Fraudulent microchip use and compliance issues found on controversial lion farms in the Free State, South Africa

Operating without valid permits and inconsistent record keeping were some of the irregularities found on commercial facilities for captive lions.

A number of serious management and compliance issues were revealed on lion farms in the Free State province, South Africa, by a joint team of researchers from MONITOR, Blood Lions, and World Animal Protection. Potentially fraudulent activities relating to the use of microchips, operating without valid permits, and incomplete, inconsistent, and unclear record keeping were some of the irregularities found on commercial facilities that keep and trade captive lions and other predators.

Lions on a commercial lion farm in South Africa. Photo by Blood Lions

African lions are legally farmed in South Africa for commercial uses in interactive tourism activities, such as cub petting, voluntourism, or the “canned” hunting industry (where captive-bred lions are released into a confined space to be killed for sport). Other reasons include trade in live animals, or selling their body parts for the needs of traditional Asian Medicine.

All lions born and kept on commercial farms in South Africa should be registered with the provincial authority and fitted with a unique identification microchip, in order for each animal to be followed from birth to death through the system and to avoid the laundering of wild-caught and/or non-registered captive-bred lions.

Lions on a commercial lion farm in South Africa. Photo by Blood Lions

A multinational team of researchers used permit data legally obtained from provincial authorities to summarise such uses of lions on farms in the Free State and found multiple instances of violation of national and provincial regulations.

It is known that the Free State province is at the heart of the commercial lion industry, with about a third of all lion facilities across the country located on its territory. These farms in the Free State predominantly breed, keep and euthanise lions, as well as trade with other provinces to supply “canned” hunting farms and tourism facilities. They also prepare lion body parts for export, such as taxidermy for trophies, and skeletons for the bone trade with Southeast Asia.

Lion cubs on a commercial lion farm in South Africa. Photo by Blood Lions

Data legally obtained from the Free State Department of Small Business Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs show hundreds of reused microchip numbers across permits for keeping, euthanising and transporting captive lions, indicating potential non-compliance with national and provincial regulations.

During a four-year period (2017-2020), more than 500 unique microchips (11% of the total microchip numbers) could not be followed through the system. For euthanasia permits, the number of potentially fraudulently used microchip numbers of lions was as many as 15%, and in some cases a microchip number had been reused up to four times.

This raises serious concerns that lion farm owners may deliberately be reusing microchip numbers to launder wild-caught and/or unregistered captive-bred lions.

A lion. Photo by Matthias Appel under a CC0 1.0 license

“Although some of these inconsistencies may have legitimate explanations, the number of times microchip numbers were reused is worrisome and requires further investigation by the authorities”, states Dr Sarah Heinrich of MONITOR, one of the researchers behind the study, which was published in the journal Nature Conservation.

The laundering of lions and/or other predators through the fraudulent use of microchips has implications beyond South Africa’s borders, in particular, in the trade in lion bones for traditional medicine, where bones, claws, skeletons, and skulls are exported to Southeast Asia. “Looking at live lion exports through the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), it is unclear what happens to these animals once they arrive at their international destinations. It is possible that some of these live exports circumvent the zero CITES lion bone export quota and are eventually euthanised at their import destinations to feed the persisting demand for lion bones”, said Dr Jennah Green of World Animal Protection.

CITES is the main regulatory mechanism governing the commercial international trade in certain wildlife species, including lions, their body parts, and derivatives. Under CITES, (African) lions are listed in Appendix II. A screenshot from Speciesplus.net, taken 31 January 2023.

Lions that were euthanised in the Free State in 2019 and 2020, during a CITES zero export quota for lion bones, most likely became part of a growing and largely unregulated stockpile of lion bones that exists in South Africa, which warrants further investigation.

Ensuring regulatory compliance in all areas of the commercial captive lion industry is more important now than ever. In 2021, Minister Barbara Creecy of the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DEFE), stated that the South African government intends to effectively end the commercial captive lion industry through a mandatory phase-out, which eventually was changed to a voluntary scheme.

In its current state, the lion farming industry is governed by a patchwork of contrasting legislation across multiple provincial and national authorities, with disparities and legal loopholes, which create opportunity for harmful and fraudulent activity.

“Our research highlights many areas of grave concern and these issues need the urgent attention of the Minister and the DFFE, as well as the nine provincial nature conservation authorities, to put stricter enforcement of the TOPS Regulations in place”, concludes Dr Louise de Waal, Director of Blood Lions.

Original source:

Heinrich S, Gomez L, Green J, de Waal L, Jakins C, D’Cruze N (2022) The extent and nature of the commercial captive lion industry in the Free State province, South Africa. Nature Conservation 50: 203-225. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.50.85292

Eco-certified Ashtamudi short-neck clam acquires its rightful identity

Fishermen fishing Ashtamudi short-neck clam.

Even though the short-neck clam is the major resource and export coming from Ashtamudi Lake in Kerala, India – the first fishery to be awarded with a a Marine Stewardship Council certification for sustainability in the country, a recent study found out that the mollusc had been subject to mistaken identity.

Further, this is not the first time when the species and genus name of this clam has been changed. At first, the species was identified as Paphia malabarica, which is also the name one could read in all hitherto published reports, including the Marine Stewardship Council’s register. Later on, as the name was proved to not be compliant with the current nomenclature, the Ashtamudi short-neck clam began to be referred to as Protapes gallus.

 Marcia recens from Ashtamudi lake, India.

However, the latest in-depth taxonomic study points to the clam having been misidentified from the very beginning. According to the finding of the team of A. Arathi, R. Ravinesh and A. Biju Kumar of the Department of Aquatic Biology and Fisheries, University of Kerala, and Graham Oliver of National Museum Wales, United Kingdom, the Ashtamudi short-neck clam belongs to a totally different genus, while its rightful scientific name actually is Marcia recens. Their paper was published in the open access journal ZooKeys.

Protapes gallus (Paphia malabarica) (above) and Marcia recens (below) showing obvious external morphological variations.

During their research, the scientists identified another edible species from Ashtamudi Lake that belongs to the Marcia genus: Marcia opima. While it could easily be mistaken for its commercially important relative thanks to a multitude of colour variations, it does not appear to contribute significantly to the export. Meanwhile, the actual species identified as Paphia malabarica (Protapes gallus) can be found in shallow coastal waters in the south of the country, but not in the studied brackishwater lake.

“No deleterious effects on the viability of the fishery have resulted from this error in identification, but from a legislative perspective applying the incorrect name to the exploited species could undermine its certification and protection,” comment the researchers.
“On the basis of this study, the species involved in the Marine Stewardship Council certification would be better considered at the generic level of Marcia or at the species level for Marcia recens, the most dominant species in the Ashtamudi Lake clam fishery zone.”

In conclusion, the authors of the study say that, “misidentification can undermine comparative biological studies and conservation, while more molecular studies are required to resolve the taxonomy of all clams involved in fishery.”

###

Original source:

Arathi AR, Oliver PG, Ravinesh R, Kumar AB (2018) The Ashtamudi Lake short-neck clam: re-assigned to the genus Marcia H. Adams & A. Adams, 1857 (Bivalvia, Veneridae). ZooKeys 799: 1-20. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.799.25829

Photos by Dr Biju Kumar.