2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

https://dinalpbear.eu/a-fieldguide-for-investigating-damages-caused-by-carnivores/ 1.2 How to use this handbook This handbook shall guide all those involved in suspected wildlife crime cases (legal authorities, veterinarians, biologists, stakeholders, NGOs,...) in choosing and interpreting the procedures and methods available via basic information on them, as well as providing “howto” recommendations as “best-practise” models. Since this handbook is available online in distinct chapters, all users are invited to compile their own handbook based on their specific needs. Some of the lists and files in the annex are intended to be completed and amended by the users to fulfil their specific commitments to wildlife crime cases and to support them at any level of the forensic and legal approach. We greatly appreciate any feedback, comments, suggestions and other input by the users of this handbook. Based on these amendments, we will update the handbook on a regular basis, so checking the website occasionally may be worthwhile! Any comment regarding the handbook should be sent to the following e-mail address: christoph.beiglboeck@vetmeduni.ac.at 11 2 BASICS IN WILDLIFE FORENSICS 2.1 What is Wildlife Forensics? The term wildlife “traditionally refers to undomesticated animal species, but has come to include all plants, fungi, and other organisms that grow or live wild in an area without being introduced by humans (Usher, 1986)”. Forensics means the application of science to criminal investigations whilst collecting, preserving, analysing and reporting on evidence. Although the use of science to support human forensic investigations dates back to as long as the 13th century, the application to veterinary forensics and especially wildlife forensic cases is a rather recent achievement. 2.2 Persons/Organisations involved in suspected wildlife crime cases Many persons and /or organisations may be involved in suspected wildlife crime cases and their primary interests and intentions or tasks may vary. 2.2.1 Law enforcement officers/investigators In most cases, these will be initiating the investigations at the crime site and filing the cases to be presented to the prosecutors. While having experience in criminal investigations in general, they may lack the biological aspects and background knowledge pertaining wildlife. 2.2.2 Prosecutors Prosecutors will lead and decide on the steps necessary in pre-trial criminal investigations. By gathering and reviewing all the relevant information, they will decide whether to press a charge or drop the case. Further, they will decide whether the legal authorities will accept the costs for any investigations in a specific case. It may therefore be important to assure the prosecutor of the necessity of ancillary investigations to successfully resolve a crime case. As with law enforcement officers, they may lack the biological aspects associated with suspected wildlife crimes. 12 2.2.3 Scientists at laboratories (veterinarians, biologists, toxicologists etc.) These are the experts in their respective fields during a wildlife crime investigation. Their primary task is to report on their findings during the investigation process. It is of paramount importance that they stay absolutely objective and unbiased when reporting and witnessing on a case. 2.2.4 Veterinary authorities The national veterinary authorities are government services that are responsible for the surveillance and control of (especially zoonotic) animal diseases, food production safety and animal welfare. However, as far as illegal killing of wildlife is concerned, the authorities may show reluctance to tackle the topic, referring this special issue to hunting and/or nature conservation authorities. Nevertheless, a good working relationship with the respective veterinary officers should be sought and the passing of relevant information in a suspected case of illegal killing should be discussed in advance. 2.2.5 Stakeholders Various stakeholders may be involved in suspected wildlife crimes, e.g. hunting agencies/state wildlife management agencies, National park authorities and various NGOs with interest in wildlife conservation. The type of involvement may range from constituting the official authority responsible for wildlife affairs to scientific attention regarding the respective species, often coupled with substantial financial investments in reintroduction- and/or monitoring programs of the affected species. 2.2.6 Media/public Suspected wildlife crimes often generate high media attention and are perceived highly emotional among the public, and any statements and reports may spread very rapidly in the social media nowadays. This may put an extra pressure on the investigating authorities, and stakeholders may feel obliged to take advantage of the situation for their own interests, e.g. gathering additional donations for their work. However, pre-trial publicity, e.g. public statements like press releases and social media posts from people or organisations involved that only draw on conjectures ahead of the final results of the pending investigation process may seriously hamper the investigation process. As a worst case, this may render some of the investigational work unqualified for admission in court. 13 Consequently, it is important to have a strict “chain of reporting” of who passes what information when to whom. Ideally, a media representative of the primary investigating- or prosecuting-authority trained in handling press relations should coordinate public affairs and other personnel and organisations involved should defer media inquiries to him/her. As a best practise, clarification on handling of all media affairs should be achieved by mutual agreement of all persons and organisations concerned in a very early stage of the investigation process in a suspected wildlife crime case. 2.3 Detecting Dead Wildlife Detecting dead wildlife can be very tricky and depends on many circumstances, e.g. size of animal, area, environmental conditions, time of year and many others. Therefore, it is very often only by chance that dead animals are detected, an exception being GPS collared animals (e.g. in wildlife studies or reintroduction programs) providing position data at fixed intervals.