The official version of this document can be found via the PDF button.
The below content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments.
STATES OF JERSEY
r
FUR PRODUCTS: PETITION (P.72/2006) – COMMENTS
Presented to the States on 22nd September 2006 by the Minister for Planning and Environment
STATES GREFFE
COMMENTS
Senator Syvret's Proposition assumes that the resources required to enforce a ban on fur products would require nothing more than the effort that CITES currently requires. The very specific nature of the CITES convention suggests that this is perhaps an underestimation.
Jersey is proud to be a signatory to the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species commonly called CITES. Through CITES, panels of international experts regularly assess the conservation status of species of animals and plants worldwide and identify whether they are endangered or even vulnerable to exploitation. These species and importantly, their parts or derivatives, are then listed under the Convention.
By being CITES listed, regulations and restrictions are conferred these species. Operationally this means that there can only be trade or movement of listed wildlife products if there is sufficient documentation and import or export permits to prove their legal origins as defined by the Convention.
The Convention is internationally recognised as effectively controlling and monitoring the trade in over 30,000 vulnerable species of animals and plants, whether they are traded as live specimens, fur coats or dried herbs. But, as suggested by its name, CITES, only relates to what have been deemed by scientists as endangered species. Its role is to protect the wild populations of animals or plants from exploitation. It does not necessarily impose trade restrictions in listed species that have been artificially raised or captive bred.
Under the Convention there are no restrictions on non-listed species which are allowed to enter trade whatever their method of capture. CITES is not designed to prevent legal operations such as fur-ranching of common species like mink. Similarly, CITES does not prevent the collection from the wild of commonly found species like racoons or coyotes which are described in the Senator's report.
Although Jersey has yet to fully ratify CITES, the Environment Division of the Planning and Environment Department currently administer CITES regulations in conjunction with the Customs and Immigration Department. Therefore anybody who attempts to import or export a CITES listed species requires the appropriate licences from both the country of export as well as the country of import.
In 2005 over 350 movements of CITES listed animals, plants or their derivatives were made to and from Jersey. Many of these pertain to movements of animals from Durrell or the Eric Young Orchid Foundation as well as birds like parrots entering the pet trade and items, often antiques, containing listed materials such as ivory or tortoiseshell.
I will shortly be bringing to the house, even tighter legislation that will allow us to fully ratify the treaty through the U.K. Nevertheless I would like to assure the house that operationally, we currently administer CITES very strictly.
It is important to recognise that the duties carried out by officers in relation to CITES are very different from that being proposed by the proposition. Currently attentions are focused towards CITES listed species which is a very small proportion of the trade in fur since clearly it is the more common species whose pelts are used in fashion items.
Over the last 3 years there have been less than 10 legal CITES movements of endangered species listed under CITES relating to the fur trade – an example would be the import of hunting trophies like a lion rug by a Jersey resident who participated in a legal hunt in Africa.
I hope it is clear that from a conservation perspective, my Department in conjunction with Customs and Immigration are well able to control the trade in the fur of vulnerable and endangered species in line with the International Community. However to prohibit the trade in all fur has many other considerations that the Minister for Home Affairs has quantified in her comment.