Govt loses 76.8bn/- to corrupt foreign hunting firms, ministry officials

2008-04-25 10:17:58
By Judica Tarimo, Dodoma


The government is losing 76.8bn/- annually in the hunting sector because of collusion and corruption by foreign hunting companies and Ministry of Tourism and Natural Resources officials, Kwela MP Dr Christant Nzindakaya, told the House.

Moving a private motion, which was widely supported by several MPs on hunting sector, he said the loss is partly triggered by chronic collusion by foreign hunting firms and the ministry`s officials.

``The hunting sector is run by a few private (foreigners) as a cartel with Wildlife Division officials who have adopted command control system and benefit from the system,`` said Mzindakaya.

The motion was one of the controversial private ones lined-up for tabling yesterday by individual MPs and later on discussed by the House as part of recent reforms to shape-up the conduct and general operations of one of the three state pillars.

Kwela legislator confined his scrutiny that resulted into the 76.8bn/- loss, to 80 only out of 150 hunting blocks in the country.

He blasted the ministry for inequitable allocation of hunting blocks, giving the lions-shares to foreign-owned hunting companies at the neglect of indigenous Tanzanians.

With supportive figures, he said, 12 foreign firms were given 57 prime hunting blocks out of the total 146 blocks allocated in 2006, with each company owning
on average five.

During the period under review, 10 local companies owned only 16 hunting blocks in prime-hunting areas, with an average holding two blocks per company.

``Ministry and Wildlife officials are corrupt and selfish�they collude with foreign companies in the allocation processes of blocks. Operators and managers of the industry shun publicity and many key elements of the industry are shrouded in secrecy,`` said the MP.

The MP criticised hunting umbrella organisation, Tanzania Hunting Operators Association (TAHOA) as an exclusive association formed to protect vested interests of a minority segment of people in the industry.

``It (TAHOA) does not provide equitable forum for Tanzanians to participate fully in the sector,`` he noted.

``The Wildlife Conservation Act No. 12 of 1974,`` he added, ``does not specifically provide adequate room for community-based participation in wildlife management.``

The Act, according to the legislators, gives too much responsibility and power to the Director of Wildlife in all aspects of wildlife management.

``The wildlife Policy of 1988 is outdated and lacks a management plan. A revised draft policy submitted in January 1995 was signed by the Director of Wildlife but is
not implemented,`` said Kwela MP.

``Generally, the hunting industry is full of collusions and corruption, dominated by foreigners who earn billions of money and invest in their own, with Tanzanians and their government left with nothing,`` said the legislator.

Contributing, Mgana Msindai (Iramba-East) said the whole hunting sector has been run by a few government officials and foreign companies.

``There are some ministry and
government officials who own hunting blocks through other firms. These are some of the things that corrupted and destroyed the country`s hunting industry,`` he said.

Many hunting blocks had been allocated to foreigners, as they are given even ``open areas`` which were reserved for domestic hunting by locals, contrary to procedures
and regulations governing the sector.

``At one time I tried to raise questions on these dirty practices, but I was secretly called and licensed on the ground that the blocks I questioned were owned by
a person who had connection with the French Government. I was told that if I questioned the blocks, the Tanzania would be denied financial assistance by France�that\'s ridiculous,`` said Msindai.

``My friends, the sector is facing a big crisis�foreigners are amassing these resources. The government does not benefit from the sector�Tanzanians too don`t benefit from it,`` stressed the MP.

Prof. Raphael Mwalyosi (Ludewa, CCM) criticised the government for lack of accurate figures and statistics on trophies.

``Hunting blocks are allocated randomly. I would say the sector and allocation processes are not progressive�it`s difficult to develop the industry if I one doesn`t have specific figures and statistics of the trophies, identified the number of blocks available, and set modalities for allocation,`` said the legislator.

Aziza Ally (Special-Seats, CCM) said the ministry of tourism had failed to implement new hunting tariff presented for approval in Parliament last year by the former Minister of Tourism and Natural Resources, Prof. Jumanne Maghembe.

``The Parliament passed high fees for hunting blocks, but the ministry is charging low fees�we need detailed explanation why Parliament endorsed certain fees for hunting blocks but the ministry charges different tariffs,`` said the MP.

Ulanga-North legislator Dr Juma Ngasongwa (CCM) said local companies should be given special consideration in the allocation of hunting blocks as part of the implementation of the government economic-empowerment strategies.

``Why are we giving `open areas` to foreigners instead of locals. Our mission to economically empower Tanzanians will not work if we keep on allocating many
blocks to foreigners than locals,`` said Ngasogwa.

SOURCE: Guardian

More fingers in the pie = much higher prices...

Hunting worldwide is getting far too expensive for the average hunter. I believe I'll spend the next week or so getting my boat ship-shape and go back to fishing...burning $4.00/gallon gasoline.

Get it now cause it's not going to be more available or cheaper in the future.

Hunting worldwide has always been too expensive for the average hunter. It belongs to the well-to-do, successful and those that want it badly enough to sacrifice for it. Those on the edge are affected by increases. For those that don't have consider the costs, nothing changes. For those that can't afford to even daydream about it, nothing changes.

Are you surprised??? Iam not...

Tanzania: Hunting Deals 'Cost Nation Dear'


The Citizen (Dar es Salaam)

25 April 2008
Posted to the web 25 April 2008

Damas Kanyabwoya, Dodoma And Levina Kato
Dar es Salaam

Suspect contracts for lease of professional hunting blocks, milk the country a staggering Sh100 billion (about $80 million) annually, Parliament was told yesterday.

This paints a gloomy picture on war against grand graft in a country which with corrupt deals combine to cost the Government about $1 billion (Sh1.25 trillion) each year.


Tabling a private motion in the House on hunting contracts, Kwela legislator Dr Chrissant Mzindakaya also criticized foreign domination of the multibillion shillings industry. He claimed that from professional and tourist hunting alone denies the Government about Sh76.8 billion (about $60 million) from fees paid by hunting companies irrespective of the richness of biodiversity in the hunting blocks.

" Hunting companies that run the sub sector operate as a cartel with close involvement of Wildlife Division senior officials who benefit from the system," asserted the MP. He said foreign domination of the sector denies the country huge income that could otherwise be accrued from broad-based participation of hunting firms. "These foreign hunting companies dictate terms and at times openly threaten honest government officials who stand on their way. He cited threats directed to the current Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism," he said without elaborating on the threats.

Mr Mzindakaya further accused foreign hunting companies of refusing to play by the rules and corrupting officials in the ministry to make excessive profits at the expense of Tanzania's natural resources and biodiversity. He described the hunting firms as looters of the country's natural resources. He said the Government is not getting the foreign currency from professional hunters as it should because the hunting companies remit all funds accrued to their foreign bank accounts.

Mr Mzindakaya said 12 foreign companies own 57 prime hunting blocks with each one controlling about five compared to ten local companies that only own 16 hunting blocks in prime areas. He said inconsistent rules and regulations put by the Government at a disadvantage when dealing with the powerful hunting companies. He said all blocks are charged a fixed fee of $27,000 regardless of their biodiversity, location and infrastructure available. This is wrong because biodiversity based on number and variety of game species available in prime hunting blocks could be 10 or 20 times more valuable than open hunting blocks.

The legislator proposed that blocks in prime hunting areas like in Selous Game Reserve should cost more in terms of fees and must be allocated through open tenders. "When that happens the market value of prime blocks will be higher. He suggested that fee for hunting blocks in Selous should be $400,000 per block annually or $2 million for five years.

Mr Mzindakaya also charged that the hunting sector in Tanzania is operated in big secrecy and totally lacks transparency as no information or data is made available to determine the scale and nature of the blocks and the industry as a whole. "Hunting companies and their managers shun publicity with many vital aspects of the industry shrouded in secrecy," he said. He charged that the Tanzania Hunting Operators Association (Tahoa) is an exclusive club formed to protect vested interests of a minority segment in the hunting industry.

"To a greater extent this association does not provide a forum for Tanzanians to participate fully in the hunting industry. In its reflection, Tanzanians are third class participants in the industry and are thus pushed to the receiving end," he asserted. He advised the Government to enact a new Wildlife Act to replace the outdated Wildlife Conservation Act No.12 of 1974 that gives too much powers to the director of wildlife in all aspects of wildlife management. He added that the Wildlife Policy of 1988 is also outdated and lacks proper management plan.

The MP recently, hunting companies refused to pay the $50,000 per hunting block as proposed by the Government and approved by Parliament last year because they are very powerful than the latter State institutions.

He thus proposed in his motion that the Government revise the hunting fees according to biodiversity available in the blocks, open up the hunting sector by increasing the participation of local hunters and communities to reduce capital flight. Mr Mzindakaya also urged for the stop automatic renewal of hunting licenses and introduce international tendering for hunting blocks.


He said prior to end of current contract in 2009, the Government should ensure that it uses the opportunity to revise the fees and put strict regulations to ensure fair competition in acquiring hunting blocks. Debating the motion the MPs expressed their disappointment on how the Government has failed to protect its sovereignty against powerful individuals in the wildlife sector. "Three years ago when I said Wildlife Division should be cleaned up for its failure to supervise what goes on in the hunting blocks, I was warned that I had touched interests of very powerful people at home and abroad and that this lead to aid cancellation to Tanzania from France," Mr Mgana Msindai (Iramba East-CCM) claimed.

He said this shows that the Government is helpless in the face of some few rich and powerful people in the hunting industry. Ms Aziza Sleyum Ally (Special Seats-CCM), said after the Government proposed the $50,000 fee per block last year, some officials flew to the US where they published lower fees in a book that was had a Government seal.

"I want to know how many Gvernments do we have in this country. We have one that proposes things with Parliament approval and another that invalidates those things and come up with new decisions. Is this how we run this country? Who ordered those officials to publish lower fees," she queried.

Amazingly, the most expensive hunting in Africa is characterized as costing the host country money. Ha ha ha.

Hunting leases should be sold to the highest bidder. They should then be free to charge whatever the market will bear. Regardless of whether the outfit is local or foreign, black, white or yellow, old or young, male or female. Why can't governments, particularly African ones, get that?

Of course foreign companies are going to own the majority of leases. They have the capital, the organizational and marketing skills, and after all, the friggin clients are foreign, are they not?? How many locals are willing to pay $50K for a safari?

These "empowerment" deals are just a crock, they are merely a way to legislate bribery. "Here, cut my cousin into your profits if you want the lease."

Unfortunately, we as outsiders are powerless to do anything about this. Unless we just stay away...then let's see how much it "costs" them to impose their ideological schemes.

Maybe they should raise their fees again????
I'm afraid if the Minister's don't do something fast their heads will explode @&^%$$%^& That being said, the Minister of Pork Rinds should call the Minister of Toilet Paper and get with the Minister of Insect Affairs and call a meeting of the Ministers of Non-Sense. I'm sure they can sort it all out~
LDK

I think in Tanzania the people making money are those who are politically connected, lease the areas from the government for very little money, then sub-lease it to others at rediculous mark up.

If they had the same arrangements as they had in Zimbabwe - the lease holder is the one hunting the concession, and Zimbabwe lease prices were much higher than Tanzania. And their hunt prices were much lower.

But, there was no hanky panky going on there.

It won't be long now.. Within two years you will have to be a Tanzanian Resident to be a PH or to rent a concession. I would agree. Stakeholders should be legal residents, not tourists.

That may be a good thing for Tanzania. An inconvenience to hunters.

Same old same old.

So what will be different come the revolution?

Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

At least insofar as The Who used to say, anyway, and inasmuch as I agree, which is completely.