African Indaba e-Newsletter Volume 10, Number 1 Page 10
Save Valley Conservancy: Myth versus Truth – the Facts
Lisa Jane Campbell and Willy Pabst
Editor’s Note (RDB): The Save Valley Conservancy (3,200 km2) in southeastern Zimbabwe is an association of over 20 private properties which has more or less survived the forceful land-appropriation in Zimbabwe, despite losing a third of its area, so far, to the Government. The conservancy is a cooperative private partnership for wildlife and natural resource conservation. The major income earner is sustainable hunting tourism. Photographic tourism does not play a significant role anymore due to the political crisis and the previous turmoil in the country. Contrary to the general situation of wildlife elsewhere in Zimbabwe the conservancy still holds viable game populations, including 140 rhinos. However, major efforts by the owners are needed to protect this wildlife against professional poachers. The ranches employ their own game scouts and a special force for rhino protection. Last August it became known that so-called ”black farmers“ – mainly ministers, politicians and VIPs – would be awarded large tracts of the conservancy for hunting purposes. In addition, hunting licenses for the private properties were given to 25 party heavyweights. The local press has reported widely on the incidents.
Several owners leapt once again to defend their properties and engaged in a major political negotiation process. This culminated in the ZANU-PF Politbureau under President Mugabe condemning the illegal move and ordering that hunting licenses should instead be given to the lawful owners. Conservancies are not subject to land reform or indigenization in the normal form but should seek “community participation” as the official statement put it. Nevertheless the respective Minister and some interested parties in the administration have ignored this directive and have persisted with the appropriation. It remains to be seen how the saga continues.
Conservancy members published the following text to explain the facts to the public in Zimbabwe.
Myth: The Save Valley Conservancy (SVC) is made up of the last vestige of white “Rhodesians” in Zimbabwe
Truth: The Save Valley Conservancy was founded in 1992, twelve years after independence.
•
A founding partner is the Government controlled Agricultural and Rural Development Authority (ARDA),
•
All properties that have changed hands since the early 1990s received Government’s “Certificate of no present Interest”, i.e. Government expressly did not exercise its right to purchase the properties.
•
Bikita Rural District Council became a full member in 2002.
•
Two thirds of all members have indigenous partners in some form.
•
SVC can accurately say, and prove, that the conservancy is 32% indigenized at present.
•
SVC is made up of international investors, local investors, on–the-ground investors, government, and some local communities. The Conservancy was created in 1992 with the involvement of:
o
the Government of Zimbabwe
o
the National Parks and Wildlife Authority
o
the Beit Trust
o
WWF
o
the Department of Veterinary Services.
Myth: The Parks and Wildlife Act of 1975 was a “colonial” tool used to benefit only white people
Truth: The Act introduced the concept of landholders, irrespective of race, obtaining wildlife-utilization rights as a consequence of taking responsibility for the conservation of animals on their land. After independence this Act was recognized and accepted by the Zimbabwe Government. The Act is considered one of the most modern and progressive of its kind and the idea has since been adopted in other countries. Dr. Rowan B. Martin said in September 2012: “Zimbabwe has led the way in southern Africa by adopting liberal and farsighted policies, and giving effect to these policies through enlightened legislation and innovative institutional reforms that have enabled all Zimbabweans to benefit from wildlife as a land use without racial discrimination. It is an insult to those pioneering Ministers such as Victoria Chitepo and Herbert Murerwa to cast their efforts in such a poor light as some have done.”
Myth: Conservancies are an invention from the “Rhodesia days”
Truth: Conservancies, including the Save Valley Conservancy, were founded in the early 1990s, i.e. some eleven or twelve years after independence. Conservancies were registered with and approved by the Zimbabwe Government in the 1990s. All properties that changed hands at that time were offered to Government first; Government issued “Certificates of no present Interest”, declaring that it had no interest in the land and its proposed use. Conservancies did not exist prior to 1980.
Myth: Wildlife belongs to the state or the people
Truth: Incorrect. Wildlife enjoys the legal status of “Res Nullius”, meaning wildlife belongs to nobody. User rights accrue legally to those exercising control over wildlife areas. In a fenced area the legal occupier enjoys user rights of wildlife. This applies to conservancies. [Editors’ Note: This is a fundamental principle of the Parks and Wild Life Act, 1975, as amended in 1982 – the primary reason why Zimbabwe’s conservation program was successful.]
For hunter-conservationists and all people who are interested in the conservation, management and sustainable use of Africa’s
wild natural resources. African Indaba is the official CIC Newsletter on African affairs, with editorial independence. For more
information about the International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation CIC go to www.cic-wildlife.org
African Indaba e-Newsletter Volume 10, Number 1 Page 11
Myth: Zimbabwe has a wildlife based land reform policy
Truth: No such policy has ever been approved by Cabinet or Parliament; it does not exist in legal terms.
Myth: Twenty-five-year leases for SVC or wildlife properties are legal and binding.
Truth: No original leases have ever been presented to anyone. The copies, dated from 2007, that were seen show signatures from the Minister of Environment and the Director General of National Parks. The Minister of Lands and many other members of Cabinet as well as legal advisors have made it clear that the leases are illegal, the signatures without authority, and doubt exists that these documents are available in the original.
Myth: The Wildlife Industry is poorly indigenized:
Truth: Government records show that 28% of Zimbabwe’s total area is designated for wildlife.
•
93% of all wildlife areas are in indigenous hands. The wildlife estate covers an area about 47,000 km2 (18,000 sq. mi.), 12.5% of the total land area of the country. The wildlife industry is the single most indigenized industry in Zimbabwe.
•
Conservancies comprise only 7% of wildlife areas outside of the Parks and Wildlife Estate.
•
Of this 7%, about one third is in indigenous hands, and over 50% is owned by foreign investors covered by Investment Protection Treaties.
•
Therefore less than 5% of privately owned wildlife areas in Zimbabwe are not directly in indigenous hands or control.
Myth: The SVC has refused to engage on the issue of indigenization
Truth: The SVC has long held the view that indigenization should take the form of community involvement and benefit and to this end formed the Save Valley Conservancy Community Trust, incorporating five neighboring Rural District Councils. This was achieved between 1996 and 1998, pre-dating the current indigenization act by some years.
For years the SVC has engaged with the Ministry of Environment and the National Parks and Wildlife Management Authority. Over three years, between 2006 and 2009, professionally prepared plans to bring increased benefit to neighboring communities, as well as to increase indigenous shareholding in the Save Valley Conservancy, were presented. Requested documentation was supplied by the Conservancy to the Ministry on many occasions without any formal or directional feedback from either Ministry of Environment or National Parks.
At the beginning of 2011 a steering committee comprised of would-be investors and members of the SVC was formed to guide the legal, accounting, and business processes that would be necessary to ensure smooth transactions. This process ran aground in July 2011 when the “would-be investors” stated they had no intention of investing but wanted “cash on the table”. Despite this the SVC and its members are still seeking to implement a viable indigenization plan incorporating communities. The door to genuine indigenous investment remains open today as in the past. Plans would have been implemented long ago had the authorities involved engaged with the procedure.
Myth: The SVC is closed to black investors
Truth: If that were so, why would ARDA have become a founding partner of the SVC and Bikita a later partner? SVC welcomes business investment (and always has), irrespective of race or nationality. The SVC Constitution, recognized by National Parks, provides for responsible land and wildlife management. All members and investors are committed to work within the boundaries of the balanced and non-racial SVC constitution.
Myth: The SVC is part of a Government- or President-approved land redistribution policy. The forced deployment of shareholders onto the SVC is part of a national indigenization policy.
Truth: Various senior members of Cabinet – notably the Minister of Lands and the Office of the President – have made it clear that Conservancies
•
are not subject to Fast Track Agrarian Land Reform;
•
should engage with their neighbors in community participation;
•
will honor foreign investments, which are subject to Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreements (BIPPA).
Neither the President, the Vice President, nor the Prime Minister have given approval to the attempts of some 25 individuals from the Masvingo Province to gain access to the wildlife assets of the SVC, by using leases issued in the name of a policy (the Wildlife Based Reform Policy) that has no legal existence in Zimbabwe. Genuine attempts by the SVC, to create and implement a viable plan that will benefit communities, have run aground on the ambitions of a few apparently self-nominated individuals who enjoy the support of the Ministry of Environment and the directorate of National Parks. If these “enforced partners” prevail, it will be at the expense of our employees, the local communities, and local as well as overseas investors.
Myth: There is only one property – German-owned – to which BIPPAs can be applied.
Truth: South African, Italian, and Dutch BIPPAs are applicable and the American investment is guaranteed by the International Law of Cross Border Investment, which Zimbabwe acknowledges as a member of the United Nations. For hunter-conservationists and all people who are interested in the conservation, management and sustainable use of Africa’s
wild natural resources. African Indaba is the official CIC Newsletter on African affairs, with editorial independence. For more
information about the International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation CIC go to www.cic-wildlife.org
African Indaba e-Newsletter Volume 10, Number 1 Page 12
Myth: Sustainable agriculture is possible within the SVC.
Truth: Since 2000, about 2,000 people have been forced to move to the SVC, an area designated as part of region V (unsuitable for sustainable agriculture). These people are slowly starving to death and their only possible survival lies in obtaining annual food aid. Thus, political expedience in Masvingo endangers the lives of thousands.
Myth: Members of the SVC needed no investment because the bush and animals were just there. Wild animals require no ongoing investments
Truth: SVC Members and investors expressly invested some 40 million USD in:
•
expensive wildlife re-stocking exercises, bringing many species back to the SVC including elephant, rhino, lion, giraffe, sable, nyala and numerous others;
•
white rhinos, which were brought in under an endowment policy by the Save Valley Conservancy Trust;
•
infrastructure, camps and lodges, water points, kilometers of water pipes, pumps, high electrified game fences, a radio system, vehicles and workshops, staff housing, and so on.
Note: The Conservancy took a one million USD loan from the International Finance Corporation with the approval of the Government of Zimbabwe. The loan was underwritten and paid back by members. Some 40% of the annual overheads are spent on managing, evaluating, monitoring, and sustaining the precarious balance of fauna and flora. A substantial portion of the workforce is trained towards these specific needs.
In addition, investment has been necessary over the last two decades to maintain, service, and improve the assets created. At present the expense of running these wildlife areas exceeds income by a factor of over 30%. Who better to attest to this than National Parks and Wildlife Authority themselves?
Myth: The wildlife industry is a very lucrative one in which shareholders are reaping huge dividends for little financial input.
Truth: Summarizing the above financial numbers, it becomes clear that running a current wildlife operation costs from 10 to 13 USD per hectare per year. The income generated, as per audited financial statements which are available for inspection, does not exceed 7 to 8 USD per hectare per year. To a great extent this is caused by the general environment in the country, which presently discourages tourism. The myth is probably generated by publicity about expensive elephant or lion hunts costing between 50,000 and 70,000 USD per hunt. Whilst these individual numbers can be achieved for some hunts, hunting occurs in only a few months of the year, yet expenses for staff and upkeep need to cover the entire 12-month period.
The ongoing costs of wildlife management added to the costs of maintaining properties in a condition suitable for safari tourists are substantial. The current lack of non-hunting tourists visiting Zimbabwe means that SVC members have to rely solely on income from hunting and are under considerable pressure to cover increasing operating costs. Any money earned is invested straight back into the wildlife venture. In addition, levies and statutory costs such as rural district rates, SVC levies, ZTA levies, SOAZ levies, and so on, eat up a significant portion of the income. Members foot a considerable social cost, receiving and accommodating as far as possible a continual flow of requests from local government, police, national government, and surrounding local communities for donations, contributions, and assistance.
This is why it is vital to bring back non-consumptive tourism so that conservancies and National Parks can achieve financial independence. The myth of wildlife in the SVC being very lucrative is exactly that: a myth. Those willing to evaluate the financial statements would understand the truth soon enough.
Myth: Provincial politicians are committed to wildlife conservation.
Truth: From the late 1990s about one third of the Save Valley Conservancy was subject to enforced resettlement on instructions from the office of the Governor of Masvingo. During the course of this process over 160 km of expensive double fencing was destroyed or stolen; some 80,000 snares constructed from the fence material were confiscated; at least some 15,000 wild animals destroyed.
On July 6, 2011, after six months of discussions with the SVC, members of the Indigenization Committee formed by Governor Maluleke stated to his and other’s applause: “We are not interested in wildlife; we do not want to learn about the business. We want cash!”
Savuli, a property within the SVC, was forcibly occupied by Mrs. Mahofa despite two High Court orders not to do so. Mrs. Mahofa is engaged in illegal hunting and a serious bush-meat poaching exercise.
Four hundred rhino poaching incidents occurred in the last decade in Zimbabwe, but very little has been done. Arrested poachers have been released, court records are lost, and in one case a records room burned down. Very few rhino poachers are behind bars. Only corrupt political involvement can create this legally unacceptable environment. This is a huge embarrassment to Zimbabwe’s international conservation reputation.
For hunter-conservationists and all people who are interested in the conservation, management and sustainable use of Africa’s
wild natural resources. African Indaba is the official CIC Newsletter on African affairs, with editorial independence. For more
information about the International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation CIC go to www.cic-wildlife.org