8 - Paper Tigers and Local Perseverance: Wildlife Protection in Germany

Summary

Introduction

Germany is Europe's biggest import country and transshipment point of wildlife products, including live animals for the domestic pet market and hunting trophies (Altheer and Lameter 2020: 2; Fachtagung Artenschutzrecht 2021: 5). Germany is also signatory to numerous regional and international wildlife protection treaties, such as the Washington Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS), and the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern Convention). Furthermore, as a member of the European Union (EU), Germany is bound by extensive EU regulations and directives for the protection of endangered species – namely, the various Wildlife Trade Regulations that transpose CITES into EU Law, as well as the Habitats Directive and the Birds Directive (BfN 2010: 15– 17). Finally, Germany is an active participant in international meetings where its delegations regularly advocate for expanding the protection of endangered species (Interviews (Ints) 13, 17; Klaas et al 2016: 23). For all these reasons, we would expect Germany to be an exemplary protector of endangered wildlife at home. Alas, although Germany has faithfully incorporated international treaties and European law into federal legislation, law enforcement is wanting and sentencing is routinely too lenient to have a deterring effect. Germany's wildlife protection legislation is thereby rendered into a paper tiger.

This chapter attempts to explain why Germany's actions at home so glaringly contradict its demonstrated ambitions abroad. Understanding this gap is crucial, as Ragnhild Sollund points out:

The ways in which legislation is enforced is also an indicator of the human-animal relationship and can regulate humans’ relationship to non-human animals. Analysis of enforcement (or lack of enforcement) can show the influence of general norms on legislation and vice versa and whether duties towards wildlife are respected. (Sollund 2016: 82)

The most obvious reason for lack of enforcement is the insufficient allocation of resources needed for the effective enforcement of wildlife protection laws. Germany's federal system further compounds insufficient resource allocation by adding inefficiency to the mix. The enforcement of nature protection laws is left to the 16 federal states (Glaser 2011: 7f).