FW: Important news: BirdLife South Africa & SANCCOB launch review proceedings against Minister of Dept of Forestry, Fisheries and Environment
Sylvia Ledgard
From: Andy Wassung
[mailto:Andy.W...@birdlife.org.za]
Sent: Wednesday, 20 March 2024 16:07
To: Forum
Subject: Important news: BirdLife South Africa & SANCCOB launch
review proceedings against Minister of Dept of Forestry, Fisheries and
Environment
Importance: High
Dear colleagues,
As valued BirdLife South Africa supporters, this is a courtesy letter to inform you that our organisation has made the difficult decision to litigate against the office of the Minister in the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE). With SANCCOB as our co-applicant, we are asking that the court review the decision that the Minister made in August 2023 regarding the implementation of "Island Closures" around six of the most important African Penguin breeding colonies. Such closures are intended to restrict fishing for sardine and anchovy, which are the main food source for African Penguins.
As you are probably aware, African Penguins, currently classified as globally Endangered, are one of the three most threatened species of penguin worldwide. Currently, wild populations are declining at a catastrophic rate of 8% per year, with breeding pairs in South Africa having now dwindled to around 8534. This means that over the last decade the African Penguin population has decreased by 55%. At this rate of decline, the population could be extinct in the wild by 2035!
A significant cause of this decline is linked to competition for prey from the purse-seine fishery. For several years now, there has been contestation between the conservation sector which has advocated for biologically meaningful island closures, and the purse-seine fishing industry which has maintained that island closures make an insignificant contribution to arresting penguin declines.
An Island Closure Experiment was implemented between 2008 and 2020 to assess the impacts of sardine and anchovy purse-seine fishing within the breeding penguins’ foraging ranges. The results of this experiment were recently reviewed by an Expert Panel of international scientists. The Panel's findings were intended to provide independent advice to the DFFE Minister that would assist in resolving the impasse between the fisheries and conservation sector scientists. The Panel's report concluded that carefully configured no-take zones would have a positive impact on penguin breeding success and hence materially contribute to supporting the survival and recovery of the African Penguin population. The Panel's report provided specific guidance about a trade-off mechanism for the determination of equitable closures.
Drawing on the findings of the Expert Review Panel, the Minister announced in August last year that long-term closures (10 years with a review after six years) would be implemented around six of the largest African Penguin colonies in South Africa. Whilst this announcement was welcome, we had concerns about the Minister's failure to explicitly endorse the Panel’s recommended approach to closure designs. Instead of recognising the arbiter role of the Panel, she referred the decision about closure configuration back to the conservation sector and fisheries scientists, despite previous failed efforts between these two parties to reach an agreement.
Notwithstanding several appeals by the conservation sector, urging the DFFE and the fishing industry to reassess the boundaries of the closures to ensure that these encompass the core foraging areas for the penguins, consensus has not been reached. Consequently, the interim closures that were in place prior to the Expert Panel's assessment, have now been enforced via the fishing permits around the six breeding colonies.
Our seabird scientists have determined that these closures will not provide meaningful benefits for African Penguins. The ineffectual result, of what has been a long and intense negotiation process, has significant implications for our conservations efforts.
It is essential that sardine and anchovy stocks around the primary breeding areas for African Penguins are protected and optimised. Consequently, the decision to take the Minister to court is motivated by an urgent need to resolve the prolonged impasse with the purse-seine fishery and ensure that the current ineffective closures are replaced with closures that cater to the biological requirements of breeding African Penguins.
As with any litigation, the case carries risks and the staff and Board of BirdLife South Africa and SANCCOB have not taken the decision to litigate lightly. We have consulted at length with our excellent on-brief attorneys from the Biodiversity Law Centre. We are confident that this will be an important and precedent setting case which demonstrates the depth of our commitment to halt the African Penguin's precipitous slide to extinction.
If you have specific queries about the litigation, please contact Dr Kirsten Day, our Policy and Advocacy Programme Manager (kirst...@birdlife.org.za). If you would like to know more about the threats to African Penguins and the scientific forecasting work that supports our case, please contact Dr Alistair McInnes, our Seabird Conservation Programme Manager (alistair...@birdlife.org.za).
You can also visit our website (www.birdlife.org.za) to stay up to date with our efforts to save the African Penguin.
Yours sincerely,
Andy Wassung
Andy Wassung
Communications Manager
Isdell House, 17 Hume Road (cnr Hume Road/Jan Smuts Drive), Dunkeld West 2196, Gauteng
Private Bag X16, Pinegowrie 2123, Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa
Tel: +27 (0)11 789 1122
Cell: +27 (0)76 699 8332
E-mail: andy.w...@birdlife.org.za
Donations to BirdLife South Africa may contribute to your B-BBEE scorecard as we are fully SED compliant in terms of the B-BBEE Act. We are also a registered Public Benefit Organisation (No. 930004518) and authorised to issue 18A tax certificates where applicable.
BirdLife South Africa head office is supported by many generous donors, including the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, F.H. Chamberlain, Toyota, AVIS, ZEISS, Nedbank and Sappi, as well as a number of Corporate Members and Golden Bird Patrons.
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
Any information present or attached must be regarded as the communication of information and does not under any circumstance constitute formal advice unless otherwise stated to the contrary. This information has been prepared solely for the use of the addressee. It is not intended for use by any other party and may not be relied upon by any other party. No acceptance of any liability for any unauthorised use of this information or any associated attachment will be given. Further, this information is based on the facts provided by the addressee and on the law as promulgated at the date of this document. No responsibility will be taken for advising on any changes to the information which may arise as a result of subsequent changes to law or practice.
