How many is too many?
The first contentious point on which SANParks’ proposal is based is
the actual carrying capacity of Kruger. Current elephant numbers in
the park are estimated at 12 500, while SANParks claims that the
area can only sustainably support around 7 500. The population is
doubling roughly every 10 years which means that all things being
equal, the elephant population could be as high as 20 000 by 2012 .
Even if SANParks has underestimated the carrying capacity by half,
it is clear that if not now, then at some fast-approaching point
action will be necessary.
"Given elephants' ability to transform an
entire landscape, action is needed,
or the result will be the mass starvation of elephants and other
species"
Rob Little, Director of Conservation, WWF South Africa.
Big mammals need big solutions
Possible alternative management strategies include mega parks,
contraception and translocation to other parks. Translocation is
unlikely to be a solution in itself considering that elephant
overpopulation is common to most of South Africa’s neighbours
(Namibia, Botswana, Zimbabwe and Zambia) and also to South Africa’s
other National Parks. Mozambique has a few under-stocked reserves,
but problems with inadequate fencing and poaching need to be
addressed for these to be viable possibilities.
Those in the field hail contraception as the most promising solution
science can offer but researchers believe that the option has not
been given the consideration it deserves. Is it because
contraception means no births, no deaths and therefore no money from
the sale of meat and hide (and potentially ivory) that it is not
given due consideration? Are there perhaps underlying economic
reasons for SANParks' proposed cull? We believe not, but some
critics have raised the possibility.
“Contraception as an option is fully backed and
supported by South Africa’s leading veterinarians”
Dr. Ian Raper, President of the Southern Africa Association for
the Advancement of Science
How big is big enough?
The problem can rather be framed as too little habitat and land than
too many elephants. The most obvious solution is to increase the
space available, creating mega parks and to some extent restoring
ancient migration routes. The Kruger National Park shares a border
with Mozambique’s Limpopo National Park – parts of which have been
opened up as corridors of animal movement, forming a transfrontier
mega park. Elephants were translocated into Mozambique to speed up
the re-population of the badly poached and largely reserve, only to
return to the safety of Kruger soon after. Although it may take time
for the animals to lose their fear of crossing into Limpopo, the
potential for expansion is clearly there and the South African
Government has a responsibility to support this. The World Bank has
recently granted Mozambique R120million in aid to assist in
conservation and economic growth, further establishing Mozambique as
an excellent potential partner in conservation. The question that
begs an answer is whether more space will simply buy more time, or
whether a natural equilibrium can ever be restored - again,
highlighting the need for further research.
The biodiversity and tourism link
As an eco-travel company concerned with both conservation and
tourism, we are not only aware of the challenges as mentioned above,
but equally with the impact that a culling operation would have on
visitors to the park. One can be sure that international animal
welfare organisations will react strongly against the culling
option, and pictures of the slaughtered elephants would be shown on
the internet and newspapers the world over. The first wave of
activism is just gaining momentum: ecoAfrica has received letters
from concerned would-be travellers informing us of their decision to
avoid the park and the country because of the proposed culling.
Similarly, the Humane Society of the United States has already
threatened to advise its membership of eight and a half million to
avoid South Africa as a tourist destination if the cull goes ahead.
This is concerning because if tourism to the country dried up, what
monetary value would our biodiversity hold? Tourism drives
conservation for most protected areas, both state and private, and
they would simply become unsustainable without tourist revenue. The
threat of a tourism boycott may well sway authorities, but an actual
boycott can only be detrimental to conservation. In addition, if
SANParks is tempted to cull in response to limited funding by
government, losing tourism revenue, which funds a significant
portion of the SANParks’ budget, would exacerbate the situation.
“An elephant slaughter of this size and scope
is unprecedented
in international conservation history and will undoubtedly
precipitate
a concerted international animal rights campaign directed against
the cull.”
Lawrence Anthony, Founder of The Earth Organization
