Jan 22, 2019 | News
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_btn title=”View article in E-ZINE” color=”orange” align=”center” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.africanhuntinggazette.com%2Fspring-2019%2F%23spring-2019%2F120-121||target:%20_blank|”][vc_column_text]Greywing Safari By Ken Bailey
The Stormberg Mountain region is at once rugged yet welcoming. At a distance, the rolling, grass-carpeted hills are inviting, appearing gentle and serene. Three hours in to hiking them, however, I was discovering that their true identity was somewhat different. Up close and personal the terrain is rough and uneven, and while the landscape can accurately be called “breath-taking”, so, too, is the effort required to hike the uneven slopes. Of course, that’s the way it should be when you’re hunting greywing partridge; a toll must be paid to merit the privilege of hunting these legendary birds.
Greywing partridge have long been considered by knowledgeable wingshooters to rank in the highest echelons of upland bird hunting, spoken in the same sentences and with an equal reverence as the renowned red grouse of the Scottish highlands or the robust capercaille of Eurasia. Greywings are a high-altitude bird about the same size and similar in appearance to a Hungarian partridge, and are generally found in montane grassland habitats above 5000 feet. While relatively common wherever there’s suitable habitat, they’re rarely seen because of their naturally secretive nature and the fact that they occur in widely dispersed coveys in relatively remote, mountainous landscapes. Hunting greywing partridge is defined as much by their surroundings as by the hunt itself, and any greywing in hand is a prize well-earned.
Fortunately, I was hunting with Robbie Stretton, a fifth-generation owner of the exquisite colonial-style Buffels Fontein Lodge, south of Jamestown in South Africa’s Eastern Cape. Robbie is a rancher, game breeder, PH and lodge owner, but I suspect all that is simply a cover story that allows him to pursue his personal passion for hunting, particularly greywing partridge, over his beloved English pointers.
We’d arrived at Buffels Fontein early on a cool May evening after several days of high-volume dove and pigeon hunting near Bloemfontein. I was hunting with African Hunting Gazette publisher Richard Lendrum and long-time friends T.J. Schwanky and Vanessa Harrop, co-hosts of the popular television hunting show The Outdoor Quest. Over an eland dinner (and as veterans of African cuisine know, it simply doesn’t get any better than eland!), Robbie and his wife Angela related the history of their lodge and the surrounding countryside. The Stretton family first acquired the 11,000 hectare (27,000 acres) ranch in 1840. In the early days it served as a post office, a trading post and an inn, providing a welcome respite for travellers to rest their oxen, their horses and their own weary bodies along the strenuous route between the diamond and gold mines to the north and the docks along the Indian ocean to the south. These days the farm is home to sheep, cattle and an array of big game and game birds, and serves as home base for Robbie’s hunting operations. But the fascinating history of the lodge is well-preserved through the wonderful collection of antiques and the books and firearms that adorn the walls.
After a much-needed rest in the well-appointed guest rooms, our group reassembled for an early breakfast before heading afield. To the untrained eye, locating greywings in this vast, undulating landscape seems akin to finding the proverbial needle in a haystack, but Robbie knew with unfathomable clarity where we could expect to find coveys. He is careful about his management practices, insisting that hunters take only a small handful of birds from each of the far-spread coveys. It turned out that limiting our harvest wasn’t going to be an issue, though certainly not because of a lack of birds.
Through the cool morning hours we walked up and down the open hillsides, hunting between 6500 and 7000 feet above sea level. As is demanded of this pursuit, Robbie’s English pointers were fit and disciplined dogs that could hold a point until we were in position. Greywings have a tendency to fly downhill for long distances when flushed, so finding and reflushing scattered birds is an iffy proposition. If a dog flushes a covey at a distance it’s highly unlikely you’ll get a second crack at them, so well-trained dogs are a must.
Greywing coveys range from just a couple to as many as 30 birds, but most often number from five to ten. As it so happened, the first point of the morning was a pair, and at the flush the birds broke in separate directions. One exploded straight away before veering sharply left to take full advantage of the high winds that seem to be the norm in these hills. Astounded at how quickly it was getting out of range, I shouldered my gun and swung without thinking, holding just below the bird as it sailed down the grassy slope. At the report the bird tumbled into the grass, while to my right a quick pair of shots told me that T.J. was on the second bird. As it turned out he’d wing-tipped his and we were unable to recover it, but in short order mine was collected and I held it aloft triumphantly. As history now shows, my shooting prowess was short-lived.
Over the next three hours we traversed the hillsides under Robbie’s tutelage. He knew roughly where to expect the dogs to locate another covey, and more often than not he was right on the money. On some flushes only two or three birds would erupt from the grass; regularly it would be five to eight, and we put up one covey where 14 or 15 partridge rocketed out. In total we flushed 10 coveys totalling 84 birds. Our in-the-hand tally at morning’s end was a relatively meagre seven birds. Robbie advised that on most shoots gunners can expect to see in the region of 60 birds, with an anticipated bag of about 15, depending on the shooting ability of the hunters. While the dogs more than held up their end of the bargain, our numbers reveal that, clearly, T.J., Vanessa, Richard and I fell short of the targeted 25 per cent success rate.
Under the authority of editorial license, I feel compelled to offer a little defense of our less than stellar performance. To wit, we were shooting guns unfamiliar to us, (stunning F16 over/unders graciously on loan from Blaser) that were choked for the waterfowling and guinea fowl hunting we’d planned, when I would have preferred improved cylinder chokes, and the #5 loads we were flinging were probably not the best option; #8 shot would have been a better choice. Further, as I came to learn, as often as not you’re on rocky, uneven ground when a covey flushes (Murphy’s Law), so you’re seldom shooting from a stable position. Not to mention that the greywing partridge themselves, those taupe-clad little beauties, have a combination of natural flight skills and a game-to-the-core survival instinct that all but ensures their escape.
If I sound a little defensive, understand that it’s largely in jest. The fact is, we had a wonderful morning in an unbelievably pristine landscape pursuing one of the world’s premier game birds. How can that not be a rewarding experience? Whether we shot well or not is a relatively small part of the equation; it was the experience we were seeking.
At about noon we stopped for a well-earned lunch break and reflected on our morning. Someone’s Fitbit revealed we’d walked 15 kms (9.5 miles) since we’d left the trucks, so we enjoyed the cold drinks and sandwiches with unusual zeal. As advertised, we’d learned that greywing partridge hunting is not for the faint of heart; a reasonable level of fitness is a must, especially at these altitudes.
As we relaxed in the midday sun, a small covey of greywings flushed from cover on the steep hill above us. T.J., Robbie and I just looked at one another with knowing shrugs. So Robbie collected a couple of his pointers and up we went, at times having to climb hand over foot up the sharp incline. Eventually we got to the elevation and general vicinity of where we thought the birds had resettled, with the dogs’ no-nonsense attitude confirming there were birds close by. With every step I took care with my footing to ensure I was on stable ground should a partridge lift. That didn’t give due respect to our pointing companions, however, because in short order they had a bird locked down and when they flushed I was ready.
Three birds burst from beneath the thorny brush and I swung on the first as it flew straight away, paralleling the hillside. When the picture looked right I squeezed and the greywing dropped. Meanwhile, T.J. swung on a brace of birds, dropping one before the second disappeared safely over a crest. Two shots and two iconic greywing partridge in the hand.
Our doubleheader served as a spectacular finish to a hunt that will be etched in a special place in my memory reserved for only the most revered experiences. We’d been treated to a first-class experience in pursuit of one of the world’s great game birds, hunting up top in storied terrain, accompanied by fine people, fine dogs and fine shotguns. Sometimes I think I get more than I deserve. But I will go back, if for no other reason than to test that hypothesis.[/vc_column_text][vc_btn title=”View article in E-ZINE” color=”orange” align=”center” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.africanhuntinggazette.com%2Fspring-2019%2F%23spring-2019%2F120-121||target:%20_blank|”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_gallery type=”image_grid” images=”19789,19790,19791,19792,19793,19794,19795″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
Oct 14, 2014 | News
Management techniques vary widely, with one end of the spectrum being intensive single species production systems, and the other end being extensive, free-roaming systems. Intensive systems fall under the game farming category, and generally involve high-value species such as Sable, held in small fenced camps, where they are protected from predators and provided with all their food, water and veterinary requirements.
The purpose of these systems is to produce superior animals for live game sales or trophy hunting, and breeding may be manipulated to select animals for desirable traits, such as long horns.
Extensive systems fall under the wildlife ranching category, where wildlife is given very little assistance from the landowner other than protection against poachers.
Between these management extremes are a number of intermediate management practices that fall along a continuum, including semi-intensive systems where animals are supported by regular management interventions to maintain habitat integrity and supplement the food and water supply, and lightly managed systems where properties are large enough to accommodate most ecological requirements of the wildlife, but populations may need occasional help in years of bad drought. In some instances, different landowners may join forces to form a conservancy, whereby adjacent properties remove the fences that separate them, allow wildlife to roam freely and adopt a common management plan.
In South Africa, landowners have been allowed to commercially exploit their wildlife since the 1970s, a fact that is widely credited with the huge growth of wildlife ranching in the country over the last 40 years. Starting from a handful of game farmers in those early years, wildlife ranching has grown exponentially and now incorporates>200 000 km2 of private land representing as much as 17% of South Africa’s surface area. The precise number of wildlife ranches is not known, but is thought to be between 10 000 and 15 000, while the number of wild animals living on these properties may be as high as 20 million.
There are, however, potential downsides to wildlife ranching, and there are questions about whether the industry has a positive effect on the conservation goals of South Africa and whether the land could be put to better use for the long-term benefit of the country.
The private ownership of White Rhinoceros in South Africa illustrates many of the pros and cons of wildlife ranching described above. In the late 1960s, the then Natal Parks Board started selling rhinos to private landowners, and this process has been continued by SANParks selling rhinos from Kruger National Park and other state land.
These sales have helped keep state-owned rhino populations at sustainable levels, which helps prevent over-utilisation of food resources and maintains high birth rates. The number of rhinos on private land has subsequently reached about 5 000 individuals, or one-quarter of the national herd, while the range of the species outside formally protected areas has expanded considerably.
Given the current high rate of rhino poaching in South Africa, the contribution of wildlife ranching to rhino protection may turn out to be important to the future survival of the species. On the down-side, many private populations of White Rhinos are small and isolated because they occur on small fenced properties and therefore are making negligible contributions to the conservation of wild rhinos. Others are held in intensive breeding conditions where their breeding may be manipulated, and this might disqualify them from possible future reintroduction into the wild.
Although wildlife ranching is a large and growing industry in South Africa, there is still much that we do not know about it, and this lack of knowledge puts it at a disadvantage when it comes to government support. We do not know how many wildlife ranchers there are, how much area they use, how many animals they have, how much money they contribute to the national economy, how many people they employ, and how much they could potentially contribute towards food security.
Questions about the true impacts of fencing, the potential implications of intensive breeding and the overall contribution to biodiversity conservation also need to be answered. In an attempt to deal with some of these issues, the Endangered Wildlife Trust is conducting a study investigating the contribution that wildlife ranching makes to the green economy of South Africa. To achieve this, we are trying to interview 1 000 private wildlife ranchers using a structured survey questionnaire. Wildlife ranchers of any type could make a valuable contribution to the study and to the future success of their industry, and are encouraged to participate. Please contact the author for further details.
The positive contributions made by wildlife ranching include the following:
- Large areas of land that were once used for livestock or crops now form natural or semi-natural habitat that is generally better suited to the conservation of biodiversity. This land also conserves indigenous vegetation, protects watersheds and allows degraded land to recover;
- There are now many more wild animals in South Africa than there were 40 years ago. This is in contrast to the situation in Kenya, which banned the consumptive use of wildlife on private land in the 1970s, and has subsequently experienced a 60% decline in wildlife numbers outside state protected areas;
- These animals are distributed over a much wider area than would be the case if only state-protected areas were allowed to benefit from wildlife, and this spreads the risk from ecological catastrophes and increases the chances of long-term survival of species. Wildlife ranching also provides a buffer against possible future losses of species from state-protected areas if national land policies become less favourable to conservation;
- Numbers of some threatened species have increased as a result of their inclusion on private land, including the White Rhinoceros, Black Wildebeest, Cape Mountain Zebra and Bontebok;
- There are substantial financial benefits to be gained by wildlife ranchers, with knock-on effects to other industries and the national economy;
- The large and growing industry creates > 65 000 jobs.
The potential negative aspects of wildlife ranching include the following:
- Most private wildlife ranches have game fences that prevent the free movement of animals across their natural ranges, which is problematic for the dispersal of many species, for migratory species and for species with large natural ranges, including many large predators;
- Electric fences with trip wires present lethal barriers to some species, such as pangolins and tortoises, and result in the deaths of many animals;
- Many wildlife ranchers are intolerant of predators and use lethal control measures to keep numbers down, and this has detrimental impacts on the natural functioning of ecosystems;
- Intensive breeding systems that select for traits favoured by humans, such as large horns or unusual colour morphs, may promote the breeding success of weaker individuals and thus reduce the fitness of the overall population;
- Even though wildlife numbers are high on many private wildlife ranches, the intensive breeding practices and impenetrable fencing used on some properties mean that they cannot be considered ‘wild’. This is important because it can affect the conservation status of a species (i.e. whether it is threatened with extinction), and this in turn impacts on the level of protection that the species receives from the government;
- There is a perception that wildlife ranching is a playground for the rich and does not provide many social, economic or food security benefits to South Africa. This is not conducive to a positive attitude from government.
Sep 30, 2013 | News
CITES recently stated on its website that: The Secretariat of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) welcomes the Executive Order on Combating Wildlife Trafficking issued by the President of the United States, Barack Obama, on 1 July 2013. The Executive Order addresses both its domestic and international response to the current surge in wildlife trafficking.
The Executive Order establishes a Presidential Task Force on Wildlife Trafficking, to be co-chaired by the Secretary of State, Secretary of the Interior, and the Attorney General (Co-Chairs), or their designees, who shall report to the President through the National Security Advisor, with certain tasks assigned to it.
“This Executive Order sends a very powerful message both domestically and internationally on the need to treat wildlife crime as a serious crime on a par with narcotics and arms trafficking. The offer of financial and technical assistance to affected range States to tighten laws and strengthen capacity to combat wildlife trafficking, including the targeted training of front-line enforcement officers, is much needed,” said Mr John E. Scanlon, CITES Secretary-General.
Aug 15, 2013 | News
According to media reports Tanzanian Natural Resources and Tourism Minister Ambassador Khamis Kagasheki the Tanzanian is collecting views from wildlife stakeholders on the establishment of the Tanzania Wildlife Authority (TAWA). TAWA appears to be intended as similar to TAWICO (Tanzania Wildlife Corporation – hunting company) of the past.
According to AllAfrica.com the minister, when opening a meeting aimed at getting views and advice from personnel who served in the Ministry, said: "We are expecting to complete the process of collecting views from stakeholders, leaders and the citizens on the plan by November this year." The Minister is quoted to have said that the plan will be endorsed by Members of Parliament during the November parliamentary sessions.
The Minister said that the establishment of the authority will enable the review of the current wildlife Act that has weaknesses towards better management of the wildlife conservations. "The review of the Act will enable the Authority take action and penalize those involved in the wildlife poaching accordingly,". He also noted that review of the Act will enable the Authority promote involvement of local communities participations in wildlife conservations.
Industry role players indicated to the AHG that they hoped that the step would improve the situation on the ground. It is said that in 1965, when Tanzania’s wildlife population was higher than today, there were 47 hunting blocks. By 1997, the number increased to over 140 hunting blocks. At the same time, the number of hunting companies increased from 9 in 1984 to 42 by 2004, and according to the Wengert email in 2013, around 52 hunting companies. The increase in hunting blocks was a combination of opening up new areas to hunting combined with subdivision of existing hunting blocks. For instance, in the late 1980s and through the mid-1990s, both Southern Maasailand and the Northern Maasailand hunting concessions were first subdivided; Southern Maasailand from 2 to 8 hunting blocks and Northern Maasiland from 2 to 6 hunting blacks. Moyowosi South hunting block was split into 2 in 2001, then reconstituted into 1 block and now apparently subdivided again. Subdivisions of hunting blocks continues to the point that many are too small for viable hunting. As an example Mto wa Mbu and Lake Natron are no longer viable for plains game (e.g., zebra, eland, Grants & Thomson gazelles, lesser kudu, etc.) as there are about 6 Hunting Blocks from Mto wa Mbu to Gelai Rumba up to the border with Kenya. This is also said to be the case with Moyowosi and Muhesi.
In all cases and continuing until today, it appears that in the subdivided hunting blocks, the old quotas for the single block were given to each of the new subdivided blocks, resulting in quotas being multiplied by as many as four times or more for short-term economic gain with little or no biological/empirical data to justify these subdivisions or to determine if they were/are sustainable. In addition to safari hunting quotas, quotas were given for game capture and game cropping in many blocks, as well as resident hunters quotas. This has resulted in a major drop in Tanzania’s trophy quality because of too high a harvest rate. While some increases in quotas may have been acceptable, certainly not to the extremes, as noted above.
It is expected that TAWA will have its hands full. Like any organization, its ability to manage wildlife will depend on the moral integrity of those who run it. The new director of TAWA will have to take a very close look at the implications of hunting block subdivisions and quota multiplications. If they are to take place they must be based upon credible scientific data and recommendations coming out of the Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute (TAWIRI) in collaboration with TAHOA (Tanzania Hunting Operators Association).
Aug 5, 2013 | News
Comments about dissension among the hunting and wildlife organisations in South Africa in hunting industry publications in recent months, are in large measure, incorrect.
In 2005 SAHGCA, PHASA, CHASA, NSA and WRSA established an alliance to serve as a caucus. This initiative evolved into The Hunting and Wildlife Associations of South Africa (HAWASA). Although member associations represent their constituencies at Government forums in their own right, HAWASA is being recognised as credible representation of the wildlife industry at government forums on conservation and biodiversity and serves as a high-level spokesperson to support individual member associations in promoting the broader objectives of their specific domain in the hunting and wildlife sector.
HAWASA is familiar with the real and perceived threats to the sector, including negative public perceptions about certain aspects of the industry; bad-mouthing from anti-hunt and animal rights activists and pressure groups; and politically-driven actions i.e. land reform and regulatory processes that impact on hunters and wildlife ranchers. HAWASA is in the process of realigning its strategy to deal with these threats while striving to take the lead in the green economy.
The hunting and wildlife sector is a dynamic environment where the goal posts shift all the time and new challenges emerge continually. Individuals in the wildlife industry can rest assured that HAWASA approaches the challenges facing our industry, in a unified manner. That is also why it is so important for hunters, wildlife ranchers, firearm owners and everybody involved in the industry in whatever manner, to belong to their local associations.
