20057
Noordbrug
2522
082 451 0762
086 241 3211
Inclusion of Panthera Leo in the definition of “listed large predator” (Section 1 of Draft
Threatened or Protected Species Regulations)
The South African Predator Association (SAPA) finds the proposed unspecified inclusion of all lions (par (f)) in the said definition unacceptable. While it strongly supports the inclusion of free roaming lions, SAPA is strongly opposed to the inclusion of captive bred lions in the definition for the following reasons:
1. NEMBA Chapter 4 Part 2: Provides for the protection of species that are threatened or in need of protection to ensure their survival in the wild
Section 56 states that the Minister may, by notice in the Gazette, publish a list of:
– Critically endangered - being any indigenous species facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future;
– Endangered - any indigenous species facing a high risk of extinction in the wild in the near future, although they are not a critically endangered species
– Vulnerable - any indigenous species facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the medium-term future, although they are not a critically endangered species or an endangered species
It is clear from the above that the purpose of the Act is to ensure the survival and conservation of species in the wild . Captive bred lions have nothing to do with the survival of lions in the wild. They were not and are not responsible for the decline of the free roaming lion populations and they cannot contribute to the survival of the lion as a species in the wild.
2. Many conservation specialists have stated unequivocally that “captive bred lions have no conservation value”. A similar view was taken by the Minister of Environmental
Affairs (Marthinus van Schalkwyk) in the court case of the
1

(1) The breeding of lions in captivity plays no role in the conservation and survival of lions as a species;
(2) The destruction of captive-bred lions has no bearing on the survival of lions as a species;
(3) The breeding and hunting of captive-bred lions does not contribute to biodiversity
If that is the case, why is it necessary to subject captive-bred lions to any restricted activity based on ecological principles only , except for ethical hunting, tourism standards , husbandry, and security reasons?
normal farming and security reasons? The captive lion industry is a commercial farming operation conducted in terms of the principle of the sustainable use of wildlife species, as provided for in the section 59(f) of the Act - in the same manner as the farming with ostriches and crocodiles.
3. The judgment in the court case mentioned above was focused on the issue of the 24 month sterilization of the hunting of captive-bred lions. However, the Court made it clear that its judgment also holds for the hunting of captive-bred lions in general. The Court came to the conclusion that, as captive-bred lions have no negative impact on, and has no bearing upon the wellbeing of lions in the wild, the restrictions on the hunting of captive-bred lions introduced by the Minister in terms of the Biodiversity Act were irrational and irrelevant.
4. The conclusion of the Court: “ The two principal purposes of the Act are the management and conservation of South Africa’s biodiversity and the protection of species and ecosystems. More specifically, s 57(2) of the Act, in empowering the Minister to prohibit the carrying out of any activity involving a listed threatened or protected species provides that he or she may only do so if that activity ‘is of a nature that may negatively impact on the survival’ of that species. The specific condition for the exercise of a prohibiting power is thus one which serves for the protection of that species ” The
Minister failed to demonstrate that captive-bred lions “...may negatively impact on the survival of that species.” On the contrary, he testified that the breeding and hunting of captive-bred lions “...plays no role in the conservation and survival of lions as a species”. The Court thus found that “…the prohibition on hunting of such lions does not satisfy the requirement in s 57(2) (a).”
5. The Cou rt’s judgment did not only rendered Regulation 24 invalid as far as lions are concerned; it also contained findings on “…matters of substance that must necessarily affect the future approach of the Minister” (page 10). The “matters of substance” seems to refer to all lion related restricted activities that were introduced in the TOPS
Regulations without having any foundation in the objectives of the Act.
In the light of the above the South African Predator Association urgently requests that captive-bred l ions are exempted from the Draft TOPS Regulations’ definition of a
“listed large predator”.
Sincerely.
(Prof) Pieter JJS Potgieter
President: SA Predator Association
2013-06-06
2