http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/why-are-poaching-bush-meat-trade-and-elephant-killing-still-happening-james

The year 2013 will go down in history as an annus horribilis. The gruesome death of 14 Borneo pygmy elephants (near Gunung Lara Forest Reserves) will not be easily forgotten nor can the killers be forgiven.

It was a horrible year; bush meat was sold in broad daylight while poachers were flouting the laws.

Bush meat markets

During an operation on December 11, Sabah Wildlife Department (SWD), arrested three sellers and confiscated 145kg of sambar deer meat and 15kg of barking deer meat which were being sold at a “tamu” without valid permits.

Trade of wildlife meat occurred in Nabawan as well as in Keningau where the SWD office is located and it has been going on for quite sometime.

The credit for the tip-off should go to the bloggers (http://tengoktvonline.blogspot.com/2013/12/keunikan-pasar-tamu-di-sabah.html) who uploaded the pictures.

Wildlife meat trading in Nabawan is just the tip of the iceberg. What were SWD enforcement officers doing all this while?

Why was the arrest of small-time offenders given so much media publicity?

It appears that our politicians, bureaucrats and Danum Girang Field Centre were competing for public attention.

Sabah’s Tourism, Culture and Environment Minister Masidi Manjun was talking tough when he warned: “The war on illegal wildlife trade and poaching has just begun, so hunters and poachers in Sabah be warned that there will be no compromise as we will be prosecuting and we will charge them to the highest extent of the law. Be ready to go to jail”.

The bureaucrats were talking big too. SWD director Laurentius Ambu said: “SWD will be increasing regular surveillance on all districts in Sabah for illegal poaching and trading by beefing up its wildlife enforcement capabilities and efficiency by setting up a separate unit.”

On December 20, nine days after the Nabawan raid, yet another case of poaching was exposed.

Senior Programme Manager for WWF and three SWD honorary wardens were patrolling near Benta Wawasan Tawau (palm oil plantation wholly owned by Innoprise Corporation, Yayasan Sabah) when they stopped a four-wheel-drive vehicle with a cooler box containing two Palanok (greater mouse deer) carcasses and one Lutung merah (maroon or red leaf monkey/langur) carcass and six Bekakuk (homemade guns).

The patrol team was told by two men wearing military fatigues that they went hunting to get some meat (pusas) for Christmas and that they were waiting for three other people who were still in the jungle.

The hunters spoke Murut among themselves; they bragged to the patrol team that they went hunting with “permission” from a high-ranking law enforcer in Sandakan.

Even after being threatened, the WWF senior manager and wardens insisted that the carcasses should be surrendered to SWD in Tawau.

The patrol team lodged a police report but no action was taken against the armed hunters.

Poaching is rampant

Poaching is still rampant, right under the SWD’s nose. Illegal bush meat trading is the unintended consequences of government intervention in a market with shrinking supply but expanding demand.

The Wildlife Enactment 1998 is a primary example where the coercive power of the law has reduced the supply for bush meat.

It works both ways, the permissions for sporting, commercial and animal kampung licences are granted with temporal and spatial limitations. Another is the trading licence for selling bush meat.

Not sure if SWD is aware of the fact that licensing is more efficient if it is used for monitoring hunting activities rather than to generate revenue.

This is because what licensing actually does is, it rations wildlife or bush meat, it is a means to an end, one of the ways used by the authorities to allocate limited resources.

In this case, licensing on hunting and trading of wild animal meat is like throwing sand in the wheels. The end market result of substantial reduction in supply is the vicious cycle of ever increasing price of exotic meat that encourages more hunting.

Licensing will never generate substantial revenue, mainly because hunters can and will evade it. Furthermore, the fees have always been less than the real value of the wildlife.

What then is a real price and value of wildlife died – or alive, endangered or otherwise?

The licensing fee for sport hunting a sambar deer is RM100 per head (RM150 for commercial); common barking deer is RM50 (RM75 for commercial); greater mouse deer is RM20 per head (RM35 for commercial) and bearded wild boar RM5 (RM50 for commercial).

The market price for these four species is the price per kg a consumer is willing to pay at the illegal market place.

The fees, however, must be paid before going on a hunt, if the chance of catching an animal is less than 50-50, then it is only rational for hunters to evade getting a licence and having to pay the fees.

Again, if the fee for licences is not the real value of wildlife, why is SWD still charging more for a commercial hunting licence but less for sport and animal kampung?

The real value of these species is determined by the remaining wild population. Bearded pigs are red listed as vulnerable by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) due to the rapid loss of its forest habitat and high hunting pressure.

Studies by Bennett L.Elizabeth et al (2000) and A.A.Tuen et al (2002) in the Crocker Range Park and Sunda Bearded Pig Specialist Group shows that wild boars are still in abundance, especially in oil palm plantations and areas with Muslim population.

The market prices of wild boars are not that high as compared with its close substitutes – the feral and domesticated pigs.

The higher price during festive seasons is due to the restriction on pork importation rather than dwindling population.

Most oil palm plantation owners, whether big or small, do not value the wild boar; when there is a population explosion, wild boars become a pest.

Sambar deer is also red listed as vulnerable to extinction by IUCN, studies shows some population survived in Danum Valley (Heydon, 1994), in Tabin Wildlife Reserve (Matsubayashi and Sukor, 2005) and in Deramakot Forest Reserves (Matsubayashi et al, 2007).

The market price of sambar deer will continue to increase faster than the price of meat from domesticated deer as more hunters enter poaching hotspots.

The barking deer and both the greater and lesser mousedeer are listed by IUCN as least concern; they are still in superabundance in Danum Valley, Ulu Segama, Malua Biobank, Lower Kinabatangan Wildlife Sanctuary, Luasong and Karamuok.

That is why the barking deer and mousedeer are the cheapest exotic food in town.

Who are the poachers?

The records on arrest show that the majority of poachers are local people from the lower income group. Almost all are married men who lives in urban areas but maintain close family connection with their villagers (place of origin).

Three sellers arrested at Nabawan “tamu” are “orang kampung”. Arresting them for not having licences to sell bush meat will have no deterrent effects.

Firstly, due process at the district level takes forever. The district SWD officer said there were 10 similar cases pending prosecution.

Justice delayed is not justice denied, you said? Wrong! Sellers at the “tamu” are poor people.

Income from selling high-priced bush meat means a lot to them. I am surprised how very obedient they were; only one of them resisted the arrest by SWD.

What with the three sellers who managed to run away? They were either related to the poachers or are the poachers themselves.

Secondly, arrest and fines will make poor sellers even worse off. It seems to me that sellers at the Nabawan “tamu” is just like the Bakas Sinalau hawkers (sellers of roasted wild pigs located along Kimanis-Keningau-Tambunan roads), they rather pay fines than get a licence.

The reason is simple: they are not qualified to apply for a licence as they don’t have a licensed gun. To transfer an ownership of a licensed gun is a very lengthy and daunting process, getting a new one is almost impossible.

So, they buy illegal bekakuk, again taking a high risk of getting caught (14 years jail under section 4 of the Firearms Act 1971).

The cartridges can be bought from licensed gun owners. Don’t you think it is kind of sad that poor people are taking so many risks?

The poor, relative to the rich, have more to gain and less to lose by taking risks that are likely to result in small increases in income, as long as the increased probability of total loss remains relatively small.

Prosecuting poor people may be counterproductive

So, what will happen to the offenders? If and when they are prosecuted, can they not plea bargain? Can the accused agree to plead guilty in exchange for some reduction in sentence sought by the prosecution?

Ignorance of law is no defence. However, prosecuting poor people may be counterproductive when it creates fear rather respect or trust towards the SWD.

Fines are a punishment best imposed against the wealthy; they are in a position to afford it although it also encourages them to commit more offences.

Rich offenders usually can get away with impunity by using their political connections or bribery or simple misuse of their positions.

In addition, convicting rich criminals is costly as they have better lawyers.

Thirdly, the fines are a punishment for not having a licence. It said nothing about how wrong it is to hunt species listed in appendix II CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) such as the lutung merah. If the poachers in Tawau were prosecuted, found guilty and went to jail, will they be feeling guilty or remorseful?

Grand finale – dead elephants

The grand finale of this article is the story told by the “orang kampung” during my family’s New Year celebration.

My cousins seated at one of the tables were talking about the 14 elephants which died last January.
I overheard my cousin who lives in Tabin saying loudly that four dead elephants were believed to have been poisoned.

Another very competitive but already inebriated cousin (he lives in Kinabatangan) interjected, saying: “Try Kinabatangan, we saw another eight dead elephants also poisoned. You can smell the pesticide from the carcass.”

So, I went to join their table. Stop spreading rumours, I said. Being a researcher, I asked those at the table what kind of people would be so sadistic as to let the elephants die a slow death?

My cousins answered with clear and penetrating insights. They are not heartless but angry, frustrated and hopeless not with Nenek (elephants) but with the oil palm big players for greedily taking and fencing off all the space, including the elephants’ forage routes and their natural habitats.

Forget the SWD, if they were doing their job, the elephants would not have ended up destroying farms and palm oil and forest plantations.

Who is going to compensate the owners for that? It all makes sense, what my cousins were talking is the distribution of costs and benefits of conserving the elephants.

The benefits of having more elephants alive appeal mostly to the general public, NGOs, State (SWD) and tourism players in Kinabatangan. But none of them actually have to pay the private costs in term of damaged crops.

It is not that these people don’t love animals. Elephants cannot be conserved successfully unless gainers are willing to compensate the losers. – January 1, 2014.

Note: This article is dedicated to those risking their lives and working beyond the call of duty to protect endangered wildlife.

* James Alin is with the School of Business and Economics, Universiti Malaysia Sabah.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.