Could Culling of Elephants Be Considered Inhumane and Illegal in South African Law?

R. Slotow, A. Blackmore, M. Henley, Karen Trendler, Marion E. Garaï
{"title":"Could Culling of Elephants Be Considered Inhumane and Illegal in South African Law?","authors":"R. Slotow, A. Blackmore, M. Henley, Karen Trendler, Marion E. Garaï","doi":"10.1080/13880292.2021.1972529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Elephant culling is included in National Norms and Standards for the Management of Elephants in the Republic of South Africa, as a last-resort option to reduce elephant population size when required to meet reserve objectives. Recent judgments in South African courts have emphasised the importance of considering animal welfare in conservation. We assess the approved method of culling elephant family units, in terms of the legal and policy framework in South Africa, as well as considering elephant welfare and wellbeing. We find that the current culling method is likely to be inhumane, and potentially inconsistent with the Constitution, as interpreted by the judiciary. In addition, in certain circumstances, culling is illegal in terms of the Animals Protection and Meat Safety Acts, and contravenes World Organisation for Animal Health and global standards for the slaughter of animals. We recommend considering a moratorium on culling of elephant family units, as well as of lone bulls, until humane slaughter methods, and standard operation procedures that ensure an extremely high probability of instantaneous (“clean”) kill, are developed and approved. We recommend an ethics review process for conservation management interventions involving wellbeing risks to animals, such as is required for animal research. Notwithstanding other imperatives that need consideration, conservation practice should better balance welfare, to align with both South African legislation and global norms.","PeriodicalId":52446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2021.1972529","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract Elephant culling is included in National Norms and Standards for the Management of Elephants in the Republic of South Africa, as a last-resort option to reduce elephant population size when required to meet reserve objectives. Recent judgments in South African courts have emphasised the importance of considering animal welfare in conservation. We assess the approved method of culling elephant family units, in terms of the legal and policy framework in South Africa, as well as considering elephant welfare and wellbeing. We find that the current culling method is likely to be inhumane, and potentially inconsistent with the Constitution, as interpreted by the judiciary. In addition, in certain circumstances, culling is illegal in terms of the Animals Protection and Meat Safety Acts, and contravenes World Organisation for Animal Health and global standards for the slaughter of animals. We recommend considering a moratorium on culling of elephant family units, as well as of lone bulls, until humane slaughter methods, and standard operation procedures that ensure an extremely high probability of instantaneous (“clean”) kill, are developed and approved. We recommend an ethics review process for conservation management interventions involving wellbeing risks to animals, such as is required for animal research. Notwithstanding other imperatives that need consideration, conservation practice should better balance welfare, to align with both South African legislation and global norms.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在南非法律中,扑杀大象会被视为不人道和非法吗?
南非共和国的大象管理国家规范和标准中包含了大象扑杀,这是在需要达到保护区目标时减少大象种群规模的最后选择。南非法院最近的判决强调了在保护中考虑动物福利的重要性。我们根据南非的法律和政策框架,以及考虑到大象的福利和福祉,评估了被批准的扑杀大象家庭单位的方法。我们发现,目前的筛选方法很可能是不人道的,而且可能与司法部门解释的宪法不一致。此外,在某些情况下,根据《动物保护和肉类安全法》,扑杀是非法的,也违反了世界动物卫生组织和屠宰动物的全球标准。我们建议考虑暂停捕杀大象家庭单位,以及单独的公牛,直到人道的屠宰方法和标准的操作程序,确保极高的瞬间(“干净”)杀死的可能性,被开发和批准。我们建议对涉及动物健康风险的保护管理干预措施进行伦理审查,例如动物研究所需要的。尽管需要考虑其他必要事项,但保护实践应更好地平衡福利,以与南非立法和全球规范保持一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Drawing upon the findings from island biogeography studies, Norman Myers estimates that we are losing between 50-200 species per day, a rate 120,000 times greater than the background rate during prehistoric times. Worse still, the rate is accelerating rapidly. By the year 2000, we may have lost over one million species, counting back from three centuries ago when this trend began. By the middle of the next century, as many as one half of all species may face extinction. Moreover, our rapid destruction of critical ecosystems, such as tropical coral reefs, wetlands, estuaries, and rainforests may seriously impair species" regeneration, a process that has taken several million years after mass extinctions in the past.
期刊最新文献
Lost in Translation? Why Outdated Notions of Normativity in International Law Explain Germany’s Failure to Give Effect to the Ramsar Convention of 1971 Wild Things: Animal Rights in EU Conservation Law Addressing Illegal Transnational Trade of Totoaba and Its Role in the Possible Extinction of the Vaquita Justice for Animals: Our Collective Responsibility Carceral Logics: Human Incarceration and Animal Captivity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1