A Conservation Con?

Earlier this year, the Free State High Court in Bloemfontein, South Africa, handed down its long-awaited judgement in the case between the South African Predator Breeders’ Association (SAPBA) and the former Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism.

In essence, SAPBA, which effectively includes the canned hunting industry, challenged certain regulations in a raft of new legislation that seeks to curtail the breeding and shooting of lions in captivity (see page 24 of Africa Geographic, July 2006).

The court ruled in favour of the Minister, dismissing the application by the breeders on all counts, including costs.

Readers of this column and past features on trophy hunting in Africa Geographic will be familiar with the pertinent points. In making his ruling, the judge reaffirmed that the predator breeders make no contribution to the natural biodiversity of South Africa and that viewing the industry as ‘abhorrent and repulsive’ would be ‘objectively reasonable and justifiable’. I wholeheartedly agree with these sentiments and welcome the outcome of the case.

But while the judgement is important in the bigger picture, it should by no means be taken as the final chapter in this lamentable mess. The absurd irony of it all is that because the original legislation did not advocate an outright ban, which would have immediately outlawed both the breeding and the hunting of predators, the parties continue to argue in the courts over how and under what conditions thousands of lions are to be bred for killing.

And this as the species faces severe conservation threats in the wild, both in South Africa and across the continent.

In the meantime, the industry still needs to be held in check, and in this respect it is necessary to draw a clear distinction between the breeders and the hunters.

As far as the former are concerned, the new legislation is only a first step. Implementing and policing it, and ensuring that there is both the will and the means to prosecute, are going to be crucial. If breeding is allowed to continue, we will have to deal with the consequences of domesticating species that are integral to the definition of ‘wildness’, ‘wilderness’ and ‘natural ecosystems’. If the legislation is successful, we will have to face the highly contentious issue of what is to be done with thousands of caged lions and other predators.

Even more complex than the breeding issue is the one of hunting; not only are there millions more hunters around the world than there are breeders, but they attempt to draw distinctions between themselves on the basis of how they kill.

Most conservation agencies and ecotourism operators do the same: they oppose canned hunting, but many still support trophy hunting. How do these groups distinguish between the two and is there any merit to their distinctions? Why is shooting wild animals in a cage viewed as unacceptable, while killing off the gene pool in a wilderness area is lauded?

Aren’t all hunters merely members of the same extended fraternity? The so-called ‘fair chase’ hunting groups in South Africa certainly cannot claim to have been outspoken against canned hunting. And it is quite conceivable that a hunter who fails to bag his Big Five trophy in Botswana will end his safari with an easy captive-bred kill in South Africa.

It is inevitable that a total review of trophy hunting and its future application in conservation will be one of the next great wildlife management debates. With the outcome of this court case and the recent public debates about hunting in and around South Africa’s national parks and reserves, now is the time for this review to begin. A thorough reassessment would require a multi-disciplinary approach, involving much research and evaluation.

To this end, all major role-players from conservation agencies active in Africa – including the IUCN, government, NGOs and the greater safari and ecotourism community – would need to participate.

It is my suspicion that trophy hunting will in time be exposed as having been more of a conservation con than an effective wildlife management tool. In the meantime, I advocate that Rowland Ward’s Records of Big Game and the Safari Club International Record Book be discontinued. These trophy hunting bibles promote the shooting of what everyone else is trying to protect.

Wildlife Artist Ian van Zyl

“I don’t just paint the veld, I paint what I feel. This is not a style that you would see elsewhere. I try to interpret the times in which we live through wildlife,” Ian van Zyl, one of South Africa’s most accomplished wildlife artists explains from his book filled office in his Umhlanga home.

From it you can peek into his surprisingly ordered studio or you can venture out into the entrance hall and lounges where there’s a beautiful painting on almost every wall. His home is his gallery and his gallery is his home – and life, art and conservation are one in the same.

Van Zyl is one of many generous South African artists who donate works to be auctioned on behalf of the Wildlands Conservation Trust at the annual Art For Conservation gala dinner and auction. Funds go towards leopard, wild dog or elephant monitoring projects. It is his way of giving something back, he says.

His paintings are highly respected and hangs on the walls of some of the country’s poshest homes. Many of his pieces also grace the boardrooms and offices of major corporates. Some are landscapes that happen to be populated by Africa’s beautiful creatures and are probably far more realistic reflections of the true spirit of the vast African backdrop. Others are “animal portraits” but not in the sense of over posed, post card like images of the so-called big five.

All in all, van Zyl’s creations are both a reflection of his deep love for the environment and a message. They are often deeply symbolic. Many are even urgent warnings or vehement protests. For example, a startling painting highlights the black and white beauty of the zebra with a background of sharply contrasting dramatic red rather than the muted tones of the African landscape. This vivid splash of red, he explains, both reflects the danger of fragmenting Africa’s herds and warns against global warming.

Van Zyl’s unique style did not evolve in a formal studio. In fact, the wilderness is his studio for five to six weeks of the year when he retreats into the bush to gather material to paint. Like so many tourists, van Zyl does not believe in driving up and down in the hope of spotting game. He travels alone, has his own itinerary and is completely self sufficient. He spends long periods at waterholes, beer in hand and camera and sketch book close by. It is often hard to remember that he is working, he laughs.

According to van Zyl, although he always values seeing the big five, creatures such as honey badgers, civets and meerkats are just as intriguing. The ever vulnerable cheetah is his favourite cat. He is also fascinated by birds. “They are probably the only free things left in the world. Everything else is behind a fence.”

But he paints the zebra the most. “The stripes are so pliable. When it comes to art, you can make them do anything.”

A zebra skin stretched out on his lounge floor has helped him perfect his work, he says, quickly stressing that the animal was not shot for its skin. He is passionately anti-hunting and even the skulls in his office with its fascinating collection of natural treasures are moulds rather than the real thing.

He also has a huge collection of photographs but does not necessarily paint from these. Images of the larger predators, elephants and buffalo are etched in his mind. When he does refer to photographs, it is usually when painting birds.
Unlike his many of his contemporaries, van Zyl is anything but a copy cat artist. “What’s the point? You have to understand the nature of what you are capturing – look at habitats, prey, predators, how the whole thing meshes together. I try to portray scale which is very difficult. It is like trying to capture the wind and the noise of the veld in a fraction of a mm of paint.”

This is his wider picture and the multi-faceted context for his work. “When you are in Etosha and you find yourself surrounded by a pan that has no end and you can see the curvature of the earth, you think I’m not that important.”
For van Zyl, both the environment and individual lives should be about balance. “In nature, the balance is always right. There will always be more prey than predators. The sick and the weak don’t just die, their energy is transformed into life for a predator who may have babies to feed. Man is the only animal on earth that is not necessary – not part of the food chain.”

The balance in his work has emerged over time – 20 years as a professional artist, to be exact. “To paint the veld, you don’t have to paint every bush. To paint the sky, you don’t have to paint every cloud. I try to combine minimalism with realism. One emphasises the other.”

Van Zyl attributes his deep love for the environment to a childhood spent on the family farm in Kimberley where he was born. His says his father was a keen conservationist at a “time (when most people believed that) if it moved, you should shoot it.” He began painting from the age of five. His formal art training began during his school years at Grey College and continued to the Johannesburg Art School.

Along with being a student of nature and art, van Zyl has studied people and developed a wicked sense of humour. He warns to always be on the lookout for the unexpected. No matter how long you spend in the wild, there are always surprises – from the “tick that bites you on the arse” to jumping beans. During a recent presentation to the Watercolour Society, he explained: “You have to learn to be in the element that you are putting on canvas. You have to be out there and not in a studio.” Then he asked what would be the two most important things to take with you into the great outdoors. Most, he says, came up with art materials. He corrected them – try a toilet roll and a spade!

Van Zyl is very aware of feedback about his art. Having someone buy a painting and hang it on the wall is a huge complement, he says. He tends to take unexpected comments from those who would not ordinarily consider themselves art critics or collectors most seriously. The so-called experts tend to tell him what he wants to hear. Those who know nothing about art but react to a painting spontaneously tell him what he needs to hear.
“I never get tired of selling a painting and it has nothing to do with money. You can’t sell one like a fridge or a dishwasher. Does it matter if your contribution is held in high esteem? With painting, you never stop learning. Every day that I am in my studio, I (gain) something.”

However, for van Zyl, the most important thing of all is that he never becomes a “pot boiler” – his description of a painter who creates solely to sell his work for the highest price. His real motivation is to reach out to people with an important conservation message. He says he doesn’t want his world to become a memory and to remain behind just in his paintings and in his photographs.

By Shirley Le Guern

For more information on Art for Conservation 2009 click here.

Scouts plant 5500 trees for Arbour Week

Scouts South Africa came out in force on 5 September 2009 with the aim of planting 6,500 trees in support of a healthier planet. As part of a United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) funded initiative, 600 Scouts from around Durban rolled up their sleeves and pitched in by planting trees at the Buffelsdraai Landfill Site, near Verulam on the north coast of Durban. They came a little short of their target but planted an amazing 5500 trees in half a day, contributing to the Buffelsdraai Landfill Site Community Reforestation Project. The project has been set up by the eThekwini Municipality’s Greening Durban 2010 Programme and DSW to help address the impacts on global climate that hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup in Durban will cause. 650 hectares of land around DSW’s regional landfill site will be re-forested through the project.
KZN Scouts Co-ordinator, Lorna Newman says, “This is about making a contribution, but also our youth learning about why its important to respond to climate change. The future is in their hands”.

UNEP has provided a $100,000 grant to the World Organisation of the Scout Movement for the planting of 65,000 trees by 10 National Scout Organisations worldwide to celebrate World Environment Day. Participating countries include Mexico, the Philippines, Malaysia, Australia, India, Brazil, Hungary, Ethiopia, South Africa and Lebanon. Dr Andrew Venter of the Wildlands Conservation Trust, the municipality’s implementation partner for the Buffelsdraai Community Reforestation project, has stated that the Scouts contribution to the initiative is just the start, “Scouts SA have an important role to play in getting youngsters out there making a difference around the issue of climate change, and the opportunities for extending this kind of initiative to other areas in South Africa are definitely there”.

The Buffelsdraai Landfill Site Community Reforestation project involves the local communities, in which more than 200 “Treepreneurs” produce the trees and exchange these for food, school fees and other basic goods. The first phase of the project, scheduled to be completed by July 2010, has been funded by DANIDA (the Royal Danish Embassy) and comprises the planting of 62,500 trees. The Comrades Marathon Association and its sponsor, Bonitas Medical Fund, also contributed an additional 13,000 trees to the initiative. With the contribution made by the Scouts, it is expected that 82,000 trees will have been planted by July 2010. This is expected to sink many thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas contributing to global warming.

Prepared by Nicci Diederichs: Greening Durban 2010 Programme Co-ordinator ( Contact: 082 492 6804 )