Baviaanskloof Mega-Reserve: Leopard No 30 is killed!
6 April 2010
©The Guardian Newspaper
How many dead leopards do you see in this photo?
(For those of you who don't know, that is our president dancing at his wedding to his 5th wife in January 2010.)
In this newsletter:
The State of our Nation
2010 has not begun well for the leopard in South Africa, and especially not in its Eastern Cape Province. Neither has it done so for any other top predator species, worldwide, nor for that matter any of our biodiversity. Cultural pursuits, with its accompanying regalia as above, do not help such matters.
- 2000 years ago more than a million lion roamed Africa, in the 1940 this number was around 450 000, and today it is estimated that 20 000 remain as free ranging top predators! (2010, National Geographic)
- 3 200 tigers are estimated to remain in the wilds today, half of what remained a decade ago (2010, BBC). This is the so-called year of the tiger, and it may in fact be one of the last for the species. There are reports of a continued decline in these animals' numbers in the wild, both as a result of habitat destruction and direct persecution.
©AFP
Apt artwork for the year of the tiger, by artist Cai Quo-qiang!?
- We can speak equally of cheetah, hyenas, snow leopards, clouded leopards, orang-utans, gorillas, chimpanzees, the wolf, and many other species.
These statistical trends can be repeated for most species occupying the apex of the food pyramid and many on other trophic levels, yet the cavalier and arrogant behaviour towards our natural world continues. While researchers and project managers, by the nature of their work, are only ever regionally active, when the global plight of our ecosystems is considered, the situation looks dire. While habitat loss and competition for resources are the measurable variables involved, the intangible and in our opinion the drivers to this are human attitudes, a lack of ethics, greed and cultural pursuits. This happens while many government and conservation bodies rush headlong on the "politically correct" and "never on a Sunday" kind of approach to issues, with their glossy publications, roundtable "stakeholder" meetings and big budgets, and little action to conserve these species. Indeed it would appear that we are on a path to oblivion, but certainly will be if ordinary decent folk don't mobilise and speak out against this madness. There are also many committed conservationists worthy of support and encouragement, make it your business to do so.
Regionally, our recent research indicates that only 30-35 individual territorially dominant leopards remain in the 300 000 ha Baviaanskloof mega-reserve, Eastern Cape, South Africa, yet some individuals in the region continue to relentlessly targeting and killing them, and in the cases assisted by state officials. Few are willing to speak out against this cultural arrogance for fear of victimization.
Global black market trade in wildlife products is estimated at US $10 billion annually (2010, World Bank). Further too, South Africa boasted last week about a massive US$300 million trade deal with China exporting, amongst other products, depleted or threatened species in fish and abalone exports to China.
This newsletter is overdue, but follows more than 6 months of our private investigations in our region, and failed attempts at getting government action on various matters. This newsletter thus tells the story of the state of our nation, from the interests of conservation. It reflects symptoms of a terminal disease in our society.
Ewald Gerber (a farmer in the Langkloof near Joubertina, Tel 042 273 1739) is reported to have illegally killed this female leopard on 10 October 2009. He was reportedly accompanied on this illegal hunt by Quinton and Marlene Horak (Tel 076 734 3946, email: qhorak@gamail.com), Herman Ferreira (a policeman from Paterson police station). Also accompanying them was Ewald Schreiber, Mackie Schreiber (both of Joubertina), a farm labourer of Ewald Gerber and another off-duty policemen (also from Paterson Police station whose name is not known to us) as well as a child of one of the policemen. The leopard was reportedly hunted with dogs and shot once the dogs chased the cat into a tree. This was an illegal hunt.
This is the 30th known kill of a leopard in the region since November 2002. (Probably only 50% of these kills are ever reported.) A further 2 leopards have been rumoured to have been killed since this event in October 2009 in the same area, all reportedly at the instigation of Ewald Gerber, who has a pack of hunting dogs for this purpose. He has boasted killing 40 leopards in this area over the years - he calls it the "national sport of the Kougas". This barbarism happened in spite of Mr Gerber, at the cost of the Landmark Foundation (R16 000), having all his sheep collared with protective Dead Stop collars and compensation offered for confirmed leopard depredation losses. For reasons below and already mentioned, there seems little point to expect the "authorities" to deal with these illegal activities.
These cynical events are amplified by a set of actions by government staff or production bodies that have affected our regional work in the Eastern, Western and Northern Capes over the last 6 months. Considering the above disregard for our biodiversity and the void of moral leadership in our country, it should come as no surprise to us all.
1. LEGISLATION: Damage Causing Animal Norms and Standards
The latest draft of the Norms and Standards pertaining to the management of Damage Causing Animals (read predators) by the National Department of Environmental Affairs has mostly ignored and disregarded more than 12 months of work of their own specialist task team (of which we are part) that had advocated the outlawing of indiscriminate and unethical means of predator controls. This latest draft thus permits the continued use of gin traps, poisons and hunting dog packs. In particular what is most cynical in these efforts is that the spin doctors in the "environmental affairs" department has proposed a name change for gin traps, somehow now called "soft catch traps". These traps are no different to conventional traps, that we propose should actually be called slaughter irons, after the Afrikaans name SLAGYSTER. This is a disgrace, and it would appear that it now calls on the general public to protest this blatant disregard for evidence-based management and the recommendations made by the specialist task team.
Photos: Anonymous by request
These gin traps are being "re-branded" as soft catch traps by current proposed government "norms and standards". These recent pictures from the Northern Cape indicate their indiscriminate, lethal and barbaric nature. All that can be said is that it is perhaps the norm and the standard of livestock production in this country.
We call on all parties interested in dealing and affecting this matter to send the protest messages to the person behind the environmentally damaging drafting of legislation/regulations, Ms Magdel Boshoff (Tel: 012 310 3534, Email: MBoshoff@deat.gov.za) and copy her superiors: Mr Wadzi Mandivenyi (Email: WMandivenyi@deat.gov.za), Mr Fundisile Mketeni (Deputy Director General), (Tel: (+27 12) 310 3314/3315; Fax: (+27 12) 3206620; Email: FMketeni@deat.gov.za) and the Director General, Ms Nosipho Ngcaba (Email: NNgcaba@deat.gov.za)
We suggest that you object to the following in terms of the current draft of the Management of Damage Causing Animals Norms and Standards:
- Recommendations from the Environmental Department's own specialist task team have been disregarded in the drafting of the Management of Damage Causing Animal (DCA) Norms and Standards. The recommendations were that gin traps, hunting dogs and poisons be prohibited as methods of managing damage causing animals.
- The current definition of damage causing animals proposed in this legislation make all predators and in fact all wildlife "damage causing animals" (DCA), and thus open to legal persecution. Only repeated and regular damage caused by animals, in the presence of preventive measures being applied to the farmer's property, should qualify for an animal being classified as a DCA.
- That gin traps are cynically re-branded as soft traps in the draft legislation.
- That hunting dog packs are not prohibited in the draft legislation, and should be.
- That helicopter hunting of predators, as is common now in areas such as the Free State, Northern Cape and Eastern Cape, should be prohibited in the draft legislation.
- That captive holding of wild caught predators should not be permitted in the draft legislation.
Our research in the Karoo areas in the last 6 months have demonstrated the wide-spread decimation of our biodiversity that is ongoing in the process of livestock production, and Ms Boshoff et al, as our civil servants appear intent on legalising this persecution. We have conducted in-depth veterinarian analysed assessment of mortality amongst lambs on a karoo farm. On this farm predators have traditionally been blamed for 20% of lamb mortalities (which is representative of many other farms). In the past lambing season, we placed a veterinarian on this farm to do post mortem analysis of all deaths (100 in total). From the 60 carcasses that were located, merely 1 post-mortem indicated a probable death by predation, and 2 more were inconclusive.
Thus on evidence-based analysis it would appear that only about 5 percent of deaths normally attributed primarily to predation, are in fact the result of predators, at least on this individual farm. The other 95% would appear in fact to be the result of husbandry pratcices, poor mothering, exposure or other disease processes. In reality, past practices, and it appears that the management Ms Boshoff and her colleagues at the National Environmental Department seem intent on legalising, manages the wrong problem and continues to damage our biodiversity!
Photo: Greg McEwan-Kocovaos
Recent incident of a steenbokkie caught in a (government euphemism) soft catch trap in Prince Albert.
We ask of our government to institute legislation that is based on evidence and science, and in accordance with prevailing and acceptable ethical behaviour. The proposed legislation does neither.
We are grateful to the support of organisations like CapeNature, NSPCA and other conservation NGOs who have supported this move towards ethical and ecologically acceptable conservation legislation and actions.
2. Hunting of a leopard in the Eastern Cape by Provincial Conservation Department Staff
In December last year two Eastern Cape conservation officials, Mr Gerrie Ferreira (Tel: 042 292 0339; 0836546273, email: gerrie.ferreira@deaet.ecape.gov.za) and Mr Hennie Swanevelder (Tel: 042 292 0339; 083 406 3159, email: hennie.swanevelder@deaet.ecape.gov.za) participated in an illegal leopard hunt in the Baviaanskloof region with Ewald Gerber (who is reported to have illegally killed a leopard on 10 October 2009), with an illegal pack of hunting dogs. This occurred by their own admission and that of their seniors. Attempts to get further clarity on the departmental position in these illegal activities have been ignored despite numerous attempts to get clarity.
This hunt was illegal in terms of no permit being in place for this hunt of a TOPS animal (Threatened or Protected Species Regulations of February 2007), in terms of the current Eastern Cape hunting notice, and in respect of hunting with dogs in terms of the Animal Protection Act of 1962. Furthermore the hunt allegedly trespassed over landholding for which the hunt did not obtain permits or permission. Rumours abound that the hunt went into the protected area of the Baviaanskloof also.
In terms of TOPS regulations the following legislative requirements had been transgressed:
- The provincial department had no jurisdiction to issue such a permit as they participated in the hunt (TOPS provision 3.3), nor in fact was a permit issued at all.
- No logical consideration had been given to the threat on the survival of the species had been undertaken (TOPS provisions 10.g.iii, iv, vi, viii). Latest research indicates a precarious situation for the species in the area with only between 30 - 35 territorial leopards remaining in the area, and the species being regionally genetically isolated.
- No consideration or effort was attempted to capture and relocate the animal (TOPS provision 14.2 a), and these services were available via the Landmark Foundation - free of charge.
- No actual permit had been issued and no retrospective permits may be issued (TOPS provision 18.1 and 18.2). This department had offered and issued retrospective permits for farmers who have killed leopards in the past. (Refer: August 2007 when Mr Preez Du Plessis killed a leopard and was issued a retrospective permit, also from Mr Gerrie Ferreira).
In terms of these transgressed provisions of TOPS it would appear that state officials participated in criminally liable actions. Despite these issues being raised by us in correspondence to the department we were only informed of the following justification for the state actions: "Doing nothing was not a(n) option, that would be abdicating our responsibility. After much deliberation the option of a controlled engagement was the most feasible option." (Mr Jeff Govender; email: Dayalan.Govender@deaet.ecape.gov.za). The "controlled engagement" we assume being a hunt of the leopard… Live capture (for GPS collaring and/or relocations), compensation mechanisms, non-lethal control methods were available but were not even attempted.
Photo: Anna Haw
Other spring-loaded device called a killer trap.
3. Production bodies like National Wool Growers, Red Meat Producers Organisation and SA Mohair Growers Associations continue to advocate barbaric and indiscriminate damage causing animal management strategies.
The production bodies (NWGA, RPO and SAMGA) have continued their call for the continued legal use of indiscriminate, unethical and lethal predator control methods of so-called damage causing animals in the form of gin traps (now being referred to by them as "soft catch traps"), poisons, hunting dogs, and several other currently legal control methods. This is despite the fact that evidence is abundant that these methods have not worked, are inhumane and actually have caused their problem. This results in thousands of animals dying torturous deaths, the majority (up to 95%) being innocent by-catch.
In the absence of logic, and willing participation in solving the problem we promote the market forcing changes on agricultural production and call on consumers to use their purchasing power by avoiding the purchase of produce that is tainted with unethical production practices.
It is sad that there is a void in leadership and example by those that represent industries. Industry "leaders" on this matter are:
4. Eastern Cape Environment Department is reported to have decided to issue CITES permits to hunt damage causing leopards.
Following the events reported above in 2, the Eastern Cape Government's Conservation department is reported to have agreed to issue CITES permits to hunt so-called problem leopards. This was after lobbying by farmers and professional hunters. It is noteworthy that these hunters have been restrained from hunting leopards in Namibia when this country placed an embargo on hunting leopards last year and they are now on the lookout for other opportunities to make money from killing leopards. It will be only a matter of time before every leopard becomes a "problem" leopard and will become a target for money. The department has been evasive about confirming this reported policy decision.
If indeed this is their new policy, it flies in the face of data that indicated that the leopard populations in the region can ill afford this assault on their numbers. The main population in the Eastern Cape is in the Baviaanskloof Mega-reserve, and constitutes 30 - 35 territorial adult individuals that are most probably genetically isolated already from other source populations.
Contact Mr Jeff Govender for further information on this matter:
Dayalan.Govender@deaet.ecape.gov.za
5. The authorities have in their possession a falsified permit of 2 leopard trophies, and the relevant hunting operator is yet to answer charges hereto.
In or about September 2009 a hunting operator in the Eastern Cape was implicated in a falsification of a trophy permit. Two leopard trophies occurred on the client issued permit counterfoil page (but not on the original permit). Two leopards were presented to a Graaff Reinet taxidermist for taxidermy services.
We have yet to confirm whether charges are laid against the said operator who is reported to be a prominent figure in the game industry. We have repeatedly requested information about this matter but have not been provided such. We will keep you posted and certainly continue to promote the prosecution of illegal activities.
6. Mr Nico "Rooibaard" Ferreira issues a death threat to Dr Bool Smuts, Director of Landmark Foundation.
On 17 March 2010 Nico Ferreira (Tel 042 273 9903/072 307 4694, Email: kougawild@telkomsa.net; Website: www.kougawildernis.co.za) issued a death threat, amongst several expletives, to Dr Bool Smuts, Director of the Landmark Foundation, for his advocacy actions against lethal and illegal controls of leopards in and amongst his local and neighbouring farmers. He indicated that either he or his neighbours would shoot Dr Smuts dead should he arrive in their area. Mr Ferreira is considered a prominent farmer in the area and is a representative for the farming community on the Baviaanskloof Steering Committee.
It is noteworthy that Nico Ferreira was the first recipient of protective sheep collars from the Landmark Foundation in December 2006 that protected his flock of sheep. For 3 years thereafter he reported only one lost sheep to predation. (His sheep roams isolated mountains and he checks on them once a year at shearing time!)
Nico Ferreira now wants to kill the leopards in his area, and those wanting to protect them. Noteworthy on his website, where he is promoting tourism on his farm, the presence of leopard in the region is a selling point for his tourism product. Tourists should consider their safety and appropriateness of supporting this destination owned by someone wanting to kill leopards and people wanting to protect them.
Vote with your wallets!
And now they want to hunt the conservationists too… where to from here?
WHAT CAN YOU DO?
What is left for us to do if those tasked in authority to lead us is absent in actions or ethics? With legislation protecting our biodiversity either being ignored (by state officials and others), new legislation going counter to scientific based evidence or prevailing ethical norms, we are left with advocacy (which you could do through writing to those we have given addresses to here above), or to vote with your wallets.
We are trying hard to bring Fair Game ™ Wildlife-Friendly Products to consumers. Through avoiding products that are unethical in production, you could use your cash to change behaviour. Support the brand, and the producers who abide by its audited standards, and avoid products that cannot guarantee ethical production practices.
Announcements will follow with the release of the brand.
We believe that many farmers who act ethically should be rewarded and not dragged down to the lowest common denominator of others of lesser ethics. Consumers have to power to change these things.
Additionally there are many individuals and organisations that go to great lengths to fight these issues detailed above. Go out and support them, and their causes, and stand up and fight these abuses, as we will only stop this through collective action.
©Landbouweekblad
Unethical livestock production practices: Slaughter Irons = Gin Traps = Soft Catch Traps
