Examination of Witnesses (Questions 320
- 339)
TUESDAY 13 JULY 2004
MR CRAWFORD
ALLAN, MS
STEPHANIE PENDRY,
MS CAROL
HATTON AND
MR STUART
CHAPMAN
Q320 Sue Doughty: One of the areas
we have got concern about is gardening and gardening programmes—the
huge expansion of decking and different varieties of plants that
traditionally have not been grown in this country. Of course,
one has to distinguish between what one might call plant collections
and exotic plants. Really, have we got an issue here—and
this is a country that has for hundreds of years introduced non-native
species—where it has now gone too far? If so, how do we
persuade people about what they should be planting and what they
should not be planting, and what the effects of that might be?
What is your view on that?
Ms Hatton: I think it goes back
to what I was talking about before. As you say, it is exactly
that, is it not: it might be just as much people with private
collections of animals as it is with plants; that you bring all
of these species into garden—again, is a garden a wild place
or not—and then they spread out. I suspect that is the way
that many species like Himalayan Balsam or Japanese Knotweed in
this country actually started out. How I think you might be able
to control it is to have some better definition of what is meant
by "in the wild" and "causes to grow". That
would enable prosecutors to try and address these problems—and
perhaps more guidance about the type of plants that people would
be advised to grow. As you say, gardening is a massive, public
interest, is it not? There is a huge amount of interest in it.
If there was more guidance to people in ways such as "Please
don't use peat; use peat alternatives" or there was some
guidance about the type of plants that (a) will grow in this climate
(because I am sure we all grow lots of things that do not actually
survive) and (b) are the sorts of things that are not going to
cause a problem when they escape out into the countryside.
Mr Allan: The only thing to add,
probably, is what you mentioned, which is that the use of the
media to promote gardening is probably the exact tool you use
to dissuade people from using invasives. You turn it on its head
and you have those particular celebrities or programmes doing
features regularly on particular problematic species, and you
have books produced such as The Bad Gardening Guide rather
than The Good Gardening Guide!
Q321 Sue Doughty: So we are missing
a trick, are we not, because we should be seeing things fed into
programmes about plant crime—
Ms Hatton: Absolutely.
Sue Doughty: We have had a lot of high
profile changes in the use of chemicals in the garden, but this
is something we hear very little about.
Q322 Chairman: You have mentioned
several times that we need to redefine and better define the phrase
"in the wild". Would you actually support the idea of
legislating for what people can put into their own gardens?
Ms Hatton: I think you would have
to ask the police about that because they would have to be the
people who would enforce it. It sounds to me as if it would be
very difficult to enforce that.
Q323 Chairman: The problem is, if
you have got a garden that backs on to "the wild" and
you put in Himalayan Balsam, it is going to get into the wild,
yet there is in law no power to prevent you from doing that. Do
you think there should be?
Ms Hatton: There is in terms of
if, say, you live next door to an SSSI. Presumably then the legislation
protecting SSSIs would cover land adjacent to it as well as the
SSSI itself. However, that is a very small proportion of the land
in this country—I think there are 5,500 SSSIs for the whole
of the UK.
Q324 Chairman: In which case, when
you say define better what "in the wild" means, do you
have any suggestions as to how?
Ms Hatton: I think you would need
to ask the wildlife group PAW (Partnership Against Wildlife Crime)
to sit down and have that out with groups like Plantlife, the
police forces themselves and other bodies involved in enforcing
that.
Mr Allan: I think the way to approach
this is, perhaps, in tandem with the importers and wholesalers
who are bringing in the species that may be problematic, and getting
through to them. If the plants are not available to consumers
in the first place because you are applying certain guidelines
on what they will trade in, I think that is going to be a very
good deterrent.
Q325 Sue Doughty: It is a problem.
We have got another issue here about the evidence we had from
Plantlife and about the threat to native plants, such as bluebells,
snowdrops and primroses. Again, we are getting some measure of
protection but do you have any more thoughts about policing on
this one?
Ms Pendry: It is an area that
the police have had a few successes on in terms of looking at
plant crime on this level, especially in the eastern half of the
country where there seems to be a proliferation of organised gangs
almost, going out and targeting both bluebell woods and areas
where snowdrops are, digging them out with JCBs and collecting
thousands of these which are not very valuable in themselves individually
but if you are talking about hundreds and hundreds of thousands
of bulbs you are talking about a fairly large amount of money.
There have been a number of prosecutions but it is not necessarily
based under wildlife legislation; the police have found that it
has been easier to prosecute under something like the Theft Act
because, of course, they are stealing from somebody's land and
a plant can be somebody's property. So they would be prosecuted
under the Theft Act. There has been one case of a prison sentence
being received. The Theft Act was for the bluebell theft and there
was also a prosecution under the COTES legislation as well, where
they received a community service order. So there have been some
improvements in that sense, but I think we come back to the question
of awareness; a police officer on the beat is not going to understand
or really be terribly aware that this is possibly a crime if someone
is out there digging, and if they come across a van full of snowdrop
bulbs with men with spades they are very rarely going to stop
them and say "What have you been doing? Is it a crime?"
That comes back to the awareness issue, and it is something that
a number of forces within East Anglia, in particular, have tried
to concentrate on. During the season when this happens they do
put out publicity both to the public to say, "Look out for
this" and, also, amongst their own police forces to try and
highlight this issue as well. It always comes back down to awareness,
really.
Q326 Sue Doughty: Particularly to
WWF, you have been identifying some of these problems in Section
14, and we have touched on them just now. Is there anything else
that needs to happen around Section 14 in terms of amendment or
strengthening definitions?
Ms Hatton: Other than those two
things there was nothing else that was raised to me by the enforcers.
Q327 Sue Doughty: Are you going to
feed that into Defra when they review the Act?
Ms Hatton: Yes, absolutely.
Q328 Sue Doughty: One further area
I am interested in is the impact of wildlife crime on marine life.
Do you think it is a case of "out of sight out of mind"?
Ms Hatton: I think that is absolutely
true. I think there are two basic areas with marine crime. The
first relates to the lack of any sort of coherent legislation
for the marine environment, and the second relates to species
protection, perhaps, as you say, under the waves where people
are not aware of the species and there is a very low level of
awareness. In fact, we spoke to Devon and Cornwall Constabulary
who have done a lot of work on marine crime, and they were originally
talking to us about the problems they had with cetaceans (that
is dolphins) and the basking shark in terms of areas that were
important for them for resting and shelter, and how the old Wildlife
and Countryside Act tried to protect those areas. However, doing
that in a marine environment is very difficult because you cannot
draw a line around a map in the same way you can on land, where
you can say "That area is protected". In fact, the CroW
Act has actually now addressed that problem and protects species
everywhere they occur in marine environments, so it is not such
a problem. The thing they do say is absolutely the point you made,
which is the low level of awareness about marine crime, and they
gave us a good example of a very recent case just off the Isle
of Man where some divers swam close to some basking sharks—literally
within two metres of them. When they looked into how close you
can go before you cause an animal like that disturbance it really
was not very clear; some people said four metres, some said 100
metres, and there was a lot of confusion. Plus if you are disturbing
it who do you report it to? Who is responsible for enforcing all
of this marine wildlife legislation? So I think there is a problem
of people not knowing what marine crime is going on, and even
if they do see it they might not always know it is a crime and
they will not necessarily know where to go to report it.
Q329 Sue Doughty: There are areas
in California where you have very clear notices stating that if
they come up to you, you are in the wrong; you have got to keep
that distance. Is there anything more we could be doing in that
direction, closer to the point, about making people know that
it is their responsibility to allow the freedom of movement of
animals such as sharks?
Ms Hatton: One of the things that
the Constabulary suggested was a sort of code of conduct for the
marine environment in much the same way as we have the Highway
Code or the Countryside Code. We all know that when you go in
the countryside you close your gates and you do not drop litter—it
is something we are all brought up with. They said it would be
very useful if we had a marine wildlife code of conduct. We all
like to go to the seaside and have our holidays, but if we were
brought up with a code of standards of behaviour in the marine
environment that would help a lot. They said that could apply
to all sorts of users; it could be for people who are above the
water, on jet-skis or boats, in the water, in terms of divers,
or under the water—so that would cover things like contractors
and larger diving companies. As you say, that would set down some
standards of behaviour and make sure that people were better informed
about how they might behave or not. They mentioned as well the
recent Nature Conservation for Scotland Bill—the equivalent
of the CroW Act in Scotland—where they introduced a code
of conduct for watching marine wildlife into the statute, and
they said that was a real step forward and they would like to
see something similar introduced for the rest of the UK.
Q330 Paul Flynn: There was an article
in The Observer in March about Chris Beinvenue and his
alleged activities as what appears to be a very irresponsible
dealer in selling animals to British zoos (there were three zoos
named) and actually buying some of the surplus animals in the
zoos. He confessed he does not mind what happens to the animals
after he sells them, including very rare animals; he said you
could eat them, if you want to. We raised this with Defra and
I think they are getting back to us. Do you think that article
reflects what the true situation is? Is this trade going on? Is
it significant?
Ms Pendry: I think there are elements
of truth in that and there will always be or could always be certainly
perhaps some of the smaller zoo establishments that have set themselves
up which are able to or do, possibly, trade in this way. I think,
from what came out of that article and what was stated, really,
in that article, no law has been broken; it was simply outlining
that this was, perhaps, morally wrong and that, really, the principle
of zoos is that the zoos are there to carry out two functions,
and when they apply for their zoo licences the two functions they
have to fulfil are the conservation benefit of the species and
to play an educational role with members of the public who come
to see those zoos. If a zoo is then trading and returning profit
primarily rather than being there for the benefit of species and
for educational purposes then I feel that they are not meeting
the requirements of their application for these zoo licences.
Perhaps that is one area that should be looked at in terms of
who licenses zoos. That is where we come across another problem,
really, in that it is local authorities who license the zoos but
it is Defra who licenses the zoos in terms of being able to apply
for an Article 30 certificate which allows zoos to trade between
themselves without the necessity of other paperwork. This gives
them more of a free hand to trade. My view is that that is a good
thing because they are working for the conservation of the species.
So we have a bit of a disjointed system where we have local authorities
issuing licences for zoos without consultation with other agencies
such as Defra, who are responsible for other aspects of licensing
the zoos. I think that opens up an opportunity for people to,
perhaps, deal in animals or trade in animals where the prime aim
is not their conservation. I think it is certainly something that
does happen both in the UK and, also, throughout Europe. If a
zoo is not able to receive the licences they need in the UK from
Defra then they may be able to get animals with licences that
have been authorised from other parts of Europe and other Member
States where the ability to do that is a lot easier
Q331 Paul Flynn: There does seem
to be an implication that there were crimes committed. He was
touting round some rare chimpanzees from Africa without any details
as to their provenance. He was also forced to return two sea eagles
to a bird zoo in Britain where he did not have the correct paperwork.
Ms Pendry: Yes, I think the offences
were committed by him rather than by zoos here in the UK.
Q332 Paul Flynn: He is notorious
apparently, and there have been complaints about him elsewhere
in Europe. ACPO in their written evidence referred to an increasing
trade in endangered species on the internet, and they were saying
that they were taking some action, and Defra and Customs were
saying that they were starting to look at this. Is this something
that concerns you? Are there any practical steps you can take
to reduce the trade which is becoming a problem?
Mr Allan: I think this is something
where I feel we are behind the game on enforcement. This is really
the way that nearly all wildlife traders now operate, through
the internet. Communications are done by e-mail, bulletin boards,
chat rooms, websites, and this is how the trading is now being
done, particularly for the rarer specimens and the more illegal
specimens. The communications are being set up over the internet
and I feel that enforcement is just not catching up in tackling
this. We have to get smarter in dealing with this; we have to
learn from other areas of enforcement that are doing very good
work in tackling internet crime, like in paedophilia and so on.
There needs to be the technology put in place to try to get to
this because it is very difficult to find out actually who the
perpetrator is. There are major questions over the jurisdiction
because you do not know where that perpetrator is; they may have
set up a website that appears to be based in one country when,
in fact, they are from a different country altogether. Also, preserving
the evidence is necessary to achieve. There are many, many convoluted
areas to this that make it very difficult for your average police
or customs officer who deals with wildlife to tackle. We have
seen a very rapid growth in internet trading, not just auction
sites but just the way that wildlife traders operate. In the past
it was very difficult, perhaps, for an illegal exporter to find
out who was a suitable illegal importer who was like-minded and
not going to cause any problems. In the past communications were
done through `phone and fax, but during the period of time I have
worked, the past 10 years, we have seen this huge growth in traders
who have got illegal specimens being able very quickly to find
customers and other traders who are like-minded. This network
internationally through the internet is building up. For enforcers,
the problem is that to get into it you have to have good knowledge
of the trade and species because there is an internet shorthand
which is used. You can go into orchid list services or orchid
chat rooms where people are just talking about their orchids and
talking about particular specimens and there are, literally, hundreds
if not thousands of people discussing species of particular interest
over the web, and also there are trade deals going on; people
are offering certain things and it is all done in a shorthand
way in trade terms. Unless you are very specialised you will not
know that that species that they are offering is actually a very
rare species that there is no way they could have acquired legally.
So it is very difficult. I think there needs to be some specialism
set up to do that—certainly the National Wildlife Crime
Intelligence Unit—to ensure that they have the planning
and resources that work to actually start to focus in on this
and, through their priorities, start to tackle it one group of
species at a time, whatever that may be. I really feel that this
is the biggest challenge because this is the way that the trade
is happening now, over the internet.
Q333 Paul Flynn: That is very depressing.
I think there must be an orchid dealer outside trying to sabotage
the session! Knowing the worldwide web is anarchic and anyone
committing a crime has a great lead on anyone trying to stop it,
but is there really much chance of closing it down? You have talked
about it as growing, but have you any idea of what the scale is?
Mr Allan: It is frightening. There
was a study done by a French NGO, I think, about four years ago,
just looking at the trade in parrots on the internet. I cannot
remember the figures but I can certainly get you that information,
but they did a study looking at all the websites trading in parrots
and, basically, produced volumes of paper this big of just the
website pages. It is staggering the growth there has been. However,
I do not think it is all negative. I think the internet is a huge
resource for enforcement as well. Anybody who has knowledge of
a certain trade element can sit there, search the web and you
can detect illegal trade. If you have the resources to be able
to track that back to the perpetrator then you have a good advantage,
whereas before it was very difficult to break into the networks.
You can sit in your office or in your police station monitoring
what is going on from your desk, you can see the discussions going
on over the internet through chat rooms and so on, you can see
who is offering what on the websites, and you can see those people
who are saying, "We've always got the rarest things in stock;
if we don't have it we can get it for you", and you always
know that is a very good indication of the people to look at.
Q334 Paul Flynn: So our concern should
be the internet rather than traders like Mr Bienvenue?
Mr Allan: I think if we want to
look strategically at this and look at the problem and deal with
it systematically we need to work out a way in which we can deal
with this over the internet, definitely. It needs to bring together
both law enforcement agencies and experts in the fields of the
types of groups of species that are mainly problematic.
Q335 Chairman: We heard last week
from Defra and Customs and Excise about some of the work they
are doing on monitoring internet sales and so on. Are you involved
in that work?
Mr Allan: TRAFFIC is, yes. We
have been monitoring trading on the internet for a very long time.
You are talking about Defra particularly—
Q336 Chairman: It is the National
Wildlife Criminal Intelligence Unit that is actually doing this.
Do you feed into them the work you are doing?
Mr Allan: We feed very closely
into the Intelligence Unit, basically because one of our staff
number is actually seconded to it on a part-time basis, so we
have a direct linkage there. We are bringing expertise into the
unit by this secondment and we are providing expertise and knowledge
of the trade to help the crime unit in its work. This is a way
of working very closely with the unit. We have worked with Defra
for over 10 years and they have been supporting us in the work
we are doing, and they are actually guiding what work we are focusing
on. The only way ahead now is to use the internet to detect crime
as a starter and then take it further.
Q337 Chairman: So, I take it, you
are happy with the attention being paid to that by the authorities?
Mr Allan: I think it has to be
measured and I think it has to be put into context. If you are
looking at, perhaps, web auction houses where you have individuals
selling individual items, that is very interesting and, yes, it
shows the scale of the smaller trade and so on, but I do not think
you can necessarily find the larger-scale, more significant trade
being done through particular web auction houses. I think most
of the more significant trade is done by traders through their
websites or individually with other traders; I do not think it
is necessarily the internet auction systems that are the big problem,
mainly because, largely, those people who are selling cannot really
remain anonymous because their contact details have to be there
and the auction houses know who these people are through, maybe,
credit card details in paying for the service, or whatever it
may be. So they can always be tracked back through those systems,
so the big players necessarily are not using the auction houses,
they are doing it through web pages, through chat rooms and just
using the internet for communication.
Q338 Chairman: So focusing on e-bay
would be a mistake?
Mr Allan: I think focusing on
e-bay is not necessarily a mistake, I think it is very useful
because it can provide some leads. Focusing on e-bay was very
useful until recently. I think there was a lack of regulation
on internet auction sites but there are auction sites that are
being much more responsible now, like e-bay, who are starting
to regulate the systems and they are starting to ask for help
on how do we stop this. Those people who are trading in illegal
items are being cut out of the system, so very quickly somebody
is expelled from the system. It is going to be a knock-on process:
the police will call customs, and whoever it may be will find
those people trading on a different auction site; they will get
to that auction site and that auction site will start to smarten
up its act and resolve the problem, but it will just happen as
a result of events like this.
Q339 Mrs Clark: This is for Mr Chapman
and Ms Hatton. In terms of your evidence, you have talked about
the limits—the stranglehold, perhaps, some people might
say—on police by the RIPA Act passed in 2000, which means,
in layman's terms, that policemen can only obtain permission for
surveillance in respect of what are determined as serious crimes.
You are saying that because wildlife crime is not considered or
indeed legally classified as serious crime that really purposeful
investigation of such offences is not feasible—in fact,
quite impossible. What are you doing about this? Are you pressing
for RIPA to be amended? In fact, what should we do?
Ms Hatton: We obviously know all
about the issue—I do not need to tell you what that is.
The reason we raised RIPA within the Environmental Justice Report,
which looked at both civil and criminal law was because when we
were trying to identify which basically looked across both civil
and criminal law, we were trying to identify what barriers there
were to environmental justice. So within the criminal sphere we
talked to all the different enforcement bodies and the NGOs involved
in enforcement activity, and it was the RSPB who reported, "Well,
RIPA is a particular problem for us", and they exactly described
it in the terms you have given. In terms of what we are doing
about it, we are not doing very much other than to highlight the
problem through that publication. However, I know Stephanie wanted
to say something about RIPA in the trade context as well. Do you
want to mention that now?
Ms Pendry: It was not in the trade
context, it was just an example whereby police forces had been
able to work within the boundaries of RIPA for an operation that
was done at the beginning of this year to protect the hen-harriers,
which I think is something you are aware of.
|
