Update: Definition of Hunting Trophy

Update: Definition of Hunting Trophy

 

We scored a major victory for hunters today, but the issue is not fully over.  The issue is the creation of a CITES definition of hunting trophy.   The victory is that the definition now includes worked items made from the animals taken by the hunter, such as elephant-foot stools, hair bracelets, and boots, and can be exported without a second export permit as long as the items made from the animal are “specified” on the hunting trophy’s exporting documents. 

As previously mentioned, SCI and SCIF have played a constructive role in a drafting group assigned to form a definition of hunting trophy.  After four long sessions of the drafting group, or 6 grueling hours arguing our positions, SCIF’s Matt Eckert and SCI head of delegation John Monson were pleased to see an agreeable compromise definition that was up for adoption today, on the floor.

SCI delegation chairman John Monson made two statements on the floor on behalf of hunters.  In the first statement, he supported the draft definition in general terms.  In the second statement, he supported a suggestion from the United States that improved the document by making it clear the definition applied tore-exported trophies as well as the initial import.  So if an animal is hunted in one country, shipped to a second country for taxidermy, and then shipped to the hunter’s home, the shipment would still be considered a hunting trophy, even if worked items were included in the shipment.

For the past few years, this has all been a problem for safari hunters who live in the U.S..  Two  years ago, the U.S. published rules that eliminated worked items from the definition of a hunting trophy and required a second export permit for items made from the animal.  At this meeting, the U.S. tried to have their restrictive definition adopted as the global definition. This is exactly what SCI anticipated from the U.S., and we came to this meeting prepared to prevent its adoption.   Our preparations paid off with the inclusion of raw, processed and manufactured items in the definition.   Incidentally, this may open the door to asking the U.S. to revise its definition in the U.S. rules.

The final text has not been approved yet, because it needs some drafting work.  It will be back on the floor tomorrow.

In order to reach agreement, the countries specified that the animal parts (whether in the form of manufactured items or not) had to be identifiable to one of the animals taken by the hunter and also had to be listed specifically on the face of the export permit.  While that’s not final yet, that’s the likely result.

 

To be continued…tomorrow!