NATURE FORUM WORLDWIDE

Kiki Suarez · Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 18 Location: Chiapas MEXICO

To whom this may concern,

My husband and I came to Namibia in May 2005 for the first time. One of the impressive sights for us where thousands of seals at Cape Cross, even though we had to concentrate hard to not get sick with their strong smell.

We liked Namibia so much and wanted to photograph so much more that in 2007 we returned to Namibia for a whole year. Twice we had friends coming to visit and showed them our favorite spots. Among them Cape Cross. But we were shocked: there were ten times less seals than two years before! No fishy smell at all! What had happened?

I asked every tourist guide and acquaintance in the town of Swakopmund, where we have our base. Everybody just shook their shoulders.

Our house in Swakopmund is right at the beach. I walk there every day. Many times during the last 12 months I have seen seals dying or dead on the beach. Many little babies. Finally a woman I met on the beach where three dogs just tried to kill a baby seal, told me that a lot of culling has been done.

In the newspaper I have read that Spain is buying up the Namibian fishing grounds. I know that fishermen hate seals who steal their fish.

My question to you is: does any ecological institute or group oversee how much culling has been done? Or does the Namibian government just secretly try to eradicate the seals for the Spanish fishing boats?

I am not a biologist, I do not know up to how many seals can be sustained, but the difference in the amount of seals at Cape Cross two years ago and now is absolutely tremendous. In my estimate it looks as if they have killed 90% of the seals they had there!

The question is: when does culling become poaching, even though it is allowed by a government?

We want to mention, too, that seeing all the wonderful parks and wild animals of Namibia, we were shocked to find cheetahs caged into a small cage in the Quivertree Rest Camp near Keetmanshoop. Once a day a girl feeds them and tourists, even children, are allowed in and encouraged to touch the cheetahs. It was heart breaking to watch these wonderful animals being in such a small space! The same is true for a leopard in the Omaruru Game Lodge. All other animals have a lot of space and freedom, but the leopard seems to be in a caged zoo. Very sad especially in a country where they roam wild.

We asked in both cases how they could keep these animals in such bad conditions. Both times the owners told us that the government inspectors had given them permission to keep the animals like this. I wonder if Greenpeace and other Nature Protecting groups are informed about this. For sure this does not look nice in the overall positive image Namibia has in Nature conservation.

We would be glad, if this information leads to some investigation. We would hate to see the seal colony at Cape Cross being exterminated. What is happening just looks like that!

Many greetings

Gabriel and Kiki Suarez

Hidalgo 3, San Cristobal de Las Casas, C.P. 29200, Chiapas, Mexico
_________________
kikitheartist

The deepest truth of Buddhist philosophy holds that at the center of the universe, and of each human being, there is a basic goodness and that everything is connected to everything else. www.kikitheartist.com

Daan Vreugdenhil · Site Admin Joined: 27 Oct 2006 Posts: 45 Location: USA

Thank you Mr and Mrs Suarez for bringing this to the attention of the world. We at WICE will always look at a concern and then try to channel an alarm into a constructive dialogue between conservation organisations and the national conservation authority.

This seems an important alarm posted by Gabriel and Kiki Suarez. Often citizens' alarms may be very important in discovering a situation of destruction. Not always are the observations correct, but what is always important is the impression that a situation leaves behind on the visitors. Badly caged animals leave a bad impression on visitors and bad impressions are bad for the promotion of ecotourism and safaris. If large scale cropping or hunting of animals takes place, that is not only disastrous for the species involved, but it may be extremely bad for the tourism sector of a country.

In a situation like this, the first step to take is to find our more about the problem. We have forwarded this message to a number of organisations working in Namibia as well as to the Directorate of Environmental Affairs and kindly invited them to post here what they know about this and give their opinion about the kind of action needed.
The organizations consulted are:
Ministry of Environment and Tourism: http://www.met.gov.na
Harnas Wildlife Foundations: http://www.harnas.org/en/
The Namibia Nature Foundation: http://www.nnf.org.na/index.php
The Namibia Coast Conservation and management project: http://www.nacoma.org.na/
Seal Alert South Africa: http://www.sealalert.org/
Namibian Environment Wildlife Society: http://www.news-namibia.org/
If you have any observations to make, please register and post a comment. Your observations may help solve this issue in a constructive way
_________________
Dr. Ir. Daan Vreugdenhil
Please visit: http://www.birdlist.org/site/why_birds.htm and
http://www.adopt-a-ranger.org
as well as our beautiful pictures at:
http://www.nature-worldwide.info/phpbb/album.php

Kiki Suarez · Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 18 Location: Chiapas MEXICO

_________________
kikitheartist

The deepest truth of Buddhist philosophy holds that at the center of the universe, and of each human being, there is a basic goodness and that everything is connected to everything else. www.kikitheartist.com

sealman · Joined: 07 Feb 2008 Posts: 12

Thank you Gabriel and Kiki, for making the effort to bring your observations of the seals in Namibia to peoples attention. Your letter was published in the Namibian Newspaper recently. Its efforts such as these that will one day save this species.

You are right, Namibia is at present engaged in exterminating the Cape fur seals. Whilst pup seal clubbing of 85 000 pups(sealing) is an annual event, and with 6000 bulls shot for far east penis trade, which takes place at Cape Cross and Wolf/Atlas Bay (Diamond restricted area) from July to November, this together with trophy hunting using rifles and bow&arrows (which clearly involves no fair chase or hunt) is what is causing the scenario you have witnessed. But what is the most concerning is that Namibia claim sealing is sustainable, tour-guides deny sealing is taking place, as does government deny trophy hunting.

50% of the culling takes place within the diamond restricted area and at Cape Cross, the seal reserve is closed between 5am - 10am, which is when the clubbing takes place each morning from July - November. They actually sweep the beach clean, covering up the blood, before opening the colony to paying tourists. If tourists spot the blood soaked sand, they claim it is a recent jackal kill.

Like you, I am very concerned and as such have been addressing the issue with campaigns, media and a boycott of Namibia. In July 2007, I had a meeting with the Prime Minister of Namibia in this regard, as I flew up from Cape Town (South Africa), I did an aerial survey of all the colonies. I found about 10% of the population of what government was claiming existed. An aerial flight over Cape Cross on 10 August found the largest colony completely exterminated, 22 days into 139 day sealing season.

Namibia sealing industry is a two-man industry that employs less than 100 part-time unskilled, un-employed, un-trained people to club seals.

This is what happens when conservationists ignore a species and allow sustainable use to take place commercially on a wild population that cannot be commercially harvested.

It might interest you to understand the following. The beach seal colonies are not natural. The preferred habitat for seals is offshore islands, which unfortunately are banned to them. This is central to the whole problem. Interference by man in the natural way of wildlife. The fishing industry is ultimately behind the policy to reduce or control the seal population due to its predation of fish.

What we are dealing with here is the following. Originally seals were only found on offshore islands. Sealers attempted to harvest seals there. 1900 seals were almost extinct as a species. The direct result is that most seal breeding colonies became exterminated and remained extinct. In 1940, the first mainland colonies developed, as a result of seals fleeing the clubbing on islands.

In 1977, Cape fur seals were listed with the UN Convention in Trade of Endangered Species, Appendix 11. But this did not stop the clubbing.

In 1972, the US banned all imports, as they deemed killing a nursing pup in a breeding nursery to be inhumane and will affect the population. Sealing should have ended. Instead government privatised sealing, and sealers were tasked to find new markets. In 1983, the EU banned imports of nursing baby seals, mainly from the northern hemisphere (harp and hooded seals), nobody thought to include Cape fur seals in Namibia or South Africa, as nobody knew about this, the second largest clubbing of seals in the world. This is where Namibian sealers found a ready market to export their skins to replace the baby harp and hooded seal pup ban.

In 1990, South Africa stopped its sealing policy, but Namibia continued. Although the seal population peaked in 1993, since then it has suffered several mass die-off's from starvation involving one third to one half of the population in each incident. Pup Sealing quotas have risen not on growth but on demand, from less than 9000 to 85 000 pups.

The very latest pup surveys (upon which the population is overall based) is 205 500 pups in December 2005, a year later, in December 2006, pup count had dropped 44% to 120 000 pups. In 1993, it was 320 000 pups. 99% of seals former offshore habitat (islands) remain extinct.

To understand the above, as with an un-sustainable sealing policy, Namibia is engaged in an un-sustainable fishing policy. This means seals starve to death. Naturally mortality has increased from 32% to 44% and 62%. Namibia used to claim sealing is sustainable if no more than 30% of the pups are killed, using as their reason the 32% dying anyway in the wild. What they ignore is that, if you take 32% or 44% or 62%, from the number of pups all born in December. You will have for example in December 2006, 67 000 - 45 000 seal pups alive by July, the start of the sealing season. To then award a 85 000 pup quota, means sealers cannot possibly fill their quota and in attempting to will kill every seal pup alive remaining. Causing directly the extinction of the species or extermination of the colony. To reach their quota, older seals are then clubbed as well. Which is illegal.

But the factor why the US banned imports (as did Mexico) recently, as the EU will soon, is that you can't have a quota which is 90% pup based, which involves going into their breeding nurseries, rounding up herds of seals, separating nursing pup from cow and then slaughtering them, without the seals reacting negatively. The problem why this cruel practice has continued so long, and the species has not collapsed years ago, is that it takes time for a wild species to show the signs of collapse and an unnatural environment. What made sealing work for a few decades, is that as each pup is dependent on nursing for 12 months. Removing the pup (killing it) after 7 months, actually aids the production of next year's pup which the cow is carrying after being impregnated soon after birth. Because it frees her to forage wider and longer, and not return to the colony to feed pup frequently.

Between the 1970s and 1990s the only growth in the seal population was on the seal culling mainland colonies. Which strangely was creating the opposite of reducing the population. Seal colonies, left undisturbed, were battling to survive naturally and find sufficient fish - hence no growth and in most cases decline.

However when things are done unnaturally (building walls on islands and banning seals), things will collapse completely, which is just what you have just witnessed. It is in fact, a crime against nature.

The quota that is given out to kill seals comes from the Ministry of Fisheries, whose legal jurisdiction ends at the high water mark, sealers driving herds of seals away from the sea, in-land, which therefore is actually illegal under the legislation of Namibia. It is done to reduce costs, maximise profits and fill quotas.

To see what I am talking about look at some of these pages:
http://www.sealalert.org/Updates/2008/Update-2008-01c_en.htm
http://www.sealalert.org/Updates/2007/Update-2007-07n_en.htm
or visit our periodic news at:
http://www.sealalert.org/news_en.htm

Please express your feelings on Seal culling

Daan Vreugdenhil · Site Admin Joined: 27 Oct 2006 Posts: 45 Location: USA

It seems that Mr. & Mrs. Suarez stumbled upon an issue that indeed would need some serious attention. The figures of François Hugo - if correct - indicate that a rather large scale culling practice is going on. I searched the net and found no policy that explains what is going on, and that concerns me a great deal.

Seals are always loved by a very broad public and particularly culling cups generates great emotions among many conservationists and PARTICULARLY children. Unexplained culling can become extremely harmful for the (eco)tourism industry, which is so important for a country like Namibia.

Before this posting, I had never heard of the culling of the Cape Seal and under no circumstances shall I take a position in the biological need or the justifiability or not of what goes on here, because without thorough data I am not qualified to judge. But with almost 4 decades of experience in conservation and natural resources management in most continents, I am qualified to moderate this issue. Given the obviously economical interests involved as well as the emotions of the conservation public at large, I will do my best to moderate this issue in a balanced way.

I would now very much like to invite management authorities in the country to react. Or maybe other ecotourists have observed things. Maybe some Namibian citizens would like to respond.

With emotions high, please be courteous. Insulting each other never helps generating mutual understanding.

sealman · Joined: 07 Feb 2008 Posts: 12

Further to my previous posting:
Not many, particular in the seabird conservation circles support my views. They are primary behind the banning of seals from islands. Their belief is that seals predate on seabirds and displace the seabird colonies.

For example, historically from explorer (prior to exploitation) accounts islands off the southern African coastline, consisted of seals along the seashore and seabirds around the centre. Clearly seals and various species of seabirds evolved off these islands together. If there is one thing I have learnt working with marine wildlife is that they evolved where they are for significant reason. In my experiences with thousands of rescues, it is almost if they are pre-programmed on how and where to survive.

Lets consider the current situation. Cape fur seals have increased from near extinction (1900) to 1.3 million at their peak (1993), although the population has had several mass die-offs since, and is at least 50% less than what it was in 1993, officially they are considered least concern. Yet we know no mainland colonies existed prior to 1940. We know their habitat was restricted to 36 islands equally in total 1000 ha, which was shared with seabirds. Currently seals only occur on 10ha or 1% of their former island habitat. 99% of their former habitat (islands) remain extinct. Over 70% of the population is now mainland based. It is strangely these mainland colonies, where after sealing, overall population growth took place (which is opposite to the intended management of culls). The balance of the population has developed on inappropriate breeding habitat, all small offshore awash rocks, all less than 2ha.

Here are some examples: Largest island in southern Africa, Robben Island 500 ha, named after the seals by the Dutch (robben) is banned to seals. In fact, all islands larger than 2ha (all former seal islands) have been banned to seals. Some islands off Namibia, have a wall built around it to keep off the seals. From Mercury Island, a major seal colony in 1985, seals were chased off in the interests of seabird-exclusive conservation. After that, a Seal colony develops opposite on the mainland.

This is a classic example. The larger island Dyer Island, 20ha was named after a sealer in 1850 who killed seals on this island commercially. It was not a seabird island. It caused the extinction of seals from this island. Seals fled and found refuge on the buffer rock opposite, called geyser island 3ha. Currently, the government builds a wall around this former seal island, Dyer to ban the seals, and makes it an exclusive seabird island.

99% of the seals former habitat lost is a serious concern, and should be to all. It simply is not a question of the more dominant species, seals displacing seabirds, as it is seabirds who have unnaturally displaced 99% of the seals with mankind's assistance. Based on current average offshore colony pup density, if applied to the overall islands, pup production could be estimated at 5 million pups. Less than 2% of that number is currently produced on offshore habitat.

These are some of my concerns:

It should be born in mind, that Cape fur seals are the only species of seal reproducing on the whole African continent, and as such they should be better conserved. I find it poor management to use the status of any of 32 species of seabirds an argument to disrupt this natural development of seals.

Daan Vreugdenhil · Site Admin Joined: 27 Oct 2006 Posts: 45 Location: USA

Some of the things that François Hugo added, require thorough analysis! I have personally been involved in the question of the conservation of oceanic birds in different oceans. They In the course of last century, they have become extremely vulnerable, as their colonies are threatened by rats, lifestock turned loose (pigs, dogs and goats).

Many species will need help to survive as a species. With pressure on ecosystems now everywhere, managers are forced to make choices, and sometimes weaker and rarer species must be helped by management measures in order to help them survive as species. Whether or not the choices made in Namibia are sufficiently balanced is not up to me to judge.

It is obvious that the authorities and conservation groups should deal with this situation with great transparency and it is paramount that whatever choices are made, that they be made very clear to the public, and particularly potential ecotourists interested in this country which I never visited, but which must be absolutely beautiful.

Again, please share your experiences and viewpoints. Should seals be killed to save birds? Do the birds concerned really need this kind of protection? Is the killing humane?

Kiki Suarez · Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 18 Location: Chiapas MEXICO

I sent my first letter about my concern about the seals at Cape Cross to a young Ovambo woman and friend of mine in Namibia. She immediately wrote to her minister and received this answer:

Dear C.

I have recieved the chain-letter email below and I am quite disturbed that you have sent it around to so many.

As a former anti-apartheid activist in the States and an NGO person, I stood in countless picket lines, threw eggs at Savimbi, worked for sanctions on South Africa and screamed about women's rights to equal pay for equal work. We even joined the anti-nuke folks for joint protests against the Reagan Administration. Those were the days!

But, I sit here appalled at the generalizations being thrown around here on this Seal cull issue and most particularly when they are connected to the tourism industry. On a bad hair day, I wish all of these people so concerned about our Seals were also concerned during the Struggle for Justice and picketed, protested and contributed to SWAPO's efforts to help the people of this country live free. I remember well that back in the day, we could rarely get the conservation and animal rights people to EVER join us in picketing for human rights. I always thought them myopic and therefore, hollow.

Namibia is eco-sensitive because we must be. We live on a knife's edge with a fragile eco-system. We preserve and manage what we have because we must! Are we perfect? Not a chance. Is anyone? No. But, in the tourism sector, our product is our country; that is how we feed our families - growing our tourism product. I often wondered how the people who most complain about what we do and don't do here in the developing world are people whose own wildlife in their own countries are mostly only in Zoos. They have wiped out their animals with their own development and need for economic growth in their countries and they look at other countries and want to pontificate in a 'holier-than-thou' attitude. What arrogance! Many of these people launching and supporting these campaigns are white liberals from upper middle class to rich backgrounds who have trust funds, inheritances, investment accounts, own their home(s) and do this work as an avocation, not to feed themselves. Call me cynical...I am getting old...but, it smacks of hypocrisy and 'fake-ness'. To be fair, I have met many with that exact background, but who are sincere in their wish to stop something that they really feel is a bad thing. But, I've met others that are anti-social, with negative personalities and who really would resort to things like trying to attack our economy, for their own selfish priorities.

For anyone... anyone to threaten the tourism economy in Namibia which employs over 71,000 people is economic sabotage of Namibia. The issue in Kenya, on the surface is between two ethnic groups over the issue of the President stealing the election. Underneath that violence the issue is poverty, unequal opportunity, corruption and joblessness. I wonder how much of Kenya's wildlife will survive with 98% cancellations in their tourism sector, and angry, hungry, armed people whose tourism jobs have disappeared range out over the Masai Mara hunting for meat to feed their families and a Government ill equiped to stem the poaching (they never have been able to get over this hump anyway) because of the disarray....??? Tell me, how much wildlife suffers when WARS break out? How many dogs, cats, beloved pets... burned when homes were set on fire by angry roving mobs in the Kenyan countryside? How many cattle have been slaughtered out of revenge? Thank God, Namibia is no where near that situation and our successes since Independence is a reason for that. Now...not all is rosy here... God knows we need changes and we have our issues too, but after living in several African countries and seeing life in South and Central America and impoverished Ghettos in the States or in the Applacian Mountains of West Virginia... I have learned that Namibia is tremendously better off than many, many, many other places. Charlotte, poverty is ugly and ugly things happen when poor people rise up. Seals or any other wildlife or conservation issue will be the last thing on anyone's mind when anger over joblessness takes hold. These Seal activists don't live here and couldn't care less about what happens to people without jobs here.

This particular south african activi in the note below is getting tiresome. He has issues. Indeed, he and anyone else for that matter, has a right to say what he wants, but he does not have a right to slander our country. He does not have the right to scream "FIRE" in a crowded auditorium. Namibia is absolutely NOT exterminating its entire Seal population. Each time I read something this one activist puts out, he gets more hysterical and 'ups' the alarmist rhetoric to dramatize the issue more and more. In this way, he tries to capture headlines and attention. I have counseled the industry to leave this particular guy to his own. He received a golden opportunity from the Prime Minister to meet with GRN folks from various Ministries to make his point. I disagree with that access, but it is done now and no one can argue that he has been ignored. Data is one thing; alarmist, hyped, misinterpreted figures are another.

For example, he quotes what he says are Seal Cull numbers, from what source? and then, compared to what? If there are 1 million seals (I don't know the number) and the eco-system can sustain only 900,000 (this is just hypothetical on my part.... I have no correct numbers), and the cull is for 85,000, (...though I hate the reality of killing any animal for non-life sustaining reasons), where is the argument? There are over 800,000 still there! Living, thriving and reproducing. Why doesn't he finance moving those excess Seals to beaches in his own country? Perhaps that is a solution that he and those that support him have not costed and considered? God knows I hate the way they do this and I have never understood why we cannot find a better method. But, whether the cull is needed or not has already been argued for years. This is NOT a new issue. These activists fail to give the population figures against which to juxtapose the cull figure. This is NOT a mistaken ommission; it is a part of these people's manipulation and we must not play into it.

Charlotte, please I urge you to not forward any more propaganda from these people. You are encouraging their cause for good reasons, but are not skeptical in questioning the source and ramifications of this one guy and his single-minded, anti-Namibia campaign. WHO is orchestrating this? Why? What are the methods? What are the sources? Who is funding such a campaign? What does it mean for tourism? These are the questions that must be asked and answered before any of us throws in our lot with these Seal people.

My sister, please....be careful here,

Jackie
_________________
kikitheartist

The deepest truth of Buddhist philosophy holds that at the center of the universe, and of each human being, there is a basic goodness and that everything is connected to everything else. www.kikitheartist.com

Kiki Suarez · Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 18 Location: Chiapas MEXICO

This is my answer letter to the upper letter by Mrs. Asheeka:

Dear Mrs. Asheeke,
I am Mrs. Suarez from Mexico who just stayed for the whole of 2007 in Namibia. My husband and I came to Namibia first in 2005 and we fell in love with it. That is why we returned, travelling its wonderful landscapes and photographing the country´s animals. We love the people, the lodges and many good things the Namibian Government obviously does for its people. Many things are much better in Nambia than here in Mexico and as part of the government you can be proud of this.

I wrote the inquiry letter about the Cape Cross Seals and I am surprised myself about the big reaction it is getting in the internet.

I notice frustration and anger in your letter and I do understand that. If I sounded angry in mine, please, forgive me. I am just concerned. I did not want to leave Namibia without at least writing a letter about this issue.

You are right: I am white and middle class. I do know, though, that poverty is terrible and leads to a lot of destruction. I see this every day here in Mexico. Our jungle is nearly depleted and there are hardly any wild animals left. I am German originally. In Germany we have depleted a lot of nature because of economic development and yes, you are right - we have no moral stand to now deny the same development to other countries. In Germany I see nature better now, but know that it has to do with the decrease in population.

When I was young - I am getting old, too - I did picket in favour of human rights, though, and I did against apartheid. I am not a nature activist (and often I do feel bad about that) and I do not belong to any party or organization. I am a mother, grandmother, painter and photographer. I love peoples of all colors and cultures and I love nature. I am worried about us as a human race as I am worried about our planet.

I do think that nature - issues are not of any one country anymore, as we are all connected and depletion of species in one part of the world does effect many other systems in other parts.

The only thing that I intended with my letter was to ask questions. Nobody I asked in person while in Namibia could give me an answer. What I saw with my own eyes is that there were ten times less seals at Cape Cross in 2007 than we photographed there two years earlier. We photographed that both times, because we are photographers, not because we belong to any group or program. The difference in the numbers of seals is mind - buggling and the word "extermination" does come to mind. I do know that numbers of animals have to be culled. I am not against that. My questions are just: who oversees the culling? How many seals are sustainable? How are they killed?

After reading your letter to Charlotte, my impression is that you are a very knowledgeable and sensitive woman. I would think that you, too, would like for Namibia to have a thriving seal colony within the limits possible. I imagine also, especially you being a woman like me, that you, too, would feel better if the animals which need to be culled would be killed as humanely as possible. Maybe, being in the position you are in you can have some influence on this. If my letter could lead to this, I am more than satisfied.

With admiration and gratitude I am

yours Mrs. Kiki Suarez
_________________
kikitheartist

The deepest truth of Buddhist philosophy holds that at the center of the universe, and of each human being, there is a basic goodness and that everything is connected to everything else. www.kikitheartist.com

Kiki Suarez · Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 18 Location: Chiapas MEXICO

THE PICTURE DOES BECOME MORE AND MORE COMPLICATED. OBVIOUSLY THERE IS A LOT OF ANGER BETWEEN THE NAMIBIAN GOVERNMENT AND SEALERT. TO FIND A SOLUTION SO THAT THE SEALS IN NAMIBIA HAVE A CHANCE A MIDDLE - WAY (BUDDHA!!!!) HAS TO BE FOUND.

Dear Mrs. Suarez,

Thank you very, very much for your wonderful letter. I feel you in your words and I see we are probably very much alike. I wish we had met while you were here!

I will make inquiries about the numbers of Cape Seals and see what the scientific people are saying. I know the numbers at Cape Cross have been reduced because the number of fish available for us and them is severely reduced. I believe I read somewhere that the culling numbers are down because the number of fish available is naturally reducing the Seal numbers; sadly, they are starving. I have understood from the Ministry of Fisheries that the need to cull was necessary because there is no natural preditor in the waters off Namibia to naturally keep the numbers down. I read somewhere that the cold Benguela current keeps out the Killer Whales and sharks that would ordinarily be there to prey on the seals in nature's way of culling. I am no scientist, I am a tourism executive. So, I can only repeat what I read. I am open to dialogue always. Ignorance is destructive; so I want to learn, read and know.

As I said, I also don't know enough on this to understand why they must cull in the manner they do and how they ascertain the numbers to be culled and who is watching. Those are good questions. I also, have always questioned the methods of culling; it is so brutal. I often asked, is there no other way or is that just the cheapest way? That culling must happen at all is regretful. All life is so precious. But watching baby seals be crushed to death on the beach because there is no more room or watching seals starve as fishing quotas and the Seal's needs are clashing. Fishing quotas have been reduced drastically in Namibia over the last 2-3 years causing over 11,000 layoffs of jobs in the industry. That is a fact that is well known here in Namibia. Walvis Bay people are suffering massive unemployment and the related social ills. Namibia has no alternative employment for these human beings laid off from the fishing industry and little funds for a social security net to help out the way they need it. Crime, domestic abuse, drugs, prostitution, AIDS are UP in that area due to the anger and frustration caused by a lack of jobs in the fishing industry which is the main employer. It is a terrible balance that Government is juggling and I don't have any ideas or solutions to help. I have tried to urge Government to look at building Namibia's cruise ship industry on the Coast as a way to offer employment to the thouands that have nothing since the quotas have been reduced so drastically. Unfortunately, building a new outlet for tourism to that extent will cost 100's of millions of dollars and that is not a short-term proposition; though I am working on it and there is a lot of positive interest.

I have no crystal ball or magic wand. I wish I did. I could find a place where the Seals which can no longer be sustained at the colonies could live and eat somewhere else without us bothering them at all. Sadly, reality hits hard; I don't have a magic wand.

While I am totally convinced now that you are sincere and I know your questions are valid and important, I know for certain that the Seal Activist in South Africa is not sincere and is bent on economic sabotage in Namibia. I am afraid that he is using Charlotte and will use your letter to his own agenda. If this happens your clear, understandable, positive message could be manipulated to be a support for his campaign to boycott Namibia. That is what provoked my angry response. That man in South Africa is on a one-man campaign to smear Namibia. Look at his closing of his email. He has a website called: 'boycott namibia.com." How ironic. In my activist days, we used to call for a boycott of South Africa because of apartheid. I am surprised at his cheek to equate this Seal question and culling issues with apartheid!

His letter, sent out on the bottom of your letter, insults the Prime Minister of Namibia! Wow. With that approach, the Namibian Government will see all who are associated with that man in South Africa as those who regret our victory over apartheid and colonialism and will close ranks on the matter and no longer listen to anyone, not you or me. That closed attitude is also no good and can be avoided; The Government is alert and concerned and they will dialogue and make changes as needed, but not at the behest of one extremist in South Africa.

Perhaps, with clear letters like yours and a sincere point of view, like yours, we can keep ears open in Government and see what the plan is and help ensure that no unnecessary waste of animal life is occuring? I just don't know....

Again, thank you for your letter. I understand and am clear about your intentions.

I wish you well.

Jackie Asheeke
_________________
kikitheartist

The deepest truth of Buddhist philosophy holds that at the center of the universe, and of each human being, there is a basic goodness and that everything is connected to everything else. www.kikitheartist.com

Kiki Suarez · Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 18 Location: Chiapas MEXICO

Reading these statements again and again I have two questions:

Why were the seals banned from the off-shore islands, if it is natural for them to live together with seabirds? Are they predators of seabirds or their eggs?

If too many pups are killed, why does that lead to an overpopulation which then dies? I do not understand the whole thing. Maybe it is because the mothers of killed pups become fertile again for another one, which then is killed again or how?

Kiki
_________________
kikitheartist

The deepest truth of Buddhist philosophy holds that at the center of the universe, and of each human being, there is a basic goodness and that everything is connected to everything else. www.kikitheartist.com

sealman · Joined: 07 Feb 2008 Posts: 12

In Reply to the issues raised. Without trying to upset anyone within Namibia further. The most obvious and common denominator is - very few people have taken the time to really study the seal issues. I have, in fact the past decade. It was appreciated, and something I thought highly of Namibia for the Prime Minister and then various Ministries to allow the time to discuss my concerns. However 45 minutes to grasp such a vast subject, with its root cause going back decades. Is and was clearly insufficient. As the Minister of Tourism clearly states ecotourism is the future of Namibia's prosperity. Sufficient time should be allocated.

Sealing was exclusively island based - why has it moved exclusively to the mainland?

The problem as I see it, is that unfortunately everyone within Namibia relies upon in the end, the scientific statements of scientists employed by the Minister of Fisheries. What I would like all to consider (just for a moment) is that if whatever reason, an impartial reflection in the true situation regarding the seals is not being given, then it is these scientists which are cause of Namibia's troubles.

I ask all to please think about the following. If the seal population in Namibia needs to be culled (reduced) to manage or protect fish stocks - why then are breeding females exempt and even more important, why club millions of baby nursing seal pups (who do not consume fish but suckle milk) throughout the year, upon which 90% of the cull quota is based?

This is the most important. Since 1972, we have a record of the trends in the seal population from aerial surveys. If studied carefully, two groups of seal populations emerge. One group of seals living offshore, left alone and not culled with 99% of their former habitat remaining extinct, including the largest and second largest islands off Namibia. The other group, the mainland population of seals, that have grown from 0 seals in 1940 to over 70% of the population today. If one researches the sealing, you will discover sealing activity has occurred predominately on the mainland seal colonies (Wolf/Atlas Bay and Cape Cross). Now please consider this for the future of Namibia. If the scientific policy was to control or reduce the seal population, via clubbing its seal pups. Did it do so?

Cape Cross seal colony recorded 17 839 pups born in 1972. With sealing involving 50% of the pups being killed, with a further 32%-62% dying from natural causes or starvation. We find that the seal pup production in 2006, had increased to 65 073 pups. An increased growth 264% after sealing. Atlas Bay for another, it started with 8 879 pups in 1972, growing to 62 823 pups in 1993 (the peak of the recorded seal population) which immediately proceeded its first of several mass die-offs from starvation. This was a massive 620% growth. Bearing in mind, the largest island, a former major seal colony (Possession Island) directly opposite the Atlas Bay mainland seal colony lies extinct to seals.

So I ask all in the Namibian government did culling nursing baby seal pups (millions of them) over the last 37 years, reduce these seal colonies or control the population? Clearly not. Who prescribed the methods used to cull? The scientists, would they acknowledge their mistake?

With no seals on the mainland prior to 1940 (with the exception of Cape Cross which formed unnaturally a little earlier for similar disturbance reasons on offshore islands) , why has the seal population recorded such massive unexplained growths only on the mainland sealing colonies, that even exceed the highest growths of a wild population in the wild? Did the non-culled, offshore populations of seals experience similar growths or declined?

Consider this, if as the scientists have stated average p.a seal population growth was recorded as 3,7% p.a. What factor, made this average far lower that that recorded for the sealing mainland colonies?

Now consider this. In 1940 seals forced onto the mainland, sealing intensified, where today 7 out of 10 seal pups are now born on the mainland in Namibia. At the seal peak in the population in 1993, some 320 000 pups or 1.2 million seals. 70% of that, 840 000 seals were man-kind caused. To simplify things, lets say there are now 1 million seals breeding on the mainland. Scientifically it is claimed, 1 million seals will consume 1 million tons of fish. Whose consumption will then consume more fish than the entire fishing industry.

So is this what Namibia wants? A seal population that eats N$5 billion of fish stocks each year, depleting the resource for all, costing thousands of Namibians their jobs - so that 2 sealers can club 85 000 pups and shoot 6000 bulls for the far east penis trade, earning N$2-5 million (0.02% of GDP fishing), and employing less than 140 part-time unemployed people?

Is this logical, is this prosperity?

If job creation from seals is the issue, then it can easily be shown that eco-tourism far exceeds the sealing industry in revenue and job creation. The smallest seal colony (one seal colony) in South Africa generates 6-times the income derived from Namibia's entire sealing industry, and offers year round employment, for financiers, investors, informal traders (the whole spectrum of employment).

So what is the solution. Firstly understanding that culling pups actually increases the seal population is the first step. Seal culling should therefore stop, like it did in South Africa, 17-years ago. The next thing, is to allow the seals to migrate back to their preferred and natural habitat - the offshore islands. These islands, with limited space restrict and control the population naturally. Geographically, these islands will dictate, that Namibia will only have 11% of the seal population, instead of 70% of the seal population, in its waters.

Protect these offshore islands, and marine wildlife will flourish around them, which in turn will generate massive eco-tourism interest and investment.

Fish stocks will recover, jobs will be saved and Namibia will prosper.

Remember for over 30 years, you have been dealing with the oceans top predator, who can out-compete, out-survive and establish new habitat anywhere along a desert coastline. What has been foolishly done - to assume that culling millions of baby seals will control seal growth, has backfired. On paper, increasing kill pup quotas may look good to appease the fishing industry, but in reality wildlife is something very different.

But honestly, Minister, Ministry and Namibian government rather attack me personally, whilst United States, South Africa, Mexico, Belgium, Holland and Germany ban your seal products, with the whole EU to follow soon. Continue sealing whilst the Scientific review of the European Food Safety Authority has found that what you are doing is inhumane and cruel.

You are only clubbing your own people and country. I am always open to talk and intelligent discussion, and truly want to help the seals, which in turn would help Namibia. I made that very clear to the Prime Minister recently.

For the Seals, Francois Hugo Seal Alert-SA

Kiki Suarez · Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 18 Location: Chiapas MEXICO

Thankyou for more explanations and connections in this whole issue, Francois.

Do I understand you right that the best way would be to let the seals return to their islands?

I still do not understand WHY they were chased away from their islands?

Why are the pups killed with bats and not shot?

Can you give me the answers to understand better?

Thankyou very much

Kiki
_________________
kikitheartist

The deepest truth of Buddhist philosophy holds that at the center of the universe, and of each human being, there is a basic goodness and that everything is connected to everything else. www.kikitheartist.com

sealman · Joined: 07 Feb 2008 Posts: 12

Of course, the correct management would be to protect wildlife, in this case, seals where they naturally and prefer to occur, ie islands. Their evolution could have placed them on the mainland or in Angola or elsewhere, or rescinded their front flippers like true seals - but they did not, and if sensible management is in place. This fact would be obvious to all. Nature dictates that this particular species of seal should be dispersed over 3000 km, with 4% southern east coast of South Africa, 85% Cape west coast of South Africa, and only 11% off Namibia - all of which on offshore islands. As this is the geographic location of suitable and former seal island colonies. Namibia has 70% of the seal population on 3 big mainland colonies. There are many, many reasons for this that would take pages to explain. So I wont here, but please accept it has everything to do with a balanced ecosystem.

Strangely Namibia inherited sealing clubbing from the Apartheid government, and if they are so against apartheid, why then maintain a policy routed in apartheid ideology.

Seabirds are just used as an excuse to keep seals off island, historically when seals and seabird numbers were far greater they equally shared these 36 islands. Exclusive one species island retreats for seabirds, whilst the majority of the islands stand vacate of any marine-life is not conservation, its con-servation.

There is no natural reason for 70% of the seals to be in Namibia, over the decades fish stock have been better in the south, in South Africa, so why this unnatural migration into Namibia. The answer is completely related to sealing, and how its alters natural seals breeding patterns.

Whilst most people think seals are just another wildlife to ignore and disregard, their consumption is greater than Namibia's entire fishing industry, who is the third largest employer and contributor to GDP.

One would think Namibia would have woken up to their own scientific figures and realised long ago, that seal culling is creating their own nightmare.

If you wanted to control stray cats, would you protect and exempt all female cats, and then only try and kill a portion of its kittens. Who then when awarding the kitten quota, develop into killing just the male kittens for their penis, further creating a surplus of female kittens who will grow up to bred and have more kittens, whilst being exempt from being killed after their first year. Would this management or population control not actually further increase the stray cat population and doom it to failure. Of course it would, imagine what has been done to seals, who are top predators and fish eaters.

With wild seals it would be equally wrong to sterilise the females, as this would collapse the entire species.

All that needs to be done is that they are left alone, nature and overfishing is very effective in controlling their numbers. South Africa, after stopping sealing 17 years ago, has seen no increases in its seal population, in fact many colonies are declining.

If Namibia cant stop a 2 man sealing industry, worth less than N$2 Million and employes less than 140 part-time, unskilled workers. Then Namibia is not a country, as this is not even a small business, never mind an industry.

Namibia cries unemployment and crime, if they stop sealing, what nonsense, they are the least populated country on earth, less than 2 million. South Africa has 50 million, hell even Cape Town has more than 2 million residents, and we do not need to club baby seals.

You cannot kill a 7kg pup standing in the middle of thousands of other pups with a rifle, as the bullet will go through and injure or kill other non-targetted pups and seals. Secondly trying to do so from a boat on their natural habitat islands is equally impossible.

Perhaps you can get through to Namibia, as clearly I cannot.

One thing I can tell you, it is costing Namibia 10-times, maybe even 100-times more, if they continue sealing. It already has.

Instead of doing the simple and right thing, allow seals to go back to islands - the Minister wants to spend hundreds of millions building cruise liners. Will they ever learn.

Francois.

Nikki · Joined: 11 Feb 2008 Posts: 9

Each year the Namibian government issues quotas to three oncessionaires
to brutally kill thousands upon thousands of these animals. The quotas
range between 80 000 and 85 000 pups and 6000 – 8000 bulls (the males are slaughtered for their genitalia which are exported to the East as
aphrodisiacs). And year after year Seal Alert and animal rights activists try and stop this from happening, to absolutely no avail. We have even met personally with the Namibian Prime Minister to discuss the situation and to offer economically viable solutions (which were all rejected) but the country is simply not interested in putting a stop to this. I don’t even think that a ban adopted by the EU on the import of any seal products will stop this annual tragedy.

The truth is that each year the quotas cannot be met as there simply are not enough animals left to kill. The Cape Fur Seal has to contend with fishermen killing them, permits being issued for trophy hunting and starvation. In 2006, there was mass starvation and one concessionairy admitted that on several occasions they had to stop culling activity to bury up to 900 animals in mass graves on the beaches.

I cannot begin to tell you how worried we are about the survival of this particular species. We have presented aerial photographs, along with witness accounts, to the Ministry which clearly shows that the Cape Cross Colony (the biggest) was almost non-existent (as Kiki Suarez rightly observed). The Ministry all but accused us of doctoring the photos.
No, there is no official independent verification on the numbers of seals and no, there is no ecological institute or organization overseeing how much culling is done (Greenpeace and WWF are not interested, and IFAW only paid for a scientist to write some or other report). The Namibian government will never allow it as it would expose the atrocity of this cull and it would most certainly recommend that this cull should be stopped immediately. As the Minister said to someone with influence who tried to stop the cull “we don’t take kindly to former colonialists telling us how to run our country”.

Seal Alert remain open for dialogue and ways to collaborate towards a solution.