NEW! REVISED EDITION-CHAPTER 4- LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR ANIMAL RIGHTS AND GAME MANAGEMENT IN NIGERIA

CHAPTER 4

LEGAL REGIME OF ANIMAL RIGHTS AND GAME MANAGEMENT IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS

INTRODUCTION

Wildlife preservation may appear to mean more or less the same as nature conservation, but for a long period it has been used differently.  The reason is that the first wildlife to benefit from protection was those mammals and birds important as game.

The firs game protection laws were not only intended to preserve the pleasures of the chase for the privileged few but also to prevent over-exploitation of an important food animal.

In the 18^th and 19^th centuries in Europe, hunting became ritualized as a so-called sport and the incidental importance of the game species as food. The term “wildlife” was therefore closely associated with preservation of game animals and this concept is still widely held today.

In a few countries, there is now a trend in conservation thinking to define wildlife as including all species of animals and plants found in nature.  This has been the case for many years in counties such as Britain, the Netherlands and a few others.

The number of National Parks in the world today totals several hundred. The National Parks established before the World War II generally followed the American ideal of a wild natural landscape of great scenic beauty as in the Yellow Stone National Park founded in 1872. Some of the earliest and most famous include the Swiss National Park founded in 1914, the Ordesa National Park in the Spanish Pyrenees founded in 1981 and the Abruzzo National Park in Italy founded in 1923. The finest of the parks established since 1945 is perhaps the Tatra National Park lying across the Czechoslovak/Polish border.

The National Parks of Africa were among the finest wildlife regions left in the world. One of the most famous is the Serengeti National Park in Tanzania.

In the pre colonial Africa, the only recorded instance of practical game management during indigenous African communities comes from Ghana where since the remote past, giant land snails have formed a major article of diet.  The hatching season is proclaimed by the beating of a gong after which the collection of immature snails is discontinued. It is rather regrettable that these far-sighted snails at the expense of larger animals are being slaughtered with cold-blooded ruthlessness at all seasons in most African countries.  However, we may find succour in the awareness of snailry as reasonable number of people particularly the unemployed ones are into snailry.

On the continent of Europe, birds and flowers received greater protection than other forms of wildlife apart from game.  The British bird protection laws are more comprehensive than those of other countries and include adults, nests and eggs.

Oceanic is a Continent blessed with unique wildlife resources ranging from walrus in the cold Chukchi Sea, humpback whales in waters around Hawaii, Sharks in Sinai Red Sea, green turtles in Great Barrier Reef, sea icon in the water of South Australia, coral reefs of New Guinea (Island), and Dolphins in Ford, New Zealand.

Antarctica is one of the wettest region on earth, beneath the musky layer are animals normally seen at great depths. A flock of emperor penguins and red star fish streak through polar waters of Mamardo Sound.

AUSTRALIA

The efforts of Australian National Parks and wildlife services has led to the improvement of poultry through the introduction of a large flightless bird similar to ostrich called “emu” into a form of domestication. In 1991¹, emu meat was legally classified as a form of poultry.  Emu meat is said to be low in fat and cholesterol, yet high in protein. The large birds also yield two kinds of leather: garment quality from their body and reptilian style from their legs.  Emu even produced oils that can be used in making cosmetic products.

Australia is a land of surprises filed with bouncing kangaroos and flightless emus.Australia hosts the last untamed camel herds left on earth, the largest mob of wild horses in the world and a plague of donkeys unparalleled on the planet.

Australian explorers, Burke and wills were accompanied by camels imported from India in 1860 on their epic crossing of Australia from South to north.  The exotic creatures became the preferred companions of early adventurers because of their superior strength and stamina.  They are fuel efficient as they amazingly carried 300 kilogrammes loads for 800 kilometres on just 15 litres of water.

This animal is wonderfully reliable as they helped in hauling food and equipment to the frontier gold towns, in building the overland telegraph line from Adelaide to Darwin, and in surveying the Trans-Australian Railway connecting Sydney and Perth. Over an area of 4 million square kilometres, they blazed a trail that modern machines still find hard to follow.

By 1922, domestic camel count reached 22,000. As automobile took over, many camels were let loose to roam and reproduce freely in the wild. Today, more than 200,000 now inhabit the Australian deserts with the hope that the populations will double every six years.

Aside the foregoing, these camels that are left to run the wild makes Australia popular the owner of the only disease-free camel herds in the world and so each year a small number are exported to zoos and parks in the united states and Asia.

The history of the Australian horses is of queer mixture of feelings, both romantic and tragic.

In 1788, the first fleet of English vessel discharged its burden of prisoners, soldiers and horses on Australian shores. These horses carried early pioneers to the four corners of the continent.  Strays and run away soon established feral or wild herds and these horses became known as brumbies.  The word “brumby” was thought to have come from the Queensland Aboriginal word “baroomby” meaning “wild”.

The horses rank increased in number after World War I when demand for the “water” (a horse bred specifically for the Australian Light Horse Brigade and used by the Indian army) declined and the mounts were set free.  Today, an estimated 300,000 feral horses roam the continent but when drought strikes they starve or die of thirst. On account of this two thousands are culled each year. Some are processed for human consumption, others sold as pet food.

The Horses’ cousin, donkey also run the wild. They are more prolific than the feral horse and distributed over a wider area than the camel like horses, donkeys were first imported in the late 1700’s to pull loads or plow fields, and they quickly adapted.  They were released into the wild en masse during the 1920’s and their population densities reached 30 times that of natural herds of wild asses.

This animal was designed for desert life, donkeys like camel inhibit perspiration when dehydrated and survive water loss equal to 30% of their body weight (A loss of 12% - 15% would kill many other mammals).  They dined on lush pasture but are able to thrive on coarse plants that cattle abhor.

By the 1970’s, more than 750,000 donkeys swept across half the continent.  Systematically culled from 1978 to 1993, over 500,000 donkeys were destroyed in northwestern Australia alone. Lately, Australia fitted radio transmitters with over 300 donkeys in what is called “Judas Programme”.  They are released to join their herd and they are tracked by helicopter because there areas are inaccessible as there are no roads and most of the areas can be reached by helicopter.  Their companions are humanely culled and left where they fall.  They call these donkeys to maintain small seed populations in the hope that within a very short time donkey numbers will be back to where they were in the 1970’s.

CANADA

Canada has an exemplary system of game management through her National Parks, some forty years ago the hereditary beaver hunting grounds in Quebec province had been almost trapped out and fresh stocks were flown in from south of the St. Lawrence; at the same time the native Indians were dissuaded from hunting until reproduction had restocked the area.  In 1960, beaver quota for Quebec province was approximately 30,000 pelts, each of which, if properly prepared may be valued as high as thirty dollars.  Indiscriminate hunting reduced the pronghorn antelope from an estimate maximum of 40,000 to 30,000 in 1924.

The application of a sound conservation policy has restored the pronghorn population to a stable 400,000. Numbers are regulated through hunting and the sport has become profitable sideline for many farmers.

Concern for wildlife prompted territorial government to establish the Kluane Game Sanctuary in 1943. But many considered the protection insufficient and after decades of debate and compromise, Kluane National Park after being on drawing board in the early 1970s was established in 1972, the designation “Reserve” was added four years later in 1976.  The Park covers 8,500 square miles in the south western corner of Yukon Territory an area more than half the size of Switzerland. Kluane National Park reserve is among the largest and youngest of Canada’s wilderness parklands.

A further distinction came in 1979 when Kluane and its Alaska neighbour – St. Elias National Park and Reserve were recognized by the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) as a joint World Heritage site.

This park inhabits more than 455 species of mammals and well over 100 birds species- wolves and coyotes, grizzly bears and black bears, mountain goats, dall sheep, hares, owls and eagles, predators and prey migrators and hibernators, nocturnal and diurnal creatures.

Other National Parks include St. Elias National Park, North Yukon National Park, Alaska Arctic National Wildlife Refuge – a project to breed musk ox farms is being sponsored in part by the University of Alaska and has the blessing of the Canadian government.

COSTA RICA (CENTRAL AMERICA)

       

Most of the world’s amphibians species of frogs and toads, many land lizards and other reptiles inhabit the warm, humid tropic. Costa Rica is home to nearly 130 known species of frogs and toads out of 4,000 known species of amphibians.  Many thousands of sea turtles of several species nest on beaches along its pacific and Caribbean coasts.

        Costa Rica has established a system of National parks and Nature Reserves totaling almost a fifth of its land area to protect its natural bounty of 6,500 known species of reptiles. Turtle eggs are sold in many of the country’s bars where the yolk is mixed with hot sauce and downed in a short glass. In Costa Rica, egg harvesting was legal at certain times on Playa Ostional and on Playa nacite in Sauta Rosa National Park.

        Costa Rica devised an innovation management plan for ostional, a plan that is successfully balancing the traditional needs of the villagers with the mandate of protecting an endangered Turtle species.

        Under a law enacted in the 1980s local residents can collect eggs during the first thirty hours of an arribada, supervised by guards supplied by the association. After that, armed guards are assigned at night to protect the nests from poachers. The women of the village are asked to collect any newly born turtles that emerge in the perilous down hours and carry them safely to the sea to preclude them from being attacked by the gangs of black vultures poised to pick off the baby turtles.

DENMARK

        No less remarkable are the achievements of this small densely populated and intensively developed country. The average annual bag is 25,000 roe-deer, as well as numerous lesser game animals and birds- a figure which is more than what natural increase can offer.

UNITED KINGDOM

        In England, the history of British law and practice actually started in 1863 when it became known that veterinary students in France were being required to perform, as part of their training, operations on live horses without an anesthetics, a series of operations on each horse. A memorandum signed by 500 British veterinary surgeons was taken to Alfort by one Mr. James Cowie, and the practice was subsequently discontinued².

        In 1870 at the Liverpool meeting, the British Association Council called upon the committee of section D to consider from time to time any step that can be taken to reduce to its minimum the suffering entailed by legitimate physiological inquiries and experiments which are not clearly legitimate on live animals.

        In the following year, at the Edinbergh meeting, the committee of section D presented a report and later in the year, 1871, a committee of the British Medical Association reported on similar lines. These reports recognized unequivocally that the practice of experimenting on animals entails a danger of inflicting unjustifiable suffering, and that this danger must be guarded against³.

       

        There have been recorded unsuccessful attempts by W. Pulleney who in 1800 sponsored a bill against.

        In May 1876, Lord Caernarvon introduced in the House of Lords a Government Bill designed to give effect to the recommendation of the Royal Commission and which was eventually passed into laws as the Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876.  This is the main Act of Parliament regulating the use of animals for the purposes of experiments. Since this Act was written many others have been produced to cover not only animals used for experiments but also those unconnected with scientific work.

 The Act regulates the use of living vertebrate animals (excluding man) for the purposes of experiment calculated to cause pain. Such experiment in any event may only be carried out on premises previously registered for this purpose with the Home Office. The individuals performing the experiments must have a licence to do so. Once a licence is issued by the Home office then a relevant certificate may be appended. It is the certificate that puts limits on the type of work the experimenter may carry out.

        In 1965, the British government set up Sir Sydney Little-wood Committee 1876 Act was also studied and reported that the 1876 Act appears to be rather open to abuse and not wide enough in its reference. The Committee put forward many powerful recommendations for changes in law.  These recommendations have not till this time been effectively put into effect.

        The story of the first known prosecution was told by Mr. Scott in evidence before the Second Royal Commission (1906-12).  The Act had come into operation on 15^th August, 1876.  Three days after the enforcement of the law, one Dr. Abrath of Sunderland, issued a large placard headed “The Balham Mystery” announcing his intention to deliver a lecture at Sunderland on “Antimony” where he would perform experiments on animals to show the effect of poisons, and to demonstrate his theory that Mr. Bravo was not killed by the drug.

 The Branch of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals at Sunderland immediately reported the matter to the Secretary in London and prompt measures were taken to prevent the gentleman from performing his experiments.  According to the sixtieth section of the statue mentioned above, an offence had already been committed by the announcement to the public of experiments on animals, Dr. Abrath, having spoken contemptuously of the new statute at his lecture and provoked the decision of a portion of his audience against it, instead of apologising for his projected defiance of the Act, was summoned to appear before the Sunderland Borough Bench; at the instance of the RSPCA where he was fined for publishing the placard alluded to.

        The second prosecution was brought in 1881 by the Victoria Street Society against David Ferrier alleging that he had “damaged” the brains of monkeys while inappropriately licenced to do so.  The prosecution failed when witnesses gave evidence that G.F. Yes and not David Ferrier had been the actual experimenter. It should be noted however that the Act is in two main parts.  The first part makes several humane restrictions by providing the experimenter with special certificate.  Properly equipped with licence and certificate; and experimenter may inflict severe pain without fear of prosecution.

        In R v Mackenzie⁴. The defendant was prosecuted for cruelty to animals and was accordingly sentenced.  On appeal, based on the ground of not giving him fair hearing, the Appellate Court upheld the decision of the trial Court.  This law was flanked with criticism ever since its introduction and has been insufficiently far reaching in its requirements.  However, in 1963, the Government set up a Departmental Committee under the chairmanship of Sir Sydney Little Wood to consider the present control over experiments on living animals and to consider whether, and if so what changes are desirable in the law or its administration, 83 recommendations were made calling for new legislation, some for improved administration and other for the giving of statutory force to requirements already imposed.

        Many other Anti-Cruelty to Animals Acts have been passed, notably the Protection of Animals Act 1911. Other Acts which deal with farm animals, domesticated animals etc; their breeding, treatment and slaughter are as follows: Dogs Act 1906; Destructive Imported Animals Act 1932; Docking and Nicking of Horses Act, 1950; The protection of Animals (Anesthetics) Act, 1954, 1964; Protection of Birds Breeding Act 1958; The slaughter of Animals Act, 1958; The Animals (cruel Poisons) Act 1962; The slaughter of poultry Act, 1967; Agriculture (Miscellaneous) Act 1968. Codes of Recommendations for Welfare of Livestock, and Criminal Law Act of 1978.

        Protection of Animals Act, 1911 (1912 in Scotland) is much more extensive in many ways than in that of 1876.  Violations of its requirements have resulted in a considerable number of prosecutions for causing unnecessary suffering to animals.  Thus in the case of Dee v. Yorke⁵ the Respondent Dr. W. Yorke, was a licence under the 1876 Act, but was prosecuted unsuccessfully under the protection of Animals Act, 1911 by RSPCA Inspector H.L. Pee. It was proved that Dr. Yorke administered a drug to a donkey which brought on it a gradual paralysis.  On 30^th June, 1913, 10 days after the drug was given, the donkey was reported to be lying in a ditch, unable to rise.  The magistrate found that the Respondent could not be regarded as having knowingly or intentionally caused unnecessary suffering to the animal and accordingly dismissed the information.

        This case differs from the prosecution of Professors E.G.T. Liddel of Oxford in 1946 in that Yorke’s donkey was claimed to be under experiment until it died on 5^th July 1913, whereas Liddel’s cats were stock animals not under experimentations at the time of the alleged offence.  Liddel was convicted under the 1911, Act.

        Another recent case occurred in Scotland on 20^th March, 1978 at Cupar, Sheriff Court, A lecturer at ST. Andrews University was charged under the Protection of Animals (Scotland) Act, 1912 that on numerous occasions together with a student psychologist; he cruelly ill-treated, tortured or terrified 178 canaries, 160 Laboratory mice, 17 gold fish and 2 rats.  The accused was held liable.

        In an unlicensed experiment under the 1876 Act involving offering the animals as live bait to several cats and observing their pre-catching behaviour.  The Sheriff, John C. Mclnnes, on 23^rd March found the case proved and imposed the maximum fine of £50. However, under the Criminal Law Act of 1978 the maximum fine under the 1911 and 1912 Acts was raised to £500.

        In spite of the foregoing, the British Coalition government in 2010 scrapped protection for hens, game birds, pigs, cows, sheep and circus animals thereby stalling labour initiatives to improve animal welfare some weeks before they were due to come into force with this, millions of hens will have their beaks mutilated, game birds will remain in cages, pigs, sheep and cows in abattoir will lose crucial protection from abuse. The Agriculture Minister James Paice in November 2010 delayed by five years a ban on beak mutilation of laying hens due to come into force in January 2011.  This, the RSPCA described as “an insult to hens”.

  The government also halted a series of cases against abattoir operators, for incidents the Foods standards Agency (FSA) called the worst cruelty they had seen. The keeping of game birds in battery cages for breeding pheasants within months. Hundred of Thousands of birds are affected on slaughter house cruelty against pigs, sheep and cattle by abattoir workers affecting over 29 million animals. The prosecutions which had started against operators of abattoirs and workers following an undercover investigation by Animal welfare Charity, Animal Aid and the footage showing animals being kicked, slapped, stamped, and picked up by fleeces and ears and thrown into stunning pens with sheep having their throat slashed while not properly stunned were dropped on the ground that the prosecution said it had become aware of legal precedents where courts had refused to accept “unlawfully obtained video footage”. Instead, the Food Standards Agency has asked the slaughter houses in England and Wales to install CCTV cameras.

      On circus animals, what the public support is the ban on use of wild animals such as tigers, elephants, lions, camels, zebras, snakes, crocodiles in circus for performance in the four British Circuses, the Great British Circus, Peter Jolly’s Circus, Circus Mondao, and Bobby Robert’s Circus as the RSPCA believes the circus is no place for a wild animal. It does not believe that wild animals should be subjected to confinement, constant transportation and abnormal social groups associated with circus life. The UK government promised in 2007 that wild animals in traveling circuses would be banned yet lions, tigers, elephants and other animals still tour the UK.

       In the wake of the public outcry of the government’s betrayal of animal rights, the government offered a rather weak defence that Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) an independent group recommended that an outright ban should not be put in place until there are alternatives to stop pecking and cannibalism affecting over 20 million laying hens and that FAWC advised there is no sufficient science to justify a ban on cages for breeding game birds.

        However, the last government announced they would ban the practice of beak trimming in 2002 but it failed to put sufficient pressure on the industry to comply. Rather than dropping the ban altogether Mr. Paice has set a new timetable for the ban in 2011 with an end to trimming hen’s beaks with hot blades and that trimming using infrared continues. Even with infrared, there is some scientific evidence that suggests infrared is just as painful as the blades and that it still causes distress because their natural behaviour is to peck, which trimming prevents.  

        The English Game Laws which formed the basis for colonial states originated following the loss of royal control over forested lands.  After the Norman invasion, existing forests and all game (but not all wildlife) was appropriated by the kind as his private property.

        Trespass and poaching were strictly punished primarily as places where the king and those whom he designated as worthy might engage in the chase.  As the power of the landed gentry grew, individual grants of privilege were superseded by general game laws that described the nature of access to game for the society as a whole.

        The first law of this kind was passed in 1390, limited to those owning real estate with rental value of more than forty shillings, per year, the killing of hares, conies or deer and the keeping of dogs.

        By 1671, a refined version of the 1390 law and emerged, access to game was limited by this law to four categories of individuals.  Those with (1) real property worth in excess of $ 100 annually;  (2) Sons and heirs of an esquire or of a person of higher degree (3) those with lease of 99 years or more worth in excess of $100 annually and the owners of previously existing franchise, granted to their ancestors by a previous king.

        Concerning transport of livestock there are Codes of Recommendations for the welfare of livestock.  These codes are crown copyright and are reproduced with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty’s, stationery office.  The Codes are as follows. Code No 1 which deals with cattle has section 1 dealing with general provision; section 2 housing; section 18 – 20 space; section 13-15 with ventilation and temperature, section 21- 28 food and water, and sections 29- 26 management.

        Code No 2 dealing with pigs has sections 1-3 as introduction; sections 4-9 housing and ventilation; sections 10 – 11 temperature; section 12 lighting, section 13 mechanical equipment and services; section 14 space allowance; sections 15 and 16 food and water, sections 17 -21 management.  It has additional recommendation for pigs kept indoors (farrowing).  Section 22- 24 deal with pigs and suckling piglets; section 25 growing pigs, sections 26-27 with breeding sow and gilts, section 28- 30 with boars whilst sections 31 -33 deal with pigs kept outdoors.

       

        Code No 3 dealing with domestic fowls has sections 1–5 as introduction; sections 6-8  housing generating; section 9-10 housing on floors; section 11-14 housing in cages, ventilation and temperature; sections 20-21 lighting; section 22-23 mechanical equipment and services; sections 24-25 space allowances; sections 26-28 food and water, sections 29-34 general management; sections 35-37 beak trimming, sections 38-39 blinkers (spectacles), section 40 with dubbing; section 41 toe cutting, section 42 dewinging, section 43 castration – surgical castration should not be undertaken for example dubbing.  If dubbing is necessary it should be done within first five days of life or using curved scissors. Dubbing of older birds is a difficult and severe operation which should be done only on veterinary advice and by a skilled operation. Sections 44-47 deal with disposal of dead day- old chicks and hatchery waste.

        Section 42 states that dewinging- pinioning, notching or tendon severing which involve mutilation of wing tissues should not be undertaken.  Sections 49 -51 relate to day – old and section 52- 54 to growing birds.

        The recommendation made in Sections 49-54 of Code No 3 relate to handling and transport operations of animals during international transport. For example, it is provided that day-old chick’s packing materials should be dry and free from moulds.  Section 50 provides that chicks should be transferred to the brooders as soon as possible.

        The Code recommended additionally on Range birds management in section 55 and that Range birds should not be kept on land which is “fowl-sick” (fowl sick land is land which has become contaminated with organisms which cause or carry disease to an extent which would several prejudice the health of poultry on the land, sections 59-61 deal with housing whilst section 62 relates to food and water.

        Code No 4 dealing with turkeys has sections 1-5 as introduction: sections 6-8 deal with housing generally; sections 9 and 10 with housing on floors, sections 11-14 with housing in cages and their brooders, sections 15-19 with ventilation and temperature generally, early stage and later stage, sections 20 and 21 with lighting, sections 22 and 23 mechanical equipment and services; section 24 with space allowances; section 24 breeding on floors, in cages and in enclosed range areas, sections 26-28 with food and water; sections 29-35 management generally; section 36 handling of hens; section 37 tow cutting, sections 38- 40 beak trimming; section 41 desnooding, section 42 dewinging, sections 43-46 deal with disposal of unwanted day-old poults and hatchery waste, section 47 handling and transport of stock on the premises generally, sections 48-50 growing and adult birds.

        Interestingly, provision has been made for the periodic review of these Codes and subject to the approval by the Parliament for their amendment. Further Codes were prepared to include sheep and other livestock such as ducks and rabbits.

GUYANA

        This is small South American country that has some of the Continent’s finest untouched wilderness.  It is also noted for the abundance of crocodiles, which form the largest predators.

       

KENYA

        The regulations of the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance of 1951 were strictly enforced.  The hunting regulations as from 1953 were applied without discrimination to all races, no difference between indigenous and expatriate populations.  There are licences and permits for:

a.                Full game licence permits shooting of the animals specified in the third schedule of the Wild Animals Preservation Ordinance in the number specified therein for a period of 12 moths.

b.                14- day licence as above but species and numbers are reduced and hunting is permitted for 14 conservative days.

c.                 Private land licence permits hunting of animals specified in third schedule only on private land is unlimited number for 12 months.

d.                Special licences in respect of elephant, rhinoceros ($15) Giraffe ($15), leopard ($10) cheetah ($10), ostrich ($5) colobus monkey ($1), blue monkey ($1).

Permits to shoot game for the purpose of providing labour are not normally granted.  Penalties are contained in sections 45 and 46 of the Wild Animal Preservation Ordinance.  The maximum penalty is for offences against rhinoceros and is $500 and 6 months imprisonment.

The legislation grants powers of search, arrest and seizure for the purpose of enforcing the game law.  Game management is carried out by ensuring that no species is allowed to suffer extreme elimination in the hands of man in areas where its presence can be tolerated or which had been set aside for its enjoyment.

No capturing campaigns are carried out as such but where game has to be removed from an area that is required for development, preference is for capture rather than shooting. Every encouragement is given to private enterprise to organize and foster hunting tours and the results areexcellent⁶.

Today, the wonders of wild nature are part of the wealth of Kenya. The country is blessed with abundant wildlife gainfully managed in its National Parks, which include Massai Mara National Park, L. Nakudu National Park, Malindi Marine National Park, Wutamu Marine, National Park, Tsavo National Park and a host of others.

Nakudu National Park is noted for birds such as flamingo. Malindi and Wutamu Marine and noted for their beautiful coral reefs where over 200 species of fish can be seen in the clear waters and Tsavo National Park is noted for elephants, zebras, vast herds of hundred of cape buffalo.

The Nairobi National Park’s establishment was no easy task after a tumultuous battle against obstacles of reluctance of colonial authorities in heeding the 1930’s voices of activists like Archie Ritchie and Mervyn lowie.  Nairobi National Park, the first in East Africa was born on December 16, 1946 when the then colonial governor of Kenya, Sir. Philip Mitchell signed its birth certificate.  The park contains more than 100 mammals’ species and 400 bird species.

The park is relatively small; it has an estimated size of 117 square kilometres

Nairobi National Park operates one of the best known animal orphanages where separated or strayed infant animals are reared and restored to the wild which animals include buffalo, antelope, civet cats, warthogs, mongooses, elephants and rhinoceros.  As a result of poaching Kenya lost more than 95% of its rhino in less than 20 years.  By the early 1990’s, number had fallen from 20,000 to barely 400. Due to intense protection measures, the rhino population has increased to about 450 and Kenya is now one of only three African counties in which black rhino populations are either stable or increasing.  

NAMIBIA

       

The local tribesmen have now become involved in the conservation of their own natural resources.  According to the magazine-African Wildlife, a conservation education campaign started by the Namibia Wildlife Trust resulted in both the Damara and Heroro tribal authorities banning hunting totally in the region⁷.

        The Wildlife Trust also gained support from Himba herdmen in Kaoko land who had appointed their own tribesmen as game guards. This positive support of the traditional leaders has led to tribal feelings of pride in their natural wildlife. However, the numbers of elephant and black Rhinoceros in this spectacular region have increased.

        The Namibia’s Ethosa National Park is managed for tourism as well as for wildlife.  Wildlife is being patrolled by scouts on foot and on horse-back and by rangers in four-wheel drive vehicles.  The animals are counted and monitored by wildlife researchers and a fence of 500 miles in circumference encloses the entire park to discourage animals from straying into adjacent farmlands.

        The Park has some 50,000 big mammals roaming the wilderness reserve covering more than 8,500 square miles in the interior plains of south western Africa.

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

        Tonda wildlife management area covers 54 square miles on the far southwestern corner of the country.  The Bencbach River flows into the Arafura Sea. Rusa deer was introduced into it by the Dutch missionaries in 1922 and wallabies graze on the seas of grasses.

        Papua New Guinea is an Island paradise of birds whilst its neighbouring Islands are home to more than 700 known species of birds (more than in all Europe) and (100 fewer than in all of North Africa).

RUSSIA

       

        An impressive instance of wildlife management led to the recuperative power of certain ungulates concerning the saiga antelope in the Soviet Union.  In spite of a prohibition of hunting instituted in 1919, the saiga population steadily diminished due to a combination of poaching, wolf predation and exceptionally severe winters.

        By 1930 only a few hundred remained and special measures were taken to protect the species.  Within ten years the number of saiga had been restored to the level of century ago and today, the total saiga population has reached approximately two million.  The annual harvest is between 150,000 and 200,000 saiga (each yielding an average of 60lb meat and a valuable skin) and yet they continue to increase.

Siberian tigers once roamed Korea, Northern China, Mongolia and as far west as Lake Baikal, in Russia.

For many years Siberia’s immense and inaccessible forests provided ideal territory for these great tigers Humans, who  pose the only serious threat to the cat’s existence seldom ventured there when Siberian tigers became few in the wilds of eastern Siberian when lumber companies from abroad have been clear-cutting most of the forest cover.  As the trees disappear, so do the deer, elk and boars as well as the Siberian tigers.  To help stop their decline, the Russian government maintains large wildlife preserves, such as the Sikhote Alin Nature Reserve. Greater efforts were made to save the Siberian tiger and local inhabitants took the lead in these.

As a result, the Siberian tiger made a modest recovery.  A census carried out in 2005 found that between 430 and 540 tigers live in Siberia.

On the other hand, Siberian tigers in captivity breed readily and do relatively well.  There are more than 500 Siberian tigers in zoos around the world.  These tigers are not released into the wild for the fear of assurance of their future safety particularly for poachers involved in the trade of exotic souvenirs.  Tiger teeth, claws, bones, and pelts, including those of young cubs, all fetch a high price.

SPAIN

        Through Cabarceno Nature Park in the Spanish province of Cantabria, it was proved that a scarred landscape can be beautified and converted into a Park. Restoring beauty and embellishment to a ruined desolate and Nature landscapes of cabarceno is commendable Brawn bears climb cliffs once chiseled out by Roman miners Elephant and gazelles graze on lush pastures that grow on the formerly stripped bared land.  Young tigers roam about. 

IVORY COAST

        In 1926, Ivorian government took protective and innovative measures of its biological gem and established Tai National Park located in the southwest corner to cote d’ ivory near the Lebanon border .  The park is the largest remaining portion of the virgin tropical rain forest.  The park includes more than half of the existing rain forest in West Africa of 3,500 square kilometers.

  

TANZANIA

        Tanzania (formerly Tangayinka) Fauna Conservation Ordinance of 1951 arrangement affords a reasonable compromise between the unrestricted liberty of the indigenous population to hunt at will and the comparatively severe restrictions, which are applied. It is reported that, while no great number of local licencees are yet in Tanzania, the system appears to be working well.

        Of the most famous African National Parks and which have become one of the great tourist attractions of the tropics are Serengeti National Park and Ngrogro Conservation Centre of 5,4000 and 3,000 square miles respectively. The ecosystem provides a paradise of animal life that is marvel to behold.  Visitors are astonished by the unique sight of thousands of large mammals as well as many species of birds, lizard’s snakes, flowers and insects.

        The Serengeti is a wild land with immense, rolling grassland encompassing an area of some 30,000 square kilometres.  The land is covered   with a layer of rich volcanic soil, creating ideal conditions for the lush grasses that carpet the land.  There are areas of acacia woodland and thorn tree savanna that supply foliage for browsing families of elephants.

The cattle of the Massai were excluded from the plains of the Serengeti National Park because it was claimed that they were overgrazing the grasslands and impoverishing the wildlife habitat.

        Apart from the above, the Selous Game Reserve is a place where a glimpse of the lifestyle of elephants, rhinos and hippopotamus can be caught.  There are now some 40,000 hippos in the Selous⁸.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

        The seed of the National Park was planted more than a century ago in California where commercial exploitation of Yosemite Valley and the senseless cutting of giant sequoias had aroused great public concern.  A handful of men came together to put pressure on Congress to preserve the beautiful valley and a grove of the irreplaceable trees both of which were on the federal property.

        After overcoming some disabilities in founding a National Policy and a National Wildlife Service after years of struggle, there are now over 15 million acres set aside as National Parks or with associated status, Yellow Stone, best known of American National Parks was established by an Act of Congress on 1^st March, 1872 and was the first.

        The law which brought it into being laid the foundation for a new pattern of land use by which the United State Congress subsequently set aside millions of acres for preservation exclusively for the conservation of wildlife and the pleasure of the people.

        In 1916, another Act of Congress established the National Park Service, which administered the federal funds which are appropriated each year for maintenance and improvement of the National Parks.

        Under this legislative mandate, the National Park Service is charged with a dual responsibility (a) To preserve for all time the natural wonders within its boundaries in an undisturbed state and (b) To make them available for the enjoyment of all the people. Under its commitment to preserve the parks in their natural state, the park service is required to protect wildlife from trappers and hunters and to preserve the forests, streams and lakes from despoliation. Proposals from President Roosevelt is instructive when he said thus: “the nature has given recurrent and poignant warnings through dust, storms, floods and droughts that we must act while there is yet time if we would preserve for ourselves and our posterity the natural sources of a virile national life”.

        In 1870’s there were various legislation on game.  Many species especially deer and game birds were routinely protected by seasons closed to hunting, some states restricted efficient hunting technologies such as hounding deer or trapping, snaring and netting, upland birds.

        By the early 1870’s in New York City, law enforcement by game protection associations demanded legislated marketing periods that extended beyond the hunting season.  Consequently, 1871 (cap 721, pp. 1669-81) offered the two months following the close of quail and goose season for the disposal of legally killed birds.

        The 1872 Maryland Law (cap 54, pp.74-81) prohibited the use of vessels within one-half mile offshore, prohibited the use of the huge, cannon-like punt and swivel guns, and limited the hunting of waterfowl to daylight hours of Mondays, Wednesday s and Fridays.

        Licence fee of twenty dollars and five dollars per annum were payable respectively by users of sink boxes and sneak boats. 

        To enforce these and other provisions, an 1870 Statute (cap 296, p.507) ordered the commanding officer of the state oyster police to detail inspectors “ at such times as he shall be able to spare them” during the wildfowl season.

        The North Carolina’s law (cap. XLIIp. 85) prohibited Sunday and Night hunting and the use of any gun “other than can be fired from the shoulder”.

        Oregon in 1874 prohibited the taking of deer or elk to obtain horns, hide or hams as the sole prize.

        A Colorado Statute of 1872 (p.p 134-136) required that the hunter of big game bring all edible portions to market.

        The provision of the Yellow Stone Park Act, passed by Congress in 1872 indicated that there was sympathy for this view on a national level.  The Act directs the secretary of the interior to attend only to “the wanton destruction of the fish and game found within the said park and to their capture or destruction for the purpose of merchandise or profit”.

        Alabama first had its general game law in 1907.  The prohibition of fire, hunting, enacted originally as part of law relating to the Mississippi territory in 1803 and provided only a penalty of 39 lashes for violation by slaves was reviewed for the state in 1822 as”An Act to suppress the evil and pernicious practice of fire hunting” and applied only to deer hunters in possession of gun and fire at night.

        Georgia law 1858 prohibited non-residents from hunting and fishing within the limited of the state.

        Arkansas had its game law in 1875 and the Connecticut legislature in 1861 (ch. LXXI, pp. 102-103) carefully defined trespass as entering the land of another for the purpose of hunting contrary to the provisions of the game law and without the consent of the owner or occupant.

        Kentucky in 1861 (ch. 58, p.p. 69-70) protected insectivorous birds except against the landowner on this own land.

        Nearly 100 years following the passage of the British Cruelty to Animals Act, the United States Congress passed the Animal Welfare Act (AWA).  The delay in enactment of a Federal Laboratory Animal Statute was due more to the nature and evolution of the American political system than to any other factor.  Until the middle of the 20^th century, the states were considered the proper level of government to regulate animal research, if there was to be regulation. The 10^th Amendment to the U.S Constitution reads “The power not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited to it by the states are reserved to the states respectfully or to the people “Gradually, state’s rights were eroded by an expanded interpretation of the Constitution and Federal Government became formally involved.

        The first National Laboratory Animal bill in the U.S. congress was introduced in 1916 by Senator Jacob H. Gallinger. Hearings on this bill were held on 19^th June, 1916. However, no further action was taken until 1966 when the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966 was passed, based on the promise that the authority of the Federal Government to regulate interstate commerce could be applied to the sale and use of experimental animals.

        The Animal Welfare Act, 1970⁹ is an amendment of an earlier 1966 Act. It is an amalgam of provisions relating to the commercial use of animals as well as to the use of animals in research facilities Section 13 of the Act provides that the secretary shall promulgate standards to govern the humans handling, care treatment and transportation of animals by dealers, research facilities exhibitors.

        And shall require, at least annually, every research facility to show that professionally acceptable standards governing the care, treatment and the use of animals, including appropriate use of anesthetic, and tranquilising drugs during experimentation. Section 16 provides that the secretary shall promulgate such rules and regulations as he deems necessary to permit inspector to confiscate or destroy in a humane manner any animal found to be suffering as a result of a failure to comply with any provision of this Act or any regulation or standard issued there under.

        There are other federal laws protecting laboratory animals.  Both the endangered species¹⁰ and the Marine Mammal protection Act which protect animals that are subject to controls under these laws in respect of purchase, acquisition or capture, any marine mammals or endangered species that a permit must be obtained for these purposes. Only scientists and public display facilities may obtain these permits.  The Endangered Species Act requires that experiments may be done only if they directly benefit the species.  Thus, breeding programmes, dietary need studies etc are acceptable but not solely for the benefit of human research.

        The Military procurement Authorization Act of 1974 prohibited research on dogs for the purposes of developing biological or chemical warfare.  The enactment of the Toxic Substances Control Act 1979 (TOSCA) shows the legal commitment of the Federal Government to test, evaluate and regulate substances harmful to the environment.  Though, TOSCA, the Environmental Protection Agency controls the manufacture and production of chemical substances and requires the submission of test date before manufacture may commence but during House consideration of the Toxic substances bill, Congress man, Richard Ottinger offered an amendment to give preference to available tests which do not involve animals.  The amendments failed to pass.  Another amendment sponsored by congressmen Andres Maguire was accepted.

        In 1971, the National Institute of Health found it advisable to issue its own policy on care and treatment of research animals.  First issued in 1971, the NIH guidelines on laboratory animals were updated in 1979 (Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources, 1979).  The principles for use of live animals specify qualified adequate analgesics and avoidance of unnecessary pain.  For example, E. Taub was convicted in 1982 under Maryland Anti-cruelty law for failing to provide adequate veterinary care for monkeys but the conviction was overturned by the Court of Appeal ruling that Maryland’s Law was not intended to cover federally supported animal experiments.

        In 1977, two employees of the University of Hawaii released two dolphins from experimental situation to the ocean.  The defence argued unsuccessfully that dolphins are persons and therefore cannot be stolen property and therefore their liberation unjustified.

        There is an Endangered Species Act 1973, which bans the import of animals or plants on an endangered or threatened list whilst the 1900 Lacey Act forbids the entry of plants or animals taken illegally out of another country. Conservation of wildlife was not left at the doors of state governments Theodore Roosevelt made conservation more than a political issue in America but rather a moral imperative.  More than a half century ago, he sounded this warning that “To skin and exhaust the land instead of using it so as to increase its usefulness, will result in undermining in the days of our children the very prosperity which we ought by right to hand down to them amplified and developed”.

       

        In the same vein he said “Experience has taught us that the prudent husbandry of our national estate requires far-sighted management.  Floods, drought, dust and storms are in a very real sense manifestations of nature’s refusal to tolerate continued abuse of her bounties. Prudent management demands not merely works which will guard against these calamities but carefully formulated plans to prevent their occurrence- such plans require co-ordination of many related activities.  But it is not wise to direct anything from Washington.  National Planning should start at the bottom, or in other words, the problems of township, countries and states should be co-ordinated through large geographical regions and come to the capital of the nation for final co-ordination”.

        On May 18, 1937, A         COOPERATIVE PROGRAM FOR TREE PLANNING ACT was enacted.  This Act called Norris-Doxey Act was sponsored by Senator George Norris and representative Wall Doxey of Mississippi.  This Act greatly expanded the systems of federal grants to the states for forest seedlings and general reforestation and afforestation.  The Act authorises co-operation in the development of farm forestry in the states and territories and for other purposes.

        On March 29, 1944 – The SUSTAINED- YIELD FOREST MANAGEMENT ACT was enacted into law.  This law formalized programmers for management of federally owned lands on a sustained yield basis.  The force of law made possible larger and more efficient logging and marketing procedures for selling the timber.  The Act promotes sustained yield forest management in order to (a) stabilize communities, forest industries, employment and taxable forest wealth; (b) assure a continuous and ample supply and stream flow preservation of soil erosion, amelioration of climate and preservation of wildlife.  In 1950, a water policy for the American people was formulated.  The report of President Truman’s Water Resources policy commission presented detailed recommendations about natural water policy. Although the report itself resulted in no general legislation on the subject, a substantial number of the recommendations have been put into effect, either through law or administrative regulation.

        Section 64 provides that preservation and enhancement of the nation’s fish and wildlife resources should be recognized as one of the important objectives of comprehensive River Basin planning.  The requirements of this objective should be thoroughly investigated in connection with project proposals designed to serve other major purposes.  Releases of water from multi-purpose reservoir projects should be adequate, except where higher uses dictate otherwise to guarantee continues use of river by wildlife and fish.  All proposed basin projects should be studied to determine in advance their effect on waterfowl habitat.

Section 65 provides that recreation potentialities of all water resources, whether natural or artificial should be recognized, and expansion of outdoor recreation opportunities should be given full consideration in all comprehensive basin programmes.  To achieve the objective, suitable land adjacent to federal water projects should be reserved for recreation use and consideration should be given to minimising water level fluctuations in storage reservoirs during vacation season, to improving low flows of rivers and to pollution abatement. In densely populated areas and in regions where natural water recreation opportunities are limited; recreation may be a controlling factor in water resources programme.

Section 66 provides that co-operative arrangements should be worked out with states and local governments for planning development and maintaining recreation areas at government water projects, subject to the observance of specified standards to preserve general opportunity to enjoy the recreation resources under conditions in harmony with the natural environment.

Section 67 provides that federal participation in recreation features of water resources programme should be determined in relation to federal participation in other recreation programmes. To this end, it is desirable that congress authorises a study of the whole recreation field, having as its objective the development of a National Recreation Policy.

THE MULTIPLE USE ACT was enacted on June 12, 1960.  This law was the first major revision in the specific laws dealing with established multiple-use for “outdoor recreation, range, timbers, watershed and wildlife and fish purposes” in addition to the sustained yield concept first introduced under Gifford Pinchot.

This Act authorises and directs that the national forests to be managed under principles of multiple use and to produce a sustained yield of products and services and for other purposes.

Section 2 of the Act provides that the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized and directed to develop and administer the renewable surface resources of the national forests for multiple use and sustained yield of the several products and services obtained there from. In the administration of the national forests, due consideration shall be given to the relative values of the various resources in particular areas. The establishment and maintenance of areas of wildness are consistent with the purposes and provisions of the Act.

Section 3 provides that in effectuation of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to co-operate with interested state and local government agencies and others in the development and management of the national forests.

Section 4 dealing with interpretation provides under subsection (a) that “multiple-use” means “the management of all the various renewable surface resources of the national forests so that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the needs of the American……”

Subsection (b) provides that “sustained yield of the several products and services” means the achievement and maintenance in perpetuity of a high-level annual or regular periodic output of the various renewable resources of the natural forests without impairment of the productivity of the land.

The report of the Kennedy-Johnson Natural resources Advisory Committee of February 18, 1961 further stressed the conservation and resource development issues, Senator Kennedy established the Kennedy-Johnson Natural Resources Advisory Committee with members in every state.  This campaign evolved into a policy advisory committee after the election. The final report of the committee was adopted at a meeting just prior to the inauguration of the president.  The recommended enactment of legislation which assured perpetuation of wildness values, that wildlife refuges and ranges must be protected to serve the purposes to which they are dedicated without interference by commercial exploitation and that immediate legislative authorization was needed to establish a loan fund advance on duck stamp revenue to permit immediate purchasing of wetlands before drainage destroys the areas; that co-operative programmes should be developed to preserve extensive wildfowl breeding grounds in Canada.  More research was needed into the serious fish and wildlife problems being caused by expanding land use and the rapidly mounting pressures of the human population.

It was also recommended that the production of fish in the lakes and wildlife on the perimeter of reservoir should become an integral part of reservoir management. The land acquisition policies should be revised in the interest of full recreational opportunity. Research into fish production in federal reservoirs was also recommended.  The committee also recommended that many needs for work in reforestation, soil conservation, plant improvement and fish and wildlife development offer potential employment for several hundreds of thousands of idle young men between ages of 16-21 years.  

        Both federal and state projects could utilize the high school “drop-outs” in need of work experience and vocational training.  Healthful out-door work would improve the level of physical fitness, reduce juvenile delinquency and generally prepare more useful future citizens.

       

        On National Parks, the committee recommended that the shorelines parks must be acquired before all potential sites are lost to urban development and expanding national park system to meet the needs of a greatly increasing population and that the program of assistance to states and local communities in the expansion of park resources should be considered.  Although, there have been in existence a considerable number of national parks and these include Yellow Stone 1872, Sequoia 1890, Yosemite was established in 1890 though as a state operated park in 1864, Mount Rainier 1899, Crater Lake 1902, Mesa Verde 1902,  Glacier 1910, Rocky Mountian 1951, Lessen Volcanic 1916, Hawaii 1961, Mount McKinley 1971, Grand Canyon 1919, Zion 1919, Bryce Canyon 1928, Grand Tetron 1929, Carlsbad Caverns 1930, Olympic 1938, Kings Canyon 1940, Haleakala 1961, Petrified Forest 1962, Canyon Lands 1964, North Cascades 1968, Red Wood 1968¹¹.

THE WILDERNESS ACT

        This Act was enacted in September 3^rd 1964.  It climaxed a long campaign by conservationists.  It ranks as one of the major conservation achievements under President Lyndon Johnson, after an unqualified endorsement from President Kennedy.  The original Wilderness Bill for which conservation groups campaigned, involved much larger land areas but the final bill did add the force of law to administrative protection for 54 areas within the national forests.

        It also includes a provision whereby other areas within the national forests are conserved.  It also included a provision whereby other areas with national parks, monuments and wildlife refuges could be added by the secretary of the interior with congressional approval.

        Before passage, the bill was carefully amended by western interests to see that it involved no real loss of valuable timber or mining potential.

        Section 2(c) defines wilderness as in contrast with those areas where man and his own works dominate the landscape.  It is thereby recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain.  An area of wilderness if further defined to mean in this Act as an area of undeveloped federal land retaining its primeval character and influence without permanent improvements or human habitation which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which;

1. Generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature with the imprint of man’s work substantially unnoticeable;

2.    has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation;

3.    has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable and use in an unimpaired condition; and

4.    May also contain ecological, geological or other features of scientific educational, scenic or historical value.

Section 3(a) provides that all areas within the national forests classified at least 30 days before the effective date of this Act by the Secretary of Agriculture of the chief of the forest services as “wildness” “wild” or “canoe” are hereby designated as wilderness areas.  The duties of the Secretary of Agriculture are contained in subsections (1)-(2).

Section 4(c) provides that: Except as specifically provided for in this act; and subject to existing private rights, there shall be no commercial enterprise and no permanent road within any wilderness as designated by this Act and except as necessary to meet minimum requirement for the administration of the area for the purpose of this Act (including measure required in emergencies involving the health and safety of persons within the area) there shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motor boats, no landing of aircraft, no other form of mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within such area.

    Aside from the foregoing, there were the Water Quality Act of 1965 and the Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966, which provided for the foundation of the first major efforts to curb the pollution blighting America’s waters.

        The Clean Air Act of 1965 and the Air Quality Act of 1967 built strong base from which Americans began to clean the air whilst the Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965 launched a new programme to find the most efficient ways of disposing of millions of tons of solid wastes that clog the city and the country side of America.

        Endangered Species Act was passed in 1969 and amended in 1973 and 1978 whilst Marine Mammal Protection Act was passed in 1972 and amended in 1973 and 1976.

ZAMBIA

        The field of conservation is remarkable despite the ineffectiveness of the structure to conserve the game stocks being attributable primarily to a badly defined British colonial office administrative policy which is not prepared apparently, to admit that conservation of the human habitat for developing people is a prime reason for colonial administration hence the proclamation of Kafue National Park on 20^th April 1950 – a Native Trust land.

        The first Game Ordinance was in 1925, a year after the British South African Company relinquished administration.  No limit was set on the number of species of which would be hunted.  The Africans were free to limit for a half-crown licence in the sub-district in which they lived. Pitman reproduced this Ordinance, limits were first introduced in 1931, but the holder of a $ 3 licence could still shoot as many as they like of buffalo, bush pig, hartebeest, lechive, impala wildebeest.

        The year 1931 was also remarkable for the establishment of the first game reserves by the Colonial Government, though the British South African Company had earlier set aside reserves as sanctuaries for the wild game.  Elephant control began in 1935, three officers were appointed to work under provincial commissioner.

        In 1937, a District Officer T.G.C Vaughan-Jones was seconded to work on game problems as a follow up in the Pitman Report. The Game Ordinance he had drafted was passed in 1941.  Red lechive is given total protection by law except for the periodical communal limits or chilas permission of which is given by the members for Agriculture and Natural Resources.

        Chilas became illegal with the introduction of the Fauna Conservation Ordinance 1955. This Ordinance prohibited all forms of game drives.  The hunt was carried through in March and April, when the areas could hold mostly males. By May, the grand females have moved in and in September there is large number of small lambs.  In March 1957, the protection of lechive was extended to cover the whole territory.

ZIMBABWE

        Despite the recent poaching, the number of Zimbabwe’s Elephants has increased to 88,000 or roughly twice¹². This upsurge gave worry to the Wildlife Management Authority, the IUCN and WWF when expressing fears of ecological problem associated with the increase.  Although recently, international conservation have continually questioned the authenticity of the Zimbabwean government’s figures on elephant numbers.

        Zimbabwe has a sound wildlife management system as it lost only 92 Elephants to poachers in 2001. Zimbabwe has Hwange National Park, Kruger National Park etc to her credit.

GHANA

Mole National Park in the Northern Region of Ghana is a landscape consisting mainly of grass, bushes and short trees.  It was established as game reserve in 1971 and covers an area of 4,840 square kilometres.  There are over 93 species of mammals, 9 spices of amphibians, 300 species of birds, and 33 species of reptiles recorded in the park.  These include lions, leopards, spotted hyenas, civet cats, elephants, bongos, dwarf forest buffalo, warthogs, waterbuck, duickers, genets, hartebeests, mongoose, baboons, monkeys, roan antelopes, porcupines, crocodiles and snakes.

In the park, cordiality of relationship between animals and man have resulted in giving different names such as knobby, Action to elephants. It has been established that elephants never forget their friends.  The heard of mammals at the England’s Bristol 300 claimed to have said an Asian elephant he worked with for 18 years recognized him when he returned after a three-year break.  This man-animal friendly relationship is desirable in ensuring the sustainable yield of wild animal population and respect for their rights.

FOOTNOTES

1.     Awake Magazine, June 22, 1993.

2.     David Sperlinger page 12, published in 1981 by John Wiley and 5 others.

3.     Ibid Page 13.

4.     (1892) 2 Q.B. 519.

5.     The Times Law Reports xxx29 May 1914.

5a.    The Independent, Saturday Edition 13^th November, 2010 pages 1, 4.

6.     Page 458, proceedings of protection of the Fauna and Flora of Africa at Bakara Belgium, Congo, 20^th – 30^th October, 1953.

7.     Awake 1992 Edition.

8.     Saturday Punch, June 22, 2002 page 36.

9.     Amended in 1976.

10.    Conservation of Nature- Eric Duffey published in 1975.

11.    Who owns the Wildlife by James A. Tober.

12.    The Guardian, Monday June 10, 2002.