Enter our Cockatoo, Parrot & Animal Jewellery on-line shop

From a different perspective.

One of the world's leading bird experts was jailed for two-and a half years for illegally bringing endangered parrots into the UK. Harry Sissen was labelled as a liar and a hypocrite by a judge as he passed sentence at Newcastle Crown Court on 14 April 2000. Harry Sissen was charged with and found guilty of, illegally importing three extremely rare Lears macaws and six Blue Headed (Coulons) macaws into the UK. The court also heard how Harry Sissen had two other previous convictions for smuggling rare birds into the country. In 1977 he was fined £200 at Durham Magistrates Court for smuggling 20 birds and in 1981 he admitted smuggling a parrot into the UK in his car.

This is what most people know about Harry Sissen, those that know anything at all.

So what is the story as seen by 'the other side'?

Harry had bred rare birds on his family farm in Yorkshire for 35 years, up to the point of seizure.  

He was regarded as one of the most skillful bird breeders in Europe and he was successful in breeding many critically endangered species. He was raided by HM Customs & Excise in April 1998 when more than 120 birds were 'confiscated' for DNA testing. A further 19 birds were taken the following month. 

Raided means Customs & Excise just simply turned up one morning, with armed police and took Harry's birds. 

By the wording 'confiscated' (HM Customs & Excise description), one might quite rightly think, that these birds were caught up by knowing, experienced bird experts. Quietly, efficiently, with little stress? Wouldn't you?

You would be wrong. The wording should have actually been 'seized'. 

The DNA testing would either prove or disprove the alleged offence of illegally importing birds into the UK. If the DNA testing could relate young birds to adults, the assumption would surely be that the young were bred by Mr Sissen?

It would be a highly unlikely scenario that Mr Sissen could smuggle whole families of birds into the UK, if he had at all?

In December 1999 he was given a list of 16 of his rare birds that had died since the raid. They included:
A Philippine Red Vented cockatoo, a Blue Throated macaw, a Citron-Crested cockatoo, a Scarlet macaw, a Buffons macaw, a Thick-Billed parrot, two Red-Fronted macaws, a Hyacinthine macaw, a Blue-Headed (Coulons) macaw, a Yellow Tail Black cockatoo, a Major Mitchells cockatoo, a Greater Sulphur Crested cockatoo, a female Goliath Palm cockatoo and a Triton cockatoo.

The remaining 123 confiscated birds were/are scattered around zoos and bird parks in Britain.

Philippine Red Vented Cockatoo - CITES Appendix 1, critically endangered in the wild

The birds have always been Harry's main concerns, whether or not they were/are getting proper care and attention.

Unfortunately, apparently they have not.

The then 114 surviving birds confiscated by Customs & Excise officers, which did not form part of the prosecution, were the subject of a hearing to decide whether or not they should be returned to the farm.

The appeal went in Harry's favour and the birds were to be returned, but then HM Customs & Excise appealed against the judges decision to return the birds, and the decision by the judge this time was not to return them. 
Customs & Excise revealed further that after less than 18 months since the raid that at least 29 of the 139 birds seized had died in their care, the list now included: 

A Blue Throated macaw, five Hyacinthine macaws, four Red Fronted macaws, three Buffons macaws, two Scarlet macaws; three Philippine Red Vented cockatoos, a Major Mitchells Cockatoo, a female Goliath Palm Cockatoo, a Triton cockatoo, a Citron Crested cockatoo, a Yellow Tail Black cockatoo, a Greater Sulphur Crested cockatoo, a Blue Headed (Coulons) macaw plus two Thick-billed Parrots.

To date around 50 birds have died since the raid.
These birds include some of the rarest species in the world.

Buffons Macaw - Cites Appendix 1, critically endangered in the wild.

Customs officer Sarah Wallder, who was present at the seizure stated that: 'The point of restrictions is to prevent or restrict the trade in endangered species and thus promote their survival.'
Mr Sissens challenged this comment by stating that the birds had been taken in the middle of the breeding season, when birds were sitting on eggs and had eggs inside them ready to lay.

Hardly promoting survival.

Lears macaws 

The Brazilian government have applied for repatriation of Mr Sissens Lears macaws, which are among the world's rarest birds, with only 140 left and about 20 breeding pairs.

They are Annex 1 - which are critically endangered. However at this point in time they are still in the UK, having been deposited at Harewood House in the North East of England.

The Lears macaws have apparently since the raid contracted a virus, and because of this virus the Brazilian Government have now reneged on their decision to have them back. Rightly so, as the Lears are so rare any virus contracted by the remaining population would effectively wipe out the species.

Set aside the fact that they maybe should not have been in the UK, at the end of the day, what a waste.

Lears macaws now sitting at Harewood House, unable to breed.

Questions not apparently answered

Miss Wallder said that three birds had been bred since the raid. Three what? 

Only three young from so many pairs in five years? Why?  

The avian veterinary surgeon assisting Customs & Excise on the second raid was Andrew Greenwood. 

No avian veterinary surgeon was present during the first raid.  Why?

Why were the birds taken in the middle of the breeding season?

Why did Andrew Greenwood avian vet of great reknown, not stop or delay the raid knowing this?

Why did Customs & Excise seize birds that were not and are not Appendix 1 birds, such as Hawkhead parrots, Citron Crested cockatoos, Triton cockatoos?

Why were Annex 1 birds such as the Blue Throated conure LEFT at the Sissen farm?

Would this have anything to do with the value of the birds, not the licence for them?

Why can't the birds not Annex 1 be returned to Harry Sissen?

What is going to happen to the birds bred from the seized adults?

Who decided then, and decides now where the seized birds went and where they are to stay and who with?

Why have so many birds died? 

What rights do Customs & Excise actually have?

Most reading this will have views about what Harry Sissen was charged with, some in favour of the conviction - many against.  

However this page is not to go over what has been decided under British Law concerning the conviction, but to go over what actually happened to the birds. 

As I understand things, the RSPCA (Royal Society for the prevention of cruelty to animals) were not invited to attend the seizure, but the RSPB (Royal Society for the protection of birds) were in attendance.

Maybe legal, but was it morally correct?

Will the RSPCA challenge HM Customs & Excise over the seizure and the cruelty involved?

It appears that birds were taken to prove a point, birds unnecessarily cruelly taken - not Annex 1 species.  

Awaiting answers from Customs & Excise.  

Updates on the fate of the remainder of Harry Sissens birds printed here as soon as any further news is available.

NOTE: Annex 1 - CITES Appendix 1 listed - birds endangered or critically endangered in the wild CITES - Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species

Below are some answers we received in August 2003 from Customs & Excise re seized or confiscated birds:

2) Customs as a matter of policy liaise with the relevant government agencies on the disposal of the animals and birds they seize. No group of keepers are necessarily excluded from receiving seized specimens if they are considered to be the most appropriate to ensure the survival/breeding of the
species concerned - this has in the past included members of the Parrot Society.

3) It is wrong for you to assume that Customs can simply enter private premises as or when they feel like it. It is normal procedure when investigating potential Customs offences to obtain a search warrant, and
this means being able to convince a Magistrate that there are grounds for agreeing to its issue.