Elephant purchases in Namibia

zoologicus

zoologicus

Well-Known Member
5+ year member
Earlier this year 57 Namibian elephants were sold to 3 buyers -- according to National Park Rescue director Mark Hiley, "most of the buyers are from overseas".

Does anyone know where these animals may be headed, and whether or not they may be going to zoos (and if so, which ones)?
 
Westcoastperson said:
Usually when AZA or EAZA import elephants they announce it so I would mark the major zoos off the list.
Click to expand...
Very true, I had expected as much (although I personally only follow the African elephant population in the US, so I was hoping some European enthusiasts may have heard something about an import somewhere :))

Granted, I also didn't know how common wild exports were! CITES shows a minimum of 122 elephants permitted for export into China alone in the last 5-6 years. Still, I'm very interested to try and follow up on these herds.

This source says that 42 of the 57 animals to be captured will be exported (I wonder where the 15 remaining animals will go?)
 
elefante said:
Is Etosha National Park getting crowded?
Click to expand...

It's been a while but yes, essentially all national parks in Southern Africa are starting to experience some level of elephant overpopulation, especially in South Africa and Zimbabwe. Kruger for example might only have a carrying capacity of 3000-4000 elephants yet its actual population might be somewhere in the 40,000s Hwange in Zimbabwe is in a similar situation. It creates a dilemma as culling such great numbers would undermine conservation efforts in East, Central, and West Africa where Bush and Forest elephant populations are endangered. Yet the longer it is left unchecked the greater the dilemma becomes.

Here is a post where I wrote about this subject before in the Australian forums.

Swanson02 said:
I watched this great mini-documentary yesterday on the major environmental issues within Kruger National Park caused by elephant overpopulation.


The video and previous elephant surveys predict there are currently somewhere between 34,000-44,000 elephants in the extended Kruger area. The video also estimated that Kruger only had a carrying capacity of 3000-4000 elephants and hence was on the brink of environmental collapse. You just have to watch the documentary to observe the ringbarked, stunted, and felled trees all caused by Kruger's excess of elephants.

Obviously, this whole scenario has created a major dilemma for South Africa National Parks. Transporting 30,000+ elephants could literally cost a billion dollars and where do you locate them? Most countries elsewhere in Africa that have endangered elephant populations don't have the infrastructure to defend their own let alone more elephants from poaching and habitat destruction. The alternative of culling 30,000+ elephants would be disastrous PR-wise for Kruger and would also greatly undermine elephant conservation in places where they are in decline. Poachers could see it as a form of validation.

Personally, I agree with a combination of the two, i.e. transporting as many animals as possible to locations where they would thrive and unfortunately culling the rest. Anyway while watching this documentary I couldn't help but think of Monarto. I know myself and many others would prefer they hold a bachelor or a small breeding group of more endangered Asian elephants but if the situation presented itself I could see Monarto importing a large family group (a topic a keeper insisted on last time I visited) of African elephants instead.

Obviously historically we have seen many zoos in the US, Europe, and now the Middle East and China import whole herds of African elephants that were designated to be culled so why not Australia? I have a sneaking suspicion that Monarto is hoping that this might happen (in a good way). Why else would Monarto name its four feature areas in the upcoming Wild Africa precinct - Etosha, Amboseli, Chobe, and Samburu? Search any one of those parks into google images and the majority of results will feature elephants. That's like having a Yellowstone area without Bison or Kakadu themed area without crocodiles!

In the inevitable event of a Kruger mass-culling, I assume South Africa National Parks would be very eager to help any accredited international zoos receive as many elephants as they would like for nothing or at a very low price. For SANParks, it would be a way to save some face in an action that will draw a lot of criticism. Theoretically, I would like Monarto to import a large family group of 10-15 cows and calves and 2-3 founding bulls to extend the herd's longevity without imports. Monarto could be the region's only holder and could import/export a couple of bulls from the US or Europe every few decades when they need to either offload some excess animals or freshen up their genetic stocks.

Monarto would be perfect in almost every way, they have a plentitude of space, the climate is suitable, themeing is a perfect match for African elephants, etc. The only issue I can see arising is that of funding for both the transfer and the facilities as ZoosSA isn't a massive organization. Saying that though I could see the South Australian Government chipping in as 'Saving an elephant family from culling' would be a good PR boost to whoever party is incumbent at the time. Likewise, AR groups couldn't really argue against the move so it wouldn't be a risk for the SA government to involve themselves in the speculative project.

Anyway sorry for my ramblings, just watching that mini-doco on Kruger's unfortunate elephant overpopulation problems really got me thinking about the unique opportunity it could present a place like Monarto.
Click to expand...
 
Swanson02 said:
It's been a while but yes, essentially all national parks in Southern Africa are starting to experience some level of elephant overpopulation, especially in South Africa and Zimbabwe. Kruger for example might only have a carrying capacity of 3000-4000 elephants yet its actual population might be somewhere in the 40,000s Hwange in Zimbabwe is in a similar situation. It creates a dilemma as culling such great numbers would undermine conservation efforts in East, Central, and West Africa where Bush and Forest elephant populations are endangered. Yet the longer it is left unchecked the greater the dilemma becomes.

Here is a post where I wrote about this subject before in the Australian forums.
Click to expand...
And yet they had to take a group of captive bred elephants back to Africa and try and rewild them when they could of let them become part of the EEP program, and instead they could of relocated some of these from over crowded parks from other parts of Africa, where's the logic.
 
Swanson02 said:
It's been a while but yes, essentially all national parks in Southern Africa are starting to experience some level of elephant overpopulation, especially in South Africa and Zimbabwe. Kruger for example might only have a carrying capacity of 3000-4000 elephants yet its actual population might be somewhere in the 40,000s Hwange in Zimbabwe is in a similar situation. It creates a dilemma as culling such great numbers would undermine conservation efforts in East, Central, and West Africa where Bush and Forest elephant populations are endangered. Yet the longer it is left unchecked the greater the dilemma becomes.

Here is a post where I wrote about this subject before in the Australian forums.
Click to expand...
Pardon my french but TF? Elephant overpopulation? Since when? And why not just send them to other parts of Africa? And let nature make its course? There once was a guy of whom name I do not recall, that once said the resolution to pollution in South Africa was to shoot down elephants, are you proposing this? I know elephants have very destructive natures, but 40.000 in a 4.000 area? That's 10 times as much if it was real there would be almost no space left for any other creature in the savannah, also no offence but your whole post feels like a very stretched theory like those of anti-vaxxers or flat earters just to have a couple of elephants in an australian zoo
 
Mickey said:
Pardon my french but TF? Elephant overpopulation? Since when? And why not just send them to other parts of Africa? And let nature make its course? There once was a guy of whom name I do not recall, that once said the resolution to pollution in South Africa was to shoot down elephants, are you proposing this? I know elephants have very destructive natures, but 40.000 in a 4.000 area? That's 10 times as much if it was real there would be almost no space left for any other creature in the savannah, also no offence but your whole post feels like a very stretched theory like those of anti-vaxxers or flat earters just to have a couple of elephants in an australian zoo
Click to expand...
Elephants are very much overpopulated, Kruger used to cull hundreds of elephants a year, until activists got involved.
A good book that really gets into the topic is A Game Ranger Remembers by Bruce Bryden.
 
Nix said:
Elephants are very much overpopulated, Kruger used to cull hundreds of elephants a year, until activists got involved.
A good book that really gets into the topic is A Game Ranger Remembers by Bruce Bryden.
Click to expand...

A population of 7000 elephants was maintained at Kruger National Park between 1967-1994 (via culling) and even then, there was a loss of 88.5% of trees - one of many indications the carrying capacity was below 7000 elephants.

Species like the Great ground hornbill have decreased in numbers as well as a loss of tree-dwelling animals, such as lizards, reptiles, small bird of prey and an overall loss of biodiversity.

This article also discusses the issues around alternatives such as administering contraception to cows: KRUGER NATIONAL PARK – ELEPHANT OVER POPULATION - WRSA
 
Zoofan15 said:
A population of 7000 elephants was maintained at Kruger National Park between 1967-1994 (via culling) and even then, there was a loss of 88.5% of trees - one of many indications the carrying capacity was below 7000 elephants.

Species like the Great ground hornbill have decreased in numbers as well as a loss of tree-dwelling animals, such as lizards, reptiles, small bird of prey and an overall loss of biodiversity.

This article also discusses the issues around alternatives such as administering contraception to cows: KRUGER NATIONAL PARK – ELEPHANT OVER POPULATION - WRSA
Click to expand...

Quite a shame indeed, If people only understood the effects that too many elephants have on an environment and that culling is sometimes a necessity!
The above mentioned book also mentioned alternative options, but most are not cost-affective and sometimes even less ethical then culling.
The culled animals’ meat were usually also canned and spread to local communities / park rangers.
 
There is not an overpopulation of elephants, this needs to be clarified.
There is a shortage of undeveloped land that elephants have left to use.
The current wild elephant population is a small fraction of historic levels.

40ZLFyEmY3MVshEY9qZl1mHQ1akwIIDyg12Kmm0gv3c.jpg
 
Thanks for bringing this up, it is true.
Elephants are only overpopulated in the concerned National Parks / reserves, not in total numbers.
 
Sheather said:
There is not an overpopulation of elephants, this needs to be clarified.
There is a shortage of undeveloped land that elephants have left to use.
The current wild elephant population is a small fraction of historic levels.

40ZLFyEmY3MVshEY9qZl1mHQ1akwIIDyg12Kmm0gv3c.jpg
Click to expand...
Very true, around 100 years ago there was an estimated 5 million elephants across Africa, so modern populations are very underpopulated by that metric.

Saying that almost 65% of the total African Bush population today lives in the nine southern African countries with stable or increasing numbers. That's why many of these countries support the legalization of the ivory trade (something I disagree with), as ivory from excess culled animals could provide money that goes back into the national parks and support surrounding communities, incentivizing them not to encroach on wild areas for grazing. I don't agree with it, as I believe it is too risky but I do understand the reasoning.

Also, are you the creator of Serina? If so I love your art mate, keep it up! :)
 
Mickey said:
Pardon my french but TF? Elephant overpopulation? Since when? And why not just send them to other parts of Africa? And let nature make its course? There once was a guy of whom name I do not recall, that once said the resolution to pollution in South Africa was to shoot down elephants, are you proposing this? I know elephants have very destructive natures, but 40.000 in a 4.000 area? That's 10 times as much if it was real there would be almost no space left for any other creature in the savannah, also no offence but your whole post feels like a very stretched theory like those of anti-vaxxers or flat earters just to have a couple of elephants in an australian zoo
Click to expand...

You can easily have overpopulation in one area while the species as a whole is doing badly. The opposite also frequently happens, a species in general doing well but becomes endangered or extinct in parts of its range (an easy example of that is the cougar). Elephants are mostly restricted to different reserves and game parks now, because of poaching, which means you're taking animals that might normally be spread over a big area and condensing them into a few smaller areas.
 
I was camping in Tarangire National Park one night and heard gunfire. We asked our guides if those were poachers, and he said they were not. The park could not sustain the number of elephants it held, so the elephants had to leave the park at night to raid the fields of the surrounding farmers. The shots we heard were the farmers trying to scare off the elephants to save their crops. It really blew my mind to realize that even those big national parks that I'd grown up reading about and seeing documentaries about weren't large enough to support viable, sustainable populations of some of the larger mammals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top