CIC Magazine 2020/2 - English Version

CIC – Conservation through the sustainable use of wildlife

CIC MAGAZINE 2020/2

Conseil International de la Chasse et de la Conservation du Gibier Internationaler Rat zur Erhaltung des Wildes und der Jagd International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation

Publisher: CIC Headquarters H-2092 Budakeszi P.O. BOX 82, Hungary Phone: +36 23 453 830 Fax: +36 23 453 832 E-mail: office@cic-wildlife.org www.cic-wildlife.org

Cover photo by Catherine Merlin

Follow our activities on social media

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOCUS

DIVISIONS AND WORKING GROUPS

WILDLIFE WATCH

AFRICA

EUROPE

NEWS FROM OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD

STORY HIGHLIGHT

CELEBRATION

MEDIA AND PUBLICATIONS

ANNOUNCEMENTS

2

EDITORIAL T

his year has been a unique one for all of us. Like many people and organisations around the world, the CIC has been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, and we have had to make adjustments to our work accordingly. A particularly big loss for us was the cancellation of the General Assembly in Riga, as well as the disruptions to the international work that we do in advocating for sustainable use.

Having said this, we have found new ways to operate and stay active during these difficult times. The staff at the CIC Headquarters has been able to successfully navigate the remote working environment, as have our partners and colleagues. In addition, our shift into an online working space has enabled us to do things we would not have otherwise considered, such as the virtual EC and Council meetings that were held throughout the year.

We also held our very first online Hunting Auction, which was an exciting challenge for the CIC team. While the results of the auction far exceeded our expectations, the event was a learning experience for us, and we will be making sure to make adjustments and improvements to the format going forward. COVID-19 has influenced our work in other ways too, especially in terms of its impact on the world of conservation, and our response to it from a wildlife management perspective.

Since October, the CIC has been actively working alongside the Collaborative Partnership on Sustainable Wildlife Management (CPW), a collection of international conservation organisations including the CIC and 13 others, on a campaign which looks to address the wildlife management challenges that have emerged as a result of the pandemic. A problem on this big of a scale requires a fact based and coordinated response.

That’s why the CPW, in which the CIC is a member, released a joint statement which gives principles that should be followed when looking to address COVID-19 related wildlife management issues. I would really encourage everyone to go through this statement as it contains a lot of interesting thoughts on the pandemic as a whole, not just from a wildlife management perspective.

Another big focus for us since the release of the last magazine has been our information campaign on “trophy hunting”, Debunking the Myths. We decided to create this series of 10 infographics in order to help educate people on the reality of international hunting. This is something we felt was necessary considering the growing trend around the world in which countries are looking to control the ability of people to manage their own wildlife.

3

We have already seen this with countries introducing bans on the import and export of trophies, and it is something that many others are now considering, such as the UK. If you haven’t done so already, I would ask that you share these infographics with your friends and colleagues, and to use them as an information source when you’re involved in discussions on this topic. Most recently for the CIC, our members will also know we been active on the issue of captive bred lion shooting, after we released a joint statement on the practice in conjunction with Dallas Safari Club (DSC).

This joint statement makes official something which we have felt strongly about for a while, which is that this practice damages the reputation of hunters and hunting around the world.

Because of this, going forward the CIC will be encouraging Governments that support captive bred lion shooting to consider the wider implications, and we will be discouraging ”hunters” from taking part in these types of activity.

It appears that others shared our views on these matters, as we received an outpouring of support from the hunting community and beyond following the release of the joint statement. In fact, four more organisations have now joined as co-signatories of the statement.

These organisations are: Rowland Ward Ltd., the International Professional Hunters’ Association (IPHA), the African Operators’ and Professional Hunters’ Associations of Africa (OPHAA) and the African Professional Hunters Association (APHA). I would like to thank these organisations for supporting our message on captive bred lion shooting. For others that share our views on this practice, I would encourage you to pleas contact us about joining as a co-signatory.

Of course, in addition to the stories mentioned above, we have coverage of all the CIC related news that has taken place during the second half of this year in this magazine. There are a number of magazine exclusive articles included as well, which we are excited for you to see.

You will also notice that we have taken a brand new approach with the design of this magazine. For this edition, we decided to go with a completely different format, and have made some changes to make the magazine easier to navigate for readers. We hope you will enjoy the new design!

Most importantly, I would like to thank our members and partners that supported us throughout the year. It is in times like these that we should look to support one another, and I am looking forward to seeing you all in person sometime in the not too distant future.

George Aman President of the CIC

4

Photo by Keyur Nandaniya

Focus

5

What is Focus?

Focus places a spotlight on the most important developments for the CIC, as well as the wider world of hunting and sustainable use.

6

Focus

CPW Joint Statement on COVID-19 Wildlife Management Challenges The Collaborative Partnership on Sustainable Wildlife Management (CPW), consisting of 14 organisations including the CIC, released a joint statement on the wildlife management challenges that have emerged as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The statement calls for a “pragmatic, factual and science-based approach” to these challenges, and puts forward four guiding principles that should be used when making decisions to limit the spread and emergence of zoonotic diseases, while also taking the needs of human wellbeing and global biodiversity into account.

These principles are: • Recognize the importance of the use of wildlife for many communities, including Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs), in policy responses.

• Maintain and restore healthy and resilient ecosystems to reduce risks of zoonotic spillovers and future pandemics.

• Persecution including killing of wild animals suspected of transmitting diseases will not address the causes of the emergence or spread of zoonotic diseases.

• Regulate, manage and monitor harvesting, trade and use of wildlife to ensure it is safe, sustainable and legal.

It is first vital that governments and international organisations recognise the importance of IPLCs when making wildlife management decisions. This is both to ensure that livelihoods are not negatively affected by any policies that may be introduced, and to utilise local knowledge to facilitate any planned conservation activities.

In addition, allowing IPLCs to benefit from the sustainable use of wildlife incentivises them to positively engage in conservation work. Within the context of hunting and sustainable use, incentives may include direct income or other benefits such as meat distribution.

In terms of responses that should be implemented, it

7

is should be stressed that introducing blanket bans on wildlife usage (which many have called for as a response to COVID-19) would fail to address issues that are considered key drivers in zoonotic disease emergence.

These include habitat encroachment and destruction by human activity, or the impact of biodiversity loss on ecosystems’ abilities to resist disease.

Therefore, maintaining healthy ecosystems through an integrated approach, and looking to effectively enforce regulations and the monitoring of wildlife usage, should be considered as alternative measures.

IPLCs can play a significant role in both types of responses. When looking to maintain healthy ecosystems, a positive example of this in action is the use of regulated, sustainable hunting programs. Not only can this generate socio-economic benefits for IPLCS in hunting areas, it also generates much needed funding for conservation initiatives. Furthermore, sustainable hunting activities are beneficial for biodiversity as a whole, as they prevent more destructive forms of land usage, such as agriculture, from being introduced in wildlife areas.

Real life examples, such as the surge in poaching observed around the world in the wake of COVID-19, have also shown the importance of IPLCs in regulating, managing and monitoring wildlife use to ensure that it is conducted appropriately. This increase in poaching has, in part, been attributed to a drop off in revenues from the hunting sector caused by international travel restrictions. As a result, game guards and patrol units were not available to stop individuals from engaging in poaching activities.

With the future of wildlife and countless communities at risk, the CIC would strongly encourage all involved in wildlife management decision making to look at the facts, and to take these four principles into consideration.

For more information, please read the full joint statement here.

Focus The CPW comprises a group of international organizations that have mandates or programmes that revolve around sustainable use and conservation of wildlife resources.

Partners include the International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC), the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) the Food and Agriculture Administration of the United Nations (FAO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), , the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB), International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), International Trade Centre (ITC), International Union of Forest Research Organizations (IUFRO), and TRAFFIC – The Wildlife Trade Monitoring Network.

COVID-19 has been disastrous for many people and communities around the world – this is particularly true for IPLCs. It is therefore critical that IPLCs are integrated as part of any policies that are introduced in response to COVID-19 related wildlife management challenges.

This is of particular importance considering the fact that IPLCs are among the most vulnerable people within the context of current discussions surrounding COVID-19, namely calls for bans on wildlife trade and sustainable use. Evidence has shown that a blanket ban on wildlife trade would negatively impact food security for millions of people, particularly in developing nations. As many people in these countries rely on informal food systems, such as wet markets, for both access to food and as part of their livelihoods, a ban that would deprive such communities from either of these things would be seen as an infringement on their human rights.

IPLCs should also be recognised for their role in achieving conservation objectives. Their specific roles in contributing towards conservation will be explored in the later principles, however, broadly speaking communities should be incentivised in order for them to fully engage in conservation work. This can be seen in countries that use regulated sustainable hunting programs as part of their wildlife management strategy, which generate benefits such as direct income or the distribution of meat. While IPLCs do play an important role in some existing conservation policies, more can be done to include them in all aspects of our society.

Despite several countries officially recognising the rights of IPLCS, in practice, there is often a lack of legal security of tenure for indigenous peoples in these nations, with many decisions being taken without stakeholder involvement. The private sector has also been encouraged to take more responsibility, with the UN stating that the rights of IPLCs are often not granted sufficient respect by private entities operating in rural areas.

In conservation terms, there have been a number of “fortress conservation” approaches employed throughout the world, which fail to recognise the role that IPLCs play in rural areas. This is where protected areas are setup to function in isolation from human disturbance, under the assumption that human activity is harmful to conservation. This approach can lead to forced displacements, the destruction of livelihoods, loss of rights to lands, violence and more, for IPLCs. This highlights the importance of this first principle as part of the CPW joint statement, which we hope will encourage those involved in conservation and sustainable use to support those most vulnerable in these difficult times.

8

Photo by David Clode

The partnership was established in 2013, with the aim of establishing a platform for addressing wildlife management issues that require national and supra-national responses.

Focus The CPW’s second wildlife management principle on COVID-19 related wildlife management challenges addresses ways to prevent future zoonotic disease spillovers and pandemics. The path to a healthy and sustainable future can only be achieved by maintaining and restoring healthy ecosystems.

In doing so, it is important to first consider that humans are very much a part of global ecosystems, with policy responses then created with this in mind.

Therefore, not only is it essential that human activities are factored into ecosystem management, but it is equally important to attempt to mitigate our own impact on the natural world.

The CPW statement states that the encroachment of human activities into ecosystems, and the subsequent destruction of ecosystems, increases the risk of emergence and spread of zoonotic diseases.

In particular, the following activities bring about the most risks from a zoonotic disease perspective: • Deforestation • Habitat degradation and fragmentation • The unsustainable expansion of agriculture One tool that can be used to support ecosystems is the sustainable utilisation of wildlife resources. This gives value to wildlife, while also supporting people and communities living in wildlife areas.

In turn, regulated, sustainable hunting programs are able to secure these spaces as wild areas, thereby conserving species and habitats. Furthermore, this has the added benefit of preventing more destructive forms of land usage, such as agriculture (and its associated destruction of habitats) from being introduced in such areas.

The Savé Valley Conservancy (SVC) in Zimbabwe is one case study that demonstrates the conservation benefits of hunting initiatives. The conservancy, which covers an area of 344,000 ha, was originally used for livestock ranching, which decimated wildlife populations in the area.

Private land owners then shifted to a wildlife utilisation model after deciding that livestock was no longer sustainable for the surrounding ecosystem. This resulted in an increase in overall biodiversity and the regeneration of populations for many species, with the conservancy now hosting some 1,500 African Elephants, 121 Black Rhinos and 42 White Rhinos, 280 Lions and several packs of the endangered African Wild Dog. The SVC is globally recognised as an example of best practice when it comes to sustainable use, with the conservancy even being awarded the CIC Markhor Award in 2016, in recognition of its outstanding efforts in conservation, linking biodiversity and livelihoods to sustainable use.

It is examples like this, where we look to limit our own impact on ecosystems while building and maintaining their resilience, that will allow us to improve ecosystem health, of which humans are an inevitable part, and reduce the risk of future pandemics.

The scale and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic means that we require a focused and coordinated response if we are to successfully mitigate the emergence or spread of zoonotic diseases in the future. This is in contrast to any knee-jerk reactions which might directly target individual wildlife species.

This is why the third principle outlined in the recent CPW joint statement addresses the need to avoid the persecution of wild animals suspected of transmitting diseases.

Looking to persecute wild animals that may, or may not, carry wildlife diseases fails to tackle the underlying causes and risk factors of disease spillover.

For the emergence and spread of zoonotic diseases, the key drivers are habitat encroachment and destruction by human activity, as well as biodiversity loss and its impact on the ability of ecosystems to contain disease as part of a healthy,

9

living system. Within the context of COVID-19, persecuting or killing wildlife species, such as bats, will have little impact on the worldwide pandemic, as it is human-to-human transmission that is causing the increase in cases.

Furthermore, in the case of bats, killings would also put populations at risk, while losing their positive pest regulation and pollination functions.

Persecution can go beyond simply killing wild animals suspected of transmitting disease. Targeting whole sectors, as we have seen with wildlife trade, without full consideration of the consequences, may fail to tackle the issues at hand and worse still, can create worse overall outcomes.

Banning wildlife trade would, firstly, impact the lives of countless indigenous people and rural communities (IPLCs) that rely on the harvest, use and trade of wildlife resources as part of their livelihoods.

Not only this, but evidence has shown that measures such as this can actually have the opposite of the desired effect.

It is suggested that banning wildlife trade would drive trade underground and into black markets, making it more difficult to monitor and regulate, while also removing incentives for local people to conserve, sustainably use resources, and maintain ecosystem health.

This was observed in the aftermath of the Ebola outbreak in 2013-2016, where the removal of legal, wild meat triggered an increase in black market activity and its associated risks, such as a surge in poaching, and the loss of standards for hygiene and animal welfare. This highlights the need for wildlife management policies that are created to strengthen global health security to be based on sound science, rather than common sentiment.

The fourth and final principle outlined in the CPW’s joint statement on COVID-19 related wildlife management challenges highlights the need to regulate, manage and monitor different aspects of our utilisation of wildlife resources.

When left unchecked, we know that both the extractive and non-extractive use of wildlife resources can lead to issues for both animal and human health – this includes the possible emergence and spread of zoonotic diseases.

It is therefore critical that efforts are made to ensure that the utilisation of wildlife around the world is conducted both safely and sustainably.

In order to effectively introduce such regulations, it is essential that they are made using sound guidance, standards, risk assessment, risk management tools and effective enforcement and monitoring measures.

IPLCs have shown that they can play a significant role in managing and monitoring different aspects of our wildlife and, going forward, it is essential that they are appropriately integrated into our response to COVID-19 related challenges.

In one example of this, scientists have been working with the indigenous San people in Namibia and Botswana in order to utilise their tracking abilities. This provides researchers with accurate data on biodiversity and the health of wildlife species, especially when it concerns the use of location data and population densities. Such information is vital if we are to continue using wildlife sustainably, and in turn support wider ecosystem health.

Properly managing and regulating wildlife not only benefits animal and human health – it also aids in combatting illegal activities. In the case of poaching, reports of which appear to have increased in the wake of COVID-19, the issues of illegal activity and animal health go hand in hand. The recent rise in poaching has highlighted the effectiveness of conservation tools, such as sustainable hunting programs, when looking to regulate, manage and monitor wildlife use.

Evidence has shown that this increase in poaching has, in part, been attributed to a drop off in revenues from the hunting sector caused by international travel restrictions. As a result, game guards and patrol units were unable to stop individuals from engaging in poaching activities due to a lack of funds available for their employment.

However, there are other cases where hunting operators have continued to employ game guards and patrol units to combat poaching, despite the significant revenue losses associated with international travel restrictions. We have seen instances of this in countries such as Zimbabwe and Indonesia, among countless others, where the threat of poaching, and the subsequent fight against it, is still ongoing in these difficult times.

By finding new ways to regulate, manage and monitor wildlife use, while also supporting existing mechanisms that support such goals, we can work towards a more safe and sustainable future.

10

Photo by Ron Dauphin

Focus

Photo by Francesko de Tommaso

Divisions and Working Groups

11

What is Divisions and Working Groups?

Take a closer look at the latest activities from the CIC Divisions (Applied Science, Policy & Law and Culture) and Working Groups (Artemis and Young Opinion).

12

Applied Science

Trust in science; or better still, science and trust

The CIC co-organised a recent thematic webinar run by the EU Large Carnivore Platform, together with FACE and the Large Carnivore Initiative for Europe (LCIE). The title of the webinar was: “Stakeholder involvement in large carnivore monitoring”. It aimed to explore the different activities carried out in the surveying and monitoring of large carnivore populations; show how stakeholders (especially hunters) are involved in surveying and inputting data to monitoring schemes; and discuss the desirability and potential for expanding the role of stakeholders in data collection.

The webinar was chaired by Jürgen Tack, co-chair of the LC Platform and Scientific Director of ELO (European Landowners’ Organisation).

Importance of Data Collection John Linnell (Senior Researcher, Norwegian Institute for Nature Research – NINA) opened the morning session with some general remarks on why monitoring of large carnivores is important and what challenges arise when gathering scientifically sound data. He pointed out that for general distribution, data can be obtained through “citizen science” and more and more tools are available to gather such data on a broad scale on different animal groups. Population numbers are, however, more difficult to obtain. But also in this case, the resources available can be broader than just those of the experienced staff of research institutes. The increasing availability and use of camera traps and DNA sampling (mainly of scats) is a very helpful trend in this regard.

He stressed that any data needs validation. Even experts working in this field have to prove their observations to be true. Data quality, however, can be increased through a structured methodology adapted to the specifics of the given species and/or landscape.

Having set the scene, three best practice examples were then presented. This gave the audience more insights into what stakeholder involvement means in practice. Jonas Kindberg from Sweden (Researcher, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala – SLU) introduced their bear monitoring program, Ilka Reinhardt from Germany (Director, LUPUS Institute) presented ongoing wolf research, and Fridolin Zimmermann from Switzerland (Researcher, KORA – Carnivore Ecology and Wildlife Management) talked about their lynx monitoring scheme. Three countries, three species, three approaches, one goal: get the best possible information on large carnivore populations at a national scale.

Examples of Stakeholder Involvement Sweden In Sweden, hunters are very much involved in bear monitoring, as they are spread across a large area of the country and usually their contributions require little extra effort. Hunters report sightings, signs and even collect bear scats during moose hunting season. The observation data is corrected based on the effort that was invested, and experience has shown that observations show a good correlation with nation-wide systematic scat surveys. Other data stems from samples from bears that have been hunted.

The database is partly available to the public, and hunters can check their own input on individual bears. This creates a feeling of ownership for the contributors, and interest for future input.

Germany In Germany, the wolf recolonization needed quick action. Methods needed to be harmonized in the 16 federal states, which includes a yearly assessment of the distribution and a population estimate.

13

The basis of population size assessment is the number of packs, the reproductive units of wolves, rather than individual counts. Random sightings, camera trap photos are often recorded, but it is difficult to motivate people for a systematic and long-term assistance role in research, especially when collecting genetic samples.

Hunters often put out camera traps for game observations, however, information on wolves is often not shared with the authorities.

Switzerland Switzerland is in a special situation, as the European Union reports are not obligatory, but the country is party to the Bern Convention and there is a Swiss legal requirement, the “Swiss Lynx Concept”. Lynx can be observed through chance observations or with camera traps, through livestock killed, or when found dead. Camera traps can be used to observe lynx coming back to their fresh kill for several nights, but this is a rather rare occasion.

KORA works with a network of observers who are mostly game wardens, but also volunteers, such as recreational hunters. Data on large carnivores is further gathered by wildlife officers who carry out camera trapping, and can be obtained through reports from the public.

Switzerland has three different hunting regulations: Geneva has a total ban on hunting; the rest of the cantons have a hunting law based either on hunting grounds or licenced hunting. This has also implications on the monitoring scheme. In the regions with licenced hunting, professional game wardens play a central role. Where the hunting grounds are the basis of the regulation, very few professional game wardens are at work, hence, hunters are more involved in the monitoring of large carnivores, and are motivated through financial incentives, which creates also a good acceptance of lynx in their hunting areas.

Prof. Dr. Klaus Hackländer (Professor, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna – BOKU; President of the CIC Applied Science Division) reported on an initiative within the Carpathian Convention.

Through his engagement, the CIC started a comparison of the large carnivore monitoring schemes in the 7 member states. The aim is to harmonise the different national monitoring programs in order to be able to monitor transboundary populations of large carnivores in the Carpathians, a real large carnivore hotspot.

Hunters are involved in some of the countries, but not all. Also, their contributions sometimes lack quality control, and data from hunters is not fully recognised, or collected data is not processed in a transparent way.

Hence, there is very limited trust between authorities and hunters. In order to improve efficiency, hunters should be trained to gather samples and other signs of large carnivores, which are useful for scientific research, as well as consulted in the interpretation of the data before publication.

How can Hunters Help Even More?

Sabrina Dietz (Wildlife Policy Officer, European Federation for Hunting and Conservation – FACE) welcomed the possibility for the Platform to discuss the monitoring of large carnivores, as all populations have increased and expanded since the Platform was established, which has resulted in more and more incidents of human-wildlife conflict. Reliable population estimates are required to support management decisions and justify them towards rural stakeholders and the public. The aim is to achieve favourable conservation status for all populations, however, carrying capacity has two sides – ecological and social.

Hunters are involved in large carnivore monitoring in several countries at different levels, but not for the sake of being able to hunt a certain species. However, there is a need to build better cooperation and trust, and increase dialogue between stakeholders, to achieve transparent population estimates.

14 14

Photo by Zdenek Machacek

Comparison of Large Carnivore Monitoring Schemes in the Carpathians

Applied Science Enhancement through Technology Tristan Breijer (Partner Manager, Hunter&Co.; Vice-President of CIC Young Opinion) highlighted the possibilities which are offered by modern telecommunication technologies. The MyHunt application has several features which enables the user to collect field data for wildlife monitoring and research. The application is currently available and widely used in many European countries, and it will soon be rolled out on a global level.

This represents a huge potential for internationally coordinated wildlife monitoring. It requires little effort from the user, and data can be either used in a raw format for scientific purposes or, after some filtering and automatized analysis, it can provide insight on distribution and population trends to the public. In addition, the app also has the functionality to conduct surveys among users. Further discussions between users and researchers are planned to harmonise data quality and scientific analysis, which will ultimately create a more transparent, but secure, monitoring system.

Panel Discussion In the panel discussion, JĂźrgen Tack put a few direct questions to speakers, including: Are hunters, as stakeholders in conservation, really helpful partners in large carnivore monitoring? There was consensus that hunters have a place in gathering field data for scientific research, and represent a very efficient and knowledgeable information source. However, hunters in some countries need training and supervision, and good communication is needed to build the necessary trust between the institutions charged with monitoring and people who can provide the field data. It was stressed that the input from hunters needs to be sustainable over time. Monitoring of wildlife populations is an ongoing process, and the motivation of any stakeholder group has to be constantly maintained.

From a scientific point of view, data gathered by hunters needs validation, but this can be automatized e.g. with scat samples or camera traps. To increase transparency, the data needs to be made public, while also ensuring that this does not jeopardise conservation efforts. If data is made available weeks, or even months, after the observation, there is no real threat to individual animals. Data about breeding in particular needs a longer separation in time between collection and publication. Even so, transparency is really important, especially for those who provide data, to maintain their interest and motivation. This aspect can be tackled in countries where this kind of cooperation does not really exist yet, due to lack of communication. It means a lot of work will be required, however, hunters will be important in getting reliable field data, particularly from remote areas.

On the question, which other stakeholder group could be involved, panellists agreed that essentially all people who go out in the field are a potential source of data. Professionals, such as foresters, farmers, shepherds, as well as recreational users such as bird watchers, could be included. When involving other stakeholder groups, the validation of data will be key, especially if the person providing the reports has a vested interest in certain wildlife species.

Photo by Fredrik Ohlander

Way Forward New technologies that have been made broadly available really can change the world. Multiple monitoring schemes can be combined, good quality data can be obtained from all around the globe, all with simplified methods to increase the number of potential data sources.

Despite this, it is important to remember that hunters remain one of the strongest partners in this effort. Not only are they out in the field all year round, no additional resources are needed for their input either. If the appropriate transparency and trust can be found through good communication, hunters will remain interested and willing to contribute to large carnivore monitoring activities.

By utilizing these new technologies while working to maintain and increase the involvement of hunters, we can strengthen the key role that they play in wildlife monitoring going forward.

15

Policy and law

HUNTING DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC The CIC and FACE have compiled a list, by country, summarising the regulatory conditions surrounding hunting in the face of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The list includes only those countries for which CIC or FACE have received information. Please send any updated information, or new country information you might have, to office@cic-wildlife.org.

The list will be updated as new information is received.

Neither CIC, nor FACE can be held responsible for the accuracy of the information. It is provided for guidance purposes, only. For those seeking the latest, accurate information for a given country, we encourage you to consult with the relevant authorities in that country.

vital role in ensuring public safety residents, which further support and wellbeing. It has the potential their livelihoods. Hunting also to reduce human-wildlife conflict contributes to safeguarding those by keeping wild populations at species in need of protection, by numbers that do not pose risks giving them value and funding the to the livelihoods and health necessary anti-poaching measures of communities living in close to ensure their survival. In this proximity with wildlife. One regard, the negative impacts such example is the contribution associated with reduced hunting of recreational hunting to wild levels, or indeed complete bans boar population control in on hunting as a result of Covid-19 Europe where, as a result, hunters restrictions are already beginning may provide a service to both the felt. This includes increased levels ecosystem and society.[1] Disease of poaching being reported in occurrence and transmission parts of Africa in particular.[2] is rare in well managed and regulated wildlife populations.

TRAVEL ADVICE Keeping wildlife populations within the carrying capacity The COVID-19 situation is of their habitats ensures that rapidly evolving globally. Travel forestry and agricultural lands restrictions can be introduced or as well as the wildlife habitats lifted from one day-to-the-next. themselves do not experience For the latest country-specific The latest guidance list excessive levels of game damage. travel restrictions, we advise checking travel agency websites can be viewed here Hunting elevates the value of in the first instance. A selection wildlife and their habitats; thus, of such agencies is listed below. many areas are kept as wild and However, due to the ever-changing BENEFITS OF natural instead of being further nature of the regulations, it is HUNTING converted into agricultural strongly advised to check with the fields or other types of land relevant national authorities and In pursuit of game animals, use. Moreover, hunting creates chosen airline before you travel by hunters typically travel away from jobs and opportunities for local plane. settlements into more remote areas of the countryside, either alone or in small groups. This makes hunting a rather low risk, https://www.kayak.com/travel-restrictions https://www.iatatravelcentre.com/world.php yet hugely important activity. https://www.trip.com/travel-restrictions-covid-19/ further COVID-19 travel recommendations by destination, we advise that you consult the webHunting is an effective tool for For site of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). wildlife management which [1] Quirรณs-Fernรกndez, Francisco & Marcos, Jaime & Acevedo, Pelayo & Gortรกzar, Christian. (2017). assists in monitoring wildlife Hunters serving the ecosystem: the contribution of recreational hunting to wild boar population control. European Journal of Wildlife Research. 63. 10.1007/s10344-017-1107-4. species populations and plays a [2] See: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/08/science/coronavirus-poaching-rhinos.html

16

Young Opinion

Young Opinion of the International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC) would like to join our wildlife conservation colleagues in celebrating the United Nations International Youth Day.

The International Youth Day is an opportunity to celebrate and empower young peoples’ voices, actions and initiatives.

In order to move towards a more sustainable future, it is important to highlight global and significant efforts that look to enhance the engagement of young people in the field of wildlife conservation.

With people under the age of thirty representing a significant portion of the global population, Young Opinion comes together to celebrate the growing impact of youth in conservation efforts worldwide.

Given the current status of some of the world’s most endangered and iconic species being victims of unsustainable use and overexploitation, it is becoming more important to educate and engage young people in decisions affecting the world’s wildlife.

It is essential to recognize the youth as a group of capable change makers, as they are the ones who are most likely to be affected by such changes in the future. Therefore, we believe it is crucial to raise awareness and cultivate the next generation of conservationists. Key to that is education, which is needed to impart important information on wildlife and nature and, ultimately, stimulate passion on conservation.

Young Opinion stands for greater education, engagement and empowerment of young people in conservation. We encourage youth around the world to address ongoing major threats to wildlife, including habitat destruction, over-exploitation, poaching or illicit trafficking, and to promote the sustainable use of wildlife resources.

17

Young Opinion

CIC Young Opinion Research Award The CIC Young Opinion Research Award is aimed at supporting researchers whose projects contribute to the sustainable use of wildlife for the benefit of natural heritage conservation. Thereby, the goal of the Young Opinion Research Award is to promote scientific research in accordance with the spirit of CIC’s convictions. Such research may cover any or all of the three main pillars of sustainable wildlife management: economic, socio-cultural, ecological. Participants are required to send a summary of their research project, explaining the aim, methods and conclusions of the project.

The jury, a committee of CIC experts, will determine the winner, who will be rewarded with an invitation to participate at the next General Assembly, and a publication in the next Young Opinion Newsletter to present their projects and get in contact with key representatives and experts in the field of sustainable wildlife management. The prize covers the registration fee, accommodation and reasonable pre-approved travel expenses.

CLICK below to read the submission of last year’s winner, Paul Griesberger.

Modelling hunting suitability in mountainous landscapes – with a focus on red deer

18

Photo by Dominik Mecko

Wildlife Watch

19

What is Wildlife Watch?

Wildlife Watch gives readers some insight into the world of trophy evaluation, and the work of our Trophy Evaluation Board (TEB).

20

Wildlife Watch

Wildlife Watch Our Network

Looking back at the year behind us, it has definitely also been a challenging one for trophy evaluation. We started off great, with several training and evaluation events taking place before March. Unfortunately, events planned for the rest of the year had to be either cancelled or postponed.

Nevertheless, our network of measurers has been working hard evaluating trophies and entering them into TED, while the TEB has been discussing ways to adopt the system to the current situation.

Speaking of TEB, the annual Trophy Evaluation Board meeting was supposed to take place from 1011 August in Uhlířské Janovice (near Prague, Czech Republic). However, due to the travel restrictions and health risks associated with a physical meeting, the TEB and the CIC HQ decided it was better to postpone the meeting to spring 2021.

While there are a number of issues and ideas for the improvement of TES to be discussed at the meeting, the only urgent matter that had to be dealt with this year was the election of the TEB Co-Chair. The vote took place online and we are happy to announce that Mr. Tony Dalby-Welsh (UK) was re-elected for another term!

Did you know?

Despite the pandemic and the reduced number of evaluation events this year, our measurers have entered over 4,000 evaluations into TED over the last 6 months!

The TES in numbers: Active CCMs/STJs: 712 + 67 Countries in the TES: 30 Measurements in the TED: 19, 292

The TEB strongly encourages all hunters to have their trophies evaluated by a Certified CIC Measurer in order to enhance research possibilities and encourage a more wholesome approach to the evaluation, regardless of the trophy’s potential to reach a medal limit.

21

Photo by Razvan Mirel

In the Spotlight What is your experience in trophy evaluation?

I’ve been an active hunter for most of my life. I became involved with CIC Trophy Evaluation in 2012 when I completed an initial training course which was held here in Ireland led by experienced European colleagues, who had accepted an invitation to visit Ireland to teach a group of us. Following this and in order to build up my personal portfolio of experience, I took the opportunity to travel to Scotland to work alongside colleagues from the U.K Trophy Evaluation Board at organised evaluation events, such as Game Fairs, where significant examples of all the species found in the U.K. and Ireland were being evaluated.

Over the intervening years, I have also developed my experience on the wider European species. I gained my status as a Senior International Trophy Judge in 2016.

What role does trophy evaluation play in the management of wildlife in Ireland?

Wildlife Watch As far as Trophy Evaluation goes, the most significant difference between Ireland and its near neighbour the UK across the Irish sea, has to be about the latter’s much more developed structure and resources, and of course the length of time the U.K Trophy Evaluation service has been around. Dating back as far as the 1950’s when it was led by the revered expert, the late G Kenneth Whitehead, the U.K has consistently been led by a group of very experienced judges, and the present individuals leading the Trophy Board are Iain Watson and Tony Dalby-Welsh. The U.K team can and does draw on a wide range of specialists who, as well as scoring many, many trophies annually, are actively involved in the recording, history, ecology and the taxonomy of the species occurring in the U.K and Ireland. Strong links between Ireland and the U.K offers rapid access to support, advice and resources and to a large database, all of which is of great benefit to all involved. Species of quality that are presented for evaluation in Ireland are Sika and Red, while in the UK Roe deer would be the main species.

Can you say a few encouraging words for our measurers for the next year?

Given the pandemic and the situation we had this year, we all need to hear some words of hope!

Overall, Irish hunters and stalkers have come to recognise the benefits of the CIC There’s no doubt that 2020 has been a Trophy Evaluation system, and they have year unlike any other, leaving its mark certainly taken advantage of it and the on all of us, none of us I imagine will possibilities the CIC Trophy Evaluation mourn its passing. A love of hunting method offers to wildlife management and our quarry is something which and species enhancement. The compact Laurence Taaffe has brought us and keeps us together. nature of Ireland provides hunters, local Ireland/UK TEB It helps us build friendships and lets us and visiting, scope to hunt quality wild 2016-STJ-001 share knowledge, understanding and areas which have ample populations of our three species of deer, Red, Sika and Fallow. I have seen a opportunities. This has been apparent in the dark days of the major improvement in the quality of trophies, as presented, last year and has given me a lot of encouragement for the future due in part to the CIC message that management, if practiced as we move towards happier and hopefully healthier times. correctly, will produce top quality trophies. Ease of access It’s interesting how many of us have continued to focus on through Dublin coupled with a good transport infrastructure hunting, maintaining contact with fellow judges and hunting appeals to visiting hunters, while the availability of very strong friends, even when our horizons have been limited by national Sika and quality Red Deer has led in my opinion to improved restrictions and limited international travel. Indeed, as we look wildlife husbandry, as the value of strong well managed forward, it’s surprising in terms of the amount of hunting populations are recognised across the worldwide field sports that has continued to take place. 2020 has seen many exciting community and by the state. Of course, Irish culture is very trophies brought forward to me for scoring, although sadly the physical contact and fellowship of like minded individuals and welcoming and accessible, a big plus point to visitors. friends has been lacking. Hopefully as we now begin to emerge As an STJ for the UK Trophy Evaluation Board, what do from the darkness of Covid into the light of spring 2021, it you think are some of the main differences between trophy will offer us a chance for us to get back together and take our interests forward again. measuring in Ireland and the UK? Do you know a member of the STJ/CCM network who should be In the Spotlight?

Would you like your event highlighted in our events section?

Please send STJ/CCM nominations/event details to l.milatovic@cic-wildlife.org

If you have any questions about the above information, or the CIC TES in general, please contact Luna Milatović, CIC Conservation Officer, at l.milatovic@cic-wildlife.org.

Luna Milatović

22

Wildlife Watch

23

24

Photo by Elcarito

Africa

25

What is Africa?

The key decisions, policies and stories that will have an impact on countries in the African continent.

26

Africa

Helping Wildlife and Our Friends in Namibia

The Namibian Professional Hunters Association (NAPHA) has recently started an initiative, the NAPHA Conservation Pin. This pin is a symbol of their continued support of conservation in all its facets. By supporting this initiative, you too can become a valuable link in the conservation chain. To honour and celebrate 46 years of NAPHA’s conservation endeavours and the promotion of sustainable utilisation, NAPHA has undertaken this initiative to raise funds to advance and sustain Namibian conservation. Enshrined in the Namibian Constitution is the sustainable use of its natural resources. This was the first of its kind in the world. This declaration is further reiterated in the aims of the association. NAPHA is an association of members supporting a common goal.

Over the years NAPHA actively supported various research and scientific data projects; to name a few – rabies in kudu, genome sequencing, establishing the rangeland of blackfaced impala, as well as undertaking a two-year leopard survey. It has supported and facilitated undergraduate studies. It supports education, both in rural and urban areas and advocates the importance of ethical and sustainable hunting. It enjoys an open-door policy and dialogue with its line Ministry, the Ministry of Environment, Forestry and Tourism, when addressing legislative and policy matters.

The pin will become available at the end of June with two donation options available Habitat 1 For NAD 4,800 (Euro 240.00 or USD 270.00) you will receive a NAPHA CONSERVATION PIN with a topaz gemstone and a 24-month subscription to the NAPHA weekly news update, keeping you informed of developments in Namibia, as well as a copy of our annual HuntiNamibia magazine in either English or German.

Habitat 2 For NAD 2,400 (Euro 120.00 or USD 135.00) you will receive a NAPHA CONSERVATION PIN without a topaz gemstone and a 12-month subscription to the NAPHA weekly news update, keeping you informed of developments in Namibia, as well as a copy of our annual HuntiNamibia magazine in either English or German.

NAPHA’s attendance and participation on various international platforms like CITES, the AWCF, CIC, DSC, SCI, Conservation Force as well as domestic and regional affiliates and stakeholder NGO’s, has been instrumental and attributed to cumulative efforts to secure Namibia’s vast habitat, fauna and flora.

The pin, cast in antique silver, is the silhouette of Namibia and adorned with a topaz. This precious stone is typically colourless (silver) or pale blue, consisting of an aluminium silicate that contains fluorine and is found in the Erongo Mountain Range. Like antique silver, our ancient land has withstood the test of time, and not only against the elements, but also human interventions. With Namibia’s wildlife and habitat being constantly confronted by human adversity, it warrants vigilant custodianship. Such vigilance comes at a high price. With the topaz symbolizing healing, hope and abundance, it was the obvious choice to include this Namibian gem in the pin along with an engraving of the majestic kudu, NAPHA’s emblem.

27

Orders can be placed by completing the Order Form and returning it to info@napha.com.na YOU ARE OUR AMBASSADORS; WE THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING OUR WILDLIFE HERITAGE. PURCHASE YOUR PIN AND SUPPORT WILDLIFE

The Ministry of Environment Forestry and Tourism (MEFT) in the Republic of Namibia, a CIC State Member, published a call for tenders for the purchase and translocation of a total of 170 elephants. The tender is divided into four lots. The news has been widely reported on in the mainstream media, including Reuters, The Guardian, CNN and other outlets. Drought and human-wildlife conflict are the reasons given for MEFT’s decision to auction off the 170 elephants. However, one must not forget that the issue is also linked to the success of Namibia’s conservation strategy, one that has always considered the three objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) as being mutually reinforcing. The Government of the Republic of Namibia recognises the sustainable use of natural resources as the key factor linking conservation to fair and equitable benefitsharing. This is evidenced by the Community Based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM) programmes that are being run in Namibia, including the conservancy programme that was officially launched in 1998. The call for tenders includes

specific requirements, and places an emphasis on meeting high animal health and welfare standards, complying with relevant regulations, including a permit for exporting the animals where required. Interested parties have until 29 January 2021 to submit tenders. In addition to mainstream media outlets, conservationists have been calling for those who truly care for elephants, including those, who are opposed to sustainable hunting of elephants, but have alternative sustainable population management solutions that do not entail sustainable harvesting, and have the necessary finances, to come forward in bidding for these animals. The money raised will go towards improving the lives and livelihoods of those directly affected by the human wildlife conflict associated with elephants. There is still time. The CIC would like to join others in encouraging all those who wish to improve the lives and livelihoods of those coexisting with elephants, reward the successes of CBNRM, and see healthy and sustainable elephant populations, to come forward and bid.

Conservation efforts in Mozambique There are many places in Africa where hunting is the lifeblood of wildlife conservation, and a pillar of support for community livelihoods. For most operators in Africa, 2020 has been a year without clients, and consequently a year without income. Although the effects of the pandemic have been devastating for the tourism industry across the continent, many hunting operators have continued with their conservation efforts.

One such place is the Bawa Community conservation area, a vast wilderness in the far western corner of Mozambique. The area supports one of the largest populations of elephants in the country, as well as a variety of other species including buffalo, lion, leopard, Roan and Sable antelope. For some insight into the effects of the pandemic on the hunting industry in Africa’s wild places, take a look at the report below.

Click to open full newsletter

28 28

Photo by Gregory Brown

Save 170 elephants – Namibia, a victim of its own success

Africa

New Report on Impact of COVID-19 in Zimbabwe

The Zimbabwe Environmental Law Association (ZELA) have published a new report outlining the impact of COVID-19 on communities and conservation efforts in Zimbabwe.

The report, entitled “The effects of COVID-19 on wildlife reliant communities & conservation efforts in Zimbabwe,” takes a look at the direct economic impact, as well as the ripple effects on livelihoods and wildlife.

It is stated that the global safari industry has lost around $100 million in revenue due to cancelled bookings in 2020, with a total of 90% of bookings, equivalent to 8,000 hunting days, having been already been cancelled.

Developing nations such as Zimbabwe are most at risk from these developments, as they are particularly reliant on wildlife for income and as means to support conservation.

This article summarises the ways in which Zimbabwe, its people and wildlife have been affected by COVID-19. The full report can be downloaded here.

Rural District Councils Rural District Councils (RDCs), or rural branches of the government of Zimbabwe, in marginalised areas are heavily reliant on wildlife resources to fund their operations, with revenues from safari operators accounting for 90% of their income.

COVID-19, and the subsequent restrictions on travel, is likely to lead to a drastic decline in the safari revenues going to RDCs, and the services that they provide for communities.

An officer from the Mbire RDC states that wildlife resources account for “70 % of income to RDC and almost 100% for communities,” and that the suspension of hunting has resulted in limited access to “basic health services, food and water.”

RDCs are also known for implementing local level compensations schemes for those that have suffered from human wildlife conflict (HWC). These schemes include paying for a percentage of the hospital bill for bodily injuries incurred as a result of HWC. The loss of revenue from safari operators could mean RDCs are no longer able to offer such compensation schemes, and may ultimately lead to a deterioration in relationship between them and communities.

29

Communities and Conservation In Zimbabwe, through the CAMPIRE program, communities receive roughly 50% of the income generated through safari operations, which is then used to fund development initiatives.

Such initiatives include training for “ward resilience committees” and “fire management,” which make up part of the natural resource management activities that take place in rural Zimbabwe.

Safari revenues also pay for ward level anti-poaching units (APUs), which conduct “routine patrols, monitoring of illegal wildlife trade, poaching and problem animal control.”

As revenues from safari operators decrease as a result of the pandemic, it is highly likely that these wildlife management activities can no longer continue to be funded. It is also suggested that poaching and illegal wildlife trade as a whole will increase, as support and funding for APUs falls in conjunction with hunting activities.

Secondary Effects on Conservation Human wildlife conflict is an issue that rural communities must face when coexisting with wildlife. Typically, as these communities can financially benefit from wildlife and animals, conflicts are often tolerated. For example, farmers are reimbursed for any crop losses brought about by problem animals.

When they can no longer benefit from wildlife, as is the case now with COVID-19, it is feared that individuals might take matters into their own hands and retaliate against incidents of human wildlife conflict. This could take place in the form of retaliatory killings, thereby reversing existing conservation efforts.

It is also suggested that the loss of income may push people into cooperating with poachers, which would further increase the number of illegal killings that are taking place.

Another secondary effect on conservation is the reduced capacity for illegal wildlife trade monitoring.

Fishing groups in Zimbabwe are known to conduct surveillance for any potential illegal wildlife trade activity.

Due to restrictions on movement and demand, these groups have had to scale down their operations, which has also had an impact on monitoring capacity.

30 Photo by Martin Redlin

Africa

Summary of the 1st Great Debate of the CIC (4 NOVEMBER, 2020) Wildlife conservation in Africa - Sustainable Hunting in the Central African Republic Article by Emmanuel MICHAU, Head of the CIC French Delegation The choice of Africa as the topic for the first big debate of the CIC French Delegation was based on the emblematic nature of the wildlife of this continent that is so dear to us. It was necessary for us to find a topic that involved an extraordinary history, a community of thinkers, and emblematic values.

Studying the LEFOL family hunting zone in the Central African Republic, which advocates for the conservation of game through sustainable hunting, allows us to discover the extraordinary diversity of biotopes in the region; an extremely rare mixture of high plateaus, shrubby savannah, large plains, hills, primary and equatorial forests, forest galleries along the many rivers, springs and lakes. The variety of the fauna is also comparable to that of the flora.

Armed conflicts and poaching have caused the disappearance of elephants, rhinos and all other hunting organisations, with the exception of the LEFOL, which over the last 10 years has been reclaiming their territory step by step.

For regions with no other forms of wealth (tourism, diamonds, forests), the creation of reserves or nonhunting zones is extremely costly and has no economic future, whereas sustainable hunting represents a perfect economic and ecological alternative.

On the one hand, huge non-hunting territories are set aside, or given free of charge, to public bodies or NGOs which deny access to local populations and do not give any economic return; while, on the other hand, sustainable hunting societies, such as LEFOL (the latter), are known for their significant levels of financial contribution which are redistributed to the economy at local, regional and national levels.

All kinds of species can be found in this area, and there is a strong resurgence of large predators such as lions, leopards, African wild dogs, as well as the appearance of many hog (bushpig, warthog), big antelopes (giant

31

eland, sable antelope, hartebeest, bongos and bushbuck), different species of buffalo in large numbers, hippos, oribi, five species of duikers (including the famous yellowbacked variation), crocodiles and even some elephants.

Also present in this territory are 23 species of monkey including the patas monkey, baboon, the De Brazza’s monkey and the emblematic Chimpanzee. A very large population of birds can be found as well, such as different bustard and duck species, shorebirds, raptors, African green pigeons, parakeets, Spoonbill, Ibis, guinea fowl, and partridge.

Such a cohabitation can only be explained by the extreme variety of the flora.

And this system works, since populations have tripled in 10 years. Conservation and resurgence have been the fruit of LEFOL’s considerable personal efforts and investment in the preservation and improvement of flora and fauna.

Several in-depth studies and scientific reports have been carried out in the area which have demonstrated that sustainable hunting is truly the best tool for wildlife conservation.

Despite their success, LEFOL continues to invest in science for conservation; a pilot project, which is still seeking funding (tax-free donations), is in preparation to further improve sustainable management.

It is the role of the French Delegation of the CIC to identify the most meritorious projects, so that they can serve as models of best practice, and feel supported in their efforts. We must set an example, share experiences and help each other. My ambition is to demonstrate that hunters are the first defenders of the environment; they are scouts, at the forefront of the protection of fauna and flora.

The CIC is, and has been, very present in Africa and very much listened to. There are currently 7 African State Members and the promotion of this Central African territory is part of the CIC’s mission.

PERFECT FIT WITH SILENCE RS

HIGH PERFORMANCE FROM SHORT BARRELS RWS SHORT RIFLE – LEAD-FREE ALSO AVAILABLE! Perfect for silencers.

Available in 5 calibres and 3 bullet heads.

rws-ammunition.com RWS is a registered trademark of RUAG Ammotec, a RUAG Group Company. These products can only be purchased with a valid license.

32

Photo by Luke Stackpoole

Europe

33

What is Europe?

Our coverage of the latest news coming out of Europe on hunting and sustainable use.

34

Europe

New Study on Chamois in Europe Sharing a press release from the German Wildlife Foundation (Deutsche Wildtier Stiftung) on a new study entitled ‘The Chamois in Europe’

“What does the future of the Alpine chamois look like? A study shows that there are considerable differences in the monitoring and management of the Alpine chamois between the individual countries of the Alpine region. Conclusion: in Bavaria, the chamois populations are hunted far too intensively. This means that their conservation status in Germany is not favourable and the future prospects are bleak.

Disarray in the protection of the Alpine chamois revealed by new study: Failures in Austria and Germany” Hamburg, 18 May 2020.

35

Unfortunately, going alone at a national level is an everyday occurrence in the EU – and the COVID-19 crisis is not the first occasion. This also applies to the handling of wild animals that are under special EU protection. A good example of this is the Alpine chamois. It is under the special protection of the EU’s Fauna-Flora-Habitat Directive and is also listed in the Bern Convention.

Alpine region in the monitoring and management of their common conservation asset, the Alpine chamois. “While France, Italy and Slovenia estimate the conservation status of the chamois through elaborate monitoring of the living chamois population, Germany and Austria simply report the number of harvested animals to the EU,” Münchhausen criticised.

“The EU countries bordering the Alps are therefore obliged to regularly survey and assess the condition of their chamois populations”, emphasised Hilmar Freiherr von Münchhausen, Managing Director of the German Wildlife Foundation. He added: “Chamois may only be hunted when the conservation status of the populations is favourable”. A joint study by the German Wildlife Foundation and the International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC) has now shown that there are considerable differences between the individual states of the

“Data and analyses on the age and social structure of the chamois population is completely disregarded, although it is precisely this information that characterises professional hunting utilization”.

The differences become even clearer when planning hunting interventions: In almost all EU countries, the hunting quota is determined taking into account biological data such as natural winter mortality; in Bavaria, the harvest quota is only derived from the condition of the forest vegetation. “The inadequate implementation of the EU requirements culminates in Bavaria, in the designation of areas where the chamois no longer has a closed season”, stated Münchhausen. Studies by the German Wildlife Foundation indicate that the chamois populations in Bavaria are hunted far too intensively. This means that their conservation status in Germany is not favourable and the future prospects are bleak. The German Wildlife Foundation and the CIC are therefore calling for comprehensive monitoring of chamois in Bavaria, no local extension of hunting seasons and the designation of areas with closed season, so that the populations can recover regionally.

36

Photo by Maria Mihaltan

The study can be downloaded in German here

Europe

Resource Africa Urges Celebrities to “Let Africans Decide” Resource Africa have released a video edition of their open letter addressed to UK celebrities, which was published in July, 2020. Signed by over 50 community leaders and written on behalf of millions of people from eight southern African countries, the letter urges celebrities to stop using their influence to undermine African livelihoods and conservation efforts.

The video, entitled “Let Africans Decide,” reiterates the importance of sustainable wildlife use for many southern African communities, many of whom are living below the poverty line. Not only does sustainable use provide vital income to countless people in wildlife areas, it also provides economic incentives for those that must deal with the consequences and conflicts that occur as a result of coexisting with wildlife.

The open letter calls for a response to actions preventing communities from exercising their rights and conserving the wildlife on their lands.

Such actions include those of the United Kingdom’s Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), which conducted a consultation on the controls that govern the import and export of hunting trophies in and out of the UK. While the results of this consultation have not yet been released, it is feared that it could result in the introduction of further restrictions on the movement of trophies – a move that would be devastating for indigenous peoples and rural communities (IPLCs).

The CIC urges DEFRA, and others looking to introduce restrictions on the hunting trophy trade, to consult with the relevant stakeholders before making In addition, countless conservation successes would decisions that could have unintended consequences not have occurred without these types of operations for wildlife and people. taking place in rural areas.

37

Celebrities Undermining the Human Rights of Communities In an open letter addressed to celebrities based in the United Kingdom, over 50 community leaders from across southern Africa are urging a number of prominent individuals to “stop using their influence to undermine the human rights of impoverished people and jeopardise wildlife conservation in the region.”

The open letter addresses some of the issues associated with the actions of these celebrities, and how their influence may harm the lives of rural communities and wildlife in southern Africa. They highlight the struggles that communities must face when coexisting with wildlife, and subsequent need for incentives in order for wildlife to be conserved.

The letter also mentions the many socio-economic This letter comes as a response to multiple benefits that can be derived from well regulated, activities looking to undermine the human rights sustainable hunting programs, and how they are vital of impoverished people and jeopardise wildlife in supporting livelihoods in hunting areas. conservation in Africa. This includes the actions of the UK’s Department for Environment, Food The overall message of the letter is clear; community and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), which conducted a leaders want the voices of communities coexisting consultation on the controls that govern the import with wildlife to be involved in the discussions and export of hunting trophies. taking place in the UK. This, they argue, should “acknowledge both our conservation successes The aim of this consultation was to determine and our communities’ right to earn a livelihood the extent to which the trade of trophies supports through the culturally appropriate and sustainable conservation efforts and human livelihoods, and management of our resources for the benefit of our whether a total ban, or further restrictions, is needed people and wildlife. Anything less is to put the rights in the UK. of animals before the rights of Africans.”

The CIC is in full support of rural African communities, and their right to use wildlife resources to support human livelihoods and conservation.

It is essential that policy decisions affecting southern African countries are not influenced by the opinions of UK celebrities, who may not have a full understanding of the realities of the rural communities living amongst wildlife.

38

Photo by Larry Li

While DEFRA has not yet published the outcome of their consultation, a number of high profile celebrities have been actively campaigning for a ban on the movement hunting trophies. In some cases, they have even urged their fans to take part in the consultation, asking that they vote for policy options that would restrict the trade of trophies in and out of the UK.

Europe

Open Letter: Biased Statement from DEFRA Spokesperson on Hunting Trophy Consultation In response to a biased statement made by a civil servant of the British government, the International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC) have published an open letter addressed to the Rt Hon. George Eustice MP, Secretary of State for the United Kingdom’s Department for Environment, Food and Rural affairs (DEFRA).

The statement in question was given by a DEFRA spokesperson in a recent article in the Independent, entitled “British hunters have killed at least 60 lions since Cecil shot, as ministers delay trophy imports ban again.”

The article details inter alia the current delay in the release of the outcome of DEFRA’s consultation on the controls that govern the import and export of hunting trophies in to and out of the UK. While the consultation is intended to serve as an opportunity for the British government to come to a fact based decision on the topic of hunting trophies, this statement indicates that DEFRA is not impartial on this issue, which may impact the validity of the consultation itself.

The contents of the open letter can be found by clicking here.

39

Photo by Alvaro Serrano

The open letter, addressed from the President of the CIC, George Aman, calls for the statement to be retracted from the article in the Independent, and suggests that measures should be implemented to ensure that the consultation is conducted using an impartial and fact based approach.

THE “CIC-France LABEL” 2020 Conservation Through Sustainable Hunting

The “CIC-France LABEL” Committee for Conservation through Sustainable Hunting, chaired by Emmanuel Michau, met on Zoom on November 27th to award the “CIC-France LABEL” 2020 to Messrs Alain and Kewin Lefol.

The hunting guides from the Central African Republic were given this award due to the threefold increase in wild animal populations on their 10 million hectare territory, which was achieved in an eight year time period. They will thus be able to receive donations and legacies sent by members, all tax-exempt.

Below is the relevant presentation that was made in early November, 2020:

Photo by Lina Loos

Click the picture to watch!

40

Europe

Phasing out lead shot over wetlands at all costs While the title of this article may sound appealing to some, the real costs associated with the recent European Commission (EC) Regulation concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), specifically regarding lead in gunshot in or around wetlands, is something that should concern many across the European Economic Area (EEA).

Most significantly, this regulation will create a number of issues for EEA States’ enforcement officers, and 10 million citizens including hunters, farmers, sports’ shooters, and competitive clay shooters.

Restricting the use of lead shot for hunting over wetlands is a well-intentioned objective, and is already regulated in 23 European Union (EU) Member States due to the implementation of prescriptions by the Ramsar Convention. However, the EC Regulation contains a number of major problematic areas which all of the above-mentioned groups of EU citizens, and others, will need to comply with.

While these errors could have been avoided, sadly the EC ignored the advice of its own scientific agency, leading to breaches of: • The principle of proportionality; • The presumption of innocence, resulting in the Commission exceeding the implementing powers under REACH by creating new obligations for “consumers”; and • The principle of legal certainty.

While the CIC supports the intention of the EC Regulation, sadly the consequences will be extremely disproportionate for the EEA States’ enforcement officers and the above-mentioned groups of citizens. It will result in multiple legal challenges in EEA countries. In this context, the EC Regulation text would have benefited immensely from further work in the REACH Committee before becoming law.

Unfortunately, the EC chose to ignore the advice of its own scientific agency (European Chemicals Agency - ECHA) and made fundamental errors when it came to finalising the Regulation text. It is worth emphasising that:

41

• ECHA did not propose the inclusion of vaguely defined buffer zones around wetlands, the EC did.

• ECHA did not propose banning possession of lead shot and illegally reversing the presumption of innocence, the EC did.

• ECHA proposed a three-year phase out period based on a socio-economic assessment, but the EC changed this to two years.

• ECHA did not interpret the Ramsar definition so broadly to include even temporary puddles, the EC did, creating the possibility for unresolvable situations for hunters and enforcement officers.

Fortunately on the last point, a major change was put forward by the EC in the last phase of drafting of the Regulation, namely in the application of the definition of ‘wetlands’. The EC mentioned explicitly, including in two answers to parliamentary questions (see questions here and here) that Member States can apply guidance on how to apply the definition within their territory in line with the objectives of the restriction (protecting waterbirds) and proportionality.

As mentioned, the Regulation also exceeds its powers of implementation under REACH, with the Regulation text altering and adding rules over and above those that it should have available to use. This is clear when looking at Annex XVII to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

Specifically, the Commission is looking to create new obligations for consumers, including hunters, not to use or carry lead gunshots (i.e. consumer products) within 100 metres in or around wetlands. Typically, consumers do not have to meet obligations of this nature under REACH.

Finally, this restriction on the use of lead in gunshot over wetlands is just the beginning! The EC already has in its drawers a draft regulation that will look ban the use of lead in a number of other applications outside wetlands, including in bullets on all terrains and in fishing tackle. Not only will this impact the hunting community, it will have serious implications for anglers, sport fishing and other businesses working in the fishing sector as well. The CIC is grateful for the efforts of its national CIC Delegations in the EU in pushing for a reasonable and proportionate regulation of lead shot over wetlands. More such efforts will be required in the future.

42 42

Photo by Sebastian Pociecha

The same legal defect exists in the Regulation text whereby hunters are victims to a reversal of the ‘presumption of innocence’ and the burden of proof by banning possession of lead shot while wetland shooting. In effect, the draft proposal intends to alter the normative content of Articles 67 to 73 and 126 of REACH. While the intentions of the EC Regulation are good, sadly the form is not and will come at a cost to many.

Europe

The following article has been prepared by FACE – the European Federation for Hunting and Conservation. It provides details of what the new regulation banning lead shot over wetlands will mean for hunters in EEA countries.

The CIC and FACE have been working closely on this issue over the last few years. More details of this cooperation can be found in the article: https://www.face.eu/2020/12/what-does-the-new-regulation-on-banning-lead-shot-over-wetlands-mean-for-europes-hunters/

What does the new regulation on banning lead shot over wetlands mean for Europe’s hunters?

After months of scrutiny, long delays and widespread criticism from various stakeholders, the new regulation banning lead shot over wetlands is expected to take effect from January 20231 onwards in all EEA countries. The text of the regulation is here with translations in the different languages: https:// ec.europa.eu/transparency/comitolog y-register/ screen/documents/064660/6/consult Most EU Member States already have national laws in place except for Poland, Ireland, Romania, Slovenia and Malta. It is important to note that waterbird hunting is not a popular activity in Slovenia and Malta has very few wetlands.

How is this regulation different?

• The definition of “wetlands” is much broader than existing national laws. For example, it includes peatlands with and without visible water, and potentially covers any ground after heavy rain.

• An aggravated element is that all wetlands have a fixed buffer zone of 100 meters around them.

Discharging lead shot in or within 100 metres of wetlands is prohibited regardless of the species being hunted.

• Anyone carrying lead shot within 100 meters of ‘wetlands’ will be presumed guilty of wetland shooting unless that person can demonstrate that it is intended for any other type of shooting.

with small areas of temporary water and what constitutes a peatland (including forestry on peat soil) for the purpose of this regulation. This is not an easy task because there is a general lack of clarity on how to define peatlands.

Following widespread criticism from the European Federation for Hunting and Conservation (FACE), its members and partners on how the Ramsar definition lacks legal certainty, the European Commission (EC) recently stated that the definition of wetlands should be interpreted “proportionately” and that they might consider issuing guidelines. FACE believes this is necessary for effective implementation. The EC also stated that national authorities are best placed to take into account the specificities of the different territories and to issue guidance to their enforcement authorities or to stakeholders, on how the definition of wetlands should be correctly interpreted, in line with the objective (protecting waterbirds) and proportionality.

The EC’s late intervention suggesting the need for guidance acknowledges that the definition of wetlands used in this regulation is too complex without guidance. However, it is questionable whether national guidelines, or other national advice on the scope of the regulation are compatible with the general principles of EU law. This is because The definition of “wetlands”: EU regulations are, in principle, directly applicable Hunters and enforcement officers will need clear (unlike EU directives) and should not require guidance to understand, for example, how to deal guidance for their application.

43

Banning “carrying” of lead shot: If a hunter is carrying lead shot within 100 meters of a wetland, but is not waterbird/wetland shooting, he/she can prove by any means acceptable to the enforcement authorities that it is another type of shooting they are undertaking. A hunter could justify this by saying that he/she was merely passing through the wetland to hunt elsewhere. It will be of course challenging for a hunter carrying lead shot to prove that he/she is not going wetland shooting because a typical day’s hunting includes time crossing water features and wet ground. For example, if an enforcement officer finds a hunter within 100 metres of wetlands carrying a lead shot, it is easy for the hunter concerned to claim a ‘positive’ (“I am hunting partridge elsewhere”), but in many cases difficult to demonstrate a ‘negative’ (“I am not hunting ducks within 100 metres of wetlands”).

Enforcement authorities need to be acutely aware of this as well as the various laws that protect citizens fundamental rights. This aspect of the regulation needs to be carefully considered with respect to enforcement at national level. In this context, it will be important for national hunting associations to demand an assessment of whether the reverse burden of proof is compatible with national constitutions, the EU Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Future actions: What needs to happen in the next two years?

The EC needs to work with relevant stakeholders in producing EU guidance to ensure this regulation is understandable to hunters and enforcement officers.

National hunting associations must work with their governments to create national instructions that minimise as much as possible any disproportionate consequences emerging from the ambiguous definition of wetlands. At the same time, it is will be important to explore how the new provision on banning the carrying lead shot can be enforced at national level, without being in breach of citizens’ fundamental rights.

active in awareness-raising to ensure hunters know what is coming in two years. National hunting associations particularly in Poland, Ireland, Romania, Slovenia and Malta must remain very active in awareness-raising and in providing advice on what shotguns are suitable for non-lead shot. Organising events to test non-lead shot have proved to be popular in several countries and help hunters to prepare for the transition.

With respect to firearms, national advice should consider whether countries are members of CIP, how best to check/test shotguns, and what implications exist for hunting insurance in the event of an accident with the use of non-lead shot . Following the advice of their national hunting associations, hunters should check whether their shotguns are suitable for non-lead shot. For shotguns, it is important to differentiate between those where steel shot is available in many countries (10/12/16/20 calibres) and those shotguns where it is not (24/28/.410 calibres). Aside from calibre complexities, shotguns can be categorised as follows: • Suitable: Shotguns capable for use with nonlead shot without testing/modification; • Limited suitability: Shotguns capable for use with a limited range of non-lead shot cartridges without testing/modification (e.g. standard pressure, limited range of shot sizes); • Unsuitable: Shotguns that are currently unsuitable for steel shot, which require modification (e.g. to choke or chamber), or replacement and/ or testing to ensure they support the pressures of alternatives.

Generally, the best approach is to facilitate and encourage hunters to check whether their shotguns are suitable and test non-lead shot, for example, in a clay shooting range. Most hunters in Europe use steel shot to comply with existing laws on lead shot over wetlands mainly because it is the same price as lead shot. Other more expensive options are available, such as bismuth and tungsten.

For further information, please contact your national National hunting associations will need to remain hunting association.

This date is depended on when the regulation is published in the official EU journal. When published, the regulation could be challenged in the EU courts by a Member State or a hunter deemed to be “directly concerned” by the regulation at issue. National courts dealing with future cases concerning the regulation are also allowed to ask clarification on the interpretation of the regulation to the European Court of Justice (the so-called preliminary ruling). Considering the unclarity of the regulation, this is a concrete possibility.

1

44

Europe

Wildlife Estates Plenary Session 2020 This year’s Wildlife Estates Plenary Session took place on 2-3 September in Wolfsburg (Germany).

The Steering Committee met to update the situation in each country within the label and all the progress made thanks to the hard work of the national delegations. We were able to count on the physical assistance of the national delegations of Germany, France and Belgium. The rest of the members did so by telematic means. The Scientific Committee updated the changes that are being made within the current methodology to follow the guidelines of the new CAP along with new projects. The Wildlife Estates label is not only the largest European private certification but also the most up to date. Konstantin KOSTOPOLULOS, the current director of the project, informed us of the current situation at a European level and the evolution of the different policies that will be adopted in the EU.

45

During the plenary session, 5 diplomas were awarded to the following estates: Forstrevier Basedow, Territory “Forstgut Bodenstein” on the estate “Forstbetrieb Wintzingerode”, Forstgut Eickhof, Gut Basthorst and Frhr. Knigge’sche Miteigentümergemeinschaft. The addition of these 5 estates has grown the total area managed by the project by 5320 hectares.

The plenary session also saw the conference “Rewarding ecological system performance as an exceptional chance for the Wildlife Estates” where MEP Lena DÜPONT presented an update on the current situation in the European Parliament, Professor Ernst SCHULZE explained the “Biodiversity and Forest Management, A German view” in detail.

In the photo from left to right: Christoph zu STOLBERG-STOLBERG, Roderich FREIHERR VON LOE, Milana Freifrau von RUFFIN, Günther Graf von der SCHULENBURG, Dr. Jobst Graf von WINTZINGERODE, Thierry de l’ESCAILLE, Jens JACOBI and Alexander SCHÖNBURG-HARTENSTEIN

The subsequent colloquium between GĂźnther Graf von der SCHULENBURG, Susanne WITTIG (Co-founder of Brainforest), Helmut DAMMANN-TAMKE (UCD Parliamentary Party Leader) and Professor Ernst-Detlef SCHULZE highlighted the benefits of having an environmental label and what benefits the owners should reap.

Finally, Dr. Jurgen TACK (ELO Scientific Director) explained the advances of the LIFE (Land is forever) project where he explained the different tools used in the project to highlight the fundamental work of private owners in terms of environment and biodiversity.

As a culmination, a visit was made to the Biodiversity Project Bisdorf composed of waterlogged meadows, wet woodland fragments, shrub areas, hedgerows, dry grasslands and populations of wild pears and apples.

The difficult nature of current circumstances required an unusual logistical arrangement by our host, GĂźnther Graf von der SCHULENBURG, in order to comply with German health regulations.

The WE Secretariat kindly thanks the efforts made to ensure that the event took place.

46

Photo by Balaji Malliswamy

News from Other parts of the World

47

What is News from Other parts of the World?

Stay up to date on the state of hunting across the globe by looking at the most impactful stories that have taken place outside of Africa and Europe.

48

New Zealand

New Zealand’s Annual Tahr Cull A Question of Principles

Himalayan Tahr (Hermitragus jemlahicus) were introduced to New Zealand in 1905. Today they are classified as a game species. However, with no natural predators and with favourable environmental conditions in New Zealand the species require careful management in order to minimise damages, especially to native fauna and flora. New Zealand tahr populations have been managed through recreational hunting, commercial guided hunting, and government culling operations for decades. The current tahr management system led to the approval of annual New Zealand Tahr Control Operational Plans for 2018-2019 and 2019-2020. Both of these plans were ultimately the result of meaningful consultations with relevant stakeholders, including the hunting community which represents an important voice, particularly given the socio-cultural and economic importance of tahr populations to many rural New Zealanders.

Against this background, the CIC closely followed developments surrounding the 2020-2021 Tahr Control Operational Plan, including concerns about the data underpinning the management decisions in the plan, the proposed levels of culling, and the degree to which stakeholders were consulted in the lead up to the plan’s approval on 30 June 2020.

Photo by Sebastien Goldberg

On 10 July 2020, the New Zealand High Court ruled – in a case entitled ‘The New Zealand Tahr Foundation Incorporated v The Minister of Conservation’ – that the 2020-2021 tahr operational plan approved by the New Zealand Department of Conservation (DoC) was in breach of the applicant’s (New Zealand Tahr Foundation) legitimate expectation of appropriate consultation. The High Court ruled that the applicant had a legitimate expectation of meaningful consultation and that there was partial inadequacy

49

by the respondent (Minister of Conservation) in meeting that expectation.

While the Decision on the operational plan was not quashed, it was referred back to DoC for reconsideration and further consultation. As part of the ruling, reduced limits were imposed on aspects of the 2020-2021 plan until further consultation was held. This meant that DoC could only undertake half of the 250 helicopter hours set out in the 2020-2021 operational plan that they had approved.

This High Court ruling highlights a crucial principle in the management of any game species – whether native or introduced, threatened or abundant – that of meaningful stakeholder consultation. The New Zealand hunting community, which represents the interests of far more than just recreational hunters and guides, is a crucial stakeholder in the management of tahr populations in New Zealand.

In addition to meaningful consultations, any operational plan of this nature must be underpinned by sound, up-to-date population monitoring data.

Such data should underpin the management of any game species, regardless of where it is located. In this regard, the CIC welcomes the provisions under the 2020-2021 operational plan for determining the research and monitoring requirements for tahr populations. This is a first step, and the CIC hopes that it will quickly lead to appropriate research and monitoring being implemented. This is something that is needed sooner rather than later in order to inform management decisions.

While the CIC would normally urge for culling to be avoided where possible, it recognises that it can be a necessary tool to keep wildlife populations in check and to help minimise human-wildlife conflict or other damages, including to native fauna and flora.

However, any culling program must be based on accurate and up-to-date data, ongoing monitoring, and the result of meaningful consultation with all relevant stakeholders.

USA

Great American Outdoors Act Signed into Law On the 22nd of July, the U.S. House passed landmark legislation to promote conservation and access to public lands and waters on a strong bipartisan vote of 310-107. Passage of the Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA) represents the single greatest financial commitment to increasing public land access and opportunities for sportsmen and women in a lifetime, and marks a monumental victory for the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation (CSF) in its work on behalf of hunters, anglers, recreational shooters, and trappers.

The Great American Outdoors Act, which passed the Senate last month on a strong vote of 73-25, will provide $9.5 billion over 5 years to address the crumbling infrastructure on America’s public lands and waters. While the National Park Service will receive $6.5 billion in funding, the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation (CSF) led a successful effort to secure the inclusion of $3 billion to repair and maintain public land infrastructure overseen by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and U.S. Forest Service (USFS), agencies that provide critically important recreational opportunities for America’s sportsmen and women. „After years of work, we are excited that the Great American Outdoors Act will now become law with the President’s signature. This is a historic victory for sportsmen and women,“ said CSF President Jeff Crane. „This legislation will advance conservation, increase access for hunters and anglers, provide much needed support for public lands and waters, and boost the already formidable sporting-conservation economy.

CSF extends our sincere thanks to the House

and Senate Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus (CSC) members that championed and voted to support these priorities.“ The inclusion of funding specifically for BLM, USFWS, and USFS lands and waters will ensure that Americans have the ability to access critically important hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting opportunities. Over 246 million acres, or 99%, of BLM lands are open to hunting and fishing while the USFS reports that 99% of the 193 million acres it administers are open to hunting and at least 99% of USFS administered rivers, streams, and lakes are open to fishing. Collectively, BLM, USFWS, and USFS annually support more than 25 million hunting days and nearly 45 million fishing days, highlighting the importance of these lands for America’s sportsmen and women as well as the outdoor economy. Additionally, funding to address these agencies‘ maintenance backlog will create over 100,000 employment opportunities.

The Great American Outdoors Act also provides full and permanent funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) at $900 million annually. LWCF is one of the most successful and influential conservation programs in our nation’s history. As a testament to the impact of LWCF, the program has completed a conservation, recreation, or access project in every single county in the country.

GAOA also ensures $15 million annually is dedicated to increase public access for hunting, fishing, recreational shooting, and other forms of outdoor recreation.

On 4 August, 2020, The Great American Outdoors Act was officially signed into law by President Trump.

50 50

Photo by Luke Tanis

Story Highlight

51

What is Story Highlight?

In Story Highlight, we provide our take on the biggest and most current issues that we are currently working to address.

52

Story Highlight

United Against Captive Bred Lion Shooting The CIC and Dallas Safari Club (DSC) released a joint statement on the practice of captive bred lion shooting on 16 November, 2020. While it is often mistakenly referred to as “canned lion hunting” or “captive bred lion hunting,” what is certain is that the practice is not representative of responsible, sustainable, fair chase hunting. Not only does the shooting of captive bred lions go against resolutions of the IUCN, it also goes far in damaging the reputation of hunters, and sustainable hunting, around the world.

This is why the CIC and DSC came together to release this joint statement and, going forward, both organisations will be looking to call on Governments in support of the legal shooting of lions bred in captivity to consider the wider implications, in addition to discouraging their respective members from engaging in the practice entirely.

Following the release of the statement, an outpouring of positive feedback from all across the hunting community and beyond was received. In turn, four more organisations decided to join as co-signatories of the joint statement, in support of the messages on this practice outlined in our original publication.

The organisations in question are: Roland Ward Ltd., the International Professional Hunters’ Association (IPHA), the African Operators’ and Professional Hunters’ Associations of Africa (OPHAA) and the African Professional Hunters Association (APHA).

Photo by Prince David

We would like to thank these organisations for joining as co-signatories, and encourage others who wish to join, to please contact us.

53

54

55

56

Photo by Saketh Upadhya

Celebration

57

What is Celebration?

Join the CIC in celebrating the latest developments from the sustainable use community, as well as our partners and colleagues!

58

Celebration

Let

25th Anniversary of AEWA

The CIC would like to join in celebrating the 25th anniversary of AEWA – the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds, an independent international treaty developed under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programme’s Convention on Migratory Species.

As an organisation, the CIC is actively involved in supporting the work of AEWA through the CIC Membership network, with a number of CIC experts regularly in attendance at AEWA meetings and working groups.

’s c e

Since 2016, we have also been joining AEWA in celebrating World Migratory Bird Day (WMBD), The intergovernmental treaty was set up on 16 June along with other WMBD partners.

1995, with the aim of coordinating efforts to protect migratory bird species and their habitats in the With an eye to the future, the 8th Meeting of the Parties to AEWA (MOP8) is due to take place in African-Eurasian region.

Budapest, Hungary in 2021 within the framework During this 25-year period, AEWA has played a of the One With Nature – World of Hunting and critical role in seeking to ensure that the utilisation of Nature Exhibition. The CIC is actively engaged in migratory waterbirds is conducted sustainably across assisting the AEWA Secretariat and the Hungarian their flyways, in accordance with the best available Government in preparations for AEWA MOP8. knowledge on their ecology and on ecological systems.

The CIC would like to take this opportunity to congratulate AEWA for 25 years of excellent work, It has also helped to ensure that contributions and is looking forward to assisting in the ongoing from local and indigenous peoples have been taken efforts to protect migratory waterbirds and support into consideration when looking to support the sustainable use. conservation and sustainable use of migratory species and their habitats.

For more information on AEWA’s 25th anniversary, please visit their dedicated webpage.

59

l

Celebration

World Migratory Bird Day The CIC would like to join in celebrating World Migratory Bird Day 2020 – the theme for this year’s celebration was “Birds Connect Our World.”

To commemorate the occasion, President of the CIC, George Aman, spoke on the importance of migratory bird conservation in a recent statement published on the WMBD website.

leb rat e

“We all have a shared responsibility to look after migratory birds, as they rely on us to conserve their breeding areas, stop-over sites and wintering grounds all along the flyway. Hunters also share this responsibility; if we fail to do our job in one area, this will result in consequences for the rest of the world. This is why the work we do in restoring wetlands, and providing resting stops and feeding areas, is critical for the future health of migratory bird populations.”

AEWA, or the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds, first launched World Migratory Bird Day to raise awareness on the importance of conserving migratory waterbird species, their related habitats, and the international cooperation needed to reach conservation objectives.

!

AEWA recognises the important role that hunters play in maintaining sites that are critical to waterbird conservation. The CIC has been supporting their work, including World Migratory Bird Day, in order to help safeguard bird populations around the world.

As another sign of our great cooperation, we would also welcome you to view the CIC’s recent video message addressed to AEWA, which was created to congratulate them on their recent 25th anniversary.

The video includes the President of the CIC (George Aman), Head of the CIC’s Migratory Bird Management Specialist Group (Iben Hove Sørensen) and Representative of the CIC on the AEWA Technical Committee (Mikko Alhainen) speaking on the achievements of AEWA over the past quarter century, from the perspective of the sustainable use community.

60

Photo by Mike Marrah

Media and Publications

61

What is Media and Publications?

A collection of the best CIC articles and publications over the past six months, in addition to other interesting stories that we would like to bring to your attention.

62

Media and publications

CIC and Hunter & Co. Formalise Their Collaboration The International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC) is proud to announce a new cooperation agreement with Hunter & Co. and their mobile hunting application ‘MyHunt.’

The Munich based company brings together hunters, software developers and nature enthusiasts, whose shared vision is made possible through the MyHunt mobile app, a “faithful companion that is always by the hunter’s side, providing assistance with all hunting processes, allowing hunters to simply go out and enjoy nature.”

Hunter & Co. and the CIC share many of the same values, and the cooperation agreement will see both organisations assist one another in order to achieve their respective goals. For the CIC, this means ensuring the conservation of wildlife through sustainable use, safeguarding natural habitats and local communities, and the preservation of cultures and traditions linked to nature. Hunters play a crucial role in each of these. The aim of Hunter & Co. is to deliver a mobile application for hunters which is easy-to-use and responsive to the needs of hunters internationally. With members in more than 80 countries across all five continents, and global conservation activities, the CIC has vast international experience, knowledge and networks which could assist.

President of the CIC, George Aman praised the initiative, stating, “We are excited to see this cooperation agreement come to fruition, and it is something that we are confident will bring value to both organisations, including CIC members and users of the MyHunt app.”

Hunter & Co. will be launching a new communication platform within the MyHunt app, allowing the CIC and its partners to bring app users the latest hunting and conservation news and content from around the world. Those that would like to support the work of the CIC will be able to donate through the MyHunt app, thereby helping the CIC to further its goals and to continue to develop insightful content for all app users.

The CIC will be supporting Hunter & Co. in their efforts to expand their services internationally, with the aim of increasing the number of active users around the world. By leveraging the CIC’s extensive network of National Delegations, Regional Coordination Fora, and Divisions, we will look to assist Hunter & Co. in the development of regionally responsive app features, in order to respond to the needs of hunters in different countries.

The CIC is delighted to have formalised our collaboration with Hunter & Co. and is looking forward to working closely together.

63

What is MyHunt?

MyHunt is the app made by hunters, for hunters. The team had a simple vision – to bring hunters together and to make the preparation and follow up work that goes into hunting easier.

MyHunt is the faithful companion that is always by the hunter’s side, providing assistance with all hunting processes, allowing hunters to simply go out and enjoy nature.

Hunter & Co. is based in Munich, and is made up of a small team of hunters, software developers and nature lovers. Their journey started with a vision for the app in May, 2018. Two years later, they have amassed over 200,000 downloads, and they are continuing to expand internationally to bring their services to hunters around the world.

Photo by Gilles Lambert

For more information, please see the Hunter & Co. website: https://www.hunterco.de/en/about-us/

64

Media and publications

Debunking the Myths What you’ve always wanted to know about “trophy hunting” Over the past few months, the CIC has been focusing its efforts on an information campaign on international hunting, often referred to as “trophy hunting”. This series, called “Debunking the Myths,” takes a look at 10 myths commonly associated with this proven wildlife management, conservation and livelihood supporting activity.

Our aim with this series was two-fold. To both educate those misinformed on international hunting activities, and to facilitate those that recognise the benefits of such hunting programs in spreading the word to the wider public.

While ignorance on this topic may not seem like an immediately pressing issue, these prevailing ideologies can and will have and significant impact on global ecosystems.

We are already seeing a growing trend around the world where countries that are far removed from international hunting activities are looking to introduce restrictions on the movement of hunting trophies. This has already happened in countries such as France, USA, the Netherlands, and is currently happening in the United Kingdom. Such restrictions restrict the ability of countries to manage their own wildlife, and can have a disastrous consequences for wildlife, habitats and human well-being.

It is often public opinion that drives governments to introduce policy changes, therefore, it is of the utmost importance that the full range of benefits of international hunting is, at the very least, brought to people’s attention.

No matter which side of the debate you stand on, it is best to explore all of the facts and to consult with the relevant stakeholders, in order to come up with the best wildlife management policies.

This series was also created to help tackle the often used argument suggesting there is a lack of evidence to support claims relating to the conservation and livelihoods benefits associated with international hunting. This is precisely why we have taken a fact and evidence based approach to this series, with each of our myths created using only using reliable and accurate information.

Photo by Geran de Klerk

If our aim is to persuade those against hunting, and in turn influence policymaking at the highest levels, it is vital that we have this base of facts in place to start working towards our goals Now that we do have these myths, what is the best way forward? The CIC has been working to distribute these myths to both the wider public through our media network, and to policymakers around the world through the CIC Membership.

For those reading this and wishing to assist us, we would encourage you to share this series to help educate others and most importantly, to use them where relevant when engaging in conversations on the topic of international hunting.

65

Click on the pictures to jump to article

66

Media and publications

50 cases of hate crime

50 individuals have been convicted of hate crimes, after abusive language was used in comments responding to a Facebook post uploaded by a female hunter in Germany.

The original post, which was first uploaded over two years ago, includes a picture of the hunter standing next to a dead fox. Fox hunting is permitted is Germany and many other countries, as it plays a key role in tackling prey depletion, particularly for bird populations.

Despite this, the post went viral, amassing significant negative attention and over 5,000 comments to date.

While cases are still ongoing, 50 of the abusive comments have now resulted in legal consequences, including cease and desist orders, as well as numerous civil and criminal convictions. A total of 10,000 EUR in fines, court fees and damages have been issued to commenters.

Photo by Kiyun Lee

The comments included abusive language such as: bitch, scum, tying up, gagging, you piece of dirt, we will find you, in addition to derogatory terms for the female reproductive organ.

The President of the German Hunting Association (Deutscher Jagdverband), Volker Bรถhning, urged victims of online hate crimes to collect evidence and to report any incidents of abuse.

67

Media and publications Artemis is a Working Group of the CIC, which aims to increase female participation in hunting and sustainable use around the world.

In this section, we have collected a couple interviews that Artemis President, Dr. Soňa Chovanová Supeková, recently conducted with the Slovak media. The articles explore the current state of the hunting world for women, and the challenges that they are facing.

We don’t kill, we hunt! Meat on the table does not bother many, but it is modern to have a problem with hunting.

Every hunter has their own story, but their family background and traditions on hunting or forestry comes first. However, they, too, must face hostility and misunderstanding in this way of life, which mainly focuses around the protection of nature.

How do male hunters react to you?

If you had asked me ten years ago, I would have responded sheepishly, looking for the right words.

At that time, we encountered negative reactions such as “a woman has to stand by the stove”, “a woman does not belong in the forest”, with ridicule and so on. In recent years, however, it has been completely different. Our members are active in the functions of the district chambers, and they are equally dedicated to cynology, sport shooting, falconry, and hunting music. I think half the members of the hunting horn club are women. There are five of us in the hunting association, where I am a member.

Hunting is not just about the activity itself. It’s actually a way of life.

That’s right. It’s a way of life to which you submit a lot of your free time. It’s not just caring about wildlife, game and nature. It is, to some extent, a life in nature, and the symbiosis of man with it. It is a way of living together in the hunting community, it is part of our social life, education, and a part of the upbringing children and grandchildren. I devote hours every I’m sure you’ve also come across opinions asking week on hunting and related activities, and hunting is how a woman can kill. Do you react to them? only a fraction of that time.

I have met these opinions, and not once have I reacted to them. Even just a week ago, I was lecturing Does the Slovak Hunting Club engage in activities kindergarten teachers on hunting as part of the that are closer to women?

Learning about the Forest project. There I answered Yes, we support women in hunting and focus on this question with, “what about those Slovak women activities such as education, working with children, who keep poultry or rabbits at home and ensure that gastronomy, and hunting fashion. We meet at hunting the chicken gets on the table on Sunday, do they not social events, hunts, and we have members that don’t kill them? have partners that are involved in hunting and they Hunting has been an integral part of humanity since feel comfortable with us. time immemorial. There are a number of prehistoric We even organised the first international conference, drawings where women were part of the hunt to Women and Sustainable Hunting, in Bratislava, ensure their livelihoods. I’m saying that we don’t kill, which had participation from eleven countries. In we hunt. I hunt for tasty game, too, because it’s healthy the International Council for Game and Wildlife organic meat. I’m not going to say I’m not pleased Conservation (CIC), I established a female hunting with an interesting trophy, but selective hunting in platform called Working Group Artemis. I was also accordance with our legislation is sacred to me. recently elected as Artemis President for another term.

68

Media and publications Some hunters on social media are threatened by people. Does that happen to you?

I basically do not publish photos of caught game on social networks. I did so about 12 years ago, and I didn’t like what my high school classmate wrote.

They weren’t threats, but it was very unpleasant.

So I told myself I didn’t have to do this. I also recommend the members of our club not to present themselves with caught game inappropriately, in order to preserve hunting traditions and respect for game. But, what is common and ordinary in hunting does not impress, so if someone’s objective is to be an influencer and to collect likes, as opposed to those who hunt as part of their lifestyle, they will naturally post images with sexy poses, or with blood on their hands, as way to garner attention and to irritate those against hunting.

I have no problem disassembling and slicing a deer, but I don’t publish it, I’d rather put a recipe for a good deer sirloin on my private profile. I haven’t been threatened by anyone, I’ve seen about three instances in 10 years on our club’s Facebook page, but they were insignificant.

This is article has been edited for use in the CIC Magazine – the full version of the interview can be viewed here.

Bloody catches on social media, or cyberbullying among hunters Hunters commonly hunt, but they are also hunted on social media. Especially female-hunters. Why? Social networks can be helpful, but they can also have their issues. It depends on how we set it up. They are an excellent marketing tool. However, if someone decides to be an influencer on social networks, for example, if they want to influence certain groups of people, they must be interesting to them. At the same time, they market themselves to some extent “in their own skin”. The success of an influencer depends on the number of followers, the likes collected and other interactions on posts. They try to reach the widest possible audience, because it is paid for by sponsors, manufacturers, companies or brands.

From this point of view, for influencers it is a commercial matter, and sometimes at any cost! What is common in hunting, both positive and normal, is of little interest on Facebook and especially on Instagram. Several editors have expressed an interest in writing about female hunters, but they want to hear more about these interesting stories.

Do you have a specific example?

More than five years ago, a young lady presented her experience of traveling in the United States, where she was given the opportunity to hunt with a bow, when she did not had a hunting license in our country.

Later, she hunted in Africa and published photos of catches on her public Facebook profile, including a picture with bloodied hands. She added a comment to the picture saying that she will remember the smell of freshly caught meat for the rest of her life. She made a New Year’s wish from this post, as it was December 31st. There was also something about the great feeling of blood on your hands! Our hunters pulled their hair out! If that was the case for us, what was the reaction of non-hunters? Today, this person no longer has inappropriate photos on their profile.

69

She wasn’t the only one…

It must be said that there are a few so-called hunters and influencers in Slovakia that started posting similar articles. God, that’s not what our hunting is about!

Last year, several girls published articles on social networks on the right to hunt, staged, and in sexy t-shirts that they cut out of a piece of game. Almost all of them were the same, standing in a row. Not to mention that they were naked from the waist up, with a flint slung over the shoulders.

However, this is not a reality. None of us hunters go to the forest like this! Not to mention our work feeding in the summer and the sprinkling of vegetables on feeding grounds. If you see this for yourself, you will understand that things such as this are commerce and virtual reality, not our hunting reality!

conducted an empirical survey on cyberbullying among hunters on social networks and found that hunters who presented themselves online, even without posing with caught game, had experienced serious personal attacks. She stated, I quote: “The problem of prejudices, stereotypes and lack of knowledge leads to the possibility of encouraging people to cyberbully others. People raised in cities, far from nature, are easily persuaded to attack other groups they consider deviant. Verbal aggression deeply rooted in stereotypes, prejudices based on ignorance, and overly idealistic and naive worldviews are becoming more and more widespread.”

You carried out a similar survey in Slovakia as well.

What were the results?

The survey involved 241 hunters and non-hunters,

Publishing images of caught game in non-hunting magazines, and especially on social media, does not create a good image of hunting. Why do many hunters ignore this?

There is a certain amount of exhibitionism in each of us, everyone likes to brag, but not everyone can guess the limits of how far they can go. Most hunters are unaware of the consequences. They consider it normal to take pictures of caught game, but they do not look at it through the eyes of others. However, it is not possible to create a positive image of hunting in this way. Hunters are divided into two camps: Some say that posing with game is normal, that they have nothing to hide. According to others, we should not publish these images at all. I think that there are professional hunting magazines for this, where we can also boast about a trophy and share pictures of game with our community. If we do this within the framework of ethical rules, we will be understood. But if our divided society sees a person in a non-hunting medium, whether in the press or on social networks, the public will react negatively.

men and women from towns and villages aged 18 and over. I asked if they were on social media, whether they publish their caught game, things such as this.

Interestingly, men publish such photos regularly, and I was also surprised to learn that women did so as well.

Up to 62 percent of people accepted these photos, as long as our hunting traditions were followed.

However, some respondents do not accept them under any circumstance. A significant group of hunters said Last year, you organized an international conference, they were unnecessarily upsetting the public. Only Women and Sustainable Hunting, in Bukowiecz, eight percent said it was a personal matter.

Poland, which focused on communication on social networks. What was most interesting to the This is article has been edited for use in the CIC participants?

Magazine – the full version of the interview can be We agreed that it is not appropriate to present viewed here. our caught game on social networks. For example, Professor Aleksander Matulewska from Poznań

70

Media and publications

Wildlife Trade Bans May be Detrimental for Pandemic Prevention and Conservation A ban on wildlife trade may be a misguided, potentially harmful, response to COVID-19, according to a new publication.

The devastating impact of COVID-19 has forced the world to re-examine its relationship with nature. Understandably, people around the world have been calling for reform in our approach to global health security. One narrative that is often brought up in this discussion is the need for a ban on wildlife trade, both in China and beyond.

While it is clear that we should look to improve our pandemic preparedness, many have also questioned whether wildlife trade bans would be the appropriate response.

A recent publication that has been widely shared online, entitled Overselling wildlife trade bans will not bolster conservation or pandemic preparedness, argues that a ban on wildlife trade is not the optimal approach, suggesting that it may even hinder efforts to prevent future outbreaks, as well as the work of conservationists. In this article, we take a look at some of the key points from this paper and provide some of our own thoughts on how wildlife trade bans could hinder existing efforts to conserve nature.

Are wildlife trade bans effective?

Safeguarding ourselves against future zoonotic diseases will not be as simple as introducing a wildlife trade ban. Past attempts to use bans as a regulatory measure have shown that they may have unintended consequences. The article brings up the response to the Ebola outbreak in 2015, where policymakers decided to introduce bans on bushmeat trade.

“These bans fell short of their stated aims, as bushmeat trade was pushed into illegal channels that limited surveillance and bans undermined community trust— not just in conservationists but also in the Ebola outbreak response.”

This example shows that such bans don’t necessarily

71

eliminate the demand for certain animal products, causing these species to continue to be traded on the black market. Trade going through these illegal channels could increase the likelihood of future pandemics, due to the limited capacities for monitoring, and poor health and safety standards.

Pushing trade into illegal channels may also cause a surge in the number of illegal killings, as there would be nothing stopping poachers from selling illegally sourced animal products. Some working in the wildlife sector, whose livelihoods would be affected by a ban, may even be pushed to collaborate with poachers as a way to earn a living. In principle, wildlife trade bans should limit the exposure of humans to wildlife species, thereby limiting the possibility of future outbreaks of zoonotic diseases.

The reality is that these situations are complex, and an appropriate response will require more thought on the part of policymakers.

Zoonotic diseases can emerge from anywhere Our susceptibility to zoonotic diseases is actually mainly a result of the close relationship between humans and wildlife. Whether it is though farming, cohabitation, hunting or hiking, interacting with wildlife is deeply integrated into many aspects our lives. Our close proximity to nature is precisely why pandemics have the potential to emerge from anywhere, not just through wildlife trade. One only has to look at the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS), to find that humans are at risk of contracting diseases from other pathways.

“MERS-CoV spreads to human beings through dromedary camels. Halting the wildlife trade[…] would not necessarily prevent a novel MERS-like virus from emerging as a pandemic threat.”

People are at risk of contracting MERS as camels are often kept as livestock, or for transport – this risk would still be reality even if a ban on camel

Photo by Hari Nandakumar

can infect humans via common bird species such as gulls, ducks, and chickens. In this case, even if controls on wildlife trade were to prevent the spread of this virus through chickens, transmission to humans could still occur through gulls or ducks. This shows that a wildlife trade ban does not look to address the full scope of our vulnerability to zoonotic diseases. It can be argued that the best approach would be to make improvements to global health security, while also taking into consideration our existing relationship with wildlife.

What should be done instead?

As has been discussed, wildlife trade bans have the potential to backfire on conservation and pandemic preparedness, and their implementation would only be one part of the story when attempting to stop future outbreaks of zoonotic diseases.

By improving the foundations of health security instead, the world will be better equipped to combat all types of new diseases, including those that are not zoonotic in origin.

In instances where we were better prepared for potential outbreaks, as was the case with the H1N1 influenza, outbreaks were managed more effectively.

“The 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic originated in North American pig farms. Thankfully, influenza is a well-recognised pandemic threat. As a result, the international community has more stringent safeguards against an influenza pandemic, including governance of outbreak response, sequence sharing, and vaccine production.”

Looking at global health security holistically, areas that would be worthwhile investing in would be monitoring, containment, patient care, genome sequencing, vaccine production and distribution. In

terms of preventing the emergence of viruses that may arise in a similar fashion to COVID-19, rather than eliminating wildlife trade entirely, a more appropriate response may be to introduce stricter health and safety standards in the legal wildlife trade sector, or more stringent checks on the source of animal products.

Wider implications for conservation While efforts should be made to safeguard ourselves against future zoonotic diseases, it should be ensured that it is not at the detriment of existing conservation efforts. The article suggests that approaches motivated by fear, such as a ban on wildlife trade, would “handicap the real work of engendering respect for nature, weakening conservation in the long-term.”

“Respect for nature” can circle back to conservation in many ways. This could mean ensuring that wildlife harvesting practices are conducted ethically and safely – something which would be difficult to enforce should trade shift to illegal channels.

Second order effects on conservation may come as a result of the breakdown in relationship with local communities and wildlife. Should people come to fear wildlife, or if wildlife is demonised, this could result in increased poaching or illegal killings. Landscapes may even be at risk, as there would less incentive for people to protect certain species, and their related habitats, when they can no longer benefit from their utilisation.

The CIC fully supports efforts to ensure that humans maintain this respect for nature. A connection with wildlife is what leads many people to practice hunting – a continued respect for nature allows them, and future generations to practice hunting and the wider management it entails.

72

Media and publications

CIC Joined Survival International’s #GreenLandGrab Initiative

On 30th of September 2020 leaders from around the world made commitments at the UN Summit on Biodiversity. Making the right decisions when it comes to biodiversity is more crucial than ever before, which is why we were disappointed to see the lack of representation of indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs). To ensure that their voices are not lost, Survival International was running a campaign releasing videos recorded by indigenous communities that had been impacted by conservation projects. #GreenLandGrab When conservation projects do not take the needs of IPLCs into consideration, it can negatively impact human livelihoods. This was highlighted in a letter sent by Survival International, and co-signed by the CIC, to the Convention for Biological Diversity (CBD) Secretariat. The letter outlined the issues relating to the introduction of protected areas for 30% of the planet, which was included in the zero draft of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework.

Much of these issues relate to a lack of safeguards in place for IPLCs, which is worrying as similar efforts in the past have led to communities being displaced, as well as human rights abuses. This highlights the importance of the #GreenLandGrab initiative, which looked to give a voice to indigenous peoples and local communities around the world. Survival International released videos in every hour for 24 hours, and we encouraged everybody to view them on their Twitter and Facebook.

73

Media and publications

Online Hunting Auction When we talk about the achievements of the Hunting Auction this year, we must first of all mention the generosity and loyalty of our members despite the adverse circumstances we encountered in 2020. Amazingly, we received 37 donations for this year’s events. And, despite the entire Auction taking place online, we brought in a total of almost EUR 80,000! Thank you all for donating!

Of course, we would not have had this success without enthusiastic buyers, so a big thank you to all who participated and made use of our new online innovations in bidding. We are constantly working to improve the system, and we will be looking to ensure that a seamless bidding process is in place for the next auction in 2021.

We hope that our new online platform will encourage more and more members to participate in the auction, even those who do not have the opportunity to attend the next General Assembly and World of Hunting and Nature Exhibition in 2021.

Unfortunately, the conditions of the live auction were not the most favorable this year, which is why we did not achieve our goal. Nevertheless, it was still a great success overall. Thank you, once again, for your support!

Donors Michel & Denis Nolens Michel Mantheakis Monisuer et Madame Turquin Olivier Jacquemyns Rolin & André Swenden Orsolya Nagy (Turul-Vadfarm) Philipp Burla Pilisi Parkerdö Zrt / Gabor Reinitz Prince Alexandre Poniatowski Ramiro Gonzalez Allende (Puelo Expeditions Argentina) Romantik Hotel Spielweg SAKO Ltd SEFAG Forestry and Timber Industry Company Zrt. Slovak Hunters Chamber STEYR ARMS GMBH Swarovski Optik KG Zalaerdő Zrt. ZEISS

Photo by Christine Donaldson

Alejandro Allende Árpád Sárkány Artem Veselov (ProfiHunt LTD) Aru Game Lodges Beretta Cordelia & Rudolf Kräling Diethelm & Katja Metzger Dirk Brockhaus Dr. Jens-Jürgen Böckel Eberhard Freiherr von Gemmingen-Hornberg Fondation François Sommer/ Louis de Rohan Chabot Francois Labet H. Krieghoff GmbH Hans-Werner Blöcker HHK SAFARIS Hugo Kotzé Kistemplom-Tanya Hunting Association

74

Photo by Balaji Malliswamy

Announcements

75

What is Announcements?

Keep up to date on the most important developments within the CIC, our Membership and our ongoing events which take place throughout the year.

76

Announcements

New Heads of Delegations The French Delegation have elected Emmanuel Michau as their new Head of Delegation (HoD). His father, Christian, was an early member of the CIC and a famous hunter of small game in Europe. In addition, he was known as a prominent hunter of big game in the early days of African exploration. Emmanuel Michau has a family estate in Sologne, which is filled with a variety of wildlife including waterbirds, as well as small and big game, with deer even giving birth to fawn on the property. He is also an enthusiastic conservationist, and has been involved in conservation for many years. Professionally, he is currently a passionate business lawyer and a member of the Paris Bar. He also holds the position of Vice President of INSEAD alumni, where he graduated in Business administration after an LLM at NYU. His oldest daughter is a member of the French branch of Young Opinion, as well as his son who living in Berlin. As Head of Delegation, he wants to open up French hunters to the possibility of hunting experiences abroad, while also sharing best practices with members. For him, he makes it clear that hunters of small and big game are the first defenders of wildlife.

Dr. Steffen Koch has been elected by the members of the German Delegation as the new Head of Delegation (HoD), after his predecessor Dr. Wilhelm von Trott zu Solz decided not to stand for re-election after six very successful years as HoD. Professionally, Dr. Steffen Koch works as a lawyer in the field of restructuring and insolvency. Amongst other leading positions, he has been President of INSOL Europe, and is a member of the board of both the Turnaround Management Association (TMA) Germany, as well as the German sponsoring society for the Erongo Mountain Rhino Sanctuary Trust (EMRST) in Namibia (all pro bono). He first joined the German Delegation in 2014, where he soon began playing an active role. Dr. Steffen Koch is a passionate advocate for nature and sustainable hunting in Germany and beyond. His favoured destination for hunts is Namibia, particularly in the true wilderness far away from civilisation and cellphone coverage. He is married and a proud father of three adult sons who, to his delight, follow their father along the hunter’s path, with all them having hunted together with him in Namibia.

77

Björn Wilhelm Widmark was elected as the new Head of Delegation for Sweden on 20 August, 2020. Born in the south of Sweden in 1947, he holds a long and esteemed career in the Swedish Army, serving from 1967 to 2003. There, he held various positions, including Commander of the Lappland Brigade and Defence Attaché in Moscow. He holds the title of Brigadier (retired) and for many years he was also the Aide de Camp (ADC) to His Majesty the King of Sweden. In Sweden, one fulfills this for duty 24 hours a day for one month a year - in his case, it was for 14 years. He has been married to Ulrika Barnekow since 1974, with whom he has a son, Axel, an avid hunter himself, as well as three grandchildren. Björn Wilhelm Widmark has been hunting since he was young; today, most of his hunts take place together with friends on his land in the south of Sweden. In addition, he is also a keen on hunting abroad, with his recent hunts involving visits to countries such as Mongolia, Poland, Norway, South Africa, Scotland, Namibia and Romania. During his time as ADC, he also had the privilege to participate as a hunter on many occasions, both at official Royal hunts, as well as at the Kings more private ones. He is looking forward to work not only for the Swedish Delegation, but also together with all the representatives for CIC Delegations from other countries. In reference to this, he said “Together we can make a difference in the interests of sustainable hunting.”

Announcements

CIC Partners with Dallas Safari Club The International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC) and Dallas Safari Club (DSC) signed a joint Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), formalizing their partnership to benefit wildlife conservation, and support sustainable wildlife use and the livelihoods of rural and Indigenous people.

This partnership provides the opportunity to leverage the combined reach and influence of DSC’s and CIC’s knowledge, programs and networks to effectively guide policy in a way that encourages science-based wildlife management. DSC and CIC will work diligently on all matters impacting hunters internationally.

CIC President, George Aman stated, ”CIC and DSC have been successfully working together for a number of years. Both organisations bring something unique to the table. Formalising the collaboration with DSC strengthens our existing close relationship with them, and will help us work towards a world that values and supports sustainable hunting for the benefit of people and nature.”

2021 DSC Convention Update

In-person convention cancelled; replaced with a virtual event.

Dates remain the same: 11-14 February 2021 More details will be forthcoming. Please visit the DSC website (www.biggame.org) for more information.

78

Announcements

CIC Communications Prize 2021 The CIC calls for nominations for its 2021 Communications Prize!

This award was established to recognise media publications which highlight different aspects of nature conservation through the sustainable utilisation of wildlife resources.

There are currently three categories for these awards:

Print: Books, Magazines, Other printed products Digital media: Social media platforms, Websites, Blogs Film: Short films, Documentaries, Movies Nominations can be sent to us only through the CIC National Delegations in the three official languages of the CIC (English, French, and German), however the source material can be in any language. Please contact your Head of Delegation referencing the CIC Communications Prize, together with a link to the work and the category of submission you would propose for the award. Only nominations received through the CIC Nationval Delegations will be considered by the Jury.

You do not need to be a CIC member to apply, a nd we would encourage all to get involved!

The deadline for submissions is 28 February, 2021.

The winner will be announced at an award ceremony, which will be held during the Closing Ceremony of the 68th CIC General Assembly in Budapest, Hungary (28th September, 2021).

We look forward to many interesting submissions, and good luck to all involved!

If you would like to hear more about the CIC Communications Prize, please see our website, or contact us at office@cic-wildlife.org

79

Announcements

CIC Markhor Award 2021 Help us find excellent candidates for the CIC Markhor Award, 2021!

The Markhor Award is awarded to conservation projects of multinational relevance, that link the conservation of biodiversity and human livelihoods through the application of sustainable use principles.

The prize ceremony is to be held at the 3rd CPW Wildlife Forum in Budapest, Hungary within the framework of the “One with Nature�

World of Hunting and Nature Exhibition (25 September-14 October, 2021).

If you would like to apply, or if you know of a conservation project that you think should be nominated, then please contact us at office@cic-wildlife.org Emails should contain a description of the conservation project, including the background, goals, operations and any outcomes, as well as an explanation of why you think it should receive the award.

The deadline for nominations is 28 February, 2021.

For further details on how to apply, or if you have any questions relating to the Markhor Award, please contact us at the aforementioned address and we will make sure to get back to you.

80

81

82

83

84

in memoriam

Dr. Gerhard Frank

Professor Ryszard Dzięciołowski

Sardar Naseer Tareen

Dr. Nikola T. Belev

Jean Louis Chavane de Dalmassy

József Váry

Louis G. Schnyder von Wartensee

85

The CIC Headquarters wishes you a joyous festive season and a wonderful New Year!

86 Photo by Kelly Sikkema

H SO WIT L A W NO KI

VS O R A W S R AIL K I T P O

dS START SMART SEE THE UNSEEN

87