BY NOKUTHABA DLAMINI 

The Sustainable Use Coalition Southern Africa (SUCo-SA) has issued two strongly worded statements criticising decisions made at the CITES CoP20 conference in Uzbekistan, accusing Parties of undermining conservation success in southern Africa and ignoring evidence from range states.

In the first statement, SUCo-SA Vice Chair and the Confederation of Hunters Association of South Africa CEO Stephen Palos condemned the vote rejecting a proposal to remove the abundant southern giraffe from Appendix II. The proposal received 49 votes in favour, 48 against and 38 abstentions — including the 27-member EU bloc — falling short of the two-thirds majority required.

Palos called the outcome “yet another travesty of justice at the CITES CoP,” arguing that the decision reflects “a world dominated by an emotion before science philosophy in conservation.”

He singled out opposition from several African countries, saying:

“The most vocal objections made came from African countries with shocking records in conservation… where poaching, conflict, poverty, and desperation have decimated their wildlife, and now sell their souls to global anti-use/animal-rightist NGOs.”

Palos said the Chair “overlooked Eswatini and allowed none of the observer organisations an opportunity to speak,” forcing South Africa to call for a vote despite having “superbly presented” the proposal.

According to SUCo-SA, evidence showed that southern giraffe populations in Angola, Botswana, Eswatini, Malawi, Mozambique, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe are “overwhelmingly increasing, with only one population reported as stable, and not a single population showing decline.”

The statement said this success is the result of “decades of effective national legislation, management frameworks, investment by private and community custodians, and sustainable-use incentives.”

But SUCo-SA argues that countries with no giraffe populations or poor conservation performance are influencing decisions that harm nations managing wildlife successfully.

“Once again, CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) has managed to punish success and reward failure in conservation. And real people in southern Africa pay the price in hunger and deprivation.”

SUCo-SA: CITES Parties “killing with kindness” on rhino horn and ivory

In a second statement titled “CITES Parties Killing with Kindness at CoP20 – Rhino Horn & Ivory,” the SUCo-SA Executive criticised what it described as a predictable pattern where CITES Parties praise southern African conservation results while refusing to support related proposals.

The coalition said:

“They start by congratulating southern African range states for their ‘outstanding successes’… And then, without pause, they immediately announce that they will not support the proposal.”

The statement argued that many countries rejecting downlisting proposals come from regions where rhino or elephant populations have “collapsed or are entirely absent,” and that 47 years of trade bans and demand-reduction campaigns have failed.

“If 47 years of demand-reduction campaigns and trade bans have not saved rhino or elephants, at what point do we acknowledge that this approach is not working?” the coalition asked.

The statement questioned the positions of the EU, UK and USA, asking why they continue to “punish African conservation successes while rewarding failures” and why they “elevate the views of non-range states and discount the data, management systems, and lived realities of the countries that actually protect these species on the ground.”

According to SUCo-SA, southern African countries deserve practical support, not diplomatic praise that leads to policy obstruction.

“In the most diplomatic but patronising manner, southern African countries are told, in effect, to ‘go to hell, but enjoy the trip.’ This is what we mean when we say they are killing with kindness.”

The coalition said African states are “not asking for applause; they are asking for recognition of proven results” and the policy space to continue what works.

The statement concludes with a challenge to the global convention:

“CITES must decide whether it wants to remain a forum guided by evidence and sovereignty, or one led by political theatre and external pressure. The future of rhino and elephant conservation depends on that choice.”

BY NOKUTHABA DLAMINI 

As the world prepares for the 20th Conference of the Parties (CoP20) to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), Zimbabwe has outlined a bold and comprehensive policy agenda that shifts global discussions beyond ivory and toward broader issues of sustainable use, human rights, and community empowerment.

In an exclusive interview with VicFallsLive, Dr. Agrippa Sora, board chairman of the Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority (ZimParks), said the country’s proposals are anchored on a simple but transformative message: wildlife conservation must deliver real benefits to the people living with wildlife.

Key proposals Zimbabwe taking to CITES CoP20

1. Commercial trade in elephant leather products

Zimbabwe is pushing for approval to engage in regulated commercial trade in elephant leather products. Authorities argue that this form of value addition can bring economic gains to local communities, promote sustainable use, and reduce reliance on donor funding.

2. A formal voice for communities within CITES

Zimbabwe is advocating for the establishment of an Advisory Body or Community Forum within CITES, ensuring that the voices of rural people—who coexist with wildlife—formally shape decisions on international trade, conservation restrictions, and benefit-sharing.

This push echoes one of the founding principles of CITES, which acknowledges that “peoples and States are and should be the best protectors of their own wild fauna and flora.”

3. Recognition of human rights within conservation governance

Zimbabwe’s delegation wants CoP20 to acknowledge the human rights dimensions of conservation—particularly:

• The right to safety for communities facing human–wildlife conflict
• The right to food security
• The right to benefit from natural resources within their landscapes

For Zimbabwe, these rights are inseparable from wildlife management.

Moving beyond ivory: A broader view of sustainable use

Dr. Sora emphasized that Zimbabwe does not want the CoP20 debate to be reduced to ivory.

Zimbabwe argues that without these broader interventions, the conservation model remains unbalanced—protecting wildlife while leaving the people who live among it trapped in poverty

Youth at the centre of the conservation agenda

One of the strongest themes in Zimbabwe’s CoP20 position is youth empowerment, an area Dr. Sora said is now central to national conservation policy.

“Zimbabwe is supporting the Youth Ethnic Conservation Agenda, and we want to continue empowering young people,” Dr. Sora said.

“These are young people who travel long distances between villages and shopping centres, often unaware of wildlife incidents happening around them.”

He revealed that Zimbabwe has approved the establishment of a national chapter of the CITES Rural Youth Network, a platform designed to give young rural citizens a voice in global conservation decision-making.

Dr. Sora said young people—often traveling long distances between villages and service centres—are the first responders to wildlife encounters, yet are rarely included in policy processes.

“Their inclusion is critical for awareness, safety, and community resilience,” he said.

A rights-based approach linked to national priorities

Dr. Sora linked Zimbabwe’s CITES proposals to the country’s National Development Strategy (NDS2), which prioritises poverty eradication.

“We want to ensure that communities living within wildlife landscapes receive meaningful support and benefits from the natural resources around them,” he said.

This includes promoting value addition—for example, crafting products from elephant leather—and enabling community enterprises tied to legal wildlife products.

“We are promoting opportunities for value addition so that communities can benefit economically from the wildlife with which they coexist.”

He added that the board is committed to transitioning youth from vulnerability to empowerment, ensuring access to education, business opportunities, and long-term livelihoods.

Unlocking finance through sustainable use

Zimbabwe also plans to push for financial mechanisms—particularly the sustainable use of existing wildlife stockpiles—to support community development.

“Our aim is to secure mechanisms that allow us to reinvest in these communities, strengthening their resilience and ensuring they thrive alongside wildlife.”

Zimbabwe argues that restrictive global trade rules deprive communities of funding that could improve safety, reduce human–wildlife conflict, and support conservation programs.

Zimbabwe’s position rooted in CITES founding principles

Zimbabwe’s proposals, Dr. Sora said, are consistent with the spirit of CITES itself.

The convention’s preamble affirms:

Wild fauna and flora are an irreplaceable part of the earth’s natural systems… Peoples and States are and should be the best protectors of their own wild fauna and flora… International cooperation is essential to prevent over-exploitation…

Zimbabwe believes that empowering communities, recognizing human rights, and enabling sustainable use are simply modern applications of these foundational principles.

BY NOKUTHABA DLAMINI 

When l visited South Africa recently with the Zimbabwe Parliament and Wildlife Management Authority delegation, I was taken on a private tour of Boschpoort Predators by Hannes Wessels — President of the South African Predator Association, SUCo-SA member, and one of the industry’s most outspoken defenders. For hours, he walked us through his sanctuary, breeding areas, and off-site hunting properties, offering an unusually frank look into a sector that is often hidden behind controversy and media narratives.

“The youth are our conservationists”

We began in the sanctuary section, where Hannes explained why thousands of schoolchildren visit the property each year.

“On Tuesdays and Thursdays school groups visit us free of charge,” he said. “Our school system in South Africa has no conservation value in the syllabus anymore. The youth are our conservationists, and that’s why it’s important to bring their schools in and take them through the jobs.”

The sanctuary is one of three main sections: the public sanctuary, tiger breeding facilities in the valley, and a mountain breeding area that is closed to visitors.

“We don’t want human imprint on animals that are going into the hunting land,” he explained.

Breeding, hunting and the “Buffer” argument

Hannes spoke openly about the role of the predator-breeding industry in South Africa.

“We need to keep this industry open, because it’s a buffer for the wild populations we’ve got,” he said.

“There’s been unnecessary negativity. People see an animal in a cage and think it’s starving today because of what they see in the media.”

He argued that captive-bred lions reduce pressure on wild reserves, especially as some national parks face disease challenges.

“A specimen like that, you won’t find in our national parks anymore — Kruger is compromised due to disease in the lions. Other metapopulations are under pressure.”

He also highlighted the economic contribution:

“This industry contributes five hundred million to GDP from lion hunting alone,” he said. “If you look at the whole value chain — taxidermy, shipping agents — it makes up to a billion.”

Traditional use and sustainability

Standing beside the enclosures, he spoke about cultural practices involving animal parts:

“Animals are part of traditional medicine in our culture, and there’s nothing wrong with it as long as it’s used sustainably. You cannot change the culture of a nation, but you can teach sustainability.”

The challenge of tiger genetics and DNA markers

At the tiger section, he turned to what he called South Africa’s biggest challenge in tiger management:

“South Africa cannot export tigers to the countries of origin because we haven’t got DNA markers,” he said.

“I can say this is a Siberian, but it’s got Bengal blood — nobody can tell me. That’s the problem: there’s no regulation or DNA system to determine pure lines.”

He mentioned that one of his colleagues is working to change that.

“One of my staff members is working on that to see if we can get tiger markers in, so we can actually determine what we’ve got.”

Traceability

Hannes described a new programme they believe will reshape South Africa’s predator sector:

“We’ve got a new traceability programme, written by one of the best, especially for the lion industry,” he said.

“We can trace a lion from cradle to grave — DNA, parentage, everything.”

This, he said, is crucial for international acceptance:

“The US (United State of America) wants traceability on the product. They don’t just want to know it doesn’t threaten the species — they want enhancement findings. It must prove a benefit.”

He argued that once traceability is universal:

“CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) will open up, because then we can prove we are not busy with inbreeding.”

A database to counter inbreeding claims

He said their internal database already captures detailed lineage:

“I’ve got parentage, I’ve got DNA, I’ve got everything. We can prove we’re not breeding irresponsibly.”

But he added that government itself lacks accurate numbers:

“If you ask the department how many one-year-old male lions we have in captivity, they battle to tell us.”

The new programme aims to force uniform reporting across the industry.

Re-wilding and new conservation fund

Hannes revealed a new initiative:

“Every lion that will be hunted in the future will contribute to a conservation fund,” he said.

“That fund is busy with projects like re-wilding.”

He insisted re-wilding can work:

“They say you cannot re-wild a lion — it’s like teaching a house cat to hunt. We re-wilded lions in 2016, and it’s working.”

Breeding success and natural mortality

He explained that captive-breeding success mirrors natural patterns:

“The success rate is usually four cubs, but there’s a 25% loss. Four will be born, you’ll raise three — one is always lost.”

In nature, he said, mortality is even more brutal due to pride takeovers.

“A new male kills all the cubs because he wants his own blood. That’s why it’s almost impossible for a father to mate with his daughter in the wild.”

Some online images showing thin lions mislead the public, he argued:

“Most of those pictures are lions growing old. They’re not sick — they just go old and starve naturally once they’re chased out.”

The 1984 Smith study: “Putting facts ahead”

Hannes cited the work of Dr Smith, who sedated a number lions in Kruger in 1984 to establish physical averages.

“Smith claims a big lion male should be 1.05 metres at the shoulder,” he said, standing beside one of his large males.

“This one is 1.32 — higher than a normal lion male. That’s the genetics we’re working with.”

He emphasised that quality genetics drive higher industry prices.

Industry scrutiny and advocacy

Hannes believes misinformation is one of the industry’s greatest challenges.

“We are confronted with opinions. We’ve got the science, we’ve got the proof. NGOs are sponsoring opinions and we haven’t got the funding to put the facts out.”

He credited sector associations

“If it wasn’t for Peter, Stephen, and especially Richard — attending meetings, fighting for us — we would have lost this industry a long time ago.”

He dismissed political threats to shut predator farming:

“The wish of the government to close the industry is the same as my wish to win the lottery — it will never happen.”

Inside the facility: Slaughterhouse, hospital, and daily Realities

At one point we passed the onsite veterinary building.

“That’s our hospital where we treat all our animals,” he said. “It’s also the slaughterhouse for carcasses — nothing is wasted.”

He explained they had just processed a horse that had died that morning following an attack with a wildebeest.

Gabi and the nocturnal predators

The tour almost ended with Gabi, a six-year-old predator kept in the sanctuary.

“Normally nocturnal,” Hannes said, “but she’s quite big, and she was hand-raised before being released on the property.”

A controversial but transparent vision

My tour with Hannes revealed a man deeply committed to a model that blends conservation, utilisation, and economic sustainability — a model many organisations and countries intensely debate. He insists that with science, genetics, traceability, and strict record-keeping, the predator-breeding industry can both protect wild populations and support livelihoods.