Zambia’s favourable climate attracts American tourists
From BWALYA NONDO in Nevada, USA
ZAMBIA’S favourable geo-political climate has stirred interest in a number of Americans to visit and sample the various tourism attractions. Some American citizens who thronged the Zambian stand at the on-going Annual Hunters Convention taking place in the American desert city of Reno, at the Spark Reno Convention Centre said, they were interested in coming to Zambia being one of the safest tourism destinations in the world. Peter Morris, a professional hunter and conversationalist underscored the importance of peace and political stability as key factors that determined the development and growth of tourism as an economic sector in any country. Mr Morris pledged to use his professional affiliation to help market the Visit Zambia Campaign across the United States.
American citizens’ interest to visit Zambia was aroused more by Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources Minister, Kabinga Pande’s, speech to the convention, urging them to consider Zambia a safe safari-hunting destination. Mr Pande said the Zambian Government recognises the high economic value of wildlife resources and that tourism had been rated second most important economic sector, of which safari hunting was an integral part.
The minister said Government had linked poverty reduction in hunting areas to wildlife conservation. He said revenues collected from safari hunting were shared equally between local communities and the Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA). Mr Pande said safari hunters coming to Zambia would therefore contribute greatly to the enhancement of the rural economy especially in the development of social services. He said Government had put in place various mechanisms to add value to hunting expeditions.
On elephant hunting, the minister said Zambia decided to introduce this as sport hunting on pilot basis in Chiawa and Rufunsa Game Management Areas that border Zimbabwe. He said this decision was arrived at after observing that there was hunting of elephants in Zimbabwe and not in Zambia. This was despite managing the same animal population that kept crossing the borders.
The minister was grateful to Safari Club International for organising the convention that accorded Zambia an opportunity to market its safari hunting and tourism attractions. The weeklong convention has attracted 19,000 delegates from around the world.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Feeding from the cooking pots of the community...
Kalaluka Mulyokela
As long as ZAWA still remain a parastatal institution feeding from the cooking pots of the community, it will remain a liability to conservation efforts in the country and beyond than a prime mover of objective and sustainable natural resources management practices and innovations.
A promise made in public having been abrogated in order to create some friendship with individuals and give ZAWA a breath to pay some credit is the most terrible betrayal of trust among parties, collaborators and sympathisers. ZAWA will never commit itself to any truth as long as they are dripping with the desire to make money for their senior staff and settle what they owe people. It is a very shamefully situation that the donor agents have continued to go to bed with ZAWA while deliberately failing to put enough conditions and ask for tangible and projected results of the use of their money.
Professional judgment and management of wildlife is no longer the main focus but the commercial benefits gained in such a program. Have a look at what happened in the Legacy Deal. If ZAWA was ready to lease the 218 hectares of the prime area of the Park here in Livingstone for an initial $9 million and a further $ 2 million per annually, what is so special about 10 elephants selected without scientific or any elaborate research based on many considerations let alone the concern of other partners. They went even further to quickly review the draft management plan and zoned the 218 hectares as a high level use area with full support of "top and learned senior management of ZAWA. Elsewhere heads would have rolled but at ZAWA some people have built empires and dynasties run purely as an individual wish. Shame on Govt and its misinformed technocrats at ministry level.
ZAWA has completely lost direction and unless the influence of political rhetoric is stopped, by the time the alarm of misuse of public resources will have been sounded, it will be like closing the stables when the horses would have escaped.
If you check in today's Post newspaper, you will see adverts asking the public to apply for hunting licenses in GMAs. If you as a forum asked for the animal census on which the quotas will be based, you will be given none. Most likely they will be based on hunting success. We all know that this is not the best data on which to base hunting quotas. Even the minister had said it that unethical methods were used by even safari operators who he even threatened to deal with. What other atrocities are been committed by unaccompanied individual hunters in GMAs. Dry season drinking points have become target spots for most people hunting in GMAs
Today ZAWA game guards in Mazabuka have been turned into fish scouts, they are used by some farmers locally to clean their cattle farms of their own staff who poach for the pot once in 365 days while the Lechwe in Lochnivar are slaughtered at will by poachers. The list is endless and for those with the passion to see sanity return to ZAWA there is only one term to use that is "wildlife management in Zambia has go to the dogs and Government has NO will to say the least"
Can the National Consultative Forum address such concern for the people of Zambia and World over before its role becomes synonymous with any compromised line ministry department. Please pass this to people that will have the nerve to find a common ground for our wildlife including donors.
As long as ZAWA still remain a parastatal institution feeding from the cooking pots of the community, it will remain a liability to conservation efforts in the country and beyond than a prime mover of objective and sustainable natural resources management practices and innovations.
A promise made in public having been abrogated in order to create some friendship with individuals and give ZAWA a breath to pay some credit is the most terrible betrayal of trust among parties, collaborators and sympathisers. ZAWA will never commit itself to any truth as long as they are dripping with the desire to make money for their senior staff and settle what they owe people. It is a very shamefully situation that the donor agents have continued to go to bed with ZAWA while deliberately failing to put enough conditions and ask for tangible and projected results of the use of their money.
Professional judgment and management of wildlife is no longer the main focus but the commercial benefits gained in such a program. Have a look at what happened in the Legacy Deal. If ZAWA was ready to lease the 218 hectares of the prime area of the Park here in Livingstone for an initial $9 million and a further $ 2 million per annually, what is so special about 10 elephants selected without scientific or any elaborate research based on many considerations let alone the concern of other partners. They went even further to quickly review the draft management plan and zoned the 218 hectares as a high level use area with full support of "top and learned senior management of ZAWA. Elsewhere heads would have rolled but at ZAWA some people have built empires and dynasties run purely as an individual wish. Shame on Govt and its misinformed technocrats at ministry level.
ZAWA has completely lost direction and unless the influence of political rhetoric is stopped, by the time the alarm of misuse of public resources will have been sounded, it will be like closing the stables when the horses would have escaped.
If you check in today's Post newspaper, you will see adverts asking the public to apply for hunting licenses in GMAs. If you as a forum asked for the animal census on which the quotas will be based, you will be given none. Most likely they will be based on hunting success. We all know that this is not the best data on which to base hunting quotas. Even the minister had said it that unethical methods were used by even safari operators who he even threatened to deal with. What other atrocities are been committed by unaccompanied individual hunters in GMAs. Dry season drinking points have become target spots for most people hunting in GMAs
Today ZAWA game guards in Mazabuka have been turned into fish scouts, they are used by some farmers locally to clean their cattle farms of their own staff who poach for the pot once in 365 days while the Lechwe in Lochnivar are slaughtered at will by poachers. The list is endless and for those with the passion to see sanity return to ZAWA there is only one term to use that is "wildlife management in Zambia has go to the dogs and Government has NO will to say the least"
Can the National Consultative Forum address such concern for the people of Zambia and World over before its role becomes synonymous with any compromised line ministry department. Please pass this to people that will have the nerve to find a common ground for our wildlife including donors.
Monday, January 29, 2007
Conservation Force going awry...
Elephant Hunting Is Fully Open In Zambia / Getting A Handle On “Sustainable Use”
(posted August 2005)
Zambia has most definitely opened safari hunting of elephant as planned. The hunting is limited to only a few areas this safari season, but that is a beginning. We have been after Zambia to open elephant hunting for more than a decade. Some readers may remember that I began the Zambia Initiative within Safari Club International in the middle 90’s to rebuild Zambia’s failing safari industry. That initiative was successful, but we were unable to persuade the Zambian officials to add elephant hunting to their safari menu. Periodically, the authorities have continued to consult Conservation Force about opening elephant hunting and this season have finally begun some limited elephant hunting.
Conservation Force has met recently with Zambia’s management and with CITES permit authorities and has pledged to assist all US hunters with their trophy import permit applications as a free legal service until they are approved and accepted routinely. We are, in fact, already assisting all of the known US hunters. Their permits have been filed. We’ve also met face to face with the US Fish & Wildlife Service as a facilitator to expedite the necessary information exchange between that agency and Zambia for issuance of elephant trophy import permits. The necessary intergovernmental correspondence between the USF&WS and Zambia is ongoing.
Under the USF&WS regulations adopted in the early 90’s, the USF&WS must make two findings before issuing an elephant trophy import permit. First, under CITES, it must determine that the trophy import is for a "purpose" that is not "detrimental". Second, under the US Endangered Species Act (ESA), it must determine that the underlying hunting benefits, or enhances, elephant conservation. In making the second determination under the ESA, the Service essentially re-makes the biological non-detriment determination made by the exporting country (Zambia) and additionally must be provided hard evidence of conservation enhancement. Permit applicants should collect and furnish the USF&WS evidence of the abundance of elephant where they hunt, the effect of their hunting on reducing or controlling poaching, all related revenue directed towards conservation of the elephant, community programs and incentives derived from the hunting and other benefits. Remember that the renowned CAMPFIRE PROGRAM in neighboring Zimbabwe that began in the early 1990’s rested on elephant safari hunting. Sixty-eight percent of the revenue of that program was derived from the safari hunting of 54 elephants per year. The pre-existing poaching was largely eliminated and the number of elephants killed in problem animal control was greatly reduced. We wish Zambia every bit the same success, though their initial elephant hunting is limited to problem animals in a small number of indigenous communities.
(posted August 2005)
Zambia has most definitely opened safari hunting of elephant as planned. The hunting is limited to only a few areas this safari season, but that is a beginning. We have been after Zambia to open elephant hunting for more than a decade. Some readers may remember that I began the Zambia Initiative within Safari Club International in the middle 90’s to rebuild Zambia’s failing safari industry. That initiative was successful, but we were unable to persuade the Zambian officials to add elephant hunting to their safari menu. Periodically, the authorities have continued to consult Conservation Force about opening elephant hunting and this season have finally begun some limited elephant hunting.
Conservation Force has met recently with Zambia’s management and with CITES permit authorities and has pledged to assist all US hunters with their trophy import permit applications as a free legal service until they are approved and accepted routinely. We are, in fact, already assisting all of the known US hunters. Their permits have been filed. We’ve also met face to face with the US Fish & Wildlife Service as a facilitator to expedite the necessary information exchange between that agency and Zambia for issuance of elephant trophy import permits. The necessary intergovernmental correspondence between the USF&WS and Zambia is ongoing.
Under the USF&WS regulations adopted in the early 90’s, the USF&WS must make two findings before issuing an elephant trophy import permit. First, under CITES, it must determine that the trophy import is for a "purpose" that is not "detrimental". Second, under the US Endangered Species Act (ESA), it must determine that the underlying hunting benefits, or enhances, elephant conservation. In making the second determination under the ESA, the Service essentially re-makes the biological non-detriment determination made by the exporting country (Zambia) and additionally must be provided hard evidence of conservation enhancement. Permit applicants should collect and furnish the USF&WS evidence of the abundance of elephant where they hunt, the effect of their hunting on reducing or controlling poaching, all related revenue directed towards conservation of the elephant, community programs and incentives derived from the hunting and other benefits. Remember that the renowned CAMPFIRE PROGRAM in neighboring Zimbabwe that began in the early 1990’s rested on elephant safari hunting. Sixty-eight percent of the revenue of that program was derived from the safari hunting of 54 elephants per year. The pre-existing poaching was largely eliminated and the number of elephants killed in problem animal control was greatly reduced. We wish Zambia every bit the same success, though their initial elephant hunting is limited to problem animals in a small number of indigenous communities.
Sunday, January 28, 2007
Zambia Minister lobbies for elephant hunting with US Fish & Wildlife Service
Zambia lobbies US over elephant trophy hunting
From BWALYA NONDO (Public Relations Officer, Zambia Ministry of Tourism, Environment & Natural Resources), Nevada, USA
The Daily Mail 27 January 2007
ZAMBIA has launched a campaign to lobby the United States government to recognise elephant trophy hunting as key to the conservation of the earth’s largest mammal. The American government does not allow its citizens to participate in elephant safari hunting in Zambia, and advances the Convention on Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) banning, dealing in ivory among others, as the reason for its position. Zambia has since met the United States Fisheries and Wildlife Services authorities to argue that increased quotas for trophy hunting in selected areas with trans-boundary elephant populations, was necessary. These areas include the Zambezi valley, where the elephant population was shared by Zambia and Zimbabwe. Zambia considers a quota of eight for the Lower Zambezi, far below the limit settings recognised for elephant trophy hunting quotas.
Minister of Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources, Kabinga Pande, who is leading a delegation of Government, Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA), and Zambia National Tourist Board (ZNTB) officials to the annual hunters convention in the American desert city of Reno, said he was concerned that while Zimbabwe was allowed a gigantic 500 quota in the shared trans-boundary elephant population for sport-hunting, Zambia was restricted to a paltry 20, annually. Speaking when he met United States Fisheries and Wildlife Services, director, Ken Stensil, at the Reno Convention Centre, Mr Pande observed that sport-hunting had the potential to bring large financial benefits to the country and empower local communities economically and motivate them to participate in conservation projects. He said sport hunting would also go a long way in easing animal-human conflicts in game management areas and therefore enhances conservation of animals such as elephants. He said sport hunting was a conservation tool that would help Zambia plough back proceeds into the community. He regretted that in the past, the government has been subsidising conservation of elephants through funds raised from other species when the elephant could itself contribute to its own management. Between 2001 and 2005, 115 elephants were killed on control programmes, resulting in a loss of US$1.1 million in licence fees. If the same animals were hunted for trophy, communities would have realised US$575,000 for investment in various socio-economic areas to reduce poverty. Mr Pande said although many elephants were killed on control programmes every year, the only benefit to the community was meat. He said it was for this reason that communities supported the resumption of trophy hunting.
The United States was an important market for Zambian trophies and appealed to authorities to rescind the decision not to allow their citizens to bring trophies from elephant-hunting safaris. Mr Pande also cautioned the American government to be wary of some safari hunters who were maligning the Zambian government through e-mails, suggesting that safari hunting in Zambia was corruptly handled.
And Mr Stansell assured the Zambian delegation that US authorities would study the Zambian case. He appealed for more information to enable the American authorities appreciate Zambia’s elephant situation clearly. The five-day convention organised by Safari Club International, has attracted 19,000 delegates from around the world.
From BWALYA NONDO (Public Relations Officer, Zambia Ministry of Tourism, Environment & Natural Resources), Nevada, USA
The Daily Mail 27 January 2007
ZAMBIA has launched a campaign to lobby the United States government to recognise elephant trophy hunting as key to the conservation of the earth’s largest mammal. The American government does not allow its citizens to participate in elephant safari hunting in Zambia, and advances the Convention on Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) banning, dealing in ivory among others, as the reason for its position. Zambia has since met the United States Fisheries and Wildlife Services authorities to argue that increased quotas for trophy hunting in selected areas with trans-boundary elephant populations, was necessary. These areas include the Zambezi valley, where the elephant population was shared by Zambia and Zimbabwe. Zambia considers a quota of eight for the Lower Zambezi, far below the limit settings recognised for elephant trophy hunting quotas.
Minister of Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources, Kabinga Pande, who is leading a delegation of Government, Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA), and Zambia National Tourist Board (ZNTB) officials to the annual hunters convention in the American desert city of Reno, said he was concerned that while Zimbabwe was allowed a gigantic 500 quota in the shared trans-boundary elephant population for sport-hunting, Zambia was restricted to a paltry 20, annually. Speaking when he met United States Fisheries and Wildlife Services, director, Ken Stensil, at the Reno Convention Centre, Mr Pande observed that sport-hunting had the potential to bring large financial benefits to the country and empower local communities economically and motivate them to participate in conservation projects. He said sport hunting would also go a long way in easing animal-human conflicts in game management areas and therefore enhances conservation of animals such as elephants. He said sport hunting was a conservation tool that would help Zambia plough back proceeds into the community. He regretted that in the past, the government has been subsidising conservation of elephants through funds raised from other species when the elephant could itself contribute to its own management. Between 2001 and 2005, 115 elephants were killed on control programmes, resulting in a loss of US$1.1 million in licence fees. If the same animals were hunted for trophy, communities would have realised US$575,000 for investment in various socio-economic areas to reduce poverty. Mr Pande said although many elephants were killed on control programmes every year, the only benefit to the community was meat. He said it was for this reason that communities supported the resumption of trophy hunting.
The United States was an important market for Zambian trophies and appealed to authorities to rescind the decision not to allow their citizens to bring trophies from elephant-hunting safaris. Mr Pande also cautioned the American government to be wary of some safari hunters who were maligning the Zambian government through e-mails, suggesting that safari hunting in Zambia was corruptly handled.
And Mr Stansell assured the Zambian delegation that US authorities would study the Zambian case. He appealed for more information to enable the American authorities appreciate Zambia’s elephant situation clearly. The five-day convention organised by Safari Club International, has attracted 19,000 delegates from around the world.
ZAMBIA: OF TRUCES, BROKEN PROMISES AND ELEPHANT
On 3 January 2007, a truce between Government and the hunting safari industry – including all of the tourism and conservation community, was brokered by the Minister of Tourism, Environment & Natural Resources, Kabinga Pande, at a meeting in Lusaka. The Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) Director-General, Dr Lewis Saiwana, admitted past mistakes and requested future cooperation, and the Minister promised a future open door policy, requesting that the campaign against Government cease and that the factional fighting besetting the industry should be resolved. On Monday 15 January, 2007, Ian Manning and Rolf Shenton, steering committee members of the Natural Resources Consultative Forum of Zambia (NRCF) – a cross-sectoral forum of all the stakeholders in the environmental and natural resources field, met with the Chairman of the ZAWA Board, Walusiku Lisulo, who stated that ZAWA would fully consult all stakeholders in the future. This undertaking was confirmed by Dr Saiwana, who added that no elephant hunting permits would be issued without full consultation with all concerned, and that a full round of stakeholder meetings would be held in February 2007 on the return of the Minister, the Chairman and the DG from their attendance at the forthcoming Safari Club International meeting in Reno, USA. The NRCF had in January 2006, invoked the precautionary principle, and with the agreement of the hunting fraternity of Zambia, advised the Minister that no elephant hunting should be allowed until the necessary supporting scientific information was to hand. This had been ignored by the Ministry and ZAWA in 2006, assurances obviously now being sought that this would not happen again.
On Tuesday 16 January, the licensing office of ZAWA phoned safari operators to announce that an auction of elephant hunting permits would be held at ZAWA HQ on Friday19 January, 2007. On Wednesday 17 January, Manning e-mailed and had delivered by courier to Dr Lewis Saiwana, Walusiku Lisulo, and the public relations officer of the Ministry, Bwalya Nondo - the latter promising to place the letter in the hands of the Minister, a letter querying the auction. No reply was forthcoming.
On Friday 19 January 2007 - in a repeat of the auction of 2006, and witnessed by a safari operator’s representative, ten elephant for sport hunting were put up for auction at a reserve price of $10,000 each, two elephant permits being purchased by Mr Doug Reynolds of Royal Zambezi Safaris, to be killed in the Chiawa concession, an area adjoining a photo tourism hotspot. Rashid Randera of Baobab Safaris and Nyampala Safaris, who in 2006 had purchased eight elephant permits, attended the auction, did not take part in the public bid, but met with the auctioneers prior to the auction. No other operators, Reynolds and Randera apart - as in 2006, attended. An opportunity was given to the acting Director General of the Zambia Wildlife Authority, Isaac Longwe, to comment on the auction. He has so far not done so.
Ian Manning
23 Janaury, 2007.
On Tuesday 16 January, the licensing office of ZAWA phoned safari operators to announce that an auction of elephant hunting permits would be held at ZAWA HQ on Friday19 January, 2007. On Wednesday 17 January, Manning e-mailed and had delivered by courier to Dr Lewis Saiwana, Walusiku Lisulo, and the public relations officer of the Ministry, Bwalya Nondo - the latter promising to place the letter in the hands of the Minister, a letter querying the auction. No reply was forthcoming.
On Friday 19 January 2007 - in a repeat of the auction of 2006, and witnessed by a safari operator’s representative, ten elephant for sport hunting were put up for auction at a reserve price of $10,000 each, two elephant permits being purchased by Mr Doug Reynolds of Royal Zambezi Safaris, to be killed in the Chiawa concession, an area adjoining a photo tourism hotspot. Rashid Randera of Baobab Safaris and Nyampala Safaris, who in 2006 had purchased eight elephant permits, attended the auction, did not take part in the public bid, but met with the auctioneers prior to the auction. No other operators, Reynolds and Randera apart - as in 2006, attended. An opportunity was given to the acting Director General of the Zambia Wildlife Authority, Isaac Longwe, to comment on the auction. He has so far not done so.
Ian Manning
23 Janaury, 2007.
Zambia Natural Resources Consultative Forum advises against elephant sport hunting
NATURAL RESOURCES CONSULTATIVE FORUM MEETING TO DECIDE ON THE CONTINUANCE OF SPORT ELEPHANT HUNTING IN ZAMBIA
And to provide advice to the
PERMANENT SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TOURISM, ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
10 JANUARY 2006
INTRODUCTION
A meeting was held at 1430 hrs on 10 January 2006 to discuss the question of Elephant Sport Hunting (ESH) in Zambia so as to prepare an urgent Advisory Note for the Permanent Secretary and the Minister in the light of their forthcoming attendance at the meeting of the Safari Club Convention in Reno, Nevada, USA starting on 18 January 2006, a convention where the elephant quota for 2006 would be sold by Zambian Safari Operators and their agents. Regrettably the Acting DG ZAWA declined to attend in person or to send a competent officer (a preliminary meeting of the NRCF Steering Committee had been held the previous week to discuss the matter with the Acting DG ZAWA, the latter declining to attend)
The meeting overwhelmingly agreed that given the absence of the necessary base-line data (see below – prepared for the meeting) from ZAWA on which clear advice may be tendered to the Permanent Secretary, that the precautionary principle should be invoked and ESH banned for 2006, and until such time as ZAWA provided the essential inputs
The Chairman NRCF however ruled that the MTENR should be advised of the situation but that a meeting with ZAWA should be held after SCI Reno to decide on the formulation of the Advisory Note.
NRCF, as far as those present was concerned, therefore rests on the horns of a dilemma.
1.0 BACKGROUND
In 2005 the Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) issued a quota of 20 elephant for sport hunting by foreign clients in the Chiawa, Rufunsa and Lower Lupande hunting concessions; 10 to be utilized by the concessionaires of those areas, the remaining 10 to be auctioned to other safari operators – the proceeds to be deposited in an elephant conservation fund and shared with affected communities. The quota was issued by ZAWA in response to complaints by local communities of elephant damage to crops, and of loss of life . The DG ZAWA stated that 20 problem bull elephant had been identified by his officers and that these would be shot, and that measures would be taken to assist communities in improving their capacity to defend themselves against raiders. The Tourism Council of Zambia (TCZ), the Safari Hunting Operators of Zambia (SHOAZ), the South Luangwa Conservation Society (SLCS) – which produced an analysis of the issue, in particular a response to ZAWA’s Draft Guidelines for Elephant Sport Hunting (ESH)”, and Conservation Lower Zambezi (CLZ) opposed the hunting of elephant on the grounds that elephant were being poached , that populations had not yet recovered from the hunting ban of 1982, and that the few bull elephant in these areas were of considerable value to the non-consumptive tourism industry. Numerous international elephant conservation organizations also opposed the move. In 2004, ZAWA had applied to the Conference of the Parties (COP) of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora (CITES) for the ivory taken from the 20 elephant to be exported to CITES signatory countries. This application was granted. ZAWA’s application for elephant to be downlisted to Appendix 2, enabling it to sell its stockpile of 17 tons of ivory, was refused. At least one international organization supported the introduction of elephant hunting and had negotiated with the US Fish & Wildlife Service for ivory from the 20 hunted elephant to be imported into the USA. This was, however, refused. ZAWA, through the NRCF held a consultative meeting on the elephant hunting proposal, but had already announced the issue of the hunting quota.
2. Policy and Zambian International Treaty Obligations
Zambia Draft National Policy on Environment (May 2005) •The wildlife resource is generally under severe and increasing pressure due to increase in human population and loss of habitat as a consequence of expanding human settlements and conversion of habitat to available land. • Depletion in most places of wildlife due to illegal harvesting a consequence of high poverty levels. • Deforestation and uncontrolled hunting is leading to a widespread depletion of all of wildlife • Loss of biodiversity through weak management of protected areas. • Community-based management still weak and not yet widely practiced. • Potential for tourism development jeopardised through reduction in large mammal populations and degradation of habitats in some places. • River flow changes through hydro-power dam regulation causing reduced production of floodplain wildlife. • Development of mechanisms for re-investment and revenue sharing with the poor.
CITES Convention Guided by way of non-detriment finds and ultimately by the application of the precautionary principle
1992 – Burnt 6.5 tons of ivory. Paid for by Elefriends +
2002 – Application for transfer of elephant to Appendix 2 refused
2004 – Application to sell 17 tons refused
2004 – Application for parties to import ESH products from Zambia ?
Biodiversity Convention: Where knowledge is lacking, guided by the application of the precautionary principle
The African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (2003) -an AU mirror of the Biodiversity Convention
Lusaka Agreement 2002 - 68. The Zambia Wildlife Authority is currently investigating the role of Zambian nationals and ivory sourced within Zambia relating to the recent seizure of 6.5 tonnes in Singapore. There have been seven arrests to date including an unspecified number of ZAWA staff members.
2005 - Lusaka Agreement Task Force currently investigating 6 tons of illegal ivory confiscated in Singapore 2002 – now moved to Nairobi, believed to come from Zambia.
African Elephant Conservation Act: A U.S. federal law that reaffirms the endangered status of African elephants and allocates money toward conservation efforts US law recognizing endangered status of African elephant
3. Precautionary Principle Guidelines
Guideline 1: INCORPORATE Incorporate the Precautionary Principle explicitly into appropriate legal, institutional and policy frameworks for biodiversity conservation and natural resource management. Elaboration: Application of the principle requires a clear legal and policy basis and an effective system of governance. It also requires the establishment and maintenance of adequately resourced institutions to carry out research into risk and uncertainty in environmental decision-making.
Guideline 2: INTEGRATE Integrate application of the Precautionary Principle with the application of and support for other relevant principles and rights.
Guideline 3: OPERATIONALISE Develop clear and context-specific obligations and operational measures for particular sectors and contexts, or with respect to specific conservation or management problems.
Guideline 4: INCLUDE STAKEHOLDERS AND RIGHTHOLDERS Include all relevant stakeholders and rightholders in a transparent process of assessment, decision-making and implementation
Guideline 5: USE THE BEST INFORMATION AVAILABLE Base precautionary decision-making on the best available information, including that relating to human drivers of threats, and traditional and indigenous knowledge
Guideline 6: CHARACTERISE UNCERTAIN THREATS Characterise the threat(s), and assess the uncertainties surrounding the ecological, social and economic drivers of changes in conservation status.
Guideline 7: ASSESS OPTIONS Identify the available actions to address threats, and assess the likely consequences of these various courses of action and inaction
Guideline 8: ALLOCATE RESPONSIBILITIES FOR PROVIDING EVIDENCE Allocate roles and responsibilities for providing information and evidence of threat and/or safety according to who is proposing a potentially harmful activity, who benefits from it, and who has access to information and resources
Guideline 9: BE EXPLICIT Specify that precautionary measures are being taken and be explicit about the uncertainty to which the precautionary measures are responding.
Guideline 10: BE PROPORTIONATE In applying the Precautionary Principle adopt measures that are proportionate to the potential threats
Guideline 11: BE EQUITABLE Consider social and economic costs and benefits when applying the Precautionary Principle and where decisions would have negative impacts on the poor or vulnerable explore ways to avoid or mitigate these
Guideline 12: BE ADAPTIVE Use an adaptive management approach, including the following core elements: • monitoring of impacts of management or decisions based on agreed indicators; • promoting research, to reduce key uncertainties; • ensuring periodic evaluation of the outcomes of implementation, drawing of lessons and review and adjustment, as necessary, of the measures or decisions adopted; • establishing an efficient and effective compliance system.
4. A Few Multi-National Organizations Position on Zambia ESH
Conservation Force: Has been supporting ZAWA in ESH
Save the Elephants Organization: Opposed to ESH, advocating non-lethal Green Hunting
Bloody Business.com: Opposes hunting, states CITES will monitor the Zambian ESH (World Peace Herald 23 May 05)
Born Free Opposes
IFAW Opposes
US Fish & Wildlife Service: Does not allow imports of ESH from Zambia
Under the USF&WS regulations adopted in the early 90’s, the USF&WS must make two findings before issuing an elephant trophy import permit. First, under CITES, it must determine that the trophy import is for a "purpose" that is not "detrimental". Second, under the US Endangered Species Act (ESA), it must determine that the underlying hunting benefits, or enhances, elephant conservation. In making the second determination under the ESA, the Service essentially re-makes the biological non-detriment determination made by the exporting country (Zambia) and additionally must be provided hard evidence of conservation enhancement. Permit applicants should collect and furnish the USF&WS evidence of the abundance of elephant where they hunt, the effect of their hunting on reducing or controlling poaching, all related revenue directed towards conservation of the elephant, community programs and incentives derived from the hunting and other benefits
And to provide advice to the
PERMANENT SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TOURISM, ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
10 JANUARY 2006
INTRODUCTION
A meeting was held at 1430 hrs on 10 January 2006 to discuss the question of Elephant Sport Hunting (ESH) in Zambia so as to prepare an urgent Advisory Note for the Permanent Secretary and the Minister in the light of their forthcoming attendance at the meeting of the Safari Club Convention in Reno, Nevada, USA starting on 18 January 2006, a convention where the elephant quota for 2006 would be sold by Zambian Safari Operators and their agents. Regrettably the Acting DG ZAWA declined to attend in person or to send a competent officer (a preliminary meeting of the NRCF Steering Committee had been held the previous week to discuss the matter with the Acting DG ZAWA, the latter declining to attend)
The meeting overwhelmingly agreed that given the absence of the necessary base-line data (see below – prepared for the meeting) from ZAWA on which clear advice may be tendered to the Permanent Secretary, that the precautionary principle should be invoked and ESH banned for 2006, and until such time as ZAWA provided the essential inputs
The Chairman NRCF however ruled that the MTENR should be advised of the situation but that a meeting with ZAWA should be held after SCI Reno to decide on the formulation of the Advisory Note.
NRCF, as far as those present was concerned, therefore rests on the horns of a dilemma.
1.0 BACKGROUND
In 2005 the Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) issued a quota of 20 elephant for sport hunting by foreign clients in the Chiawa, Rufunsa and Lower Lupande hunting concessions; 10 to be utilized by the concessionaires of those areas, the remaining 10 to be auctioned to other safari operators – the proceeds to be deposited in an elephant conservation fund and shared with affected communities. The quota was issued by ZAWA in response to complaints by local communities of elephant damage to crops, and of loss of life . The DG ZAWA stated that 20 problem bull elephant had been identified by his officers and that these would be shot, and that measures would be taken to assist communities in improving their capacity to defend themselves against raiders. The Tourism Council of Zambia (TCZ), the Safari Hunting Operators of Zambia (SHOAZ), the South Luangwa Conservation Society (SLCS) – which produced an analysis of the issue, in particular a response to ZAWA’s Draft Guidelines for Elephant Sport Hunting (ESH)”, and Conservation Lower Zambezi (CLZ) opposed the hunting of elephant on the grounds that elephant were being poached , that populations had not yet recovered from the hunting ban of 1982, and that the few bull elephant in these areas were of considerable value to the non-consumptive tourism industry. Numerous international elephant conservation organizations also opposed the move. In 2004, ZAWA had applied to the Conference of the Parties (COP) of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora (CITES) for the ivory taken from the 20 elephant to be exported to CITES signatory countries. This application was granted. ZAWA’s application for elephant to be downlisted to Appendix 2, enabling it to sell its stockpile of 17 tons of ivory, was refused. At least one international organization supported the introduction of elephant hunting and had negotiated with the US Fish & Wildlife Service for ivory from the 20 hunted elephant to be imported into the USA. This was, however, refused. ZAWA, through the NRCF held a consultative meeting on the elephant hunting proposal, but had already announced the issue of the hunting quota.
2. Policy and Zambian International Treaty Obligations
Zambia Draft National Policy on Environment (May 2005) •The wildlife resource is generally under severe and increasing pressure due to increase in human population and loss of habitat as a consequence of expanding human settlements and conversion of habitat to available land. • Depletion in most places of wildlife due to illegal harvesting a consequence of high poverty levels. • Deforestation and uncontrolled hunting is leading to a widespread depletion of all of wildlife • Loss of biodiversity through weak management of protected areas. • Community-based management still weak and not yet widely practiced. • Potential for tourism development jeopardised through reduction in large mammal populations and degradation of habitats in some places. • River flow changes through hydro-power dam regulation causing reduced production of floodplain wildlife. • Development of mechanisms for re-investment and revenue sharing with the poor.
CITES Convention Guided by way of non-detriment finds and ultimately by the application of the precautionary principle
1992 – Burnt 6.5 tons of ivory. Paid for by Elefriends +
2002 – Application for transfer of elephant to Appendix 2 refused
2004 – Application to sell 17 tons refused
2004 – Application for parties to import ESH products from Zambia ?
Biodiversity Convention: Where knowledge is lacking, guided by the application of the precautionary principle
The African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (2003) -an AU mirror of the Biodiversity Convention
Lusaka Agreement 2002 - 68. The Zambia Wildlife Authority is currently investigating the role of Zambian nationals and ivory sourced within Zambia relating to the recent seizure of 6.5 tonnes in Singapore. There have been seven arrests to date including an unspecified number of ZAWA staff members.
2005 - Lusaka Agreement Task Force currently investigating 6 tons of illegal ivory confiscated in Singapore 2002 – now moved to Nairobi, believed to come from Zambia.
African Elephant Conservation Act: A U.S. federal law that reaffirms the endangered status of African elephants and allocates money toward conservation efforts US law recognizing endangered status of African elephant
3. Precautionary Principle Guidelines
Guideline 1: INCORPORATE Incorporate the Precautionary Principle explicitly into appropriate legal, institutional and policy frameworks for biodiversity conservation and natural resource management. Elaboration: Application of the principle requires a clear legal and policy basis and an effective system of governance. It also requires the establishment and maintenance of adequately resourced institutions to carry out research into risk and uncertainty in environmental decision-making.
Guideline 2: INTEGRATE Integrate application of the Precautionary Principle with the application of and support for other relevant principles and rights.
Guideline 3: OPERATIONALISE Develop clear and context-specific obligations and operational measures for particular sectors and contexts, or with respect to specific conservation or management problems.
Guideline 4: INCLUDE STAKEHOLDERS AND RIGHTHOLDERS Include all relevant stakeholders and rightholders in a transparent process of assessment, decision-making and implementation
Guideline 5: USE THE BEST INFORMATION AVAILABLE Base precautionary decision-making on the best available information, including that relating to human drivers of threats, and traditional and indigenous knowledge
Guideline 6: CHARACTERISE UNCERTAIN THREATS Characterise the threat(s), and assess the uncertainties surrounding the ecological, social and economic drivers of changes in conservation status.
Guideline 7: ASSESS OPTIONS Identify the available actions to address threats, and assess the likely consequences of these various courses of action and inaction
Guideline 8: ALLOCATE RESPONSIBILITIES FOR PROVIDING EVIDENCE Allocate roles and responsibilities for providing information and evidence of threat and/or safety according to who is proposing a potentially harmful activity, who benefits from it, and who has access to information and resources
Guideline 9: BE EXPLICIT Specify that precautionary measures are being taken and be explicit about the uncertainty to which the precautionary measures are responding.
Guideline 10: BE PROPORTIONATE In applying the Precautionary Principle adopt measures that are proportionate to the potential threats
Guideline 11: BE EQUITABLE Consider social and economic costs and benefits when applying the Precautionary Principle and where decisions would have negative impacts on the poor or vulnerable explore ways to avoid or mitigate these
Guideline 12: BE ADAPTIVE Use an adaptive management approach, including the following core elements: • monitoring of impacts of management or decisions based on agreed indicators; • promoting research, to reduce key uncertainties; • ensuring periodic evaluation of the outcomes of implementation, drawing of lessons and review and adjustment, as necessary, of the measures or decisions adopted; • establishing an efficient and effective compliance system.
4. A Few Multi-National Organizations Position on Zambia ESH
Conservation Force: Has been supporting ZAWA in ESH
Save the Elephants Organization: Opposed to ESH, advocating non-lethal Green Hunting
Bloody Business.com: Opposes hunting, states CITES will monitor the Zambian ESH (World Peace Herald 23 May 05)
Born Free Opposes
IFAW Opposes
US Fish & Wildlife Service: Does not allow imports of ESH from Zambia
Under the USF&WS regulations adopted in the early 90’s, the USF&WS must make two findings before issuing an elephant trophy import permit. First, under CITES, it must determine that the trophy import is for a "purpose" that is not "detrimental". Second, under the US Endangered Species Act (ESA), it must determine that the underlying hunting benefits, or enhances, elephant conservation. In making the second determination under the ESA, the Service essentially re-makes the biological non-detriment determination made by the exporting country (Zambia) and additionally must be provided hard evidence of conservation enhancement. Permit applicants should collect and furnish the USF&WS evidence of the abundance of elephant where they hunt, the effect of their hunting on reducing or controlling poaching, all related revenue directed towards conservation of the elephant, community programs and incentives derived from the hunting and other benefits
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)