The Samarkand meeting
The European Parliament has adopted a resolution on the European Union's objectives for the next global conference on wildlife (CITES CoP20), aimed at strengthening the EU's commitment to ensuring that trade in wild fauna and flora is legal and sustainable. This year, CITES celebrates 50 years of regulating global wildlife trade. The 20th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES (CITES CoP20) will be held in Samarkand, Uzbekistan (November 24 to December 5, 2025), setting the agenda for future international commitments on wildlife trade.
You May Also Like ..
Hunting programs
For the first time in a decade, the European Parliament has adopted a science-based approach to the movement of hunting trophies, avoiding calls for restrictions and instead recognizing the benefits that well-managed hunting programs can provide for wildlife conservation and local communities. In addition to FACE, several organizations welcome the outcome of the European Parliament vote. Laurens Hoedemaker, President of FACE, said: "The European Parliament deserves praise for adopting a science-based approach to hunting, and in particular to the transport of hunting trophies. This marks an important step in recognizing the positive role hunting can play." Regarding the transport of hunting trophies in Europe, strict laws are in place to ensure its sustainability. Furthermore, the European Commission and Member State experts are applying stricter control on specific species as part of the EU Action Plan against Wildlife Trafficking.
The benefits of legal and sustainable trade
It is important to note that the European Commission and other international organizations, such as the IUCN, have recognized that legal and sustainable wildlife trade can provide multiple benefits for conservation, livelihoods, and local economies, and support efforts to combat illegal activities. In a briefing paper by the IUCN Sustainable Use and Livelihoods Specialist Group (IUCN SULi), experts argue that "poorly targeted or blanket bans or restrictions impact both good and bad hunting practices. They are ineffective tools that risk compromising important benefits for both conservation and local livelihoods, exacerbating rather than addressing the major prevailing threats of habitat loss and poaching." (Source: FACE)
