Fiona Macleod
Riccardo Ghiazza, the animal dealer at the centre of the furore about the export of 30 baby elephants from the Tuli bushlands, sold two African elephants to pop idol Michael Jackson in 1993.
Jackson is listed by the United States Fisheries and Wildlife as one of the American clients who have bought more than 670 mammals and reptiles from Ghiazza in the past five years.
Other clients include zoos, theme parks and animal traders. The list of animals they have bought include 10 lions, 15 black- backed jackals and a string of smaller mammals.
Also on the list are 418 reptiles sold to a wildlife smuggling outfit in Hollywood. This outfit, known as Strictly Reptile Incorporated, was charged and convicted in 1997 on various counts relating to the smuggling of wildlife from Argentina to the US.
The two elephants Ghiazza sold to Jackson went to the star’s private zoo in Neverland, California. They were babies orphaned as a result of culling in the Kruger National Park.
Ghiazza approached South African National Parks early this year for more young elephants from the Kruger, but his request was rejected.
Over the years there have been rumours of maltreatment and neglect of animals at Neverland but, says the Humane Society of the US, because it is a private institution and Jackson has “powerful friends”, the accusations have never stuck.
The society unsuccessfully opposed Jackson’s application for an import permit for the elephants, Richard Farinato, its director of captive wildlife protection, this week told the Brits magistrate who is deciding whether Ghiazza can keep the 30 Tuli elephants.
Farinato added that Jackson is not a potential buyer of the Tuli babies, which are destined for zoos, theme parks and other places.
Jackson is not the first celebrity to enter the fray. Actor Richard Pryor added his voice of protest this week to those of singer Chrissie Hinde and the Spice Girls. Pryor wrote to President Nelson Mandela, urging him to facilitate the return of the babies to the Tuli bushlands and to prohibit elephant dealers from operating in South Africa.
It is not clear how much Ghiazza has made out of his wildlife trade to the US in the past five years, but an indication of the amounts involved is that he agreed to pay the Tuli land owners R12 000 per elephant.
On the Internet he advertises his outfit, called African Game Services and based near Hartebeespoort Dam west of Pretoria, as “a leading player in the capture, relocation and exportation of wild African and other animals.
“Thousands of animals, from rodents to elephants and from lions to giraffe, have been exported by African Game Services,” the Internet advertisment claims.
Organisations that oppose the Tuli elephant deal say it was nothing more than a money- making exercise, for both the landowners and Ghiazza. The landowners counter that though they needed to raise money for fencing, the main reason they sold the elephants was to help reduce overpopulation in their reserve.
Farinato told the court the birthrate among elephants in captivity is extremely low, so the demand for animals caught in the wild is likely to continue. In the past 100 years in American zoos, only 20 elephants have given birth.
Zoos are moving away from the brutal, old- fashioned training methods being used at Ghiazza’s premises, he said. They are not only cruel, but result in the deaths of one to three people a year in the US.
The final evidence was heard this week, and the case was postponed to November 26 for argument.