Brian Hioe10/18/2026EnglishEnvironmentalOctober 2026PoliticsSocial Movements

Animal Rights Advocates Call for Referendum on Snare Traps | New Bloom Magazine

by Brian Hioe

語言:
English
Photo Credit: 臺灣動物共生聯盟 TOEC/Facebook

ANIMAL RIGHTS ADVOCATES are currently campaigning for a referendum to be held on the use of wild boar snares.

In particular, animal rights advocates have long criticized wild boar snares as overly cruel. Such traps use spring-loaded mechanisms to tighten around animals’ limbs when triggered.

Nevertheless, such traps have also been criticized for ensnaring other species, as they do not distinguish. Endangered species such as Formosan black bears and leopard cats had also been killed by such traps, as have cats and dogs, sometimes resulting in their losing limbs if they survive.

Though claims had been made that Indigenous hunters used such traps as part of traditional hunting rights, animal rights groups have generally cited that this was rarely the case, in that Indigenous hunters generally do not use such traps. By contrast, such animal rights advocates state that Indigenous hunters more commonly use traps made from wood, bamboo and vines, and other natural materials. In the past, the Central Election Commission turned down calls for a referendum on the use of wild boar snares on the basis that the referendum was unclear as to whether it pertained to traps used by Indigenous hunters.

Otherwise, such traps are sometimes used by farmers as a means of preventing damage to their crops. Animal rights advocates have called on the government to provide electric fencing, protective netting, or other means for farmers to protect their livestock and crops.

The proposals called for by animal rights advocates are relevant to the use, display, and sale of wild boar snares, as well as their import and export. It is thought that China is a major source of some of the wild boar snares used in Taiwan.

It is unclear as to whether the Central Election Commission will approve the referendum currently called for by animal rights advocates. At the same time, without a major political party endorsing it as an issue, such a referendum is unlikely to gain traction. It is to be seen if either the DPP or KMT, or perhaps even both parties, throw their weight behind the proposal.

One notes that there have been cases of political bipartisanship between both major parties on the issue of animal rights in past years, as seen with politicians of both parties supporting enshrining animal rights in the constitution. Even so, such politicians ultimately did not prove serious about such promises outside of election campaigning, as a result of which neither the KMT nor DPP acted on claims in past election cycles that animal rights would see constitutional protection.