https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...eserve/#.Wx5ug4pKjIV



Outrage after Kruger lion baited and shot by trophy hunter in neighbouring reserve

By Don Pinnock• 11 June 2018

An American is believed to have paid R1-million to bring down a Kruger Park lion from a pride beloved of tourists.

On Friday a male lion was shot by a trophy hunter in Umbabat Private Nature Reserve on the boundary of Kruger National Park. Unconfirmed reports suggest it may have been the leader of the Western Pride named Skye, beloved of many tourists. If so, his cubs will be killed by another male taking over the pride.

It is probable the lion was lured out of Kruger Park with bait provided by an elephant and buffalo hunt, which took place beforehand. The hunter, whose name has not been established but is believed to be American, is estimated to have paid over R1-million to pull the trigger. Everyone involved in the hunt appears to have gone to ground, all calls going to voicemail.

The hunt raises many questions about the protection of wildlife in Umbabat and the Associated Private Nature Reserves (APNR), of which it is a member. The biggest question is why the APNR reserves, on the unfenced western boundary of Kruger, are permitted to hunt animals from one of Africa’s premier, state-owned game reserves.


Shortly before the hunt took place two NGOs, the EMS Foundation and Ban Animal Trading, sent a Cease and Desist warning to the APNR chairman, Rob Garmany, CEO of Kruger Park Glen Philips and The Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency, threatening legal action if the hunt took place. Following the hunt they will now be considering their legal options.

Considerable hunting takes place in the APNR each year, sanctioned by the Kruger National Park and Provincial Authorities, though few tourists who visit its high-priced lodges know this.

The combined permitted APNR quota for 2018 for Timbavati, Klaserie, Umbabat and Balule was 4,467 wild animals. This included 52 elephants plus a bull older than 50 in Umbabat which could potentially be a 100-pound tusker, which many argue should never be hunted. It also listed 36 buffalo (despite a 68% drop in numbers to 2,327 in 2017), 44 kudu, 19 warthogs, seven hippo, a lion, a leopard, eight hyena, five giraffe and 4,171 impala.

A lion was expressly excluded by Kruger, but permission to hunt one was given anyway by the licensing authority, Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency. How Kruger’s sanction was circumvented needs investigation.


Shortly before the hunt, the Board of Directors of Ingwelala, a share block within Umbabat that does not allow any hunting on its four properties, tried to ensure at a meeting with the Umbabat warden, Bryan Havemann, that the dominant male lion of the Western Pride would not be hunted. Havemann indicated his willingness to ensure it was not the lion named Skye.

There is ongoing tension in the APNR between lodges that rely on tourists who want to experience live animals and hunting properties and hunters who want to kill them.

Shortly after the hunt, Phil Biden of Thornybush Reserve emailed Rob Garmany, chairman of APNR, saying Thornybush “would be asking his Exco to consider if we are happy for the APNR to continue to have a hunting protocol when the hunting reserves do their own thing in any event. It may be better for the individual reserves to have their own protocol so that innocent parties are not caught up in issues like this”.

Perhaps more than any of the other reserves within the APNR, there are extreme tensions between hunting and anti-hunting owners in Umbabat, particularly over the hunting of predator species.

The lack of auditing and clear abrogation of responsibility was underlined in the hunting permissions letter from Kruger Park:

“[We] cannot comment on the revenue income or expenditure reports received from Umbabat, since it is not clear from the report how the entities within Umbabat as federal system manage and monitor income generated as result of the animal off-takes.

“It is also not clear towards which conservation, management and socio-economic activities the revenue generated is being directed. It is the mandate of MTPA as issuing authority to verify that management takes place.”

Kruger enumerated a number of other flaws, some so serious that it would have been reasonable to expect the application to be rejected.

Umbabat has been in the news previously for controversial hunting practices when a well known coalition male lion was shot. That hunt was apparently on the property of the Luttig Trust.


Speaking for the EMS Foundation and Ban Animal Trading, Michele Pickover said Kruger Park and the animals it is tasked to protect “are of enormous consequence to humanity and as such are held in trust on our behalf. They are a national heritage asset.

“If cultural heritage, for example, was handled in the same way, it would mean that national heritage institutions would be able to sell off items such as the records of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the Taung skull or Sol Plaatje’s diary to rich capitalists and private collectors to do with what they want. In principle, there is no difference. South Africans must stand up and say ‘enough is enough!’ and fight in the animals’ corner and for our national heritage.” DM

There we go again!

This has nothing to do with conservation.

It all boils down to ban hunting!

Where was the outrage about the poisoned lions??

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
There we go again!

This has nothing to do with conservation.

It all boils down to ban hunting!

Where was the outrage about the poisoned lions??

There is no outrage and a couple of no name green groups are trying to ride on the back of Cecil.

There are 2,000 Lions in the Kruger and one coalition alone has been know to kill over 100 others.

I wonder how Mr Pinnock thinks the considerable conservation efforts in those parts are funded.

I have it on pretty good authority that the hunt was perfectly legal and above board. As so meone remarked here, this is just an effort by some two-bit greenie organisation to get exposure on somebody else's dime.

Is it just me that thinks the word "outrage" is often misused and overused?

jvw375 is perfect right about the legality. The hunting protocol precludes targeting pride males and they were apparently targeting a loner whose area of operation includes KNP. They had apparently been supplied with pics of the lion not to target.

The effort is also driven by some individuals of a shareblock within the reserve. A Whatsapp group Save Skye had been created. These guys are now adamant that RAW files of the pictures be provided to them and to inspect the skin to ID the lion shot.

Regardless of whether legal or not, it's one more shit show that could have been avoided. In this day and age, perhaps it is better to just not hunt certain species in certain areas.

Whether it's elephants along Gonarezhou or lions along Kruger, the bad press all hunters get simply isn't worth it, in my opinion. Plenty of other places to hunt that aren't so 'under the microscope'.

quote:

Originally posted by Balule:
jvw375 is perfect right about the legality. The hunting protocol precludes targeting pride males and they were apparently targeting a loner whose area of operation includes KNP. They had apparently been supplied with pics of the lion not to target.

The effort is also driven by some individuals of a shareblock within the reserve. A Whatsapp group Save Skye had been created. These guys are now adamant that RAW files of the pictures be provided to them and to inspect the skin to ID the lion shot.

Thats what I heard and this was the monitored and identified Lion that was agreed to be hunted by the stakeholders. A post pride male. Lets move on.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
There we go again!

This has nothing to do with conservation.

It all boils down to ban hunting!

Where was the outrage about the poisoned lions??

Posted on my Facebook about the poisoned lion, no response, will post this and watch the "outrage"

https://africageographic.com/blog/kruger-lion-hunted/



Kruger lion hunted – what we know
Posted on 11 June, 2018 by Simon Espley in Hunting, News, Opinion Editorial, Wildlife and the Opinion Editorial post series. — 4 Comments
Posted: June 11, 2018



Opinion post: Written by Simon Espley, CEO of Africa Geographic


A large male lion was trophy hunted on Thursday morning last week in the Greater Kruger National Park. We have confirmed by way of personal discussion with the warden of the area that the hunter is from the United States and that he paid in the region of R1-million to kill this wild lion. The hunter’s name is unknown at this stage. Wildlife activists claim that the lion was a pride male lion they call Skye, but this fact is yet to be confirmed.

The lion was killed in Umbabat Private Nature Reserve, which forms part of the Associated Private Nature Reserves (APNR), and falls within the Greater Kruger National Park. There are no fences between the private reserves and the Kruger National Park. Umbabat, in turn, is made up of many smaller private properties.

It’s highly likely that this tragic incident will justifiably trigger an emotional tsunami, with substantial consequences for Umbabat, neighbouring private game reserves and possibly even the entire Greater Kruger. At time of writing, there is already much speculation and finger pointing within Umbabat, APNR/Greater Kruger and amongst the broader public. Members of Umbabat are meeting today in Johannesburg to discuss the situation.

I tried to determine the facts as they currently stand, and can report as follows, after a lengthy telephone discussion this morning with Umbabat warden Bryan Havemann, and with representative of other affected parties. Havemann provided all documentation requested by me. Africa Geographic will keep you advised of further developments, as we become aware of them.

1. Was the hunt legal?

Havemann: Yes. The authority to hunt the lion was provided in a quota letter issued on 21 February 2018 by the relevant governing authority – Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency. The quota request by Mbabat was initially turned down, due to inadequate information being provided, but subsequently approved once the outstanding information was provided. Information published by wildlife activists this morning via a South African news platform was based on outdated information, and is not accurate.

2. Was the lion baited?

Havemann: Yes, the lion was baited. We baited the lion in order to make sure that we did not shoot lions that are prohibited in terms of the lion hunting protocol (see below).

3. How old was the lion?

Havemann: The lion met the requirements of the Greater Kruger lion hunting protocol of April 2018. These requirements are:

i) Older than 6 years;

ii) Reasonable steps taken to ensure that no pride males under 8 years old are selected;

iii) Consultation with lodges and landowners in the area;

iv) Males cannot be shot if in the presence of females;

v) No appearance of the recessive leucistic gene (‘white lions’).

4. Was the lion killed the lion referred to as ‘Skye’?

Havemann: I am unsure of the exact identity of the lion named ‘Skye’, as we do not name lions. We met with the local landowners and lodges during the run up to the hunt, as required by the lion hunting protocol, who provided photos of a male lion they have named ‘Skye’ (because he has a scar under his eye). We undertook to ensure that this named lion was not the target lion, and made sure that the Umbabat professional hunter was aware that this lion was out of bounds. A report by Umbabat chairman Lenny Willson described the lion killed by the hunter as follows: no facial scarring, age 8.5 to 9 years old, worn down and broken teeth, prominent spine, no appearance of ‘white lion’ gene, no other lions in the area before or after the hunt.

5. Why does Umbabat hunt lions and other species?

Havemann: We permit hunting in order to pay for ongoing reserve management and security costs. There is no profit in this, we try to cover costs. The landowners also pay levies, which provide the balance of the funds required to keep the private land available for the good of wildlife conservation. We only have one commercial lodge amongst our landowners, and so cannot reply on tourism as a major funder. We would be happy to stop trophy hunting if third parties would provide the necessary funding.

Final comment from Simon Espley, CEO of Africa Geographic
Humankind has surely evolved sufficiently to reject the fetish of a few wealthy people for killing iconic animals for fun. It is time to get rid of trophy hunting of these icons as a conservation funding mechanism where there are alternatives, and I am totally convinced that the intellectual and financial resource at Umbabat and other nearby private game reserves could solve this riddle if they applied their minds and thought outside of traditional methods. I know that many of the Umbabat owners already do feel this way.

If alternative solutions are not found, there is a real risk that the APNR will start breaking up, and that fences will come back up in places. The anger generated amongst the social media-empowered general public, driven by activists who value impact over fact, is a toxic cocktail that will drive change – regardless of the consequences.

This will be a journey for Umbabat, not an event. It’s time to start that journey.

The following quoted portion sums up the source of the "outrage." It has nothing to do with a lion dying. It has everything to do with a desire to ban hunting.

quote:

Final comment from Simon Espley, CEO of Africa Geographic
Humankind has surely evolved sufficiently to reject the fetish of a few wealthy people for killing iconic animals for fun. It is time to get rid of trophy hunting of these icons as a conservation funding mechanism where there are alternatives, and I am totally convinced that the intellectual and financial resource at Umbabat and other nearby private game reserves could solve this riddle if they applied their minds and thought outside of traditional methods. I know that many of the Umbabat owners already do feel this way.

Just another nail in the coffin!

And then the coffin gets wet and falls to pieces...

I don't think that is how this is all going to play out.

Chaps the Kruger has implemented fine policies in conservation and have proven that hunting pays the brunt of the bills.

It is unfortunate that there are those who will consistently nurture these important species for their own gain.

Per the reserve warden-“we would be happy to stop trophy hunting if third parties would provide the necessary funding”. The day the greeenies put money where their mouth is will be a cold day in Hell!

If they don't want "iconic" animals removed from Kruger then, they need to high fence ALL of the park!

I've hunted in the Umbabat, it is a mish mash of properties, some hunted, some not. But quota is issued to all as are assessments for the area.

.

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by Balule:
jvw375 is perfect right about the legality. The hunting protocol precludes targeting pride males and they were apparently targeting a loner whose area of operation includes KNP. They had apparently been supplied with pics of the lion not to target.

The effort is also driven by some individuals of a shareblock within the reserve. A Whatsapp group Save Skye had been created. These guys are now adamant that RAW files of the pictures be provided to them and to inspect the skin to ID the lion shot.

Thats what I heard and this was the monitored and identified Lion that was agreed to be hunted by the stakeholders. A post pride male. Lets move on.

For what it is worth this is my vote.

I am always amazed at how opinions are offered on "How it should be done" by individuals who have no understanding or knowledge of the relationship between the KNP and the APNR as it pertains to the western border of the KNP.

This relationship is one steeped in history and a relationship hard fought for. This is and was always linked with politics and big money !
The area between the Sabi and Olifants of the the most sought after properties in Southern Africa. !

One could argue the very essence of the being of what was / is "my Africa"

The shooting of a lion known to tourists and researchers in the KNP by baiting in a APNR reserve whether legal or not bad optics ! One hunters will and cannot win !

https://lowvelder.co.za/436100...egarded-sustainable/



UPDATE: Hunting of Kruger lion regarded as sustainable

The hunt was approved on February 22 after which the lion was hunted on Friday, causing tensions to flare.
4 hours ago

UMBABAT – A male lion was hunted on the border of the Kruger National Park on Friday after conservationists lost the fight to prevent the hunt.

Kholofelo Nkambule, senior manager of communications and public relations for the Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency (MTPA) confirmed on Monday that a male lion was shot by an unknown trophy hunter in the Umbabat Private Game Reserve four days ago.

This was according to Michele Pickover, speaking for the EMS Foundation and Ban Animal Trading, who opposed the hunt and was concerned that the lion was part of the Western Pride. “This has increased the ongoing tension in the Associated Private Nature Reserves (APNR) between lodges that rely on tourists, and hunting of animals,” she said.



Whether or not the lion was the dominant member of the Western Pride as dreaded, has not yet been confirmed.
“The biggest question is why the APNR reserves, of which Umbabat is part of, on the unfenced western boundary of KNP, are permitted to hunt animals from one of Africa’s premier, state-owned game reserves,” asked Pickover.



Initially the MTPA and SANParks opposed an application for the hunt and both parties required population information from the APNR and Umbabat. Based on the information that was later supplied on enquiry, the hunt of one lion that was regarded as sustainable at 1,3 per cent of population, was approved on February 22 (provided that it took place within the legal framework that is in place).
According to Nkambule, the reasons for approval were based on the Constitution of South Africa: Section 24 (b), (iii).

Seeing that this is such an emotive and controversial issue, chairman of the Ingwelala Share Block (a share block within Umbabat) Kevin Alborough, notified all stakeholders on Wednesday that the hunt was underway in Umbabat.

In a meeting held on May 27, in the presence of Umbabat warden Bryan Havemann, the process of applying and obtaining approval for species to be hunted each year and the correct protocols, was explained. Attendees were ensured that the leader of the Western Pride, named Skye, was not the target. An elderly male, that often encroached into the north-eastern region of Umbabat from the Kruger, was in the cross-hairs.

Whether or not this promise has been kept has not yet been confirmed. A recent report, that resulted in an outrage, stated that hunting a lion was expressly excluded by Kruger, but permission to hunt one was given anyway by the licensing authority, the MTPA.

To this, media specialist of SANParks, Isaac Phaahla, said they are not an authority that allows or gives permits for the hunting of animals, neither are they responsible for the monitoring of such activities, therefore it would be wrong of them to comment on the matter.
“The relevant authority that has overall responsibility is the MTPA. SANParks would like to urge those who have evidence of wrongdoing, to present evidence to the MTPA so that all those matters can be investigated,” he said.

“There are protocols and regulations that have to be followed by all reserves and areas open to the KNP, and this is guided by the policy framework on sustainable use or animal off takes for legal hunting,” he concluded.

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:
Chaps the Kruger has implemented fine policies in conservation and have proven that hunting pays the brunt of the bills.

It is unfortunate that there are those who will consistently nurture these important species for their own gain.

Agreed Andrew!

Several points of note - take it for what you will.

1. The KNP long ago stopped culling for non-scientific / non-wildlife management reasons, we all know what those were! Since then the park's population of elephants, buffalo, and many other species have grown way beyond the carrying capacity of the park....including predators.

2. These "reserves" where the fence between them and the park has been removed on purpose - serve several purposes...one of which is to help as a "management tool" in trying to control the ever burgeoning wildlife populations within the park. They gotta go somewhere!

3. The money generated via sport hunting these properties is used to help with management / conservation....including the wildlife.

4. Why these anti hunting goofballs continue to think "iconic" species like the African Lion are somehow granted "eternal life" is beyond me? A carefully selected / beyond breeding / old lion can either die at the hands of other males and completely go to waste (often times the case), he can die a slow death by starvation (very sad outcome and still for nothing) or he can be taken by a hunter (paying lots of money) and his death can be a benefit to the greater good of the species, the area and wildlife in general? He's gonna die at some point....period!!! He can die in vein, or he can die while providing a benefit to others....its really pretty simple! But simple logic evades the mindless fools who are lead by their emotion rather than rational thought!

" These "reserves" where the fence between them and the park has been removed on purpose - serve several purposes...one of which is to help as a "management tool" in trying to control the ever burgeoning wildlife populations within the park. They gotta go somewhere! "

Nope the other way around !

The membership ( owners ) of the reserves approached the government and not the government them !

The reserves came about by principles of management of consensus by individual owners who realized that individual parcels of land could not sustain wildlife under the rulings of the wildlife act.

A standard "farm" as originally surveyed by the government surveyor in the 1880's was roughly 5000 ha in size and with the wildlife act and prerequisites for fencing and separation of game from domestic cattle to prevent spreading of disease amalgamation of farms in groups was the answer to the problem of fencing.

as to the need to generate money from hunting to conserve... again wrong as most of the big name original and subsequent players were wealthy individuals with other sources of income and the reserves were not dependent on hunting income at all ! Many of the early landowners were former hunters who transitioned to non consumptive conservation !

Well ALF, when I met with the head ranger at the Klaserie (in his office - on the reserve) he gave me the above info....perhaps he was wrong too?

This is an interesting insight to the numbers on one APNR property, Timbavati, written by a tenant lodge owner....

"In our most recent year of data, where the Timbavati photographic tourism numbers had peaked, the revenue brought into the reserve by 24,000 photographic tourists was less than one third of the revenue brought in by only 46 hunters for the same year. It’s not hard to imagine that 24,000 tourists have a much larger carbon, and resource use, footprint than 46 hunters, not to mention the amount of activity within the reserve required to support all of those photographic tourists – deliveries, waste management, water use, electricity provision, and staff, to name but a few."

Full piece is worth a read....

https://www.africahunting.com/...-conservation.42898/

Aaron

You mean Erwin Leibnitz

Ok so facing the possibility of future land claims by the ANC on properties to the west of the KNP after 1995 I took it upon myself to do a detailed and concise study into the ownership pathway of properties to the west of the KNP between the Olifants and the Sabie to establish who and what owned what property form time of first awarding by the old ZAR government prior to the Boer war.

The object of the exercise to field a vigorous defense in the eventuality of such a claim when it came. Lucky for me I sold my Mango farm on Blyde river well before a claim did arise. Our game ranch adjacent to the Klaserie was spared.

The situation with the block of unaffiliated properties between the Klaserie and the Timbavati came to a head at what became known as the Thornybush convention in August of 1991.

Tt was a case of "us" against "them" them being the APNR reserves.

The "us" represented by about 70 independent land owners representing a parcel of land covering 110 ,000 ha

In October of 1991 the ILA was founded to represent the independent Land owners.... I was there, my late father a founding member together with his good Friend Abie Venter ( later to be disbanded in 1992 when it became clear that the ANPR reserves were not going to relinquish control over their western border nor were they for any form of commercial utilization of game or property either as tourism or large scale hunting ! ( though they did allow very selective and limited hunting within their borders)

The Fort Copieba Motel conference was held on the 19th of October 1991 at which point the issue came to a deadlock. The APNR reserves put impossible numbers forth to become part of their circle.
2 million South African Rands for any owner to join and no commercial interest allowed !

At this meeting my late father told the representative high ranking office of the Air Force off threatening to shoot down any low flying Mirage fighter with his hunting rifle if it passed low over our property...... much to the glee and cheering of the now quite pissed off private land owners.

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:
Chaps the Kruger has implemented fine policies in conservation and have proven that hunting pays the brunt of the bills.

It is unfortunate that there are those who will consistently nurture these important species for their own gain.

Agreed Andrew!

Several points of note - take it for what you will.

1. The KNP long ago stopped culling for non-scientific / non-wildlife management reasons, we all know what those were! Since then the park's population of elephants, buffalo, and many other species have grown way beyond the carrying capacity of the park....including predators.

2. These "reserves" where the fence between them and the park has been removed on purpose - serve several purposes...one of which is to help as a "management tool" in trying to control the ever burgeoning wildlife populations within the park. They gotta go somewhere!

3. The money generated via sport hunting these properties is used to help with management / conservation....including the wildlife.

4. Why these anti hunting goofballs continue to think "iconic" species like the African Lion are somehow granted "eternal life" is beyond me? A carefully selected / beyond breeding / old lion can either die at the hands of other males and completely go to waste (often times the case), he can die a slow death by starvation (very sad outcome and still for nothing) or he can be taken by a hunter (paying lots of money) and his death can be a benefit to the greater good of the species, the area and wildlife in general? He's gonna die at some point....period!!! He can die in vein, or he can die while providing a benefit to others....its really pretty simple! But simple logic evades the mindless fools who are lead by their emotion rather than rational thought!

It is my impression that this has all blown over and the antis are more protesting about the proposed lifting of the hunting ban in Botswana.

Although much of you have little to do with social media today we hunters have a much stronger voice and sites are littered with conservation references that stem from our industry. We seem to be standing our ground here and would do well to march forward.

Alf, times have changed in the APNR and the anti-poaching costs are tremendous.
Despite the anti-poaching rhino are still being poached, 4 on Rietvley and 3 last week in the Klaserie.

The Balule came late to the game and quite frankly can be viewed as the one of the "us" groups. For the most the Balule's founder members were of a different mindset to the original APNR reserve "old boys club"
.

My handle 'Balule' refers to the Sotho name for the Olifants River and not the reserve, I have had a lot of fun in the watershed of the Olifants River hiking, hunting, fishing, paddling. If I am forced to give a secondary address it would be in the Umbabat. My father actually lived in the Balule Reserve when it became part of the APNR.

Perhaps just to clarify and expand on the statement of the "us and the them"

There are two narratives put forth on the early history of the coming about of the KNP in South Africa.

One a product of Afrikaner nationalism firmly grounded as consequence to the socio economic and sociopolitical effects of loss the Boer War by Afrikaners. (this was and is basically a one sided story seen through the optics and machinery of the Nationalist Afrikaner political system) The same effect that gave rise to the policy of Apartheid.

The second a more balanced and arguably historically true account as put forth by Jane Curruthers of the University of South Africa in her numerous writings on the Subject.

Two very important events gave backdrop to the subject of conservation and hunting.

One was the Rinderpest and the other the Boer war. The latter likely the single most important event in the socio political history of South Africa.

It is apparent that after the discovery of gold and diamonds in the former Boer Republics
a social divide emerged.

One of a Urban Elite vs rural "peasantry".

The Urban Elite were wealthy and they could afford to play ! Sport hunting was always a form of play in these circles.

The concept of amalgamation of properties to form "reserves" mostly for purposes to protect for purpose of sport hunting as opposed to subsistence and commercial hunting is a very old concept. Aristocracy in Europe and England typically held land for this purpose and appointed game keepers to enforce trespassing laws.

This practice came about in the Lowveld even before the Boer war.

Important to this the fact that the primary financial support required to bring this about funded not from income derived from the property itself but from other sources.

It is not surprising to see then that this practice was one found in the circles of the very wealthy in urban society. The early pioneers in this regard were wealthy industrialists and businessmen.

A simple look into who's who in the later founding of the Klaserie , Sabi Sands and Timbavati bears this out. It is interesting that many of the early pioneers were sportsmen but with time they all became non hunting conservationists.

British Imperial rule after the Boer war saw a influx of Sport hunters who competed directly with subsistence and commercial hunting. Commercial hunting was mainly for ivory.

As far back as 1884 the need for conservation of game became apparent and the "Volksraad" (equivalent of a house of representatives) of the old ZAR tabled discussions and even laws to limit commercial exploitation of game. This did not sit well with ordinary rural dwelling citizens ! This was the catalyst to the proclamation of the Pongola reserve inn Natal , the Sabi reserve, the expanded Sabi reserve, the Shingwedzi and finally the greater KNP.

Smuts later asked for a greater Dongola reserve that would have spanned the top of the whole Transvaal from the Kruger in the east to Botswana on the west . This became a political casualty in the 1948 elections.

A social divide between hunters and conservationists was created which persisted and still persists albeit in another form today.

Game laws and proclamations enacted over the years enhanced this divide. Newspaper cut outs in the 1940's and 50's bear witness to this.

Lest we not forget Subsistence and commercial Hunters were responsible for the almost complete decimation of game populations in the old Transvaal! One could argue that from early on it was the sport hunters and their need to preserve to keep their sport viable that saw to conservation !

By the time the Boer was was done it was so bad in the Lowveld that only a handful of individual animals of certain species survived !

Game , hunting, game farming, reserves became a political football exploited by the Afrikaner Nationalist movement. The game laws of 1935 and later 1949 part of the political scene.

Even the founding of the SA Hunters association mired in this us vs them divide.

https://lowvelder.co.za/436643...-not-skye-says-mtpa/



UPDATE: Hunted lion was not Skye, says MTPA
But the NGOs that opposed the hunt are not quite done yet.
2 hours ago

UMBABAT – The Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency (MTPA) yesterday confirmed that they have kept their promise regarding the lion hunt in Umbabat Private Game Reserve last Friday.
In a meeting held on May 27, in the presence of Umbabat warden Bryan Havemann, attendees were ensured that the leader of the Western Pride, named Skye, was not the target. An elderly male that often encroached into the north-eastern region of Umbabat from the Kruger National Park (KNP), was in the crosshairs.


Initially the MTPA and SANParks opposed an application for the hunt and both parties required population information from the Associated Private Nature Reserves and Umbabat. Based on the information later supplied, the hunt of one lion that was regarded as sustainable at 1,3 per cent of population, was approved on February 22 (provided that it took place within the existing legal framework).
Even though MTPA head of professional hunting, Riaan de Lange, confirmed that the hunt took place on the border of the KNP last Friday, he assured Lowvelder that it was definitely not Skye.
SANParks media specialist, Isaac Phaahla again reiterated that the MTPA, who approved the hunt, gives the final comment on applications for hunting permits. “It is the only authority with powers to decline or approve those applications. As SANParks we have not launched an investigation, nor have we requested to see the issued permit,” said Phaahla.
He explained that the Kruger is a wild area, and as such SANParks does not name specific animals because, “we manage an ecosystem and not certain species with particular emphasis on individual animals.
“Again we have stated and requested parties who feel that something wrong was done, to furnish MTPA with evidence to investigate as the authority in these matters,” he said.

But the NGOs that opposed the hunt are not quite done yet. Speaking on behalf of the EMS Foundation and Ban Animal Trading, Michele Pickover said that they will now do everything in their power to get access to the carcass, as they are still not convinced that the MTPA kept their promise.
She also pleaded with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to disallow the import of the trophy hunted by one of its citizens.

https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...ameras/#.Wy00FKdKjIV


Opinionista • David Forbes • 22 June 2018
The lion hunt controversy: Why use bullets instead of cameras?

Controversy continues to escalate over the hunt of a lion in a private game reserve adjacent to Kruger National Park by a wealthy American hunter on June 7, 2018.


Respected environmental journalist Don Pinnock recently alerted the public to the hunt in the Umbabat private nature reserve, which has drawn a vitriolic media response from local hunter Peter Flack.

Emotions are running high on social media such as Facebook, where hunting versus conservation adherents are at war. Letters are written to the editor, journalists scurry all over Mpumalanga, Limpopo and Gauteng, conservation NGOs are outraged, lawyers’ letters are written, press releases put out, and the media storm continues unabated.

Hunt details are deliberately vague and scarce: a male lion was hunted on June 7 in the Umbabat area, somewhere on a conglomerate of private properties known as Group 13 which is accessible only to their landowners and the warden or ranger and anti-poaching patrols.

Group 13 consists of properties named as Luttig Trust (2), Willson, Joubert, Nyoka, Tloupane, De Villiers, Buchner, and Nyarhi. No further details of these secretive properties or their owners is known at this stage.

The lion was baited, says the warden, Bryan Havemann. It was then shot by a rich businessman from Kentucky, USA, (name known) for an amount in excess of R1 million, according to press reports. The hunt was facilitated by a hunting outfit based in Nelspruit (name also known) and the carcass was taken to a taxidermist in Nelspruit (name also known). Although the hunt was billed as an “open range, fair chase, ethical, sustainable” hunt, the fact that the lion was baited is illegal and suggests otherwise.

The lion, whose identity has not yet been established, is believed by some who visit the area regularly to be nicknamed Skye, the dominant male of a lion pride in the area that often ranges into Kruger National Park (KNP). More about this later.

There is some debate around whether Skye’s pride, known locally as the Western Pride, is a Kruger-based pride or a private nature reserve (PNR) pride. It may also be mixed. Many people are naturally outraged that one of South Africa’s natural resources and major tourist attractions is being commercially exploited by trophy hunters.

Further, if Skye was the hunted lion, the cubs and young males he sired will be killed by a new lion that takes over the pride, disrupting the pride’s social structure, so the consequences of the hunt may be much worse than expected. Already one of the three lion cubs has been killed by lions from another pride.


People are also upset that some PNRs adjoining Kruger allow trophy hunting. Others, such as Ingwelala, do not. The UNESCO-declared KNP-to-Canyons Biosphere on which many of these PNRs are situated is a global and national heritage site. When the fences are down, animals can belong in one moment to KNP and then, by crossing an invisible line where the fences used to be, suddenly be privately owned.

Conservationists are rightly saying that hunting should not be allowed in PNRs that are buffer zones to KNP where fences are down, as the identity and ownership of animals hunted in these PNRs cannot be established.

The debate for and against hunting is reaching a new peak, with respected conservationists like Ian Michler being branded as anything from “not caring about conservation” to “trying to make everyone a vegan”.The conservationists, on the other hand, have demanded a review of hunting licence practices by the authorities, specific information regarding this particular hunt, and have engaged lawyers to fight for the rights of wild animals.

With good reason.

Lion populations have decreased in Africa by 90 percent in the last 100 years, with only around 20 000 left. First it was rhino poaching (South Africa loses more than 1000 a year), then lion bones to replace dwindling supplies of tiger bones for trade in the Far East, and now elephants are being poached increasingly regularly.

A Chatham House report says illegal wildlife trade is rising at an “alarming rate”, and has more than doubled in the last decade, with the crime threatening the stability and security of societies and economic life at every point along the chain.

The illegal wildlife trade is the fourth largest globally after narcotics, counterfeiting, and human trafficking, and impacts far beyond the “mere” killing of wild animals.

Poaching of endangered species is estimated to be worth more than US$8 billion to US$10 billion a year (excluding fisheries and timber). The wider category of the illegal wildlife trade (such as birds, reptiles and other animals such as pangolin) is estimated at a staggering US$19 billion per year.

The legal wildlife trade is estimated at a further US$300 billion a year, with annual hunting revenues in sub-Saharan Africa estimated at around US$200 million.

Both legal and illegal trade devastates biodiversity, fuels civil conflict, threatens national stability and provokes economic losses worldwide. Indirect costs are not known.

Returning to the hunt, following Pinnock’s article, Umbabat put out a media statement purporting to “put the record straight”, claiming its own members manage the 18 000 ha “according to good conservation practices as outlined and agreed upon by all the reserves and relevant provincial authorities, such as the MTPA (Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency).”

Very few (and none from Umbabat) of these documents or policies are in the public domain, to my knowledge. Neither are the Management Plan or the minutes or policies of the Management Authority of the Umbabat nature reserve (UPNR), which also claims that 65 percent of their budget goes to anti-poaching, which protects wildlife (but also their hunters and their potential prey).

UPNR claims 30 percent of its income from hunting, and “none of the funds from hunting goes to any individual. There is no personal gain from hunting for UPNR members.” Why then do the landowners support hunting if there is nothing in it for them?

With regard to the laws governing hunting, the Greater Kruger Hunting Protocol cannot be found during a quick search of the internet. Is it public? The UPNR claims that before a hunting permit is issued, “a rigorous process of assessment and adjudication takes place. Animals are counted, studies are compiled, experts are consulted, reserve management practices are scrutinised and assessed, needs are considered whether appropriate, and only thereafter, will the authorities consider issuing a permit to hunt” (sic). The questions of who compiles the studies, who the experts are, who monitors the management practices (UNPR has not been monitored for the past year by KNP), who assesses and scrutinises practices etc, are not explained. Are hunters themselves judge and jury?

The UNPR then accuses someone of a “leak” of a “premature document to bring discord” and to allege the UNPR was engaged in illegal hunting. They also dismiss the “luring” of a lion from KNP (although they make no mention of the baiting that occurred). While the UPNR claims the hunted lion was not Skye, they have not to date provided any evidence (photographic, examination of the skin for comparison to known photographs etc) to back up their claim. And Skye and his pride have not been seen since June 8, with the death of the one cub confirmed by a ranger.

A meeting between the UPNR and Theo van Wyk, the chair of the Nkorho Reserves (a sub-reserve), adjudicated by confirming that “legal and other requirements regarding the hunting protocol was adhered to, including principles and ethics”. Nkorho also “reviewed” the photographic evidence, and concluded that the hunted lion was not the same” (as Skye).

Well then, nothing to worry about. Just a storm in a teacup.

Except that none of this “evidence”, nor the documentation requested, has been provided. I doubt it will be, unless public pressure is brought to bear on them.

The root problem appears to be the well-trodden myth that blood-lusting hunters always resort to: hunting pays for conservation and is sustainable. Evidence shows that hunting pays very little to conservation. There are also never any financial documents provided to sustain their argument. If they opened their books and the hunting fraternity was less secretive (do they have something to hide?) then perhaps we could have an even-handed debate about it.

The business model of African Parks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Parks) successfully manages 15 protected areas in nine countries in Africa, and employs more than 1 000 rangers, using a budget of approximately US$35 million in 2016. It is headquartered in Johannesburg, and Prince Harry is president. That sounds much more sustainable than hunting for trophies.

There have been scenarios posted of how photographic safaris could outweigh hunting safaris in terms of income and sustainability. But do the landowners want to spend the cash setting up a tourist operation for longer-term benefits and income? Or is the hunting myth just a smokescreen for bloodlust? Boys with guns? Danger? Camaraderie? Male drinking sessions around the braai or in the boma? A hangover from war? The insufferable, eternal arrogance of Americans and Europeans? Another manifestation of the racist, patriarchal, archaic inheritance from apartheid days?

The jury is out. For me, I have made my decision.

Morality and personal ethics demands that I work to help save the planet from wanton human destruction. Animals don’t have guns. They can’t shoot back. They have a limited habitat, they can’t run away. They have no money. They can’t hire security.

The animals have no voices except ours. We must use them. Let us not allow silence, or worse, indifference, to destroy our country’s future income and prosperity. We must keep one of Africa’s few wildlife wonders alive and thriving.

If we don’t, our children will see the extinction of species and the destruction of our heritage. Would any hunter really want that? DM

https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...t-skye/#.Wz3-M9JKjIV

Digging for the truth about Skye
By Don Pinnock• 5 July 2018

The hunting of a lion in Umbabat Reserve alongside the Kruger National Park has been cloaked in secrecy ever since it was discovered. With the worldwide outcry at the killing of Cecil several years back, that’s hardly surprising. Here’s what we know so far.

The message arrived as a WhatsApp. It said: “I can give you the hunter’s name and phone number. Can you assure I remain anonymous? I do not want to be exposed.”

It popped up the day after I’d published a story in June 2018 about the trophy hunt of a lion in the Umbabat Reserve adjacent to the Kruger National Park. There are no fences between the park and the reserve, so it was very possible it could have been a Kruger lion.



I’d been alerted to the hunt by a concession holder in the reserve who also wanted to remain anonymous, plus a letter from the chair of one of the reserve’s concessions to board members trying to head it off (he failed).

The story had evoked damage control from the hunting fraternity, as any stories I write about hunting generally do. (It’s a rather self-protective industry) When I followed up with the reserve and the Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency (MTPA) – which licensed the hunt – they did not take my calls.

I messaged the Umbabat warden, Bryan Haverman, asking him which lion had been hunted and why – when Kruger Park had expressly forbidden a lion hunt in their quota – one had been shot. I got no reply. But he confirmed to Simon Espley of Africa Geographic that the animal had been baited.

So of course the WhatsApp message was intriguing.

Who was the hunter?

I messaged back: “Okay, anonymity assured.” The reply was more detailed than I had anticipated:

“The outfitter and professional hunter was Graham Sales, the US hunter was Jared Whitworth from Hardingsburg, Kentucky. Riaan de Lange was the MTPA official who issued the permit. The hunt was marketed to the client as a hunt where baiting was allowed.

“There never was a ‘skinny old lion’ in the area they claimed they were hunting. Had there been, he would have been run off by the dominant male.

“Unfortunately I cannot prove this to you, but the client was told they would be baiting a big Kruger Park lion. This was in communications sent (to) the client prior to the hunt. They are now all trying to cover this up, including Umbabat, hence the refusal to let anyone see the skin.”

Whoever my source was, they knew a lot about that hunt. It seemed legal, according to several journalists’ follow-up inquiries. So the problem wasn’t about a wrongdoing but about receiving information from a single source. You can’t name people without fact-checking and verifying information. But nobody except the “Deep Throat” was talking.

A bit of research turned up a Graham Sales who owns a safari hunting outfit of the same name in Mbombela and offers hunting trips in Klaserie and Timbavati private reserves which border Umbabat. Lions aren’t on its website’s inventory, but buffalo, elephants, leopards, rhinos and crocodiles are. It offers ethical hunts and “selective use of renewable resources”.

Research also turned up Whitworth Tools in Hardingsburg, Kentucky, and the Kentuckiana Chapter of Safari Club International which has a Jared Whitworth as sponsor and donor. Both he and family members were listed as members of the local hunt club.

The source included phone numbers for Sales and Whitworth. I called repeatedly but they all went to voicemail. A colleague in the US tried, but got the same result. He then had a friend in Kentucky try (in case the cell was not taking foreign calls) but still no answer. The next step was to message the named people to see whether they could throw some light on the lion hunt and offer them right of reply. I sent them both a similar message:

“Hi Graham, my name’s Don Pinnock, an environmental writer. There has been a lot of interest in the hunt of a lion in Umbabat. I have details, including that it was legal. However I’m sure you are aware that there’s quite a bit of public heat around hunting, so before publishing the details, I’d like to afford you the space to give your side of the story. So I await your comments. However if you have not got back to me before the end of this weekend, I will assume that to be a ‘no comment’, which of course is also perfectly acceptable.”

And I waited. The weekend came and went.

Was the lion Skye?

It’s not definite it was the pride male until the carcass has been checked by an independent viewer, but evidence is stacking in that direction.

Following the hunt, the Umbabat Private Nature Reserve (UPNR) put out a statement that “the hunted lion was well past his prime – as per the hunting protocol – and was not a pride lion. The hunted lion had worn down and broken teeth, a protruding spine (all signs of advanced age).”

But a WhatsApp I received from a different anonymous source arrived the same day saying the lion wasn’t an “old skinny male with broken teeth” but the well-loved Umbabat pride male named Skye. If that was so, he was younger than the permitted hunt age of six years so it would constitute a permit violation. If he was baited (as Umbabat warden Haverman confirmed to The London Times) that’s a violation in terms of the 2007 Threatened or Protected Species (TOPS) legislation.

Riaan de Lange of the MTPA denied access to the carcass, which is alleged to be at Life Form taxidermist in White River. He said it was owned by the hunter who needed to give permission. But he wouldn’t provide the hunter’s name and refused to produce the hunting permit. But an email from a hunting “insider” included the claim that he had seen the skin. Oops. Insiders only.

For journalist Adam Cruise, who went to see him, De Lange produced a photocopied image of the face of a dead lion that was clearly not Skye. But he would not hand it over for further verification and admitted that he “could show a picture of any dead lion”.

He said the hunting permit included permission to bait the lion, which is not normally allowed. But it was done, he said, to allow the hunter to make sure he and the accompanying professional hunter could identify the correct lion to shoot. Then he told Cruise:

“It’s a pity we didn’t have more pictures. If the hunter had other pictures, then there would be no excuse, but he only had this one, so one can’t blame him if he did shoot Skye.”

It sounded as though he was hedging his bets in case it turned out to be the pride male. And he would naturally be aware that the Greater Kruger Hunting Protocol requires that “reasonable steps should be taken to gain knowledge of the males with pride affiliations and their ages, thereby ensuring that pride males under the age of 6 years are not selected”. He would also be aware of the TOPS non-baiting regulation.

In the US, meanwhile, a legal team for the Center for Biological Diversity and the Humane Society for the United States fired off a letter to the head of the US Fish and Wildlife Service asking the agency to block the import of the trophy pending an independent identification of the lion carcass.

According to Ingwelala concession holder Kevin Alborough, Skye has not been seen or heard since the hunt. One of his cubs has been found dead, a sign he is not around to protect them.

“In my personal opinion,” he wrote to the Ingwelala board of directors, “until conclusively proved otherwise, it appears that on a balance of probability the lion shot was the dominant male of the Western Pride. I find this morally despicable.”

If Skye was not the hunted lion, why the secrecy? Showing a journalist the hunting permit and the carcass of a skinny old lion would make the story go away.

Deep Throat’s information was looking increasingly solid, but I really hoped he or she could find a way to get it further corroborated.

“Not in the country. Give me a few more days,” was the answer. So I waited some more.

Meanwhile an old hand in the wildlife game outlined how a “redirected” hunt could take place (no relation to this hunt intended, of course):

“The PH gets a permit to shoot a non-pride lion of the ‘right’ age. Around the fire before the hunt he mentions to his client that there’s a big pride male around, but he’s not permitted to shoot it. For the hunter, bragging rights and an honours listing with Safari Club International is very important and he wants in.

“The PH allows himself to be ‘persuaded’ to go for the pride male for a considerable, no-contract, extra fee. The PH then uses some of that to pay off any wardens or officials and they hunt the pride male at the end of the hunt so it can be whisked out the country fast. It’s an old trick.”

Maybe that happened at Umbabat, but there’s no proof of it. Just lots of secrecy.

What was the fallout from the hunt?

Kruger Park, meanwhile, seems to becoming concerned about issues surrounding the hunt. Its managing executive, Glenn Phillips, told an Umbabat concession holder that “if Umbabat does not sort out their governance issues, KNP will re-erect the fence”.

And Alborough, the chairman of non-hunting Ingwelala (a concession within Umbabat) and another member resigned from the board as the issue developed. Alborough had tried to stop the hunt taking place and was probably disgusted when it did.

John Varty, one of the key developers of the Greater Kruger concept, waded into the debate. On his website he wrote:

“This lion is a national asset. It does not belong to Umbabat. To attract the tourist, the ecotourist lodges are dependent on the ability to find iconic animals for their guests. Therefore, by allowing a hunter – who has no skin in the game – to shoot Skye or a 100lb [tusk] elephant, you have removed one of your prime tourist attractions.

“I suggest that Timbavati and Umbabat, who have fine reputations, should not engage in the murky world of money, professional hunting and the killing of iconic animals by wealthy people for fun. It will catch up with you and taint your reputation. Rather build your lodges, create jobs, uplift communities and travel the high road.”

Neither Sales nor Whitworth answered my WhatsApp message, but the double tick in the message frame indicated they had received them. If they were not involved, why no objection or attempt to rectify the claim before publication? After all, I’m not accusing them of doing anything illegal, though there may have been some permit violations that have yet to be tested.

If they were involved in the hunt, though, I can understand their reticence. The international storm over the baiting and killing of Cecil the Lion in Hwange, Zimbabwe, by Minnesota dentist Walter Palmer was a startling indication of the growing unpopularity of lion trophy hunting among the general public.

Greater Kruger is an internationally famous sanctuary for wild animals and Kruger Park is a Unesco International Man and Biosphere Reserve visited by millions of people each year. Unlike Hwange, there are a lot more people who would be concerned about its iconic lions and make their objections heard.

Personally, I couldn’t pull the trigger on a beautiful wild animal. But if ethical hunting is to continue, this is not the way to go about it. Secretive hit-and-run hunting by foreigners searching for iconic trophies is the best way to give the business a very bad name. DM

It's all moot. All the private farms, including game farms (and perhaps especially game farms) are going to be confiscated and the game will die from poaching, starvation, lack of water, and formal/informal PAC.

I say especially the game farms as this will be viewed as politically correct and does not endanger the food supply ... not to mention that anything that generates foreign currency attracts the attention of government officials.

Lion, in particular, don't do well with farming.

And poaching will be rampant in the Park once the mobs invade the buffer lands.

Have the greenies considered this outcome? Of course not.