In July 2012 this presentation was given by Margot Stewart to the Rhino Issue Managers meetings held at Gallagher Convention Centre, Midrand, Gauteng.

1. SOUTH AFRICA’S
RHINOS
a candid look at the 2012
rhino crisis…
Margot Stewart July 2012

2. A. BACKGROUND

3. When decisions are
made about SA’s
rhinos we should
never forget two
VERY important
stakeholders…
The citizens of
SOUTH AFRICA….

4. ….and the Rhinos themselves….

5. Until a few hundred years ago the
African continent was filled with
wildlife that was deemed to be
res nullius (without owner)

6. As Southern Africa became
populated and cultivated by
man the wildlife of Africa
was confined to an ever
diminishing area.

7. 1895 Jakob Louis van Wyk introduces a
motion for the creation of game reserves to
counter the over-exploitation of wildlife
resources through excessive hunting by
white settlers
1898 President Paul Kruger proclaims
the park to be a “Government Wildlife Park”;
later being known as the ‘Sabi Game
Reserve’.
1902 James Stevenson Hamilton is
appointed first game warden.
1923 The first tourists arrive.
1926 The Sabi Game Reserve and the
neighbouring Shingwedzi Game Reserve
along with the adjacent farms were
combined to form the greater ‘Kruger
National Park’.
Pioneers of the Kruger Park

8. The State took on the
custodial care of the
wildlife on behalf of it’s
citizens.

9. THE KRUGER NATIONAL PARK TODAY.
Today it forms part of the Great
Limpopo Transfrontier Park with the
Limpopo National Park in Mozambique
and among others the Gonarezhou
National Park in Zimbabwe.
To the West, the Park is surrounded by
tribal land, private game concessions,
farms and mining.
It is the flagship of parks in SA and
receives about one million visitors per
year, generating by far the biggest
tourist income for the country.

10. Many smaller parks, public and private,
are found throughout the country.

11. When seen on a
map - there is
not much
wilderness left.
In South Africa
only 6% of land is
conserved.
Botswana 10%
Namibia 13%

12. This historical
and
contemporary
map of lion
distribution
gives a good
indication of
shrinkage in
wildness area
available to
wildlife in
Africa.

13. SUMMARY TO
BACKGROUND
1. The State is the Legal custodian of
wildlife in National & Provincial parks on
behalf of it’s Citizens.
2. There is very little wilderness area left in
SA – approx. only 6% of total land mass is
conserved.
3. The wildlife reserves (especially the
Kruger Park) and the iconic BIG 5
animals are critical to tourism in our
country.

14. B. PROBLEMS IN THE
WILDLIFE INDUSTRY

15. THE BIRTH OF THE
WILDLIFE INDUSTRY IN SA
* 1965 - 4 fenced game ranches (first wildlife auction was held in 1965
near Tshipise)
* TODAY – OVER 9,000 private game ranches OR 16.8% of total land
*South African wildlife ranching is unique in the world with its exempted wildlife
ranches, where wildlife belongs to the owner of the land.
*South Africa is the only country in the world where the big five can be legally
hunted.
*Today the number of animals owned by the private sector is about 3 to 4 times
more than the number in government protected areas.
*Wildlife ranching is the fastest growing agricultural activity in South Africa in
the past three decades.
*There is fierce competition between the wildlife ranching sector and
government institutions. (Du Toit)

16. SOME QUESTIONS
QUESTION 1:
If a game farm requires a Certificate of
Adequate Enclosure before hunting can
take place how can hunting be allowed on
private farms that abut the Kruger Park
where there is no fencing?

17. QUESTION 2:
Has the Dept of Environment lost
control over the private Wildlife and
hunting sector and why have TOPS and
CITES regulations not been enforced?

18. SUMMARY TO WILDLIFE
& HUNTING INDUSTRIES
1. The wildlife industry is among the fastest growing
sectors
2. This industry is highly non-compliant.
3. The Dept. of the Environment appears to have
difficulties in regulating the wildlife farming & hunting
industries.
4. The Kruger National Park must be secured against
theft of game especially that which is used for
hunting.
5. There is evidence of gross abuse of wildlife that is
unacceptable and contrary to International norms.

19. C. THE RHINOCEROS
POACHING CRISIS

20. THE RHINOS OF
SOUTH AFRICA ARE
THE NEW TARGET OF
POACHING
SYNDICATES WHO
HAVE DECIMATED
THE POPULATIONS
FURTHER NORTH IN
AFRICA.

21. * Traditional demand for horn from Asia
* Criminal syndicates perceive SA as a
soft target with corrupt officials
* Lack of rhino in other range states due
to extinction.
WHAT MAINLY DRIVES RHINO
POACHING?
EXTERNAL FACTORS

22. INTERNAL FACTORS
*Availability – last population of importance
– SA has 90% of world’s rhino
*Rural poverty in SA and neighbouring countries
*Inadequate protection for rhinos
*Law enforcement, judicial system caught unprepared
*Until recently, poaching was a low risk crime with lenient
sentencing
*Local criminal syndicates trade horn illegally
*Investment cartels in league with private rhino owners/ranchers
perpetuate the market in horn.
*National, provincial and private horn stockpiles
*Non- compliance to CITES regulations especially with regard to
permitting (pseudo hunting).
•

23. SUMMARY OF RHINO
POACHING CRISIS
• 1. A rhino poaching crisis exists due to an escalation of poaching
since 2008 and a rogue element in the Wildlife industry have been
implicated as have corrupt game rangers and ex-policemen.
• 2. The authorities were caught unprepared but signs of recovery
are evident.
• 3. There are more INTERNAL factors causing poaching than
EXTERNAL and the situation is highly complicated.
• 4. The boundaries of the National & Provincial parks must be
secured.

24. D. RHINO HORN
TRADE & C.I.T.E.S

25. RHINO HORN TRADE
1. Rhino horn trade has been conducted for hundreds of
years from Africa with evidence of Chinese and
Arabian traders.
2. In 1975 a UN initiative was launched – CITES
(Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora).
3. South Africa was one of the first countries to join and
all Rhino species were incorporated onto Appendix I
due to their high level of endangerment.
4. Rhino & rhino horn trade was declared illegal.

26. 5. With the arrival of the Rhino Poaching Crisis it has become
apparent exactly what level of abuse has been perpetrated
on this species.
6. In 2008 stricter regulations were promulgated under the
National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act. with
regard to wildlife. (TOPS)
7. In 2009 the law was further tightened with the
announcement of a total moratorium on rhino horn trade
within South Africa.
8. It appears that this had little effect on wildlife owners and
currently (July 2012) only approximately 25% are compliant
with regard to statutory requirements to record and
register rhinos as well as horn stockpiles. (du Toit)

27. STATUS OF RHINO AT CITES
• 1975 All Rhino on Appendix I
• 1981 First proposal to CITES for trade – rejected
• 1989 Second proposal to trade – rejected
• 1992 Late submission
• 1994 Proposal to trade live animals - accepted with
restrictions as per annotation 503: Ceratotherium simum
simum *(population of South Africa, for the trade in live
animals to appropriate and acceptable destinations and
hunting trophies only)
• 1997 SA proposed TRADE IN HORN at CoP10 in 1997
proposed an annotation ° 503 to allow the trade in parts
and derivatives but with a zero export quota – rejected
• 2004 Swazi White rhino on Appendix II.
• 2004 Black Rhino hunting quota set at 5.

28. SUMMARY OF RHINO
HORN TRADE
• 1. Rhino horn has been traded from SA for decades if
not hundreds of years.
• 2. SA has been non-compliant to CITES Regulations
because of weaknesses in the permitting system.
• 3. Despite all & every evidence to the contrary, SA
continues to be lobbied by pro-trade protagonists who
capitalize on the fact that certain State owned parks
own large horn stock piles and will benefit FINANCIALLY
from trade.
• 4. Rhino horn has been scientifically examined and has
found to be lacking in any medical benefit of any value
so the proposal to trade it raises issues of ethics and
morality.

29. THE CONCEPT OF RHINO HORN
TRADE FAILS ON EVERY LEVEL:
In their natural habitat, Rhinos are dangerous to man so their horn
cannot be “harvested” without considerable interference to the animal,
including capture, anaesthetising and restraint and all of these carry
risks to both man and animal. THERE IS NO WAY OF HARVESTING
RHINO HORN WITHOUT BEING CRUEL AND ABUSIVE.
FAIL X
A rhino needs its horn for many reasons such as self-protection, social
behaviour and daily function. Once dehorned a rhinos horn grows back
in a deformed shape. IT IS ABNORMAL AND UNNECESSARY FOR A
RHINO TO BE WITHOUT ITS HORN.
FAIL X

30. Rhino horn has no medicinal benefit to man and this has been proved in
many studies. Any perceived benefit (as placebo) does not warrant the
rigours and cruelty of capture and defacement. It does not cure
cancer or cerebral-vascular disease (one of the Terms of Reference
required by CITES to support a trade proposal) and any rumours about
this have been spread by criminals with intent to grow the market.
FOR A COUNTRY TO SELL A BOGUS PRODUCT AS MEDICINE WITH
FULL KNOWLEDGE OF ITS INEFFECTIVENESS IS TANTAMOUNT TO
FRAUD.
FAIL X
There is no reliable and updated data to satisfy the CITES Terms of
Reference because a Census of the Rhino population in South Africa is
overdue and TOPS Regulations have not been enforced. AGAIN THE
CITES TERMS OF REFERENCE HAVE NOT BEEN MET.
FAIL X

31. In their proposal at CoP9 in 1994, South Africa set out the reasons why
the status of the Southern White Rhino should be down listed to
Appendix II. They declared a healthy and growing population under
effective management and living in the perfect habitat. They claimed
that the rhinos could withstand the exploitation that trade would bring,
and I quote: “trade will not result in an increased level of undesirable
or illegal exploitation.”
Since the sale of rhino to private owners, the authorities and scientists
have lost all control over the recording of population figures, except to
say that the figures don’t add up and that horn is moving illegally. IN
FACT EVERY REASON THEY PROVIDED CITES WITH HAS PROVEN TO
BE FALSE SO IN EFFECT THE DECISION TO ALLOW THE WHITE RHINO
TO BE DOWNLISTED HAS PROVEN TO BE FAULTY.
FAIL X

32. Taking all of the afore-mentioned
information into consideration,
especially the high level of non-
compliance in the Wildlife industry and
an inability to satisfy the Terms of
Reference that are required by CITES,
any new proposal will again be rejected.

33. MY PROPOSAL
• I urge the Minister of EA to order for all of the
current stocks of horn to be rendered unfit for
consumption and burnt to destruction.
• I also recommend that the Minister propose to
CITES at CoP16 that the White Rhino
(Ceratotherium simum simum) once again be
included under Appendix I.
• This will afford the white Rhino the fullest level
of protection available and assist with law
enforcement as well.

34. THANK YOU.