Chris Mercer is Co-founder and Director of CACH (Campaign Against Canned Hunting) which he started with his partner Beverly Pervan as a not-for-profit Section 21 company, dedicated to getting all trophy hunting banned in South Africa. He is co-founder of the Kalahari Raptor Centre (retired), co-author of "For the Love of Wildlife", and "Canned Hunting ~ a National Disgrace" and a retired Advocate of the High Courts of Zimbabwe and Botswana.
Please explain what canned hunting is, and the level in which it is practised in South Africa.
Canned Hunting is the practice of hunting where the target animal is unfairly prevented from escaping the hunter, either by physical constraints, such as fencing, or by mental constraints, such as habituation to humans. All species including exotics like bears, jaguars, tigers etc are bred for canned hunting in SA. The scale is huge - there are at least 5000 lions in captivity awaiting the arrow or the bullet.
How does canned hunting differ from trophy hunting, and in turn how does it differ from sustainable hunting as a revenue source? Do any of them hold a valid place in the modern conservation arena?
As the Kenyan government recognised 30 years ago, there is no place in real conservation for sport hunting. It is a barbaric relic of colonialism. Since all sport hunting takes place in fenced off land in SA, all trophy hunting is canned to a greater or lesser extent. Virtually all target animals have been captive bred for the purpose.
What is the commercial bushmeat trade and how has its legalisation affected poaching levels in both national and provincial parks?
Don't know about this, other than there is a serious problem with conservation officials doing game butchery ie using their government guns and vehicles to slaughter and sell wildlife which they are supposed to be protecting.
Who are the hunters and from where do they come? When hunting is such a profitable industry in South Africa how can one hope to stop them from practising their sport in the country, or is targetting the hunter himself a hopeless task?
About 55% of trophy hunters come from USA, the balance from Europe. A concerted effort in both the hunters' host country to ban trophy imports is needed to complement efforts in the hunting colony (SA) to ban hunting and the export of trophies.
In your opinion how does the spectre of hunting practises in South Africa reflect upon the country and its people and can you see a downturn in the tourism market because of it, (2010 not withstanding)? Ghandi once said “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated” Is this fair to apply such a statement to South Africa or is the pro hunting lobby the minority but who have the greatest say?
For cultural reasons, the hunting industry controls conservation in SA. Many conservation officials are themselves professional hunters. Only proof of a greater economic loss from endorsing hunting (through loss of ethical tourism) will persuade government to ban it.
Within your website you make mention of various groups who favour canned / trophy hunting. How does the normal South African person feel about the issue? Do you feel that there is enough being done to raise the issue in the public arena and if not how do you propose to bring it into focus?
Yes, unfortunately most wildlife conservation organisations in SA like WWF -SA and EWT are fanatically pro-hunting, but thanks to our campaign, public awareness is being mobilised and this poses a threat to the financial support for pro-hunting orgs. They will be forced to distance themselves from canned hunting (which they are starting to move towards)
Aside from changing public opinion, and that of those in the government, what hope have you of changing the mentality of those who own / run the game farms where canned / trophy hunting is practised, and how can you achieve such an objective?
Through ethical tourism. By educating the public on the cruelty that lies behind tourist reserves where hunting takes place, ethical tourists will go elsewhere. When profits fall, so will support for hunting. Ethical tourism is the greatest weapon against canned hunting.
With the 2010 World Cup coming to South Africa the world’s media will be focused upon the country: how do you propose to capitalise upon this and promote the anti hunting message?
By promoting ethical tourism. So-called 'responsible tourism' orgs in Europe are hopelessly ill-informed, so there is much need for public education in Europe and USA.
When one thinks of canned hunting commercially captive bred lions come to mind. How are other species affected by canned hunting both endangered or otherwise?
Lions come to mind because we selected the symbolic and charismatic animal for our campaign. In fact all wildlife including exotics and endangered species are being captive bred for hunting purposes. In SA conservation can be accurately described as institutionalised cruelty.
What will be the immediate affect of the new regulations coming in to force (postponed from June 2007) in February 2008?
None whatever. Despite the well orchestrated chorus of dissent from captive breeders, the new legislation legalises canned hunting.
In such a massive country as South Africa how can such regulations (law) be enforced and who will bear overall responsibility for this enforcement? Who will be responsible for such an undertaking in the various provinces?
Provincial officials many of whom are themselves professional hunters will supervise the implementation of the new regulations. They will ensure that there is no adverse impact upon the hunting industry.
How many canned hunting farms / reserves exist within South Africa and how many animals (estimated) does this practise encompass? What do you estimate the total combined income of these concerns to be and how does this money filter down to benefit the local communities, as for example happens with Eco Tourism projects? And how much of this income is invested into conservation?
About 9000, yes nine thousand 'game farms' cater to the 'game' industry. Figures given by and to government have all been shown to be utterly unreliable so this is a data deficient area. The notion that hunting pays for conservation needs to be put into perspective. For example, consider this:
Trophy hunting takes place in the Timbavati Conservancy adjoining Kruger Park, and the fences have been dropped to allow Kruger animals to roam onto hunting land. Thus, elephants and high value animals are used as currency in lieu of levies. In other words when the owners need to repair a fence or build a road, instead of paying for it by levying the members, they sell a few high value animals such as elephants, buffalo, or lions to trophy hunters in order to raise the funds. When you think that the landowners in Timbavati and Klaserie include the richest people in South Africa, it shows a deplorable meanness and greed. Although the conservancy owners of Timbavati and Klaserie pay basic levies, they would rather sell wildlife to hunters than take out their cheque books to pay supplementary levies.
This is what the hunting industry means when it says self righteously that ‘hunting pays for conservation.’
Is there a time when you can envisage those involved in this business moving away from hunting (whether it be canned or trophy) tourism to ethical / eco tourism? What influences would affect this change and how would it happen? (Ie how easy would it be for a number of farms to remove fences thus creating a reserve of huge hectarage in which the animals could be released?)
Clearly SA needs a new paradigm in Conservation, which would open up the land, take out the fences and create corridors between the fragments of nature reserves. This is not politically feasible in the macro-political situation.
What is your opinion on the controlled culling of the expanding elephant population in Kruger National Park? How does such a radical undertaking effect the elephant herds (aside from reducing numbers) and what would be your alternative proposal to control their numbers?
South Africa has adopted the doctrine of sustainable use, which lumps elephants and bacteria together in its definition of ‘organisms,’ and now regards itself as licensed by the United Nations Environment Programme and the IUCN to treat elephants as if they were bacteria.
Together, these factors will destroy the ‘wild’ elephants, converting them into alternative livestock, living and dying in hunting farms which used to be game reserves. Already trophy hunting takes part within Kruger Park in designated ‘contract areas’ and Kruger Park animals are hunted on an industrial scale on virtually all of the land that borders the western boundary of Kruger park, where the Park boundary fences have been deliberately dropped for the financial benefit of private land owners (and SANParks.) The worst offenders against elephants are the provincial reserves, like Pilanesberg, Madikwe, Letaba, Manyeleti, Andover and the APNR (Association of Private Nature Reserves) which include Klaserie, Timbavati, and Umbabat.
The much publicised Transfrontier Peace Park around Kruger, which includes Zimbabwe’s Gona re Zhou (Place of the elephant) and Mozambique’s Coutada 16 hunting bloc, ought to provide an alternative to culling by allowing elephants to migrate into the adjoining reserves. This has not happened because neither the Zimbabwe or Mozambique governments have the political will to remove the tens of thousands of squatters who have moved into the game reserves, where they occupy themselves by snaring and shooting animals and cutting down hardwood trees to make charcoal. So when you hear Southern African governments justifying their decisions to cull elephants because ‘there are too many elephants for the land’ you will know that this is not strictly correct. There would be plenty of land for expanding elephant populations if African governments could only control their human populations. African politics are destroying the elephant, and turning the game parks into hunting farms of institutionalised cruelty. Without a government ethic of compassion and protection, what hope is there for the animals? And when rural African populations have been allowed to continue with nihilistic lifestyles without restraint, how long before they destroy the resource base on which their own survival depends? The fate of the African elephant will be the fate of Africans too. The elephants are only the sentinels of what is to come. Seen against this descent in to chaos, the new regulations are clearly so inadequate as to be meaningless; a mere public relations exercise designed to deflect public criticism without stopping the cruelty.
The ivory stockpiles also reveal the extent of the incestuous relationship between conservation services and the trophy hunting industry. Although elephant populations are almost entirely in the public domain in national parks, the ivory stockpile statistics show that ivory holdings have increased only in private hands. How can this possibly be? Do elephants never die on land owned by the public even though more than 90% of them live there?
The conclusion from all this is inescapable: the new regulations prove yet again that the hunting industry owns and controls conservation in Southern Africa and the elephants will continue to be hunted with sickening cruelty.
What you can do about it?
First, tourists to South Africa can practice ethical tourism. By supporting only wildlife destinations which allow no hunting - such as resorts certified by the Campaign Against Canned Hunting Inc non-profit see here both private and provincial reserves will be encouraged to drop hunting in order to avoid suffering greater losses to their legitimate eco-tourism.
If you were able to sit down face to face with Marthinus Van Schalkwyk, Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism in a televised debate over this issue, and had a short time in which to influence him and the government, how would you word the argument against Canned and trophy hunting?
As Hector Magome, spokesman for SANParks, says: “The protectionist mentality is irrelevant today….wildlife must be used to reduce human poverty otherwise we will lose our parks”. I would try to convince the Minister that only rigid protection will save the wildlife and keep the tourists coming and thereby alleviate poverty. Poverty is caused by the human propensity for reckless breeding. Implementing birth control methods like China has done will alleviate poverty much better than killing wildlife.
How could the proposals for land repatriation affect the hunting industry? By purchasing such farms under compulsory purchase could the government affect a collapse of canned hunting concerns and could you ever see this occurring?
No. This process is a political one aimed at transferring land ownership from whites to blacks, and it will be just as devastating for SA wildlife as it has been in Zimbabwe.
As much as you would like to see a complete ban on the hunting industry, realistically can you envisage a day when this will ever happen, as it did in Kenya? If not what is the best solution for compromise in your opinion?
It all depends upon ethical tourism. And that means educating Europeans who make up the bulk of eco-tourists.
If a change in attitudes does occur from where do you think this will be driven? Home or abroad? And how do external foreign influences affect government policies on this issue? For example,what do you hope the online petition (www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/160781929) will achieve?
Raising public awareness again and again is our only hope.
How, as an active campaigner are you, Chris Mercer, viewed by those within South Africa and those further afield?
With hostility in SA conservation circles. There is a large amorphous body of support in SA society but the challenge is to mobilise that.
What are your plans for the future, in terms of both continuing to campaign against hunting in South Africa and on a personal level?
I shall continue to do what I already do: raise awareness by all legitimate means of the plight of SA wildlife, and the ethical illiteracy of the SA conservation regime.
The views expressed therein are solely those of the interviewee and do not necessarily reflect those of Safaritalk.
button and follow the prompts. By doing a full edit it allows you to reformat the post and text as opposed to just adding / deleting text.