World Lion Day: Call for urgent action as captive lion ban stalls
'This World Lion Day must be a turning point,' said the director of the animal welfare organisation of Four Paws, Fiona Miles. 'We owe it to every lion suffering in captivity to act now and not in another year or two.'
The minister confirmed last month that the department is making rapid progress toward publishing a prohibition notice that will ban the establishment of new captive lion breeding facilities in South Africa.
In April 2024, the department published a policy position. It is committed to ending the captive keeping of lions for commercial purposes and closing captive lion facilities, putting a halt to the intensive breeding of lions in controlled environments, and ending the commercial exploitation of captive and captive-bred lions.
Yet, more than a year later, implementation is lagging, and public patience is running thin. Parliamentarians and the National Council of SPCAs have also voiced strong support, citing shocking evidence of squalid conditions, starvation, disease, and neglect in captive facilities.
Thobile Zulu-Molobi, ministerial spokesperson, confirmed to Rekord on August 7 that such a notice has not been published as yet.
This decision of putting such a notice out forms part of broader efforts to phase out intensive breeding practices for commercial purposes and strengthen the country's biodiversity laws under the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act of 2004.
'This marks a turning point in our approach to wildlife conservation,' said George. 'By addressing critical animal well-being provisions in the regulations to be published in due course, we are committed to enforcing clear, effective, and legally robust measures that protect South Africa's natural heritage and address concerns raised by the public, conservation experts, and stakeholders.'
The Lion Prohibition Notice will implement a key recommendation from the Ministerial Task Team Report and is in line with the objectives of the Policy Position on the conservation and sustainable use of elephant, lion, leopard, and rhinoceros.
The notice prohibits the establishment of new captive lion facilities for commercial purposes, aligning with global conservation standards and ethical wildlife management practices.
The required 30-day consideration period has passed after the notice was tabled before the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) on June 10.
The department has completed critical administrative steps for promulgation.
Miles told Rekord they welcome George's clear stance and progress toward ending South Africa's captive lion breeding industry. 'The move to prohibit new captive lion facilities is a critical and overdue step in addressing one of the country's most harmful wildlife practices.'
She explained that with around 8 000 lions and an unknown number of tigers suffering in captivity at any given time, there is no time to waste. 'We strongly support the publishing of the Lion Prohibition Notice as a starting point for real, enforceable change.'
To Miles, the notice is, however, still a far cry from enacting a full prohibition on the commercial breeding and keeping of captive lions, as has been undertaken by the department.
'We stand ready to assist with our global expertise in animal welfare, sanctuary care, and the responsible rehoming of rescued big cats, to facilitate the closure of the captive lion sector. The phase-out must be comprehensive, and we'll continue to advocate for the welfare of all big cats caught in this cruel industry,' she said.
'We fully support Minister George's commitment to shutting down the industry, but action cannot wait any longer.
'We are urgently awaiting the implementation plans of the department and stand ready to support with our global expertise in sanctuaries, animal welfare, and the long-term care of rescued big cats.'
Captive lions in South Africa are bred not for conservation, but for profit. They are used for cub petting, walking with experiences, wildlife selfies, and the lion bone trade.
Recent animal cruelty convictions, including cases of lions starved to death on a Free State farm, have revealed the systemic abuse at the heart of this industry.
'South Africa has a responsibility to lead with integrity,' added Miles. 'Allowing commercial exploitation while claiming conservation sends a dangerous, contradictory message to the world.'
While the department is in the process of enacting legislation to prohibit the establishment of new captive facilities, it is still unclear how and when they intend to implement a complete closure of the captive breeding, keeping, and trade sector.
To ensure meaningful change, Miles is calling on the South African government to end all commercial breeding, keeping, and trade of big cats and their parts, with a complete phase-out of captive facilities by 2030. She also urged the government to prohibit the private keeping of big cats, as well as the use of big cats in circuses.
'These steps cannot be symbolic gestures. South Africa's reputation as a conservation leader is at stake,' said Miles.
How the public can help this World Lion Day
– Avoid cub petting, lion walks, or any captive big cat interactions.
– Support ethical sanctuaries.
– Help your friends and family understand the difference between true sanctuaries and those operating for profit.
– Speak up: Urge decision-makers to fully implement the policy position to end captive lion keeping, breeding, and trade.
A highly acclaimed, multi-award-winning documentary on captive lions is now available for free viewing on the Ultimate Nature Documentaries YouTube channel. Four years since its premiere at the Monte-Carlo Television Festival, this hard-hitting, powerful documentary is as relevant as ever. Lions, Bones & Bullets lays bare the truth behind captive lion breeding and the lion bone trade. Graphic detail can be upsetting to sensitive viewers.
Watch the FULL Lions, Bones & Bullets doc below:
Do you have more information about the story?
Please send us an email to [email protected] or phone us on 083 625 4114.
For free breaking and community news, visit Rekord's websites: Rekord East
For more news and interesting articles, like Rekord on Facebook, follow us on Twitter or Instagram or TikTok.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
a day ago
- The Citizen
Minister upholds green light for Eskom's new nuclear power station in Western Cape
Minister upholds green light for Eskom's new nuclear power station in Western Cape Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment, Dr Dion George, has upheld the 2017 decision to grant Eskom Environmental authorisation to construct and operate a new nuclear power station in Duynefontein, Western Cape. The decision was upheld after appeals were made by various environmental organisations. 'In considering these appeals, I have carefully reviewed the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAr), as well as the independent peer review conducted in respect of the project. 'In the end, my decision was made in respect of the principles of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), and with full appreciation of the environmental, social and economic considerations involved,' the minister said on Friday. The original decision to grant the environmental authorisation was made in October 2017. Various appellants challenged the decision, submitting appeals that ranged from comprehensive and detailed submissions to shorter, individual objections. This week, the minister has decided, in terms of section 43(6) of NEMA, to dismiss the appeals, and confirm the decision to grant the environmental authorisation to Eskom. Appeals dismissed, but more approvals still needed for nuclear build The minister's decision to uphold the environmental authorisation does not automatically grant Eskom permission to begin with the construction or operation of the nuclear power station. The entity is still required to obtain several additional statutory authorisations before proceeding in accordance with section 24(7) of NEMA. The authorisations include: A nuclear installation licence from the National Nuclear Regulator (NNR); Approval from the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA); Water use licences from the Department of Water and Sanitation, and Any other relevant approvals, including those from the Minister of Mineral and Petroleum Resources. 'As per section 24(7) of NEMA, the granting of an Environmental Authorisation does not exempt an applicant from complying with any other applicable legal requirements or obtaining permits from other competent authorities,' George said. Dion says that the protection and preservation of South Africa's environment is a non-negotiable. 'The Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment supports South Africa's transition to a cleaner, more sustainable energy future where inclusive growth, job creation and poverty reduction are central,' he said. – Breaking news at your fingertips… Follow Caxton Network News on Facebook and join our WhatsApp channel. Nuus wat saakmaak. Volg Caxton Netwerk-nuus op Facebook en sluit aan by ons WhatsApp-kanaal.
Daily Maverick
3 days ago
- Daily Maverick
SA's trophy hunting quotas spark legal battles and civil society backlash
A fierce battle over South Africa's hunting quotas has erupted, drawing sharp lines between three opposing camps. Animal protection NGOs and conservation groups have sent submissions to the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment's (DFFE) Government Gazette for what they call the illegal, unethical and unscientific issuance of hunting quotas. At the same time, pro-hunting groups, led by Wildlife Ranching South Africa (WRSA), have taken legal action against the DFFE for failing to issue quotas for three CITES-listed species – African elephant, black rhinoceros and leopard – for the 2024 and 2025 seasons. The dispute issue has reignited the national debate about conservation, ethics and the future of South Africa's biodiversity economy. Court order On 21 July 2025, the Gauteng High Court ordered Environment Minister Dion George to produce all decision-making records related to the quota process within 10 days. The court also awarded costs against the minister, a move seen as a judicial rebuke of executive inaction. WRSA's press brief accuses the minister of engaging in 'a gross dereliction of duty', warning that the absence of quotas has 'crippled the regulated hunting industry, undermined rural livelihoods, and thrown South Africa's conservation credibility into question'. George responded in a press statement, calling WRSA's 'rhetoric inflammatory and misleading' and saying 'the court has not ruled on the substance of WRSA's application'. NGOs: quotas without science are illegal WRSA's legal offensive and the DFFE have both drawn sharp criticism from animal protection and conservation NGOs, including Humane World for Animals, the EMS Foundation and the Wildlife Animal Protection Forum of South Africa (WAPFSA). These organisations argue that DFFE's failure to publish quotas is not the real problem but a symptom of a deeper breakdown in scientific integrity and public accountability. Humane World for Animals (formerly HSI Africa), which temporarily interdicted the 2022 export of trophies, says the department's prior decisions were 'unlawful' because they were issued without valid non-detriment findings (NDFs) and without proper public consultation, which are requirements under the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (NEM:BA) and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). For 2022, the DFFE set quotas for 150 elephant, 10 leopard and 10 black rhinoceros trophies. These quotas do not represent actual export volumes since the South African government releases typically report quota allocations, not actual export counts. While exports were temporarily halted in 2022, the hunting of trophies continued unabated. There is no reliable current data on exports, but historically, according to a Humane World for Animals report, from 2014 to 2018 South Africa exported an average of 4,204 trophies per year, representing 16% of global exports. This included 1,337 elephant trophies (about 268 a year), 574 leopard trophies (about 115 a year) and 21 black rhino trophies (about five a year). The EMS Foundation echoed Humane World for Animals' view in its own 51-page objection to previous quota processes, calling them 'arbitrary, opaque, and devoid of transparent ecological reasoning'. The EMSF, supported by WAPFSA (a coalition of more than 30 organisations focused on animal welfare, biodiversity, ethics and public participation), filed formal objections to DFFE's 2024 and 2025 public notices on non-detriment findings (NDFs) for CITES-listed species and for input on the Draft National Biodiversity Economy Strategy (NBES), which presents the government's desire to ramp up trophy hunting to industrial levels. They argued that the public consultation processes and the scientific methodologies were procedurally and substantively flawed, undermining CITES compliance and NEM:BA obligations. The NGO perspectives counterbalance industry-led claims, stressing ecosystem and welfare-centred conservation, and demand timely, transparent governmental response. Their involvement signals potential avenues for amicus support, broader civil society litigation or independent scientific intervention should the case escalate further. Legal framing: action vs inaction Despite their common focus on the DFFE's governance failures, WRSA and the NGOs present diametrically opposed legal arguments: WRSA Legal position: The DFFE's failure to issue quotas is unlawful; Objective: Compel the minister to act. NGOs Legal position: The DFFE's prior issuance of quotas without legal basis is unlawful; Objective: Block quota decisions lacking science and consultation. In short, WRSA's litigation attacks ministerial inaction, while the NGOs challenge unlawful action. Challenge in the Constitutional Court In another major legal development, the South African Hunters and Game Conservation Association has launched a Constitutional Court challenge against provisions in the National Environmental Management Laws Amendment Act 2 of 2022. These contested provisions introduced a definition of 'animal wellbeing' into South Africa's biodiversity legislation, a move the association claims is problematic. It is asking the court to declare these provisions either invalid or temporarily suspended. The DFFE, listed as one of the respondents, has stated that the legislative process was complied with constitutional and administrative requirements, and asserts that public participation was facilitated adequately, and thus there was no procedural irregularity worthy of invalidation. Animal protection groups have again responded with fierce opposition. The National Council of SPCAs (NSPCA), also a respondent in the case, firmly opposes the challenge, describing the wellbeing definition as essential, constitutionally sound and reflective of both animal sentience and international obligations. In late 2024, the NSPCA secured a high court interdict after learning SA Hunters had allegedly tried to reach a private settlement without involving key stakeholders. The NSPCA has since formally joined the Constitutional Court proceedings and filed its opposition, labelling the challenge as legally flawed and procedurally opportunistic. Similarly, the EMSF (also a respondent) has called on all state respondents, including the minister, to reject the challenge. EMSF argues that the wellbeing provisions are justified, scientifically grounded and necessary for effective wildlife protection – warning that their removal would undermine both conservation and legal integrity. What's at stake? The outcome of these challenges could redefine the legal responsibilities of the state in managing South Africa's wildlife. The wellbeing definition before the Constitutional Court plays a key role in shaping these legal reforms and views the provisions as vital for protecting wildlife from cruelty and neglect. The NGOs maintain that the new laws empower the minister to act on evidence of harm and apply a precautionary approach – critical for ethical wildlife governance. In the other case, a ruling compelling the department to publish quotas may force transparency, but could also deepen the rift between industry and civil society over what kind of wildlife economy the country should pursue. The NGOs warn that without robust processes, the DFFE risks turning quotas into rubber stamps for an unsustainable and exploitative system. With the minister now legally required to disclose internal records behind the quota delays, the next phase of litigation could expose how quota decisions – or indecisions – were made. WRSA has already hinted at further action, including potential contempt applications, if the department fails to comply. As South Africa balances conservation, economic development, ethical consideration and public accountability, these legal battles offer more than just a clash over hunting – they are a litmus test for the future of biodiversity governance in the country. DM Dr Adam Cruise is an investigative environmental journalist, travel writer and academic. He has contributed to a number of international publications, including National Geographic and The Guardian, covering diverse topics from the plight of elephants, rhinos and lions in Africa, to coral reef rejuvenation in Indonesia. Cruise is a doctor of philosophy, specialising in animal and environmental ethics, and is the editor of the online Journal of African Elephants.
Daily Maverick
3 days ago
- Daily Maverick
Pieter-Louis Myburgh's exposé of (yet another case of) corruption deserves a monument
Writing a column can be extremely difficult sometimes. At least for me it is. As much as I enjoy the act of writing, the gestation of ideas can take several days. My approach is always to step out of the traffic, get a birds-eye view of things, give them meaning and situate them — always trying to capture the differing light dispersion — and then write about them. Sometimes when you sit down to write about things and you see how they land, you get a sense of the perceptual distortion, of the violence of reality, and how it forces you back to the keyboard. Consider the following analogy. When you view cars travelling on a highway from high above, they appear to be going slowly, but step onto the actual highway, and you literally feel the force of the speeding cars. I gained the same sense from my very limited playing time in ice hockey (I was rubbish at it). It's a beauty to behold a game from the stands high above the arena where you see patterns and flows — you even see plays emerge before they actually do — but step on the ice and it's an entirely different thing. The illusion of stillness is quickly shattered when a two-metre tall guy from Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, slams you into the boards — that's when you re-evaluate your life choices. Really. And so I come to my initial intent for this week's contribution, and the 'high-level' idea I was mulling over — race-based policies and what the government has been doing to reverse things like job reservation, or quotas for black people in higher learning. Recruitment drive Seriously, check out this statement from the time when the National Party was on a white-people recruitment drive in the Netherlands during the 1950s. 'Work reservation is essential for the decent type of immigrant who does not want to become mixed up with people of a lower mentality… We have a law in South Africa called 'work reservation' under which our Whites are protected, and I can assure the speaker and the others present that if White ' ambagsmanne ' [tradesmen] come to South Africa, they will be protected.' Then dropped Pieter-Louis Myburgh's videographic expos é of (yet another case of) corruption. So flagrant were the would-be bribe givers that their grotesquery ought to be enshrined in a statue and given a place of prominence in Pretoria to remind future generations of the weaker moments of our young democracy. Wearing my other hat, I have written about and studied the way monuments or statues of 'great men' (Metal Men on Horseback) dotted the European landscape, ostensibly to valorise them, when it really is about power (my inquiry was about war and its impact on social consciousness) and what we believe is important to remember. Consider the declaration, in support of erecting an 'equestrian statue' of England's King George on Manhattan Island: it was 'to perpetuate to the latest Posterity, the deep Sense this Colony has of the eminent and singular Blessings received from him during his most auspicious reign'. The 'reign' of the ANC has become inauspicious. The scene at the table in the video of Pieter-Louis Myburgh, the Independent Development Trust's recently suspended CEO, Tebogo Malaka, and the entity's spokesperson, Phasha Makgolane, reminded me (immediately) of the bronze-work by sculptor Eric de Saint-Chaffrey of a game of Manille between César and Panisse, characters in Marcel Pagnol's Marseille Trilogy. For what it's worth. I have enormous soft spots for Hamal Heykeli, the bronze statue of a traditional porter carrying a heavy load, and of the Monument to Draper or Craftsmen, both in the Fatih District of Istanbul, and for the Worker and Kolkhoz Woman sculpture in Moscow — which makes a change from the monuments and memorials dedicated to warriors and military leaders, which I wrote about in this space previously. The value of such a monument to our weaker moments should serve as a reminder to future generations of just what the state had become after the first 'activist leaders' of Nelson Mandela's administration eventually gave up and left politics. Here's an anecdote. About 29 years and six months ago, a suggestion was made (by a public servant) that a particular state department hold a Christmas party for staff. The head of that department said something like this: 'Imagine that there are one million public servants in South Africa. If we spent R10 per person on a Christmas party, that would be a waste of R10-million of taxpayers' money. We have more important things to do.' What has happened on the ice, or on the highways (in the above analogies) since those days of optimism has been a shock to the system. Explaining it is easier than understanding it. It reminds me that our efforts of rolling back the injustices of the past through (necessary but insufficient) race-based policies have inherent contradictions that we have probably failed to address properly. They have simply resulted in get-rich-quick schemes. At some point (my informed guess is that it was after 2006), a door was opened and there was a repetition of sorts of what happened during the transition from Soviet communism to capitalism in Russia. That transition was marked by 'lawless rapaciousness'. Anatoly Chubais, the architect of privatisation in Russia, said of the new capitalists at that time that 'they steal and steal and steal. They are stealing absolutely everything and it is impossible to stop them.' Greed vs expectations He imagined that things would get better; that they, the new private capitalists and owners of state-owned enterprises, would mature over time — but their greed never quite kept up with expectations. During the Mandela administration and deep into the presidency of Thabo Mbeki, we shared those expectations. Pecuniary gain and get-rich-quick schemes saw a dramatic rise in the wealth of the political elite and cadres of the liberation movement. We are reminded here of what Chubais said about privatisation when the new capitalists stole and stole and stole 'absolutely everything and it is impossible to stop them'. This helps us understand the inherent contradictions in the way that the ANC-in-government failed South Africa from not long after the outset. This was when that most awful of justifications slipped into South African politics: ' I did not fight the Struggle to be poor.' Smuts Ngonyama was right; we did not fight the Struggle to be poor. He was also wrong; we did not fight to get rich, but to improve the wellbeing, prosperity and safety of children and adults, the protection of women, and to generate high levels of trust among individuals and groups in South Africa. Though I am nowhere close to (even the periphery of) the ruling party, spare a thought for those first-generation political leaders from the Mandela and Mbeki administrations. Imagine, just for a minute, being president now, and waking up every day to a new scandal that is so far from your daily reach that being president is a bit like standing in the middle of a highway with cars flashing by, and you don't know where to look or what to think, and you remain in a constant state of panic, fear, confusion — and shock.
