COMMENTS to the HIGH LEVEL PANEL on Behalf Of

Home , Elephant cognition

2nd Floor Offices, 290 South, 7 Umsinsi Junction, Dube City Dube Trade Port, La Mercy, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa Tel : +(27) 32 814 0140 Mobile : +27 (0)61 226 6868 Email: [email protected]

Web : www.allrise.org.za

Chairperson: Advisory Committee (High-Level Panel) C/O Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries Attention: Ms Pamela Singh/Ms Ofentse Mashiyane By email: [email protected] [email protected]

15 June 2021 Dear Ms. Singh,

SUBMISSIONS ON THE WORK OF THE HIGH-LEVEL PANEL ESTABLISHED TO REVIEW POLICIES, LEGISLATION AND RELATED PRACTICES ON THE MANAGEMENT, BREEDING, HUNTING, TRADE AND HANDLING OF ELEPHANT, LION, LEOPARD AND RHINOCEROS

1. We address you on behalf of Elephants, Rhinos and People (ERP), an NGO founded to preserve and protect Southern Africa’s wild elephants and rhinos.1

2. We hereby submit comments on the publication of the High Level Panel Report reviewing Policies, Legislation and Related Practices on the Management, Breeding, Hunting, Trade and Handling of Elephant, Lion, Leopard and Rhinoceros which was submitted to the Minister of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries on 15 December 2020 (“the Report”).

3. We commend the panel on the thoroughness of the Report and particularly the stringent recommendations regarding the breeding and keeping of captive lions.2 Our comments are specifically related to elephants and where we consider the need for further input and investigation lies.

The Report 4. The Terms of Reference categories set out in the Report are:3 4.1. Management and the need to understand how the different land-use classes and associated practices contribute to conservation, the biodiversity economy and fair and equitable sharing of the value of the species. The Report recognises that management interventions raises welfare concerns, unintended consequences for degradation, and reputational risk to international tourism and international relations. Compensation is referred to as one of a number of alternatives to deal with damage-causing animals (and the risks of compensation to sustainable conservation have been identified).

1 https://www.erp.ngo 2 Page 328 3 Page 142

All Rise Attorneys for Climate and Environmental Justice is a non-profit company with registration number 2019/305876/08 and NPO Ref. 232-020 and an accredited law clinic in terms of section 34(8)(b)(iv) of the Legal Practice Act, 2014 Directors: Jeanne Fick, (non-executive), Renee Kirkham (non-executive), Mawande Mazibuko (non-executive), Trudie Nichols (non-executive), Dineo Skosana-Ngwenya (non-executive), Janice Tooley (executive), Kirsten Youens (chief executive) Attorneys: Kirsten Youens, Janice Tooley

4.2. Management concerns over the welfare of animals in captive and intensive facilities, as well as tourism practices associated with these, especially interactions. Although the South African Tourism Services Authority (SATSA) has developed guidelines, these are not yet adopted. Although there are welfare criteria and norms and standards, for example for zoos, these cannot be uniformly applied for all species and land use classes. Depending on the land-use class and whether a population is wild or captive, best practice guidelines and norms and standards would differ in terms of aspects such as management, handling, and tourism.

4.3. Utilisation of the animals for hunting to be sustainable into the future and to continue contributing to conservation, the wildlife economy and the well-being of people, a social licence to operate is required from the public, not only enabling legislation. A report on biodiversity risks associated with intensive and selective breeding, that also covers reputational risks associated with hunting of captive bred game, including lion, has been developed by the Scientific Authority and can inform this process going forward. Guidelines of what is required for hunting to be seen as responsible and as a contributor to conservation have also been developed by the IUCN, while CITES also provide requirements for hunting trophy exports.

4.4. Trade restrictions and challenges related to trade are directly linked to its perceived impact on the conservation status of the species and welfare (including social behaviour) implications for individual animals. In addition, trade is invaluable for sustainable conservation financing and economic viability of wildlife-based business operations. An assessment and understanding of the above-mentioned, as well as international demand, should inform South Africa’s trade strategy.

5. The Report acknowledges the National Norms and Standards for the Management of Elephants in South Africa4 and we read the Report with such Norms and Standards. 6. The table on page 153 of the Report5 itemises the challenges that different stakeholders experience in respect of each of the Terms of Reference (TOR). These include: 6.1. Concerns over poor practices in terms of handling and well-being of captive elephants; and

6.2. There being no norms and standards for captive elephants.

6.3. The following issues of concern relating to the animal welfare model/ approach are detailed:

6.3.1. There is no overarching wildlife welfare policy.

6.3.2. The definition of well-being in NEMBA is too narrow, with a call for consideration of a broader definition.

6.3.3. The legal framework is dated. Consideration should be given to updating and standardizing the national and provincial welfare-related legislation and regulations.

6.3.4. Welfare legislation and the application thereof is poorly understood and is further compromised by inadequate and unclear welfare standards, and limited cooperation between industry, rescue groups, welfare organizations, and welfare inspectors.

4 GG 30833, 1 May 2008. 5 The table presents the challenges different stakeholders experience in respect of each of the Terms of Reference.

6.3.5. There is poor framing, development, or buy-in of the approach to wildlife welfare.

6.3.6. There is lack of understanding of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ practices, and what is acceptable – with individual perspective dominating, further exacerbated by a lack of training or accreditation in welfare issues and animal ethics, within conservation and management training programmes.

6.3.7. There is a need for government, state and provincial agencies to engage with wildlife welfare.

6.3.8. Management interventions (e.g., reintroductions, relocations, population management, euthanasia, collaring, veterinary interventions) – including adaptive management methods – are not subject to ethics controls and management plans are not scrutinized for welfare.

6.3.9. Not all research goes through Animal Use Committees (AUCs) or Ethics Committees.

6.3.10. Tourism practices and interventions for tourism products for free roaming animals (e.g., habituation, off-road driving, euthanasia) and captive animals (e.g., housing, interactions) are not scrutinised for welfare, and are not subject to ethics, standards, or guidelines of acceptable practice.

6.3.11. There are no norms and standards for captive populations.

6.3.12. There are no standards, guidelines, or regulations for effective ‘rehabilitation of animals into the wild’ (an area defined as ‘wildlife rehabilitation’), with specific information on the welfare of wild animals that have been injured and placed in captivity for treatment/ rehabilitation often not released. There is also concern over how confiscated animals are dealt with.

6.3.13. There is a general lack of broad regulations pertinent to welfare for all wildlife, including the five iconic species – and the activities related to them.

7. Some of the welfare issues are recommended to be dealt with in the following manner:6

7.1. The Minister requests Cabinet to establish an inter-ministerial committee (IMC) on biodiversity conservations and sustainable use to lead cooperative governance in this area. The IMC should undertake the review and revision of conflicting legislation and practice, championing the protection and conservation of the five species in the wild, enhancing the wilderness and conservation reputation of South Africa. The work of the IMC should seek to stimulate strategic ecologically sustainable use of natural resources for justifiable social and economic benefit.

7.2. The revision of the Animal Protection Act and Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1992 to ensure the welfare of wildlife is fully protected under law, and to put in place appropriate regulations to ensure compliance with this.

7.3. The revision of the Animal Improvement Act and its regulations to remove the five iconic species and putting in place legislation that prevents the domestication and intensive and selective breeding of these iconic wildlife species.

6 Page 297 of the Report.

7.4. The revision of the Performing Animals Act and its regulations to remove the five iconic species and their use for performance prohibited.

7.5. Consideration of removing the five iconic species from under the auspices of Agriculture with all elements sitting firmly under DEFF, including welfare, captive animals and farmed wildlife. The required capacity will need to be developed in DEFF.

8. These recommendations are welcomed.

9. In discussing elephant ivory and elephant management specifically from page 313 – 316, the Report contextualises the issues and some are listed below:

9.1. South Africa has growing populations of elephants and concerns have been raised about South Africa is a signatory to the SADC Protocol on Wildlife Conservations and Law Enforcement, which recognises that the survival of wildlife depends on the perceptions and development needs of people living with wildlife, socio-economic value of wildlife, and equitable distribution of benefits for the sustainable use of wildlife.

9.2. The ongoing debate has been very divisive in Africa. In the past, South Africa has typically aligned itself with other SADC countries, which account for the majority of Africa’s large elephant populations.

10. The goal is that:

“South Africa will focus on addressing elephant population management priorities and related financing needs and adopt a position that engages stakeholders and range states to work towards building a global consensus for elephant conservation and sustainable use.”

11. The recommendations given in the Report for achieving this include:

11.1. Government to rigorously explore and support the implementation of alternative benefit streams to international ivory sale, such as highlighted in the recommendations under the transformation sector;

11.2. Government initiates an engagement process with other parties, both that support and opposed the ivory trade;

11.3. Government develops a communication and engagement strategy on its plans to bring stakeholders on board with a clear articulation of timelines, in order to manage stakeholder expectations;

11.4. Revise the Elephant Norms and Standards, if required.

12. However, on our reading of the Report, the keeping of elephants in captivity does not seem to be fully covered and the policy positions on keeping elephants in captivity, interactions, zoos etc. are not dealt with. We will therefore limit our comments to these issues and to human-elephant conflict. 13. We welcome the acknowledgement in the Report that “a perception of wildness and wilderness in the wildlife sectors presents an international competitive advantage for South Africa.. [and] there are risks and threats to our reputations, that captive, intensive, and selective breeding, handling, captive interactions, ‘canned’ hunting, and bone and derivative trade brings to South Africa.”

14. We also welcome the finding that, in order to protect the sense of wildness of South African wildlife landscapes and iconic species, captive facilities for the five iconic species should be reviewed, with a view to phasing these out.

Captivity

15. While the Report expresses concern regarding how captive animals in general are dealt with and makes recommendations that the Animal Welfare Act and the Performing Animals Act be revised, the Report does not go into detail on the issue of captive elephants and the use of elephants for entertainment. This is a shortfall in the Report.

16. According to the National Norms and Standards for the Management of Elephants in South Africa,7 (“Norms and Standards”) the Minister must have published an Annexure VII that provides Minimum Standards for the management of captive elephants8 within 12 months of the Norms and Standards coming into effect. It has been thirteen years since then and no Minimum Standards have been published.

17. As recognised in the Norms and Standards, elephants are intelligent, have strong family bonds and operate within highly socialised groups and unnecessary disruption of these groups by human intervention should be minimised.

18. Science has established that elephants possess attributes once regarded as unique to humans, setting humans apart from animals. However, scientific evidence confirms that elephants have these attributes as well, e.g. emotions, empathy and capacity to grieve, culture, complex cognitive abilities, tool-use, vocal learning, self-awareness and intelligence (Bradshaw, 2007). These qualities can no longer be considered uniquely human. However, these findings are not yet reflected in the legislation on animal management aspects, such as the ones mentioned in the Report.

19. One main issue that needs to be addressed in our current legislative and policy framework is the term “captivity” itself. This is applicable to all the species in the Report and not just elephants. What does it mean to be “in captivity”?

20. The Report refers to captive animals as “those that are in controlled environments, where the focus is on individual animals that are dependent on various levels of intensive human interaction”.9

21. The Threatened and Endangered Species (“TOPS”) Regulations10 2007 defines "captive breeding operation" as a facility where specimens of a listed threatened or protected animal species are bred in a “controlled environment” for conservation or commercial purpose.11

22. A "controlled environment" means an enclosure designed to hold specimens of a listed threatened or protected species in a way that -

7 GN 251, GG 30833. Commencement date 1 May 2008. 8 Section 22(2). 9 Page 143 of the Report. 10 GN R150, Gazette No. 29657. 11 Regulation 1(1).

22.1. prevents them from escaping; 22.2. facilitates intensive human intervention or manipulation in the form of the provision of - 22.3. food or water; 22.4. artificial housing; or 22.5. health care; and 22.6. may facilitate the intensive breeding or propagation of a listed threatened or protected species, but excludes fenced land on which self-sustaining wildlife populations of that species are managed in an extensive wildlife system. 23. An “extensive wildlife system" means a system that is large enough, and suitable for the management of self-sustaining wildlife populations in a natural environment which requires minimal human intervention in the form of- 23.1. the provision of water; 23.2. the supplementation of food, except in times of drought; 23.3. the control of parasites; or 23.4. the provision of health care. 24. "kept in captivity" or "captive kept", in relation to a specimen of a listed threatened or protected species, means that the species is kept in a controlled environment for a purpose other than - 24.1. transfer or transport; 24.2. quarantine; or 24.3. veterinary treatment. 25. The Free State Nature Conservation Ordinance defines “captivity”, in relation to any animal, as “the confinement of such animal to such an extent that it cannot maintain its natural way of living”.12 26. The Western Cape Nature Conservation Ordinance defines “captivity” as “captivity” in relation to any wild animal as “the keeping within an enclosure by means of any fence, wall or obstruction of any kind whatsoever in such a way that such wild animal is unable to maintain itself by natural means”.13 In terms of section 35, any owner of land on which any species of protected wild animal is found may in the prescribed manner and form and in relation to any such species, apply to the Board for a certificate of adequate enclosure as contemplated by subsection (4) in respect of the whole or any portion of such land. 27. Subsection (4) provides that if the Board, having regard to the size of the land in respect of which application has been made under subsection (1), the number of the species of protected wild animal to which such application relates which is normally found on such land and such other circumstances as it may consider relevant, is of opinion that the animals in question are in effect being kept in captivity, it shall refuse the application or grant the application subject to certain conditions.

28. Section 10 refers to minimum cage sizes:

12 Nature Conservation Ordinance 8 of 1969. 13 Nature Conservation Ordinance 19 of 1974 as amended.

29. In relation to any nondomestic animal, the KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation Ordinance defines “keep in captivity” as “to have [elsewhere than in a zoo, any game, wild mammal or exotic mammal as a pet or under private restriction] the same in possession or custody, to exercise complete control over it, or in any way whatsoever and by whatever means to restrict its movement or flight.”

30. However, the Conditions for Keeping Wild Animals in Captivity, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa14 (“The Procedures”) contains tables in Annexure 2 in which different area sizes are prescribed per species. Area sizes are dramatically different to other provinces as is evident between the table below from the KZN Procedures and the one above from the Western Cape:

31. Therefore, to “keep in captivity” or “captive animal” in KZN has much stricter controls with animals on large tracts of land deemed to be “captive” according to the Procedures. For example, a cheetah on

14 Registration, Permits and Licenses for Keeping Wild Animals in Captivity and for the Exhibition, Breeding or Relocation, or Trade, Sale or Exchange (Alienation) of Such Animals, 2013.

less than 5000 ha of land in KZN is deemed to be a captive Cheetah; an elephant on less than 2000 ha is also deemed to be “captive” . This has caused many of its own problems and issues around inconsistency in the legislation and policy have been noted in the Report:

31.1. One of the key challenges raised in panel meetings relates to a lack of coordination and harmonization of legislation and policy resulting from shared competencies as prescribed in schedules 4 and 5 of the Constitution.15 Issues proposed by the sub-committee for further consideration by the HLP include the development of environmental implementation plans and environmental management plans to coordinate and harmonise the environmental policies, plans, programmes and decisions of the various national departments that exercise functions that may affect the environment or are entrusted with powers and duties aimed at the achievement, promotion, and protection of a sustainable environment, and of provincial and local spheres of government, in order to:

31.1.1. minimise the duplication of procedures and functions; and

31.1.2. promote consistency in the exercise of functions that may affect the environment.16

31.2. Key findings of this study were also included:17

31.2.1. The plethora of nature conservation legislations relevant to each of the nine provinces and the age of these legislations.

31.2.2. Major inconsistencies in the various regulatory provisions. An addendum (Annexure H) was provided containing the relevant provisions for all 40 selected species for the primary nature conservation legislation per province as well as the NEMBA TOPS, the Game Theft Act and the Animal Improvement Act (AIA).

31.3. Notable evidence of inconsistencies in regulating the game industry and lack of congruence in law reform among provincial conservation authorities.

32. For the purpose of the following section, we apply the more general use of “captive” and not the terms used in the Procedures that are applied by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife.

33. There are a number of issues with keeping elephants in captivity. These include:

33.1. Physiological, e.g., obesity, feet and back ailments, infectious diseases etc.

33.2. Psychological, e.g., trauma, PTSD, depression etc.

33.3. Cognitive, e.g., intelligence, emotional range etc.

33.4. Evolutionary, e.g., ingrained complex social system, gregarious etc.

15 Page 112 of the Report. 16 Sections 11 and s12 of NEMA provide a mechanism through which to address the lack of cooperative governance. 17 Page 125 of the Report.

34. The below is divided into two overall sections - one on the intelligence of elephants and the other on the effects of captivity. This is based on scientific studies with references to the literature (a reference list is provided at the end).

Elephant intelligence and cognition A. Cognitive tests in elephants 35. Research in elephant cognition is proving that elephants are a lot more complex than previously thought. Cognitive tests used on animals phylogenetically closer and more similar to humans (chimpanzees, gorillas etc.), such as the mirror-self-recognition, tool use etc., may not be appropriate in determining cognition in elephants (Bates, Poole and Byrne, 2008), but they have been tried. 36. The mirror-self-recognition test was performed on three Asian elephants in the Bronx Zoo, USA. The aim of the test is to determine whether an animal knows that it is looking at itself in a mirror – and not another individual, i.e., self-recognition. One of the three elephants passed all levels in the test (Plotnik, de Waal and Reiss, 2006). Another example was a study on self-awareness and self-understanding, where tame Asian elephants were asked to hand the researcher a stick, whilst standing on a mat that the stick was attached to. This meant that the elephant would have to understand this and move off the mat in order to give the researcher the stick. The elephants got off the mat and handed the stick to the researcher significantly more times during the test session than during the control sessions (Dale and Plotnik, 2017).

37. More ecological relevant studies have been conducted in recent years. These studies have focused on elephant perception and memory in the field (Bates, Poole and Byrne, 2008). These studies have shown female elephants’ ability to distinguish between vocalisations of approximately 100 other female elephants (McComb et al., 2000), elephants’ ability to use urine to distinguish specific family members (Bates et al., 2007), as well as elephants categorising humans into subclasses based on the level of threat they pose through visual and olfactory cues (Bates et al., 2007), as well as acoustic cues (McComb et al., 2014).

B. Teaching is a sign of intelligence

38. In a normal elephant society, a big part of an elephant’s life is to learn from its seniors in the herd. Young elephants are taught basic survival skills, such as which plant species are edible, where to find water, which routes to take to a specific area etc., but also more complex aspects such as their language, how to behave in certain situations, how to raise their own future calves etc. Allomothers are an important part of this teaching and a relatively unique feature for elephants. This teaching of skills and the ability to learn them require intelligence. Their behaviour is not an instinctual reaction to an event (Lee and Moss, 2011). 39. Other aspects of intelligence levels in elephants, which are difficult to prove scientifically beyond anecdotal, are their empathy and their personalities. Elephants have been seen consoling distressed individuals and mourning the death of loved ones (Douglas-Hamilton et al., 2006; McComb, Baker and Moss, 2006). Each elephant has a unique personality, e.g., some have a well-developed sense of humour, some are gentler than others, some are introvert and others extrovert, some are popular and some are not etc.

C. Social Structure is a sign of intelligence

40. A large portion of the elephants’ large brains are used for the information processing necessary for their complex social life, with complicated networks and multiple social tiers, and hierarchies both within family groups and between family and bond groups over vast distances (Bates, Poole and Byrne, 2008). 41. Elephants have a complex social network, known as a fission-fusion society. The core is made up of a family unit consisting of blood relatives, i.e., mothers, daughters, sisters etc. Beyond the family unit are bond groups, clans, and independent males or bachelor groups of males. The different types of groups are not isolated from each other. The bonds that exist between members of a family unit extend to other groups in the area. An example is bond groups. When a family unit becomes too big, it will split in two. After such a split, the two new family units do not move off to different regions never to have contact again. Instead, they remain in contact with each other, and will regularly meet, i.e. they are bond groups (Moss and Lee, 2011).

D. Communication is a sign of intelligence

42. Communication in elephants involves a range of sensory channels – visual, acoustic, tactile and olfactory. These communication methods can be used separately and in synergy. The development of the use of all these diverse channels highlights the complexity of elephants and the intelligence needed for this type of information processing. 43. The language of elephants has been studied in detail over the years. The researchers at Elephant Voices spearheaded by the renowned elephant researcher, Dr Joyce Poole, have developed a database of all the visual behavioural displays observed, identified and translated to date18. Vocalisations have been recorded, dissected and assigned meaning through numerous in-depth studies (Poole et al., 1988, 2005; Poole and Granli, 2004, 2011; Poole, 2011; Lee et al., 2013).

44. An example when all communication channels are used is the greeting ceremony between bond groups. Visually by raising their heads, and lifting, spreading, and flapping of the ears. Acoustic via vocalisations such as rumbles and trumpets. Tactile by rubbing against each other, touching each other with trunks, intertwining trunks, and clicking tusks together. Olfactory by temporal gland secretions, urination and defecating (Poole and Granli, 2011).

45. Not only is this happening within the close-knit units of family groups and bond groups, but it is also happening between individuals of distant groups. Long-distance communication through low-frequency vocalisations is detected aurally and seismically adds to the complexity of elephant communication. Through this type of communication, it has been shown that elephants have the ability to recognise correctly the vocalisations of up to 100 other females (McComb et al., 2000; Bates, Poole and Byrne, 2008).

46. During the studies leading up to the development of the well-known beehive fences now widely used in human-elephant conflicts, it was discovered that elephants have a specific vocalisation used only to warn others of bees being present. This was determined by playing recordings of this specific rumble to resting and relaxed elephants, who then displayed the behaviours observed during encounters with actual bees, such as avoidance behavioural displays like headshaking, dustbathing and retreating at speed from the source of the sound (King, 2010; King et al., 2010)

18 https://www.elephantvoices.org/multimedia-resources/24-elephantvoices-gestures-database-background.html

E. Other signs of intelligence

47. From the above, we should have acquired an understanding of the complexities within elephant societies. The intelligence of elephants is also evident in how they associate with their surrounding environment. Studies have shown elephants to be able to categorise people into subgroups based on the level of danger they pose to them. This requires extraordinary cognitive abilities. 48. Studies showed elephants were able to identify and categorise people into subclasses based on their ethnicity through odour and garment colour. Two groups were used – the Maasai and the Kamba, where the Maasai are known to hunt elephant while the Kamba tribe is not. In addition, the Maasai use characteristically brightly coloured garments that may be detected from a distance on the savanna, while other tribes generally use paler garments. These facts were utilised in a set of experiments. When met with the colourful Maasai garments, the elephants reacted with aggression. To build on this, another subset of experiments looked at the olfactory cues by exposing the elephants to both unworn and worn garments. Garments that had been worn by Maasai elicited strong defensive behaviours, as opposed to garments worn by Kamba men (Bates et al., 2007).

49. This ability to classify people into groups is not limited to visual and olfactory cues. Acoustic cues are also used to divide people into groups based on sex and age, with adult male humans posing a higher threat and resulting in strong defensive actions than adult females and young boys. Not only that, the studies also showed that elephants distinguished based on ethnicity, classifying Maasai speakers as more threatening than Kamba speaking people (McComb et al., 2014).

50. The intelligence of elephants can also be seen in human-elephant conflicts. The majority of crop-raiding events take place during the cover of darkness. These findings are based on collaring elephants with satellite collars that allow a remote observation of the elephants’ movements and behaviours. In human dominated landscapes with a high animosity to elephants, the elephants generally keep to thick vegetation during the day, essentially hiding from humans. As night falls, and human activity decreases to its lowest, the elephants start moving. This does not only apply to crop-raiding events, but also in situations where elephants have to move through an area inhabited by people in order to get to a safe area. It is evident that the elephants are trying to get through the hostile environment as quickly as possible (Osei-Owusu, 2018; Wilkie and Douglas-Hamilton, 2018; pers. obs. by I. Hansen, ERP). This type of behaviour speaks volumes of their intelligence, as it requires memory of past events of that particular area, as well as pre-emptive planning by waiting for cover of night.

Elephants in captivity

F. Taming elephants

51. The taming of elephants is also known as Phajaan or “elephant crushing” – the essence of which is to break the animal’s spirit through deprivations and torture. The process starts with removing the young elephant from the safety of its family group. This in itself is traumatic to the young one. As it is still in its emotionally formative years, a separation will cause attachment disorders, and will have long-term impacts on brain function and predispose the animal to physical and mental disorders and diseases (Bradshaw, 2007). Then it is immobilised with chains and/or ropes, beaten it with wooden rods and poles and prodded with bullhooks and deprived feed and water (Bradshaw, 2007; Bradshaw, 2010).

This can continue for days, until the elephant submits to handlers. If it survives the crush, the negative reinforcement technique will continue in every handling from here on out, e.g., bullhooks used to move individuals to desired areas or to perform certain tricks etc. The relationship between handler and elephant always holds an element of fear through the tools and methods used during the taming process (Bradshaw, 2007). 52. Not all elephants survive this process. A study on Asian elephants showed that the younger the calves are at taming, and the less experienced their mothers are, the higher the mortality risk (Crawley et al., 2020). Another study investigated the difference in age-specific mortality between wild-caught and captive-breed Asian elephants. They found that the older the individual is when captured and tamed, the higher the mortality risk, even years after the event (Lahdenperä et al., 2018).

53. There are alternatives to this method being used now focussing on positive reinforcement, where the training revolves around using rewards to encourage favourable behaviour, as opposed to punishing unwanted behaviour. I do not know which taming and training techniques are used in the captive facilities in South Africa. It is stated that the zoos in the US stopped using corporal punishment in the mid-1970s.

G. Elephants and PTSD

54. Neuroscience has shown that all mammals share a ubiquitous developmental attachment mechanism and a common stress-regulating neurophysiology (Bradshaw et al., 2005; Bradshaw and Schore, 2007; Bradshaw, 2010). Because of these similarities, animal studies have been used to make inferences about human behaviour. But it translates the other way as well. Therefore, studies of human post- traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have been instructive in understanding the effect violence has on elephants. Dr Bradshaw has conducted research in this field and has shown that elephants can and do suffer from PTSD both in the wild and in captivity (Bradshaw et al., 2005). 55. In wild elephants, the causes of PTSD are instances of deaths of family members through hunting and poaching, but also on larger scales such as culls and poaching in war times. Depression, abnormal startle response, hyper aggression and unpredictable asocial behaviour are some of the symptoms of PTSD in wild elephants (Bradshaw et al., 2005; Bradshaw, 2010).

56. A policy paper assessed the welfare of elephants held in captivity in the US entertainment industries, i.e., circuses, zoos and other entertainment businesses, and related this to the scientific knowledge available on this. The conclusion was clear. Due to the severe detrimental physical and psychological effects of captivity and training, the practices of keeping elephants in captivity should be ended (Bradshaw, 2007).

H. Effect of captivity

57. Some wild animals may fair relatively well in captivity, but elephants are not one of them. They adapt poorly to a life in captivity, which is evident through the wide range of challenges and issues associated with captive elephants, e.g., decreased longevity, obesity, foot ailments, depression, auto-immune diseases, intraspecific aggression, stereotypy and infanticide. Psycho-behavioural symptoms include personality disorders, poor social skills, unpredictable outbursts, self-injury, poor social skills and anhedonia (Bradshaw, 2007).

58. For one, elephants in captivity are known to suffer from a range of ailments not observed in naturally free-roaming conspecifics. One common ailment is problems with the feet. A survey cited in Bradshaw (2007), states that 62 % of captive elephants in North America suffered from severe foot disease. It is suspected that these ailments occur due to a combination of the hard surfaces of and limited mobility in their confinement areas. Another common ailment for captive elephants is joint disorders, with 42 % of captive elephants suffering from this (Bradshaw, 2007; Saddiq et al., 2020).

59. Obesity is also a common ailment of captive elephants. And possibly a contributing factor to the disorders associated with feet and joints mentioned above, which do not seem to be occurring to a large extent in wild elephants (Bradshaw, 2007). However, studies on this are lacking but being conducted. One study showed that obesity does seem to be prevalent in North American zoos (Morfeld et al., 2016).

60. Captive elephants have a significantly shorter life-span than their free-roaming wild conspecifics (Clubb and Mason, 2002; Clubb et al., 2008). In addition to this, they are known to breed poorly in captive facilities (Clubb et al., 2008). According to Bradshaw (2007), a survey of 35 North American zoos showed 60 stillbirths, and out of 15 live births, 73 % of the females had complications during the birth. Infanticide committed either by the mother herself or other elephants present are not uncommon. Neither is infant-neglect and injuries to calves. The root cause is suspected to be the trauma of captivity experienced by the mothers (Bradshaw, 2007).

61. Elephants are migratory animals following the nutrients and water availability in natural settings. They have evolved to this form of life, which is evident in their genetic makeup. Placing mobile and active elephants in captivity is a dramatic departure from their normal lives and what their bodies are evolutionary adapted for (Bradshaw, 2007).

62. In captivity, the elephants are subjected to control, both physically and socially. No aspect of their life is their own with scheduled times for feeding, being outdoors, being activated, confined, treated for various ailments etc. 63. According to the Assessment of the potential risks of the practice of intensive and selective breeding of game the Intensive Breeding Report,19 (“the Assessment”), there is general agreement that removal of animals from the wild for keeping in captivity can be detrimental to wild populations if done at unsustainable levels. There is also recognition that in exceptional circumstances only, captive populations can contribute to the recovery of threatened populations.20 64. The Assessment defines domestication as “a long and endless process during which intensively managed animals become gradually adapted to both humans and captive conditions” (Teletchea 2015). (This is a much more complex process than taming, because it includes genetic modifications of the species in question by intensive directed selection for preferred phenotypic traits and their underlying genotypes (Cieslak et al. 2011)). 65. How long it takes to domesticate a species varies depending on the species. For instance, it took 6 generations for the first signs of domestication in silver foxes and only by the 30th generation 70-80 % of the population was considered ‘domesticated elite’. That is equivalent to ~45-47 years of intensive

19 Jeanetta Selier et al. (2018): Assessment of the potential risks of the practice of intensive and selective breeding of game to biodiversity and the biodiversity economy in South Africa. https://conservationaction.co.za/resources/reports/an-assessment-of-the- potential-risks-of-the-practice-of-intensive-and-selective-breeding-of-game-to-biodiversity-and-the-biodiversity-economy-in-south- africa/ 20 Page 45

artificial selection (with no training or socialising with humans to keep the domestication purely genetic). 66. Obviously it is not possible to draw a comparison between the two species, but just a ‘food-for-thought’ and completely speculative calculation: 67. An elephant generation would probably be ~20-25 years. Let’s say 20 years and use the findings from the silver foxes, that means the first signs of domestication would be seen in the captive and selectively bred population after approximately 120 years with 70-80 % of the population showing signs of ‘elite domestication’ after 600 years. 68. It is entirely possible that it would happen faster in elephants considering their intelligence and if they were trained and exposed to humans continuously. But the point is just to illustrate that it is a process taking a lot longer than 20 years – in case there are people arguing that the elephants in captivity now are already domesticated or in the process of being domesticated. 69. The Assessment confirms that it is well established in the scientific literature that over time domestication results in diverse phenotypic and behavioural changes to wild animals, including decreased flight responses, increased sociality, earlier reproduction, and modification of endocrine and metabolic systems. 70. It further confirms that the removal of specimens of Threatened species from the wild for introduction into intensive breeding facilities is likely to be detrimental to the wild populations. Currently animals for intensive breeding are sourced from either extensive systems or other intensive breeding facilities, and vary depending on the species.21

I. Elephant riding22 71. Elephants are wild animals. Some may have been tamed, but they are not domesticated animals. This means that individuals have had to go through a traumatic training process in order for them, as wild animals, to allow humans on their backs. This is not a species that has been breed over centuries to reach the level of domestication we see in for instance horses. Horses have been selectively bred by humans to pull carts and wagons, as well as to mentally allow people to ride them, but also physiologically to develop a spine strong enough to carry them.

72. The harmful nature of riding elephants was raised in 2014 by World Animal Protection.23 Since then, there have been major strides in elephant welfare in this regard with over 200 travel companies have removed elephant riding as an option on their itineraries. TripAdvisor stopped promoting venues offering elephant riding in 2016. Instagram join in in 2018 by banning the ability to search hashtags related to unethical wildlife tourism and instead raised awareness by installing a “Learn more” button. With the goal of being a leader in animal conservation, South Africa should set an example for the rest of the world with regards to elephant interactions and elephants in captivity. 73. Elephants are large animals, but their spine is built to carry their massive bodies, not to carry additional weight on their backs. The spine’s bone structure consists of bony protrusion extending upwards, resulting in pain when pressure and weight is applied to it. Carrying people can lead to spinal injuries.

21 Page 127 22 Reference to several news articles: https://www.worldnomads.com/responsible-travel/make-a-difference/planet/why-elephant-riding-should-be-removed-from-your-list https://www.goodthingsguy.com/environment/debunking-many-myths-elephant-riding/ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/article/global-wildlife-tourism-social-media-causes-animal-suffering 23 https://www.worldanimalprotection.org

The weight of a person is enough to cause damage but add on a chair (known as a howdah) with a weight of 200-400 kg and the likelihood just increases. Furthermore, the chair can also result in skin abrasions through the continuous friction.

74. According to a 2016 journal article,24 globalization of standards for elephant trekking would not be sustainable, as each country offering the experience has a variety of unique consequences with bans or restrictions (Duffy et al., 2011). The working elephants lack the ability to adapt, making them difficult to reintegrate into the wild (Duffy et al., 2011). This further limits the banning of the practices. However, phasing out the practice over time is recommended. A shift in focus on standards geared towards improving the conditions, financial sustainability, and number of sanctuaries for the working elephants is recommended. This shift will allow the gradual phasing out of the practice and re-wilding of working elephants. Retiring working elephants gradually, rather than suddenly, can thus eliminate the potential harm to the elephants and the surrounding communities.

75. The article concludes that the elephants that humans use as a means in leisure practices are mistreated and often abused. The death rates within the confining walls of zoos are increasing while the birth rates are decreasing. Elephant trekking in the tourism industry focuses heavily on profit rather than elephants' welfare, causing unjustified stress to working elephants. The conspicuous consumption of ivory and "trophies" is highly unproductive, impeding on freedom and supporting elephant captivity.25

76. A report published in June 2015 by the NSPCA on the welfare status of elephants in captivity in South Africa revealed that South Africa has 26 elephant back safari and sanctuary facilities nationwide, housing a total of approximately 125 elephants. In South Africa, 17 attacks on people by captive/managed elephants were reported between 2001-15, resulting in six deaths and 11 injuries.26

77. In a 2016 article27 Dr. Louise de Waal28 uses the Five Freedoms29 as per the directives of the World Animal Health Organisation [OIE]30 to discuss elephant back riding:

Freedom from hunger and thirst

78. In the process of breaking the elephant’s spirit (see also Freedom 3), the animal is often deprived of water and food, according to World Animal Protection (WAP).31

79. Under natural conditions, elephants spend up to 16 hours per day foraging for food, eating a wide variety of vegetation and fruits. The foraging time of a captive elephant used for riding is heavily restricted or even absent, making the food and water presentation unnatural and constantly interrupted due to the entertainment programmes for the paying visitors. Their diet is generally limited, consisting of the bare basics with a lack of variety that makes the provision of supplements essential, especially Vitamin E.

24 The Use of Elephants in Leisure and its Negative Effect Illuminare: A Student Journal in Recreation, Parks, and Leisure Studies, Volume 14, Issue 1, pages 1-9, 2016, Online Publication Date: June 13, 2016

26 https://nspca.co.za/animal-welfare/wildlife/elephants-captivity/elephant-exploitation/ 27 https://www.travindy.com/2016/11/truth-behind-elephant-back-riding-south-africa/ 28 https://conservationaction.co.za/author/louise-de-waal/ 29 Referred to on page 197 of the Report 30 https://www.savc.org.za/pdf_docs/2017%20Jan%2010%20Animal%20Welfare%20statement.pdf 31 https://www.worldanimalprotection.org/sites/default/files/media/int_files/breaking_africas_elephants_report.pdf

Freedom from discomfort

80. The camps where the elephants are kept when not used to ride are unnatural with often unsuitable substrate like concrete that can result in foot problems. The riding takes place at any time of the day, even during the heat of the day, and during which the elephants lack places to hide from the public.

Freedom from pain, injury or disease

81. First and foremost, young elephants are broken into submission, typically by restraining them with ropes or chains, so they can only move when instructed. This often includes inflicting pain by using bullhooks, wooden battens, and whips. This training process, based on a system of dominance, can last for weeks until the animal becomes submissive and compliant. Once the handler has established dominance, this situation is then maintained through a delicate balance of fear and reward. More than half of the elephant facilities in South Africa use this method called ‘free contact’, which includes the use of physical punishment by using a bull-hook to train the elephants ) and sometimes even electric cattle prods. According to WAP, elephant handlers in Southern Africa confirmed that young elephants undergo a similar breaking process as used in Asia.

82. A fully trained elephant used for elephant back safaris, carries at least one person if not more on its back, either on a blanket or saddle, but often with no padding at all. Although elephants are large and strong animals, they are not built to carry weight on their backs, which can cause pain and potentially spinal injury. Carol Buckley, president of Elephant Aid International32 explains that “instead of smooth, round spinal disks, elephants have sharp bony protrusions that extend upwards from their spine. These bony protrusions and the tissue protecting them are vulnerable to weight and pressure coming from above.”

Freedom to express normal/appropriate behaviour

83. In the wild, elephants live in complex, multi-layered, matriarchal groups comprising family units of related females and their offspring. Young elephants are often taken away from their mothers and siblings, more often than not captured from the wild, and forced to live in more or less solitary conditions away from their highly social family groups.

84. African elephants in captivity generally are allowed to forage under supervision for some time of the day, but the space available for foraging is insufficient. The nights are spent in confined camps and in many cases the elephants are chained. These unnatural conditions restrict them from forming proper social relationships and force these naturally nocturnal and diurnal creatures to be inactive.33

85. It is commonplace for male elephants in musth, when they become more difficult to manage, to be chained for long periods of time. The chains can not only physically harm the elephants, but can be psychologically detrimental to these naturally active, inquisitive and intelligent animals.

Freedom from fear and distress

32 https://elephantaidinternational.org/about/founder/ 33 https://www.worldanimalprotection.org/sites/default/files/media/int_files/breaking_africas_elephants_report.pdf

86. The main issues under this heading are the lack of escape from the public and the excessive human handling and human touch. Again, most of the issues mentioned under Freedom from pain, injury or disease also apply to this section.

J. Conclusion

87. The Report refers to One Welfare34 which highlights the interconnections between animal welfare, human well-being, and the environment. It fosters interdisciplinary collaboration to improve human and animal welfare internationally. One Welfare also helps to promote key global objectives such as supporting food security, sustainability and reducing human suffering. While the Report admits that the nuances of our understanding of animal welfare are evolving, “there are basic principles that are broadly and globally accepted, including the principle that cruelty and inhumane treatment of animals is unacceptable.”35 88. The use of elephants in leisure serves no true and absolute necessary benefit to humans and causes undue harm and suffering to elephants. The cruel and abusive use of elephants in unproductive leisure, such as trophy hunting, entertainment (e.g., zoos, circuses), ivory consumption, and elephant trekking is a strong contributing factor to their diminishing population now threatened by extinction. Raising awareness on the status of the elephant population and the causes of its decline, with a more ethical and educational approach for elephants in the tourism industry who are incapable of re-integration, is crucial.

Recommendations

89. It is therefore submitted that the Report should include the following recommendations: 89.1. The term “captivity” be nationally legislated, taking into consideration the need for range for elephants and other species, the ability to effectively manage the elephants and the vast difference between zoo captivity versus open range “captivity” in game farms or nature reserves.

89.2. Elephants should only be kept in captivity for the purpose of rehabilitation or sanctuary or temporarily pending their release into the wild.

89.3. The minimum standards for the welfare for well-being of captive elephants are agreed through an independent process (role-players, regulatory authority) and included in the permit conditions.

89.4. Immediately amending the conditions of permit holders to exclude entertainment activities such as elephant back riding, to use the clause 9A in the revised NEMCA for well-being of animals.

89.5. The Minister initiate a time-bound process to phase out all elephant interactions.

89.6. The Minister publishes Annexure VII that provides for Minimum Standards of the management of captive elephants, and compliance with these Minimum Standards shall be a requirement of

34 Page 197 35 Page 198

the Management Plan and a condition of the permits for keeping elephants in captivity. The content of the Minimum standards should be released for public comment prior to finalisation.

Human-Elephant Conflict Mitigation

90. According to the Report, besides hunting, most elephants are killed on reserves due to human- elephant conflict, normally because of poor internal fences, or due to poor tourist guide behaviour, artificial water provisioning and other issues which could be prevented, if responsible management was practiced.36 91. The Report does not, however provide recommendations as to how this conflict may be resolved. 92. ERP’s strategy is to protect and preserve elephants and rhinos in the wild, through an approach based on alleviating poverty among rural people in surrounding areas, and supported by a range of non-lethal, tactical interventions. 93. Conservation organizations typically specialise in their particular branch of conservation, and then engage in community outreach as a means to an end. In the case of ERP, poverty-alleviation and community development are front-and-centre, insofar as the strategy is concerned. This is predicated upon the reality that one is unlikely to be able to protect and preserve elephants and rhinos on a sustainable basis in the medium to long term, without meaningfully altering the economic circumstances of impoverished and underprivileged people living on the periphery of conservation areas housing the threatened species. 94. Rural people in these areas are (or should be) the true custodians and ongoing guardians of these creatures, and there should accordingly be a clear nexus established for them between their economic and social welfare, and the safety and well-being of the elephants and rhinos under their care. ERP’s approach and fieldwork methodologies are designed to establish and realize this nexus for communities, establishing powerful economic engines to achieve income substitution, and obviate the need for (legal) hunting and culling, and poaching. These economic initiatives include but are not limited to agriculture, apiculture, training (technology and conservation), waste management and aspects of eco-tourism. 95. Attached to these comments is a summary of ERP’s approach to human-elephant conflict mitigation. According to ERP, human-elephant conflict should be approached on two fronts: 95.1. On the ground with direct mitigation approaches; and 95.2. From the top with more indirect but powerful and encompassing tools. 96. Examples of direct mitigation approaches include beehive fences; water sources for wildlife; water sources for people; electrified fences; chillies and unpalatable cash crops; monitoring programmes with collaring and 24/7 surveillance; support the start-up of elephant related business such as honey, paper production from elephant dung, crafting of wooden sculptures from trees knocked over by elephants; and education and training. 97. Examples of indirect mitigation approaches include land-use planning, corridors linking protected areas with limited adverse activities, policies encouraging co-existence, buffer zones on perimetres of

36 Page 225

elephant areas, replacement compensation and a change of mindset and willingness to try new methods.

Recommendation

98. The Report must propose measures that should be taken to facilitate the limiting of human-animal conflict. 99. ERP is willing to provide input to the HLP in this regard.

Conclusion

100. Once again we commend the HLP on the thorough Report and thank the HLP for the opportunity to submit our comments thereon.

Yours sincerely,

Kirsten Youens (Signed electronically)

References not included in the footnotes

• Crawley, J. A. H. et al. (2020) ‘Taming age mortality in semi-captive Asian elephants’, Scientific Reports, 10(1), pp. 1–9. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-58590-7. • Douglas-Hamilton, I. et al. (2006) ‘Behavioural reactions of elephants towards a dying and deceased matriarch’, Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 100(1–2), pp. 87–102. doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2006.04.014. • Lahdenperä, M. et al. (2018) ‘Differences in age-specific mortality between wild-caught and captive- born Asian elephants’, Nature Communications. Springer US, 9(1). doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-05515- 8. • Lee, P. C. et al. (2013) ‘Enduring consequences of early experiences: 40 year effects on survival and success among African elephants (Loxodonta africana)’, Biology Letters, 9(2). doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2013.0011. • Lee, P. C. and Moss, C. J. (2011) ‘Calf development and maternal rearing strategies’, in Moss, C. J., Croze, H., and Lee, P. C. (eds) The Amboseli Elephants: A long-term perspective on a long-lived mammal. The University of Chicago Press. • Morfeld, K. A. et al. (2016) ‘Assessment of body condition in African (Loxodonta africana) and Asian (Elephas maximus) elephants in North American zoos and management practices associated with high body condition scores’, PLoS ONE, 11(7), pp. 1–20. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0155146. • Moss, C. J. and Lee, P. C. (2011) ‘Female social dynamics: Fidelity and flexibility’, in Moss, C. J., Croze, H., and Lee, P. C. (eds) The Amboseli Elephants: A long-term perspective on a long-lived mammal. The University of Chicago Press. • Osei-Owusu, Y. (2018) Human-Wildlife Conflict: Elephants - Technical manual. • Plotnik, J. M., de Waal, F. B. M. and Reiss, D. (2006) ‘Self-recognition in an Asian elephant’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(45), pp. 17053–17057. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0608062103. • Poole, J. H. et al. (1988) ‘The Social Contexts of Some Very Low Frequency Calls of African Elephants’, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 22(6), pp. 385–392. • Poole, J. H. et al. (2005) ‘Animal behaviour: Elephants are capable of vocal learning’, Nature, 434(7032), pp. 455–456. doi: 10.1038/434455a. • Poole, J. H. (2011) ‘Behavioral Context of Elephant Acoustic Communication’, in Moss, C. J., Croze, H., and Lee, P. C. (eds) The Amboseli Elephants: A long-term perspective on a long-lived mammal. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 125–161. • Poole, J. H. and Granli, P. K. (2004) ‘The visual, tactile and acoustic signals of play in African savannah elephants’, Endangered Elephants, past present & future. Proceedings of the Symposium on Human Elephant Relationships and Conflicts, Sri Lanka, September 2003, pp. 44–50. • Poole, J. H. and Granli, P. K. (2011) ‘Signals, gestures, and behavior of African elephants’, in Moss, C. J., Croze, H., and Lee, P. C. (eds) The Amboseli Elephants: A long-term perspective on a long- lived mammal. The University of Chicago Press.

• Saddiq, H. M. U. et al. (2020) ‘Post-mortem examination of a female elephant suspected of having degenerative joint disease: A case report’, Advances in Animal and Veterinary Sciences. • Wilkie, R. D. and Douglas-Hamilton, I. (2018) ‘High-resolution tracking technology reveals distinct patterns in nocturnal crop raiding behaviour of an African elephant (Loxodonta africana) in Amboseli, Kenya’, Pachyderm, 59, pp. 41–48. Available at: file:///C:/Users/Sagarika/Downloads/514-2269-1- PB.pdf.