African Wildlife and Environment Issue 66

GENERAL

GENERAL

Dear Editor and WESSA Team As a proud South African living in Australia, I was delighted to receive African Wildlife & Environment #65- I don’t know what happened to my #64! Whilst I have lived in Australia for almost 19 years, not a day goes by when I don’t think back to my country of birth and its magnificent natural heritage. In fact, when I came to Australia some 19 years ago - I am married to an Australian lady - the most important items to accompany me were my natural history book collection (in excess of 1 000 books); a magnificent collection of mainly African carved walking sticks and last but not least, a crazy collection of hats that I used to wear during my bush excursions. In fact, one of these hats - obtained from my good friend, Clive Walker - is made from the bark of a baobab tree and I used to tell my Australian wife, “smell this hat - it smells of Africa!” At that stage, my wife had never been to South Africa but had a deep love and interest in African wildlife and had read extensively on the subject. In 2003, she accompanied me to South Africa for her first visit and smelling the African bush first hand for the first time, she understood why I love my sticks, my hats and my books! I am proud of WESSA and the role it has played going back to the 1880s in the battle to conserve Southern Africa’s wildlife and environment and that is why following the unfortunate demise of Environment - People and Conservation in Africa , WESSA has done its members and the broader public a big service by bringing back its famous magazine and to paraphrase a writer in this autumn edition, it is indeed good to hold this magazine in my hands again! In this issue #65, I particularly enjoyed reading my old friend- sorry, John, longstanding friend- John Ledger’s editorial and commend WESSA for retaining John as the Consulting Editor, and I have no doubt, that as always, readers will benefit from John’s insights and considerable knowledge. I also enjoyed GOOD READS as this enables me to see what’s new on the book scene. It was also good to read about the Greater Kyalami Conservancy - an area that I knew well coming from Johannesburg and it was also most gratifying to read that 119 field rangers graduated from the Southern African Wildlife College. Hopefully they will have a large impact in preserving our precious wildlife and help keep the dreaded poachers at bay. I also enjoyed Bryan Havemann’s stories about “Following Predators” and hope that he will publish these in a book sometime. May WESSA and African Wildlife & Environment go from strength to strength and may the efforts of all who love and fight for the preservation of our precious African wildlife, be crowned with success. Warm regards from Sydney, Australia R ob Schneider (Past trustee of the Endangered Wildlife Trust, the Wilderness Trust, the Rhino & Elephant Foundation etc. and a proud Life member of WESSA!)

Morgan Griffiths ( African Wildlife & Environment 65) enthusiastically hails the ‘incredible precedent setting win in the North Gauteng High Court’ where the Environmental Minister was told to consider the climate change impacts of the proposed Thabametsi coal power station. The Court was persuaded by Earthlife Africa (ELA), represented by the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), that the Minister had authorised the go-ahead for thepower stationwithout adequately considering the ‘climate change impacts’. The problem here is that nobody actually knows how to measure these ‘climate change impacts’! While most people have been brainwashed by the media and show-boaters like Al Gore that Carbon Dioxide (CO2) from burning fossil fuels is a threat to the global climate system, those who delve beneath the populist froth are aware that this a highly disputed and complicated field. CO2 is not only emitted from many and various sources, but as it is an essential fuel for plant growth, is also sequestered (taken up) by plants in huge amounts. How many of your readers might know that the Democratic Republic of Congo is the fourth highest emitter (after sequestration) of CO2 in the world, after China, the USA and India? How is that possible, when DRC has no big industries or power stations? There are in fact many different sources of CO2, with deforestation and biomass burning being among the most important. A recent review claims that only 4.7% of the CO2 emitted annually from all sources can be attributed to human activities! So neither the Minister, nor anyone in her Department, nor the environmental consultants, let alone ELA, the CER and the learned judge that handed down this decision, know how to evaluate the ‘climate impacts’ of the proposed power station. Indeed, a careful consideration of all the facts might conclude that the impacts are beneficial rather than negative. It is well-known that plant growth is enhanced by increased levels of CO2, and in Limpopo Province, as well as neighbouring Botswana and Zimbabwe, many people might possibly benefit from increased wood and agricultural crop production. WESSA’s Environmental Governance Programme Manager should be careful about aligning the Society with these opportunistic anti-coal activists who are so quick to run to the courts and waste tax-payers’ money in frivolous skirmishes about a non-existent problem.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Your opinion is highly valued and welcome. Please send your feedback, letters, comments and suggestions to editor@wessa.co.za

Responses to ‘Reserve boundaries under pressure’ in African Wildlife & Environment , Edition 65 (2017) This article was recently brought to our attention. The Private Rhino Owners Association (PROA) is dismayed and disappointed at Mr Griffiths’ inaccurate portrayal of the organisation; his lack of sensitivity towards private rhino owners and the pressures they currently face in keeping their rhinos safe; and his insulting remarks towards private rhino owners in general. We are also deeply concerned at WESSA’s negativity and opposition towards the rhino horn trade, given its propensity to be an ideal model of sustainable utilisation in conservation – a model that has proven highly successful for various wildlife species in South Africa. We have held WESSA in high regard as a credible and balanced conservation organisation and it would be a great pity to see it devolve into yet another animal rights organisation. Mr Griffiths states that WESSA is certain that “re opening legal trade will encourage a growth in horn consumer demand” and that this will “undoubtedly exacerbate rhino poaching above current levels”. PROA would be interested to know which studies Mr Griffiths and WESSA have based their research on in this regard or whether they are simply echoing opinions derived from anti-sustainable-use groups. Numerous independent scientific articles have been published on the economic aspects of re opening the domestic trade in rhino horn and they primarily indicate that doing so would in fact, drive horn prices down and would therefore relieve poaching pressure on rhino populations. Prior to 2009, when a domestic trade in rhino horn existed, rhino poaching figures were negligible. Citing the disastrous once-off ivory auctions as proof of a failed trade policy further illustrates Mr Griffiths’ ignorance of the situation, as the ivory auctions were isolated cases that were poorly planned and executed, with long moratoriums attached as conditions of the sales – this led to a speculative response and ensured that ivory remained artificially scarce on the market. Hence, little to no reduction in elephant poaching resulted. PROA is proposing a regular, sustainable and strictly controlled trade in rhino horn – horn that is sourced from healthy, live rhinos. Ours is a voluntary association with general members and it is a non profit organisation that promotes the conservation, protection and proliferation of all species of rhino on private land in South Africa and the rest of Africa.

Since 2009, when the domestic moratorium on horn trade was imposed by DEA, private reserves have spent more than R 2 billion on rhino protection and management. Today, they are responsible for the conservation of about 37% of the nation’s rhino, with a much lower percentage poaching loss of total rhino killed in SA. They are doing an exemplary job of keeping their rhinos safe, despite great adversity. They risk their own lives, and those of all their employees, every day to do so. They regularly display acts of immense bravery to protect their rhinos, just as employees of our national reserves do. A great number of lives, both animal and human, have been lost in this fight to save the rhinos and we believe that most rhino owners have had to experience at least one deeply traumatic rhino poaching incident on their land. Mr Griffiths, if you had to face this situation, or put your family’s lives on the line to keep one safe, we wonder if you would be singing the same tune… Finally, private reserves receive no government funding and very few of them receive public donations. For WESSA to claim that this is another case of “money first, conservation second” is not only insulting to private reserve owners, it is blatantly false and at worst, damaging to the ongoing efforts of all the people involved in keeping rhino safe at present. Sincerely, Pelham Jones (PROA Chairman) and Tanya Jacobsen (RhinoAlive) As a loyal and faithful servant to WESSA for the past 25 years, I found Morgan Griffiths’ report entitled Reserve boundaries under pressure in which he slams the Department of Environmental Affairs for opening of legal trade in rhino horn, misleading. He goes further to say “it is WESSA’S considered opinion … that this will lead to the rapid demise of these species” Really? If this truly is WESSA’S opinion, I’m afraid it will precipitate the rapid demise of WESSA rather than that of our rhinos. Griffiths’ unfounded remarks smack of animal rightism and he should be removed from the fold! Ian Withers WESSA Knysna

Ed Bokman

4 |

5 | African Wildlife & Environment | 66 (2017)