Published by the government of Zimbabwe
Wisdom Mdzungairi
6 July 2002
Battle lines have been drawn between five Southern African countries and international non-governmental organisations over the sustainable utilisation of large populations of elephant ahead of the high-profile Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species meeting.
Although there are 54 proposals to amend the lists of species subject to trade controls or prohibitions, the high-ranking item for the Santiago Conference in November will be the African elephant.
The battle this year is, however, likely to be compounded by the fact that several countries are opposed to Zimbabwe's land reforms.
There has also been some increase in poaching and loss of wildlife range associated with the land reform and resettlement programme, a Cites national technical committee said recently.
The five countries are Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
The debate over elephants has focused on the benefits ivory sales may bring to local communities and conservation programmes versus the concern that such sales may inspire increased poaching.
However, the National Parks and Wildlife Management Authority argues that the land reform has resulted in more areas being ceded to the Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (Campfire).
This has helped to stabilise and in some cases has reversed the rate of conversion of wild habitat as rural communities in these areas have adopted wildlife production as a land use option and have designated land exclusively for wildlife.
This strategy could only be sustainable if the benefits outweigh the costs of living with wildlife. In addition, the panel of experts who reviewed Zimbabwe's elephant proposals in 1992 and 1996 concluded that there were no threats to the survival of Zimbabwe's elephant population in the short or medium terms.
Illegal killing incidents have remained low, the authority said.
Between 1998 and 2001, ivory sales to licensed local manufacturers netted $23 million while elephant hides worth $44,4 million were sold to licensed dealers during the same period.
The one-off raw ivory sale conducted under the Cites secretariat in Japan also raised $76 million, of which $22 million went to Campfire or rural communities and $54,3 million went to parks coffers.
Revenue raised from the sale of elephant hide by the authority was used to rehabilitate the Hwange National Park game water supplies and to revamp the radio communication system in the major elephant range areas - Zambezi Valley, Sebungwe, north-west Matabeleland and Gonarezhou.
Trade
In short, the limited trade of elephant products under Appendix II has benefited the wildlife authority, landowners, wildlife industry and indeed elephant conservation in Zimbabwe, and its proponent neighbours.
Zimbabwe, which along with South Africa, Botswana, Namibia and Zambia, are seeking authorisation to conduct commercial exports of manufactured elephant leather goods.
To that extent, this would ensure that rural communities and local leather industry fully benefit through value addition rather than exporting semi-processed hide, since there are already control measures for the ivory and hide processing industry.
Trade in elephant products will have a positive effect on the elephant populations in Southern Africa. The five proponent states see the absence of trade in elephant products as the greatest threat to elephant survival in the region.
Kenya and India last month proposed to the Cites that trade in African elephant products should be banned and the species should be uplisted to Appendix I.
Their argument is they are concerned that any legal trade will encourage illegal trade.
Facts, however, from the Southern Africa region do not support the assertion, and the proponent countries say those concerned about elephant conservation should draw lessons from other species like the white rhino.
The issue of ivory stockpiles in Africa was a fundamental problem that needs to be solved and with the success of the last experimental controlled trade there was evidence that trade could be conducted without producing serious negative consequences elsewhere.
Africa Resources Trust director Dr Cecil Machena, in an interview, said one recent survey of ivory markets in South and South-East Asia indicated that the sale of ivory in Southern Africa under Cites did not cause ivory trade to increase in that region.
Ivory stockpiles within the five countries were also presenting major management, administrative and security problems.
The costs of storing and managing these stocks are at least US$35 000 per year. This is based on a cost of US$8 000 for recovery of ivory from field stations, US$12 000 for two person or 24-hour police presence throughout the year, and US$500 for staff salaries for stock management.
It was hoped that the international community should take cognisance of this situation and the predicament that conservation agencies find themselves in, especially in countries where elephant populations were expanding, where law enforcement was effective and where there was co-operation from the public.
It is laudable, however, that the decision by the Sadc states to present their proposals as a regional position has boosted Zimbabwe's chances of securing another annual export quota of ivory at the forthcoming Cites meeting in Chile.
The Sadc region has more than 400 000 elephants that are competing for food, water and other resources, with plains game threatening the survival of other game species and humans.
The over-abundance of elephants has led to local extinction of roan antelope and a decline in abundance of some large mammal species such as Cape buffalo and bushbuck in Hwange National Park, recent studies have shown.
A reduction in species bio-diversity in the Zambezi Valley Escarp-ment has also been observed.
Ecologists were now considering several protected areas to be so overstocked that a major "die-off elephant" is imminent as happened in Gonarezhou in 1992, and is likely to occur in the event of sever drought.
It was, however, likely that with the continued increases in population, there was going to be reduction exercises to protect the habitat.
It costs about US$100 to cull each elephant if recovery of products was to be done adequately and up to US$1 000 to translocate an elephant.
This means that an elephant population reduction exercise in protected areas to safe ecological carrying capacity of between 35 000 and 40 000 elephant would require huge financial resources, according to park officials.
The key elephant countries in the region are Zimbabwe, Botswana, South Africa, Namibia, Mozambique and Zambia, and because there is no even distribution, the jumbo explosion could hurt the regional states' environment.
Chairman of the Sadc convention on wildlife management protocol and enforcement Dr George Mtafu, who is also Malawi's tourism minister, was likely to lead the regional position at the Cites in November.
Proposal
This, officials said, was meant to effectively block a proposal by Kenya and its sponsor India to uplist the African elephant population to Appendix I, which bars trade on the pretext that elephants are endangered.
Speculation had been rife that a split was looming between Zimbabwe and the three Southern African proponent countries over proposals to seek annual export quotas of ivory because of the land reform exercise.
Interestingly, Zambia, which at the last Cites meeting sided with Kenya and India, has joined its four proponent neighbours - Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe in a bid to offload its stocks through an annual ivory quota.
Zambia this year introduced hunting, which is regarded as the most sustainable way of utilising wildlife for the benefit of the poor communities around the world.
In its proposal, Zimbabwe wants to secure an annual export quota of five tonnes of ivory and maintain the burgeoning elephant population on Appendix II.
The country also needs permission to hold a one-off sale of 10 000 kg of ivory after 18 months, trade in hunting trophies for non-commercial purposes, trade in live animals for non-commercial purposes to appropriate and acceptable destinations, trade in hides and leather goods and trade in ivory carvings for non-commercial purposes.
The three-part proposal seeks to maintain limited trade in products of other Appendix II-listed species such as hippopotamus, lion, leopard, cheetah and roan antelope.
Zimbabwe is also seeking permission to maintain safari-hunting quotas for elephant, leopard and cheetah and increase the crocodile quota from 150 to 250 per year due to the significant increase in its population.
The national parks and wildlife authority needs about $30 million to promote the concept of sustainable use and trade in wildlife species of economic importance.
Cites secretary-general Mr Willem Wijnstekers this week said that the high-profile item for the Santiago Conference would be the African elephant.
After an eight-year ban on ivory sales, three African countries - Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe - were allowed to make one-time sales from their existing legal raw ivory stocks in 1997. They made proposals for annual quotas in 2000 but then withdrew them, he said.
"This year, the three countries, plus South Africa are proposing a one-off sale of existing ivory stocks followed later by annual quotas.
"The proposals are for a first sale of 20 000 kg and an annual quota of 4 000 kg for Botswana, 10 000 kg and 2 000 kg respectively for Namibia, 30 000 and 2 000 for South Africa and 10 000 and 5 000 for Zimbabwe.
"Zambia too is now proposing a one-off sale of 17 000 kg. India and Kenya, on the other hand, are proposing that all African elephant populations be returned to Appendix I," said the Cites secretary-general.
Mr Wijnstekers added that a number of other proposals involved transferring species from Appendix I to Appendix II in order to permit trade. Cuba would like to sell 7 800 kg of hawksbill turtle shells from existing legal stockpiles.
"Some of the important issues raised by this year's proposals include what role Cites should play regarding commercially valuable fish and timber species and the kinds of incentives that local communities will need to continue protecting the wildlife that surrounds them," said Mr Wijnstekers.
"Cites' efforts to reduce threats to individual wild species are vital to the broader goal of making environmental conservation and poverty reduction mutually supportive," said Dr Klaus Töpfer, Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme, which administers the Cites Secretariat.
The Cites lists, or appendices, are revised every two-and-a-half years.
Appendix I prohibits all commercial trade in some 900 species that are threatened with extinction.
Appendix II regulates trade in 4 000 animal and 22 000-plus plant species through a system of permits.
The Cites secretariat would issue its comments on the 54 proposals submitted by member governments on June 6 in mid-July.
It was important to note that the convention's 158 parties decide whether to accept, reject or modify the proposals at the 12th Conference of the Parties (COP) to Cites.
Based on the experience gained during Cites 10 and 11, it was prudent that the country's submission of the elephant proposal to the COP 12 was presented jointly with other regional proponents, whose proposals were similar, environmental experts said.
Zimbabwe's elephant proposal at COP 11 in Kenya in 2000 failed to get much support from West Africa, North Africa, the European Union and other regions due to lack of consensus within Sadc.
A compromise was reached when Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe agreed to withdraw their proposal for an annual export quota of raw ivory while Kenya and India also withdrew their proposal to put the African elephant on Appendix I.
Appendix II allows regulated trade in elephant hides, leather goods, elephant meat, hunting trophies and ivory carvings for non-commercial purposes and export of live animals for non-commercial purposes to appropriate and acceptable destinations.
After intense lobbying by international non-governmental organisations, hypocrisy began to show in the form of bizarre annotations and twisting around of issues after it had emerged that the four states had been commended for their conservation management strategies.
If the Sadc states had not come together as a block ahead of the Chile conference, there were fears that Zimbabwe's elephant population would be uplisted back onto Appendix I. The battle this year is, however, likely to be compounded by the fact that several countries are opposed to Zimbabwe's land reforms.
Increase
There has also been some increase in poaching and loss of wildlife range associated with the land reform programme, Cites national technical committee said recently.
But only 92 elephants were poached countrywide from last year to date, most of them along the Zambezi Valley, and according to the census, the number was insignificant.
Some 27 rhinos died between 2000 and December last year due to various reasons ranging between natural deaths, snaring and unknown causes.
Zimbabwe has always been the pacesetter during the fight for the continued authorisation of trade in raw ivory and for the support of sustainable use of wildlife resources.
A recent survey has revealed that the elephant population has increased to unsustainable levels in Sadc.
Zimbabwe now has more than 89 123 elephants, including minor areas that were not surveyed, more than the country's carrying capacity of between 40 000 and 45 000 in elephant range areas or national park estates.
In Hwange alone, there are over 45 000 elephants when the country's largest game park can accommodate 20 000. Gonarezhou, the second largest game park, currently has over 25 000 when it can only sustain about 10 000 elephants.
According to a report prepared jointly by the National Parks and Wildlife Management Authority, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), there are fears of ecological problems if numbers are not checked by culling or sport hunting.
Botswana was also facing an ecological disaster if the elephant population was not contained by way of regulated trade, culling or other means of controlling as they have shot to about 130 000.
In its proposal, Botswana said the population continued to grow at a rate of five percent per annum, and "it must be worth restating that the elephant range in the northern part of Botswana has been expanding westwards into Okavango where elephants had not been seen in many years".
South Africa, Namibia and Zambia also have significant numbers of elephants estimated at more than 50 000 animals.
The region, in particular Zimbabwe has contributed fully to the interim system to monitor the illegal trade in ivory and illegal killing of elephants.
Zimbabwe has also recently implemented the Monitoring Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) as its allocated sites, with the intention of eventually implementing the system throughout the elephant range in the country.
The country also was contributing data on ivory and elephant product seizures to the Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS), the Cites monitoring system for assessing illegal trade.
Elephants were radically modifying wildlife habitats in most of the country's protected areas comprising 16 percent of the total land area.
Africa's largest land mammal population compression has been cited as the principal factor in the modification of habitats of the protected areas of Zimbabwe, including Hwange National Park, Chizarira, Zambezi Escarpment Parks estate and Sengwa Wildlife Research area.
The modification was exacerbated by the fact that most protected areas were located in areas characterised by low and erratic rainfall, limited surface water, and inherent low soil fertility.
According to the Parks and Wildlife Act (1975), the objectives of the authority were to preserve and protect the natural landscape and scenery, and to preserve and protect wildlife and plants and the natural ecological stability of wildlife and plants.
Until 1989, in order to conserve elephant habitat and to maintain biological diversity, the authority continually tried to reduce elephant densities in protected areas to levels not exceeding a single elephant per square kilometre.
"Unfortunately, since the transfer of the populations to Appendix II there are still pressures to reduce numbers," said a parks senior ecologist.
Provision of sustainable artificial water supplies to game was one of the major management activities with huge financial implications.
"For instance, the provision of sustainable artificial water supplies in Hwange National Park costs about $12 million per year.
"About 90 percent of water consumption is due to elephants, so the costs will continue to increase as elephant numbers continue to increase," parks ecologists said.
It is Zimbabwe's submission to the COP 12 that the exercise could be self-financed if recovered products, such as raw ivory and hide, could be marketed on international markets without unnecessary restrictions.
Supported by scientific evidence, Zimbabwe and its Sadc proponent countries are geared to win the "elephant battle" once more but not without a big fight as international NGOs, protectionist groups masquerading as animal lovers, are all out to discredit sustainable utilisation of wildlife, especially by regional states.
Of particular interest will be the debate over the proposed listing in Appendix II of two species of toothfish or Chilean sea bass.
The toothfish proposals raise the issue of Cites' role regarding valuable and heavily traded fish stocks and its relationship to regional fisheries agreements, the Food and Agriculture Organisation and other international regimes.
Other species proposed for inclusion on Appendix II include big leaf mahogany, seahorses and 26 species of freshwater turtles.
Japan is seeking the transfer of most northern hemisphere populations of minke whale and a Pacific population of Bryde's whale; its proposals stress the use of national legislation and DNA identification of individual whales to monitor catches and trade.
Argentina, Bolivia and Chile want to expand their ability to sell the fine silky wool sheared from live vicu-a to include a number of additional vicu-a populations.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2002 The Herald. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
