Collecting Wildlife 217 claims to being a recreational activity than trophy hunting which is more closely associated with the hunting experience and dominion over animals and wild places Yet, while in principle legal trophy hunting is regulated and monitored by law enforcement and conservation authorities, the large sums of money involved dictate that illegal activity is closely associated with trophy hunting which in reality is poorly regulated, subject to weak enforcement, lacklustre prosecutorial efforts and provides opportunities for corruption (Lindsey et al 2006) Thus regulatory and legislative frameworks that govern the trophy hunting industry require improvement (Lindsey et al 2006) and also need dedicated resources to be in place, not only aimed at ensuring that the ‘legal’ trophy hunting industry is effectively monitored and its regulations complied with, but that the illegal aspects of trophy hunting are properly enforced Seemingly ‘minor’ breaches of sport and trophy hunting regulations indicated by illegal activities carried out as part of legal trophy hunting show a disregard for animals that leads to them being considered only in respect of their value as trophies and subjects of the hunt The more serious illegal poaching and trophy hunting that takes place, also illustrates how illegal commercial activity firmly views animals as disposable Thus it becomes a form of animal abuse that ignores the conservation imperatives of legal sport and trophy hunting which is intended to represent sustainable use of wildlife and ignores the species conservation imperative of preserving rare and threatened animals for future generations Collecting as Animal Abuse: Some Preliminary Conclusions Debates in theology, criminology and the study of animal law concerning the rights of animals and the moral wrong of inflicting harm on other sentient beings have explored the relationship between man and non-human animals, the need for legal rights for animals and issues of animal abuse and the need for increased standards of animal welfare (see Ascione 2008; Scruton 2006; Sunstein and Nussbaum 2006 and Wise 2000) Green scholars have exposed ecological and species injustice as well as identifying areas where mainstream criminal justice will benefit from a green perspective while ‘general’ criminal justice techniques can be applied to green crimes Species justice concerns mean consideration of both direct and indirect harms to nonhuman animals and the rejection of speciesist notions of justice that may contextualise some forms of animal abuse as victimless crime Within green criminology,