Questionable Buffalo and Hippo culling in Kruger

Information and Discussions on Management Issues of Concern in Kruger
Post Reply
User avatar
harrys
Posts: 13870
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 5:37 am
Country: South Africa
Location: Warmbaths
Contact:

Questionable Buffalo and Hippo culling in Kruger

Post by harrys »

Kruger animals becoming meat for starving neighbours

Kruger Culling: Beyond hungry neighbours and bulging biomass

Image


This is a story about too much hippo poo in the Kruger National Park, hungry neighbours and rain that just won’t fall. It’s also about culling, but the park doesn’t like the word and prefers harvesting. Either way, rangers have been out with their rifles and the Skukuza abattoir is open for meat processing.

Let’s begin with the poo – something hippos are pretty good at producing in large volumes. Kruger is in the grip of a severe drought. Rivers are drying, pools are emptying and grass is in short supply for herbivores.

Hippos –­ all 7 500 of them in the park ­– need water or they get sunburned. So they head for whatever pools are available to them, crowd up, munch and defecate. The result poisons the water for everything else. So ‘harvesting a sustainable resource’, ie killing, has begun.


According to William Mabasa, the park’s communications officer, ‘allowing natural attrition to take its course is probably ecologically the best. But it ignores moral issues such as allowing animals to die and rot in the face of the huge need in neighbouring areas.’ Best, then, to pot them before they expire and haul them off to the abattoir.

Buffalo harvesting isn’t about poo. According to Mabasa, ‘we have committed ourselves to contribute to feeding schemes of school children in neighbouring areas, hence the sustainable use of buffalo. There are 47 000 of them at a time when the biomass in the park is at it’s highest ever.’ The harvest, he says, would be no more than 4% – that’s around 1880.

In view of the large populations of these herbivores as well as the mortalities the park has already observed and anticipated, ‘these numbers are ecologically not significant.’

The park has an interesting justification for this harvesting which goes beyond hungry neighbours and bulging biomass. Before Europeans arrived and declared a park, there were, says Mabusa, around 15 000 hunter-gatherers using it as their shopping mall.

‘We greatly underestimated their role in shaping this ecosystem. [By removing them] we removed this driver from the Kruger ecosystem and we are researching ways to simulate their role again [in keeping down numbers] .


‘It would not be possible or suitable to reintroduce humans, but rather to simulate their influence in certain areas.’

So culling, which has had extremely bad press in the past, is not what they’re doing, he says. They are, instead, ‘focusing on alleviating pressure on sensitive areas’ in line with pre-modern precedents. Other herbivores may be considered in future.

Exactly how many animals have been ‘cropped’ so far? Apart from the comment that it is ‘generally between 1% and 4%,’ Mabasa did not give figures. The numbers, he said, are not cast in concrete as it’s ‘not possible to determine how the situation will unfold as the drought further develops.’

A report in Africa Geographic in June said that 59 hippos had been culled, another 100 hippos and 300 buffalo were in the firing line. Since then no news has emerged about cull numbers or how and to whom meat is being distributed in surrounding communities.

It’s also not clear whether the core of the problem is poo, poverty or the absence of pre-modern humans at a time when the rain just won’t fall. Whatever the driver, Skukuza’s abatoir, once infamous for the large number of elephants that passed across its chopping tables, is once again open for business.

(Source: Conservation Action Trust)


Marakele day trips

KNP: May be one day again??
stefan9
Posts: 379
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2016 10:08 pm
Country: SA
Contact:

Re: Kruger Culling: Beyond hungry neighbours and bulging biomass

Post by stefan9 »

Totally unacceptable as far as I am concerned. O/ 0*\


User avatar
Richprins
Committee Member
Posts: 75834
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 3:52 pm
Location: NELSPRUIT
Contact:

Re: Kruger Culling: Beyond hungry neighbours and bulging biomass

Post by Richprins »

The "new reasoning" behind this is total BS. Personally I think it is largely a PR exercise as tourists were getting upset by seeing hippo in their death throes all over the place. The real test will be once ellies are culled, which is hopefully the next step, which is urgent IMO.

Will dissect later! :evil:


Please check Needs Attention pre-booking: https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=322&t=596
User avatar
Mel
Global Moderator
Posts: 28221
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Germany
Location: Föhr
Contact:

Re: Kruger Culling: Beyond hungry neighbours and bulging biomass

Post by Mel »

Is it really possible to compare hunting that used to be with culling that is now??? I don't think so. Humans tend to exploit these days but had a common sense of what nature and wild life does for them earlier on.


God put me on earth to accomplish a certain amount of things. Right now I'm so far behind that I'll never die.
User avatar
Puff Addy
Posts: 648
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 7:32 pm
Country: Czech Republic
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Kruger Culling: Beyond hungry neighbours and bulging biomass

Post by Puff Addy »

I stopped reading at the first "poo" as I assumed, based on the vocabulary, that the article must have been written for four-year-olds. :O^


User avatar
Flutterby
Posts: 44150
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:28 pm
Country: South Africa
Location: Gauteng, South Africa
Contact:

Re: Kruger Culling: Beyond hungry neighbours and bulging biomass

Post by Flutterby »

Puffy! lol


User avatar
Flutterby
Posts: 44150
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:28 pm
Country: South Africa
Location: Gauteng, South Africa
Contact:

Re: Questionable Culling in Kruger

Post by Flutterby »

‘Kruger Park to feed wild animals to hungry humans’

A wildlife conservation group has questioned the motives behind the SA National Parks’ (SANParks’) proposed culling of several species of animals, saying the move is probably the result of food scarcity in the area for people, rather than a shortage of grazing owing to the drought, reports The Citizen.

SANParks says its intention to cull species of certain animals in the Kruger National Park (KNP) is due to the drought, which has gripped the country since last year. But the Conservation Action Trust is “not buying any of it”. “One would hope that the drought is not a cover for SANParks to start a ‘silent’ culling programme,” said the trust’s Ian Michler.

“To their credit, SANParks themselves admit to the errors of too much management in the past – it’s why they closed down so many waterholes and changed the fire policy. Taking it upon themselves to decide how many animals may die through natural circumstances seems then to be a return to heavy-handed meddling.”

Michler’s view was that food scarcity in the region was the reason for culling.

“If government has identified food scarcity as an issue of serious concern, then they need to deal with improving the socioeconomic drivers of this ongoing problem,” he said.

“Culling or harvesting buffalo and other large species from national parks to feed people is not a responsible or acceptable way of doing it. And none of this has anything to do with sustainable use, a catchphrase increasingly being resorted to as a sweeping justification for almost every intervention involving wildlife.”

An abattoir?

The trust recently published an article on its website in which it stated that “rangers have been out with their rifles and the Skukuza abattoir is open for meat processing”.

SANParks acting head of communications William Mabasa could not give a clear indication of the number of animals to be culled – or when the culling would occur. But he said this was not a “sneaky reintroduction of culling by SANParks”.

“Culling, cropping, harvesting, ecological removals, sustainable resource use are all terms that have been used. If culling in your book means controlling the size of these populations or numbers, that is not what we are doing.”

While SANParks agreed that the “purist way of allowing natural attrition to take its course is probably ecologically the best”, it ignores “moral issues” such as allowing animals “to die and rot in the face of the huge need in neighbouring areas”, he said.

“The current drought is being noted for its unprecedented impact on human wellbeing, with an estimated 22 million persons in southern Africa in need of some assistance. SANParks cannot remain oblivious to this issue.”

Mabasa said the numbers were not cast in concrete, as it was not possible to determine how the situation would unfold.

“The large herbivore biomass is currently the highest in Kruger’s history – plus or minus 20 000 elephant, 47 000 buffalo and 7 500 hippo – and we see significant changes in habitat caused by these high numbers. Buffalo and hippo are drought-sensitive species and previous droughts in KNP have shown population declines of up to 50%.

“Given that the buffalo population is at higher densities than previous droughts, it is expected that the population will incur huge losses during this drought. If the numbers that remained after the previous droughts in the ’90s for buffalo and hippo are considered (14 000 and 2 000, respectively), significant mortalities are anticipated.”

– Caxton News Service


User avatar
Richprins
Committee Member
Posts: 75834
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 3:52 pm
Location: NELSPRUIT
Contact:

Re: Questionable Culling in Kruger

Post by Richprins »

My comments in red:

According to William Mabasa, the park’s communications officer, ‘allowing natural attrition to take its course is probably ecologically the best. But it ignores moral issues such as allowing animals to die and rot in the face of the huge need in neighbouring areas.

"Probably" is not a scientific term, end of story. This exercise, which is culling despite the various ridiculous names given to it, has massive moral consequences indeed, and creates a huge precedent, especially regarding the elephant in the room. The huge need in neighbouring areas is a result of scandalous misgovernment, lax infrastructure development, illegal immigration, and unprecedented overpopulation. Nothing to do with the drought in the long term. Animals die and rot all the time in Kruger. It's called nature, which has been doing its thing for millions of years.


‘we have committed ourselves to contribute to feeding schemes of school children in neighbouring areas,


Thakhuli once accused me of "hiding behind my schoolchildren" regarding previous altercations, and yes that is partially irrelevant, but I would like to mention the irony. SANParks has not committed itself to anything, in this regard. It is in the mind of the political powers that be. Granted, it may be a noble concept, but "we" should not be just SANParks. That statement reflects the increasingly arrogant attitude that the bigwigs at SANParks regard the parks as their property, not that of all South Africans, and indeed all humans!



hence the sustainable use of buffalo. There are 47 000 of them at a time when the biomass in the park is at it’s highest ever.’ The harvest, he says, would be no more than 4% – that’s around 1880.


Kruger has no real idea of how many buffalo, or indeed any large mammals including rhino there are in the park, in the absence of proper annual aerial censuses that ended almost two decades ago. Figures are based on widely-spaced irregular transect flights, coupled with ground observations, which are fed into statistical guesstimates. Money has been available for a full census for years now, but nothing has happened. Hopefully it is happening now? This is ABSOLUTELY not "sustainable use". That is an entirely different long-term concept. This is "ad hoc crisis management" and has no scientific basis whatsoever.


In view of the large populations of these herbivores as well as the mortalities the park has already observed and anticipated, ‘these numbers are ecologically not significant.’


Any numbers are ecologically significant, ESPECIALLY when only certain species are removed, and the numbers themselves remain open to possible increase pending any scientific research. Hippo, buffalo and elephant were culled successfully in the past, under a non-drought related paradigm, with varying degrees of success. The process was closely and scientifically monitored, once again supported by annual aerial censuses. Decades later, these paradigms have shifted quite dramatically, regarding climate change, artificial water provision, diseases/disease control, international events and increase in the effective conservation area around Kruger. Very dangerous to adopt a quick "gung ho" approach.


Before Europeans arrived and declared a park, there were, says Mabusa, around 15 000 hunter-gatherers using it as their shopping mall.

‘We greatly underestimated their role in shaping this ecosystem. [By removing them] we removed this driver from the Kruger ecosystem and we are researching ways to simulate their role again [in keeping down numbers] .

This is utter bullshit, I'm sorry! Since neolithic times human hunter-gatherers have had a tiny influence on animal numbers in this area, and far more significantly understood the balance that had to be kept between nature and people to ensure the real "sustainable utilistaion". In fact there were very few humans in Kruger, EVER! This ethos has long disappeared in Sub-Saharan Africa in modern times, and indeed in much of the third world, with modernisation leading to rapacious overutilisation and greed that would have made the paltry 15 000 in 2 million hectares shake their heads in shame!


‘It would not be possible or suitable to reintroduce humans, but rather to simulate their influence in certain areas.’


This must be the most mind boggling, sarcastic and paternalistic comment to come from a senior SANParks official in years, and there have been many! It is cringeworthy, as they say, and embarrasses us in front of the global conservation community. In one swoop it suggests primitive social engineering, redefines the black local communities as "hunter gatherers", and sets a wild precedent regarding instant gratification for humans flying in the face of a century of careful conservation in this area. Also, who decides where "certain areas" will be? Weren't the humans in all or most areas? Apartheid or not, Kruger creates incalculable amounts of money and employment for humans in the area, and nationally, the loss of which resulting from this entitlement mentality will make a few animals sold/given as meat seem like a picnic!


They are, instead, ‘focusing on alleviating pressure on sensitive areas’ in line with pre-modern precedents. Other herbivores may be considered in future.

Exactly how many animals have been ‘cropped’ so far? Apart from the comment that it is ‘generally between 1% and 4%,’ Mabasa did not give figures. The numbers, he said, are not cast in concrete as it’s ‘not possible to determine how the situation will unfold as the drought further develops.’


I can tell you how the situation will develop, drought or not. Unless there is a very well thought-out, transparent, apolitical and cautious system of delivery of Kruger herbivore biomass protein to communities, said will demand more and more, or feel they can go and get it for themselves, as Mabasa has said humans are entitled. This has implications for "sustainable rhino harvesting" for example. It is one thing to help communities, but quite another to imply that a conservation area should be opened to human predation on an unquantified scale.


Please check Needs Attention pre-booking: https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=322&t=596
User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 67237
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Re: Questionable Culling in Kruger

Post by Lisbeth »

My compliments, RP \O

This time you have really hit most/all of the weak points in the arguments of Sanparks! ^Q^ ^Q^ ^Q^ It is just a pity that they do not listen and that their main purposes are not at all the ones that they are proclaiming O/

Whatever Sanparks is doing, they seem to have forgotten their responsibility towards the totality of the South African population and not only! 0*\ They should not be under control of the Government's directions either.
. It is in the mind of the political powers that be. Granted, it may be a noble concept, but "we" should not be just SANParks. That statement reflects the increasingly arrogant attitude that the bigwigs at SANParks regard the parks as their property, not that of all South Africans, and indeed all humans!


"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
User avatar
Flutterby
Posts: 44150
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:28 pm
Country: South Africa
Location: Gauteng, South Africa
Contact:

Re: Questionable Culling in Kruger

Post by Flutterby »

Very well said RP!! ^Q^ ^Q^ Just a pity that more people won't get to see your response...especially SANParks! :-(


Post Reply

Return to “General Management Issues - Kruger”