Pro Bono | Problem animals

Given the recent assassination of "Voortrekker", the famous elephant bull wandering in the Ohungu Conservatory in the Erongo region, the Legal Aid Center has been asked to explain what Namibian law allows people to do when their life or property is threatened wild animals.

In law, the term "problem animal" means an animal declared as such by the Minister in a notice published in the Official Gazette, in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 4 of 1975 on the conservation of nature.

At present, only four species are reported to be "problematic": baboons, lynx, dassies and black-backed jackals.

Therefore, the use of the official legal term "problem animal" has a very limited application and does not apply to what people generally consider to be "problem animals" such as elephants, lions, hyenas, cheetahs, hippos and crocodiles.

In fact, some wild animals that may be in conflict with humans have been declared "protected game" (including lions and crocodiles) or specially protected game (including elephants, hippos, rhinos and African wild dogs). ).

In this context, the Nature Conservation Ordinance provides for the defense against wild animals in several ways.

The four species that have been officially declared problematic animals can be hunted by anyone who owns or leases the land where the animal is. The person who owns or leases the land may also hire another person to do so.

But the situation is very different as far as protected and specially protected games are concerned. In general, protected game and specially protected game may only be hunted with a permit from the Ministry of the Environment and Tourism.

However, a protected game or specially protected game may be killed without permission by a person who owns or leases land, or occupies communal land, "for the defense of a human life or to prevent that to be human being hurt or to protect the life of every human being. livestock, poultry or domestic animal ", while the life of this livestock, poultry or domestic animal is threatened.

Similarly, the law allows for the killing of game without authorization to protect cultivated land and gardens that are surrounded by fences in the shelter of game – but elephants, hippos and rhinos can not be hunted for these reasons.

In such cases, the person who kills the protected animal must report it in writing to the nearest conservator of nature or to the nearest police office within 10 days.

In addition, in accordance with the MET National Policy on Human-Wildlife Conflict Management (2018-2027), a written report must also be submitted to the Director responsible for Wildlife Management in National Parks, including information on "good reasons to reasonably believe that the animal at the root of the problem was the destroyed animal and an explanation of the reasons for that trust".

The policy also addresses longer term threats. The MET can approve the destruction of animals when these pose persistent problems or when the number of wild animals is so high that conflicts become an intolerable burden for the local community.

Slaughtering should be based on a departmental assessment that ensures that any authorized destruction of wildlife will not compromise the long-term conservation of the species in question at the national or regional level and (outside protected areas) after consultation with local and regional stakeholders.

So, what does it mean for elephants like Voortrekker? Voortrekker did not meet the legal definition of a "problem animal" because elephants are not currently part of the species officially declared "problem animals".

Given the danger of illegal global ivory trade for elephant populations, it would be foolish to declare elephants "problem animals" in the future.

In addition, Namibia would not be allowed to do so because of its international commitments under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which lists elephants as as a protected species. (The elephants of Namibia are listed in Appendix II of this treaty, which covers species that are not necessarily threatened with extinction at the present time, but which can be so if the trade is not tightly controlled.)

So what about exceptions for threats to people and pets? Killing an animal without a license is only legally justifiable if the elephant is threatening a human life or domestic animals when there is a clear and immediate danger. This does not apply to a situation where someone follows an elephant after it has caused damage and then kills him.

In addition, the law explicitly states that elephants can not be killed without permission for the defense of crops and that no protected game can be killed on the spot to protect other types of property, such as structures. physical or water supply facilities.

However, the Nature Conservation Ordinance does not lay down clear guidelines for the issuance of game hunting permits protected by the Ministry. It appears that the Department relied on its national policy of managing human-wildlife conflict to justify its action for the issuance of a permit to kill Voortrekker by declaring it as an animal causing problems.

The policy requires that certain questions be asked in deciding whether or not an animal should be destroyed: (1) Has the animal injured or killed a person? (2) Has the animal persistently killed livestock? (3) Has the animal remained near a camp, behaving aggressively so that residents feel threatened? (4) Could additional problems be caused if the animal concerned was not destroyed?

If the answer to all of these questions is "no," permission to kill the animal is not justified.

Opinions on the answers to these questions differ as to Voortrekker. Some argue that Voortrekker did not pose a threat to the community, while the ministry gave a number of reasons justifying the authorization to kill Voortrekker, including the principle that the government is accountable to its citizens and must protect their life and their livelihoods first and foremost.

These conflicting viewpoints add further confusion to the decision-making chain that applies to hunting licenses for protected animals such as Voortrekker.

The goal of Namibia should be to reconcile the protection of life and the interests of those who live with wildlife, protecting endangered species, and preserving Namibia's reputation as the only species in the world. 39, one of the world's greatest champions of natural resource management.

We recommend that future surveys of permits issued to authorize the killing of protected game be more complete and transparent. This would help dispel any doubt as to whether laws and policies are strictly followed in managing potential conflicts between wildlife and communities.