Month: August 2015

The Blood Lions documentary crew recently hosted a media screening in Johannesburg. This film is part of a global campaign to bring an end to predator breeding and canned hunting industries.

South Africa is home to more than 6 000 captive-bred lions, with approximately 160 lion ranches in operation for the sole purpose of turning lions into profit.

The campaign provides information on canned hunting.

“I have been on this story since the late 1990s and it’s been a long, tough journey for a number of reasons. However, with the release of Blood Lions, I sense we have the best chance of bringing an end to the horrors of predator breeding and canned hunting,” said environmental photojournalist Ian Michler.

British wildlife volunteer, Keeton Hill, shares his experience and findings after his time at Ukutula farm, South Africa.

In 2013 I volunteered at Ukutula, a supposed lion conservation centre outside of Brits, Pretoria, in South Africa. For 6 months afterwards, I spoke of how great the experience was, and about how much good Ukutula were doing. Several weeks after returning from South Africa, I saw a claim that they were involved in the sale of lions for hunting. Initially, I dismissed this claim. However, after seeing more accusations, I decided to do some research to prove these claims wrong. A year and a half later, I am still yet to do so. Instead, I have only seen more and more evidence that I actually volunteered at a farm largely suspected to be involved in the canned hunting industry.

The project was booked through an agency which specialises in volunteering and working abroad. I spent 2 weeks in South Africa looking after lions. At Ukutula, volunteers were told that the lions were removed from their ‘dangerous’ parents, and hand-reared instead for their own safety. We were then told that samples were taken from the 100+ lions on the farm for research purposes, and that where possible, older lions were released into the wild.

 During my two week stay, I noted several ways of doing things that I didn’t agree with. For example, there was no permanent staff member in charge of supervising the volunteers who were looking after the cubs. Upon arrival, volunteers were given a brief overview of how to care for them. As of that overview, it was up to the volunteers to decide between them who were to complete what tasks. Any authorisations or approvals were to be sought from the owners, who weren’t always available. This sometimes led to volunteers not knowing how to handle some situations, which then resulted in disagreements between volunteers. For example, some volunteers allowed young children to pet the cubs, whilst others didn’t. Some allowed guests to feed the cubs, others didn’t. There was also an occasion during which the powdered milk supply for the cubs ran out. It was a two hour wait before more was delivered. I also didn’t agree with the cubs being able to be hired for parties and events (which happened several times during my stay). Despite these things, I naively believed everything that we were told about the ‘research’ conducted at the park, and the lion ‘release’ program.

 After the accusations against Ukutula were made, and I started my research, it became clear that these claims of releases were simply not true, and that Ukutula was far from what it made itself out to be. I realised that it operated in exactly the same way as canned hunting farms are described as operating. These similarities included a constant stream of cubs being born (there were 9 under the age of 3 months whilst I was there, with more on the way), large groups of tourists petting the cubs throughout the day, walks with older lions, and promises of the eventual release of lions into the wild (of which no evidence has ever been provided).

 In order to build up a balanced and comprehensive picture about Ukutula, and find out as much about it as possible, I asked questions to a previous volunteer, a previous member of staff, and the centre’s current owner. I asked both the previous volunteer and previous staff member if they had any reason to believe that the suggestions regarding Ukutula being involved in the canned hunting industry were true. The volunteer told me that they no longer supported the centre, as they had heard several claims that lions were sold from the park (something which the centre themselves later admitted to). The staff member politely declined to comment. I then asked the current owner a series of questions, regarding why they bred so many lions, and when and where their lions are released. I was told that the centre had never claimed to release lions into the wild (which is simply not true, as myself and several other volunteers were told by the centre themselves that they do).

Since this initial realisation, it has only become more and more clear that the Ukutula lies to its volunteers and guests, has never released any lions into the wild, and that they are also more than likely involved in canned hunting. The farm admitted to moving at least 2 lions, Michael and Mandela, to zoos in the United States, and the whereabouts of several lions, such as Kevin, Kylie, Ricky, and Jenny, to name just a few, are now unknown. Attempts at finding out where these lions might be through asking members of the farms staff have proved unsuccessful, always resulting in rudely written replies, which avoid answering the question. For example, when asked the whereabouts of Kevin the lion, an Ukutula employee replied, “none of you(r) damn business”. When I questioned the farm using an alternative email address to my own, posing as a volunteer interested in working there, they admitted that “lions are relocated in different places”. When I asked, “doesn’t that mean that the people that you send lions to could then sell them onto hunters”, the farm replied that, with a supposed “monitoring system” in the planning, this should mean that they should be “able to react to that”, but “sadly it does not mean there is a 100% guarantee”. I have also since realised that the CITES database shows absolutely no record of any lions being exported from South Africa for release into the wild in any other country. However, what it does show, is mass exports for lion trophies, lion bones, and lion skin.

I have shared my findings and opinions with any volunteers who were at Ukutula with me, and continue to attempt to inform other people who have been to the farm, as well as people that I know personally, about the canned hunting industry. Unfortunately, many previous volunteers refuse to believe about the industry, and defend the farm, often insulting or ignoring the people trying to inform them.

As the canned hunting industry is entirely legal in South Africa, creating awareness and understanding of the industry is vital, as this is one of the only ways to fight against it. The more people who know about canned hunting, the better, as this lessens the amount of unknowing volunteers who believe themselves to be doing good, which then lessens the money that these farms receive. This is why Blood Lions is so important, as it could finally be the large scale exposure of canned hunting that is needed to educate people about the canned hunting industry, as well as maybe even changing the terrible fate of South Africa’s captive-bred lions.

 

Cape Town – The Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) on Thursday condemned canned lion hunting and the killing of Zimbabwe’s most famous lion, Cecil.

During a national assembly plenary in Parliament in Cape Town, IFP member of parliament Narend Singh, said: “The practice of canned-lion hunting is unacceptable and must be driven from our country and continent.”

“It’s high time that South Africa stands up and says that its wildlife is no longer for sale to the highest international bidder, its high time that we stand up for our wildlife.”

Singh stood up in parliament on Thursday calling on government departments to work together to curb the killing of lions.

Discussing a recent showing of the documentary “Blood Lions” at the Durban Film Festival, Singh applauded the African National Congress’ Derek Hanekom for his involvement.

“We salute the Minister of Tourism who appeared in the documentary and hope that he will be engaging his counterparts in Environment and Agriculture on this issue as it will require a multi-pronged ministerial and departmental approach,” he said.

Singh called canned lion hunting an atrocity and disgrace and referred to the recent killing of Zimbabwe’s 13-year-old Cecil.

“This practice continues unabated at home in South Africa and in most of our fellow neighbouring states as well,” he said.

On July 1, Cecil the lion was lured, tracked, and shot with a hunter’s arrow by American dentist Walter Palmer who reportedly paid £35 000 (over R600 000) for the illegal hunt. Cecil was later shot dead and decapitated. A few days after the kill, Cecil’s carcass was discovered and Zimbabwean authorities confiscated the trophy that Palmer and his accompanying Zimbabwean hunters had made.

“It is safe to say that this barbaric practice and throwback from the days of colonialism is nothing but an abhorrent relic from an evil past,” said Singh.

“Why should the very few hunting operators be enriched at the expense of the many who will now never be able to see a ‘Cecil the lion’ proudly wandering our vast African expanses?”.

Singh said it was the duty of all South Africans and Africans to protect the continent’s wildlife.

“Our lions are apex predators, the pride of African wildlife, and they deserve nothing less than our most stringent protection.”

International appetite for the Cecil story is still high but many locals just don’t share the outrage.

HARARE – It’s been suggested that Cecil the lion has been the biggest international news story to come out of Zimbabwe since the elections in 2008.

International appetite for the Cecil story is still high but many locals just don’t share the outrage.

The ‘Cecil the lion’ story broke in South Africa just over two weeks ago but it took until this week for global attention and outrage to really pick up.

That was partly when the hunter who killed Cecil was finally identified as a US dentist, Walter Palmer, after previous reports had speculated he was Spanish.

Many Zimbabweans have been left feeling bemused and irritated by the international media frenzy over the story, which isn’t being matched inside Zimbabwe.

Well-known journalist Fungai Machirori says on the ‘Voices of Africa’ blog that it is ironic that the world is diligently following Zimbabwe’s wildlife with no thought or concern for its people.

She says that the outrage over Cecil plays into the stereotype that Africa is all about poverty or wildlife stories.

Palmer is said to have paid $54,000 to hunt and kill the animal.

‘AT LEAST TWO LIONS SHOT FOR CANNED HUNTING IN SA EVERY DAY’

As outcry over the death of the Cecil the lion continues to dominate social media, experts in canned hunting in South Africa say at least two lions are shot for canned hunting a day in South Africa.

Canned hunting has been criticised as a fast-growing but brutal industry in South Africa.

Specialist consultant on the Blood Lions documentary Ian Michler says the quickest way to make money in the industry is to breed lions for the kill.

“Today we have a situation where there are anywhere between 6,000 and 8,000 large predators, on about 200 farms across South Africa. They are offering about 1,000 lions to be killed annually in this country.”

He says people will pay up to $48,000 to kill of a lion like Cecil in South Africa.

“Prices range from $5,400 for lioness up to $48,000 for a big, black male lion.”

PALMER APOLOGISES TO HIS PATIENTS

Reports say the US dentist who killed Cecil the lion has written to his patients to apologise.

Walter Palmer said in a letter that he had not discussed his passion for hunting with patients because he knew the issue was divisive.

Britain’s Guardian newspaper is quoting a radio station in Minnesota where Palmer is from.

He said he hadn’t been able to see his patients because of the media interest in the story and he’s having to have them referred to other practices.

PALMER IS IN HIDING

The American dentist at the centre of a global controversy has gone underground in the onslaught of criticism he’s faced over his killing of Cecil.

Palmer received a barrage of condemnation after he shot the animal during what officials allege was an illegal trophy-hunt in Zimbabwe.

Online reviews continue to trash Palmer’s dentist practice, the pile of stuffed animals outside it grows and its website is no longer available.

In an email to his patients, Palmer said that under current conditions it was no longer possible to keep his office open.

Media outlets that have tried to find him have had no luck as the man who said he enjoyed being a hunter now seems to be the hunted.

 

African countries that legalise hunting activities experience scrutiny around their conservation efforts, and how much money they make from it.

Trophy hunting, which is offered in 23 sub-Saharan African countries, generates an estimated US$201 million per year. Out of the 23 countries taking part in legal hunting activities, Tanzania, Mozambique, Namibia and South Africa have the most effective controls and the highest levels of transparency.

Countries such as Chad, Sudan, Congo, Mali, Senegal, Togo and Nigeria – to name a few – suffer from political instability that disrupts the ability to effectively implement control regimes on hunting.

The magnifying glass has been focused on hunting on the continent because of the kinds of animals hunted as well as the increase in illegal activities. Arguments around the viability of hunting are often related to the difficulty in regulating the numbers of animals hunted and transparency around what happens to the money generated.

As a consequence, debates spearheaded by the European Union in its strategic approach to African Wildlife Conservation steer towards a highly restricted approach to hunting in Africa.

This policy was designed as a response to global concerns about the vulnerability of African wildlife. Changes in demographic and economic trends have lead to resources being used up more rapidly. This has included a rise in illegal hunting as well as landscapes being degraded.

How hunting makes money

The relevant government bodies issue hunting licences and permits. These costs are included in the trophy/hunting fee. This fee is determined according to staff wages – professional hunters, trackers, camp set-up, accommodation, field staff – and the government levy.

The government levy varies from country to country, ranging between 12% and 17% of the trophy/hunting fee in Mozambique, Tanzania and South Africa.

Hunting fees also range between different countries depending on the services provided. Zambia has overtaken Botswana as the most expensive. South Africa, where hunters can pay only for what they shoot, is among the cheapest.

The hunting fee of an elephant can be priced upwards of US$49,000 for a hunting package. Lion hunting fees are dependent on the sex and origin of the animal and can be upward of US$20,000.

Documentary joins fight against ‘blood lions’ killing fest

Canned hunting is the hunting of animals that have been bred for that purpose. Although canned hunting of varies species takes place around the world, the lions have become the preferred prey. Hunted lions are sourced from captivity or from the wild. The justification of canned hunting is that wild lion populations are not affected.

Different approaches yield different results.

 Wildlife tourism in Tanzania – in the form of hunting concessions, trophy licences, live animal export and non-consumptive tourism – generates 12% of the country’s GDP.

Tanzanian wildlife is governed by a number of acts and departments. The Wildlife Conservation Act and the National Parks Act sets out the management and administration of permits in Tanzania. The Wildlife Protection Unit regulates the unlawful utilisation of wildlife.

As a result of this regulation, the Tanzanian government benefits from hunting through tourism and the levies paid by hunting concessions. The money then goes towards wages, maintenance and the running of protected areas, which makes up 40% of Tanzania’s land mass.

Extensive policies and legislation help Tanzania continue its hunting activities. This holds true for other sub-Saharan African countries, such as Namibia, South Africa and Mozambique. South Africa alone generates about US$77 million from hunting, about 0.25% of the national GDP. As a whole, Southern African Development Community countries with hunting tourism generate US$190 million.

Zambia and Botswana take different routes

Zambia and Botswana approach hunting from two opposing perspectives. Botswana placed a total ban on hunting in 2014.

Zambia imposed a ban on hunting elephant and lion in 2012, before announced its intention to lift it last year. It finally did so earlier this year.

Tourism contributes around 12% to Botswana’s GDP. It is estimated that hunting sustained more than 1000 rural jobs through trophy fees. But Botswana is not concerned about the estimated losses from the hunting ban because of predicted and historical revenue made up by the photographic tourism sector.

Botswana’s hunting ban extends to all animal species and applies to locals as well as foreigners. This means that the indigenous Khoisan are no longer permitted to practice their traditional way of life as hunter-gatherers.

The long-term outcome of the current approach is still to be seen. Conservationists are concerned about the ecological demands and degradation that may result from the impact of increasing elephant populations. This is particularly due to the arid conditions of Botswana and the population growth and ecological impacts of elephants.

Zambia’s wildlife tourism industry differs from Botswana significantly. An estimated 6.5% of its GDP is generated by tourism. The initial motivation behind the ban was the difficulty in enforcing regulations, monetary expenditure and wildlife population declines. To address these concerns, Zambia intends to adopt the regulation strategies of Tanzania, Mozambique and South Africa to make its hunting industry viable.

Delicate balancing act

African nations face pressure to ban hunting, particularly in light of the poaching epidemic. Decisions to allow hunting or ban it are based on assessing the balance between economic gain to conservation efforts.

SA game-hunters defend the right to shoot

Hunting can contribute to conservation efforts by facilitating the recovery of bontebok, black wildebeest, cape mountain zebra and white rhinoceros. The money generated from the hunting of these species generated funds for breeding programs, reintroduction’s, protection and management.

But getting the right laws and regulations in place, and then ensuring that they are implemented, is a challenge for many countries.

There is no uniform approach to conservation and history has proven that hunting can play a significant role – not only for conservation, but also to the benefit of neighbouring rural communities. Perhaps a cultural rather than sentimental approach to hunting is needed.

Elise Tempelhoff Elise Tempelhoff Twee tot drie “geblikte”, halfmak leeus word elke dag in sogenaamde “trofeejagte” in Suid-Afrika doodgeskiet.

Die leeus is gewoond aan mense en is so mak dat hulle as’t ware na die jagter aangestap kom om geskiet te word.

Dis die verhaal van tot 8 O00 “geblikte” leeus wat in die dokumentére rolprent Blood Lions weergegee word. Dis Woensdagaand in Gauteng uitgereik.

Pippa Hankinson, vervaardiger van die rolprent, sé Blood Lions is gemaak met die doel om die waarheid agter die “wrede, onetiese” bedryf in Suid-Afrika aan mense wéreldwyd oor te dra.

“Ek het vier jaar gelede ‘n private leeutelery in die Vrystaat besoek. Om te sé ek was geskok, is om dit sagkens te stel. Die beeld van 😯 leeus wat in klein kampies aangehou word, het my erg ontstel. Hul stres was voelbaar en die re- sultaat van inteling duidelik sigbaar. Ek het eers later uit- gevind daar is sowat 8 O00 van hulle wat oral op plase land- wyd woon. Hulle word geteel vir ‘n bedryf wat vir die ele- naars en jagondernemings mil- jarde aan inkomste verseker.”

Volgens Hankinson is bale min van die plase vir gewone mense toeganklik en daarom weet bitter min Suid-Afrikaners wat daar aangaan.

Ian Michler, veldgids, spesialisnavorser en verteller in die rolprent, het die begin van die bedryf in die 1990’s meegemaak. Die regering is destyds vergeefs gevra om in te gryp en dit te stop.

Volgens Michler moet die bedryf in die kiem gesmoor word en al dié plase hul bedrywighede staak. Die uiteinde sal wees dat tussen 7 O00 en 8 O00 leeus van kant gemaak sal moet word.

“Hu11e het géén bewarings- waarde nie en sal nooit weer in die natuur vrygelaat kan word nie.”

Prof. Pottie Potgieter, voorsitter van die Suid-Afrikaanse Roofdiertelersvereniging, stem nie saam nie en sé in die rolprent leeus wat in gevangen- skap geteel is, red Wilde leeus van uitwissing. Mense jag eerder dié leeus as Wilde leeus.

Karen Trendler, spesialiswildverpleegster, is uiters bekommerd oor die diere se welsyn. Van die welpies word volgens haar drie dae na geboorte van die wyfie weggeneem sodat sy dadelik weer bronstig raak. “S6 word sy ‘n teelmasjien.”

Die welpies word hans grootgemaak en veral oorsese jong- mense kom help versorg hulle. “Baie min van hulle besef aan- vanklik dat hulle bydra tot die groei van dié wrede bedryf.”

Van hulle kom dit wel agter en is gewoonlik erg ontnugter, sé Trendler.

Volgens haar val “geblikte” leeus tussen die krake in departemente en wetgewing deur. Die departement van om- gewingsake hou vol hy bemoei hom net met die welsyn van Wilde leeus en het dié halfmak diere oorgegee aan die departement van landbou, bosbou en visserye, wat ook nie presies weet wat om met hulle aan te vang nie.

“Intussen groei die bedryf feitlik daagliks,” sé Trendler.

Derek Hanekom, minister van toerisme, met wie ‘n onderhoud ook in die rolprent gevoer word, sé dié bedryf kan Suid-Afrika se beeld erg benadeel. Sy department kan dit egter nie reguleer nie. I Aktiviste wil trofeejag laat verbied – bl. 5 Hulle het giiiin bewaringswaarde nie.