Minister supports proposal to curb SA’s captive lion industry

South Africa has diverse cultures, remarkable geological wealth, and exceptional biodiversity — but also the world's largest population of captive lions which could cost the nation its reputation as a “premium wildlife destination”.

That's the view of a ministerial task team on “voluntary exit options and pathways from the captive lion industry” in a report presented by forestry, fisheries and environment minister Barbara Creecy on Wednesday.

“South Africa is a country with diverse cultures, remarkable geological wealth, and exceptional biodiversity, much of which is unique and with high levels of endemism,” said Creecy.

Task team

Creecy's comment aligns with section 24 of the constitution which says everyone has the right to an environment which is not harmful to their health or wellbeing, and to have the environment protected for the benefit of present and future generations. 

In a parliamentary briefing Creecy introduced the task team, chaired by Kamalasen Chetty, and including Obeid Katumba, Dr Louise de Waal, Carla van der Vyfer, Dr Christine Steyrer, advocate Justice Mnisi and Dr Kelly Marnewick.

“This exit strategy should consider all possible options prevailing within the captive lion industry,” she said.

“Cabinet has endorsed all of these recommendations,” said Creecy, thanking the task team for their “stellar work” on recommendations addressing the “difficult issues” in the captive lion industry.

Chetty raised a “number of concerns”, including the ethics of animal wellbeing, regulating the industry, and its effect on international and domestic communities.

The export of trophies to the US, the increase in foot and mouth disease which necessitates funding for medical care, and the cost of food, were the onus of facility owners who did not necessarily have the means to cover them. 

South Africa being the country with the largest population of captive lions, and a history as an exporter of lion bones, contributes to it potentially losing its designation as “premium wildlife destination”, warned Chetty.

Social awareness

“Globally, there's an increase in social awareness and the rejection of the captive lion industry,” he added, which further contributes to the pressure of ending the industry. 

Industry associations advocated for maintaining the status quo and suggested stricter government enforcement, with Chetty saying it was a nationwide issue with provinces having a “wide range and diversity of policies” which made enforcement difficult.

“In general,” said Chetty, “there's been a preference — from those who have indicated that they want to exit — for a 'phase-out' option which will give them the ability to continue to raise some revenue and transition to a more sustainable business.”

Phase-out option

The 'phase-out' option includes the rehoming of lions to safe havens. 

Two mandatory prerequisites for a voluntary exit have been established by the task team, emphasising the lions' physical wellbeing and that of population control: “That you conduct health assessments of lions; that those lions who are compromised should be euthanised humanely, as advised by a professional vet. 

“The task team believes that the best [option of ensuring population control] would be through surgical sterilisation. 

“We have a developed a comprehensive set of protocols and guidelines to guide the process; this includes a protocol for euthanasia, a protocol for the disposal of carcasses, and a protocol for population control.”

The phase 1 pathway — which remains the “preferred method” — is that of sterilisation and surrendering lions to safe havens (the latter which he described as “the most viable exit in the industry”).

“The regulatory environment for an outright ban does not yet exist. In the same cabinet meeting where we approved the policy position we also approved a biodiversity bill which is going to be put out for public comment. That bill enables the minister to outlaw certain practices, but at the moment there isn't a regulatory environment that allows him to do that. Our view is that, given the parliamentary process that took place in the previous term where the report was adopted by all parties which is something that is unusual, that the practice should be stopped. 

“We feel that we can't do nothing. We are also mindful of the fact that there was — and still is — a legal enterprise and we want to find ways to enable those entrepreneurs to exit over a period of time. 

“Government is not going to finance this process, other than as a facilitator. The current fiscal situation does not permit that, therefore there have been other approaches, which include talking to donors to assist with the incentivisation.”

Asked how long the exit would take, Creecy said “the question of long-term exit relates to the question of the process of party votes. There would be a 60-day comment period; the comments would then be factored into the legislation and then the legislation introduced into the National Assembly.From the National Assembly it would need to go to the national council. That falls under the legislative arm of government, and we would not have direct control.

“I suppose, from my experience, one might be looking at somewhere between 18 months to two years to pass legislation and that, of course, assumes that there's no legal challenge”.