Article re Taiping Four gorillas

[Guest guest]

New Straits Times » Features

 

EARTH MATTERS: Gorillas in the mist

Sarah Sabaratnam and Elizabeth John

 

Apr 27:

--

 

Four gorillas which arrived in Taiping Zoo in the

beginning of 2002 sparked off a trail of inquiry.

Being a species threatened with extinction and

protected under a convention, questions were raised

about the legality of their presence here, and the

destination they were later despatched to. ELIZABETH

and SARAH SABARATNAM delve into the matter.

IT has been exactly two weeks since the four lowland

gorillas - dubbed the Taiping Four - were flown away

in secret to a zoo in Pretoria, South Africa.

 

Yet the international attention, the accusations and

the pressure that mounted after the gorillas arrived

at the Taiping Zoo two years ago have not abated.

 

Questions continue to be asked: Why was the media not

informed of the transfer? Why did Malaysia choose the

Pretoria Zoo? Why did the authorities not respond to

Cameroon's request for the gorillas to be returned to

their country of origin? Why are those implicated in

misleading the authorities about the origin of the

gorillas, not being prosecuted?

 

Misliah Mohd Bashir, the Department of Wildlife and

National Parks director of enforcement, seems

unruffled by these queries. Like most Malaysians, she

probably is not impressed by foreigners telling us

what to do. She says the decision Malaysia made

complies with the Convention on International Trade in

Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

 

The decision (to send them to South Africa) had also

been approved by the World Association of Zoos and

Aquariums, she says.

 

" We also don't know for sure if the country of origin

for the gorillas is really Cameroon - they only made

an application for the specimens (in November 2002),

eight months after the animals were confiscated.

 

" In such a case, where animals are confiscated, and we

are not sure of the country of origin, we have the

final decision as to where to send them. " This is in

accordance with Article VIII, section 4 (b) of the

CITES text which reads: " the Management Authority (in

this case, the Department of Wildlife and National

Parks) shall, after consultation with the State of

export, return the specimen to that State at the

expense of that State, or to a rescue centre or such

other place as the Management Authority deems

appropriate and consistent with the purposes of the

present Convention. "

 

Malaysian authorities had also earlier said that they

were satisfied that the Pretoria zoo was capable of

looking after the gorillas. These reasons seem valid.

However, they may not be in the best interest of the

gorillas.

 

NGOs such as the International Primate Protection

League (IPPL) and primatologist Jane Goodall had felt

that a sanctuary and not a zoo would have been a more

suitable destination for the gorillas.

 

They also felt that the gorillas should have been

returned to their country of origin which is

speculated to be Cameroon; South Africa was unsuitable

as gorillas do not exist in the wild there.

 

Ian Redmond, who has researched gorillas in the wild

for many years, when contacted by e-mail, highlighted

the need to send the animals to a country where there

are gorillas in the wild.

 

" I'm sure the keepers at Pretoria will do their best,

but the quality of life for these four orphans simply

cannot be as good in a city zoo in a latitude outside

the tropics as it could be in a well-run sanctuary in

their country of origin, where climate and food plants

are natural to them and a forest enclosure is

planned. "

 

Upon closer inspection though, Malaysia's ultimate

decision could have been influenced by the possibility

in the future of a zoo-to-zoo exchange programme with

Pretoria - should the gorillas breed successfully

there and produce offspring. Another question that has

been asked is why a third party is being allowed to

benefit from the gorillas - which is in contravention

of CITES.

 

" Nobody is benefiting. Usually all our confiscated

animals are sent to the Malacca Zoo and we could have

kept the gorillas within the country but because they

are a high-profile animal, we had to send them to

Africa. We decided on South Africa because it is

suitable, " says Misliah.

 

Why did we have to send them away at all?

 

Gorillas are animals threatened with extinction and

are therefore protected under Appendix I of CITES,

which does not permit their trade for commercial

purposes. They are also totally protected in their

countries of origin.

 

CITES allows the animal to be imported or exported

only in exceptional circumstances such as for

scientific research or for animal exchange programmes

between zoos. In the case of the Taiping four, the

Taiping Zoo had put in the application for the

gorillas as part of an animal-exchange programme with

the University of Ibadan Zoological Garden in Nigeria.

 

Sun bears and Malayan tigers were to be sent to Ibadan

in exchange for the gorillas. But we stumbled (see

accompanying story) with the documentation procedure

and our authorities did not act on the discrepancies.

Despite this, Malaysia went ahead and issued a new

CITES import permit for Taiping Zoo, for five

gorillas, in December 2001.

 

Then on Jan 18, 2002, four gorillas (one is believed

to have died during the transfer) arrived in Malaysia.

The transfer of the gorillas was facilitated by

Nigercom Solution Sdn Bhd, a company appointed by

Taiping Zoo.

 

In March 2002, when the IPPL heard of the transfer of

the gorillas to Malaysia under " suspicious

circumstances " , it initiated an investigation. An IPPL

investigator was sent to Malaysia and the media in

Africa was alerted. There was a breakthrough in the

investigations when Glenn McKenzie of the news agency

Associated Press investigated the Ibadan zoo and found

an elderly female gorilla living by herself,

confirming that the zoo did not have a

captive-breeding programme.

 

According to the IPPL, zoo employees informed McKenzie

that many young gorillas had passed through the zoo -

and that many of those awaiting shipment had died

there. " One keeper stated that the baby gorillas who

reached the Ibadan zoo came from Cameroon. "

 

This led the Nigerian Government to conduct a

presidential inquiry and the Malaysian authorities to

conduct investigations into the matter. Investigations

by the Nigerian authorities confirmed that the Ibadan

zoo does not have a breeding programme as stated in

the CITES export permit.

 

According to the Animal Welfare Institute quarterly,

the inquiry in Nigeria identified the perpetrators

which included animal dealer Tunde Oduyoya " whose 1999

fax to the world's zoos offering baby gorillas for

sale had caused an international scandal; and Dr Dora

Akinboye, the director of the Ibadan zoo.

 

Malaysian authorities conducted their own

investigations and found that Nigercom Solution had

vacated its premises. They contacted the CITES

secretariat in Switzerland which confirmed that the

permits issued by both countries in question were

genuine but misleading as they stated that the

gorillas were captive-bred.

 

Following an official inquiry with Taiping Zoo

director Dr Kevin Lazarus, Misliah came to the

conclusion that Taiping Zoo was aware that the

gorillas were not from a captive-breeding programme in

the Ibadan zoo but did not disclose this information

in its application.

 

She also said that where the CITES management

authority of Malaysia was concerned, it had complied

with CITES procedures all the way.

 

Mohd Nawayai Ishak, director of the Malaysian

Association of Zoological Parks and Aquaria, feels

that where Malaysia is concerned, " we did nothing

wrong " . " We feel that as the Malaysian Government

followed all the requirements, and that the CITES

secretariat issued an import permit based on our

documents which were in order, the Government has not

done anything wrong. "

 

But conservationists are still not happy as no one in

Malaysia has been charged with contravening the CITES

by falsely declaring the origin of the gorillas.

 

Says Redmond: " Last year Nigeria set a good example by

sending back two confiscated gorillas and setting up a

presidential inquiry to take legal action against

those involved in wildlife traffic. Malaysia, sadly,

did not.

 

Thus, instead of sending a message that smuggling

valuable species will result in prosecution for the

offenders and professional shame for all those

knowingly involved, the impression is that with luck

you can get away with it, or at least avoid any

negative consequences. "

 

He feels that sending the right message about illegal

trade of gorillas is important because such activities

cause untold damage. " We should recall that these four

infants represent, at a conservative estimate, 56 dead

gorillas! " At least four out of five infant gorillas

die in trade, so four live babies equal 20 captured,

and each infant is captured by killing at least two

adults - the mother and father - so four live babies

equal 40 dead adults and 16 infants that died before

reaching adequate care. "

 

Many parties have denounced Malaysia for not taking

any action against those implicated. Three things need

to be clarified at this juncture. Although a precedent

should indeed be set, the point is the authorities in

Malaysia don't actually have anyone to implicate.

 

Dr Lazarus has been blamed but there is no proof that

he knew that the gorillas were captive-bred.

 

Also, the Protection of Wild Life Act, as it is, has

flaws that will no allow any action to be taken, even

if anyone is implicated.

 

A second issue is why the department issued an import

permit if a suspicious export permit arrived at their

desk here before it issued an import permit. This is

in direct contravention of the CITES. Misliah also

showed us a few suspicious-sounding letters from the

Ibadan zoo to the department. Furthermore, warning

bells would have been clear enough after the

application by a commercial company, Fish Paradise, to

import six gorillas.

 

Better tabs on companies like Nigercom Solutions are

also needed. Is it really so easy for companies and

the people running it to disappear?

 

A third problem with charging anyone in Malaysia lies

with our laws. The Protection of Wild Life Act does

not require applicants to state whether the animal is

captive-bred or sourced from the wild.

 

There are also no provisions to prosecute anyone who

falsely declares where an animal was sourced from.

 

Obviously, there is room for improvement in our level

of vigilance and enforcement. Chris R. Shepherd, from

TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, a conservation organisation

that monitors the illegal trade of wildlife, says in

future, the authorities in Malaysia have to do

everything possible to ensure that this does not

happen again.

 

" In the future, authorities should take every measure

to ensure that animals imported for zoos are obtained

from legal sources. Better communications with the

country of origin will help prevent issues like this

one. If in doubt the trade should not be allowed. "

 

 

 

The writers can be contacted at

<featuresfeatures

 

 

 

Question of permits and approval

 

 

 

WHENEVER there is a request (as there was from Taiping

Zoo) for an Appendix 1 species (in this case

gorillas), the Convention on International Trade in

Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES)

management authority in Malaysia, the Department of

Wildlife and National Parks, would first have to issue

an import permit to, in this case, the management

authority in Nigeria.

 

 

It will only do so after it is satisfied that the

application is for an animal-exchange programme

between the zoos; that the zoo is qualified to keep

the animal, and the gorillas were captive-bred in

Nigeria.

The Minister of Environment can only approve the

application.

 

 

Upon receiving the CITES import permit and

application, the management authority in Nigeria needs

to ensure that the gorillas are captive-bred and not

wild caught before issuing an export permit for the

gorillas to be exported to Malaysia.

 

 

According to Misliah Mohd Bashir, the Department of

Wildlife and National Parks director of enforcement,

all these papers were in order - that is Taiping Zoo

applied for the gorillas through the proper channels

in 1999. So the department issued an import permit

which in the end lapsed before it was utilised.

 

 

However, she said, suspicion arose when the export

permit arrived at the department in October 2001) for

the export of six gorillas to a private company called

Fish Paradise. The export permit was also issued

before the import permit by Malaysia, which is in

direct contradiction of CITES provisions.

 

 

The department then wrote to the Nigerian management

authority and the CITES secretariat asking that they

verify the CITES export permit sent to Malaysia.

 

 

However, no reply was given. Instead, on Nov 6, 2001 a

new CITES export permit was issued directly to Taiping

Zoo by the CITES management authority in Nigeria. The

export permit verified that all the specimens were

captive-bred in the Ibadan zoo.

 

 

Meanwhile the CITES secretariat in Geneva responded on

Nov 13, 2001 expressing its concern that a serious

infraction against the convention was taking place.

 

 

But Malaysian authorities went ahead and issued an

import permit in Dec 2001 for the one that had lapsed

earlier.

 

 

The gorillas arrived two months later, and this was

followed by international outcry.

 

 

Dr. Shirley McGreal, Chairwoman

International Primate Protection League

PO Box 766

Summerville, SC 29484, USA

Phone - 843-871-2280, Fax- 843-871-7988

E-mail - smcgreal, Web: www.ippl.org

 

" He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt.

He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord

would suffice. "

--Albert Einstein