They say "International concern is growing around South African game industry insiders who are dabbling in illicit rhino horn and lion bone trade"

And again as  David Newton of the wildlife trade monitoring network TRAFFIC was quoted in IOL in 2010, regarding the existing trade in lion bones from within the private game industry:

He remarked that a “limited trade in lion bones” was occurring, and added that captive lion breeders could exploit the situation and “create a new market”.

This blog is worth a read......

And remember that there are as few lions on the whole African continent as there are rhinos in South Africa alone.

We are delighted to announce that, under the aegis of the German Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, Uwe is holding a wonderful Serengeti Photo-Exhibition at the famous Zoological Research Museum Alxander Koenig in Bonn, Germany  between the 30th May and the 15th July.

Entitled "Serengeti- A Wonder of Evolution", the Museum presents more than 60 of his pictures and collages in prints ranging from 24-32 inches up to 40-120 inches on original ©Canson Museums-Canvas.

Click here for further information on this must see Exhibition.

In the episode, he discusses  the increased demand for lion bones and the worrying parallel between rhino poaching and trade in lion bones...

Click on this link to listen in.....

In the episode, we discuss our recent landmark conference on the conservation needs and status of African lions which was held in Johannesburg on the 29th and 30th March.

Click on this link to listen in.....

 We have now joined JustTextGiving by Vodafone!

An easy way to donate to LionAid is by sending a quick text from your mobile phone - nothing could be simpler!

Just text LION16 followed by the amount (£1, £2, £3, £4, £5 or £10) to 70070 and we will receive your valuable donation. it's as simple as that.

Your support WILL make a difference by helping to fund our work to conserve the remaining lion populations.

Click here to see what we are doing TODAY to save lions.

Thank you for your support!

On Sunday May 13th please go along and support the Anglian Five-A-Side Football Tournament he has organised. Click here for all the details.

On Sunday June 24th, John will be running in the Torbay Half Marathon. Please sponsor him as he runs this wonderful race to raise money for LionAid. Click here for all the details.

The Management and Scientific Authorities of seven African lion range States attended as follows:
Cameroon, Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Nigeria and Senegal.

We now  very much look forward to working with all these African lion range States to initiate regional and pan-African lion conservation measures to halt current catastrophic population declines in this iconic species.

We would like to thank Defra and the UK Government for granting us the funds without preconditions  to hold this conference.

LionAid has been asked develop National Lion Conservation Plans with all these lion range States. This places us in the responsible position of coordinating and facilitating overall lion conservation and management programmes, and we will soon proceed to responsibly address this remit.

                                                              ACTION PLANS

1. All lion range States that have not developed their National Lion Action Plans for lion conservation and management in a structured and coordinated way, to urgently do so by April 2013. Such coordination of the Action Plans to be undertaken and facilitated by LionAid.
2. The lion range States that practise consumptive utilisation of lions (e.g. trophy hunting) to ensure adherence to best practices of sustainability and transparency, and shall regularly monitor utilized populations.
3. The lion range States to propose to the IUCN to review the listing of the African lion with a view to upgrading the species to “endangered” status. LionAid to facilitate.
4. The lion range States to request UNESCO to consider the lion as a World Heritage Species, once the criteria and process has been established and a proposal for listing has been submitted.  LionAid to facilitate and inform.
5.  The lion range States to share intelligence with regional law enforcement agencies on illegal trade, e.g Lusaka Agreement Task Force (LATF) and INTERPOL.
6. The lion range States to establish a database along the lines of the Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) programme of the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) for the illegal killing of lions, and keep accurate records on legal killing of lions associated with problem animal control measures and trophy hunting. Such records about legal killing to be made available by approval from and on request to the individual lion range State.
7. The lion range States to develop standardized data collection methods for lion population monitoring; currently it is difficult to accurately compare among methods utilized by the range States and results obtained thereby.
8. The lion range States to continue to engage in discussion regarding the correct and appropriate listing of lions on CITES (whether Appendix 1 or 2) as new information regarding the impact of trade becomes available.
9. The lion range States that have not yet done so are urgently encouraged to provide input into the ongoing CITES Lion Periodic Review process being led by the CITES’ Animals Committee representatives for African region.
10. Cognizant of current trans-boundary conservation plans, the lion range States to collaborate fully on trans-boundary lion conservation programmes/initiatives for shared lion populations, and to incorporate trans-boundary lion population needs in their National Lion Action Plans.
11. The lion range States to regularly assess progress of current lion research programmes within their countries as to their relevance to national needs and priorities, and to engage in a tender process to invite specific research on lions within subjects identified by the range states. 
12. The lion range States to encourage data collection in research areas of feline disease and genetics in addition to the ecological and human/livestock conflict dimensions of lion conservation.
13. The lion range States and LionAid to pursue urgent mobilisation of resources to achieve the above resolutions. The lion range States to identify national and trans-boundary programmes according to their identified priorities for funding submissions facilitated by LionAid.
14.  The lion range States to engage with neighbouring range States/regional range States to constructively collaborate on best ways forward to ensure the long-term survival of lions. Consideration to be made by range States to hold a series of small scale conferences among neighbouring range States to develop and implement regionally cohesive and regionally appropriate lion conservation strategies facilitated by LionAid.
15.  The lion range States to call for regular pan-African conferences to report progress on the above Action Plans, identification of new needs based on emerging data, and to determine overall continental best ways forward to ensure the conservation and management of the species. The next of these to be held in April 2013.
    

This article again highlights the concerns about the emerging lion bone trade facilitated by CITES permits issued by South African authorities,  a supply made available by South African captive lion breeders, and the growth of legal but nevertheless  “pseudo trophy hunts” engaged in by Laos nationals.  It follows on from Pieter’s article “A worrying parallel between rhino poaching and trade in lion bones?"  (10th March).

Even without the ongoing catastrophic declines in African lion populations, this new trend is indeed a very worrying development – it could lead to specific poaching of lions for their bones. In 2008, it was estimated that a kilo of lion bones was worth about $10. Two years later in 2010, one kilo was now worth $300, an increase of 2,900%. What are they worth now? Certainly enough to support the trophy fees and associated costs of pseudo trophy hunters from Laos, who bagged at least 54 lion trophies in 2010? And to profit Laotian companies that received 250 kg of lion bones provided by South Africa in 2009? So is a kilo of bones now worth maybe $500? $700? $1000? Nobody yet knows, but a lion probably has about 30kg of bones, so possibly worth $30,000? Certainly enough to stimulate an interest in among the poaching syndicates so effectively working to smuggle elephant ivory and rhino horns from Africa to Asian paymasters.

I’m tempted to say that while South Africa has prided itself on wonderful conservation initiatives that have placed wild species in private hands, many aspects have gone wrong. So I will. South Africa needs to realize that their actions in terms of exports of lion, rhino, and elephant body parts echo negatively across other African range states, and need urgent revision. It might be commerce, but is not conservation.

As stated at the beginning of the Conference, all range states need to urgently and cooperatively decide the future of lion populations that they often share. The African lion is a common heritage, and individual range states were well aware of their responsibility to jointly participate in conservation programmes.

We have today sent the draft conference resolutions decided by the range state delegates for their final comments and input. Once confirmed, these resolutions will be made public, but we can already say that the range states decided on significant ways forward to ensure the survival of the species. The Conference was seen by all as a starting point, and LionAid will facilitate all further discussions and plans to go forward. We will organize another meeting one year from now, and the range state delegates will expect significant progress on a number of issues.

This Conference will show the world that African lion range states are greatly concerned about the significant declines of this species. Informed conservation plans are necessary to ensure the survival of the species, and to reverse the decline in numbers wherever possible. This will require both internal and external funding and LionAid firmly believes that such funding can be identified and applied according to the priorities identified by the range states. It is the range states themselves who will decide on how best to conserve the species within and across their borders, and the Conference delegates were united in seeking all best and relevant information to inform their ways forward.

The Conference exceeded our expectations, not least in terms of the synergy among the range states attending. From Senegal in the west to Ethiopia in the northeast, all came together for a united and common purpose – ensure the survival of lions in Africa!

Picture credit: Chris Harvey

Click here to DONATE

We have structured the conference agenda to allow the maximum of free discussion among delegates. African lion conservation is the responsibility of African lion range states, and must be addressed with African solutions.

We are extremely grateful to all the represented nations for sending their delegates. It will be a Conference that will set lion conservation priorities for years to come, and we also thank the UK Government for making funds available to contribute to this important meeting.

Stay tuned for updates!

Want to contribute? Click here

Picture credit – Jean Huet

We have invited a diversity of African lion range states (Senegal, Cameroon, Nigeria, Namibia, South Africa, Botswana, Mozambique, Zambia, Tanzania, Kenya, Ethiopia, Uganda, Zimbabwe and Malawi) and the response to date has been wonderful. Eleven countries already confirmed attendance. The conference will be held in Johannesburg on March 29th and 30th, and in addition to the range states we expect a number of NGOs to attend.

We aim not to have this conference to be a talk shop but rather a consequential and immediately implementable contribution to conservation of African lions. We will therefore invite representation from country Management Authorities (usually Ministries) and Scientific Authorities (Wildlife Departments and Universities). This will ensure relevance to national lion conservation priorities.

What is most important is that African range states adopt the relevant measures to conserve an iconic species with local solutions.

Read the full Press Release here

Picture Credit: Chris Harvey

“Let us note the names of those decision makers responsible …  for allowing sentiment to cloud their professionalism and let us record these in the anals [sic] of history for when this occurs, they should be held accountable and be remembered for being responsible for the total decline of wild lion populations.

Allow me to start:
Dereck and Beverly Joubert (and their related ORGS and NGOs)
Lion Aid [LionAid]
IFAW [International Foundation for Animal Welfare]
Born Free Foundation
Several corrupt African Wildlife Departments
USFW [the US Fish and Wildlife Service]

Therefore, I now suggest every hunter to go as often as they can and hunt as many lion as they legally can. Let's shoot them all and be done with it.”

While we provisionally accept this silver medal, we will soon provide news that might place us in future contention for gold.

Meanwhile, it was a tough journey to achieve the silver medal. We would like to thank all our supporters, friends, parents, children and dogs for their support towards this achievement. We would also like to thank all those who voted for us among the hunters, their supporters, friends, children, parents etc. Please let us know when and where the award ceremony will take place?

We are humbled by this award, as we realize that it was achieved only by dedicated, careful, and scientific dismissal of all specious arguments by the hunting community trying to prove that hunting is conservation. We dismissed their economic arguments, their community benefit arguments, their financial benefit to range state government arguments, and their saving the species arguments. We so raised their hackles about their nonsensical rhetoric they awarded us this medal. We are honoured to be listed in the anals [sic] of the accuratereloading forum.

To the winner of the gold medal, Dereck Joubert, we say this. Well done, well deserved. But you will not be wearing that medal for long.

Picture credit: http://binged.it/ADfdT5

LionAid is delighted to be able to report that the Scientific Review Group (SRG) of the EC Wildlife Trade Regulations has considered the issue, and recently formed a “negative opinion” on all wild lion specimens originating from South Africa. This means there is an import ban in place as of 10th November 2011 into the European Union for all lion trophies from South Africa designated as “wild”.

The Scientific Review Group judged that “wild” lion trophies (and all other lion products designated by CITES export permits as coming from a “wild” source) were being mislabelled. In other words, the SRG formed the same opinion as LionAid – there was either a “leakage” of captive bred lions into the “wild” category, and/or that such “wild” lion trophies might have originated from neighbouring countries (Zimbabwe, Mozambique) and declared in South Africa.

Such mislabelling had been going on for many years, and we commend the SRG for this decision. It will not prevent “captive bred” trophies from being imported into the EU, but stands as a clear message to the exporting authorities and hunting operators in South Africa that mislabelling will no longer be tolerated by the European Union.

We have also been assured in a meeting with the EU Directorate General for the Environment on January 11th that they will place all African lion imports into the EU on SRG agendas this year, with special emphasis on western and central African lion populations.

The decision by the SRG on South African wild lions indicates once again the value of careful consideration of scientific data to guide informed opinions and policies. The SRG can revise the negative opinion in the future, but in the mean time a clear message has been sent to South Africa – amend your reporting to end mislabelling and fraudulent declarations, or suffer an import ban to the European Union. We would strongly advise the USA Management Authority (the US Fish and Wildlife Service) to take note of the SRG decision and follow suit. After all, close to 70% of “wild” South African lion trophies are imported into the USA…

First, these are rented animals, to begin with a dicey practice for a zoo to get involved in. Would they rent a camel, an elephant, a polar bear? Not on your life, but a panda is different somehow. The rental fee has not quite been disclosed by the Zoo, as this would perhaps be crass. But journalists have mentioned $1 million per year, and we are not sure if this is for both “Sweetie” and “Sunshine” as the pandas are known, or whether this is $1 million for each. The Edinburgh Zoo last year lost £1.5m, saw its visitor numbers slump 15% to just under 550,000 and had to be rescued with a £2m bank loan. This year it has seen directors suspended for alleged misconduct. One was exonerated and reinstated, one was dismissed and its previous chief executive left, according to the Guardian newspaper and the Born Free website.  They seem a bit like Lehman Brothers in terms of their investment practices.

Second, where does all the rent-a-panda money go? China says it is for panda conservation, but I have my doubts. There are some wild pandas in China. Little is being done to provide additional protected habitat for them. There are many pandas in captive breeding programmes, but pandas being pandas, once in captivity they seem to shut down reproductively and require a number of assisted breeding interventions to make baby pandas. Big time assisted breeding, as in artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization, etc. But what is the future of those “assisted” pandas? More rent-a pandas? The only reintroduction attempt into the wild was a disaster, and the single panda involved died. This was kept quiet by the Chinese authorities for many months… In addition, is the public now convinced that Edinburgh Zoo will “save” pandas, and that therefore the dire situation of wild pandas is now being adequately addressed? Conservation via confuscation? 

Third, what will Edinburgh do with these rent-a-pandas? Breed them? Good luck there, and for what purpose? To have more captive pandas that cannot be returned to the wild and thus contribute zip to real panda conservation? And who owns the offspring under their contract with China? Has Edinburgh Zoo read the fine print on the contract? Born Free provides this analysis from other zoos with rent-a-pandas:

" “We are not aware of any revenue coming in associated with our pandas. It is a common misconception about keeping pandas.” Christina Simmons San Diego Zoo. The Daily Record January 30th 2011

"The four zoos (Washington, Atlanta, Memphis and San Diego) collectively spent $33 million more on pandas from 2000 to 2003 than they received in revenue from exhibiting them.” Washington Post August 2005

"It was astonishing too see, in most cases, how much more it was costing the institutions than that [the panda exhibits] were bringing in.” David Towne. Giant Panda Foundation. National Geographic News 2006

"The loan agreements, most spanning ten years, have become a financial headache for the Nation’s [Washington] zoo” National Geographic News March 2006"

 Yet Edinburgh went ahead.  Already in debt, they rented pandas. We do hope it will bring positive finances to the zoo so they can pay back their bank loan. But it has to be seen for what it is – a costly gimmick. No conservation value, no benefit to wild pandas or other species. Zoos have an educational and conservation responsibility to the wild relatives of the species they display. Renting pandas is not the way forward. Who will pay the rental fees two or three years from now when the public droves and their gate fees have diminished? Does Edinburgh have a long-range plan? If so, let’s hear from them.

Picture Credit: BBC Nature

An online search of the CITES Trade Database allows one to make distinctions among the different categories of “trophies”. We pointed out that it was absolutely impossible for South Africa to export an average of 265 “wild” trophy lions on average per year over that period, as there were simply not enough wild lions in the country to support this offtake. We suggested widespread substitution of captive bred lions made up the numbers. Mr Hargreaves pointed us to a statement by Dr Dewald Keet, Chief State Veterinarian of Kruger Park, to suggest only about 15, yes, fifteen wild lions could be available to be shot as trophies per year in South Africa. A slight difference from 265 as reported by CITES.

So we will stay with our original assessment that CITES authorities in South Africa have many captive bred lions in the mix of “wild” trophies. It should be noted that false labelling is punishable by law under the Lacey Act of the United States and also under the European Union Wildlife Trade Regulations. Whether that applies to a lion trophy imported as “wild” versus “captive bred” remains to be tested in court, but the regulatory statutes are in place, and the Lacey Act authorises legal repercussions for both the importer (client) and the hunting operator. 

Mr Hargreaves also pointed out that there was a major discrepancy when the CITES records were searched for “all categories” versus the cumulative and specific categories of “wild” and “captive bred/ranched”. And he is right. Suddenly 997 lion trophy exports from South Africa go missing. We would expect a few errors here and there in the CITES records, but 997 trophies from 2000-2009 is a bit on the wild side. How can this have happened? Mr Hargreaves suggests double labelling, and he might be right.

Nevertheless, two matters are clear, and both have to do with CITES urgently getting their house in order to investigate what is happening with issuing authorities in South Africa. First, 15 available wild lions per year cannot supply 265 trophies exported under the “wild” category. Second, a discrepancy of 997 lion trophies in their records cannot be simply attributable to clerical error.

CITES (officially termed the Convention in International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora) was established in 1973. 175 member states are now signed up to regulate international trade in wildlife species to ensure that such trade does not compromise the species’ conservation status. CITES is maintained by contributions from signatory Governments to the Convention, meaning our taxes. If CITES is responsible to us, we should reasonably expect better reporting and greater transparency?  

That estimate was based on the “opinions of experts” attending the conference. Perhaps “wild guesses” would have been more a more appropriate descriptor. New information has become available in 2010 and 2011, and these results paint a completely different and much more depressing picture, especially as they are based on some actual surveys. 

Western African lions are genetically distinctive from other lions in Africa. Think Bengal Tigers and Siberian Tigers. But unlike those tigers, the western African lions have not been given much (any?) conservation attention. The IUCN has only unofficially recognized them as “regionally endangered”, and not formally afforded them the Red List status they now sadly deserve.

And these lions, believe it or not, are still trophy hunted – from 2000 to 2009, a total of 263 male lion trophies was exported from Cameroon, Burkina Faso and Benin. Would people sit quietly by if Siberian Tigers were trophy hunted? So why this strange complacency for western African lions?

Have a look at the table below that summarizes the status “accepted” by the IUCN in 2006, the more realistic current estimates, and the LionAid analysis. And realize that continued complacency will kill this unique cat.  

IUCN 2006 western African lion population numbers and current updates

Analysis: The IUCN conference on western and central African lions, published 2006, rather than performing a country-by-country analysis of populations, designated “Lion Conservation Units” (LCUs) – areas of lion conservation importance. LCUs sometimes amalgamated relatively isolated lion populations (but occurring in some measure of proximity) and those that might be shared across national borders. In virtually all cases, estimates were not based on actual counts, but rather on “guesstimates” from delegates. More recently, better information has become available (see references below) from actual field counts. For example, Henshel et al (2010) surveyed 15 LCUs as defined by the IUCN and only found evidence of lion presence in 2 LCUs (Nigeria – Yankari and Kainji Lake). Crous et al (2011) updated lion numbers in the Benoue Complex in Cameroon. Other information comes from informed sources who have significant knowledge of the areas.

This more reliable current information indicates significantly lower lion population numbers than proposed by the IUCN in 2006. While the IUCN estimates cannot be considered reliable as they were based on little more than “opinions”, so the estimated declines of between 59 and 72% must be seen as approximations and not necessarily applicable to the last five years. However, what is abundantly clear from current information is that far fewer lions exist in western Africa than previously thought, and thus that their conservation status is becoming ever more tenuous. Given that western African lions are genetically highly distinctive from eastern and southern African lions, the need for effective protection programmes becomes ever more urgent.

a Where no new information exists, the 2006 data is brought forward
1 Radek Klimek, Peter Luptak – private communication
2 Henshel et al 2010. Lion status updates from five range countries in West and Central Africa. Cat News 52.
3 Hans de Iongh – private communication
4 Croes et al, 2011. The impact of trophy hunting on lions (Panthera leo) and other large carnivores
in the Bénoué Complex, northern Cameroon. Biological Conservation 144.

Picture credit: Martin Fowkes

It contains the usual folderol, but there is a very interesting section in “Target 6: Help avert global biodiversity loss”. Under Action 17 “Reduce indirect drivers of biodiversity loss”, the communication states “… the EU will take measures…to reduce the biodiversity impacts of EU consumption patterns, particularly for resources that have negative effects on biodiversity” -17a. 

This would apply directly to the EU consumption of lion trophies, especially those from western and central Africa, where France is the major consumer. As explained before, these lions are genetically distinct from all other lions in Africa, are highly endangered, are losing populations at a great rate (locally extinct in Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana and Congo by 2010 surveys; Nigeria has 39 lions left, Cameroon, Burkina Faso, and Benin still allow trophy hunting despite greatly declining populations), and should be immediately be declared prohibited imports to the EU.

Also, the communication states “ The Commission will work with Member States and key stakeholders to provide the right market signals for biodiversity conservation, including work to reform, phase out, and eliminate harmful subsidies at both EU and Member State level, and to provide positive incentives for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use” – 17c.

This would, inter alia, hopefully provide a means of phasing out EU and UK subsidies for the Botswana beef industry that is greatly destructive of biodiversity in that country (see our blog on that matter here 

We will be bringing this matter up when we meet with the Cabinet Member of the EC Commissioner for Environment on January 11, 2012.

Photo credit: David Dugmore

Please bring this report to the attention of members of Congress, Senators, Members of Parliaments, and Members of European Parliament who represent you. It is a document that all decision makers need to see to end lion sport hunting. We need your active participation to circulate this report. Thank you.

Picture Credit : Chris Harvey

The response came from Richard Benyon (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs). Mr Benyon replied this was a matter for CITES, but acknowledged that there are areas in Africa where lion populations are of real concern. He referred back to a debate on lions in Westminster Hall (brought by Andrew Turner MP and LionAid), and mentioned that concerns expressed by Ms McCarthy’s question and the previous debate will be raised with CITES.

LionAid will continue to promote such questions in Parliament, and advise MPs on pertinent issues. Future questions will concern the endangered status of western and central African lions that are still being trophy hunted, the need to give Kenya and Namibia all assistance to ensure the current CITES periodic review of lions will take place with only peer-reviewed scientific data and is free from vested-interest lobbying, and that current abuse of lion quotas in Zimbabwe is rectified immediately.

We commend Ms McCarthy’s question, and look forward to working with her in the future to ensure full efficacy of the UK Parliament in achieving successful lion conservation programmes.

Transcript: 
11. Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab):

 What steps she is taking to curb the hunting of endangered species. [82281]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Richard Benyon):

No native endangered species can be legally hunted in England. Although we cannot intervene directly in legal hunts of endangered species allowed by foreign Governments, the UK pushes for international co-operation through the convention on international trade in endangered species—CITES—in order to ensure that any trade in endangered species is sustainable. The UK also strongly supports the International Whaling Commission’s moratorium on commercial whaling.

Kerry McCarthy:

Will the Minister therefore join me in condemning the trophy hunting of endangered and vulnerable species such as that carried out by the millionaire banker and Tory donor, Sir David Scholey, who was pictured in The Sun recently, posing by the bloody corpse of a lion under the headline “Who’s the bigger beast?”? Does the Minister condemn that?

Richard Benyon:

 We recently had a debate in Westminster Hall about lion trophies and importation to the UK. There are certain areas of Africa where lion populations give real cause for concern, and we are working through colleagues in CITES to ensure that the concerns in that debate and throughout the House are raised.

Picture credit: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3806600/Whos-the-bigger-beast.html