Home / Resources and Writings / Weblog / Plant Conservation / Kruger National Park Elephants too Successful
Kruger National Park Elephants too Successful
The elephant population in South Africa's Kruger National Park has grown steadily since the turn of the 20th century, when only about 50 of them inhabited all of South Africa. Now numbering over 14,000 and increasing by around a thousand animals per year, the elephants are threatening the vegetation and water supply that supports other rare species in the park. Officials estimate that the park can sustain only around 7,000 elephants. A cull of 7,000 to 10,000 animals is being considered.
The last cull in 1994 caused such a public outcry that the government banned culls of the species. Similar reaction is expected if a new cull is announced. Officials agree that a cull will be necessary to preserve biodiversity in the park and want the public to understand the difficult decision.
Link: 10,000 Elephants Facing Slaughter to Protect Trees from the Times Online
Posted by Eric La Fountaine at 11:40 AM on September 22, 2005
Want to talk about this weblog entry? As of August 22, 2006, all new entries and most older entries are cross-posted to the UBC Botanical Garden Discussion Forums for discussion (you might need to use the search function to find the thread you are looking for).
This is an effort to reduce the amount of time spent dealing with spam (the forums are very good at stopping spam, the weblog commenting system is not so good).
Older entries already containing comments remain open for discussion.
Comments
The time of great Africa, is quite finished; even if I have some difficulties to admit it, national park and game reserves have to regulate their own resources to not put in danger the fragile "equilibre". I have organised in 1987 at Douala, some signature list against ivory trafic in central Africa. But in austral Africa, the situation is not the same, and we have to admit that actually, man [may] have to "adjust" the density of population.
Posted by: Buillas at October 16, 2005 2:38 AM
It makes me think of Wallace and Gromit and the Wererabbit, which I just watched. They resolved the problem by having a sweet rich lady look after the enormous population of rabbits eating everyone's vegetables. Instead of trying to kill them she accepted their presence and allowed space for them to continue living.
This obviously isnt going to work in the park because other species are at risk.
But killing an animal like an elephant is a terrible thing to do, in terms of cruelty and trauma.
What about contraception?
Posted by: sd at October 20, 2005 2:50 AM
I would not be so sure that killing an elephant would be so bad when considering the people that are starving just outside Kruger national park.
In order for contraception to work, you would need to apply it to at least 4,000 females all the time. This is a very very expensive endevour that is not practical. It works on populations of less than 100. This population has around 13,000.
Culling may not be a pleasant option, but when done humanely it would be better than the deaths by starvation of other animals in the park, potentially even elephants themselves, loss of more fragile endangered species and the continued starvation of people outside the park who could benifit from the meat and money.
Posted by: er at February 24, 2006 9:25 AM
Whether to cull or not should be based on whether the supposedly Park is actually a park or a big zoo. if it is a big zoo of some sort then culling is justified. if the park is viewed as a natural ecological system, them nature should take care of itself of which it is more capable of (than man). afterall we do not understand nature ways as much we should regardless of the many studies done.
Posted by: Ntombo Adrian at March 26, 2006 4:41 AM
