Sale of lion skeletons to Far East under scrutiny
yesterday.
Last week, the Saturday Star reported on the outcome of a stakeholder consultation meeting where the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) outlined its proposal for the lion bone quota to be set at 800 skeletons. No trade would be allowed in bone products, fragments and teeth.
In their statement, the organisations emphasised they didn’t support the commercial captive breeding of carnivores “because it doesn’t contribute to the sustainable, responsible use of our wildlife resources, and in some cases, may have negative impacts on the conservation of these species in the wild”.
But they recognised that captive origin lion bones had been traded from South Africa for several years and trade volumes had risen every year since 2007.
Between 2008 and 2014, the bones of nearly 5 000 lions had been sent from South Africa to Laos, Vietnam, Thailand and China, where they are sold as a substitute for tiger bone wine.
This week, the Environmental Investigation Agency warned that the draft quota would stimulate consumer demand for the bones of more endangered big cats like tigers – fewer than 4 000 remain in the wild.
“Legal big cat bone trade undermines enforcement and exacerbates tiger bone trade as elite consumers will continue to seek the authentic bones of wild tigers as a premium product, which in turn leads to poaching and illegal trade across Asia,” it said.
The DEA emphasised no exports of lion bones would be authorised this year until the export quota for the trade in these specimens had been established and communicated to the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (Cites).
In a compromise agreement arising out of the Cites conference last year, it was agreed that South Africa would set an annual export quota for the trade in bones, bone pieces, bone products, claws, skeletons, skulls and teeth for commercial purposes derived from captive bred lion populations.
In their statement, the environmental groups highlighted their concerns for the welfare of captive lions, citing the current legislative loopholes that make policing and prosecution of welfare offences difficult.
“Promoting the captive breeding of wild animals for their parts is contrary to modern global trends and opinion,” they stated.
A motion was passed in September last year by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature to outlaw canned hunting and non-conservation-based captive breeding of lions and other predators.
“We recognise the government is in a challenging position and needs to balance the demands of the industry with the urgent need for effective wild lion conservation.
The quota… is taking positive steps towards better regulation of the captive lion industry.”
In March, the SA National Biodiversity Institute (Sanbi), together with several universities, will begin a threeyear study to monitor the lion bone trade, supported by the department.
“This isn’t going to go away,” remarked Michelle Pfab, of Sanbi’s scientific authority. “It’s a 1 000-year-old belief. If you stop the trade, where are they going to go for the lion bones? To our wild lions, to tigers?”
The organisations said if questions – including whether the government had the capacity to monitor and enforce trade regulations effectively, how captive lions be distinguished from those of wild lion populations, and how the legal trade would affect the illegal trade in the rest of South Africa – could not be adequately investigated and answered, “then it is evident the practice of captive breeding for the lion bone trade should not be considered a viable component of South Africa’s wildlife economy”.