Africa Wild

Richprins wrote: ↑Wed Jun 19, 2019 9:42 am
He also says that it is their mandate to do post-mortems on dead animals to help in their analysis of roadkills, yet when questioned adds that sometimes they leave the carcasses, sometimes not...

Post mortem for road kill.......
Vehicle travels too fast, vehicle collides with animal. Animal suffers severe internal damage. Animal dies.

On the other hand.
How are they going to explain the bite marks on the throat of this Impala???

He says they saw the bite marks, actually, but still decided to load the carcass as they were afraid now. It is garbled adolescent lying.

Richprins wrote: ↑Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:45 pm No, this is an absolute BS story by SANParks:

A- There is no such thing that there is a "mandate" for any staff to pick up roadkill, certainly not "Game Capture Unit" (Game Capture is often outsourced anyway.)

B - Staff would not do this in an unmarked vehicle, without wearing uniforms, unless it was some sort of emergency.

C - The tourists would most certainly have told the "staff" that it was a kill.

D - Staff are expressly instructed not to disrupt tourist sightings.

E - There is zero evidence to suggest roadkill, rather clear predator wounds.

F - If there is indeed doubt or concern, the ranger would be summoned by staff.

G - Game removal would be done using an official bakkie, not in such an unprofessional and unhygienic way.

100% correct

Why wasn't the giraffe that's been on the H4-1 this entire week, which definitely wasn't killed by a predator, picked up then if it's Sanparks policy

Did the vehicle head towards Satara after the fact, how are they going to carry out the "post mortem" at Satara. i.e. are there facilities at Satara for this or was the impala then transported to Skukuza or is a specialist going to be called in

Maybe we need to also consider that those who picked up the impala are so incompetent that they couldn't tell the difference between a road kill and a leopard kill, which is even more scary to consider.

Personally, I feel this impala was taken for the pot, end of story

Nobody can find any reliable source on social media who has a photo or is direct eye witness of the leopard kill, very strange. There should be any photos at least of the leopard sighting. And all the people who saw the taxi only said they were told it was a leopard kill.

That a spokesperson does not have reliable info shortly after the event is no wonder

Remarkable, that an involved staff member is allowed or asked to have an (or fake) interview (who is the interviewer?) to deliver first hand info. Good step into the right direction for transparency!


If there is a (new) policy to take roadkills, this would make sense only if it was for investigation to set up stats or gain more info about roadkill hotspots etc.

Conflicting info about post mortem to be done, but for obvious roadkills it would be a waste of money to do so


In my opinion this is nothing to be seriously concerned about.

Dzombo wrote: ↑Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:28 am

Richprins wrote: ↑Wed Jun 19, 2019 9:42 am
He also says that it is their mandate to do post-mortems on dead animals to help in their analysis of roadkills, yet when questioned adds that sometimes they leave the carcasses, sometimes not...

On the other hand.
How are they going to explain the bite marks on the throat of this Impala???

Answer will be under the carpet after much sweeping

Lowvelder phoned the people who took the video, Klippies. Their version is fine.

This couple has not seen any leopard (kill).

IMO the whole story is a storm in a glass of water

Lisbeth wrote: ↑Wed Jun 19, 2019 1:05 pm IMO the whole story is a storm in a glass of water

Really????
I think not enough fuss is being made in the "right" places....or maybe there is?

IMO it's just another indication how far SANP are from what their actual remit is - conservation