Dear Trade (DEER Case)

 
     CASE NUMBER:   276
     CASE MNEMONIC: Deer
     CASE NAME:     International Deer Industry


A.   IDENTIFICATION

1.   The Issue

The commercialization of wildlife has many facets, namely the
hunting, harvesting, ranching and herding of wild ungulates such as
bison, wapiti, deer, reindeer and moose.  Traditionally these
hoofed mammals (ungulates) are considered part of the wild of
nature and therefore there is a sentiment that they are inherently
different from traditional farm animals such as cows and goats. 
The commercialization of such wildlife for meat, venison, milk,
trophy, hide and velvet antlers have fueled an ongoing debate of
the morality of wildlife husbandry.  Most countries have commercial
deer industries, and, the largest producers of deer and reindeer
products and by-products for trade on the international market are
North-eastern European countries and New Zealand.  Demand for such
products are world wide with an heavy concentration in Asia.

2.   Description

The concept of wildlife ranching is not unique to the modern era. 
The practice of game husbandry was adopted by the Romans in the 1st
century BC apparently in response to the declining abundance of
game."  Records of that time credit a Roman citizen, Fulvius
Lippimus, as the  inventor" of wild game  preserves."  The reason
for keeping game then is the same as today:  amenity, sport, meat,
and special products."  Common animals enclosed were wild boars,
wild goats, mouflon, and exotic antelope.  Eventually, the Roman
law recognized the practice of herding and keeping wildlife.  The
rules regulating ownership of wildlife were:

For wild beasts, birds and fishes as soon as they are captured,
become, by natural law, the property of the captor, but only as
long as they continue in his power...Their natural liberty is
deemed to be recovered when they have escaped from sight, or,
though they continue in sight, when they are difficult to
recapture.  In the case of those wild animals, however, which are
in the habit of going away and returning, as pigeons, and bees, and
deer, which habitually visit the forest and return,...only the
cessation of the intention of returning is the termination of
ownership in them acquired by the next occupant.

The practice of wildlife husbandry as recognized under law
continued after the fall of Rome.  In about 800 AD, with the
consolidation of most of Europe under Charlemagne, the
administration of wildlife became to be called the Forest Law. 
This law regulated the use of all woodland resources and while
small game was available to hunt by local people, large game was
reserved for the monarch.  In medieval Europe, the practice of
royalty and nobility maintaining private herds of wildlife, as well
as employing their own private hunters, was a common practice.  The
penalty for poaching a deer owned by royalty, as opposed to a deer
which roamed in a common forest, was death.  However, in 1225, the
tyrannical reign of royalty over wild beasts was stopped by the
signing of the Forest Charter, a supplement to the Magna Charter. 
This new forest law prohibited capital and corporal punishment of
citizens who broke the game laws.

Over the next 600 years, the rules governing the penning, herding
and hunting of wild game relaxed to the point that in the mid 19th
century, the legal access to wild game was not dictated by social
status or political patronage; it became to be considered a right
rather than a privilege to hunt or herd wild game. 

When the commercialized hunting became popular in the mid-1800s,
populations of wild ungulates, buffalo, deer, elk, and moose, were
severely depleted by over-hunting.  The idea originally put forth
by Charlemagne that wildlife is held in trust for the public by the
state was again reiterated in the establishment of the Lacey Act of
1990  which restricted interstate movement of game products in
response to the emergency created by uncontrolled market hunting." 

Critics of market hunting advocate wildlife husbandry.  Although
today, New Zealand leads the world in the modern incarnation of
commercial deer farming, the idea originated in other places and in
other times.  As described above, the practice is many centuries
older in Europe although the attention was on hunting and amenity
rather than venison production. 

The use of deer for medicinal purposes dates to the Qing Dynatsy
(221-207 BC) but specific references to antler does not appear
until about 200 AD were it was used to treat infertility.  However,
in Europe in the 1st Century AD, the Roman Plinius Secundus wrote
that antlers contained a sort of healing drug and described its use
for the treatment of epilepsy.  In the 1600s in Central Europe, a
description of the use of powdered antler to treat baldness,
pimples, lice, toothaches and snakebites is found.  Venison also
was considered to protect people from febrile infections.  These
notions seem to have been lost as the royal stag became the
property of the hunting nobility.

As the modern U.S. expanded westward, with the depletion of
populations of wild deer for their venison and velvet antlers and
American bison for their hides, the Department of Agriculture
pursued a policy of endorsing game farming to protect the
populations of these game animals and the United States government
issued an extension bulletin for prospective deer farmers in 1908.
This marks the first effort in the modern era of government support
in favor of wildlife farming; moreover, this is not simply an
endorsement for commercial exploitation purposes, but rather this
is support in the name of conservation. 

As legislation to curb commercial hunting curtailed that industry,
domestication of game grew more popular, however, the trend for
deer and bison ranching never reached the level of interest in the
U.S. as reindeer and other forms of deer ranching have achieved in
Europe, China, and New Zealand.  New Zealand is by far the largest
producer of deer and deer by products.  It is also the largest
exporter of such products.  International markets for all varieties
of game meats represents only about 10 percent of the world total
meat production.  Nevertheless, New Zealand venison can be ordered
in restaurants world wide with the majority being consumed in
central Europe, and there is a growing demand in Southeast Asia. 

New Zealand is also the major supplier of velvet antler with
exports approaching 450 tons.  Next is the People's Republic of
China which has an increasing capacity of over 400 tons but
quantities are not consistent from year to year.  The next largest
producers are much farther down the list of quantity suppliers:
Russia is about 60 tons, the U.S. is at about 20 tons, Canada is at
about 17 tons.  In addition to this growing international supply,
Korea is the major importer of velvet antler for its traditional
medicinal properties.

Because the traditional markets for velvet antler are mature,
attention is turning to western markets either as a source of
standard biologics for western pharmaceutical companies or as
nutritional supplements for the growing health-food industry. 
However, the success of this initiative is uncertain.  Animal
products entering the European Union are coming under increasing
scrutiny from the standpoint of animal welfare.  Furthermore,
velveting is not permitted on European deer farms.  Objections in
North America seem to stem more from concerns of the Food and Drug
Administration than from animal rights activists.  There has been
a recent move to control all herbal tonics and nutritional
supplements which cannot provide scientific substantiation for
their claims.  Although there is some indicative scientific work on
the health properties of velvet antler products, it is not of
sufficient depth of scope required by the FDA.  Imports of New
Zealand antler power already have been suspended although small
amounts of Canadian product still flows across the border.

Have the policies of animal husbandry aided in restoring the
depleted populations of ungulates due to market demands for their
meat, antlers and hides?  According to Robert Hudson of the
University of Alberta,  there is no question that wildlife
populations have improved since the turn of the century in the
aftermath of unbridled subsistence and market hunting.  White-
tailed deer have extended their ranges and are much more abundant
now than in historic times.  Wapiti and bison have repatriated to
some of their former ranges."  

3.   Related Cases

OSTRICH Case
HOOF Case
BOTSWANA Case
VEAL Case

     Key Words

     DEER
     MEAT
     SPLL

4.   Draft Author:  David Baldwin (May, 1996)

B.   Legal Cluster

5.   Discourse and Status: DISagreement and INPROGress

Within Canada, Alberta permits farming of only indigenous deer
species, while British Colombia permits only farming of only exotic
species, and still yet Manitoba permits neither.  A further example
of disagreement with deer by-products is the British ban on velvet
antlers due to concerns for animal welfare, while New Zealand and
China thrive in such business legally.  Issues of morality of
slaughtering wildlife for their meat and antlers serves to divide
the public on the issue of wildlife husbandry although morality
does not play a role within the industry.

6.   Forum and Scope: New Zealand and UNILATeral

This issue is generally covered by the unilateral laws governing
each country of production or trade--in this case, New Zealand, as
the largest producer and largest exporter of deer and deer by-
products such as venison and velvet antler.

7.   Decision Breadth:   1 

In specific terms, there are only about 15 major players in the
production and large-scale demand for deer and deer by-products on
the international market.  These states are mainly located in
Northern Europe, East Asia and North America.  However, 3 countries
alone, New Zealand, PR China and Russia make up about 75% of the
world market of producers of venison and velvet antler. 
Furthermore, Korea alone can account for about 85% of international
demand for velvet antler for its tradition al remedial properties;
while Germany, the leading importer if venison, can claim about
half the world total of venison consumption.

8.   Legal Standing:     Law

Although some regional organizations, such as the EU, have outlined
regulations governing the trade in deer and deer products, most
regulatory practices are left to the individual states to determine
their own policy.  For example, Britain, by way of a ban, does not
allow the import of velvet antler into the UK due to public outcry
for animal rights.

C.   GEOGRAPHIC Filters

9.   Geography

     a.   Geographic Domain: Asia
     b.   Geographic Conflict Site: Australia
     c.   Geographic Impact: New Zealand

10.  Sub-National Factors: NO

11.  Type of Habitat: Temperate forests.

D.   Trade Filters

12.  Type of Measure: IMSTD

It is not uncommon for each country to deal with the trade of deer
products and by-products by their own standards.  Canadian
standards vary according to individual province (see number 5),
while some states have unified national standards like the UK (see
number 8).  No mention can be found on specific regulations
governing the export of goods.

13.  Direct vs. Indirect Impacts: DIRect

By New Zealand exporting such large quantities abroad, this has a
direct impact on the populations of deer in other countries
(especially lesser developed countries) who, without imports, would
rely on market hunting of wild herds to fulfill some of the demand
for velvet.

14.  Relation of Measure to Impact:

     a. Directly Related:     Yes  Deer Population
     b. Indirectly Related: No
     c. Not Related: No
     d. Process Related: Yes  The ethical manner of antler
harvesting

15.  Trade Product Identification: Venison and velvet antler

16.  Economic Data

Industry Output: World game-meat production of all sources is about
35,000 tons per annum with New Zealand as the world leader
exporting 13,000 tons in 1993 which earned the deer industry in New
Zealand approximately NZ$126 million.

The main consumers of venison can be found in Central Europe.  The
leading importer is Germany which leads with imports of about
16,000 tons or about half its annual consumption. 

In the velvet antler trade, New Zealand is the largest supplier and
exports are assumed to reach about 450 tons per year, with the PR
China not far behind with about 400 tons.  Korea and Hong Kong are
the largest importers of velvet antler but much of this is assumed
to be reexported to the west in either powder or some other
processed form.  Korean imports, which appear to be about 85% of
the international market, have an estimated value at more than
US$1.5 billion.

17.  Degree of Competitive Impact: Low

Specific information regarding the degree of impact that the
international deer trade has had on the environment is not readily
available, but it is generally held that wildlife ranching of
various deer species for meat and other by-products has saved
approximately 20% of the world population of wild deer from
commercial hunters trading in deer products.  In contrast, it is
also generally held that commercial ranching to provide farmed
products as an alternative to wild resources has had little effect
on conserving that population of deer that is lost annually to
sport hunting.

18.  Industry Sector: FOOD

Meat from the deer is of course food stuffs, and the use of the
hides is traded as leather goods; but the use of the velvet antler
can be either as medical or health goods.

19.  Exporter and Importer: World wide trade

As mentioned in the economic data, for meat, Germany is the leading
importer and New Zealand is the leading exporter.  However, for
velvet antler, New Zealand is the leading exporter and Korea is the
leading importer.  Korea's imports are estimated to be about US$
1.5 billion (much of this is thought to be re-exported either in
whole form or in a processed form).

V.   Environmental Clusters

20.  Environmental Problem Type: Species Loss, Land

Although none of the species which are currently being farmed are
listed as endangered, as was evident with the bison in American
history, if wildlife husbandry does not serve world demand for
these products, commercial hunting can quickly deplete wild
populations to extinction.

21.  Species Information

     Name: Deer
     Type: Animal/Vertebra/Mammal/herbivore
     Diversity: NA
     IUCN Status: NA

22.  Impact and Effect: LOW and PRODuct

The harvesting of commercially ranched deer has a small impact on
the environment other than the positive impact of conserving the
population of deer in the wild.

23.  Urgency and Lifetime: LOW and Unknown

The urgency of stopping or preventing further environmental damage
is negligible.  Furthermore, the lifetime of the deer species until
extinction cannot be calculated at present.

24.  Substitutes: LIKE, and SYNTHetic

Substitutes such as beef are available as substitutes for wildlife
meat like venison.  However, a substitute good would only impact
the trade of the deer industry and not significantly affect the
impact of the trade on the environment.  As for velvet antler,
other synthetic velvet substitutes are available, but are not in
high demand.  Here again, even if there were an available
substitute for natural velvet antler, since most velvet antler is
produced through deer farming, and does not come from natural
resources in the wild, the impact of a velvet substitute would be
negligible to the wild environment.

VI.  Other Factors

25.  Culture: YES

26.  Human Rights: NO

27.  Trans-boundary Issue: NO

Herds of domesticated deer are generally located within one state
boundary and do not involve roaming across trans-border lines. 

28.  Relevant Literature

Anonymous. 1996.  About Deer Farming in New Zealand. Internet.  
www.upstel.net/jnorwood/commercial/farming.html

Fennessy, P.F., Pearse, A. J. and Drew, K.R. 1993. Deer Farming:
Development, progress and perspectives. Proc. VII World Conference
on Animal Production 1:205-223.

Hudson, Robert J. 1996. International Deer Industry: Production
Systems. Internet.  
cervid.forsci.ualberta.ca/LDN/world/wrldDeer_Toc.html

Hudson, Robert J. 1996. Wildlife Ranching: Dancing with the Devil.
Internet: cervid.forsci.ualberta.ca/LDN/GreatDebate.html

Hudson, R.J., Drew K.R. and Baskin, L.M. 1989. Wildlife Production
Systems: Economic Utilization of Wild Ungulates. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.

Luxmoore, R.A. 1989. International Trade. In Wildlife Production
Systems. Cambridge  University Press, Cambridge.

Staalund, H. and Niemenen, M. 1993. World Reindeer Herding: Origin,
History, Distribution, Economy.  Proc. VII World Conference on
Animal Production 1:161-203.