Chairperson, hon Minister, Deputy Minister, and members, our esteemed environmental sector family, ladies and gentlemen, may I extend to all present, on behalf of the portfolio committee, a warm welcome to this 2013 annual debate of the Budget Vote of the Department of Water and Environmental Affairs. I rise on this occasion on behalf of the ANC - and hopefully the portfolio committee - in unconditional support of this 2013-14 Budget Vote allocation to the department.
As I said in the same debate last year, and I quote:
The department is mainly a policy-formulating department on matters environmental and, therefore, is comparatively small and well- functioning. The department's finances and financial management systems are in good health. For years now, the annual financial statements have been unqualified, with problem areas being insignificant and easily dealt with. Therefore, there is little to be gained by debating and belabouring the obvious.
I, without hesitation and unconditionally, repeat and again support this prognosis for this year. The portfolio committee's comments on this year's Budget Vote are contained in its report to be tabled in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, ATC.
I will spend the rest of my address on the scourge of rhino poaching, which has gripped our African continent with a vengeance and threatens to decimate all the wonderful rhino conservation successes South Africa and Namibia have had with the bringing of the African Rhino from the brink of extinction, in the last century, only to witness their possible demise in this century. I start by laying out the relevant facts and figures.
The majority of Africa's black and white rhinos, 98,3% in fact, continue to be conserved by four African range states: South Africa, Namibia, Kenya and Zimbabwe. Today, of the 25 460 African rhinos alive, 5 055 are black rhinos and 20 405 are white rhinos. Conserving 83% of Africa's rhinos and 75% of wild rhinos in the world makes South Africa the premier rhino range state globally, with 18 910 white rhinos and 2 044 black rhinos. One of the most perturbing statistics that I came upon is that in 1960 there were 100 000 black rhinos in Africa, excluding South Africa. Today, there are a paltry 3 150 still existing in the rest of Africa.
From 2006 through February 2012, a minimum of 2 387 rhino were reportedly poached in 11 of the 12 rhino range states in Africa - only Uganda had no poaching incidents. Of this number of poached rhino during this period, 1 460 occurred in South Africa, 362 in Zimbabwe, 90 in Kenya, and 67 in Mozambique, with other African range states showing small losses. Of the number poached in South Africa, it can be seen that the basic pattern has remained the same since 2007, namely the numbers poached are increasing rapidly each year, with 36 in 2006, 13 in 2007, 83 in 2008, 122 in 2009, 333 in 2010, 448 in 2011, 668 in 2012, and by February this year 112 had already been killed.
Despite the high and increasing levels of poaching, both rhino species have continued to increase in the wild, with white rhino up from 17 475 in 2007 to 20 405 in 2012 and black rhino up from 4 230 in 2007 to 5 055 in 2012. But, worryingly, the continued escalation in population growth has slowed down. However, as Dr Knight has demonstrated, with a 6,9% and 5,6% average net growth of white and black rhinos respectively, and with 2,2% losses to poaching and a small percentage to pseudo-hunting, our national herd is still annually increasing, but we must remain vigilant not to allow the mortality rate to surpass natural births. South Africa remains the major white and black rhino range state, conserving 18 910, or 93,%, of white rhinos and 2 400, or 40%, of black rhinos.
Today, in South Africa, we have 205 000 km of game ranches, which amount to 16,8% of South Africa's territory and covers an area over three times as large as all the national and provincial protected conservation state areas, with 10% being occupied with rhinos. This translates into our national herd of 20 454 rhinos being conserved on over five million hectares of land consisting of some 395 private ranches and 36 state- protected areas. Therefore, in South Africa, about 24% of rhino populations are held on privately owned land, with 21% being in provincial reserves and 55% in SANParks. Astonishingly, this means that South Africa's private conservation sector owns more rhinos than the rest of Africa or the whole of Asia.
Since I have become chairperson of the portfolio committee in November 2010, I can say without fear of contradiction that no single issue in the environmental or water sectors has stirred the passions and emotions of conservationists and the public alike more than the massacre of our rhino population, on an alarming, ever-increasing scale each year since 2006. Members of the portfolio committee are daily provided with advice and information on the issue. Some of this advice and debate is simplistic, narrowly defining the issue, single-dimensional and often self-serving, depending on the interests of the sender. Some of the solutions forwarded to me vary from changing the definition of terrorism in our law to include rhino poaching, to deploying the army to guard rhinos, to shooting poachers on sight, to poisoning the horn to kill the consumers, and many others.
I likewise, without fear of contradiction, can say that no other issue in the environmental sector in the last two years has been given as much attention, thought and action by our government, our Ministry, our department, our portfolio committee and myself as chairperson, than to effectively and sustainably deal with this totally unacceptable slaughter of our rhinos. What has become crystal clear in the process is that there is no silver bullet, no single action, no single country or organisation that is, or has, the solution to this very complex problem. We simply need to consider all options and best practices, at a global level, and implement as many as seem possible. So, the first step to finding the right suite of management options is to accept that there is no single solution to this complex challenge facing the world and, particularly, South Africa. Accepting this is critical, as is accepting the fact that conservation orthodoxy of the last few decades does not present a solution, even if it runs contrary to one's conservation philosophy or one's economic orthodoxy or philosophy.
We simply need to do things differently. What we have done in the past is simply not working. So we need a suite of new management options for our rhino population, drawing from the international best practices and some new and innovative ones in the area of wildlife conservation and viable and relevant economic models, and we need to stop rehashing old and tired orthodoxies and philosophies, of both the conservation and economic variety, as they have brought us to this dangerous tipping point in the first place and are helpless in providing us with present solutions. Although the dialogue and the weighing of options has earnestly and vigorously, but maybe not always honestly, begun, we require an immediate and drastic escalation in timeframes and the finding of solutions must be escalated globally, although this should not hold South Africa back from doing whatever is possible to find solutions in the meantime.
As support for my above analysis, prognosis and possible future approach, and to contextualise the vastness and complexities of the problem at a global level, allow me to direct your attention to the Dalberg report - which was funded by the World Wildlife Fund - dealing with illicit wildlife trafficking, as follows, and I quote:
There are many different estimates of the financial value of illicit wildlife trafficking worldwide; however, reliable estimates are hard to find, mainly because the trade is illegal. Unreported and unregulated fisheries trade alone has been estimated at between US$4,2 billion and US$9,5 billion per year, the value of the illegal timber trade as much as US$7 billion per year, and the illicit wildlife trafficking, excluding fisheries and timber, as between US$7,8 billion and US$10 billion per year. Combining these numbers, illicit wildlife trafficking, including timber and fisheries, comprises the fourth largest global illegal trade after narcotics, humans and counterfeit products.
The report also contains the following views and conclusions, and I quote:
Although illicit wildlife trafficking is a crime with wide security implications and has well documented links to other forms of illicit trafficking, the financing of rebel groups, corruption and money laundering, the issue is primarily seen as an environmental issue, which puts it low on governments' agendas. Internationally, blame for the issue is passed back and forth between source and consumer countries; and there is a lack of collaboration, co-ordination and accountability between the two. Demand is driven by consumer trends but there is little market insight into the consumer habits of the emerging middle class in key demand markets such as Asia. Supply-side enforcement efforts have tended to focus on rangers in protected areas. This approach has been sporadic and underinvested, and it has often neglected improved criminal investigation, prosecution and co-ordination both nationally, for example, in the areas of trade, justice and commerce, and internationally. The current increase in poaching shows that investment in frontline protection is necessary to halt immediate extinction. Simultaneously, a systemic approach from source to the kingpins, to the consumers, needs to be implemented. It is time to change the approach to fighting illicit wildlife trafficking by creating the right incentives for all stakeholders to make the issue a priority. The WWF calls upon governments to take immediate action to recognise the threat posed by illicit wildlife trafficking to their own sovereignty and the need to treat this crime equally and in co-ordination with efforts to halt other forms of illegal trafficking, corruption and money laundering. The issue must be addressed by multiple ministries ...
... and I can add countries ...
... in a co-ordinated manner.
In South Africa, we have to some extent heeded this advice in the Dalberg report and have in the last two and a half years, in an integrated and co- ordinated manner across Ministries, provincial governments and other stakeholders, embarked on many and varied actions, programmes and activities to address this scourge. Due to time constraints, I will not deal with any of these initiatives today. Hopefully, other speakers will.
The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, Cites, which is made up of 175 countries, banned international trade in rhino horn in 1977. Since 1977, at least three to four rhino subspecies have become extinct in the wild. Of the world's five rhino species, only two, the African black and white rhino, have increased in number in the wild, while two have decreased drastically, and one remains on the brink of extinction. South Africa and Namibia, as rhino range states, stand out as success stories, whilst in almost all other range states, rhino numbers are down since 1977. While well-intentioned, this trade ban on legally selling rhino horn seems not to have saved any species or subspecies of rhino, whilst succeeding in driving the illegal selling of rhino horn underground, creating a lucrative and well-functioning, illegal, underground black market, which is a haven for organised crime, diverting vast sums of possible conservation funds into the hands of criminals.
Therefore, the portfolio committee views the existence of a lucrative, rapidly growing, underground black market illegally trading in rhino horn, as the elephant in the room, when discussing solutions to the massacre of our rhinos. In the portfolio committee's view, priority number one for the international wildlife conservation community must be to destroy or, at the very least, seriously debilitate this black market and replace it with a strictly regulated legal market mechanism. Understandably, as gleaned from the Rhino Issue Management, RIM, report overseen by Mr Mavuso Msimang, which I extensively borrow from, discussions on trade and commerce as conservation tools result in predictably heated debates. Some view the lifting of the ban on trade in rhino horn as the panacea that would end poaching and save the rhino from otherwise inevitable extinction. This view is supported by market theorists who argue that in a market where rhino horn could be traded freely, market forces would automatically drive horn prices down, obviating the need for syndicates to face risks associated with poaching. Those opposing this view argue that there is no evidence to indicate that prices could decrease and that it is more likely that demand, being legitimised, would increase and thus exacerbate the plight of the rhino.
Regardless of the position one takes, the data suggest that the banning of legal open trade in rhino horn has not resulted in reduced demand for the horn and has thus not helped the objective of saving the rhino from imminent extinction. Escalation in the slaughter of rhino is proof of this. Consumers simply do not believe that rhino horn has no medicinal value, no matter how many times we have said so. Using increasingly sophisticated means, poaching syndicates have capitalised on the Cites ban to supply what appears to be a resurgent market demand. It is therefore crucial that possibilities of legalising the trade in rhino horn, within well-defined and restricted parameters, are investigated through the development of appropriate models.
It seems abundantly obvious to me, as remarked by Dr Brian Child, that rhino horn trade has been banned for 35 years, yet rhinos are still highly threatened and on the brink of extinction, and surely it is time to devise new approaches. Legalising rhino horn trade for South Africa is likely to shift the market out of the hands of organised crime into legal channels, which must be good for rhinos and other wildlife currently moving through these illicit channels. A large and steady supply of horns is also likely to lower and stabilise prices, which also plays against the black market. Rhinos are most seriously threatened where proprietorship of them is weak or where there are insufficient funds for law enforcement in protected areas.
It is further clear to me that to effectively end, or at least contain, rhino poaching to acceptable levels requires a suite of several carefully thought-out, multipronged interventions. In the immediate term, there can be no substitute for heightened security, costly as it is, using well- trained, properly equipped, committed rangers supported by the best available technologies. Simultaneously, biological conservation measures, including range expansion, should be investigated and implemented. Finally, as long as there is demand for rhino horn, effective means of supplying it must be developed that would have the effect of saving the wild African rhino as a species. These strategies must be finalised with urgency.
I find strong support for my proposition of promoting conservation and sustainable utilisation of natural resources within our wildlife community, in our Constitution, in the various international agreements on biodiversity to which we are party, and in our national environmental legislative framework. Importantly, section 24 of the Constitution of 1996 provides that -
Everyone has the right -
(b) to have the environment protected, for the benefit of present and future generations, through reasonable legislative and other measures that -
(ii) promote conservation; and
(iii) secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while promoting justifiable economic and social development.
Our constitutional and legal framework, therefore, supports conservation through sustainable utilisation and provides a legal basis for, amongst others, trade as a tool of conservation. It is noted that Cabinet, in December 2012, agreed that the Minister should start a dialogue on the viability and desirability of lifting the Cites ban on trading in rhino horn. The Minister is urged to obtain Cabinet's endorsement for initiating the process of getting Cites approval at Cop 17, which will be held in South Africa in 2015, to lift the ban on trading in rhino horn, but to only argue for a limited and well-defined trade in rhino horn, within a market mechanism strongly regulated - possibly even between state parties - and only of rhinos that died of natural causes, or from present stockpiles, or possible dehorning, and upon compliance with very strict obligations. No animals should be killed in the process.
It would be remiss of me, as chairperson, not to end this debate by thanking all members of my portfolio committee for the integrity, humanity, diligence and intellectual vigour and honesty with which they participate in the activities of the committee, with a special acknowledgement to the leaders of the various parties in the portfolio committee for their constructive engagement and support. I owe all a debt of gratitude. Thank you. May I also pay a special tribute in Parliament to the wonderful contribution that two true South African patriots, the honourable Piet Mathebe, who is now our High Commissioner in Zambia, and the honourable Gareth Morgan, who has taken a sabbatical from political life, have made in this portfolio committee over many years. I also welcome the hon Dlomo and hon Rodgers to our portfolio committee. May your contribution be everlasting and empowering and your stay be fulfilling.
May I also pay tribute and thank the Minister, the Deputy Minister, the director-general and her department, the boards and senior management of all environment entities for the helpful, diligent, open and transparent manner in which they engage the portfolio committee and the intellectual vigour and honesty with which they do so. I thank you for listening attentively. [Applause.]