航空公司决定禁运猎物 8月6日口译文章：猎狮新闻促使航空公司决定禁运猎物

　　 近期，美国牙医猎杀明星狮子塞西尔(Cecil)一事在社交媒体和世界各地激发了人们对狩猎的愤怒。此事也暴露了航空公司把遭到猎杀的动物作为货物运送的事实，或将有助于转变现有的航空政策。

　　 周一，达美航空(Delta Air Lines)成为最新一家针对运送猎物的运输规定作出修改的航空公司。总部位于布鲁克林的消费者请愿机构SumOfUs.org的活动总监保罗费瑞斯(Paul Ferris)表示，除达美外，法国航空(Air France)、荷兰皇家航空(KLM)、西班牙国家航空(Iberia)、国际航空集团(IAG Cargo)、新加坡航空(Singapore Airlines)和澳洲航空(Qantas)在上周均表示将禁止运送猎物。SumOfUs.org致力于推动货运政策的修改。

　　 如果无视公众对塞西尔被杀的反应和对濒危物种面临的困境与日剧增的担忧，航空公司和其他大型旅行公司无疑是愚蠢的， 费瑞斯说。

　　 这样的禁令最初是由南非航空(South African Airways)在今年4月发起的，随后阿联酋航空(Emirates)、汉莎航空(Lufthansa)和英国航空(British Airways)也加入其中。这些公司承诺不会再运输大型猎物，包括大象、犀牛、狮子和老虎。

　　 之前，其中一个拒不让步的公司就是达美。这家公司拥有美国和多个非洲国家之间的直飞航线。不过，面对来自旅客和活动人士的压力，还有在Change.org网站上的请愿行动，达美也让步了。

　　 达美航空将正式在全球范围内禁止以货物形式运输任何狮子、豹、大象、犀牛和水牛，立即生效，达美航空发言人摩根达兰特(Morgan Durrant)说。在此项禁令之前，达美严格的货物收寄政策完全遵守了各国政府对保护物种的全部规定。达美也将与相关政府机构和其他组织一起审核其他猎物的收寄政策，以支持合法运输。

　　 当然，对于变革的顽强抵抗还是存在的。南非航空起初发起对猎物运输的禁令，是因为运往吉隆坡的一单货物标记为机械部件，但在澳大利亚经停时被发现是象牙。不过，从7月开始就有报道称，南非航空已经取消禁令，又开始重新运输被杀的猎物。

　　 在来自非洲之外的猎人中，美国人占了很大一部分。根据倡导良心狩猎的非营利组织保护力量(Conservation Force)提供的数据，每年有1.5万名美国游客前往非洲进行狩猎游。目前，有11个非洲国家颁发猎狮许可，其中包括津巴布韦、南非、纳米比亚和坦桑尼亚。

　　 按照职业猎人协会(Professional Hunters Association)公布的数据，在这些国家中，南非的狩猎行业规模最大，估计产值在6.75亿美元左右。同样重要的是，狩猎还与豪华旅游业结合了起来。比方说，猎狮的收费可达5.5万美元。

　　 非洲的不少大型动物猎场配有豪华住宿服务。猎杀塞西尔的明尼苏达牙医瓦尔特帕尔默(Walter Palmer)采用的装备供应商布须曼游猎公司(Bushman Safaris)即为一例。

　　 连锁豪华酒店并不会谴责为了获得纪念品而进行的狩猎活动，也不会禁止宾客猎杀大型动物，尽管此类活动对当地经济贡献寥寥。根据智库自由经济学人(Economists at Large)发布的一份报告，狩猎活动的收入中，不到3%流向了当地导游、企业主或是居住在临近动物领地的社区里的民众。

　　 许多动物保护人士感到忧心忡忡，他们认为规范狩猎活动的法规措辞模糊，而且往往会导致偷猎。

　　 各方对非洲狮种群规模的估算不一，不过许多说法认为一个世纪前约为10万头。目前的数据则为3.5万头左右。狮子的种群规模曾经较为稳定，但在过去三年里显著缩小，因此美国鱼类和野生动物管理局(United States Fish and Wildlife Service)提议将之列为受威胁物种。

　　 尽管进入名录并不会消灭狩猎行为，但会使其接受监管，方式是推出将猎取的动物运入美国的进口许可制度。反对把狮子列入名录的人士担心，管理局的这项提议会阻碍通过狩猎来筹集保护基金。有关这项建议的决定将于2016年1月做出。

　　 不过，尽管联邦监管方面步伐缓慢，动物保护人士表示，在推动变革上，达美等航空公司和其他类别的旅游企业所处的位置要有利得多。

　　 【查看译文】

　　 The recent killing of a popular lion named Cecil by an American dentist in Zimbabwe sparked considerable outrage on social media and elsewhere against safari hunting. The event has also brought to light the role that airlines play in transporting trophy kills as cargo, and may have contributed to changing airline policy.

　　 On Monday, Delta Air Lines became the latest carrier to change its rules about transporting hunting trophies. Its announcement came as a group of airlines including Air France, KLM, Iberia, IAG Cargo, Singapore Airlines and Qantas signaled last week they would ban the transport of trophy-hunting kills, according to Paul Ferris, the campaign director at SumOfUs.org, a consumer-based petition agency in Brooklyn, which has pressed for changing cargo policies.

　　 Airlines and other large travel corporations would be foolish to ignore the public reaction to the killing of Cecil the lion, and growing concern about the plight of endangered species, Mr. Ferris said.

　　 Such a ban was initiated by South African Airways in April, and Emirates, Lufthansa and British Airways later joined. These airlines pledged not to carry big game trophies, including elephants, rhinos, lions and tigers as cargo.

　　 One major holdout had been Delta, which has direct service between the United States and countries in Africa. But bowing to pressure from some travelers and activists, and an online petition on Change.org, Delta changed its position too.

　　 Effective immediately, Delta will officially ban shipment of all lion, leopard, elephant, rhinoceros and buffalo trophies worldwide as freight, according to a statement by Morgan Durrant, a Delta spokesman. Prior to this ban, Deltas strict acceptance policy called for absolute compliance with all government regulations regarding protected species. Delta will also review acceptance policies of other hunting trophies with appropriate government agencies and other organizations supporting legal shipments.

　　 Still resistance to change can run deep. South African Airways initially banned trophy cargo after a shipment of elephant tusks marked as machine parts bound for Kuala Lumpur was discovered during a stop in Australia. But since July there have been reports that SAA lifted the ban and has resumed shipping trophy kills.

　　 Americans make up the bulk of non-African hunters. About 15,000 American tourists visit Africa on hunting safaris every year, according to Conservation Force, a nonprofit group that advocates responsible hunting. Currently, 11 African countries issue lion-hunting permits, including Zimbabwe, South Africa, Namibia and Tanzania.

　　 Of those, South Africas hunting industry is the biggest, estimated to be worth around $675 million, according to the Professional Hunters Association. And just as important, it is woven into the luxury sector of the travel industry, with fees that can reach $55,000 to hunt lions, for example.

　　 Many of the ranches in Africa where big game is hunted have their own luxury accommodations. Such is the case with Bushman Safaris, the outfitters used by Walter Palmer, the Minnesota dentist.

　　 Luxury hotel chains do not condemn trophy hunting or ban hotel guests from big-game hunting, even though it does little for the local economy. Less than 3 percent of the revenue from trophy hunting goes to local guides, business owners or people living in communities near the animals, according to a report by the think tank Economists at Large.

　　 Many conservationists are concerned that the laws regulating trophy hunting can be ambiguous and often lead to poaching.

　　 African lion population numbers vary, but many estimate there were about 100,000 a century ago. Today, there are around 35,000. Lion populations had been stable, but because they dropped noticeably in the last three years, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service has proposed listing the lion as a threatened species.

　　 While this would not eliminate trophy hunting, it would regulate it through a permit system for importing sport-hunted trophies into the United States. Opponents to the listing are concerned that the agencys proposal would hamper conservation funds raised by the fees collected for trophy hunting. A decision is expected by January 2016.

　　 But while the pace of federal regulation moves slowly, conservationists said airlines like Delta and other travel corporations are in a much better position to press for change.