Captive Breeding of Gamebirds for Shooting in South Africa

AGRED Policy - 2005

Introduction

The shooting of captive-bred gamebirds (the 'put-and-take' system) is a huge industry in the United Kingdom, USA and elsewhere. The precedent and scale of these industries could be the motivation for the proposed introduction of captive-breeding and release of both exotic (foreign) and indigenous gamebirds in South Africa.

In South Africa, the deliberate introduction of exotic gamebird species to the wild in order to establish free-breeding populations for hunting is said to have repeatedly taken place without success. But there is no substantive account of such efforts and information is scarce, partly because most such releases are illegal. Accidental introductions, perhaps mainly from waterfowl collections, have also taken place. Such escapes may have been the origin of the feral population of Mallards Anas platyrhyncos in the wild in South Africa. The captive-breeding of exotic gamebirds for shooting is underdeveloped in South Africa and has apparently been tried without real success to date, although a legal Common (Ring-necked or English) Pheasant Phasianus colchicus shooting operation exists in the Lydenburg district. However, the number of put-and-take schemes could increase rapidly if South African landowners and operators respond to a perceived increasing demand from foreign sportsmen for bird shooting in South Africa, and who are familiar with 'put-and-take'.

Another issue is the captive-breeding of indigenous gamebirds. This has commercial potential in situations where landowners with relatively small areas of land try to optimize the number of hunts by releasing captive-bred birds. The 'put-and-take' of indigenous gamebirds appears to be an attractive possibility in the context of generating significant income for poor rural communities from gamebird shooting whilst introducing the practice of habitat management for sustaining these artificial stocks. This viewpoint is argued on a socio-economic basis in terms of integrating gamebird shooting into the greater reality of South Africa as a developing nation with many poor communities. However, such a programme would come at a very significant research cost to investigate the many negative biological implications and develop the technical knowledge for the implementation of a financially viable scheme.

The ethics of captive-breeding and release for shooting means very different things to pro-hunting and anti-hunting lobbies. The anti-hunting lobby believes that hunting is unethical as an activity in its entirety and would argue that breeding birds for release and shooting is even less acceptable. In Europe in particular, pressures to ban bird shooting are increasing and draw on powerful emotional and moral issues. WWF-SA is South Africa's largest conservation NGO in terms of funding and programmes. WWF-SA hold a position that animal rights activists can drastically threaten the cause of conservation in South Africa.

From a professional hunting viewpoint, the term ethical hunting is used here to mean sustainable hunting carried out in defined ways which guarantee an element of fair pursuit for the target species. If ethical hunting is extended to a captive-breeding and release situation, ethical hunting should include the standards of care of birds in captivity and conditions surrounding their release.

Regardless of its position on captive-breeding, AGRED should not condone operations which are unethical in their raising of captive-bred birds, or in the hunting activities, including the method of releasing birds. It is worth stating that in the UK, there are various options from the release of birds straight over the guns to a 6-12 week introduction period into the wild, and that these options will vary in acceptability to a broader public and bird shooting enthusiasts themselves

The preferred AGRED position

The preferred position of most AGRED members is to promote the management of natural habitats to allow for sustainable utilization of populations of wild-bred birds. By caring for the natural habitats, the gamebirds will be sustained. AGRED's focus on management is reflected in the Mission statement (Appendix 2).

However, it is vital that AGRED takes part in all debates relating to the developments to ensure that it can play an influential role, even if the final outcome of such debates runs counter to AGRED's advice and position. Where necessary, AGRED must grasp the nettle of public debates when appropriate even though these are fraught with risk, and must have a long-term strategy to prevent both AGRED and wingshooting as an industry being linked to damaging situations with a huge emotional content such as the recent furor over the mistreatment of the Tuli elephants.

What is the national legislative position?

The draft White paper on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of South Africa's Biological Diversity (Notice 1095 of 1977) very clearly states in principle its opposition to the introduction of alien species (See Appendix 2).

There is also a clear opposition to introduction of alien (exotic) species in the international arena stated in the Conventions on Biodiversity and Migratory species (African Eurasian Waterbird Agreement) (Appendix 3).

Who should AGRED influence?

Despite the intentions of the draft White Paper, the Mpumalanga Conservation Department has issued a permit for Common Pheasant raising and shooting in Lydenburg, and other licensed examples may exist. This decision was probably taken on the basis that exotic gamebird introductions will fail to establish themselves as breeding birds in the wild in South Africa.

Therefore the legal development of captive-breeding operations depends on permits issued by the provincial conservation agencies, based on national legislation. AGRED should therefore advise and influence national and provincial government agencies on this matter.

It should be kept in mind that the legal frameworks and regulations are ultimately an expression of the broader public's will. Ideally, AGRED should influence the broader public, and notably participants in the wingshooting industry and landowners, on the merits and demerits of captive-breeding and introductions. Voluntary agreement to a wise approach is far more easily regulated and cost-effective, especially in South Africa where resources to implement regulations are sometimes limiting. It requires time, understanding and a concerted effort to achieve such outcomes.

Under current circumstances, some provincial conservation agencies lack the resources to implement regulations. If captive-breeding is sufficiently lucrative, such operations could develop even if provincial permission is not granted. Understanding of the problems and issues associated with captive-breeding should aid voluntary observance of regulations. This is preferred to the policing of unpopular regulations. Thus there is an imperative to clearly make the case in a broader public forum.

The problem

The conventional wisdom is that the introductions of exotic species to South Africa have all failed, and therefore this is the inevitable future path. Two aspects of this statement are questioned.

Firstly, it has been very difficult to find written confirmations of such introductions and failures, and thus it may be that the frequently-repeated mantra of introduction and failure has assumed its own validity through repetition. Documentation of these many failed introductions is required, however true it may be.

Secondly, at least one foreign gamebird, the Mallard has succeeded, whilst another, the Mute Swan survived on the South African mainland for some time. The Chukar Partridge survives on Robben Island. There has been widespread penetration of the domesticated strain of the Helmeted Guineafowl into wild guineafowl populations. In this case, a domesticated strain of Helmeted Guineafowl originating from West Africa via France has been widely introduced into South Africa. Thus at least four introductions have succeeded to a greater or lesser degree. Elsewhere in the world, some introduced populations proliferated only after a long period of establishment e.g. 70 years in the case of Mallard in New Zealand. South African habitats are becoming increasingly altered and there is no guarantee that future introductions may not work. Simply, history is not a guarantee of the future. Consider the array of gamebird species in the world. It is inherently unlikely that not one other exotic gamebird species will be unable to successfully colonise South Africa. The understanding of the potential of this problem requires a much improved knowledge base.

At least two provinces in the past have given permission for Ring-necked Pheasants to be bred in captivity and males only then to be released for shooting.

Conservationists would argue strongly on the basis of the precautionary principle (in short, if you do not know what the impact will be, then err on the conservative, safe, precautionary side). This viewpoint would argue against introductions into South Africa.
Amongst the risks are the introduction into South African gamebirds of new diseases and parasites, and the risk of spreading existing diseases in captive-breeding situations into new wild populations.

Most AGRED members would argue that in South Africa, hunting wild-bred birds offers the best shooting experiences, whilst conserving natural habitats. However true this may be, the argument alone is probably inadequate to prevent license applications based on the financial imperative of successful commercial 'put-and-take' operations delivering a guaranteed number of birds during a shoot.

Captive-bred shooting operations are likely to be lightning rods for attack by animal rights movements and increase the long-term risk of severe adverse publicity to the wingshooting industry.

However, there are situations in which the breeding of gamebirds indigenous to South Africa may be acceptable. Three examples are: the breeding of indigenous genetic stock of Helmeted Guineafowl as an alternative and replacement for the domesticated strain of Helmeted Guineafowl; local 'put-and-take' community schemes which, in effect, introduce poor rural communities into habitat conservation and lastly captive-breeding programmes for purposes other than re-introduction into the wild in South Africa, including zoo propagation of rare species for release in countries of origin.

AGRED should leave the door open for such captive-breeding operations where wild gamebird populations in South Africa or elsewhere are the actual or potential beneficiaries. In this regard, it is notable that there is a report that captive-bred Grey Partridge Perdix perdix have been successfully re-established in the wild in Italy, breeding successfully, and challenging the widely-held position in Europe that game-farm birds are useless for re-establishment of extirpated populations. However, it should be noted that gamebirds are still widespread and abundant in South Africa, reducing the need for such operations.

AGRED needs to give consideration to listing ethical standards required for captive breeding of gamebirds, and in the release of gamebirds for shooting.

A policy on captive-breeding of gamebirds needs to be placed within the legislative framework of South African law as the major legal constraint, and within international conventions which frame an international context for such issues.

The way forward

AGRED's policy needs to be informed by a summary of the history of past introductions of foreign gamebirds in South Africa, summarizing as much information as possible on biological issues facing the release of captive-bred birds. The second aspect of this work is the summary of studies on captive-breeding of indigenous gamebirds and the success or failure of subsequent releases. It will take many months to gather this information which seems to be largely available as anecdotal information and not as scientifically documented work.

Thus AGRED's policy needs to be viewed as conceptual work in progress, and open to change as and when significant new information is developed.

AGRED needs to develop criteria for ethical standards in capture and release and to establish the national and international legislative and policy framework for these policies.

AGRED needs to adopt interim policies until the advent of new thinking or information overturns the policies described below.


Interim Policies on the Captive-breeding and Release of Exotic and Indigenous Gamebirds

A Policy on the Captive-breeding and Release of Exotic Gamebirds for Shooting

In defining this policy, AGRED draws attention to the persistence and apparent increase in numbers in South Africa of the exotic Mallard Anas platyrhyncos, which hybridizes with the Yellow-billed Duck Anas undulata. AGRED notes that the Mute Swan Cygnus olor and Chukar partridge Alectoris chukar have established populations in South Africa, admittedly for a restricted period of time (Mute Swan in the southern Cape) or in an island station (Chukar Partridge). AGRED believes that there are risks to indigenous South African gamebirds and habitats from the introduction and captive-breeding of exotic species of gamebirds, including introduction of disease and parasites and displacement of naturally-occurring populations, especially as South African habitats become increasingly modified and invaded by exotic species including plants, vertebrates, invertebrates and micro-organisms. AGRED believes that the best outcome for all South Africans in terms of integrated conservation, economic and social outcomes will result from the wise management of natural habitats for sustainable indigenous gamebird populations based on wise and scientific advice.

Therefore, AGRED does not support the breeding and release of exotic gamebird species for shooting, unless four conditions are met. These are:

o Unequivocal demonstration that any proposed introduction of exotic gamebird species will not survive in the wild. Such proof will necessarily include a relevant literature survey listing all known introductions of this species elsewhere in the world.
o Unequivocal demonstration that such introduction will not introduce new diseases or parasites into South Africa, and that captive-breeding operations will not create conditions for the proliferation of resident diseases and parasites which may affect indigenous populations
o Demonstration that habitat management (including possible re-introduction of wild-bred indigenous birds) to increase populations of naturally-occurring indigenous gamebirds to commercially viable levels is not a viable option for the area.
o That ethical standards of care in the rearing of birds and release for shooting are met.

AGRED will oppose any new application to provincial agencies for permits for the captive breeding of exotic gamebirds for introduction into the wild or for shooting using the put-and-take system which do not meet these four criteria.

AGRED will contribute constructively to this debate by developing a database of the known introductions of foreign gamebirds, documenting known and supposed reasons for their persistence or failure. AGRED will continue to take part in discussion on the introduction of exotic species and its consequence even if new permits are granted in opposition to AGRED's stance on this matter, in order to learn from these experiences and to influence further debate.

Should any permits be granted for the release of exotic gamebirds into the wild, AGRED asks that every bird released should be individually banded with SAFRING (University of Cape Town) metal leg bands. Operations using such rings should undertake training acceptable to the SAFRING standards, and the renewal of permits should be dependent on the annual submission of adequate data to SAFRING, thus ensuring sound data collection for decision-making. Released birds should be screened for diseases and parasites. Such operations should meet strict standards for rearing in captivity and release and monitored by provincial conservation agencies.

A Policy on the Captive-breeding and Release of Indigenous Gamebirds for Shooting

In defining this policy, AGRED draws attention to the widespread penetration by captive-bred birds from an exotic subspecies of the Helmeted Guineafowl, and documentation showing that these birds will introduce undesirable biological characteristics (e.g. reduced reproductive output resulting from inadequate parenting behaviour). AGRED believes that there are risks to naturally-occurring South African gamebirds and habitats from the introduction and captive-breeding of indigenous species of gamebirds, including introduction of disease and different genetic stock, especially as South African habitats become increasingly modified and invaded by exotic species including plants, vertebrates, invertebrates and micro-organisms. AGRED believes that the best outcome of gamebird utilization for all South Africans from an integrated conservation, economic and outcomes results from the wise management of natural habitats for naturally-occurring gamebird populations based on wise and scientific advice.

AGRED does not support the breeding and release of indigenous gamebird species for shooting, unless five conditions are met. These are:

o Captive-bred birds should derive from wild-bred birds caught in the same region with oversight from conservation authorities. Alternatively there should be unequivocal demonstration that the genetic stock of captive-bred birds does not differ at an inter-population level from the populations of the same species occurring naturally in the same area. This applies largely to the more sedentary francolins, partridges and guineafowl.
o Such introductions do not constitute regional exotic populations, i.e. the introduction of a South African gamebird species into an area outside its natural distribution.
o Unequivocal demonstration that new diseases and parasites will not be introduced into regions where they can affect indigenous gamebirds, and that captive-breeding operations will not create conditions for the proliferation of indigenous diseases and parasites which may affect indigenous populations
o That ethical standards of care in the rearing of birds and release for shooting are met.
o Demonstration that habitat management to increase populations of naturally-occurring indigenous gamebirds is not a viable option for the area.

Accordingly, AGRED will oppose any new applications for permits for captive-breeding which do not meet the first four criteria and would request justification for granting of a permit which did not meet the last criterion.

AGRED may give active support to captive-breeding programmes where special circumstances provide conservation, social and economic outcomes without compromising naturally-occurring populations. Should permits be granted for the release of indigenous gamebirds into the wild, AGRED believes that every bird released should be banded with individually numbered SAFRING (University of Cape Town) metal leg bands. Operations using such rings should undertake training acceptable to the SAFRING standards, and the renewal of permits should be dependent on the annual submission of adequate data to SAFRING, otherwise the independent control function is lost. Released birds should be screened for diseases and parasites. Such operations should meet strict standards for rearing in captivity and release and be monitored by provincial conservation agencies.

AGRED will contribute constructively to this debate by developing a database of the known introductions of indigenous gamebirds, documenting known and supposed reasons for their persistence or failure.

AGRED will continue to take part in discussion on the introduction of indigenous species and its consequence even if new permits are granted in opposition to AGRED's stance on this matter, in order to learn from these experiences and to influence further debate.

Appendix 1

Worldwide Fund for Nature South Africa
Animal Rights as a Threat to Conservation
As the population of the wealthy "developed" nations move ever further from their daily interactions with Nature, they move into a realm where simplistic "animal rights" approaches/solutions to mankind's interaction with wildlife become ever more appealing to "the man in the street". WWF-SA believes that the conservation community completely underestimates how devastating this trend could be, if allowed to proceed unchecked. This attitude can lead to mismanaged or unmanaged systems; for example (A) the lack of control of introduced invasive alien species which can threaten the future viability and biodiversity of the invaded ecosystems, (B) the lack of control of overabundant large native herbivores in protected areas where their uncontrolled population growth similarly reduces the viability and biodiversity of the protected ecosystems, and (C) the issue of opposition to the sustainable consumptive use of native wildlife populations - where allowing this use might be of fundamental importance in ensuring that native species and untransformed ecosystems survive in areas where human needs will otherwise drive these areas into alternative land usage under which ecosystems are transformed (e.g. cultivated) and/or native wildlife is replaced with domesticated livestock.
By failing to recognise, and then face head-on, the enormous strategic challenge posed by the growth of the animal rights movement, the conservation community could seriously impair its ability to influence for the better the fate of the natural world in the decades to come.
WWF-SA is continually on guard to ensure that our own conservation policies continue to be driven by genuine conservation imperatives and not by animal rights agendas.

Dr Rob Little
Director: Conservation WWF South Africa
2 July 1999


Appendix 2

Mission

AGRED's guiding principle is to perpetuate the natural African heritage through sustainable utilisation of gamebirds in a manner that benefits rural communities and the sport of shooting, whilst meeting the highest standards of conservation management.


Appendix 3

The White paper on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of South Africa's Biological Diversity

The section on alien organisms (pages 36-38) focuses on alien organisms which threaten ecosystems, habitats or species. The critical issue here is that any gamebird introduction has the potential to threaten naturally-occurring gamebird species or populations. Alien organisms are plants, animals and microorganisms which do not naturally occur in an area, and which are deliberately or accidentally introduced by humans to ecosystems outside of their natural range. This may be at a local level, where species are moved from one type of habitat to another, or at a global level where species are introduced into different continents or regions. The AGRED policy used the word exotic interchangeably with the word alien because exotic is better understood by the wingshooting industry.

The following is quoted verbatim (page 36):

1.6. Alien organisms

Policy objective 1.6. Prevent the introduction of potentially harmful alien species and control and eradicate alien species which threaten ecosystems, habitats or species.

The preamble is excluded as are introductory comments on Policy and Strategy, as these comprise (pages 36-37)

The following is quoted verbatim (pages 37-38).

To achieve this objective, Government, in collaboration with interested and affected parties, will

1. (a) Review, streamline, and if necessary strengthen existing legislation to control the introduction and spread of potentially harmful alien organisms. Actions will be taken to improve the effectiveness of legislation and ensure consistency; and
(b) Strengthen the enforcement and effectiveness of existing punitive measures to control the introduction and spread of potentially harmful alien organisms.

2. Develop a regulatory procedure for the introduction of alien organisms into South Africa, whereby the potential risks of introduction are comprehensively assessed against intended benefits to introduction. This assessment will be followed by the adoption of appropriate mitigatory or preventive measures.

3. Develop control and eradication programmes and provide ongoing support to existing programmes, based on a priority-rating system and in relation to costs and resources. This will consider threats posed to biodiversity, as well as social, economic and environmental costs and benefits derived from using and removing identified organisms. The planning of intensive mechanical clearing operations will take account of job creation schemes and will provide for regular follow-up.

4. Prevent where feasible the unintentional introduction of alien organisms into South Africa.

5. Develop a national policy on the inter- and intra-provincial translocation and inter-basin transfer of species, including lists of prohibited and approved taxa.

6. Promote the use of local, indigenous species in rehabilitation and revegetation schemes.

7. Provide incentives for the landowners to control or eradicate alien organisms identified as threatening biodiversity.

8. Strengthen, support and coordinate the effort of existing institutions and programmes to detect the early establishment of invasive alien organisms, and to catalogue and describe such invasions.

9. Support and strengthen the development of biological and other control methods for alien organisms that threaten biodiversity.

10. Improve understanding conserving the impacts of alien organisms on biodiversity

11. Improve public education and awareness posed by the planting or illegal importation of alien species, and identify actions which can be taken to avoid such risks or to control the spread of alien organisms.

12. Improve capacity amongst implementing agencies to regulate the introduction control and eradication of alien organisms that threaten biodiversity.

13. Negotiate and liaise with neighboring countries to maximise commonalities and minimize conflicts between policies, legislation, and practices relating to alien organisms that threaten biodiversity.

Appendix 4

Convention on Migratory Species and Convention on Biological diversity

These two conventions are two of the mot important relating to international agreements on conservation of natural biodiversity. South Africa is a contracting party to both conventions.

1. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)

The following is quoted verbatim from Article 8. In-Situ Conservation

Each contracting Party shall, as afar as possible and as appropriate:

…..
(h) prevent the introduction of, control or eradicate those alien species which threaten ecosystems, habitats or species.

2. The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals

This extract note focuses on the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds which is an agreement under the Convention of Migratory Species of Wild Animals


The following is an extract, taken from Article III General Conservation measures

1. The Parties shall take measures to conserve migratory waterbirds, giving special attention to endangered species as well as those with an unfavourable status.

2. to this end, the Parties shall:

…..

(g) prohibit the deliberate introduction of non-native waterbird species into the environment and shall take all appropriate measures to prevent the unintentional release of such species if this introduction or release would prejudice the conservation status of the wild flora and faun; when non-native waterbird species have already been introduced, the Parties shall take all appropriate measures to prevent these species from becoming a potential threat to indigenous species.