EXCERPTS FROM THE WAPFSA SUBMISSION:
- WAPFSA hereby official submits our official objection to the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment’s invitation for written representations or objections to the Proposed Hunting/export quota for Elephant, Black Rhinoceros and Leopard Hunting Trophies for the 2024 and 2025 Calendar Year published as Notice Number: 5583 in the Government Gazette on the 22nd November 2024.
- We note that this objection will be published and will be collated into a comment and responses report which will be made available to the public as part of the consultation process.
- The Wildlife Animal Protection Forum of South Africa (WAPFSA) is a national network of 30 South African organizations that was explicitly set up and designed as a vehicle to engage with government on wildlife issues and to put wild animals onto the political agenda, based on ethical and compassionate conservation and harmonious coexistence within nature.
- WAPFSA members share clearly articulated principles that are part of our Founding Document, initiated in 2016. Our common goal is to safeguard and protect wild animals and their welfare and well-being, as well as biodiversity, individual species, individual animals and the interests of vulnerable people.
CITES: “Nationally established export quotas should as far as possible, be communicated at least 30 days before the start of the period to which the export relates”.
5. A calendar year is defined as the twelve-month period between January and December of any given year.
6. It is of great concern that a public consultation regarding the hunting/export of elephant, leopard and black rhino trophies for the 2024 Calendar Year has been initiated on the 22 day of the eleventh month of this 2024 calendar year.
7. This leaves 9 days of the 2024 calendar year remaining after the closure of the public consultation period, after which the Minister is required to give “due consideration” to the public representations received.
8. No explanation for this choice of timing has been provided. This timing is out of step with the CITES recommendations which provide that “nationally established export quotas should as far as possible, be communicated at least 30 days before the start of the period to which the export relates”.1
8. 1 Management of Nationally Determined Export Quotas, https://cites.org/eng/res/14/14-07R15.php
9. The publication of a quota for the 2024 calendar year so late in the year is in our opinion, unfair, unreasonable and irrational, and could be grounds for the setting aside of the current consultation process under section 6(2)(h). of PAJA.
Section 99 of NEMBA: “Public Participation Process sufficient information must be provided to enable members of the public to submit meaningful representations or objections”
10. As stated in the gazetted notice, the invitation for the submission of representations on the proposed 2024 and 2025 quota was issued in terms of sections 99 and 100 of NEMBA. These provisions set out the public consultation requirements for the Minister’s exercise of power under NEMBA.
11. Section 100(2)(b) sets out that notice of a public participation process under section 99 of NEMBA must contain “sufficient information to enable members of the public to submit meaningful representations or objections”.
12. The Gazetted Notice of consultation on the 2024 and 2025 proposed quota contains no quota figures.
13. In addition, because of the absence of the inclusion of the findings of the Scientific Authority and the rationale for the trophy hunting quota for black rhinoceros, leopard or elephant it is impossible for any member of the public to meaningfully interrogate or engage with the proposed 2024 or 2025 quota. This is both a material flaw in terms of section 100(2)(b) of NEMBA and under PAJA.
CITES Appendix I or Appendix II: Lack of Non-Detriment Findings
14. Further, the non-detrimental findings of the Scientific Authority, for the black rhinoceros, leopard of elephant are not even referred to nor provided in the Gazetted Notice.
15. These scientific findings should be confirmed as non-detrimental in relation to CITES Appendix I or Appendix II species which asserts that a restricted activity (such as trophy hunting and export) of these species will not be detrimental to the survival of the species in question.
16. Leopards and Black Rhinoceros are listed under CITES Appendix I while African Elephant populations in South Africa are listed under CITES Appendix II. All three species are also listed in the Lists of Threatened and Protected Species (TOPS) under the Threatened and Protected Species Regulations published in terms of section 56 of NEMBA (with leopards being listed as “vulnerable”; black rhinoceros as “endangered” and African Elephant as “protected”.
17. Section 62 of NEMBA refers to the publication of “Annual non-detrimental findings” which must be published in the Government Gazette allies to all three of these species. This is in line with the CITES recommendation that a “non-detriment finding should be made whenever an export quotas is established for the first time or revised, and reviewed annually.”
18. It is of material concern that hunting/export quotas for elephant, leopard and rhinoceros have been set in the absence of a current gazetted non-detriment finding in relation to these species in the current or preceding calendar year.
Conclusion: Procedurally unfair, unreasonable and irrational in terms of PAJA
19. Considering the points set out above, WAPFSA is of the opinion that this consultation process constitutes unlawful, procedurally unfair, unreasonable and irrational administrative action in terms of PAJA.
20. As the protection of South Africa’s wildlife is a matter of public interest, the Minister’s exercise of power quotas and initiating a flawed public consultation process constitute a breach of the South African public’s right to adequate public participation in matters that affect them, the right to just administrative action in of section 33 of the Constitution and the right to have the environment protected through legislative and other means in terms of section 24 of the Constitution.
21. The proposed quota and the consultation process should therefore be withdrawn. “
Image Credit: ©EMS Foundation 2024
©WAPFSA 2024. All Rights Reserved.