Hi again,
Herewith, some snippets from various sources.
I appeal to you to send me items to distribute to our members for the Cleft Stick, the Game Ranger magazine and to be posted on the web site. These are your magazine and website, so ensure it gets the news that you would like to see in it.
Please let me have any changes to your physical address, phone no. or e-mail address to keep the database up to date.
Thanks to all of you who have made the effort. Please will any of you who know of members who do not get this “electric” Cleft~Stick, & have access to e-mail, pass their address along to me.
Don Yunnie
7 Chalet Drive, Hilton, 3245, South Africa Local Tel & Fax (033) 343 1534 Int. Tel & Fax (+2733) 343 1534 cell 082 377 7562 E-mail dyunnie@xsinet.co.za.
If you do not wish to receive this e-mail newsletter please send a blank e-mail to me at the above address with the word “unsubscribe C~S ” as the message heading.
GRAA MEDIA STATEMENT ON SOUTH AFRICA’S ENVIRONMENTAL FISCAL POLICY - 8 th May 2006
For immediate release
Much has been said and written in recent months about the very healthy state of the South African economy and Finance Minister Trevor Manual has even invited Civil Society to make suggestions regarding where and how excess funds should be invested and spent.
In a recent article in The Witness entitled “SARS owed R35 billion” (dated April 4, 2006) it was stated that “Finance Minister Trevor Manuel has announced that SARS collected R1 billion more than the revised budget of R417 billion for the last financial year. The R418 116 billion collected was also R45, 3 billion more than the original estimate of R372,8 billion … The preliminary revenue result we announced today gives further credence and justification to the mood of optimism and confidence in the country and our ability to fund our ambition for a better life for all South Africans, Manuel said.”
The Game Rangers Association of Africa (GRAA) therefore suggests that Minister Manuel strongly re-considers the budgets allocated to the protection of protected areas in South Africa.
In an article published in Earthyear in 2004, SANParks CEO David Mabunda rightfully questioned whether it is realistic to expect conservation agencies to be self-supporting or financially self-sufficient. Conservation agencies suffer from chronic financial problems that prevent them carrying out their conservation mandate adequately. In developed countries around the world the cost of managing protected areas is mostly fully borne by the state, whereas in developing countries there is a mix of donor-dependency and heavy reliance on tourism development. In South Africa, it is understandable that the past apartheid imbalances in our society should be addressed, including the lack of adequate housing, health care systems, water and electricity as well as infrastructure development. However, as Mabunda pointed out, this should happen alongside other constitutional imperatives including the protection of the environment!
Although SANParks generates approximately 80% of its operational revenue from tourism and is a world leader in this regard, there are limitations to tourism performance, if the biodiversity mandate is not to be compromised. Tourism in protected areas is not the panacea for the survival of nature conservation and enhancement of local economies. In spite of the controversial commercialisation programme implemented by SANParks since 2000 (which generates approximately 8, 5% of SANParks total tourism income of over R200-million), not all national parks generate a surplus or break even. Only five out of the total of 20 parks do, whereas the 15 loss-making ones are of biodiversity value and most will probably never break even. The same is true for the majority of our provincial protected areas. It should be recognized that the Kumleben commission of inquiry into the state of conservation in 1988 concluded that “nature conservation as such can never be self-supporting … it is therefore short-sighted and fallacious to expect a protected area to become economically self-sufficient”.
South Africa’s national park estate expansion of approximately 140 000 hectares since 1994 has not been followed by an increase in the state operational grant. Furthermore, the cost of conservation (fencing, resource protection, restocking of species, disease-control, monitoring, construction of management roads, administration, etc) has increased markedly in the last decade or so, yet state operational grants have decreased in relative terms. Protected areas should not be declared without providing for the accompanying operational and capital costs.
Over-dependence on tourism to fund protected area management can lead to unsustainable tourism practices. As Mabunda cautioned, we could see the Kruger taking the Disney World route, and in fact many argue that South Africa’s flagship park has already commenced along this route. The risk of introducing tourism products that will compromise the aesthetic and ecological attributes (including wilderness qualities) of protected areas to achieve “financial self-sufficiency” is a very real one. Over-development of tourism facilities to the extent that they alter the ecological integrity of the protected area is another danger. Within this picture, many South Africans are excluded from conservation areas because of the tourist based pricing structures. To counter these risks, the state must fulfill its primary obligation to fund environmental protection adequately!
Society does not create protected areas for financial profit but to conserve the natural, cultural and historical landscapes for the benefit of present and future generations. To evaluate a protected area’s success and value in terms of the financial bottom-line alone is simplistic and disingenuous. Financial prudence in resource utilisation should not be confused with financial self-sufficiency. The state will always have a constitutional obligation to fund the public good, which includes the protection of the environment in terms of section 24 of the Constitution.
End.
[African-elephant] Elephants snatched from wild with conservation approval (South Afr-IFAW prss rel)
This article has been made up of some email discussion and is presented here as information to our readers.
I read the most recent Mail & Guardian report "Fury over jumbo 'kidnap' " on this item of news with some concern. But we need to get all the facts and try to verify them. What should we in the GRAA say?
What I read in the M&G and what came through with this e-mail makes me suspicious of the real intentions by Selati and Elephants for Africa because the e-mail did not have the 'facts' that was in the M&G's.
It seems that Selati maintains that this is part of a animal population control measure and Rob Snaddon, the Managing Director of Selati, is quoted to have said "We have a closed reserve- a fenced area where a wide variety of game flourishes including elephants. If the elephant population grows too big for that space, it impacts on all the other animals at Selati, as well as the existing elephant population". The M&G states that Snaddon said the decision to capture the youngsters and send them for training was taken "after careful consideration of the various options open to us". If this is so then - what is the difference between what they need to do on their property and what SANParks are arguing to be allowed to do - i.e. cull elephants? We need to establish whether the 6 young elephants were part of a family group(s) and whether other elephant individuals were in fact culled. If not - then the whole thing is totally unethical.
(It also puts into question the whole aspect of numerous 'small' private game properties being allowed to introduce elephants because the problem of over-utilisation and the need to manage them just escalates and the private wildlife/tourism industry in South Africa just has too many questionable practices - canned hunting and breeding genetic 'freaks' such as white and black of what ever species for hunting purposes are two in the range out there).
The M&G goes on to report that when Elephants for Africa (Efaf) was asked what they paid for the young elephants they said R 10/kilo - the meat price "because they would have been culled". If we take IFAW's investigation, reported by M&G, into elephants in captivity in South Africa on face value (because I do not know the purpose and scope of the investigation or how it was conducted and I have not had sight of the report either) last year in March it (IFAW's report) concluded that Efaf was not just capturing elephants for their own elephant-back safari business but was also training them to sell onwards in the range of R900 000 each or "lease" them at between R20 000 - R25 000 a month per animal.
This starts to put a very different slant on the whole business and, to me, begs the question - what is the relationship between Selati and Efaf because I do not believe that if the reported amounts of money for 'trained elephants' are true - then the opportunity exists for deals being made so Selati receives a better return on their elephants. If I am totally wrong then I will accept being so.
IFAWs report apparently states that the elephant-back tourism industry claims that "it is saving young elephants from sure death in 'culls' ". This incident does not have the hallmarks of 'saving' young elephants but exploiting them for pure commercial purposes.
Xwe African Wildlife Research, an NGO, sent a lawyer's letter to Limpopo conservation authorities requesting them to withdraw the capture permit and have the young elephants returned to their families. It is reported that if this is not done they will apply for an urgent High Court interdict. This suggests that the 6 young elephants were not part of a larger elephant cull on Selati.
From the M&G news item there are two other bits of information that I did not pick up in the e-mail. The presence of the National Council of the SPCA, even though they are against this practise, is interesting. Both Selati and Efaf say, in the M&G news item that the elephant capture had gained NSPCA's”approval” What is their own (NSPCA) stance on this incident and did they approve of the capture?
The Limpopo provincial conservation authorities is reported by M&G of having given their approval as well. Why - with all the furore currently going on about elephant management practices did they allow it? It will just make the reaching the 'best practice' elephant management practice option all the more difficult to reach. The nature conservation management authorities must gauge the ramifications of their actions in a wider context and not just in their area of jurisdiction.
It is interesting to note that EMOA opposes the capture and training of elephants for elephant-backed safaris. Why did the Limpopo conservation authority not seek opinion from EMOA?? Why did Selati not involve EMOA and are they a member - why did they not uphold EMOA's stance on this issue?? Do I want to the answers to these questions? No - they may confirm my growing jaundiced view of elements of the private wildlife industry in southern Africa.
It puts the whole elephant-back safaris operations into a questionable practice category. But I do not have all the facts and I am sure that they will not emerge either now it has hit-the-news and the Animal Rights movement are involved.
Is this not a symptom of an industry that either cannot or will not regulate itself on ethical grounds???
In this weeks M&G there is an advert "Get off the elephants' backs" Is there an overpopulation of elphants - have they exceeded their carrying capacity? It is a 'Critical Thinking Forum'.
The Panel moderator is Judge Dennis Davis - Cape High Court.
The panel members are:
Prof Willem van Riet - Peace Parks Foundation, Lamson Maluleke - Maluleke Community, Prof Rudi van Aarde - University of Pretoria, Michelle Pickover - Xwe African Wildlife Research, Prof Kevin Rogers - University of Witswatersrand, Date Tuesday 30 May 2006, Time 18h00 for 18h30, Dress Smart Casual or Traditional, Venue The Atlas Studios, 33 frost Avenue, Milpark
If anyone wants to read the full M&G report - I am sure it is on their website under Fury over jumbo 'kidnap in the April 28 - May 6 2006, Vol 22, No 17.
I believe there are a couple of issues under debate here:
As Drummond says, the emotional media got hold of it, and finding out what really happened would be neigh impossible. I believe however that the GRAA can have a stand-point on this sort of issue in general.
Natal Parks Board Jamboree
Attention all ex Natal Parks Board staff, or anyone involved with NPB as a regular supplier or user of conservation resources, such as hunters.
Invitation to the Second NPB Jamboree
You are invited to attend the 2nd NPB Gathering to meet old colleagues and friends and put names to faces that were almost forgotten from the days of the old Natal Parks Board. All are welcome.
Date: Sunday 28th May 2006, at 11h30
Venue: The Tudor Rose, in Camelot (outside Hillcrest)
The get together will be a braai at the Medieval Castle – Steak, chop and boerewors, choice of salads, putu and tomato gravy. Cost R60 p.p. payable as you cross the moat. There will be a cash bar.
The response in 2005 was outstanding and if you missed that one, make sure you don’t miss this one.
If you wish to attend, please contact Rodney Henwood at 031 – 7681274 a/h or 083 – 6757184 anytime, or on email henwood@telkomsa.net to place your names on the list for catering purposes.
Directions: From Durban – Take N3 to Pmb then fork onto M13 Pinetown, just after the Pavilion & then up Fields Hill, take R103 Hillcrest Old Main Road off ramp. Turn right into Hillcrest. ** Go through 5 sets of robots and turn right into Inanda Road at 6th robot – after 1.5 kms turn left into Westriding Road and immediately right into Wishart Road, then 200m to the Camelot gate.
From Pmb - Take N3 to Durban – take M13 Pinetown / Hillcrest off ramp just after the top of Key Ridge – take second offramp and turn left into Hillcrest. Then follow directions from ** above.
If you know of any ex staff who may not know about the jamboree, please pass this information on to them.
INTERNATIONAL DAY OF THE RANGER
21 May 2006
Rangers for the 2010 Biodiversity Target
Sustaining the integrity of protected areas is a key function of any robust management regime and differentiates between the so-called ‘paper parks’ and those protected areas that truly make a contribution to world conservation. Protecting these places provides a range of goods and ecological services to meet human needs and can contribute to poverty alleviation by providing employment and sustainable development opportunities. At the heart of protected area management is the RANGER* - the protector of conservation areas. In this role the ranger is primarily responsible for the integrity of the protected area, with respect to both its geographic area as well its environmental or cultural components. As such, s/he is the critical interface between the protected area, its governing authority, the planners, developers, communities and the visiting public. Rangers are the “Thin Green Line” between the destruction and the continued integrity of parks. Rangers are known by many titles around the world, many of which (such as Guardeparques used throughout Spanish speaking Latin America) reflect their guardian or custodian role.
Over time the focus of the ranger's role has expanded, reflecting a much greater critical interface with both local and broader communities. The ranger acts as a day-to-day bridge in community liaison programmes, developing key partnerships and engendering a sense of ownership for those living, visiting and working within protected areas. A central part of their role includes the development and delivery of environmental education, both in terms of the protected area and wider conservation principles.
As guardians of often highly valuable natural or cultural resources, rangers are all too often faced with combating illegal commercial and non-sustainable exploitation of these resources, frequently at great personal risk. Regional conflict, civil wars and political upheaval impact heavily on protected areas, but even under these circumstances dedicated rangers have remained resolutely at their posts, and all too often have paid for their dedication with their lives.
In addition to human threats, rangers often have to battle the elements and unforgiving terrain at inopportune times, especially when involved in activities such as search and rescue, wild fire control or wildlife capture operations. Particularly in the developing world, rangers often live and work in remote and isolated areas, with minimal logistical and institutional support.
The term ‘ranger’ came to be used in England by William the Conqueror for the guardians of the Royal Forests. It was however the US definition in the 19th Century that was to find its’ way in to international usage through the adoption of the term in the first national parks. The reputed first modern day Ranger was Galen Clark who became ‘guardian’ of Yosemite on 21st May 1864 when it was declared a California State Park
The role of rangers has been recognised in Activity 1.4.6 of the CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas, which stipulates that Parties shall: “Ensure that protected areas are efficiently managed or supervised through staff that are well-trained and skilled, properly and appropriately equipped, and supported, to carry out their fundamental role in the management and conservation of protected areas”, to which should be added: “safely and efficiently”.
It is fitting that the International Day of the Ranger is followed by the The International Day for Biological Diversity. The International Ranger Federation fully supports the CBD and the Programme of Work on Protected Areas, and joins the world in celebrating The International Day for Biological Diversity on 22nd May 2006.
The International Ranger Federation asks participants and celebrants of International Day of the Ranger to:
If we act now, it is within our power to achieve the 2010 biodiversity target and halt the loss of biodiversity:
David Zeller
President
International Ranger Federation
email: irfpresident@soft.co.za
Cambodia, 8th May 2006
* The International Ranger Federation defines a ranger as “the person involved in the practical protection and preservation of all aspects of wild areas, historical and cultural sites. Rangers provide recreational opportunities and interpretation of sites while providing links between local communities, protected areas and area administration.”
Note to journalists: for more information, or executive or regional contact details visit the International Ranger Federation website at www.int-ranger.net.
POSITION(s) AVAILABLE
Assisting Ecologist Position, African Wild Dog Conservation, Eastern Zambia.
Job Description:
This project is implementing conservation management recommendations from previous research, to establish a viable metapopulation of endangered African wild dogs (Lycaon pictus) in eastern Zambia. The wild dogs are being utilised as a flagship species to conserve large areas of habitat, and to increase connectivity between two existing National Parks. The project incorporates:
As Assisting Ecologist you will:
The majority of the work will be conducted in South Luangwa National Park, the Lower Zambezi National Park, and adjoining Game Management Areas. Base camp has electricity (most of the time) and basic facilities but work will also be carried out in harsh, remote areas and include periods of bush camping.
Selection Criteria:
Commitment to project conservation outcomes is essential, as is a willingness to learn and the ability work with individuals from diverse cultures with different values.
Applicants must be in good physical condition; field work will include walking, long days driving, and some heavy work including using hi-lift jacks, digging vehicles out of mud and carrying heavy equipment. You must also be capable of working independently, and willing to work long hours.
Time off will be negotiated and may consist of several consecutive days off every couple of months. If you are a nine-to-five person and prefer your comforts over having elephants at your door this job is not for you! Conditions become very hot and humid late in the year. On the up-side you will be working in one of the best game areas in Africa, and with a rare and charismatic species.
Further Details:
You will need to provide your own transportation to Zambia. Start date is June 2006, based minimum 9 months/yr in the field, 2yr position, renewable. Local and Regional applicants are preferred. The project is a non-profit conservation project and as such salary range is restricted, however all costs in Zambia will be covered including food and board (not bar), and travel within Zambia. Annual salary range is from US$9000 to $18000 (neg.) depending on skills level.
Applicants who can bring their own student scholarship on a post-graduate program and save costs will also be considered. Studies must be compatible with the project field program and the Assisting Ecologist role. The remaining three months per year (Zambian wet season) will be negotiated depending on the chosen applicant as time off, study time, or continued AWDC work.
Please email your application to info@awdczambia.org. Include "job application" and your name in the email subject field. Closing date for applications is the 18th May 2006. If successful you will be sent a second round interview questionnaire, and if selected you will undergo a three month trial period in this position. Phone communications are limited unfortunately but final stage applicants may be contacted by phone by prior arrangement.
--- Auxillary jobs available to new South African immigrants to Canada with Conservation or related experience.
The Watershed Management Division of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) offer auxillary positions every summer, usually a period between 5 and 7 months for the protection and security of crucial water-producing mountain catchment areas called “Watersheds” that supplies 21 municipalities in the Greater Vancouver Region in the Province of British Columbia. Illegal activities, fire risks and contractor activity are greatly increased during summer with long daylight hours, thus the need to hire additional personnel. Duties involve environmental monitoring, pollution control, enforcement of watershed regulations, supervision of contractors working in the watersheds, fire prevention, anti-poaching, watershed access control and trespass enforcement. In addition to the position, incumbents must obtain an OFA (WCB approved) Level 1 First Aid Certificate with transportation endorsement which is required to operate an Emergency Transport Vehicle (ETV) as an emergency 1st responder at an accident scene.
The Regional District manages 3 large watershed reserves and one interpretation reserve for educational purposes on Watershed Management. These watershed reserves contain large tracts of original old-growth coniferous forests and alpine lakes and salmon-bearing habitats feed by snow caps and glaciers which feed into a large network of rivers, lakes, wetlands and creeks then into water storage dams supplying the bulk drinking water systems for urban areas. Parts of the watershed used to be logged in the past leaving behind a network of forestry roads required to be patrolled and inspected for damage and erosion, particularly road embankments. Wildlife found in the watershed include Black Bear, Cougar, Bobcat, Deer, Coyotes, Racoons, Bald Eagles and various small mammals and birds.
Previous law enforcement (particularly conservation enforcement) or general security experience and the ability to work alone in remote areas with limited supervision are essential for these positions. A drivers’ license is also essential (new immigrants are allowed to use their license from country of origin for max. 90 days then must convert to a BC license – a road test is required to convert.) Watershed Security personnel also ensure Occupational Safety Act regulations, policies and procedures are complied with by other staff and outside contractors working in construction sites within the watershed.
Uniforms are issued free of charge and working hours are shift based (4 x 11.5 hrs/day on followed by 4 days off) based on a police shift system. Some shifts are night shifts based on a 5 day/week schedule.
Training courses offered involve chainsaw operation, 1st Aid, ATV operation and boat operation. Other duties include sanitation control of boats used on watershed dams and lakes, assisting in search and rescue, monitoring activities of fish and wildlife researchers and/or technicians conducting special projects within the watershed.
Anyone interested may contact the Watershed Security Coordinator, Watershed Management Division, Clyde Macleod by e-mail at clyde.macleod@gvrd.bc.ca or write to or send a resume (CV) to his business address:
4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC Canada V5H 4G8.
Tel. (604) 432 6241
Fax (604) 432 6419.
I can be reached for further information and assistance at agmillar@shaw.ca or Alex.Millar@gov.bc.ca.
Tailpiece-
Girls nights out!
The other night I was invited out for a night with "the girls."
I told my husband that I would be home by midnight, "I promise!"
Well, the hours passed and the margaritas went down way too easy.
Around 3 a.m., a bit loaded, I headed for home. Just as I got in the door, the cuckoo clock in the hall started up and cuckooed 3 times.
Quickly, realizing my husband would probably wake up, I cuckooed another 9 times.
I was really proud of myself for coming up with such a quick-witted solution (even when totally smashed), in order to escape a possible conflict with him.
The next morning my husband asked me what time I got in, and I told him "Midnight".
He didn't seem pissed off at all.
Whew! Got away with that one!
Then he said, "We need a new cuckoo clock".
When I asked him why, he said, "Well, last night our clock cuckooed 3 times, then said, "Oh shit.", cuckooed 4 more times, cleared it's throat, cuckooed another 3 times, giggled, cuckooed twice more and then tripped over the coffee table and farted."
Matter of Fact
This is an electronic newsletter of the Game Rangers' Association of Africa. The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the Association, nor of the Editor. This is intended to be an exchange of news snips, ideas and communication between members. Newsletter content may be copied and re-distributed without authorisation. Correspondence should be addressed to the Editor at dyunnie@xsinet.co.za