Lee Rhiannon (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Monday of this week was World Lion Day, a special day to celebrate the wonder of this majestic species. I think all of us have enjoyed lions in every way—they are just such extraordinary animals—from storybooks for young children to enjoying wildlife documentaries. There are many species in the world that are incredibly unique, but the lion figures in so much mythology and in so many childhood stories and scientific studies that have brought wonder and enjoyment to so many people.

I think it is very understandable that a worldwide day has been established. Then we heard a few weeks ago about the shocking killing of the lion, Cecil, that has mobilised so many people around the world. Why were they mobilised? Because of such extreme cruelty done to one animal. That speaks volumes, that people do care and that they value it when governments like the present government make these changes to regulations so that there is increased protection for this important species.

We have this disallowance before us, and the Greens will certainly not be supporting it. I think that if the mover, Senator David Leyonhjelm, had any decency he would have withdrawn this disallowance motion, particularly after what happened to Cecil the lion. That really did highlight public opinion and how important this change is—the change that he now wants to disallow with his attempt to change that section of the EPBC Act.

Other members have spoken in the debate on aspects of how this industry works. Indeed, it is an industry; it has nothing to do with conservation. People who promote this canned hunting and the spin-offs associated with that use issues to do with conservation as cover, but that is certainly not the intent here. It actually works in completely the opposite direction.

First off, I have a few comments on canned hunting. I think people have heard that canned hunting is described as 'shooting fish in a barrel' because that is just to try to get it across to people that it is not hunting; it is something that has been manufactured. Largely, what we are talking about here are rich, white men going to these countries to shoot elephants, rhinoceros, lions and probably other extraordinary species that one finds in Africa in a way in which they know they will get a result. They will be able to kill the animal. Then they stuff the parts of the animal—the paws of the lion and its head. In the case of elephants it is even parts of their feet that are stuffed so that they may become tables. I just find the whole thing extraordinary, that it is something that people would want to do.

I certainly cannot call it a sport; I can barely even call it hunting. That is why people have come up with this description, 'canned hunting'. Again, I emphasise this: there is no conservation benefit in this. It is actually a negative in terms of conservation. And there are no benefits to local communities. I noticed that an earlier speaker, Senator John Williams, made out that there were benefits that go to local communities. He had no basis for that, or evidence to back that up. I think it is important that the impact it does have on local communities is set out.

Firstly, research published by the pro-hunting International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation and also by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation—and this has been supported by other researchers in the area—have found that hunting companies contribute only three per cent of their revenue to communities living in hunting areas. Obviously, that is an average—in many cases there may be some that are higher but there are a lot which are much lower. The vast majority of their expenditure does not accrue to local people and businesses. We find that the firms involved, government agencies that might be trying to drive this and some individuals who are looking to make a profit out of it have few links to local communities near lion habitats. This is quick money and often big money for those pushing behind the companies, and the locals are left in an even worse situation—often with the lion's habitat destroyed.

Canned hunting is also often called 'trophy hunting'. Trophy-hunting advocates present the industry as very large. They cite figures as high as $200 million in annual revenue. But in the context of national economies—and we are talking about Africa here—the industry is tiny, contributing at best a fraction of a per cent of the GDP. Nature based tourism does play a significant role in national development. This is where countries like Australia can assist countries in Africa to develop that side of their tourism. That is the way this should be going. This is a debate that we should not be having in the 21st century. This is the big, white hunter going to Africa and killing these majestic species. It should have ended long ago.

Nature based tourism, as I said, does play a significant role. Across the countries which have been investigated, trophy hunting revenue was only 1.8 per cent of tourism revenue while nature tourism is bringing increasing amounts of financial benefit to local communities.

Conservationists and many MPs, particularly in countries across Europe, are pushing for the European Union to ban the import of lion parts—the heads, the paws and the skins—as trophies from African countries. Sadly, it is not just lions. As I said before, the situation for elephants remains very serious. The European Union has banned trophy-hunting imports of elephants from Tanzania and Mozambique. I understand that it is also banned in Botswana. Unfortunately, the European Union has not placed a full ban on trophy hunting; that is a campaign that continues. I congratulate Botswana's government. It is a very poor country, and it has brought in a self-imposed ban on trophy hunting—further confirmed after the death of the lion Cecil. So this is a huge campaign, and again I congratulate the government for taking this action.

We needed this change to the law. Why did we need it? We needed it not just because of issues of cruelty but because of issues that are literally about the future of this species. There are 32,000 lions left in Africa. North Africa no longer has lions. They are already extinct in that part of that huge continent. The numbers in West Africa are in the hundreds, possibly 500. In central Africa, east Africa and southern Africa, the numbers are obviously higher. But 32,000 overall is not a huge number of animals for this species.

You heard earlier from an earlier speaker in this debate that this species has gone from being classified as vulnerable to being classified as threatened. The lion population is in serious decline. This is an issue that should concern all of us. Anyone who stops to think about would have to find this shocking. While the lion is not our native species, so many of us have grown up with lions in our children's books—just reading about lions, just appreciating this creature that is at the head of the food chain in Africa. Certainly it does engender some fear at times, understandably; they are a tough species looking after their young. The wonder of life that is encapsulated in the lion species is something that we should not threaten in any way. Certainly trophy hunting does that.

I will mention a few more details about this industry. When I read about the tragedy of Cecil the lion, and then saw it, I checked out some of the issues going down with this industry. It really is deeply shocking. Lions are being bred purely for people to come along and kill them. That is not hunting at all. I do not think hunting of wild animals should occur in any form. But it is particularly wrong that they are captured in a certain area and then there is an absolute guarantee that the big white hunter can come in and kill off a few of these majestic big cats.

Research that has been done in this area has found that there are 160 farms in parts of southern Africa that are legally breeding more than 5,000 big cats per annum purely for this canned hunting market. Really that is quite sick. In South Africa in 2012 canned hunting was so popular it generated US$70 million. And, again, barely any of that money stays with local communities. This is money that is quickly going overseas or to big companies in Johannesburg and other key parts of South Africa.

Regulation of this industry is virtually nonexistent. What it comes down to is: if you have the money to pay, you buy a dodgy permit and you can go off and shoot these animals. What happens then? You shoot the animal; you take the skin; you take the head; you have your trophy; you go home. I guess you then put it on your wall and invite your friends over. I mean, really!

But there are other aspects. It is not just trophies. There is also a trade in the bones of these animals. The lion bone trade is part of a lucrative medicine market in China and parts of South-East Asia. The concern here is that the canned hunting market of lions is actually providing cover for an illegal trade in wild lion bones and tiger bones also. This is another very worrying aspect of how this industry is playing out.

There is yet another aspect. Many of you would have heard about the puppy farms in Australia. We now have cub farms as a spin-off of this industry. This is to supply lion cubs. How cute are little lion cubs! You do want to cuddle them. They are absolutely gorgeous. So I can understand that people want to go along and pat a little lion cub. As part of this industry people are breeding up the cubs so that people can come along and pay good money—bring their children along—to pat a lion cub, in fact many lion cubs. It is a tourism attraction. They actually have these petting parks.

It is presented again that this is something wonderful for conservation because these poor little lion cubs have been orphaned and now we need to ensure we conserve the species. 'Come along. You can pat a lion cub. We are looking after it.' The implication is that it will go back out to the wild. But virtually none of those lion cubs go back out to the wild. By far the majority of them have been bred specifically to go to these petting farms. It is something that is very abusive. It is done in the name of conservation but it is factory farming at its worst.

Also, what happens to the mothers, the lionesses? It is very unnatural in terms of the way the lionesses are treated—like with puppy farms here. Often lionesses are giving birth to two and three litters per year, which is well beyond the pattern of a lioness in the wild. Again, this is deeply wrong. Then the breeders remove the cubs from the mother lionesses at a very early age, disrupting the whole natural way that prides of lions, these most beautiful animals, live. I have read that in some cases the cubs can be taken off the mother within an hour. That is another form of cruelty.

There was cruelty in the way Cecil was shot; there is cruelty in the whole notion of canned farming and canned shooting; there is cruelty in the way hunting is undertaken; and there is cruelty in the way these lionesses are treated.

I noticed, when the mover of this disallowance, Senator Leyonhjelm, spoke, he said that the people who were against canned hunting had an 'intense personal dislike' of hunting. That is quite an abusive phrase. It is again trying to misrepresent these people. Yes, we do strongly oppose canned hunting. But think about why it is done. It is not some intense personal thing. It is actually very objective. What we are saying is that these animals should not be treated so cruelly; bred purely to be shot, for the pleasure of someone who has the money to kill these animals, in a very easy way. They will get their shot sooner or later, and then they can cut up the animal and take it home in parts. That is what people are objecting to. It is very objective in terms of how they have made their decision. Yes, they might feel very concerned and upset by it, but it is certainly a judgement that they have made on a very reasoned basis. It is also a judgement has been made for biodiversity reasons. We know the loss of species around the world, the loss of our glorious biodiversity, and all of us should take a stand on that. That is another reason people are speaking out against the cruelty to lions and other wildlife in Africa and why all of us should vote against this disallowance.