Introduction This paper will explore my reflection on the enforcement perspective following the wildlife debate. First, I will review the relevant literature on the enforcement perspective. Following this, I will reflect on my experiences and learning following the wildlife debate and how it influenced my perspective on wildlife crimes. Specifically, I realize that the wildlife advocate perspective must have more influence over wildlife crime policies and funding as there are too many pre-existing issues within all other perspectives to meaningfully address wildlife crime and conservation issues. Lastly, I will reflect on the issues of money and power in creating solutions to deter wildlife crime.
Literature Review
As outlined in the debate,
…show more content…
I believe that all other perspectives, except for the wildlife advocates, are too corrupt and will prioritize their own personal gain over the needs of wildlife conservation. As explained by the wildlife advocates during the debate, the other perspectives have too many pre-existing issues and alternative agendas that will impede the conservation of wildlife, such as the corruption of enforcement agencies and weak penalties for getting caught (Bamwine, 2019). For instance, the prosecution and investigation perspective tends to lack the awareness and means to determine the scale and scope of wildlife crimes (De Vries, 2023). Likewise, weak wildlife legislation and policies, coupled with the issues of corruption and awareness brought upon by the other perspectives showcase the inherent issues in sentencing wildlife crime: wildlife criminals are more likely to get away with their crimes or face weak punishments if they get caught (Bamwine, 2019; Wyatt et al., 2020; De Vries, 2023). The interconnected issues between prosecution, investigation, sentencing, and enforcement illustrate weaknesses in both criminalization and regulation of wildlife crimes (Wyatt, 2013). None of these perspectives show any capability of combatting wildlife issues on their own, as resolving issues within one perspective does not resolve the issues within the other perspectives. For example, as mentioned in the debate, investigation, prosecution, and sentencing serve cannot deter wildlife crime if enforcement cannot catch and criminalize poachers. Likewise, better enforcement alone cannot deter wildlife crimes, because the issues embedded within the other perspectives will compromise the legal processes in criminalizing and regulating wildlife