The SA Minister of Environmental Affairs, Marthinus van Schalkwyk, appointed a Panel of Experts to draft norms and standards for the hunting industry in June 2005. Individuals were appointed on the basis of their expertise in a range of areas that affect and are affected by the hunting industry including wildlife management, community involvement, transformation, biodiversity conservation and sustainable use. Among them were Dr Holly Dublin, Chair of IUCN Species Survival Commission, and Saliem Fakir then of IUCN South Africa (both will be presenters in the SUSG/ZSL Symposium on Recreational Hunting in London in October 2006 – see Announcements section). The SA hunting industry is said to be worth US$ 500 million and to embrace 10,000 game ranches and wildlife units.

The Panel reported in October 2005. It was guided by three broad sets of principles: the sustainable use of wildlife, the humane treatment of animals and ethical hunting, in particular, the principle of fair chase. Following is a summary of the Panel’s main recommendations taken from the Report’s ‘Executive Summary’ (N.B. this is not the complete text and minor editorial changes have been made and some bold type added to achieve clarity.)

“Intensive versus extensive production systems

There are considerable differences between extensive and intensive wildlife production systems. In the former, the hunting industry has created the basis for many livestock production units to convert to extensive wildlife production, and hunting is both a revenue-earner and a tool to support conservation management objectives. There is a tendency for the economic objectives to override the conservation management objectives. The Panel therefore recommends that each extensive wildlife production unit be managed according to scientifically-based management plans that are set out in terms of conservation management objectives and off-take of species for hunting purposes be in accordance with these.

In terms of intensive wildlife production units, the Panel found that hunting does not support any conservation objectives and is, in general, not compatible with the principle of fair chase. For the purposes of protecting the integrity of the hunting profession, and the reputation of the country in this regard, hunting should not be permitted within intensive production systems. Furthermore, since intensive production wildlife production is a form of agricultural production, the standards and legislation that apply to livestock production should apply to it.

Captive-bred animals

The principle of fair chase is not compatible with the hunting of captive-bred animals unless they have become self-sustaining on extensive wildlife production units. In general, the practice of hunting captive bred animals should be disallowed.

Import, translocation and genetic manipulation of wildlife

The Panel recommends that the Minister place a ban on the import of all alien species for hunting purposes and recommends the prohibition of the translocation of species outside their range zones.

Gamebird Hunting

The Panel established that gamebird hunting is a unique form of hunting that has the potential to develop into a lucrative trophy hunting sport but that it needs to be regulated differently from mammalian hunting due to the substantial differences between the two forms of hunting.

Put-and-take and canned hunting

The Panel recommends that both these practices should be prohibited as they compromise the principle of fair chase and the humane treatment of animals. Furthermore, “put-and-take” also poses threats to biodiversity conservation.

Other forms of hunting

The Panel recommends that national guidelines be established, which can then be adopted by the provinces so that there is a uniform approach to bow hunting. In terms of “green” hunting, the repeated darting of an animal for commercial purposes is considered an inhumane practice. In terms of hunting with dogs, the use of dogs for tracking and retrieval of a hunted (dead or wounded) animal is considered an acceptable practice. Hunting by means of packs of dogs is considered an inhumane practice and should be prohibited.

Hunting in protected areas

The Panel is of the view that commercial hunting practices should be prohibited on publicly owned land in national and provincial parks (this includes special nature reserves, national parks and nature reserves as per the Protected Areas Act definitions). The Panel acknowledges that there is a need to manage population numbers in these reserves and recommends that where culling is required it should be undertaken by the public authority in charge and not made available on concession.

Participation, Community and Regulatory issues

There are many opportunities for promoting or advancing transformation of the hunting industry. These include options for greater community involvement in hunting, greater ownership of extensive wildlife production units by previously disadvantaged individuals and employment opportunities in all high skilled occupations associated with both the hunting industry and its ancillary industries.

There are already extensive regulations in place at a provincial level governing the hunting industry. The Panel recommends that uniformity is established through a set of national norms and standards.

The Panel recognises that there is a need for the Minister to formally recognise national representative organisations that stand for the interests of the professional hunting, recreational hunting and associated industries.

The Panel has made recommendations regarding quota setting, permitting, independent monitoring and compliance and enforcement. In general, the basis for the proposed regulatory system is a process of regular scientific assessments and monitoring of species and ecosystems.

There is currently no national system for monitoring the conservation status of species. There is an urgent need for the collection of national data that is related to the wildlife industry.

Capacity

The Panel recommends a capacity and training needs assessment to gauge the capacity within public institutions, and to assess whether government officials, at all spheres of government, are able to fulfil their responsibilities with regard to policy and regulatory oversight.

The Panel recommends that the newly established wildlife forum should be continued, and made more representative of the different role-players that interface with the hunting industry. The proper regulation of the hunting industry as set out above will require additional financial resources. The hunting industry should in part contribute to such resources, in the interests of an effective regulatory system.”

Commenting, Dr Rolf Baldus, who has worked extensively as an advisor for African wildlife administrations (and will also be a presenter at the SUSG/ZSL symposium), said “There is always the danger of ‘throwing out the baby with the bathwater’ and having seen the report……I fear that this could be the case.” Since receiving the report the Minister has announced that draft national regulations and norms will be published early in 2006.

Clearly these Southern African developments will be of wide interest, not least for the SUSG/ZSL symposium mentioned above.

January 2006. Robin Sharp CB is Regional Chair for Europe, Sustainable Use Specialist Group: robinsharpcb.freeserve.co.uk

Sustainable, January 2006, contents page