South Africa Plans to Grow Biodiversity Economy
Wildlife has blossomed on privately-owned land in South Africa since legislation was passed in the 1970s, making the ownership of wild animals and their utilisation a viable alternative to conventional agriculture with crops and livestock. This has made South Africa an attractive destination for ecotourists and hunters, and has allowed the evolution of a thriving economy based on biodiversity. But not all citizens of the country have benefitted from this form of land-use. Draft legislation from government now proposes some bold new initiatives to address this gap – but will they work?
In the Government Gazette No 50279 of 8 March 2024 the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment invited public comment on the Draft National Biodiversity Economy Strategy (NBES). The lengthy (60 pages) original notice may be accessed at: https://www.dffe.gov.za/sites/default/files/legislations/nemba_draftbiodiversityeconomystrategy_g50279gon4492.pdf
This document contains many proposals that will resonate with the hunting community, and demonstrate a welcome shift in government policy that seemed in recent years to have drifted more towards the animal rightist philosophy rather than the pragmatic sustainable wildlife management practices of South Africa’s neighbours such as Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe. On the other hand, many of the proposals seem ill-considered and based on wishful thinking rather than careful analysis based on facts and figures.
Given the very broad scope of the NBES, it is rather difficult to provide a manageable overview that is not overly long and complex. Instead, I will attempt to pick out a few highlights from the Government Gazette that may be of particular interest to our readership, and offer comments on these. It should also be noted that a number of organisations and individuals have already made public comments in the media about the NBES. These range from predictably negative views from the anti-hunting and animal-rights lobbies to positive views from various sources in SADEC countries, wildlife economists and wildlife management specialists.
An annoying feature of the draft NBES is that some of the background details underpinning the strategy are apparently contained in a separate SEIAS document, making it very difficult to understand the hard numbers behind some of the goals and aspirations stated in the strategy (if indeed they exist).
Any inquiries in connection with the draft National Biodiversity Economy Strategy, or in connection with obtaining a copy of the Socio-Economic Impact Assessment Study (SEIAS) on the draft National Biodiversity Economy Strategy, can be directed to Mr Khorommbi Matibe at KMatibe@dffe.gov.za
For those unfamiliar with the history of South Africa, it should be pointed out that land tenure and forms of ownership and occupation are convoluted and complicated, to say the least. First colonised by the Dutch and the British in succession, there were prolonged conflicts between colonists and resident natives from the Xhosa and Zulu nations. The British waged a brutal war against the Zulus in 1879, which saw a humiliating defeat of the Royal Army at Isandlwana and then the decimation of the Zulu Army at the Battle of Ulundi. Next followed the Anglo-Boer war, a bitter conflict marked by shameful treatment of the boers by the British, where thousands of women and children died in concentration camps while boer farms were torched and plundered in a scorched earth policy.
In the next phase the Dutch and Huguenot settler descendants evolved into the Afrikaner nation with their own language and culture, and in 1948 their National Party won political domination. They implemented a policy of racial segregation or ‘apartheid’ which attempted to create ‘independent homelands’ for the major black ethnic groups, while ‘whites’ of European descent took ownership of large areas of farmland across the country. This was of course a bitter dispensation for the black majority and increasing racial tensions were headed for civil war until 1994 when democratic elections saw the African National Congress (ANC) become the governing party in the ‘New South Africa’ which comprises no less than nine provinces, each with its own legislature and certain executive competencies, including conservation and therefore biodiversity.
To further complicate this already messy mix of governance, the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act 41 of 2003 provides for the recognition of traditional communities, including the establishment and recognition of traditional councils; a statutory framework for leadership positions within the institution of traditional leadership, the recognition of traditional leaders; legislative houses of traditional leaders; provision for the functions and roles of traditional leaders, and more. Land tenure within these traditional communities is usually allotted by a ‘traditional leader’ or tribal chief and land-use decisions are seldom based on ecological principles or carrying capacity.
Many of the former ‘homelands’ now fall under traditional governance. Land degradation through over-stocking is widespread, and soil erosion pervasive. Many traditional communities regard their livestock as wealth and ‘money in the bank’, and growing populations place increasing pressure on land and habitat suitable for wild animals and biodiversity. Although the population growth curve appears to be flattening out as South Africans become increasingly educated and urbanised, the momentum of the exponential population growth since the 1950s will be felt for many years to come.
The South Africa of 2024 is a country in trouble in many respects. The economy has remained lethargic for years and unemployment is among the highest in the world. Young people, even those with good education, are unable to find jobs. Frustrated youths are the brushwood of incendiary revolution. Government is desperate to ignite the economy, create employment and to address the plight of the so-called ‘Previously Disadvantaged Individuals (PDIs).
In some ways the NBES can be viewed as late attempt by government to address some of the land tenure and resource access issues that it has failed to deal with during 30 years of ANC management. It may also be interpreted as a desperate effort to seek political support for an increasingly unpopular administration. In this it has fallen short.
The latest political development is the outcome of the May 2024 elections that has resulted in the ANC losing its dominance for the first time in 30 years, gaining only 40% of the national votes and now with a ‘Government of National Unity’ currently under construction. Given the highly complex and fragmented picture of the South African historical and political landscape, let’s look at some selected proposals in the draft NBES.
From the Executive Summary
South Africa is a country with diverse cultures, remarkable geological wealth, and exceptional biodiversity, much of which is unique, and with high levels of endemism. With this rich endowment comes the responsibility and challenge of ensuring that all species and ecosystems are conserved and used sustainably for the benefit of current and future generations. The National Biodiversity Economy Strategy (NBES) is developed to optimise biodiversity-based business potentials across the terrestrial, fresh water, estuarine, and marine and coastal realms, and to contribute to economic growth with local beneficiation, job creation, poverty alleviation, and food security, whilst maintaining the ecological integrity of the biodiversity resource base, for thriving people and nature.
This is an ‘Apple Pie and Motherhood’ statement with which few would disagree.
Page 14: Action 2.1.: Increase the number of Big Five animals available for fair-chase trophy hunting, especially in community owned areas and larger contiguous privately owned land. Expanded fair-chase Big Five-based Trophy Hunting industry with strong global reputation. There are limited wild trophies available, especially of elephant and lion, and there is potential for additional hunting of leopard in a manner that promotes the thriving of the leopard species in the wild with pointed reduction of poaching. Larger, contiguous areas with populations of big five species, including adjacent to Kruger and other PAs, for sustainably harvesting animals to provide for a larger number of high-end trophy hunting packages in a manner compatible with other potential enterprises such as ecotourism. A key element for transformation, but also requiring focused interventions for enhanced global reputation. Opportunities created within the five mega-living landscapes (see Goal 1) will complement this action.
This is a worthy goal which most hunters will support.
Page 14: Action 2.2.: Formalise and expand sustainable recreational hunting, including for traditional use, especially into community owned areas. Expanded and more inclusive recreational hunting is a key driver of conservation compatible land-use. There is potential for plains game to be introduced to community areas as a basis for ecotourism, recreational hunting, and feeding into the game meat industry, and other value chains. Traditional hunting could transition to recreational hunting, with added value.
The big question here is the sustainability of such ‘recreational’ hunting. In Namibia the relevant Ministry sets annual quotas for hunting off-takes, based on real numbers ascertained by regular counts by trained staff. The word ‘recreational’ may be inadvisable and seized upon by the anti-hunting lobby as something trivial akin to golf or tennis. Maybe ‘conservation hunting’ would be a better term for science-based off-take.
Page 24: Action 10.4.: Develop and implement a strategy for a market for regulated domestic trade in high-end parts and derivates (e.rhino horn and elephant ivory for local value-add enterprises based on processing and use of products. International commercial trade in rhino horn and elephant ivory is currently restricted by CITES. While South Africa may work towards submitting a proposal to CITES once conditions are favourable and the Rhino Commission of Inquiry recommendations have been met, until this is achieved, we should explore domestic options for trade. To maximise the value of domestic trade, i.e. that domestic trade can bring income to support private, community and state conservation land-use, local value-add would need to be developed to such an extent that the sale of derived products can generate sufficient funds. Innovative approaches are needed to identify products, and develop the necessary local markets. For example, health clinics to administer traditional remedies using rhino horn for health tourists from the far East, or ivory carving being done locally for local sale and export for personal use.
This is a welcome shift in thinking by government, and one which perhaps recognises that CITES bans on trade in rhino horn and elephant ivory have been futile, and have only benefitted the illegal trade to the huge detriment of the animals concerned, with extreme cruelty involved in the killing of rhinos by poachers in particular.
The NBES requires extensive revision and reworking before it is worthy of serious consideration. Plans to expand Marine Fisheries are completely out of touch with the fact that these fisheries are already at or exceeding sustainable limits. Similar plans to develop Freshwater Fisheries seem oblivious to the extent of pollution of inland waters and the lack of limnologists and other trained personnel to manage dams and rivers.
The architects of the NBES appear to be keyboard warriors with little appreciation of the constraints and vagaries of the real world out there. The sustainability of wildlife populations depends entirely on rainfall, which is highly variable and subject to regular fluctuations between periods of drought and good rains. Contrary to public perceptions promoted by climate activists and biased media, these conditions have little to do with the so-called ‘climate crisis’ and everything to do with natural fluctuations driven by solar energy, ocean currents and sea temperatures, and the resultant effects on the atmosphere and water vapour.
The stated goal of numerous (up to 1,000) new commercial plant nurseries on communal land to supply medicinal and horticultural consumers is completely unrealistic against the background of water scarcity and mismanagement in South Africa that leaves many communities without sufficient water for drinking or personal hygiene.
My advice is for successful hunting property owners and operators to carry on doing what they do well, cherish and nurture the hunters that come to our country to pursue their passion, and to be models of sustainable wildlife utilisation that can be used by those who are truly interested and dedicated to taking up this form of land-use as a viable option for the future well-being of their communities, families and children. The biodiversity economy is not some low-hanging fruit that is there for the picking by government edict. Successful biodiversity enterprises have been painstakingly built over a long time and through steep learning curves and hard work, not by those mesmerised by computer games, cellphones, artificial intelligence or the fourth industrial revolution.
Dr John Ledger is a past Director of the Endangered Wildlife Trust, now a consultant, writer and teacher on the environment, energy and wildlife. He lives in Johannesburg, South Africa. John.Ledger@wol.co.za
