Challenges facing some Desert Lion Prides in Namibia. What needs to be done to save them?

REFLECTING ON THE CBNRM (COMMUNITY BASED

NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT) MODEL IN ITS CURRENT FORM- PROTECTED AREAS AND THEIR

POTENTIAL TO IMPROVE THE STATUS QUO.

By Izak Smit, chairperson of DeLHRA

(Desert Lions Human Relations Aid).

21 May 2021

This is OP-ED is simply based on the view

of the author based on 32 years of regularly traversing the areas in question

of which the last ten years were spent more intensively focussing on Desert

Lion Human Conflict whilst working with Conservancies and the affected communities.

NAMIBIAN CONSERVATION-BEFORE AND AFTER

INDEPENDENCE 21 MARCH 1990

Before independence, the “Suidwes Afrika

Natuurbewaring” was pretty much run autonomously in a military fashion where

every-one knew their place and a low tolerance for outsiders was maintained.

Discipline was the order of the day and maintenance of infra-structure a high

priority. To the old “Bokkiewagters” (Game Rangers), it was not a job but a

calling and way of living. The top structure ruled with an iron fist and outsiders

were viewed with suspicion and marginalized as the brotherhood stuck together,

much like in the army those years. Appointments were made on the basis of

strict vetting and merit and promotions were hard earned. No one dared to

question or challenge the top “Brass” and the public had “no business

interfering with the work of the Ministry”. NGO’s were unheard of and had no

justification as “Natuurbewaring” had it all “under control”.

In 1990 Namibia gained independence from

the South African Government and this culture was inherited by the new

governing body. The management structure was now changed, and the experienced

and knowledgeable pale males had to clear their desks as cadre deployment

became the order of the day. Few remained as mentors were needed for the

transition as empowerment manifested. Those who remained found themselves in

powerful positions as advisors and mentors as the transition process leaned

heavily on their experience and expertise. Those who were replaced who took the

“Golden Handshake” early retirement/retrenchment packages had to seek new

opportunities where their skills would be relevant and valued. This led to many

of them, people like Jan Joubert, starting up Tourism Safari businesses as

tourism started growing in Namibia while some later formed NGOs.

THE ERA OF NGO’s-

GARTH OWEN SMITH-HIS BOOK “AN ARID EDEN”

AND MARGIE JACOBSON’S BOOK “LIFE IS LIKE A KUDU HORN”

As things developed and the new Ministry of

Environment and Tourism settled in and went through its settling/growing pains,

over the years capacity and resources seemed to have become increasingly

challenged and the ministry’s mandate became more and more impossible to

execute without outside/outsourced assistance. Enters the era of the NGO’s.

Some of the ex-Nature Conservation staff availed themselves and, in time, many

NGO’s were formed. The IRDNC, Integrated Rural Development and Nature

Conservation formed by Garth Owen Smith was one of many. These then joined the

umbrella body NACSO, Namibian Association of CBNRM Support Organisations.

Funding and grants from organisations like WWF floated the financial boats of

these NGO’s and MOU’s with the Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) were

signed and collaborations forged. To this day this structure pretty much rules

the roost.

In the beginning Garth Owen Smith’s

organisation was also faced some stonewalling from the MET as can be seen in

his book “An Arid Eden”. In time, after some lengthy and laborious

persuasion,  the MET endorsed his

proposed CBNRM (Community Based Natural Resource Management) model and the

first Conservancies were registered in the early 1990’s. The NGO’s that were

“in the fold and toeing the line” now had the political clout needed to operate

and relationships with the newly formed Conservancies were forged. Although

there was some collaboration, each NGO operates independently, has its own

mission and vision, agenda and interests. Many livelihoods are dependent on the

funding these NGOs receive and a number of ex Nature Conservation employees

from the old dispensation found a home here and their knowledge and experience

stood to benefit their organisations.

These NGOs now became the advisors and

consultants of many of the Conservancies and functions like Game counts and

others that the Conservancies’ inexperienced managements needed help with were

often outsourced from/guided by said NGOs.

The books written by the late Garth Owen

Smith, “An Arid Eden”, and his partner Margie Jacobsohn, “Life is like a Kudu

Horn”,  gives good perspective of the

history of the IRDNC and how it was established.

While the title of Garth’s book, an Arid

Eden, was appropriate until about 2013/14 it no longer holds true in the face

of the decimation of the wildlife in the conservancies over the last about

seven years. Someone bitterly commented that the title of the book,  “Life is like a Kudu Horn”, is actually more appropriate

now since a Kudu Horn is configured like a screw and the game population in the

conservancies are “pretty screwed” right now.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MEFT AND

NGO’s-EX BOKKIEWAGTERS AND LIVELIHOODS-DAISY CHAIN AND INTERDEPENDENCE

As many of the NGOs are dependent on

authorisations and permits of some kind from the MET, toeing the line as

dictated by the MET had become a pre-requisite. With-holding a researcher’s

permit or an NGOs work permits needed to operate can mean the end of the line

for that entity. Unsurprisingly therefor, bonding became essential. This

resulted in an “exclusive club” and you could decide whether you are in or out

by pledging subservience to the rules or not. This, in return, ensured

“protection of your turf” and kept annoying newcomers/outsiders out. The

previous Permanent Secretary mastered the art of directing this orchestra

through bullying tactics and strategies. It worked well! In one instance a

newcomer was accepted after arranging study grants for 2-3 MET employees

through his organisation first, a fair exchange? Mutually beneficial deals

involving funding and revenue streams sweetened the arrangement or “Daisy chain”

and in some instances a researcher would team up with a select few NGOs who have

big Tourism interests, a win-win situation of note, although in contrast with

some clear permit provisos!

NGO’s AND THEIR AGENDAS AND

INTERESTS-SPONSORSHIPS

This situation therefor leaves us with a

regulating body dependent on a group of supporting NGOs for the purpose of

executing the ministry’s mandate that are being run like businesses and funded

by corporate donors and sponsors in need of maximum exposure and recognition

for “fulfilling social responsibilities”. Some of the NGOs are also supported

by the private sector and more particularly, tourism operators in a mutually

beneficial arrangement which included commercial film making and the rare high

valued privilege to see collared Lions.

Hang on you say, this sounds like mud

slinging and the usual handbag in-fighting amongst conservationists in

competition. No, it is not, it needs mentioning to give perspective on why the

current status quo needs a make-over as the CBNRM model evolved negatively

being driven by self- serving outside influences.

THE OUTDATED CBNRM MANAGEMENT MODEL-NEED

FOR MAKEOVER-SHORTCOMINGS AND MAKE UP- TRIPLICATION OF WILDLIFE-BLURRING OF

LINES-HAVING CAKE AND EATING IT-LEGISLATION AND PROTECTION

When a car starts to smoke, cough, wheeze

and generally starts performing poorly, one is forced to check for the problem.

Is it the gearbox, differential, engine or electrics maybe? If it is all of the

above, you change the whole damn thing.

The CBNRM mode has been going since the

early 1990s which makes it about 26 years old. Things evolve and influences

like climate change changes the variables and essence of such a model over time

and it, inevitably at some stage, needs reviewing. Desertification, both as a

result of overgrazing and climate change has progressed to a point where so-called

traditional farming, nomadic pastoralism and even subsistence farming may no

longer be sustainable or even possible. Traditional farming, in the modern

context has reached proportions in places emulating modern commercial farming

which has no place in an unsuitable, sensitive, arid environment.

Diversification of income is much needed and no traditional, albeit

destructive, livestock farming can hold the environment hostage to its needs

any longer. All of us on this planet are going to have to adapt or, yes, die! A

sixth mass extinction is not just a rumour, the tangible evidence is there for

all to see!

The CBNRM model caters for “sustainable

use”, which includes both consumptive and non- consumptive exploitation of

resources. Currently the lines are blurred and haphazard “zoning” which is

supposed to distinguish between farming, hunting, general, wildlife and tourism

areas, is just a thought which vanishes with the first signs of a drought when

it all becomes available as “emergency grazing” areas. This of course impacts

heavily on the availability of the very scarce nutrition the Wildlife had

become dependent upon as they adapted over centuries to survive in this hostile

environment.

In many instances we have witnessed semi-nomadic

Himba pastoralists and local farmers simply ignoring the Conservancy rules and MEFT

directives by driving large numbers of cattle into ephemeral rivers and areas

“zoned” for Wildlife and Tourism. Even worse, Reed beds would be set alight in

order to induce new growth for the starving cattle with no regard to the

destruction of the environment and ecology. The Huaruseb, Hoanib and Huabrivers

in particular became linear farms in these times to the detriment of and

causing major disturbance to the Wildlife. Since the moratorium on hunting and

utilisation had been announced after it had been discovered that the Game

populations were becoming precariously low, bushmeat poaching increased which

took its toll on the few remaining animals tasked with repopulating the

conservancies in future. Allowance was made for Game to be hunted for purposes

of catering for traditional leadership meetings and in many instances the

animals could not even be found. Some Farmers openly defied the MEFT and Law

enforcement agencies during the drought and the environment paid the price as the

result. The outcome was quite predictable and is now manifesting in starving

predators and ecological systems imploding.

The question that now arises is whether

having your Cake and eating it is possible in this context? The very

environment that attracts Tourism is under siege by Agriculture, the latter

which is clearly failing and not sustainable. In the end it will be either or……

. Either the Environment will have to be protected or it will logically be

overrun and turned into the wasteland it is already fast becoming. The Ministry

of Environment, Forestry and Tourism (MEFT) is regularly on record stating that

the CBNRM model is so successful and serves as a role model to the rest of the

World. It claims that Wildlife had “triplicated” in numbers and that the

current lack of game in the conservancies had been solely caused by the nasty

drought…. . While it is true that game in Namibia has vastly increased over the

years, this can mostly be attributed to the commercial farm owners on freehold

land diversifying in order to survive financially and to optimize their return

on investment. This had been instrumental in building a big Hunting Industry

which contributes handsomely to the GDP. The difference being that the owners

of the game manage it like a business and carefully manage and invest in their

own stock for long term gains. The conservancies, however, being on state land,

are not managed in the same way at all and no real ownership and accountability

exists in this model. Windows of opportunity for corruption, maladministration

and mismanagement are abundant and exploited. This is sadly reflected in the statistics

regarding the high failure rate on financial audits of conservancies in Namibia

(over 84% failed?) and the current, sorry state of affairs regarding the

depleted natural resources.

All of this could not have been intentional

and a large portion of this failure could be attributed to the fact that the

management committees are simply in most cases not equipped to run these

“Parks”. Office bearers in responsible positions in many instances do not have

the knowledge, experience, acumen and training to execute their portfolios. I

do not fix my own plumbing as I would flood the house and possibly the town,

therefore I outsource a Plumber for that purpose. I also do not perform Heart

surgery as I am not qualified to do so. The same holds true here and it is

expected of these people to perform such tasks up to the same standards as a

highly qualified National Parks management structure would deliver? Oh, hang

on, there are many NGOs advising and assisting said Conservancies…. ? Now

therein lies the problem. Different agendas, interests, missions and visions

and in many cases the exact same lack of knowledge, training, experience etc.

and so forth exists within these NGOs. No, badmouthing them is not the purpose,

merely stating the facts here. A lot of confusion and the evident failure of

the current status quo being reflected in the affairs of the conservancies and

state of the environment bears witness to this. Also, after 26 years, if

properly empowered, surely the conservancies would have been able to function

effectively and independently by now?

 Let

us face the brutal truth, without insulting any party, the CBNRM model needs a

make-over of note and the drawing board beckons while time runs out!

In our humble opinion, the example of

Africa Parks, set in Africa over the past years as a turnaround specialist is

very relevant. In order to optimize Wildlife and Tourism areas these have to be

identified and clear boundaries defined to begin with. It should then be

gazetted as such, whether as concession area or proclaimed protected area,

either way it must emerge with a status properly protected by legislation and

through law enforcement. Farming, general and hunting areas (the latter clearly

not bordering the protected areas) should be clearly zoned with clear

distinction from the protected areas. This would have the advantage that vast

areas with huge potential like the breath-taking area between the Ugabriver and

the Southern Veterinary fence boundary along the Bergsig/Springbokwasser gate

road including the whole Huab valley can then enjoy the same protection as the

Palmwag concession area and even be integrated with the latter. This will mean

that instead of being a free for all area exploited and damaged by all

currently, it can be developed by concession holders and investors and run like

a park by custodians charged with managing Human Wildlife Conflict, security

and anti-poaching and maintenance while optimizing revenue, creating job

opportunities, skills-development and welfare for the Conservancy communities.

The aim should be proper mentorship and development with clear goal posts

ultimately enabling absolute empowerment over a period. Palmwag concession has

proven its success with Gondwana lodge and the Hoanibriver Wilderness Lodge

contributing substantially to the conservancy coffers. The wheel in this

instance, does not need to be re-invented but merely copied and pasted by

including more protected areas.

Land use guidance and assistance to

subsistence farmers enabling diversification to ensure food security while

downscaling livestock farming to provide sustenance instead of being managed as

a “traditional currency” will be of paramount importance. Considering what the

Israelis harvest from their equally arid Desert there is no shortage of options

that should be investigated and developed. Education and training will be key. Continuing

on the same destructive path currently followed in the name of “traditional

livestock farming” will be short lived considering the progressive

desertification and change and is not negotiable really.

THE DROUGHT AND POOR MANAGEMENT-RESULTS

IN PROTECTED AREAS VERSUS CONSERVANCIES

Good rains on and off had been experienced

between 2007 and 2012 and it was a “time of abundance” during which the

predators, a good barometer of the health of an ecosystem, and their prey

species had multiplied to a point considered as being well balanced. Game

counts, for such an arid environment with below 150 mm of rain falls per year,

were impressive. This was, however, clearly the end of a “boom cycle” and a dry

cycle was to be expected as per the normal and natural ebb and flow trending of

“seven fat and seven lean years” as a well-known, historical phenomena.

The quotas released for the “sustainable” utilisation

of the game were unprecedented and overly generous but according to those

responsible for the game counts, justifiable. People like the well- known

environmentalist Christiaan Bakkes  and

myself frowned upon this and we made our disgust  publicly known at the time. We encountered Zebras

that were clearly wounded and left to die in the “Red line” veterinarian fence near

Palmwag during one cull of 70 Hartmann Mountain Zebra and Christiaan Bakkes’

article in the Namibian newspaper, titled “End of the Game” described the waste

and massacre on the Giribes Plains amongst other similar cases of

indiscriminate plundering (as per his book “Plunderwoestyn”). This earned him an

end to his long career in the Tourism industry in Namibia due to the

traditional leaders and Chiefs’ wrath incurred.

Not very long after this, filling hunting

quotas started to become problematic as the number of animals available simply

did not match the numbers on the permits anymore. Hunters started to abandon

concessions due to non-viability and the question arose, “where are the

animals?”. A Moratorium on Shoot and Sell and own use was hurriedly imposed as

late as 2017 and after confronting those NGOs responsible for the game counts, we

were “confidentially” told that the scientific formula used for the estimation

of the game numbers had been found to have been flawed and hence optimistically

biased.

With no means of putting the Toothpaste

back into the tube, the damage had been done and we witnessed the resultant

sharp escalation of Human Lion Conflict in these areas from 2014/15 onwards. As

a consequence, this had a big impact on Lion mortalities through poisoning and

shooting by retaliating farmers. In one single incident a Lioness pregnant with

four fully developed and ready to be born, cubs was shot and killed.

When comparing the variance in Predator/Prey

ratios in protected areas, i.e. Palmwag concession, Etosha Park etc. versus the

same in the conservancies, the contrast is shocking. The conclusion can only be

that management, or the lack of it, should be held responsible since the

protected areas had gone through the exact same ordeal caused by the drought.

It has become apparent that, when “sustainable utilisation” quotas were

calculated no, or inadequate provision had been made for Predator requirements,

loss of game to poaching and disease/natural causes and that no contingency/allowance

had been made for core herds needed to repopulate the areas once the wet/boom

cycle begins. The results were clearly starving predators and Human Lion

Conflict escalating to an all-time high. Whenever Humans upset the equilibrium

in nature, Newton’s Law comes into play…..

THE TURNAROUND AND SOLUTION-MANAGEMENT,

BENEFITS-AFRICAN PARKS-REVERSING HABITAT SHRINKAGE-% OF LAND UNDER

“CONSERVATION”-SUCCESS CLAIMS  BY MEFT

While it is good and well for the MEFT (Ministry

of Environment, Forestry and Tourism) to boast that about 43% of land in

Namibia is under conservation, the question arises as to how the land outside

of protected areas in this category is being managed and why the disastrous results

and outcome. Having huge areas under conservation devoid of Wildlife due to

poor or inadequate, inefficient management may look good statistically but in

real terms defeats the object. It is common knowledge that the habitat of Lions

in Africa has shrunk by about 80% over that last decades and the same holds

true for the Kunene region, formerly known as Damara and Kaokoland. Where Lions

used to roam from the Ugabriver in the South right up to the Marienfluss in the

North, barring few Lions, most now only occur in the protected Palmwag

concession area. Recently the whole Huabriver Lion population had to be

translocated to a sanctuary due to starvation and more will follow. It would

make more sense to identify areas in Conservancies ideal for Wildlife and

Tourism and convert those to “Park-like concessions” with the appropriate

legislative and statutory protection surely?

A Perfect example of such successful

turnaround endeavours is that of African Parks. So far, they have taken over

management of about nineteen Parks in Africa in countries where conservation

had failed in totality. Their successes in Liuwa Plains and other parks speak

for itself. Not only do they manage the parks but the positive effects of their

Human Wildlife Conflict management, anti-poaching, skills development, job

creation, community welfare and upliftment etc. has made a huge, positive

impact on the lives of those living in close proximity to the parks as well as

conservation. By employing experts and applying sound principles, management

plans and strategies their story is one of success. It simply cannot be

expected that the same results could be obtained by incapable, inexperienced

locals advised by a a mix of, own interest driven NGOs on a hit and miss basis.

The shockingly low game counts leading to the current disastrous ecological

imbalances in the conservancies bears witness to this. The rather desperate,

urgent last-minute efforts by the MEFT to outsource the services of a consultant/advisor

unfortunately casts doubt on their grip on the situation and gives the

impression that they may be at the end of their tether…

CONCLUSION-

The reality is that it is very late in the

day and if Namibia is serious about continuing on the path towards successful

conservation of its natural heritage, no amount of political correctness will

realise this.

We need to accept that things are wrong,

learn from past mistakes and take some concrete action, even if unpopular in

some circles. One cannot simply put a Band aid on a bullet wound. The solutions

are there and need to be expeditiously implemented. For this, Political Will is

required first and foremost. Own interests/livelihoods, egos and needs will

have to take a back seat. Much like the climate change phenomena where some

drastic changes are needed to bring down CO2 emissions which involve sacrifices

and a paradigm shift, conservation has also arrived at a clear crossroad.

In hindsight, the words of Chris Bakkes may

have proven to be prophetic, this could indeed be the “End of the Game” unless

acted upon with urgency….. .

 It

would be sad to see the CBNRM model,  Garth-Owen Smith’s lifelong dream, disappear

in the Desert dust…. 

Admin

  5 years ago

International Polar Bear Day: Feb 27, 2021

Information from https://www.wwf.org.uk/learn/fascinating-facts/polar-bears

photo: Florian Schulz/visionofthewild.com

1. POLAR BEARS ARE CLASSIFIED AS MARINE MAMMALS

Because they spend most of their lives on the sea ice of the Arctic Ocean depending on the ocean for their food & habitat, polar bears are the only bear species to be considered marine mammals 

photo Jon Aars/Norwegian Polar Institute/WWF-Canon

2. POLAR BEARS ARE ACTUALLY BLACK, NOT WHITE 

Polar bear fur is translucent, and only appears white because it reflects visible light.  Beneath all that thick fur, their skin is jet black. 

Photo: naturepl.com/Steven Kazlowski/WWF

3. THEY CAN SWIM CONSTANTLY FOR DAYS AT A TIME. 

As well as reaching speeds of up to 6mph in the water, polar bears can swim for long distances and steadily for many hours to get from one piece of ice to another. 

Their large paws are specially adapted for swimming, which they'll use to paddle through the water while holding their hind legs flat like a rudder. 

 photo: Steve Morello/WWF

4. LESS THAN 2% OF POLAR BEAR HUNTS ARE SUCCESSFUL 

Although about half of a polar bear's life is spent hunting for food, their hunts are rarely successful.  Polar bears main prey consists of ringed seals and bearded seals, 

though they will scavenge carcasses or settle for small  mammals, birds, eggs, and vegetation 

photo: Public Domain

5. SCIENTISTS CAN EXTRACT POLAR BEAR DNA FROM JUST THEIR FOOTPRINTS 

an innovative new technique developed by WWF and DNA specialist firm SPYGEN allows scientists to isolate DNA from a polar bear's footprint in the snow. 

Two tiny scoops of snow from a polar bear track revealed not just the DNA of the polar bear that made it, but even from a seal, it had recently eaten. 

photo from WWF.org Website

6. THEY FACE MORE THREATS THAN CLIMATE CHANGE

While climate change remains the greatest threat to the polar bear's survival, that is not all that the predator is up against.  The oil and gas industry is turning its eyes to the arctic, and with it comes potential risks of habitat destruction from oil exploration work.  Contact with oil spills can reduce the insulating effect of a bear's fur requiring them to use more energy to get warm, and can poison them if ingested.  Polar bears can also be exposed to toxic chemicals such as pesticides through their prey, which can affect a bear's biological functioning and ability to reproduce. 

photo: Klein & Hubert/ WWF

7.  GRIZZLY-POLAR BEAR HYBRIDS EXIST

As recently as 2006 genetic testing confirmed the existence of polar bear-grizzly bear hybrids, also known as 'grolar bears' or pizzly bears'.  The hybrid physically resembles an intermediate between the two species, but as wild hybrids are usually birthed from polar bear mothers they are raised and behave like polar bears.  The ability for polar bears and grizzly bears to interbreed is unsurprising when you consider that polar bears evolved from brown bears as recently as 150,000 years ago. 

 image:  WWF-Canada

8. THERE ARE AS MANY AS 19 SUBPOULATIONS OF POLAR BEAR

The total population of approximately 26,000 wild polar bears is divided into 19 units or subpopulations, of these just 1 subpopulation is increasing, 5 are stable and 4 are in decline.  The remaining 9 have not been assessed as they are data deficient. - we simply do not have enough information about them to know how they are doing.

photo: Steve Marello/WWF

9. MALE POLAR BEARS CAN WEIGH AS MUCH AS 10 MEN

Male polar bears can weigh up to 800kg and are twice the size of females.  This, in addition to the fact that they can measure up to 3 metres long, making polar bears the largest land carnivore in the world. 

photo WWF-US/Elizabeth Kruger

10 THEY CAN SMELL THEIR PREY UP TO A KILOMETER AWAY 

Polar Bears have a very strong sense of smell, which they use to find seal breathing holes in the ice.  Once it has found the hole, the bear will wait patiently until the seal comes up for air to attack.  They can even detect a seal in the water beneath a metre of compacted snow. 

PLEASE ADOPT A POLAR BEAR AT support.wwf.org.uk

Other cool facts about Polar Bears: 

They can overheat when in running in the summer and when temperatures rise above freezing. 

The clean themselves by rolling in snow. 

They can reach speeds of up to 25 mph on land and swim 6mph. 

They can live up to 30 years 

A female polar bear will have an average of 5 litters of cubs her lifetime 

SAFARI TRIPS TO SEE POLAR BEARS! 

Polar Bear Mother and Newborn Cubs – March

Spring Polar Bears of Baffin – March & April

Narwhal and Polar Bear Safari – May & June

Polar Bears and Glaciers of Baffin Island – August

Polar Bear Migration Fly-In Photo Safari – October & November

TO KEEP UP TO DATE ON POLAR BEARS WE RECOMMEND YOU BOOKMARK:  

https://polarbearsinternational.org/

CCAH

  5 years ago

Slaughter of wolves in Scandinavia

The shameful War against

Wolves in Sweden and Scandinavia

Questionable and

partly biased background information concerning the present wolf slaughter in

Sweden 2022,

by Eva Stjernswärd

Painter

artist

Board member of NGO

Jaktkritikerna (Hunting Critics) and Dris (Animal’s Voice in Society) against

licensed hunting in Sweden.

KA

 The current hunt in 2022 is more cruel than usual as the different

local County Boards are cooperating to eradicate whole wolf families from their

territory and habitat. Norway (A non EU-country where the hunt for 54 wolves

can go on until 31^st of May) and Sweden are cooperating with each

other in this grotesque extermination, creating a wolf holocaust. On the

Swedish side nearly 2 000 hunters have registered to kill 27 wolves.

Finland will also started a hunt for 18 wolves on February 1st. So in Scandinavia more than 99

wolves will be slaughtered in the most gruesome ways in 2022. 

Wolves and other predators were almost eradicated because of human

persecution toward the end of the 19^th century. In the early part of

the 1900’s, the romanticism of nature as well as people moving in to urban

areas helped to awaken an appreciation of a diverse fauna. Even the hunter’s association

helped to protect certain species. But unfortunately in the late 1930’s the

hunters association was nominated by the state to be responsible for wild life

management and they were granted huge economic resources, which coupled the

state and hunting interests, copied from a model then being utilized in

authoritarian Germany. This model is still valid and renders them a budget of

approximately 5.6 million dollars each year. This has created an institution that

exerts control over wild life as well as being a lobbying force infiltrating

the government and the political agenda for hunting on all levels. This is despite hunters only representing

less than 3 % of the population.   

Why is there trophy hunting in

a developed country like Sweden?

Wolves were completely

protected from 1966 to save the species. But as we can see this has changed in

spite of being under the EU protection laws when Sweden agreed to enter the EU

in 1995. As from 2010 licensed hunting has escalated trophy hunting in Sweden,

as hunters can now kill bears, lynxes and wolves. Foreign hunters are welcomed

too. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency changed its strategy of wild

life management in favor of hunters after a string of political changes from

the end of the 1990’s. This escalated when hunters decided that predators,

especially wolves, should be viewed as competitors for other game that they

were hunting! This had a negative impact on all wild animals, but for predators

in particular, as they were politicized.

Shutterstock
Reindeer farming has developed

very unlike its cultural heritage and is now an industry with export ambitions. Not to mention the

extreme cruelty with which farmers are allowed to handle reindeers (Not as Nature intended – A book by

undercover journalist Rich Hardy). These semi-wild animals are transported to

slaughter houses in masses. Snowmobiles and helicopters are used to round the

animals up under stressful conditions. Although climate change is more of a

threat than predators, enormous financial support from the state keeps this

cruel business alive.

There is huge

financial support to reindeer owners/villages from the state to “accept” the

presence of predators in their land, as well as payment for each of their animals

taken by predators. However, this in no way protects the predators from

ultimately being killed. On the contrary; this has been proven by the increase

in so called protective hunting as well as illegal hunting. For wolves, this is

a lethal problem in additional ways; as the only path to genetic renewal actually

comes from Finland and Russia. No wolves survive if they enter Sweden. The hate

of wolves has become pathological when not even “stately bribes” can save them.

In some regions it’s like a reminder of the witch hunts that took place against

women in the seventeenth century.

 The debate about the

degeneration in Swedish wolves has been unsuccessful in achieving any more

protection for them than other than token numbers.

In 2016 the Supreme

Administrative Court ruled that 300 wolves must be the minimum for conservation

of the species. Instead of this being a minimum - it is used as a maximum of

tolerance by the EPA and the hunters. Biological and scientific proof does not

help. The legal system is basing its judgement on this, which in general leave

the NGO’s appeal with hardly any success in saving individuals. The European

Commission has an open case against Sweden’s wolf hunt but nothing concrete has

been achieved yet.

Sweden’s repetitive

violation of the EU’s Habitats Directive continues and by customizing its own

national loop holes and interpretation of the exception rules for limited

hunting, Sweden is also undermining the aim and purpose of the Convention on

International Trade in Endangered Species, CITES, as export permits for all

trophies is easily granted by the Agricultural Board. On this note, its worth

mentioning that Swedish government refused to take up the ban on import of

trophies from canned lion hunts in 2016/2017, which would have been a low

hanging fruit. Unfortunately it shows that most politicians in all parties are

not at all engaged when it comes to animal protection, and definitely when

hunting is concerned.

Despite the Covid

pandemic the mink industry and industrial farming of pigs and chickens prevails

in horrible conditions in Sweden.

More than 7 000 red

listed predators have been killed in 20 years

K.A.

The Swedish

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Naturvårdsverket,

has even increased the quota for legal trophy hunting. Since the year 2000 more

than 7 000 brown bears, lynxes, wolves and wolverines have been killed

legally in this system.  

 In Sweden today, we

have an estimated 2 800 brown bears, not much over 1 000 lynxes and perhaps

600 wolverines. This is in a country with a low density of people in the areas

where predators naturally have their habitats. But predators have become chess

pieces on the political agenda. This polarization is based on predator conflicts

locally by hunters, livestock owners, reindeer keepers and of course the economic

interest groups behind them.

The system of

monitoring and counting wolves is done by local authorities and hunters. As the

wolf is considered not only to be a threat to livestock but as a competitor in

the hunter’s quest for wild game – it’s easy to conclude that the hunters want

to demonstrate as high a count of predators as possible.

In addition, humans

are diminishing predator’s territory in general, with exploitation of land for

livestock, especially the huge areas in northern Sweden where reindeers are

kept roaming free.

Wolf population

The number of wolves

is always debated and questioned as illegal hunting still counts for 10-20 %. When

the counting of individuals is done (1^st October to 1^st

March) these wolves as well as the animals killed in accidents or for other

reasons (killed in livestock conflicts for example) after this date, are not

accounted for. This means that wolves killed after 1^st March and

until the following autumn, that is several months after, when the hunting decisions

are being made are not included! Some believe that there could therefore be

even less than 300 wolves.

K.A.

The “precautionary principle” is not a Swedish forte

When it concerns

bears, wolves and lynxes, the “precautionary principle” is largely ignored.

The official number given

was 395 wolves when the authorities took the decisions to kill 27 to 33 of them

in 2022. Some local counties are even trying to extend the areas to be sure to

kill wolves that are trying to flee. This is what can happen on the border to

Norway (involving administrative boards in Dalarna, Värmland and Jämtland) and

it is repeatedly happening in the county of Gävleborg. Legally it should not be

allowed to change or extend hunting areas that were initially drawn up when the

decisions was made, in November/December. But the local administrative boards

of the mentioned regions above – are hard liners against predators, as are all

the northern regions. We do not know yet what the courts will say.

 What is both cruel and

alarming - is the inbreeding and degeneration in Swedish wolves.

Many male wolves have

only one testicle (cryptorchidism) and autopsies of killed wolves show cruel

proof of hunters sadism – many have old wounds and lead ammunition in their

bodies.

 In Sweden the predators are

killed against the EU directives for protection of species. Labeled

license hunting and/or protective hunting

 Both methods have increased since 2010. The

Swedish Environmental Protection Agency has delegated the decisions to local

government boards in each county that houses predators. The protective hunting

orders are often given over the phone and mostly the animals are permitted to be

killed the same day. The time to challenge the decisions by NGO’s is therefore futile

and purely symbolic. These hunts are fast executions done by helicopter and snowmobile.

On the ground dogs are utilized to track them down if they try to hide in dens.

The heli-hunts might be inspired from American war-fare…and also what is

happening now in the US. Sadly these methods spread like a pandemic due to

globalization and hunters’ international organizations. Historically, Americans

started shooting African game from trains and cars in the era of the white hunters, also the time of the

Swedish baron Blixen (husband of author Karen Blixen) who guided all the rich

and famous on trophy hunting and killing tours in Africa.

So cruelty still takes

its toll in Sweden. Females with young are not spared. For example wolverine

females with cubs are permitted to be killed in their den. Female lynx with

cubs are killed from helicopter and the “ethics order” is to kill the

“children” before the mother…

The licensed hunt for

lynx takes place from 1^st of March – which is the mating season of

the shy felines. A real crime! Our Nordic Leopard!

 Legislation against animal

abuse does not include wild animals – only hunting laws are applied.

Swedish hunting laws

are based on the use of animals as objects - owned by the hunter and/or

landowner. State land/forests are also leased for hunting and its big business,

as well as for all the agricultural farmers who lease the right to hunt on

their land. Wild life has no respite. Not even in a National Park or nature

reserve, where EPA permits hunting. The sea is also a hunting ground and EPA is

extending hunting every year on all species of seals, even the very threatened

red listed species in the northern Baltic Sea.

 Preventive killing so called skyddsjakt, technically an “own initiative”,

self-assessed killing action

Legislation allows for

killing predators in situ, as a prevention method to stop an attack. This of

course is used without control from authorities and it can’t be excluded that

dogs often provoke bears for example, while hunting other game.  And the most common argument from hunters is

that dogs are killed by wolves and that they cannot hunt elk as freely as they

want with loose dogs.

Needless to say, loose

dogs in wolves’ habitats should be prohibited – a NO GO.

Since 2010 this legislation

has been used with an alarming increase as the “excuse” to kill bear, wolves

and lynx. Very few cases lead to investigation and are annulled due to lack of

proof. The issue of animal abuse when killing a female bear for example (and

then discovering two cubs hiding in trees) or parental wolves leaving pups is

never punished or even discussed.

 The collateral damage

and the frequent wounding by hunters or dogs is never punished.

  Cruel hunting with dogs

Pack hound hunting has

developed in Sweden and is becoming animal abuse for both dogs and wild animals

that is not addressed at all. Swedish hunters have also introduced new type of

aggressive hunting dogs, which are trained on predators. The Swedish

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), mainly responsible for wild life and

hunting issues, has extended the rights to hunt with loose dogs – 3 dogs are

allowed to chase 1 wolf, it doesn’t matter whether a puppy or adult. The non-ethical

hunting methods also include old medieval ways of hunting with beaters and circling

the environment with “scary wires with moving textiles”, set up to enclose the

fleeing wolves and force them towards the hunters.

Shutterstock

Training of hunting dogs in

the wild on predators in their habitat

The worst is that EPA

has introduced even more vile techniques – namely that all hunters can train

their dogs one month before the official hunting starts! Even in areas of

Sweden where the licensed hunt will not be granted.

This means training on

wild bears (with their cubs) in their habitats begins from July-August (hunt

starts 21^st August), on wolves in December (hunt starts 2^nd

January) and lynx in February (hunt starts 1^st March). It is also

permitted to train dogs on captured wild animals in special training centers.

This sadistic practice is not addressed by the EPA, even though many protests

are heard from NGO’s. Simultaneously hunting with dogs terrorizes other

wildlife, like hunting for boar that is permitted nearly all year round as well

as nighttime.

Sweden’s hunting lobby

is firming its grip on all wildlife and the legal system for hunting is rigged.

To spin the wheel of death the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency has

liberated hunting even more on all animals, including migrating birds like

cranes and swans with a renewed decree from 2021 to 2026! Be sure to watch the interview at https://www.mojostreaming.com/video/677/crisis-facing-wolves-in-scandinavia-a-panel-discussion   

KA

Admin

  4 years ago

Lucy the elephant

Admin

  5 years ago

The winner(s) for the 2022 MojoStreaming Wildlife Calendar

Winner $500 (USA) and Cover:  Neel Sureja

A finalist that will be featured in the calendar - above photo by  Neel Sureja

A finalist that will be featured in the calendar - above photo by  Neel Sureja

A finalist that will be featured in the calendar - above photo by Neel Sureja

A finalist that will be featured in the calendar - above photo by Trevor LaClair

 A finalist that will be featured in the calendar - above photo by Trevor LaClair

A finalist that will be featured in the calendar - above photo by:  Trevor LaClair

A finalist that will be featured in the calendar - above photo by Giovanni

A finalist that will be featured in the calendar - above photo by:  Josephine Tyler 

A finalist that will be featured in the calendar - above photo by: Shiva Kumar

A finalist that will be featured in the calendar - above photo by: Shiva Kumar

A finalist that will be featured in the calendar - above photo by: Shiva Kumar

A finalist that will be featured in the calendar - above photo by:  Tumwesigye Elasmus Godfrey

To see more of their work visit:  mojostreaming.com

Please take the time to explore and learn more about our winners and their talent.

wildlife-film.com   Trevor LaClair

gp-photography.ch    Giovanni Pelloni

josephinetylerphotography.co.uk     Josephine Tyler 

neelsureja.com    Neel Sureja 

thejungledairy.com     Shiva Kumar

interiorsafarisea.com   Tumwesugye Elasmus Godfrey

CCAH

  5 years ago