Month: March 2016

Hunting, especially trophy hunting, is a topic guaranteed to get a lot of people hot under the collar very quickly, with strident polarisations between those for and against. What is right? What is wrong? What is best for Africa? Peter Borchert raised these questions after a closed meeting between South African government officials and Safari Club International (SCI) took place in Polokwane late last year.

For those who may not be familiar with SCI, an organisation based in America, it is arguably the biggest and politically most powerful hunting club in the world. Within its embrace the wealthiest and most ardent of its 25 000-plus members compete to have their names inscribed in the SCI Record Book. For 60 years the entries in this hallowed tome have commemorated, in meticulous detail, the feats of hunters and the trophies they have brought down by arrow, bullet and bolt. All in the name of sport.

It doesn’t end there, not by a long chalk Trophy hunting is an intensely competitive pastime and SCI acknowledges the grandiosity of members according to a strict, medieval-sounding hierarchy ranging from Grand Slam Awards, Inner Circle Awards, the Fourth Pinnacle of Achievement Award, the Crowning Achievement Award and, finally, the Nimrodian height of glory itself – the World Hunting Award for which the qualification requires an astonishing array of kills, including the African 29 Grand Slam (a list of species from which 29, including three of the Big Five, must be taken).

And this is just an outline of the many arcane sub-categories of SCI awards that in the case of Africa have resulted in the deaths of 2 007 lions, 791 elephants, 572 rhinos (including 93 black rhinos listed as Critically Endangered), 1 888 leopards and 3 238 Cape buffaloes, since its inception. Then there are thousands of other animals felled for some or other desirable anatomical attribute.

Collective clout

Of course there are other powerful hunting clubs in the world and hunters come from everywhere, not just the United States. And it is only fair to add that even in America there is far from universal approval of hunting – in fact a 2014 poll conducted on behalf of the International Fund for Animal Welfare found that more than 80% of Americans surveyed support the banning of lion and elephant trophies.

Relative to the world population, the proportion of sport hunters is really very small and of those the trophy hunters are but a fraction again. However, they are a very wealthy few who individually and collectively wield a lot of clout.

So, it was understandable that SCI’s meeting in Polokwane in the heart of South Africa’s big game hunting industry caused a ripple of disquiet through conservation circles, not because the meeting took place, but that it did so behind closed doors. Why the secrecy? Why was the media not welcome?

2015 – A bad year for trophy hunting

The hunting industry, especially the trophy aspect of it, has been somewhat on the back foot recently, especially here in Africa. Witness the worldwide outrage at the inexpert killing of Cecil the lion and the subsequent slaying of a great old tusker in south-eastern Zimbabwe.

And then the hard-hitting film Blood Lions exposed the shameful horrors of canned hunting. First it was shown to select audiences in South Africa, but now it is being increasingly screened at festivals and venues all over the world. Even Discovery Channel aired a one-hour cut.

Add to this the increasing number of airlines refusing to carry lion trophies out of Africa, the banning of the importation of lion trophies and lion body parts into Australia, increasing anti-trophy import actions in the US (including listing the African lion in terms of the US Endangered Species Act, which makes the importation of trophies illegal) and one begins to understand how beleaguered trophy hunters must be feeling.

Furthermore, with Blood Lions filmmaker Ian Michler now in an ongoing engagement with the European parliament to have the import of lion trophies banned across the EU, 2015 was something of an annus horribilis for the hunting fraternity. So who better to turn to than an old friend with a sympathetic ear: the South African Government.

Burnishing the chalice

No doubt SCI and their supporters will have gone to great lengths at the meeting to show their activities in the most positive light possible and to reinforce their much-vaunted contribution to the economic development of African countries that allow hunting, their services to conservation and the provision of all-important jobs in impoverished local communities.

The great chalice of trophy hunting would have been taken out, burnished and much admired as all the old chestnuts were laid out for discussion.

Almost certainly one of the first items on the agenda would have been the claim that the trophy-hunting industry generates some US$200-million in revenue across remote African rural areas. A lucrative activity indeed. But for whom?

 For a start, The $200 million Question, a report by Economists at Large, suggests that the contribution claimed is at best a rather shaky guestimate that should be used with caution. But even if we accept the figure at face value, further investigation reveals that very little actually accrues to rural communities alongside hunting areas.

Only about 3%, in fact. The vast majority goes to commercial firms, government agencies, or overseas, or stays in regional capitals. Moreover, any amounts that do go to government coffers rarely end up in communities, thanks to corruption and other questionable spending priorities.

Of course US$200 million (about R3 billion) is not to be sneezed at, but in the context of economies as a whole it represents a fraction of 1% of the collective GDP of the countries reviewed in the report.

What’s more, it transpires that across the board, trophy-hunting revenue amounts to a mere 1.8% of total tourism receipts. Perhaps not too surprising in light of a study by the University of Port Elizabeth that estimated ecotourism on private game reserves generated “more than 15 times the income of livestock or game rearing or overseas hunting”.

Exaggerated economic importance

And do hunting camps contribute meaningfully to employment as the industry claims? They do provide jobs, for sure, but they are generally seasonal, poorly paid and without much security considering the dangers involved. Also hunting camps tend to be basic, with very low staff complements.

Photo safaris on the other hand mostly operate all year and run to high standards of accommodation and services that engage a substantial staff complement. There is also a far greater security of tenure and the opportunity to learn hospitality and conservation management skills that can and do lead to lifelong careers.

Clearly the economic development importance of trophy hunting is greatly overstated. Certainly it adds little real nourishment to the poorly stocked larders of conservation.

Specious claims

The arguments justifying trophy hunting extend well beyond the economic claims. Hunters argue that their activities take out only older animals that are past their breeding lives and therefore have fulfilled their purpose. Such specious claims have been perpetuated for decades and have been mostly accepted by a gullible audience.

Science shows clearly, however, that the elderly of many species still breed and make a vital contribution to the structures of their society. Removing them artificially upsets all sorts of behaviour around reproduction, collective wisdom and, as been proved in the case of elephants, discipline within herds.

Then there are the assertions that hunters keep vast tracts of Africa in a near wilderness state and that their activities add to vigilance against poaching. This might be true in some cases of privately owned land but it can’t be used as a sweeping generalisation.

The lion breeding and hunting farms that have burgeoned in South Africa are little more than ecological deserts – they have no conservation value at all.

Witness, too, the situation in Tanzania, one of the great hunting destinations in Africa. The fact that some 60% of the country’s elephant population has been lost to poaching in the past five years makes one suspect that ‘hunter’s vigilance’ is not quite the anti-poaching force it is made out to be.

And so the arguments, and sometimes insults and threats, are traded back and forth until we reach a state where the ‘Yeah but, no but’ arguments (often ending in irrational conclusions on both sides of the divide) are worthy of Vicky Pollard, the obnoxious teenager from English cult comedy series Little Britain.

A rapid turnaround

One thing is for certain, the South African Professional Hunters’ Association (PHASA) has been squarely confronted by the less savoury aspects of their world, to the extent that the association has finally and formally turned its back on the controversial practice of captive-bred lion hunting.

At the association’s most recent AGM, a majority of its members voted to distance the association from the practice “until such time as the South African Predators Association could prove its conservation value to PHASA as well as the IUCN”.

PHASA also resolved that any of its members found to be involved in the hunting or marketing of captive-bred lions would face expulsion.

Strong words and seemingly a victory for the Blood Lions campaign. Michler has welcomed and congratulated PHASA on their stance. “But:’ he says, “now comes the real test. From now PHASA will be judged not on their statement but their actions – how they go about it from here. Are we going to see them actually take on errant members? Are we going to start seeing the collapse of canned hunting and the closing down of breeding farms? We wait to see.”

Right and wrong

Actions aimed at the eradication of canned hunting are a great step forward, but I want to see an end to trophy hunting and I make no bones about it. I wholeheartedly support Ian Michler and his colleagues in their strategy of getting parliaments around the world to ban the importation of trophies. It is a sound course of action and, judging by the agitation it is causing in hunting circles, an effective one.

In the end trophy hunting turns upon the fundamental distinction between right and wrong. How can shooting an animal from a safe distance with a high-powered weapon, for no other reason than to conquer it and hang its lifeless remains on a wall, possibly be construed as a moral act?

And so my question to all who champion trophy hunting is simply this: “What right does one species have to kill a member of another species for pleasure?”

A new international outcry at the treatment of Africa’s lions is about to hit just weeks after the furor over the killing of Cecil by Minnesota dentist Walter Palmer.

A movie will air this month that claims to blow the lid off big game hunting in South Africa, saying that 99 percent of
the lions bagged in the country are hand-reared and specially bred for the bullet.

The movie, Blood Lions, has already been shown in South Africa, and is expected to bring new outrage down on the heads of wealthy Americans who travel to the Dark Continent with one thing in mind –bringing back a lion’s head so they can mount it on their wall and boast how they killed it in the wild.

“There are roughly 1 000 lions killed by hunters in South Africa every year,” Blood Lions executive director Andrew Venter told Daily Mail Online in an exclusive interview. “Of those, around 10 are genuinely wild.”The movie, to be broadcast on US television channel PBS next month, follows American hunter Rick Swazey to Benkoe, a hunting lodge near Vryburg in South Africa’s North West Province.

There he is guaranteed that for a payment of $5 400 he will get to shoot a lioness he has picked out of an online
catalog of potential targets. “We were offered 14 lions with the images and prices attached,” said documentary
maker Ian Michler.

Moviemakers claim that the lioness was raised by hand in the booming so-called ‘canned hunting’ trade, although the lodge’s owner strenuously denied that to Daily Mail Online. “Benkoe Safaris do not engage in any canned lion hunting activities,” owner Ben Duminy said. “Our clients do not shoot tame lions in small enclosures as the Blood Lions video tries to portray.

”We are proud to be accredited by the South African Predators Association as a world class lion hunting destination, which means our clients hunt wild and dangerous lions on a fair chase and walk-and-stalk basis. On several occasions a hunt ended with near catastrophic results for the hunter as a result of the viciousness and aggression of the quarry,” Duminy added.

Yet he said he would not try to sue the
moviemakers. “Legal action is not an appropriate strategy to combat the lies and
propaganda of the animal rights lobby,” said Duminy. He said hunters in South Africa have their own program “aimed at putting the true facts about the captive breeding industry across to people and institutions that really matter.”

Venter and Michler believe their movie can have the same effect on the canned lion trade in South Africa that the 2013 documentary Blackfish had on SeaWorld and other marine parks in the United States. That movie exposed the way that orcas were kept in captivity. Since it came out SeaWorld shares have dropped by about half, CEO Jim Atchison was forced out and attendance has fallen off dramatically.

”Our world is changing and whether it is orcas in ponds or lions in cages, these are exploitative activities that progressive societies no longer sanction,” said Michler.

Venter, Michler and Swazey are all convinced that Benkoe’s hunts are fake. “The fact the lion hunting is inside an
electrified fenced enclosure speaks volumes,” said Swazey, an aircraft dispatcher who lived in Hawaii at the time the movie was made. But the hunting industry in South Africa is trying to promote the term ‘captive hunting’ to get away from the negative connotations of ‘canned hunting’.

”Before coming to South Africa, I found that there is a ‘Put and Take Law’ in the province where Mr. Duminy has his
hunting camp,” added Swazey. “This law requires that the animal to be hunted must be released into the hunting enclosure for a minimum of four days before being shot.” That requirement is to give time to allow any drugs that may have been used to calm the beast to transport it to the hunting ground to wear off. ”I challenge anyone to tell me how a four-day release constitutes a wild lion hunt,” said Swazey.

”My questions to Mr. Duminy are: ‘What exactly is the difference between captive and canned hunting? Why is there a need to blur the line between the two? Why is captive hunting acceptable and canned hunting not?’ The end result is the same: a lion is raised in captivity for only one purpose – to be shot.”

African lion hunting has been under intense scrutiny since American dentist Walter Palmer shot and killed Cecil the black-maned lion with a high-power crossbow in Zimbabwe last month. Cecil was not part of a canned hunt – which are virtually unknown outside South Africa. Instead Cecil was allegedly lured from safety of the Hwange National Park by two guides trailing meat behind a vehicle. Palmer only injured the animal which suffered in intense agony for 40 hours before being tracked and finished off.

The hunting team then hacked off Cecil’s head so Palmer could take it back to his home. But Zimbabwean authorities
confiscated it, leaving Palmer with nothing to show for the $55 000 he spent for the kill.

Swazey’s fee was less than one-tenth of the size paid by Palmer because lionesses are not considered such good trophies as they don’t have the iconic full mane that male lions have. One of the advantages hunters find in shooting hand-reared animals rather than genuinely wild ones is that they are unlikely to have been scratched up in fights that occur naturally in the wild, and therefore the head they get to show off will be in better condition, explained Venter.

Michler estimates there are around 200 facilities in South Africa breeding predators, mainly lions. He says there are
between 6 000 and 8 000 animals currently in these facilities. As well as providing relatively tame animals as shooting targets, these places also make money from tourists who are allowed to pet the cubs and walk with the carnivores and they also provide for a growing Far Eastern market in lion bones, which supposedly have medicinal
properties, and have largely taken the place of tiger bones in China, due to restrictions on importing tiger parts.

”Nearly all justify what they do by claiming conservation, educational or lion awareness arguments,” said Michler,
a former Cape Town stockbroker who has worked in conservation for the past 25 years. “And then, of course, they point to the economic contributions such as job creation.” But, he said, his documentary exposes those arguments. ‘The film clearly shows how lions, an apex predator that in the natural world requires ample space, are being subjected to intensive agricultural breeding practices in confined areas.

”It also shows how the breeders and farmers mix species such as lions and tiger and you also get to see and understand the considerable welfare concerns.” He said Swazey came on board after watching a promo clip the movie makers had circulated. “Rick is a genuine American hunter,” he said. “The practices of canned hunting offended every hunting sensibility he knew and so he volunteered to be part of the project.”

Michler estimates that around 1 000 hunters travel every year to South Africa to bag lions. Of those, roughly half are American.

Swazey remains a committed deer and white-winged dove hunter in the United States. “The hunting I do is to put food on the table,” he said. But he agreed to take part in the movie because he found himself repulsed by the idea of killing a captive animal solely for its trophy value. “What bothers me most about ‘hunting’ a canned animal is that the animals are in an enclosure, often baited to present a shot to the shooter and sometimes shot from a vehicle.”

Making it worse, he said, the lions are used to ‘the sight, sound and scent’ of humans.

“When a vehicle approaches a lion that was bottle-fed and raised in captivity, that sound usually means it is mealtime.”

Swazey and his team had never intended to kill the lioness and were still working out a way to make their exit while leaving the animal alive when Duminy discovered they were making a movie. Although many hunters take teams along to film their exploits, both sides agree that Swazey’s ruse was discovered because his crew appeared too professional.

Instead of capturing a lion killed on camera, the filmmakers caught Duminy threatening to kill Swazey after he is uncovered. Swazey insists the game lodge owner meant what he said, and he believed his life was in genuine danger. “How would you feel if someone twice your size threatened to kill you?” he asked. ”I trusted Mr. Duminy about as far as I could throw him. I think he had every intention of causing us serious harm if we had not left when we did.”

As for the fate of the animal that Swazey was supposed to kill, it is still unclear. “After we left the farm, we tried to arrange for the lioness to be moved to a sanctuary,” said Michler. “But negotiations between Benkoe and ourselves broke down. We got a partial refund and have no idea what happened to the lioness.”

The picture of a baboon and her baby in my kitchen pressed a button (“Baboon visit cooks up a storm in social media”, Echo February 25).

So much so, that Baboon Liaison Group (BLG) Sue Oosthuizen’s startling allegations in the Echo letters page are malicious and false. (“Baboon truths”, Echo March 10)

“Encourage baboons to raid?” Off the top of my head I can say: Ill knew she (the baboon) was coming I’d have baked a cake. “Irresponsible management of our home?” With apologies to Donald Trump: “I will build a wall — an electric fence — to keep baboons out! And the baboons can pay for it themselves.”

A few years ago, we invited Graham Noble of the BLG to inspect our property to set the record straight.

Fastidiously he ticked all the baboon-proof boxes — our home, food, caged veggies, compost system and waste.

The BLG’s current accusations in the Echo coincided with a visit from Helena of CapeNature, and Kath of Human Wildlife Solutions. “Impressive,” they agreed, and took pictures of our caged veggie garden. Since it’s now officially in triplicate for the Baboon Task Team I hope we can put it to rest in peace. The same Echo featured Blood Lions — Bred for the Bullet; a documentary featuring Ian McCallum (“Blood Lions”, Echo March 10). He said: “We must ask if we cannot protect the flagship species such as elephants and lion, then how can we do any better with the others, the littler ones, or ourselves for that matter.” Yes. Everything is connected, and we have to get it right at the top for the sake of “the littler ones” at the bottom. It is nothing to do with the imaginary idea of a personal self: I did not choose baboons, they chose me. They were on our doorstep, or rather humans encroached their territory and grabbed their land.

McCallum said the documentary is also, “A subtle invitation to examine our inner selves and our own propensity for human cruelty and deception.”

About the concepts “pride in humanity” and “shame in humanity”, in my travels to India, I directly experienced people and animals living together in non-violence, “ahimsa”, a Vedic law of “dharma” or right conduct.

I was glad to come across a letter from JM Coetzee, a reflection of a sharp intellect, to his friend and fellow writer Paul Auster: “My first observation (of India) was that this was the first country I had visited where human beings and animals seemed to have worked out a decent modus vivendi. The range of animal species I actually observed was limited — cows, pigs, dogs, monkeys — but I have no reason to think that only these animals are accepted into the human sphere. I saw no sign of cruel treatment, no sign even of impatience, though the cows wander in among the very busy traffic and hold people up. It is commonplace that cows are worshipped in India. But worship seems to me the wrong word. Relations between people and animals are much more mundane than that: a simple tolerance and acceptance of an animal’s ways of being, even when it intrudes among men.”

Africa has a pre-colonial indigenous culture that lived in harmony with nature. Credo Mutwa, an extraordinary South African character, traditional healer, and talented storyteller said in his book, Isilwane the Animal: “Western Man is taught that he is the master of all living things. The bible itself enshrines this extreme attitude, as do other great books. Repeatedly one hears of dangerous phrases such as ‘untamed nature’, or ‘interrogating nature with power’. One hears of the strange belief that man is superior to all other living things on Earth and that he was especially created to be overlord and custodian of all things animate and inanimate. Until these attitudes are combated and erased from the human mind, Westernised humans will be a danger to all earthly life, including themselves.”

It is globally accepted that our relationship with nature and each other is vital to our survival. Animal communication is popular in media like the New York Times, such as Elizabeth Austin Asch’s article “Wisdom from the Wild Nations.”

One of the measurements of conservation success is, simply, the continued existence of the species. That is a massive blindspot, for if we lose our humanity in the process we are immeasurably the lesser. “Schrecklichkeit” — an ugly, hard word for a heartless way of treating other beings.

Myriads abhor lethal conservation and our outrage is to effect constructive change on policies and “secret protocols of killing” that so deeply and justifiable upset us. To be a voice for the voiceless the focus is “wildlife protection” and our call is for legislative “rights of nature”, all of nature and its multifarious species, for human cruelty applies equally to wild animals (big and small), rainforests, cathedrals of trees, the air and the seven seas.

• This letter has been shortened.

An animal charity has slammed reality television program I’m A Celebrity…Get Me Out Of Here! for ‘promoting canned hunting’ by handling lion cubs as part of a challenge.

In February, host and respected Australian veterinarian Dr Chris Brown explained the horrors of trophy hunting big cats in fenced environments while cuddling a tiny white lion cub during the program.

But, according to the Campaign Against Canned Hunting, he unwittingly ‘endorsed’ hunting as after cubs are touched by humans they can never be returned to the wild, with many sold to canned hunts.

Contestant Dean Geyer had nominated the charity to receive his prize money if he had of been the last person standing in the jungle, but the organisation withdrew from the program claiming the stars were ‘undermining their work,’ 7News reported.

‘By handling cubs, this program and Dr Brown are endorsing the cycle of exploitation these animals face, and undermining our work,’ a statement from the Campaign Against Canned Hunting to Network Ten read.

The network responded by saying the crew followed every procedure put in place by authorities and respected Dr Chris’ judgement. The cub was reportedly from a breeding farm and is being raised to be tame.

But other animal charities also weighed in, claiming the show was promoting the negative practice.

‘They are engaging in handling predators that should never be handled,’ Donalea Parman from Animal Justice Party AJP Victoria said.

‘These animals are wild at heart predators and should never be handled.’

Part of the episode included Australia’s Funniest Home Videos star Jo Beth Taylor, 44, being wheeled waist deep into a box while strapped to a gurney.

The white lion cub was the last animal to be placed in the box and Ms Taylor happily rubbed its belly with her feet before petting it after completing the challenge.

In a separate episode, cricket legend Shane Warne snuggled up with a tiny leopard cub and the Animal Justice Party AJP Victoria slammed the move as ‘commercial exploitation’ on their Facebook page.

Environment Minister Greg Hunt also weighed in on the issue, saying: ‘butchering lions for fun and profit is not acceptable.’

Canned hunting is essentially trophy hunting where the animals are confined to a fenced in area to increase the likelihood the hunter will be successful.

It is a fast-growing business in South Africa, with upwards of 7,000 animals in captive breeding and 1,500 lions shot each year.

Cape Town – National Council of the SPCA for Wildlife Protection (NSPCA) says shutting down unethical predator breeding facilities and ensuring that they are no longer granted ownership permits is not as easy as it seems.

 

The provincial legislature’s portfolio committee on rural, environmental and agricultural development has said it wants answers on how politically connected individuals benefit from wildlife donations.

The committee, chaired by Gordon Kegakilwe, met rural environmental and agricultural development MEC Manketsi Tlhape and senior department officials over the matter on Friday.

The department was given three working days to compile a detailed report on how wildlife donations for a 10-year breeding programme were allegedly awarded to private entities.

The meeting came as a result of several media reports that claimed that individuals who had friends in high political office had received donations of rare breeds of wildlife at their private farms.

Kegakilwe said that in the interest of transparency, the department was supposed to present a comprehensive report on the project, a list of beneficiaries and assets transferred to the emerging game farmers, as well as the criteria used to select beneficiaries for the project.

“Our responsibility to ensure accountability and transparency is to conduct proper oversight and research in the manner this initiative is benefitting the historically disadvantaged communities apart from all things. The communities affected by the public purse matter the most,” he said.

Kegakilwe said that while the committee was in support of transformation and economic empowerment to previously disadvantaged communities, such efforts needed to be done in a transparent manner.

“We fully support this endeavour towards transformation but urge the department to conduct processes in a manner that is transparent, free from corruption and that will benefit the economy of the province and fully promotes the interests of the people of South Africa,”he said.

In her submission before the committee, Tlhape said the 10-year wildlife breeding programme was part of an initiative towards transformation meant to empower black people interested in game farming, an industry that has been predominantly a preserve for white farmers.

“The North West Parks and Tourism Board developed a policy on the donation of game from nature reserves since 1997,” she said. “It has always been a norm for it to donate wildlife even outside the borders of the state.”

Tlhape said the public was aware of platforms that the government used to advertise and publicise offers, especially to marginalised parties.

Among other issues raised, the committee requested that the department give an account of the number of employees working on private game farms, the percentage of all worker beneficiaries, the platforms used to publicise the game breeding initiative, the dates and applications of emerging farmers, the register of all wildlife under the parks board, the policy and strategy on game farming and the contract agreement.

The department also had to provide the list of beneficiaries and the profile of the South African Rare Game Breeding Association.

Former members of the Parks Board are expected to be part of the next meeting.

Cape Town – We’ve all known for a long time that the voluntourism industry has a dark side to it and that there are a number of ethical concerns around the practices taking place at predator breeding facilities.

South African’s canned trophy hunting industry has been in the spotlight for a while now as theBlood Lions documentary takes global audiences by the neck and shakes up the industry at large.

Here Traveller24 shares a detailed account from a UK volunteer who contacted Blood Lions about her time volunteering at what she describes as one of South Africa’s largest breeding farms just outside Kroonstad in the Free State.

The intern who calls herself Dee, has not disclosed her full name for obvious reasons, highlights how she witnessed a number of questionable practices, including poor upkeep of a sickly cheetah, enclosures that house different species resulting in fatal fights and alleged trade in animal bones.

While we have contacted the NSPCA Wildlife division for advice on what volunteers should do if they find themselves in situations like this, they have yet to respond.

If anything, Dee’s account will make those wanting to spend their time and energy doing good, thoroughly research the organisations they plan to get involved with.

The Lion in the Tiger’s den… 

“During my time at this predator breeding facility near Kroonstad in the Free State, there was a male lion cub, approximately 15-months-old, which was hand-reared and enclosed in a camp with other lions and tigers.”

According to Dee this lion cub ended up being killed by tigers.

Together with another vehicle, Dee explains how the volunteers attempted to make a barrier between the tigers and the badly injured lion.

Dee recounts how she could only watch helplessly in the bakkie as a long stand-off ensued between the animals in the pen. It was only when the owner finally arrived that the badly injured animal was able to be rescued and then taken into another vacant enclosure.

“What little medical aid that could be provided, we did, but the severe injuries sustained resulted in the death of the lion within a few hours.”

Dee confirmed she also took pictures of the punctured marks on the neck and body of the de-skinned carcass, but they are too gruesome to publish. “I never saw the whole carcass again after the incident,” says Dee.

A major cause for concern for Dee was that there was little to no professional medical attention taking place on the farm.

“During my time at the breeding ‘facility’, I never once saw a vet visit to tend to any of the big cats. Any darting of the big cats was done by the owner’s son. To my knowledge he was not a qualified Vet.” Dee also claims to have witnessed how the owners allowed “unqualified volunteers to dart the animals” at the facility.

Cheating a cheetah through poor living conditions

Dee says she formed a special attachment to a certain cheetah, while working at the facility.

“When I arrived at the facility, it was clearly evident that very little concern was shown to this animal, judging from the state of his coat and being underweight [was] indicative of diet problems.

Dee questions why the owners nor volunteers before her had recognised the poor state of the animal.

“The owners themselves would surely have seen this, one can give the volunteers the benefit of the doubt for not recognizing this, but the owners appeared to show very little concern or didn’t care enough.”

It was then that Dee realised she would need to take it upon herself to care for the animal, as she clearly was concerned about what organisations such as the NSPCA would say if they saw the animal in such a ” poor condition”.

While nobody at the facility could confirm the animal’s age, which Dee estimates to have been between 5 to 9-years-old, she said the cheetah “clearly had osteoporosis in the right hip, a problem with the right hock, heel and tendon, which became severely inflamed” during her stay.

“At the outset, I was dismayed by what they were feeding the cheetah in terms of both quality and type of meat. I got a new feeding routine setup, varying the diet and implementing supplements such as Mobi-Flex into the diet, which I initially funded and bought from Vet Clinic.”

Dee said she could see an improvement in the animal over the course of her time there, “reflected by his coat, weight gain and general behavior”.

“It’s during this period of time, through gaining his trust, I was able to venture into his enclosure and spend time with him. I was happy to just to be a part of his world without ever needing to interact with or seek contact, the very fact I was there and he accepted my presence was sufficient.”

“I believe I fulfilled my role of being a guardian to the cheetah, I had a moral obligation to do so and I tried my best to give the cheetah respect, quality care and attention he deserved within the constraints of the farm and its owners.”

Tiger cubs skinned and deboned

Another Harrowing incident detailed by Dee involved an enclosure where a group of adult lions were being housed.

According to Dee, three tiger cubs, which she helped to hand-rear had ventured through a ‘broken/open’ gate into this enclosure with five adult male lions.

“All three cubs died from having their necks broken by the lions. I retrieved the bodies of the three tiger cubs with the help of the foreman at the time, in dangerous circumstances, as we had to ward off the five adult males,” explains Dee.

Seeing how the animals were treated after their death was an emotional battle for Dee who described what ensued as ” appalling”.

“The three dead tiger cubs’ bodies were taken to the meat chiller where I identified them and awaited the owner. I was advised by the owner that a vet would come later that afternoon to certify the deaths as ‘natural causes’.”

But it was the ‘Lesson in de-skinning a dead tiger’ that got Dee even more upset.

“With one of the tiger’s hanging up on a chain by its hind legs, I was present as the owner showed the ground staff personnel how to remove the coat from the paws down and remove from the whole body intact. That afternoon the tiger’s were skinned, de-boned and the flesh burnt. The ground staff were getting a step by step introduction and lesson from the owner.

Dee reconciled herself with the fate of the animals and their bones but could accept the response she got when she suggested to the owner that she’d like to email an Australian volunteer who was very fond of one of the tigers.

“The volunteer had been to the facility numerous times and helped hand-rear the tiger and always inquired on his well being.”

The owner advised Dee not to tell the Australian volunteer saying, ” Just point to another male tiger when she comes here again, she won’t know.”

It was then that Dee understood the real value of her efforts.