Questionable Buffalo and Hippo culling in Kruger

[ubhejane]

Thanks for the feedback RP and your analysis. It doesn't seem that anyone is much further forward.

[Lisbeth]

I have always been wondering what kind of graduations the new management have. I don't even know who they are I once asked in a message to what I think at the time was the spokesperson, but never got an answer

[Lisbeth]

Your analysis is most likely correct, RP, even if rather generalizing, which of course is inevitable in this kind of controversial.

[leachy]

thanks for your input on the meeting mr richprins....

this is an extract from one of the facebook groups.

"Quoting Mr Ralph Sibande who attended the stakeholder meeting (copied from anoter page): "It is morally reprehensible to kill animals in the Kruger in order to address the supposed hunger of people. The communities around Kruger are not hunger disaster areas. No government promulgation has declared them as such. That this project, to provide free meat to these communities, was discussed alongside other relevant scientific strategies, does n ot at all make it RIGHT. And we did not challenge other scientific statements of fact made in the meeting except this INTRUSION and morally unjustifiable decision. But it will therefore remain morally offensive to all sane people around the world. In fact not a single scientific finding was raised in the meeting to justify this intended reprehensible practice. It will never gain moral acceptance by mere association or by being paraded with other scientific facts. It remains on its own an ill conceived idea. I have no doubt that it will plunge Sanparks into the murky waters of disrepute and questionable and irresponsible stewardship of our heritage."

[stefan9]

Thank you for the feedback RP.

[Flutterby]

Well said Mr Sibande!

[Flutterby]

More questions than answers as Kruger Park continues shooting buffalo


Adam Cruise | Traveller24


Cape Town- Confused explanations at a public meeting in Skukuza on Saturday are concerning stakeholders as the Kruger National Park forges ahead with its programme of shooting buffalo as part of a sustainable offtake program that does not appear to have clear objectives.

Last year, SANParks officials justified culling of hippo as drought-related – explaining it was better to kill the animals before they suffered from the drought that ravaged much of the first half of 2016 – but given the protracted rainfall in the area recently, the explanations for the continued killing has shifted to that of feeding impoverished rural populations that border the western boundary of the park.

Kruger Park rangers will shoot 300 to 400 buffalo and 200 hippo in 2017, on the back of 105 buffalo and 52 hippo killed in 2016 and the refurbishment of the Skukuza abattoir to process the carcasses for sale of meat for human consumption.

[Richprins]

More questions than answers as Kruger Park continues shooting buffalo
2017-03-13 13:06 - Adam Cruise




Cape Town- Confused explanations at a public meeting in Skukuza on Saturday are concerning stakeholders as the Kruger National Park forges ahead with its programme of shooting buffalo as part of a sustainable offtake program that does not appear to have clear objectives.

Last year, SANParks officials justified culling of hippo as drought-related – explaining it was better to kill the animals before they suffered from the drought that ravaged much of the first half of 2016 – but given the protracted rainfall in the area recently, the explanations for the continued killing has shifted to that of feeding impoverished rural populations that border the western boundary of the park.

Kruger Park rangers will shoot 300 to 400 buffalo and 200 hippo in 2017, on the back of 105 buffalo and 52 hippo killed in 2016 and the refurbishment of the Skukuza abattoir to process the carcasses for sale of meat for human consumption.


“This re-direction of culling to feed settlements is alarming given the timeframe of a few months,” says Richard Prinsloo of Africa Wild, a public forum that monitors the governance within SANParks, “since it creates many more questions regarding the management, planning, motivation, as well as confusion among the scientists and public alike.”

Prinsloo says the park has never been mandated to provide sustenance to communities and that this new strategy of commercialisation of meat seems to have taken priority over conservation and has “not borne public scrutiny.”

Ralph Sibande, another stakeholder at the meeting agrees: “We are all concerned about poverty in South Africa, but selling meat will not solve the problem.” “Besides,” he reasons, “issues of hunger are the responsibility of the Department of Social Development who are better placed than SANParks to tackle the issue.”

“Biodiversity conservation involves certain trade-offs”, says Louise Swemmer, the scientist for social and economic management at the park, “it’s about human well-being as well as conservation.”

Swemmer, speaking at a stakeholder seminar hosted by SANParks at Skukuza over the weekend specifically to address public concerns about the animal off-take program, said the process will provide “tangible benefits” to schools on a small-scale feeding scheme and will in no-way impact the overall numbers of buffalo in the park.

The Kruger National Park currently has a population of 48 000 buffalo, the highest in the park’s history according to Danie Pienaar, head of the Kruger’s Scientific Services.

But stakeholders are sceptical of the about-turn in rationale.

Sibande is concerned that the Kruger Park’s obsession with community upliftment is taking over from genuine conservation practices. “What are the conservation or scientific justifications of the buffalo off-take?” He asked of the ecologists present at the meeting.

Danny Govender who specialises in disease ecology at the park responded that the limited off-take was about minimizing the spread of bovine tuberculosis, anthrax and foot and mouth disease in buffalo, an answer that instantly raised questions of food security in selling potentially infected meat.

To add further confusion, the park’s head of conservation, Freek Venter admitted that the shooting of buffalo were selected purely on a random basis, meaning disease-management couldn’t be the main driver for the off-take either.

Another question raised was given that the seventeen rural municipalities bordering the western boundary of the park comprising of some two million impoverished citizens, how could they possibly hope to feed even a fraction of them with the meat of a few hundred animals?

“Where then are the tangible benefits for the large majority of people who won’t get any meat,” asked one stakeholder, “and what are the justifications for selecting those that do?”


William Mabasa, acting head of communications at SANParks, responded that a forum had been established among the communities to determine which schools would benefit from the feeding program and those that didn’t benefit “would understand.”

He added the Kruger has to be seen to be doing something, rather than nothing.

“We have to start somewhere, and try and build a base of support for people who have historically been excluded from benefitting from the park,” he said.

But whatever the justifications for the off-take scheme, it’s unsure how the hundreds of thousands of visitors to South Africa’s iconic game park will view the slaughter of wildlife. Around 80% of the park’s revenue comes directly from tourists who could take a dim view if they knew the animals they were photographing one day may be butchered carcasses dangling on meat hooks the next.

“That’s not good!” said a visitor at Skukuza when asked her view, “I come to the Kruger every year, but I think I will now consider Botswana or Kenya in future.”

Head Scientist, Danie Pienaar confessed that the program wasn’t perfect. “This is a process of continually learning,” he admitted, a point taken up by the park’s Managing Executive, Glenn Phillips, who has invited the public to engage and seek a compromise. “It’s about co-learning and transparency,” he said.

Phillips has undertaken to hold other such public seminars around the country. The public are invited to attend, to raise questions, concerns and contribute to discussions of this controversial topic.

Source: Conservation Action Trust


http://traveller24.news24.com/Explore/G ... s-20170313

http://www.sabreakingnews.co.za/2017/03 ... g-buffalo/

http://www.timeslive.co.za/scitech/2017 ... g-buffalo1

[Lisbeth]

Rather lame answers and at the least very superficial and certainly far from complete

Sanparks has jumped into the deep water without knowing how to swim

[H. erectus]

I get very much upset when dished above crap down my throat,
somehow always I manage to swallow.!!! My reasoning,..

In meetings gone by, other topics so cleverly separated, I was
suggested that Sanparks indulge outside their perimeters with
regard to social up-liftment. This suggestion was shot down in
flames by Mr. Phillips and we(AIP's Skuks) were bluntly told that
Sanparks have no authority to trade beyond it's borders.

Yet now I need to swallow, this a big chew, Sanparks will be selling
this "offtake" to the impoverished surrounding the park. My goodness
where did the wheels fall off Sanparks???

Only goes to show that your mandate is shattered and of no credible
standard!!