Kruger National Park: Be Careful of what We may Lose

[Richprins]

Next: the Elephant in the Room...

[Richprins]

The elephant question seems to be taking on Eskom-esque proportions, IMO.

Kruger mentions varying figures, guessing as there have been no proper aerial censuses done for decades, but it seems around 25 000, with maximum carrying capacity having been suggested at 9500 last century, and maintained as such then via culling.

This means that elephant are the second or third most numerous herbivores in the Park, after impala, and depending on what happens to the buffalo in the drought. This is abnormal.

Elephant have been left to their own devices by management, with the hope that nature will take its course. This may well happen, hopefully with them cutting down on reproduction somehow...they are very clever. But regardless, many will die if the first dry cycle in 20 years continues, as happened in Tsavo, for example:


In the late 1960s, there were approximately 35,000 elephants in the Tsavo ecosystem (40,000 sq. km). This population has suffered two population crashes.

The first was the drought in the early 1970s when an estimated 6,000 individuals died and over the next 4 years with low rainfall and lack of vegetation a further 3,000 died. The majority of these deaths were females and young elephants. Unlike pregnant females, females nursing a calf or young calves, independent bulls were able to travel greater distances in search of vegetation and their mortality was lower.

http://www.wildize.org/projects/Wildlif ... cKnight/56


Tsavo lost much of its wildlife, numbers-wise, and the ellies were the last to die. The landscape changed, as it is changing in Kruger.

Besides congestion and tree depredation in "normal" rainfall years, drought years like this are upscaling ellie impact, IMO.

Ellies eat any plants, so are not too fazed. They are also adept at finding water. But during stress times they protect that water, as tourists would have seen for a year now, impacting on other species.

Kruger is even worse off than Tsavo and Chobe, IMO, as it is not just fenced but surrounded by communities on most of its boundaries. The closure of dams and artificial waterpoints may have an unknown impact too...this is all new ground, the first drought with so many elephant and unfortunately it is new for them too, which is the scary part!

Dr de Vos says the tipping point is long gone regarding infrastructure capability for culling to be handled internally by Kruger. There is a long discussion on the culling thread. Personally, I think with government and private involvement it could be sorted, and discussions have indicated sustainable use of Kruger elephant meat could solve protein requirements for not just SA indefinitely.

But anyway, this is unlikely, so the worst case scenario is as follows:




Instead of a slow deterioration in the ecosystem, things go badly wrong in a 7 year drought cycle in Kruger, as herds congregate along shrinking rivers and dams year after year. Remember, Kruger rivers are "end users", getting what they can after extraction and pollution upstream.

First bulls, stressed by overcrowding, then herds stressed by starvation, start breaking out of the Park more and more, raiding commercial and subsistence farms. they will be shot/eaten, but it will be a mess, and not good public relations regarding communities at all, leading to a perceived justification of killing ellies inside and outside.

Poaching syndicates have a royal time, as they have done with rhino, preying on common rural opinion and an enlarged perception that elephant are rightfully entitled to be used by the people, who are also meanwhile starving and in need of cash in a country which is by then in economic recession.

Government indulges in its normal paralysis and ostrich mentality, and behind the scenes rather concentrates on getting money out of it somehow, as per Zimbabwe, with large-scale corruption and lack of law enforcement. Short-term mentality.


Here are the two big problems, though -

1. The Kruger landscape is changed, not due to climate change, which takes a long time, but rather vegetation chaos, subservient species mortality, and bizarre predator increase. Heritage lost.

2. Tourists simply abandon Kruger due to the horror story unfolding and, especially international ones, head to other parts of Africa, where ironically elephant are now decimated, and ecosystems thrive... This leads to a cash crisis in Kruger, which means the entire SANParks, with the normal labour unrest and added incentive for custodians to jump in to make money with its remaining resources. The Lowveld economy also crashes, it is incredibly reliant on Kruger, and crime and protests erupts further, leading to less tourists, a vicious circle.




The point is, plans need to be made!!!!

[Alf]

Scary consequences indeed

[Lisbeth]

RP, as far as you know has Sanparks made plans? Apart from the culling of hippos an buffalos that we have read about elsewhere?

If the elephants are left alone, will it change something? apart from the weaker ones dying of course.

We all know that there are too many elephants in Kruger.................?

[Richprins]

The plan is for nature to take its course!

[Richprins]

Link here: https://www.africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=237&t=6921

[Lisbeth]

Thank you

[Klipspringer]

The plan is for nature to take its course!

Nothing wrong with that I thin management interventions have done more damage than good


BTW: Where from come your popolations estimates?

[Richprins]

You can read about all the various estimates here, Klippies: https://www.africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f ... 1&start=30

The last one I found out officially was 22000 at the end of 2014!

Most estimated 25 000 at beginning 2013 already...

[Richprins]

Ethos:

This is a very difficult concept to quantify and define in various contexts and over various timeframes globally, but basically refers to a set of norms, values and standards established over a period of time for a specific group, in this case the administrators and staff of Kruger.

Since Kruger's inception, this invaluable world asset has regularly successfully weathered sometimes apparently insurmountable threats to its existence. These include aspirations of land use by hunters, politicians and sheep farmers in Stevenson Hamilton's time, calls for the "reserve" to be deproclaimed by various entities in the initial phases, threats of coal mining in the northern regions in the 80's (with government approval, initially), and a hefty elephant poaching war around that time. In all cases the Park survived, largely due to the gritty determination of its leaders, staff, and public and international supporters.

The above people were driven by an unshakeable devotion to what they realised was a unique heritage for future generations, and a keen understanding amongst the staff of the massive responsibility placed upon their shoulders. This became an ethos regarding excellence in spheres combining conservation and indeed also tourism.

Eventually, once the Park became an icon of conservation, support and tourism boomed uninterrupted to this day, perpetuating the ethos amongst staff.
Government, tourism income and international donors contributed steadily to large infrastructure developments, including restcamps, paved roads, dams and fences. There was also a strong effort to secure the Park by the Military, albeit mostly for political reasons, but the point is there was a great team effort for the common good of conservation and protection in the end, which cannot be ignored.

A Board was also established, consisting mostly of conservation-minded and experienced private citizens who rigorously protected the interests of conservation as an obvious prerequisite, with little reimbursement. Sharing the ethos.

Restcamps, infrastructure and facilities were scrupulously maintained and only upgraded where possible and with finances permitting, in an orderly fashion, until it was deemed a satisfactory balance had achieved between conservation and service provision to tourists. Development largely ended there, and Kruger has become a self-sustaining goose that lays a massive financial golden egg annually, providing job-creation and economic benefits for the entire Lowveld, mostly regarding spinoff industries that reach far and wide, which is the real economic benefit, (not camp tourism income) as outlined previously on this thread.

Now however, things are slowly changing, and this means the ethos is changing.

It appears there has been a real or perceived disconnect between Government and Kruger, with a diminishing will to exercise its oversight and foresight into what has become a parastatal entity as part of SANParks. There is sufficient financial support for SANParks, as required, especially during periods of crisis. But this is where it ends, and involvement strategy now seems to be simply linked to protecting a financial venture, very similar to the case with other parastatals. The Board and its officers have experienced immense upheavals , mostly linked to financial issues, which leaves a bitter taste and indicates a lack of ethos.

There is also virtually no diplomatic activity from government regarding the poaching crisis and our neighbours, and feeble commitment by the military to protect our porous borders.

Be that as it may, governments and boards have come and gone over the century, and the ethos of the staff on the ground has survived that, by and large. However this coalface ethos is also slowly changing, part of a larger realignment of the narrative and expectation phenomenon in the country.

At the more micro-management level in Kruger, regarding the specific tourism interface, an interesting approach to service delivery has emerged, with simple maintenance issues being increasingly strangely approached in terms of resolutions. Defects are increasingly being ignored pending public complaints, instead of simple daily inspections by management-level staff, or even reporting by lower-level staff. Once again the term “increasingly” must be remembered, as this is not yet the prevalent attitude in all camps/facilities. This appears to be similar to the general attitude towards the concept of maintenance and service in other parastatals and public entities throughout the country, especially regarding outsourcing of services even at micro-level, which generally raises grave financial wasteful expenditure concerns and time delays.
So a change in ethos.

The staff-tourist relationship remains mostly excellent at micro-level, which is vitally important and a precious state of affairs that needs to be maintained at all costs when compared to other parastatals and government agencies regarding public interfacing and service excellence. The ethos is strong there for the time being, with the vast majority of employees being prepared to go the extra mile to make the stay of a tourist memorable.

But behind the scenes/after hours there are increasing problems regarding the approach of Kruger staff at micro- and mini level.

Firstly, the attitude of entitlement regarding drinking and socialising, often late into the night, that pervades the rest of the country is slowly manifesting itself in some staff villages, detrimentally affecting the experience of tourists who have paid a great deal of money to enjoy a quiet bush experience. It cannot be stressed enough that many visitors come to the Park to escape the rising lawless violation of their privacy and solitude experienced in the cities, as much as for the animals.

While visitors also disturb each other that can be dealt with quite speedily, but when staff regard it as their right to party, sometimes including the managers, it becomes a slippery slope. I say this because staff and franchise/contractor employees have been very keen to choose and accept the jobs at restcamps of their own volition, and should understand that that job comes with certain restrictions and caveats related to the situation, as with any job anywhere. It is virtually unheard of that hospitality staff (and after all a tourist restcamp is a hospitality industry entity by definition) would disturb its own clients with noise pollution. This is also virtually unheard of in any similar establishments worldwide.

Combined with this is the increasing after-hours vehicle traffic by staff and their guests around and even within certain restcamps. While displaying a lack of regard for the ethos of an environmental sanctuary, it is simply against the rules of Kruger, and obviously not enforced. Speeding by staff and allied forces members, often after-hours, has led to some dramatic accidents and animal deaths, rarely reaching the stage of suitable punishment and the finalised results thereof being reported to the public. Ethos increasingly sadly lacking.

The change in ethos is more alarmingly and quickly increasing at conservation level, with more and more staff, including rangers at all levels, becoming involved in rhino poaching. This is the real demise of the ethos established over the years, as colleagues are undermining each other. While the majority put their lives on the line to protect our heritage, more and more colleagues from various services are stabbing them in the back. And effectively upon being apprehended doing their best to deny culpability or take blame.

As an example, the first senior ranger to be caught poaching, in the 80's, was so shunned, shamed and isolated by his peers at all levels that he resigned with immediate effect and left the Park straight away, even before being summarily dismissed, not suspended, and charged and swiftly convicted. He did not contest the charges, and knew he had violated the ethos. SANParks leaders apologised profusely at the highest level, and swiftly concluded the matter, in conjunction with allied agencies.

It all boils down, by association, to a lack of determined leadership at mini and macro levels. That is where the ethos must be strongest, right up to the Board and the Minister, who should set the example and relentlessly pursue enforcement and end-process punishment at all levels regarding contravention of laws, rules and standards.

Once again, the current situation eerily resembles the failure of management, foresight and commitment/culpability at other parastatals in South Africa.

One can debate the political and historical excuses for this to death, but simple economic and employment facts in our troubled country are now far more important, and a collapse of Kruger is unthinkable in this regard.

Ethos must be kept alive..there is still a lot.