SSN's Comments on South Africa's Regulations on Threatened and ...

that in the likely event that a land owner states in an affidavit that he is uncertain of how long the
animal has been on the property and does not know if the animal was born on the property, then an
application should not be considered.
Clause 9(1)(b), (c) and (d) state that breeders and people who sell, supply, and export the animal must
provide a “written undertaking” (for breeders) or an “affidavit or other written proof” (for sellers,
suppliers, exporters, purchasers, or those who acquire) that the predator will not be bred (in the case of
breeders), “sold, supplied or exported” or “purchased or acquired” “for hunting purposes”.
Unfortunately, this does not address the final disposition of the animal, only that the purpose of the
breeding, selling, supplying, exporting, purchasing, or acquiring cannot be for hunting. This clause
should make it clear that the breeder, seller, supplier, exporter, purchaser or those who acquire live
listed large predators will be held responsible if the animal concerned is used for hunting purposes (for
example, if a listed large predator that is bred for the purpose of public display later is used for hunting,
the breeder should be held responsible as should all other people in the chain).
We recommend the addition of a new sub-clause 9(1)(e) stating that an issuing authority may not
consider an permit application for “the habituating of listed large predators to humans for any purpose
including, but not limited to, public handling or taking photographs of members of the public with
predators”.
Clause 9(2)(b) explicitly allows for the hunting of rehabilitated listed large predators, including those
that have been captive-bred, that have been living in an extensive wildlife system—which can include
being fenced in, being supplied with food, water and medical treatment—provided that the animal has
been “fending for itself in the wild” for at least two years. Wild mammals that have been kept in
captivity for any period of time, particularly those bred in captivity, are unlikely to behave like animals
that did not have that experience. The related Draft National Norms and Standards for the Regulation
of the Hunting Industry in South Africa call for hunters to exhibit ethical conduct and to provide the
animal with a “fair chance” of evading the hunter. We fail to see how hunting an animal that has been
kept or bred in captivity, and that has had a closer than normal (even benevolent) relationship, with
humans is ethical or provides a “fair chance” to escape. Furthermore, we do not see how it will be
possible for an applicant to know that an animal “has been fending for itself in the wild for at least two
years”. We strongly recommend that Clause 9(2)(b) be deleted in its entirety.
Applications affecting the rights of other persons
Clause 10(1) states that if approval of the application is likely to affect the “rights” of a “specific
person” the applicant must give notice of the application to that other person. Clarification is needed as
to the term “rights” (does this refer to legal rights?) and “specific person” (would this include a
member of the public or a non-governmental organization?). We recommend that all permit
applications be subject to notice and public comment, preferably by posting on a website.
Part 3. Consideration and decision of applications by issuing authorities
Factors to be taken into account by issuing authorities when considering permit applications
Clause 13(c)(vii) states that objections to the application should be taken into consideration. As noted
above, we recommend that all permit applications be subject to notice and public comment, preferably
by posting on a website.
6