AHC#11 Lion Conservation Under Threat

Lion Conservation Under Threat - Cecil the Lion The Facts

By IJ Larivers

Anchor 2

Bayaka orchestra

A Bayaka family.

<<< Click on a cover to

view a previous article

<<< Click on a cover to

view a previous article

As I read the reports of the killing of the famous Hwange National Park lion, Cecil, by an American client, hunting with a licensed professional hunter, firstly I anticipated the media frenzy over what was at the time a largely unknown story. Predictably, it took time for the facts to start emerging, and they will continue to emerge as the case moves through the legal system.

The other facet that made the Cecil incident extremely timeous was the whole controversy surrounding lion hunting. Australia has banned the import of lion trophies. The US Fish & Wildlife Service is considering a similar move. Various commercial airlines are refusing to ship lion trophies, irrespective of their legality. There’s all the hype generated by the animal rightists, seizing on transgressions in South Africa, and the uninitiated public has been brainwashed into a bizarre word association game where you say “lion” and they say “canned”, as if that were the norm and there was no other way to hunt a lion.

My old man sitting on the right taught me to shoot dogs.

How are we fellows to keep warm? Africanis pups, Magondi Tribal Trust Land, Zimbabwe, winter of 1977.

“Great. Legal or not, it is bad timing. Given global negativity right now towards hunting of our charismatic mega-fauna....... govt's and airlines imposing new restrictions........ the 'canned lion' film about to come out. It's almost like the perfect storm is forming with regards to lion hunting.”

“If the video was an indication of the cat, he wasn't exactly wild. Here kitty kitty, bang. Not hunting in my book.”

“Dumb move. I can't imagine that the PH did not know the lion given it's notoriety. There is a distinction between legal and doing the right thing.”

The flip side, of course, is that Cecil is being used by the antis for every ounce of effect they can get out of him, and there is a lot of pro-Palmer sentiment just for this reason.

“If he wandered into a legal hunting area then he is fair game. It is difficult to see those collars and even if the hunters did see it, IMO it would still be legal and ethical. I wouldn't give an inch away in hunting rights to the antis for any reason. They don't want what is fair...they want everything their way and everyone else to go to hell. Do not try to appease or negotiate with them. It would be like Obama kissing up to Iran.”

And, with less emotion...

"First off, from personal experience in roughly the same place, same scenario, I can tell you 100% that seeing the collar can be extremely difficult, if not impossible - trust me on that. Secondly, little "aging" would be required on this one. Third, he's supposedly 13 yrs old, is someone silly enough to believe he's gonna live forever???

All this crap about it being unethical to shoot a wild lion, simply because it's collared is nonsense! He's a wild animal, living in a wild area, and supposedly went into a legal hunting area . You don't want your collared lion shot, I suggest you collar one in a pen!

Any good/real scientists will have ZERO problems with this, as I can again - personally attest to. To falsely influence the lion's outcome, is to falsely skew the scientific data. Death by hunting can/is a possible outcome in a lion's life, period!"

As the focus and public ire shifts more to Walter Palmer and away from Honest Ndlovu and Theo Bronkhorst, folks are losing track of the fact that an operator has to have a lion on quota to offer a lion, and if there is no lion on quota the hunt is illegal. Everyone is seizing on the fact that the lion was shot in a legal hunting area, and that it is not illegal to bait lions or hunt collared lions in Zimbabwe. So what? Walter Palmer, safe back home in Minnesota, says he believed the hunt to be legal. Perhaps he did.

There is no Lacey Act violation, because Cecil’s trophy has been seized by Zimbabwean authorities as evidence, and so there was no importation. When the Lacey Act was adopted in 1900 it was the first US federal law protecting wildlife. It now covers all fish and wildlife, and protected plants, which fall under the mandate of CITES, and makes it unlawful to import any wildlife that is taken in violation of any foreign, e.g. Zimbabwean, law.

There are allegations which will only be proved or otherwise in court that National Parks officials may have been bribed in the Cecil incident. It is unlikely that the client himself would be in a position to do this, however, if it can be proven that Palmer did indeed bribe any officials, he could conceivably be charged in the United States in terms of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. This act has two parts, one that addresses accounting transparency requirements and another that addresses bribery of foreign officials. Under the alternative jurisdiction section of the second part, which reads:

“It shall also be unlawful for any United States person to corruptly do any act outside the United States in furtherance of an offer, payment, promise to pay, or authorization of the payment of any money, or offer, gift, promise to give, or authorization of the giving of anything of value to any of the persons or entities set forth…

There is a very real chance that sport hunting of lion could be dealt a death blow in the near future, and we all know what will happen then. All we have to do is look at Kenya, where the country on the one hand lauds itself for having banned all sport hunting in 1977, and then bemoans the fact that its lion population will be extinct within a decade - and that was half a decade ago. Its lions have no value to the rural villagers, and between habitat loss and their being killed off as stock predators - of course with no value - they have no chance.

What the lions themselves did not need was the Cecil story happening when and where it did.

The remains of Cecil, the 13-year-old dark-maned lion who had become a sort of rock star in Hwange national park were found in July of 2015. He was allegedly baited out of the park so that he could be killed legally. Legally, if, of course the land-owner, one Honest Ndlovu and the PH - Theo Bronkhurst - had a lion on quota or on licence. (If they didn’t - which was the case - there is an unsavoury practice known as a “quota transfer” where an animal shot in an area without a quota is recorded as having been shot elsewhere and needless to say this is illegal and unethical in the extreme. I would be lying if I said there is no National Parks complicity in this practice.)

The media, virtually an unwitting tool in the hands of the antis, went into overdrive. Cecil was Cecil - just having a name made him seem like your kindly white-haired grandfather. He was referred to as a “star attraction” - as if Hwange national park was some sort of petting zoo. He had been “lured out of the park with food”, and after being killed was “beheaded” or “decapitated” - more word association. There is a “Justice for Cecil” petition already circulating the Internet. Having just eaten, I haven’t even bothered to see what PETA has to say.

Cecil was also hunted with a bow - legal in Zimbabwe, but in this case the hunter- one Walter James Palmer of Minnesota in the United States - failed to do his part and his poorly-executed shot failed to kill the lion. Walter Palmer apparently paid US$50,000 for the kill, but there was no quota or licence for a lion to be taken from this area. That was what made it illegal! Lions can be legally baited in Zimbabwe. Radio-collared lions may be legally hunted in Zimbabwe.

After the botched shot, hunter and professional hunter tracked the lion and found him some forty hours later, whence they dispatched him with a rifle. The length of time taken to follow up the lion was also eagerly and dramatically seized upon by the press. When the hunters found that he was fitted with a GPS collar because he was being studied by Hwange Lion Research, funded by Oxford University; they allegedly tried to destroy the collar but failed. Whether or not Cecil’s satellite tracking collar was discernable when he was shot is debatable, but the collar would have made a “quota transfer” virtually impossible.

The president of the Safari Operators’ Association of Zimbabwe, Emmanuel Fundira pulled no punches, saying the killing of Cecil could represent just the tip of the iceberg. Fundira made reference to a “highly organised syndicate which may involve more people than those identified.” “It’s possible that some of the cases may go unnoticed and there could be collusion involving a number of individuals. The $55,000 (allegedly paid for the opportunity to hunt the lion) could have found its way around a number of people.”

As the CEO of the parent body of the Zimbabwe Professional Hunters’ and Guides’ Association, Fundira left no doubt that the hunt was illegal. “Since this was not a legal hunt it means this money is not directly accruing to the people and government of Zimbabwe. The area where the lion was killed did not have a hunting quota for lions for 2015”. Fundira said the killing of Cecil represented a loss for the country both in heritage and financial terms.“The proper market value for a lion like Cecil would be around $100,000”.

But as has been typical of the whole Cecil drama, even someone like Emmanuel Fundira can get his facts wrong, and he did when he observed “Cecil was killed using a bow hunt (sic), a silent weapon revealing the intent to conceal what happened.” Bow hunting is perfectly legal in Zimbabwe and is seen as a legitimate option. Within the Parks and Wildlife estate it requires a special permit, but is not regulated on alienated land. The ramifications of killing a pride male like Cecil are significant; the next lion in the hierarchy - in this case, one Jericho (another Disney character) - will probably kill off any of his predecessor’s cubs as part of his assertion of dominance. Despite his age, Cecil did have cubs.

The Zimbabwe Professional Hunters’ and Guides’ Association, which does a very good job of maintaining a high standard of ethics among its members, quickly issued a statement that “ZPHGA in the follow up of the investigation concludes that in regarding the responsibility of his membership, the PH was is in violation of the ethics of ZPHGA. ZPHGA therefore with immediate effect, suspend his membership indefinitely.”

Both the PH and concession holder were arrested on charges under the Parks and Wildlife Act in connection with the incident, and National Parks has suspended Bronkhorst’s PH’s licence. They are facing up to two years’ imprisonment if convicted.

Bronkhorst, a professional hunter with Bushman Safaris (not to be confused with the legitimate operation known as Phillip Bronkhorst Safaris based in South Africa) was charged with conniving with the land owner Honest Ndlovu to kill the lion. The simple fact is, the hunt was illegal because Ndlovu had no lion on quota for 2015.

So, what about Walter Palmer? There are a lot of ways this could shape up. Firstly, it is the responsibility of the hunter - read “client”, in this case Palmer - to do his due diligence before booking a hunt; given the cost of an African safari this should be a given. Whether you can make the Conventions or not, you go onto the various forums like Accurate Reloading and ask around.

You get the lowdown on the operator and the PH. You then go to the professional association, like the ZPHGA if there is one, and you make further enquiries. Once you have done all that and are happy with the result, you should be able to relax and assume that whatever happens on your safari will be legal and ethical. In other words, if the PH tells you to shoot a lion you should be confident that it is on quota and on licence and you are hunting it in accordance with the laws and ethics of the industry.

Now, you generally wouldn’t have a lion on licence and not know it. (You would be less culpable if you had one on licence but the operator or concessionaire didn’t have one on quota, because that could be more easily concealed from you.) Which means that if your PH tells you to shoot one you should suspect something is amiss if you haven’t bought one.

Let’s approach this from a different direction. There’s a first time for everything, including an African safari, but the expense and level of this kind of hunting suggests that you will be an experienced nimrod. And well known on the forums. Well known can be good and it can be bad.

On 22 April, 2008, Walter J Palmer, 48, of Eden Prairie, Minnesota pleaded guilty to making a false statement to a federal agent in connection with the poaching of a black bear in the state of Wisconsin. Palmer had been issued a licence to hunt a black bear in Subzone A1 in northern Wisconsin. He subsequently killed one some forty miles outside of Subzone A1 and then repeatedly lied to US Fish and Wildlife investigators about the bear’s origin. He was looking at a maximum of five years’ imprisonment for that, but in the end was fined $2,939 and put on probation for one year. He was spared the felony conviction chiefly because he was a dentist and it might have impacted negatively on his ability to prescribe medications and his licence to practice. Not to mention owning a firearm.

Walter Palmer	A seasoned hunter	The image circulating of Cecil and the "Lion Killers" - actually not Cecil, different lion but nice hype.
Bronkhurst in Zimbabwean court	Honest Trymore Ndlovu	Cecil in his glory days
Walter Palmer and his Nevada California Bighorn hunted with a bow	Bronkhurst and lawyer walk the Zimbabwean courts	Bronkhurst and Ndlovu
Cecil

In 2009, according to documents from the Minnesota Board of Dentistry, Palmer settled a corrective action with the board and his insurer paid $127,500 to a woman who accused him of sexual harassment. Nothing to do with Cecil - perhaps he was just considering a career in politics.

There are still elements of the Cecil story that need to be clarified. There are persistent references in the press reports that Palmer used a crossbow to shoot Cecil. Initially I chalked those down to the inherent disregard for facts which the mainstream media tends to display when they have a nice, emotive, issue like this to rant about. Hey, what’s the difference between a crossbow and a compound bow, anyway, right? They both start with a “c”. Palmer has been variously referred to as “Parker” and “a Spaniard” too. Walter Palmer is a well-known bow hunter, but a 23 April 2008 post on the forum at Bowsite.com and referring to Palmer’s bear-hunting conviction reads:

“...this is a poaching violation, it was done with a crossbow as it is the weapon of choice for poachers. I wonder where he bought his crossbow to commit this crime?”

Did the writer know something? Does it matter? Not really. In terms of Zimbabwe law a crossbow would be the same as a bow, and I personally think that even though they seem to corroborate each other both reports are probably incorrect.

Initial comments on the forums like Accurate Reloading - before Palmer was identified - were not complimentary.

(A) (i) influencing any act or decision of such foreign official in his official capacity, (ii) inducing such foreign official to do or omit to do any act in violation of the lawful duty of such official, or (iii) securing any improper advantage…” charges could be filed in the United States. But given the buffer of Bronkhorst and Ndlovu, this would be highly unlikely.

Any way you look at it, Palmer was in the wrong place at the wrong time. It had to be Cecil, didn’t it? He may as well have shot the Pope. I doubt whether, under the circumstances, at night, Bronkhorst could have told Cecil from the Cowardly Lion or necessarily seen the radio collar, but, at the end of the day, there are the two, inter-related questions of legality and ethics. Unless Honest Ndlovu can prove he had a lion on quota (quotas are issued by National Parks, and their Investigations Branch are the ones who’ve arrested him) the lion was hunted illegally, Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

Theo Bronkhorst would have known whether or not there was a lion on quota, and he wasn’t baiting for ducks that evening. He has also been arrested and suspended into the bargain by the Zimbabwe Professional Hunters’ and Guides’ Association. Would there have been, without the radio collar, an attempt at a “quota transfer”? That would have been both illegal and unethical.

Phillip Bronkhorst, of Phillip Bronkhorst Safaris based in South Africa posted on his Facebook page that he “has got no business or family relation with Theo Bronkhorst from Bushman Safaris in Zimbabwe”, and continues “I have been receiving calls and emails from the Spanish press and the Washington Post regarding my involvement with a lion hunt that took place in Zimbabwe killing an apparently famous lion called Cecil. Sorry guys, wrong company and wrong country. To all my friends and clients I am alive and well and not locked up in jail.” Just another of the far-ranging ramifications that accrue from something like this.

The bottom line is that this sort of an incident is the last thing the hunting fraternity needs at this juncture, with the animal rightists making steady progress in their attempts to outlaw lion hunting. Even a spin doctor of the magnitude of Dick Morris could not craft a more heaven-sent piece of propaganda for the antis. So yes, I agree with the writer above who said he wouldn’t give an inch to the antis, but who has really let the side down here? I’m going to have to pull a bit of a Dick Metcalf this time around and say that it was Walter Palmer, Theo Bronkhorst and Honest Ndlovu, and with the case in Zimbabwe still to go to court, I don’t think the fallout has even started yet. Innocent until proven guilty indeed, but the facts do not lie. Laws have been broken.

Cecil in his younger years

At the same time, as this whole drama unfolds the Zimbabwe authorities and especially the Zimbabwe Professional Hunters’ and Guides’ Association are to be commended in acting swiftly, positively and responsibly in the interests of legal and ethical hunting. This is what distinguishes us from poachers or animal traffickers, and makes us true conservationists. Antis aside, we as a hunting community should stand by these actions and not the hunter simply because he is perceived to be “one of us”. If the parties are guilty, they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

SAFARI OPERATORS ASSOCIATION OF ZIMBABWE

CODE OF CONDUCT

This Code of Conduct will be complied with by all members of the Safari Operators Association of Zimbabwe.

OBJECTIVES OF THE CODE

To encourage the growth and development of the consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife tourism industry, in a manner consistent with these objectives.

To actively promote the preservation and sustainable utilization of the environment.

To maintain, protect and enhance the reputation, standing and good name of Zimbabwe’s consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife tourism industries and the Association and its members.

To ensure that all members conduct their business in a manner which will reflect the highest possible standards in business.

To encourage initiative and enterprise in the belief that properly regulated competitive trading will best serve the aspirations of the consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife tourism industries.

GENERAL

This code is designed to regulate the activities of members between themselves, clients and suppliers.

This code recognises and embodies the relevant parts of all acts of Parliament and Government regulations which relate to the consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife tourism industries as well as the codes and regulations of recognised organisations or associations such as the Zimbabwe Council for Tourism and its associated bodies.

The code recognises the necessity for enforcement of standards and practices and embodies measures and procedures by which members may uphold the code under the authority of the Executive Committee.

Members shall familiarise themselves and their staff with the provisions of this Code of Conduct.

Members shall observe not only the letter but also the spirit of the code of conduct and its ethics and ideals thus giving true significance to Aims and Objectives of the Association.

THE CODE

Members shall deal honestly and fairly with each other, with clients and suppliers of services.

Members shall treat all details of their negotiations confidentially and shall not divulge them to any third party except as required by law.

Members shall not knowingly make false or misleading statement relating to the following :-

their ability to successfully and professionally meet potential clients’ needs;

competitors;

rates, costs, accommodation, transportation, capacities or any other factor.

Members shall honour all contracts, both with clients and suppliers in spirit as well as intent and shall make every effort to honour all commitments, both written and oral.

Members shall settle all financial obligations in accordance with normal commercial practice unless otherwise specifically agreed with suppliers.

Members shall confirm all services in written form.

Members shall not attempt to convert business to themselves by directly or indirectly bringing the name of another member to disrepute.

Members shall pay the annual subscription within the specified period.

THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE

The Executive Committee shall from time to time appoint a Disciplinary Committee. The Disciplinary Committee shall investigate alleged breaches of the Constitution and/or Rules of the Association and all complaints made against members. The Disciplinary Committee shall comprise of a Chairman and three members appointed by the Executive Committee.

The Disciplinary Committee shall appoint a secretary (“the Secretary”) who shall keep, or cause to be kept, such records as are hereby required or otherwise deemed appropriate.

The quorum necessary for the transaction of business by the Disciplinary Committee may be varied by the Executive Committee shall be not less than three.

The following records shall be kept by the secretary:

details of all alleged breaches of the Constitution and/or Rules of the

Association and all complaints made against Members;

(ii) details of all disciplinary action taken against Members; and

minutes of all resolutions and proceedings of the Disciplinary Committee.

PROCEDURE FOR DISCIPLINARY MATTERS

No alleged breach of the Code of complaint made against a member shall be investigated by the disciplinary Committee unless:

the complaint is made in writing by the complainant and delivered to the Association office: or

the complaint is initiated by a member of the Executive Committee and is sent in writing to the Chairman of the Executive Committee.

The Chairman may refuse in his absolute discretion to refer a complaint to the Disciplinary Committee or may require further details of the complaint to be furnished before making such a referral. In the event that the Chairman refuses to refer a complaint to the Disciplinary Committee, the complainant, if a member, may appeal his refusal to the Executive Committee in writing and the decision of the Executive Committee in this regard shall be final.

Upon receipt of a complaint, the Chairman shall (if he thinks fit) refer to the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee shall at its next meeting, consider the complaint and carry out or cause an investigation as it shall deem appropriate. If after investigation the Committee shall consider it necessary or desirable, it shall convene a formal meeting of the Disciplinary Committee to rule upon the matter.

The member against whom a complaint or allegation lies shall be given not less than fourteen days notice of the date, place and time of the disciplinary hearing at which the matter will be ruled upon, together with full details of the complaint or allegation made against him.

The Disciplinary Committee shall be entitled at any time to require a member against whom a complaint lies to provide a written response to such complaint or to produce documentation, records or information connected with such complaint. If a member unreasonably refuses to comply with a request by the Disciplinary Committee to produce documentation, records or information, his refusal shall be dealt with as a separate disciplinary matter punishable by expulsion or other appropriate measures as determined by the Disciplinary Committee, from membership of the Association.

If the Disciplinary Committee concludes that contravention of the rules of the Association or an allegation has been established, it shall have the power to impose all or any combination of the following sanctions:

issue a caution to the Member;

reprimand the Member;

suspend the Member from membership and all benefits of membership of the Association;

expel the Member from membership and withdraw all benefits of membership of the Association;

make whatever recommendation it deems fit to the regulatory authorities regarding the licensing of the Member or any other matter

The Member concerned shall in all cases pay the costs and expenses of the investigation and hearing (if applicable) or such portion thereof as shall be directed by the Disciplinary Committee where a complaint or allegation is established as well founded.

The Disciplinary Committee shall notify the Member concerned and the Executive Committee of its decision not later than 14 days after conclusion of investigation and hearing.

APPEALS TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

6.1 A member who has been found to have contravened the Constitution and Rules of the Association or against whom an allegation has been established and upon whom any of the sanctions referred to in Clause 5.5 have been imposed shall be entitled to appeal against such imposition to the Executive Committee.

6.2 A Member wishing to exercise his right of appeal shall within 14 days of receiving notification of the determination of the Disciplinary Committee send notice in writing to the Chairman of his intention to appeal and shall at the same time indicate whether or not he intends to be legally represented at the appeal hearing. After the said period has lapsed and in the event of the Member not exercising his right of appeal the decision of the Disciplinary Committee shall be deemed final and binding.

An appeal to the Executive Committee shall be conducted as a full rehearing of the complaint or allegation against the member. New evidence or other matters not raised at the disciplinary hearing may be introduced provided such evidence or matters are relevant to the issues to be determined by the Executive Committee.

The Executive Committee shall be entitled to call for a written or oral report of the investigation and hearing of the Disciplinary Committee and shall have power to call any member of the Disciplinary Committee before it for the purpose of explaining, expanding or clarifying any matters contained in such report.

The Executive Committee shall be at liberty to publish its decisions and the sanctions imposed in disciplinary matters in the Association’s newsletter or by means of a circular to members of the Association or any other way that is deemed appropriate.

The Safari Operators Association of Zimbabwe request all members to read, acknowledge and abide by the above Code of Conduct and to sign their acceptance of such Code of Conduct in the appropriate space below.

One element that immediately leapt out was where Cecil was hunted. The concessions bordering on Hwange National Park have been a hotbed of controversy since the beginning of the new millennium. The former stomping grounds of the Big Bad himself, Dawie Groenewald of Out of Africa Adventurous Safaris, it seems that just about every corrupt politico and safari operator has been drawn to that area like a magnet over the last fifteen years. Alarm bells just went off from force of habit.