|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
"The case is that the trade is necessary because of dwindling government subsidies for the protection of wildlife". South Africa is suggesting that the world regulatory body on trade in endangered species Investigate allowing the buying and selling of white rhinoceros horn. In proposals strongly supported by the country's private game ranchers it is also suggested that international trade in other, undefined white rhino products should be legalised. The proposals are part of a draft list released this week by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism's biodiversity utilisation division. They are the first step towards the 12th meeting of the conference of parties (COP12) to the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites) in November. The various proposals have been placed on the table by a range of local bodies, including South African National Parks (SANParks), private game farmers and conservation NGOs. Public input on the proposals closes on February 13. Other proposals include selling Kruger National Park's ivory stockpile, introducing a quota for hunting cheetahs and increasing quotas for hunting leopards, both big cat species that are highly endangered. Extra protection is mooted for Cape parrots, as well as roan and sable antelopes. South Africa is one of 155 member states to Cites. The convention banned international trade in all rhino products in 1977, largely because the demand for horns - used in the East as medicines and dagger handles - was virtually impossible to regulate. Under pressure from Southern African states, however, the conference passed a resolution in 1994 allowing trade in hunting trophies and live white rhinos sent to approved conservation destinations. Past attempts to allow trade in stockpiles of white rhino horns have been rejected by Cites conferences, held every second year. The current draft proposal suggests "investigating the feasibility and advisability of establishing bilateral trade in rhinoceros horn from [South Africa's] population of southern white rhinoceros". The suggestion is strongly supported by private ranchers, who together own almost 2 000 white rhino in South Africa. They argue that the ban on trading rhino products "has failed to provide significant protection to rhino populations in the wild. "In fact, such a ban may even be counter-productive in that it prevents the full benefits of wise use of the resource accruing to rhinoceros owners, while rewarding the illegal operators and possibly stimulating poaching as the availability of the resources decreases." In the case of both rhino horn and Kruger's ivory stocks, it is argued that trade is necessary because of dwindling government subsidies for the protection of endangered species. The release this week of SANParks's annual report will add fuel to the argument. An addendum by the auditor general warns that unless a cash injection is forthcoming, the long-term financial sustainability of SANParks will be at risk. According to the auditor general's figures, the cash resources of the national parks has shrunk from a net asset of R14,3-million in 2000 to a net liability of R5,6-million last year - a decline of R20-million. Furthermore, the balance sheet indicates a net current liability of R63,8-million. In the Cites draft, SANParks proposes to sell off more than 30 000kg of raw ivory stockpiled since 1984, from culling operations and elephants that have died of natural causes. It is proposed these tusks be sold in a similar manner to the sale of almost 60 000 tons of ivory by Namibia, Zimbabwe and Botswana in 1999. Ten years after the 1989 Cites ban on all ivory exports, the three Southern African countries sold off their stockpiles in a one-off sale to Japan. The proposal is that South Africa would only sell to Cites-approved countries and that all net revenues would be used for projects that promote the conservation of elephants. While heated controversies around whether legal ivory trade encourages illegal trade and increased poaching are a regular feature of Cites meetings, debates about hunting quotas for endangered big cats are a relatively new item. The draft suggests Cites should approve the export of hunting trophies and other specimens from 15 cheetahs each year. South Africa has only two viable wild populations of cheetahs in protected areas: an estimated 200 in the Kruger Park and fewer than 100 in the Kalagadi Trans-frontier Park. The argument, mooted by conservation NGOs, is that allowing hunting will encourage agricultural farmers to protect free-roaming cheetah populations, which make up 90% of the total. Farmers who regard them as vermin are illegally killing at least 100 each year. "The only viable solution to the conservation of the free-roaming cheetah population on farmlands is to give the landowner the opportunity to utilise these predators on a sustainable basis in order to receive direct financial gain from their presence on private property." South Africa already has a Cites export quota for 75 leopard hunting trophies and skins. It is mooted that Cites increase this quota and streamline the regulations. Opponents of the big cat hunting quotas have argued at past Cites conferences that not enough is known about how many there are left in the wild. The limited Cites quotas do not reflect the thousands that are hunted, both legally and illegally, but are not for export purposes. The proposals to extend Cites protection to Cape parrots, increasingly endangered because of habitat destruction, as well as to roan and sable antelopes, are unlikely to cause much controversy. The live trade in all three species poses a threat to their future survival. It is mooted that Cape parrots be protected
under Cites Appendix I, which forbids all trade, while the antelopes be placed
on Appendix II, which allows for limited and regulated trade".
|
