Showing 91 to 95 of 106 blog articles.
Into the White

Second poem in the ‘Black and White, Wild and Wooly’ series for World Rhino Day - ‘Into the White’, Northern White Rhino (Ceratotherium simum cottoni).

This was a hard poem to write based on a hard image to see - Ami Vitale’s haunting image of the last goodbye to Sudan, the last male Northern White Rhino. The name of the poem came easily, but the rest resisted all attempts for maybe 18 months. A couple of weeks ago I made the upcoming World Rhino Day a deadline to finish and publish it as part of this series.

My commentary is in the poem. Here is Ami’s (from her Instagram account)…

‘Saying goodbye to Sudan was one of the hardest moments of my life. On that day in March, 2018, we were witnessing not just the death of this majestic creature and the functional extinction of a subspecies, but also watching our own demise. We need to start recognising that our fate is linked to the fate of animals. Without Rhinos and all wildlife, we will suffer more than the loss of ecosystem health. We will suffer a loss of our own imagination, a loss of wonder, a loss of beautiful possibilities. I hope that this moment will mark a moment when humanity recognises how interconnected we all really are.’

Efforts are underway to rescue the species through genetic science, and several embryos have been achieved, with a view to one day finding a surrogate Southern White Rhino to re-establish the Northern White subspecies. If it does not succeed, there are only the two ageing daughters of Sudan still alive - Naijin and Fatu, being cared for and guarded by Ol Pejeta - functionally extinct and awaiting the inevitable.

Ami has made a film about Sudan - find details and the story of ‘The Last Goodbye’ on her website

#intothewhitepoem

#NorthernWhiteRhino #functionallyextinct


  1 year ago
Trophy Heads (Art) you can be proud to showcase and no killing involved

A Note from Chris Jim who found a unique way to support his family.  


My name it's Chris Jim, I was born in Zimbabwe on 12/04/1976. I am the last born of a family of 8. My father Andria Jim died when I was 3 years so I was raised by my mother Maria Kim and my elder brothers. My brothers used to make cars and pushing toys out of wire, that's when I started and they taught me how to make my cars from wires. When I went to school I started to attend craft lessons from then it was my passion to make anything from wire. Still at school during weekends I used to go and sell my wires in the streets of Harare to the tourists. When I finished school there were no jobs at home so I kept on making my wire art and selling in the streets from there I didn't look back till now I am surviving from my art works. I am living in South Africa in Johannesburg,  I am married to Janet Fire, and we are blessed with 3 children,  Ashley,  Andrew and Adrian Jim. I am teaching them how one can create jobs from art.

Thank u for supporting my work,  Please visit: mojostreamingwildlife.com   USE CODE FreeShip for free shipping and save $40.00 until December 23, 2023  Allow 10-14 days for shipping

Regards Chris Jim

    

  1 year ago
Major Routes for Illegal Wildlife Trade



Major Routes for Illegal Wildlife Trade

The illegal wildlife trade is a complex and pervasive issue that spans across continents, often exploiting vulnerable ecosystems and endangered species. Major routes for this illicit trade are established based on demand, availability of species, and the effectiveness of law enforcement in various regions. Key areas of focus include Africa and Asia, where rich biodiversity often coexists with political and economic instability. The routes typically emerge from regions abundant in specific wildlife, such as elephants and rhinos in Africa or tigers and pangolins in Asia, moving through various countries before reaching ultimate consumers in wealthier nations.

One of the most notorious routes for illegal wildlife trafficking starts in Central and East Africa, where poachers target iconic species like elephants for their ivory and rhinos for their horns. From countries like Tanzania, Kenya, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, traffickers often transport contraband through ports such as Mombasa, using shipping containers to disguise their illicit cargo. These routes are further complicated by corruption and inadequate enforcement, allowing traffickers to operate with relative impunity. The ivory trade, in particular, has seen a significant increase in demand from Asian markets, making Africa a focal point for poaching and trafficking activities.

In Asia, the illegal wildlife trade is heavily driven by traditional medicine markets and exotic pet industries. Countries like Vietnam and China serve as major destinations for wildlife products, including tiger bones and bear bile. The trade often utilizes overland routes through countries like Laos and Cambodia, where borders are less monitored, facilitating the movement of trafficked goods. Wildlife traffickers frequently exploit the porous nature of these borders to evade detection, taking advantage of local economies and sometimes involving local communities in the trade, whether willingly or through coercion.

The consequences of these trafficking routes extend beyond the immediate loss of biodiversity. The illegal wildlife trade threatens entire ecosystems, disrupts local communities, and undermines conservation efforts. As species populations dwindle, the ecological balance is disturbed, leading to unforeseen consequences such as habitat degradation and the collapse of local fauna and flora. Furthermore, the financial gains from wildlife crime often fund other criminal activities, including drug trafficking and arms smuggling, creating a broader network of organized crime that poses significant challenges to law enforcement agencies worldwide.

Efforts to combat these major routes for illegal wildlife trade have seen varying degrees of success. International cooperation, such as the implementation of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), has been instrumental in regulating trade and enhancing enforcement. Successful prosecutions in high-profile cases send a strong message, but consistent follow-through is crucial. Community involvement is also vital, as local populations often hold the key to sustainable conservation practices. By educating and empowering these communities, the push against wildlife crime can become a collective effort, fostering a greater appreciation for biodiversity and a commitment to protecting it for future generations.

Identification of Hotspot Regions

The identification of hotspot regions for wildlife crime is crucial in developing effective strategies to combat poaching and the illegal wildlife trade. These hotspots are often characterized by a combination of high biodiversity and significant threats, including economic instability, weak governance, and inadequate law enforcement. Regions such as Southeast Asia, Central Africa, and parts of Latin America have been identified as critical areas where wildlife crime flourishes. In these areas, the intersection of poverty, corruption, and demand for wildlife products creates an environment where illegal activities are prevalent.

In Southeast Asia, countries like Vietnam and Thailand have emerged as major transit points for illegal wildlife trafficking. The demand for tiger parts, pangolin scales, and exotic birds drives poachers to exploit these regions. Furthermore, the porous borders and limited enforcement capabilities allow traffickers to operate with relative impunity. Identifying these hotspots requires collaboration between local governments, conservation organizations, and international bodies to gather data on wildlife population trends, poaching incidents, and trafficking routes.

Central Africa faces unique challenges, as it is home to some of the world's most endangered species, including elephants and rhinos. The illegal ivory trade has decimated elephant populations in countries like Gabon and the Republic of Congo. Conflict and instability in the region further complicate conservation efforts, making it essential to pinpoint areas where poaching is most rampant. By employing satellite imagery, wildlife monitoring technologies, and community reporting systems, conservationists can track poaching activities and develop targeted interventions.

In Latin America, the illegal trade of wildlife, particularly in the Amazon rainforest, poses a significant threat to biodiversity. Species such as macaws, tortoises, and various reptiles are heavily trafficked, often leading to population declines and ecosystem disruption. Identifying these hotspot regions involves understanding the socio-economic factors at play, including deforestation, agricultural expansion, and the role of organized crime in wildlife trafficking. Collaborating with local communities to raise awareness and promote sustainable practices can help mitigate these threats.

Effective identification of wildlife crime hotspots not only aids in resource allocation for enforcement but also informs global conservation strategies. By understanding the specific dynamics of each region, stakeholders can create tailored approaches that address the root causes of wildlife crime. This may involve strengthening local laws, improving community involvement in conservation efforts, and enhancing international cooperation to dismantle trafficking networks. Ultimately, a comprehensive understanding of hotspot regions is essential in the ongoing fight against wildlife crime, ensuring the protection of endangered species and the preservation of biodiversity for future generations.

Be sure to visit Mojostreaming.com and https://mojostreamingwildlife.com/

MojoStreaming Ltd

Cami Ciotta

producer@wildlifecrimeseries.com

Project in development: "Wild Justice" TV Series on Wildlife Crime

  10 months ago
It’s Happening in America’s Backyard

From tigers in Asia to elephants in Africa, wildlife crimes only seem to make the news when it concerns rare and exotic species and high-value animal parts like rhino horns.

But there’s no need to cross the ocean to find the pervasive and persistent problem of poaching and links to an international black market. Poaching for specific high-demand animal parts to feed the demand of a nefarious underworld of dealers, merchants and buyers is widespread in the U.S., its fingers extending to nearly all parts of the country.

And with any criminal enterprise, it’s the money that supplies the motive. For example, the American black bear has long been poached for its hide, paws, gallbladder, and bile, mainly due to their use in Eastern medicine. (Gallbladder and bile are often used to treat diseases of the heart and kidneys.) Undercover operations have found single dried bear gallbladders fetching as much as $30,000 on the black market.

But it’s not just the American black bear that’s under siege. The horns of ram sheep can sell for more than $20,000 on the black market. The bighorn sheep, which largely resides in the area between the San Jacinto Mountains and the U.S.-Mexico border, has been on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s endangered species list since 1998. Although land development and disease have been the major contributors to the dwindling of this species, poaching is only putting more nails in the coffin. These sheep are usually found in remote areas, making it a challenge for game wardens to patrol and monitor poaching activity.

Shark fins are also highly valued in Eastern cultures, making poaching off the coast of California a major problem, despite the fact that selling or distributing shark fins is illegal under California’s Shark Fin Law. When a great deal of money is at stake, the crimes continue. A single shark fin can sell for $500 in China, where it is used to make shark fin soup, a delicacy. It is estimated that there are more than 100 million shark deaths every year due to shark finning: the practice of catching a shark, slicing off only the coveted fins, then tossing the animal back overboard to die a slow and painful death  To read the full article visit:  gamewarden.org

We have a serious problem of illegal hunting in the U.S. and the NRA is NOT holding their original standards which was about gun SAFETY AND TRAINING.   NRA became the only national trainer of law enforcement officers with the introduction of its NRA Police Firearms Instructor certification program in 1960. In civilian training, the NRA continues to be the leader in firearms education. Over 125,000 certified instructors now train about 1,000,000 gun owners a year. Courses are available in basic rifle, pistol, shotgun, muzzleloading firearms, personal protection, even ammunition reloading. Additionally, nearly 7,000 certified coaches are specially trained to work with young competitive shooters.   The focus now is more about fighting for gun rights, money and political power.  Safety means nothing to the NRA. By the NRA getting away from their roots has created a very dangerous gun problem in the United States.  

Another problem in the U.S. is Texas 

Of the 1,525 seizures that FWS recorded at the U.S.-Mexico border from January 2020 to September 11, 2023, more than 85 percent occurred in Texas, accounting for 17,317 animals and exotic animal parts—such as a South African ostrich and shark bones. Learn more here: 

Learn more HERE

The biggest organization that is a threat to our wildlife is Safar Club International with their trophy hunting AND Hunting contests!  Learn more at 

linkedin.com

To read about Wildlife Crime and Corruption in the U.S. follow Cami Ciotta's newsletters at linkedin.com

To support our fight to educate people the need to protect our wildlife please donate $5.00 at wildlifebroadcast.com

or visit our store and make a purchase at mojostreamingwildlife.com

Thank you for your support and to be a part of the movement please sign up at Sign Up - MojoStreaming.com







  1 year ago
From "OUR BURNING PLANET"

TOPS FLIP FLOP



State caves in to game farmers and hunters over key wildlife protection



By Don Pinnock



10 Apr 2023



Vital legislation in South Africa for the protection of wildlife has been stopped in its tracks by a mysterious settlement between game breeders/hunters and the Department of Environment.



BeyondWords



The Department of Environment (DFFE) had gazetted the most progressive wildlife protection legislation ever drafted in South Africa. It seemed like good news for beleaguered wildlife. 



But just before it was to become law, game breeder and hunter organisations applied for an urgent interdict to halt it. DFFE responded with a convincingly argued defence of its legislation, clearly indicating its strong opposition to the application, not least on the grounds that it was not urgent.



But at the last minute, in a secret, out-of-court settlement, the Department withdrew the proposed Threatened or Protected Species (TOPS) regulations as well as related Norms and Standards amendments and agreed to pay the applicants’ legal  costs. 



Its reasoning? “Due to the urgent timeframes of the litigation, the Department required additional time to consider the varied issues raised in the court application” by Wildlife Ranching South Africa (WRSA) and the Professional Hunters Association of South Africa (PHASA). So was it urgent or wasn’t it?



What’s curious is exactly what happened between 24 March, when the Department filed its comprehensive and well argued 91-page affidavit opposing the interdict, and 27 March when it completely backtracked in conceding to retract the regulations without revealing any of its arguments.



Because the TOPS regulations were closely interlinked to four other Government Notices – also due to come into effect on 1 April – DFFE has also withdrawn the revised Norms and Standards for the management of elephants, the hunting of leopards, the amended protection list of 266 wild mammal, fish, birds, invertebrates and plants and new regulations involving the trade in rhino horn.



What were the seemingly convincing arguments made by WRSA/PHASA that made the DFFE back off? What other agreements or aspects to the settlement were reached? And why and on what basis did DFFE agree to pay costs when, in such cases, each party normally pays them? At this stage nobody’s talking and a request to DFFE by Our Burning Planet got no reply.



Consultation timeframes



The TOPS regulations were published on 3 February for public comment before being promulgated, and at that point WRSA and PHASA met with the Department. Were their concerns raised then? What prompted them to take the Department to court? 



Explaining the court challenge, the CEO of PHASA, Dries van Coller, said the publication of the TOPS regulations and species list had taken the industry by surprise because the previous very limited public participation process was eight years ago in 2015.



“The Minister’s promulgated version of the regulations differed materially from the previous versions and included numerous provisions which would be detrimental to the ability of game ranchers and professional hunters to conduct sustainable business in the game industry.”



Van Coller had grounds for complaint. Very limited public participation followed the publication of the TOPS regulations. This is in contrast to the exhaustive consultation following the recommendations of the High Level Panel on lions, rhinos, elephants and leopards and also the White Paper on Biodiversity just approved by Cabinet. 



It is also surprising that the minister’s legal advisers appear to have failed to take note of the precedent affirmed for the requirements for public participation in two other cases. One was an interim interdict granted to the Humane Society International-Africa which challenged the hunting and export quotas for elephants, rhinos and leopards. The second judgement was obtained by Endangered Wildlife Trust overturning the Department of Agriculture’s inclusion of several species of wild animals under the Animal Improvement Act.



More than time frames



A reading of the TOPS regulations, however, makes it clear why game farmers and hunters hit the panic button. It’s not just about consultation time frames. Following the report of the High Level Panel, DFFE’s Cabinet-approved proposals on animal wellbeing and the White Paper on Biodiversity just published, it’s clear that Creecy is responsive to increasing reports and studies on cruelty on game farms and, particularly, the hunting of lions bred for the bullet. 





A lion in a breeding facility. (Photo: Conservation Action Trust)



All this is having a negative effect on South Africa’s image abroad at a time when the country desperately needs to rebuild its tourist industry after the Covid pandemic.



The new TOPS regulations tighten the thumbscrews on sloppy, inappropriate, dangerous and cruel game farming and hunting in an industry that has mostly been at great pains to fly below the radar. They considerably tighten regulation of captive breeding, rehabilitation, temporary holding and commercial exhibition facilities, game farms and animal translocators.



But the regulations go much further, listing 266 species as vulnerable, endangered, or critically endangered with precise listing of restricted or prohibited activities with regard to each. These include all rhino species, elephants, lions, leopards, African wild dogs, cheetahs, hyenas and a range of plains game including southern roan and sable antelope and both species of zebra.



TOPS also tightens regulations around hunting permits and drills down on captive breeding, which must have infuriated breeders and would have been the main points of contention in the court case. A huge bone of contention with facilities involved in so-called canned hunting, where hand-reared lions are released to be shot, would have been regulations prohibiting the hunting of a large predator in an area adjacent to a captive holding facility.



Also prohibited would be the introduction of wild-caught predators to breeding facilities, a time limit after which rehabilitation facilities would have to return animals to the wild, and a ban on breeding in sanctuaries.



The TOPS regulations put captive breeding facilities under an official microscope with the ability to close them down for non-compliance with the strict guidelines. All animals and the conditions under which they are kept would have to be documented for official inspection and stud books kept to curb inbreeding and hybridisation.



Enclosures would need to comply with regulations, the food supply for captive animals detailed, plans provided for the removal of waste and the availability of veterinary services. Captive breeding facilities would be required to provide a description of the strategies used in breeding that contribute to the conservation of wild populations, a requirement that lion farms would find impossible.



Breeding facilities would be denied registration if their activities conflicted with the Biodiversity Act or with anything within the TOPS regulations. And to add to the uncertainty of game breeders, their registration could be cancelled if “there is a change in the conservation status of the species involved being bred, reared, propagated, traded or kept by a permit holder”.



A question of capacity



A weakness of the TOPS regulations – and this would have been pointed out in the court case – is that the tight control required by DFFE would require far more trained officials and a data collection system capable of responding quickly and efficiently. Sadly, neither national or provincial environmental departments have either of these. This point was hammered home by Dries van Coller of PHASA:



“We are already being hamstrung by the inability of various national and provincial departments to administrate the myriad of environmental regulations. State departments already do not have the capacity or funding to administer the wildlife industry properly. 



“We receive complaints from members on a near-daily basis of permits not being processed. There is simply no money in some provinces to cover the costs associated with statutory oversight work. The system is stalling due to the department not having enough people and money to do their job. Now we see a Minister who wants to impose even more conditions on an already over-regulated industry.” 



So here’s the question. Will the TOPS regulations and linked wildlife laws be scrapped, rewritten or hit a new round of contestation? No time frame or way forward has yet been suggested. For now the issue lies smouldering in a firepit of confusion. OBP

  2 years ago