R. Slotow, A. Blackmore, M. Henley, Karen Trendler, Marion E. Garaï
{"title":"Could Culling of Elephants Be Considered Inhumane and Illegal in South African Law?","authors":"R. Slotow, A. Blackmore, M. Henley, Karen Trendler, Marion E. Garaï","doi":"10.1080/13880292.2021.1972529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Elephant culling is included in National Norms and Standards for the Management of Elephants in the Republic of South Africa, as a last-resort option to reduce elephant population size when required to meet reserve objectives. Recent judgments in South African courts have emphasised the importance of considering animal welfare in conservation. We assess the approved method of culling elephant family units, in terms of the legal and policy framework in South Africa, as well as considering elephant welfare and wellbeing. We find that the current culling method is likely to be inhumane, and potentially inconsistent with the Constitution, as interpreted by the judiciary. In addition, in certain circumstances, culling is illegal in terms of the Animals Protection and Meat Safety Acts, and contravenes World Organisation for Animal Health and global standards for the slaughter of animals. We recommend considering a moratorium on culling of elephant family units, as well as of lone bulls, until humane slaughter methods, and standard operation procedures that ensure an extremely high probability of instantaneous (“clean”) kill, are developed and approved. We recommend an ethics review process for conservation management interventions involving wellbeing risks to animals, such as is required for animal research. Notwithstanding other imperatives that need consideration, conservation practice should better balance welfare, to align with both South African legislation and global norms.","PeriodicalId":52446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2021.1972529","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Abstract Elephant culling is included in National Norms and Standards for the Management of Elephants in the Republic of South Africa, as a last-resort option to reduce elephant population size when required to meet reserve objectives. Recent judgments in South African courts have emphasised the importance of considering animal welfare in conservation. We assess the approved method of culling elephant family units, in terms of the legal and policy framework in South Africa, as well as considering elephant welfare and wellbeing. We find that the current culling method is likely to be inhumane, and potentially inconsistent with the Constitution, as interpreted by the judiciary. In addition, in certain circumstances, culling is illegal in terms of the Animals Protection and Meat Safety Acts, and contravenes World Organisation for Animal Health and global standards for the slaughter of animals. We recommend considering a moratorium on culling of elephant family units, as well as of lone bulls, until humane slaughter methods, and standard operation procedures that ensure an extremely high probability of instantaneous (“clean”) kill, are developed and approved. We recommend an ethics review process for conservation management interventions involving wellbeing risks to animals, such as is required for animal research. Notwithstanding other imperatives that need consideration, conservation practice should better balance welfare, to align with both South African legislation and global norms.
期刊介绍:
Drawing upon the findings from island biogeography studies, Norman Myers estimates that we are losing between 50-200 species per day, a rate 120,000 times greater than the background rate during prehistoric times. Worse still, the rate is accelerating rapidly. By the year 2000, we may have lost over one million species, counting back from three centuries ago when this trend began. By the middle of the next century, as many as one half of all species may face extinction. Moreover, our rapid destruction of critical ecosystems, such as tropical coral reefs, wetlands, estuaries, and rainforests may seriously impair species" regeneration, a process that has taken several million years after mass extinctions in the past.