A FARCE AND A SHAM ~ THE NEW SOUTH AFRICAN HUNTING REGULATIONS.

By

Chris Mercer

www.cannedlion.co.za



This is the true story of one black rhino cow’s ordeal at the hands of
South African Conservationists. However, if you go to our website,
www.cannedlion.co.za/book/rhino.htm , you will see that it has been
written in plain English, which is no longer acceptable to the South
African Conservation Authorities. The Government wishes to claim
proudly that it has banned ‘canned’ hunting. But in fact, cunning
loopholes in the new policies mean that anyone with a pocket full of
dollars may still quite legitimately set a pack of dogs upon a tame
captive bred lion or other animal, and then shoot it with a variety of
weapons including bow and arrow and hand guns.



So what has changed? You may well ask. Actually, only the language.
Although the cruel practice of canned hunting remains unaffected, the
phrase “canned hunting” has been, in effect, banned. Section 17 of
the new standards introduces the bizarre idea that inflicting pain on
unoffending animals for fun can be done both ethically and humanely.

To assist the hunter, a definition of ‘humane’ is included in the new
Standards:

“humane”, in relation to the hunting of a listed animal, means that
the way in which an animal is hunted –

(a) is reconcilable with the prevailing norms of society
against cruelty to animals; and

(b) causes no or minimum –

(i) suffering for the hunted animal; and

(ii) distress to other animals in the vicinity of
the hunted animal;



In other words, if the hunting is ethical, it must be humane, and if
it is humane it cannot be canned. Voila! Canned hunting has been
defined away into oblivion.

In order to test the soundness of the fascinating new conservation
language we shall now rewrite the story of the canned rhino hunt at
Kuruman Game Park from the perspective of a South African
Conservationist.

First we have to dump the title, because the phrase “canned hunting”
has affectively been banned and so we will re title the piece:


THE LONG DAY AT KURUMAN GAME PARK.


A rhino cow was being non-consumptively utilised as a tourist
attraction in Kuruman Game Park. Sentimental, urbanised people might
erroneously or perhaps maliciously, describe the Game Park as a small
piece of fenced land across the road from the industrial estate, but
real conservationists would know that it was an ‘extended wildlife
system’ as defined in the new regulations.

The ’active management’ of the rhino cow began at 9a.m. in the morning
when she was approached by licensed hunters on foot in accordance with
good hunting practices. She was first shot humanely at about
9a.m.with a .458 Winchester in a manner which inflicted no more than
minimal suffering and did not distress any other animals in the
vicinity. Thereafter she enjoyed further humane treatment from time
to time during the course of the day. At 4.30 in the afternoon she
was seen to be bleeding from four quarters, flanks and hind quarters
but could not have been suffering more than minimal discomfort because
the ethical hunter was using an approved weapon of the correct
calibre. She must also have been pleased to know that the ethical
hunter had a permit issued by Kimberley Nature Conservation
authorities to introduce her to the doctrine of sustainable use. For
all this, and mindless of her duty to be sustainably utilised for the
benefit of conservation, she had unlawfully retreated into a thicket.
The ethical hunter was by now shooting from his safari vehicle in
accordance with good hunting practices because she was wounded, albeit
only minimally. Not because he was afraid that his vehicle would get
a puncture in the thicket or because he was tired from all that
pulling on a heavy trigger, the ethical hunter decided at 4.30pm to
pull out his cell phone and call up a helicopter from the industrial
estate across the highway from the extended wildlife system. The
helicopter arrived within minutes and descended upon the thicket in
order to flush the rhino cow out. When she emerged she received more
humane treatment from the ethical hunter’s .458 Winchester, which
caused her to retreat back into the thicket. This meant that the
process had to be repeated again and again. But this was the rhino’s
own fault because she exhibited a marked aversion to the humane
treatment she was getting.



The helicopter pilot who was for some reason upset by what he had seen
and was therefore clearly not a true conservationist, alleged that she
received humane treatment in this manner not less than ten times over
a period of forty minutes before she agreed to be sustainably used and
fell onto her knees. At this stage the hunting party were observed to
break open beer cans and to take photographs in order to celebrate the
success of their successful ethical hunt according to the prevailing
norms of conservation society. All that humane effort must have been
thirsty work. Out of a tender concern to avoid hurting the trophy
parts of her body, no attempt was made to terminate her minimal
suffering, and her active management was allowed to be prolonged until
she eventually expired later that evening. Too much should not be
made of this because every true conservationist knows that animals
cannot reason and therefore cannot suffer pain as we do and there is
really no ethical difference between killing a rhino and killing
bacteria.



Unfortunately there are spoil sports in all walks of life and the
circumstance of this hunt were leaked to some radical extremist bunny
huggers who should get a life, who deceitfully reported the matter to
the police in order to harm conservation in South Africa. The
response of the hunting party and of the conservation authorities was,
quite properly, to point out that the hunt had been conducted
ethically and in accordance with good hunting practices according to
the prevailing societal norms: viz. the hunter was licensed by
Kimberley conservation authority; he was a qualified marksman; he was
a member of a recognised hunting association which was supervising the
hunt; he initially approached the animal on foot, and he used a rifle
of the approved calibre to avoid causing more than minimal suffering
and distress to other animals in the vicinity. The rhino cow was
deemed to be wild because the enclosure in which she roamed fell
within the broad definition of an extended wildlife system, wherein
active management was required.



The Kimberley prosecutor, himself an avid hunter, and therefore a true
conservationist, accepted these defences and declined to prosecute,
saying it was impossible to prove under these ethical circumstances
that she had suffered more than minimally.



For those of you who are disgusted by the way the new hunting policies
seek to institutionalise cruelty to helpless animals, we ask you to
send emails and letters of protest to the following:



SOME USEFUL ADDRESSES

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM PRETORIA
Tel: 012 310 3955.

Please submit all written comments to:

The Director-General Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
Private Bag X447
PRETORIA 0001

For Attention: Dr Pieter Botha
Or

Chief Director: Communications Mr J P Louw
E-mail:

Director: Communications: Ms Phindile Makwakwa
E-mail:

Minister's spokesperson: Mr Riaan Aucamp
E-mail:

Chief Director: Ministry: Ms Sindiswa Nhlumayo
E-mail:

Director: Office of the Deputy Minister: Mr Livhuwani Mushasha
E-mail:

Director: Office of the Director-General: Ms Koekie Maphanga
E-mail:
Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk