ALL eyes of the environmental world are on South Africa this week, where over 3 500 government representatives and animal protectionist groups from all over the world are meeting with the aim of preventing endangered species from being hunted and traded into extinction.
WISDOM MDZUNGAIRI VIEWPOINT
The location of the 17th Conference of the Parties (CoP) to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (Cites) spotlights the particular plight of Africa’s big five — lion, leopard, elephant, buffalo and rhino.
Disputes about their numbers complicate the mission to move some or all to the Endangered Species List. Africa is home to a rich diversity of wild animals and plants, including some of the world’s most admired species.
However, the loss of habitat and endemic poaching driven by illicit trafficking, with the latter being the most immediate threat for some species, has decimated both charismatic species, like the African elephant, lion and rhino, and to a lesser extent pangolins, in recent years.
It’s a double for Africa, which also hosts the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Morocco in November. Cites CoP 17 kick-started on Saturday in Johannesburg, yet feuds have already begun pitting animal protectionist groups supported by Kenya and others against Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa seeking permission to trade in ivory stockpiles.
This follows Environment, Water and Climate minister Oppah Muchinguri’s call for the 182-member states to allow Zimbabwe to sell its burgeoning ivory stockpiles.
Unfortunately, in Muchinguri’s bid to gain approval for a once-off ivory sale, she tripped herself after giving a thumb suck figure claiming Zimbabwe has ivory stockpiles worth $9,6 billion.
- Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
- Councils defy govt fire tender directive
Keep Reading
No ways, Sister Oppah that was too far-fetched. Nonetheless, it is important that for purposes of sustainable utilisation of resources, Zimbabwe and other African countries that have abundant wildlife should be allowed a sale, if it can be proved beyond any reasonable doubt that it legitimately was from Problem Animal Control and natural mortality and not poaching.
This is to discourage poaching in the country’s safari hunting areas and national parks. Clearly, this should only be done if the proceeds from the sale will benefit communities living alongside the wildlife, and not some “fat cats” in some air-conditioned cubicle somewhere, No! If this is the case then yes, Sister Oppah must be supported.
No doubt, Zimbabwe must device effective ways of dealing with endemic poaching and illegal trade in wildlife products given some Chinese friends have been implicated.
Top of the agenda are the fates of elephants, pangolins and sharks and hundreds of less charismatic (but no less threatened) species hanging in the balance.
The gathering may be the most important conservation event. Ideally, it is not political although hot debates especially on the fate of flagship species such as the African jumbo, lion and rhino always demand diplomatic shuttling back and forth.
No wonder the first debate between Zimbabwe, South Africa, Namibia against animal protectionist groups on the first day of the two-week conference produced fireworks as Environment, Water and Climate secretary Prince Mupazviriho Chiwewete justified Zimbabwe’s proposal seeking approval for a once-off ivory sale to a destination the 182-member Cites will choose.
The Saturday debate ended by pitting brother nations against each other over a proposal to upgrade the status of the African lion from appendix two, to appendix one. Kenya has in the past proposed the lion hunting ban.
Appendix I demands a total ban in trade for listed species, while Appendix II allows partial trading. The event was hosted by the International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation. The opening salvo was fired by South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Zambia, and Wilfried Pabst of Save Valley Conservancy representing private owners and supported by the Professional Hunting Association of South Africa against Chad, Côte d’Ivoire, Gabon, Guinea, Mali, Mauritania, the Niger, Nigeria and Togo.
What makes CoP 17 special is that it is almost two decades since an African country has hosted Cites. Zimbabwe hosted Cites CoP 10 in June 1997.
Hence, Cites secretary-general John E Scanlon, said all eyes will be focused on South Africa as the 182 parties take critical decisions affecting the future of some of the world’s most precious wildlife.
As such Cites will be introducing “Eye on Africa” edition of Endangered Species stamps to commemorate and support Cites CoP17 with 12 of Africa’s flagship species and plants. Since July, the United Nations General Assembly has adopted two resolutions on tackling illicit trafficking in wildlife. Scanlon said it was, therefore, highly appropriate that the UN Postal Administration will issue these special stamps to raise awareness of wildlife conservation and to mark Cites CoP17.
UNPA chief Thanawat Amnajanan added the UNPA has been working with Cites for its Endangered Species stamp series for over 20 years.
It is the heated debates over the listing of the African jumbo, lion and rhino that will attract most participants as this will pit Sadc states against the rest of the world.
Sadc countries in particular Zimbabwe argue elephants are abundant and hence there is need for permission to sale excess to countries willing to conserve the species. Zimbabwe also argues that the lions are abundant such that they should continue to be hunted. In many of these debates Zimbabwe has failed due to a simple argument over its politics.
Animal groups argue that Zimbabwe can’t be allowed to sell because they will divert the proceeds towards selfish means at the expense of the supposed beneficiaries — communities living alongside the animals through a Campfire programme.
The greens also argue that the IUCN’s 2015 Red List assessment details serious declines in lion populations across much of their African range.
According to the assessment based on 47 well-monitored lion populations, lion numbers are inferred to have declined by 43% from 1993-2014 (approximately three lion generations) with a decreasing population trend, and the species is thought to occupy only around 8% of its historic range.
The proponents argue lions were “possibly extinct in Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Rwanda, and Togo” and were “functionally extinct in Algeria, Burundi, Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Gabon, Gambia, Lesotho, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Sierra Leone, Tunisia, and Western Sahara” basing their claim on the IUCN report. But wait, said the Sadc states, don’t presume to tell us what to do in “our” countries.
Namibian Environment and Tourism minister Pohamba Shifeta was quoted at the weekend saying there was a price to pay when living with wild animals as there was no such thing as a friendly coexistence.
Shifeta said Namibia had legalised community conservancies that allowed people to look after animals and harvest sustainably from them.
“You can understand how people living with wild animals must feel when someone from somewhere who has not even seen wild animals now prescribes to local people when they already knew what to do,” Shifeta said.
Reports say Pabst argued an attempted ban by the European Union on the importing of trophies was equivalent to banning hunting.
“We’re being told by people outside, by people my colour of skin, how to run things in Africa. In southern Africa alone if we ban sustainable use we would destroy 55 million hectares of land under conservation and lose in the region of 20 million animals, hundreds of thousands of jobs, each man or woman supporting a family of 10, and put millions of local people into destitution,” Pabst said.
“Listen to me very carefully, I mean every word I’m saying. These NGOs out there who propose to be animal protection or husbandry organisations, in my book are criminal.
Did you hear this? Criminal! Because they are soliciting money under false pretences. They go out there and say Cecil the Lion, we’re going to stop this poor animal and the others from being shot; they do not realise that if what they promise their donors would be converted into real life, we would lose the 55 million hectares and all the jobs I’ve talked about because sustainable use is a key element of funding conservation.”
But the mass cyanide slaughter of elephants in Hwange by poachers to supply the ivory market will be ammunition to anti-trade greens.
For long Cites laws have not closed all the loopholes to the trade, and the mass killings of both animals make frequent headlines. That’s for you . . . Oppah, it’s your time to shine!
Feedback: [email protected]/ [email protected]; or on Twitter: @wisdomdzungairi
