During an important month for wildlife conservation, Guildhall Chambers Environment Team barrister, Brendon Moorhouse, comments on practical issues relating to criminal prosecutions for wildlife offences in the UK.

On the 5th February 2014 the government approved continued funding to the National Wildlife Crime Unit for a further two years. The funding announcement almost coincided with the Animal Trafficking wildlife trade crisis talks in London last week at which experts from around the world gathered to discuss the unprecedented challenges to the world's endangered species.

As the 21st millennium proceeds through its early stages, rare and endangered species face unprecedented challenges. The natural world is continuing to face habitat erosion. Examples are becoming more widespread and are increasingly moving from specific species towards the global. While deforestation is driving many great ape species towards extinction, scientists now also quietly warn that the acidification of our oceans is leading to the destruction of fundamental 'building blocks' of marine ecosystems. Rare and endangered species of the world are also under unparalleled pressure from a poaching boom that has been estimated to be currently worth £12bn a year. In addition to the poachers, there is also a thriving illegal trade in rare and endangered live animals. It is a three-pronged attack on many of the rarest of our planets inhabitants.

It is a little over 40 years since CITES (the Convention on Trade in Endangered Species) was opened for signatories and so far 178 countries have ratified the convention. CITES lists, in various Annexes, some 34,000 species that are deemed to require levels of protection including 1,200 species in Annex 1 – those that are threatened with extinction. It is unarguable that the importance of the convention has never been greater, and at the same time questions need to be asked about how the convention is applied and enforced both within the UK and the rest of the world.

A prosecution for CITES offences that was brought in Gloucestershire last summer highlighted the practical difficulties involved in enforcement. The defendant, Mr Keith Beavan, had taken over the internationally renowned 'National Birds of Prey Centre' and was able to use the excellent reputation of the centre to start an illegal trade in rare and endangered birds. At the heart of the prosecution was the system of registering birds for sale or commercial use that was heavily reliant upon the integrity of the person keeping the birds. When Mr Beavan took over the NBPC it housed a number of protected wild-born Cape Verde Kites – a species that are now 'effectively extinct'. The system currently in use permitted Mr Beavan to pass off some of the Kites as captive born birds and he was able to sell them to another establishment. It was only because of the specialist skills available at the National Wildlife Crime Unit – and in this case of a bird expert, Andy McWilliam – who not only understood the licensing system and the difference between split and closed rings, but more crucially had a detailed appreciation of the licensing regime and many other details that would bypass the non-expert, that the full story of what Mr Beavan was doing was unravelled.

While this prosecution received national media attention, it is also clear that it was scratching the surface of a massive trade in illegal rare species. The necessary specialist skills to bring a successful prosecution is only part of the problem. There is also a degree of naivety amongst many people working in the conservation arena – a willingness to 'loan' birds to non-existent 'breeding programmes' without any check being made, a system where birds are dispatched with no way of determining whether the intended recipient in fact gets the animal,the ability for people to buy and sell birds that are not in their possession that encourages commercial trade in the birds, to name but three 'loopholes' that were being exploited.

While the international application of CITES has been criticised because of differences in national classifications of the scheduled species and because of different applications of sanctions, the position within Europe as to what is covered is relatively clear and of itself does not pose any serious problems ‘on the ground’ for enforcement purposes.

The United Kingdom in a variety of ways provides excellent, and in many cases world leading, facilities for conservation of rare species. While it is recognised that they are not a replacement for the threatened original habitats they form an important part of the conservation process. While it is a greater problem to try and deal with the 'global' issue of habitat destruction, the other two prongs of the attack on rare species are issues that the UK authorities can effectively tackle with sufficient will. Those are the trade in illegally poached animal parts and the trade in live animals. They are equally important conservation battlegrounds if we are to properly give effect to the CITES ideals.

In the UK the National Wildlife Crime Unit is at the forefront. Lending support to the UK Border Agency in importation issues and the Police in criminal investigations and prosecutions, the numbers of experts working in the unit is tiny with their structure 'online' showing just 11 full-time employee equivalents. Cases like the single Beavan prosecution require a huge amount of time from expert investigators, even though that case was well supported by the Gloucestershire Constabulary, because ultimately successful prosecutions rely on the detailed knowledge of the regulatory regime, coupled with good investigative skills.

What clearly emerged from the Beavan investigation and prosecution was both the scale and the international aspect of the illegal trade. It is a trade in which the participants talk to each other regularly in the process of tracking down and acquiring the rare species. It is clear that the participants are also willing to co-operate with each other in order to falsify records to support their profitable trade. Applying an effective enforcement and prosecution policy within the UK that is properly resourced, the same lines of communication would quickly send out the message that illegal trade in CITES species is a particularly risky activity within the UK.

Brendon Moorhouse is a barrister at Guildhall Chambers in Bristol, who prosecuted the Beavan case in Gloucester Crown Court in 2013.

For further information please contact:

Brendon Moorhouse

Guildhall Chambers, 23 Broad Street, Bristol, BS1 2HG - 0117 930 9000

The material contained in this article is provided for general information purposes only. It does not constitute legal or other professional advice. No responsibility is assumed by any member of chambers for its accuracy or currency, and reliance should not be placed upon it. Specific, personal legal advice should be obtained in relation to any case or matter. Any views expressed are those of the editor or named author.