Trophy hunting of species inhabiting Russia as listed in the Red Data Book of the Russian Federation

The world has seen many instances of trophy hunting of rare and protected species in the attempt to obtain finance for their protection.

Although some examples of this have been successful, is this practice truly relevant or reliable today in modern-day Russia?

The position of WWF-Russia has always been and continues to remain unchanged. We are against commercial trophy hunting of rare species listed in the Red Data Book of the Russian Federation, as such hunting contradicts the current legislation. At present, all of the species listed in theRed Data Book of the Russian Federation have been derived from trade (with some reservations). Should the population return to sustainable levels as a result of conservation efforts and natural restoration, the species can be removed from the Red Data Book of the Russian Federation. Only after that can consideration of the species' exploitation, including trophy hunting, take place.

WWF does not support or uphold possible legislation changes aiming to organize trophy hunting of the species listed in the Red Data Book of the Russian Federation, for the following reasons:

• The profit gained from such hunting will not be used for the protection of these species

Under the legislation, the money that goes to the treasury in the form of the hunting fee will dissolve into the public budget without any trace, and there is no reason to think that the budget money allocated for environmental needs will be adequate enough to provide all the measures needed to restore the population of the species in question. Alongside this, the current legislation of the Russian Federation requires that all payments for the use of natural resources go to the budget.

• Trophy hunting fees will most probably be minor

The supporters of trophy hunting speak of the considerable amounts of money that operators of hunting tours are ready to pay. For example, the supporters of the Siberian tiger hunting tours mention sums of $150000-300000 per tour, yet neglect to mention the fact that this money is the tour's worth and not the trophy's, most of which is by no means the money that will be spent on the development of the conservation projects. On the contrary, it is the cost of the organization of the hunting tour which can be very high, as well as the profits gained by the companies that organize these tours. As a consequence, only a small part of the sums in question could theoretically be used - or almost just as well not be used - for the protection of the object of hunting.

• The legalization of hunting of the species listed in the Red Data Book of the Russian Federation may increase poaching

In theory, hunting farms that focus on a species – for example, the Siberian tiger – as the object of hunting must too support the role of reproduction areas, in order that the tigers will settle on adjacent territories and that relationships will be reestablished between humans and tigers. However, it is possible that the hunting farm will cope with its task only within its borders, whereas the rest of the tiger habitat might see a considerable increase in poaching. Unfortunately, questions on why 'they' can and 'we' cannot would be inherent and unavoidable in the population of the less well-off regions. Taking this into consideration, legalized hunting of endangered species will not necessarily replace poaching; it has the potential to damage the fragile populations further than ever.