit which becomes a rural crimes unit and only focuses on property crime, as we have in Wiltshire. Senior police officers (peer pressure?) and, in our case, a PCC xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx I am not libelling him: the evidence is freely available.
When you see, time and again, the RSPCA being forced to bring civil actions, due to police intransigence and failure to act and investigate, actually win their case but then not have costs awarded against the defendant, it makes you think that we actually need specialist wildlife crime courts where all involved are dedicated to the eradication of wildlife crime and the prevention of criminals getting away with it or just getting a slap on the wrist when found guilty.
[Ed: Thanks, Simon. I can’t just take your word that you’re not libelling him, you’ll need to provide the link that supports your allegation before I can consider publishing that part of your comment. I’m afraid I don’t have the time to go looking for it myself].
I can agree with the report’s recommendations. More needs to be done to tackle wildlife crime but it is important to note that most of the routine killing of wildlife is legal, routine and widely practiced. Almost without exception, the available legal methods to ‘manage’ wildlife are demonstrably inhumane, the equipment is on free sale to anyone and there is close to zero accountability – that is, with a few exceptions, there are no competence requirements, no reporting requirements and no routine scrutiny of activities. It’s time for a root and branch review of the whole damned circus.
Well said Simon in a nutshell you’ve covered it all especially the judiciary of this country aspire to be part peer groupcrunning hunting packs shooting estates wealthy landowners etc the law breaking the law.