This conference asks: whose voices and experiences are absent from criminology? This is one of two panels organized to answer this question by highlighting the absence of nonhuman animals’ voices, despite them experiencing substantial harm and suffering at the hands of humans. This panel delves into diverse facets of crimes against nonhuman animals weaving a narrative that highlights the pressing need to include the voices and experiences of nonhumans in criminological scholarship.

Dr Alison Hutchinson's paper focuses on the impact of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) on marine life. By examining the intricacies of CITES regulations, Hutchinson unveils the complex web of challenges faced by marine species, emphasizing the urgent need for adaptive conservation measures to protect our oceans and the species that inhabit them. Monica Pons-Hernandez's contribution delves into the slippery world of eel trafficking exploring the techniques of neutralization that enable individuals to justify their involvement in such activities.

Also engaging in neutralization techniques, Alice Weedy's paper takes a critical look at the intersection of policing, wildlife crime, and police culture. Drawing on a policing perspective, Weedy’s research questions how police culture impacts officer perceptions and the overall effectiveness in the policing of wildlife crime across England and Wales. Finally, Dr John Walliss's paper focuses on the often overlooked yet growing problem of dog 'theft.' His research unravels patterns of dog abduction, discusses the characteristics of the victims of dog abduction (breed, age and sex) and addresses data problems surrounding this crime. In doing so, the paper analyses this crime through the lens of Routine Activity Theory.

Collectively, all four papers contribute to a nuanced understanding of crimes against nonhuman animals. It helps to include all species’ voices in criminological research, even if they have been systematically absent.

This paper investigates the pattern of dog abduction incidents across the UK between 2020 and 2022. With the increasing societal importance of companion animals and the rising demand for certain breeds, particularly during the period of Covid lockdowns, instances of dog abduction have become a significant concern for both pet owners and animal welfare charities.
Drawing on data gained through FOI requests to police forces and from DogLost, the UK’s largest free national database of lost and stolen dogs, the paper explores patterns of abduction over time, region and location. It also discusses the characteristics of the victims of dog abduction, the dogs themselves; specifically, their breed, age and sex. In doing so, wel seek to frame the crime through the lens of Routine Activity Theory.
The paper also discusses the limitations with the two data sources.

Over the years, many scholars have drawn on the neutralization theory to gain a deeper understanding of how neutralization techniques enable all kinds of deviant behaviour. This is also true for scholars researching wildlife crimes. Using the philosophical underpinning of green criminology and employing the case study of the European eel, I examine the use of the neutralization techniques eel fishers and traders use to overcome their guilt and engage in illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) eel fishing and their trafficking as well as in persisting in fishing and trading a critically endangered species. As found, the primary neutralization techniques identified among glass eel fishers and traders are the 'denial of injury' and the 'denial of the victim.' They portray their actions as inconsequential amid broader threats, using the denial of injury. Simultaneously, they reduce European eels to mere commodities or natural resources, disregarding their intrinsic value through the denial of the victim. These denial mechanisms collectively enable the extensive exploitation of European eels, posing a significant obstacle to effective conservation measures. Notably, the denial of injury and the denial of the victim converge when the narrative focuses on the harm to individual eels rather than the entire species. In these instances, actors construct a narrative challenging the eel's capacity to experience pain, intertwining the denial of injury with a dismissal of the victim's sentience. This complex web of rationalizations further shields them against moral scrutiny in the realm of wildlife trafficking and related crimes.

International organisations agree that more empirical evidence is needed to know how best to combat wildlife crime. In England and Wales, the police hold legislative powers to respond to and investigate wildlife crimes however it is widely cited that wildlife crime is not viewed to be ‘real policing’ (Fyfe and Reeves, 2011). Despite the UN Office on Drugs and Crime reporting that the UK has one of the best responses to wildlife crime globally, the specifics of the UK’s approach from a criminological perspective has never been researched in depth. Drawing on a policing perspective, I question how police culture impacts officer perceptions and the overall effectiveness in the policing of wildlife crime across England and Wales. I further attempt a unique application of Sykes and Matza’s 1957 theory of Techniques of Neutralisation to understand any barriers to effective enforcement from police officers surrounding this crime type.

Through observations with rural crime teams from five police forces across England and Wales and a qualitative online survey to police officers, the policing of wildlife crime across England and Wales is examined. The findings from this research will be discussed, examining how four key themes impact the policing of wildlife crime: visibility and community reassurance, training, funding and culture.