Potential Kenya Safari Hunting Setback
Legislation that may have facilitated the reopening of safari hunting in
Kenya was vetoed by Kenya President Mwai Kibaki in the last week of
December, 2004. The bill amending Kenya’s Wildlife Act was introduced in
Kenya’s Parliament and passed all hurdles between its publication in June
and its final reading and passage on the 9th of December.
For the best scoop on the Wildlife Act Amendment see the Guest Editorial by
Ian Parker, No Progress In Kenya, AFRICAN INDABA, Vol. 3, Issue No. 1,
January 2005. AFRICAN INDABA is Conservation Force’s African e-newsletter
produced by Conservation Force Board Member Gerhard Damm. It is available
free of charge on Conservation Force’s website
or from Gerhard directly. We advise you to try it. In fact, for a free
e-mail subscription of African Indaba that is published six times per year
just send an e-mail with the subject line “subscribe African Indaba” and
your name and address details to firstname.lastname@example.org. If you are a
conservation-minded hunter interested in African game conservation, there is
nothing like it.
In Indaba Ian Parker advises in a Guest Editorial that under Kenya’s
existing Wildlife Act safari hunting and even commercial cropping are
already permissible. “They are only banned through the Minister’s and
Director’s discretionary powers, which they have the discretion to reverse.
No new legislation is needed.” Nevertheless, the Wildlife Act Amendment was
represented by the Antis and the press as a hunting bill, and more
speciously, as a bill to authorize safari hunting in Kenya’s national parks!
Ian points out that the protectionists’ organizations’ oppositions to the
amendment was specious. Also that “[i]n this case animal welfare is the tool
for raising funds, but not the organization’s goal.”
Ian reports that the amendment was two-prong. It would have restructured the
Kenya Wildlife Service and, second, it would have provided a compensation
scheme for those damaged by ten listed big game species. The bill would not
have directly authorized safari hunting of mammals or commercial cropping.
It would have transferred such discretion to the community and lower level