SOUTH AFRICA’S RHINOS

a candid look at the 2012 rhino crisis…

Margot Stewart July 2012

A. BACKGROUND

When decisions are made about SA’s rhinos we should never forget two VERY important stakeholders…

The citizens of SOUTH AFRICA….

….and the Rhinos themselves….

Until a few hundred years ago the African continent was filled with wildlife that was deemed to be res nullius (without owner)

As Southern Africa became populated and cultivated by man the wildlife of Africa was confined to an ever diminishing area.

1895 Jakob Louis van Wyk introduces a motion for the creation of game reserves to counter the over-exploitation of wildlife resources through excessive hunting by white settlers

1898 President Paul Kruger proclaims the park to be a “Government Wildlife Park”; later being known as the ‘Sabi Game Reserve’.

1902 James Stevenson Hamilton is appointed first game warden.

1923 The first tourists arrive.

1926 The Sabi Game Reserve and the neighbouring Shingwedzi Game Reserve along with the adjacent farms were combined to form the greater ‘Kruger National Park’.

Pioneers of the Kruger Park

The State took on the custodial care of the

wildlife on behalf of it’s citizens.

THE KRUGER NATIONAL PARK TODAY.

Today it forms part of the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park with the Limpopo National Park in Mozambique and among others the Gonarezhou National Park in Zimbabwe.

To the West, the Park is surrounded by tribal land, private game concessions, farms and mining.

It is the flagship of parks in SA and receives about one million visitors per year, generating by far the biggest tourist income for the country.

Many smaller parks, public and private, are found throughout

the country.

When seen on a map - there is

not much wilderness left.In South Africa only 6% of land is conserved.

Botswana 10%Namibia 13%

This historical

and contempora

ry map of lion

distribution gives a good indication of shrinkage in wildness

area available to wildlife in

Africa.

SUMMARY TO BACKGROUND

1. The State is the Legal custodian of wildlife in National & Provincial parks on behalf of it’s Citizens.

2. There is very little wilderness area left in SA – approx. only 6% of total land mass is conserved.

3. The wildlife reserves (especially the Kruger Park) and the iconic BIG 5 animals are critical to tourism in our country.

B. PROBLEMS IN THE WILDLIFE INDUSTRY

THE BIRTH OF THE WILDLIFE INDUSTRY IN SA

* 1965 - 4 fenced game ranches (first wildlife auction was held in 1965 near Tshipise) * TODAY – OVER 9,000 private game ranches OR 16.8% of total land

*South African wildlife ranching is unique in the world with its exempted wildlife ranches, where wildlife belongs to the owner of the land. *South Africa is the only country in the world where the big five can be legally hunted.*Today the number of animals owned by the private sector is about 3 to 4 times more than the number in government protected areas.*Wildlife ranching is the fastest growing agricultural activity in South Africa in the past three decades.*There is fierce competition between the wildlife ranching sector and government institutions. (Du Toit)

SOME QUESTIONSQUESTION 1:

If a game farm requires a Certificate of Adequate Enclosure before hunting can take place how can hunting be allowed on private farms that abut the Kruger

Park where there is no fencing?

QUESTION 2:

Has the Dept of Environment lost control over the private Wildlife and hunting sector and why have TOPS and CITES

regulations not been enforced?

SUMMARY TO WILDLIFE & HUNTING INDUSTRIES

1. The wildlife industry is among the fastest growing sectors

2. This industry is highly non-compliant. 3. The Dept. of the Environment appears to have

difficulties in regulating the wildlife farming & hunting industries.

4. The Kruger National Park must be secured against theft of game especially that which is used for hunting.

5. There is evidence of gross abuse of wildlife that is unacceptable and contrary to International norms.

C. THE RHINOCEROS POACHING CRISIS

THE RHINOS OF SOUTH AFRICA ARE

THE NEW TARGET OF POACHING

SYNDICATES WHO HAVE DECIMATED THE

POPULATIONS FURTHER NORTH IN

AFRICA.

* Traditional demand for horn from Asia* Criminal syndicates perceive SA as a soft target with corrupt officials * Lack of rhino in other range states due to extinction.

WHAT MAINLY DRIVES RHINO POACHING?

EXTERNAL FACTORS

INTERNAL FACTORS*Availability – last population of importance

– SA has 90% of world’s rhino

*Rural poverty in SA and neighbouring countries

*Inadequate protection for rhinos

*Law enforcement, judicial system caught unprepared

*Until recently, poaching was a low risk crime with lenient sentencing

*Local criminal syndicates trade horn illegally

*Investment cartels in league with private rhino owners/ranchers perpetuate the

market in horn.

*National, provincial and private horn stockpiles

*Non- compliance to CITES regulations especially with regard to permitting (pseudo

hunting).

SUMMARY OF RHINO POACHING CRISIS

• 1. A rhino poaching crisis exists due to an escalation of poaching since 2008 and a rogue element in the Wildlife industry have been implicated as have corrupt game rangers and ex-policemen.

• 2. The authorities were caught unprepared but signs of recovery are evident.

• 3. There are more INTERNAL factors causing poaching than EXTERNAL and the situation is highly complicated.

• 4. The boundaries of the National & Provincial parks must be secured.

D. RHINO HORN TRADE & C.I.T.E.S

RHINO HORN TRADE 1. Rhino horn trade has been conducted for hundreds of

years from Africa with evidence of Chinese and Arabian traders.

2. In 1975 a UN initiative was launched – CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora).

3. South Africa was one of the first countries to join and all Rhino species were incorporated onto Appendix I due to their high level of endangerment.

4. Rhino & rhino horn trade was declared illegal.

5. With the arrival of the Rhino Poaching Crisis it has become apparent exactly what level of abuse has been perpetrated on this species.

6. In 2008 stricter regulations were promulgated under the National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act. with regard to wildlife. (TOPS)

7. In 2009 the law was further tightened with the announcement of a total moratorium on rhino horn trade within South Africa.

8. It appears that this had little effect on wildlife owners and currently (July 2012) only approximately 25% are compliant with regard to statutory requirements to record and register rhinos as well as horn stockpiles. (du Toit)

STATUS OF RHINO AT CITES• 1975 All Rhino on Appendix I• 1981 First proposal to CITES for trade – rejected• 1989 Second proposal to trade – rejected• 1992 Late submission• 1994 Proposal to trade live animals - accepted with

restrictions as per annotation 503: Ceratotherium simum simum *(population of South Africa, for the trade in live animals to appropriate and acceptable destinations and hunting trophies only)

• 1997 SA proposed TRADE IN HORN at CoP10 in 1997 proposed an annotation ° 503 to allow the trade in parts and derivatives but with a zero export quota – rejected

• 2004 Swazi White rhino on Appendix II.• 2004 Black Rhino hunting quota set at 5.

SUMMARY OF RHINO HORN TRADE

• 1. Rhino horn has been traded from SA for decades if not hundreds of years.

• 2. SA has been non-compliant to CITES Regulations because of weaknesses in the permitting system.

• 3. Despite all & every evidence to the contrary, SA continues to be lobbied by pro-trade protagonists who capitalize on the fact that certain State owned parks own large horn stock piles and will benefit FINANCIALLY from trade.

• 4. Rhino horn has been scientifically examined and has found to be lacking in any medical benefit of any value so the proposal to trade it raises issues of ethics and morality.

THE CONCEPT OF RHINO HORN TRADE FAILS ON EVERY LEVEL:

In their natural habitat, Rhinos are dangerous to man so their horn cannot be “harvested” without considerable interference to the animal, including capture, anaesthetising and restraint and all of these carry risks to both man and animal. THERE IS NO WAY OF HARVESTING RHINO HORN WITHOUT BEING CRUEL AND ABUSIVE.

FAIL XA rhino needs its horn for many reasons such as self-protection, social behaviour and daily function. Once dehorned a rhinos horn grows back in a deformed shape. IT IS ABNORMAL AND UNNECESSARY FOR A RHINO TO BE WITHOUT ITS HORN.

FAIL X

Rhino horn has no medicinal benefit to man and this has been proved in many studies. Any perceived benefit (as placebo) does not warrant the rigours and cruelty of capture and defacement. It does not cure cancer or cerebral-vascular disease (one of the Terms of Reference required by CITES to support a trade proposal) and any rumours about this have been spread by criminals with intent to grow the market. FOR A COUNTRY TO SELL A BOGUS PRODUCT AS MEDICINE WITH FULL KNOWLEDGE OF ITS INEFFECTIVENESS IS TANTAMOUNT TO FRAUD.

FAIL XThere is no reliable and updated data to satisfy the CITES Terms of Reference because a Census of the Rhino population in South Africa is overdue and TOPS Regulations have not been enforced. AGAIN THE CITES TERMS OF REFERENCE HAVE NOT BEEN MET.

FAIL X

In their proposal at CoP9 in 1994, South Africa set out the reasons why the status of the Southern White Rhino should be down listed to Appendix II. They declared a healthy and growing population under effective management and living in the perfect habitat. They claimed that the rhinos could withstand the exploitation that trade would bring, and I quote: “trade will not result in an increased level of undesirable or illegal exploitation.” Since the sale of rhino to private owners, the authorities and scientists have lost all control over the recording of population figures, except to say that the figures don’t add up and that horn is moving illegally. IN FACT EVERY REASON THEY PROVIDED CITES WITH HAS PROVEN TO BE FALSE SO IN EFFECT THE DECISION TO ALLOW THE WHITE RHINO TO BE DOWNLISTED HAS PROVEN TO BE FAULTY.

FAIL X

Taking all of the afore-mentioned information into consideration, especially the high level of non-compliance in the Wildlife industry and an inability to satisfy the Terms of Reference that are required by CITES, any new proposal will again be rejected.

MY PROPOSAL• I urge the Minister of EA to order for all of the

current stocks of horn to be rendered unfit for consumption and burnt to destruction.

• I also recommend that the Minister propose to CITES at CoP16 that the White Rhino (Ceratotherium simum simum) once again be included under Appendix I.

• This will afford the white Rhino the fullest level of protection available and assist with law enforcement as well.

THANK YOU.