If enough money can be raised, Kruger Park elephants will be relocated=20 instead of culled next year, writes Eddie Koch
THE controversial elephant cull in the Kruger Park will stop next year if=
the National Parks Board succeeds with an ambitious plan to raise funds=20 from international animal rights organisations to expand South Africa=D5s=
game reserves. The parks board this week confirmed reports that it has launched the=20 Elephant Relocation Project and appointed a private consultant to solicit=
funds from groups which have mounted a vociferous campaign, mainly in=20 Europe and the United States, against the annual elephant cull in the=20 Kruger Park. A letter sent by the consultant, Rozanne Savory, to some of these=20 organisations, says their money will be used to expand the country=D5s=20 wildlife parks and then transfer to them herds of elephant that would=20 otherwise have been shot. The shooting of a few hundred elephants in the Kruger Park every year,=20 which the parks board says is designed to prevent the herds from becoming=
big enough to destroy the natural habitat, has been at the centre of the=20 country=D5s most heated environmental debates in recent years. Anthony Hall-Martin, national parks=D5 director for research and=20 development, told the Mail & Guardian that =D2it is our intention to develo=
an alternative to culling=D3 and added that Savory was in the United=20 Kingdom this week to set up the fundraising drive. =D2The National Parks Board prefers elephant relocation to culling, but we=
are looking at a short-term solution. If enough funds can be generated, no=
family groups will have to be culled next year, but the board still regards=
culling as a wildlife management option,=D3 he said. =D2We are in the process of reviewing the scientific basis of our elephant=
management policy. That, however, is an ongoing process which will not=20 be completed before March 1996 at the earliest. In the meantime, however,=
we are more than willing to accommodate the substantial body of public=20 opinion, especially overseas, which wants us not to kill any more=20
The move marks a dramatic shift on the part of Kruger=D5s management,=20 which has, until now, maintained that the cull is necessary to keep the=20 park=D5s population at around 7 500 animals =D1 said to be the maximum=20 number that the vegetation in the reserve can support. Said David Grossman, ecologist and member of the North West Province=D5s=20 new conservation board: =D2I don=D5t believe that it has ever been establis= hed to=20 the general satisfaction of scientists, either locally or abroad, that it i=
neccessary to cull elephants in the Kruger National Park at present levels=
on so-called scientific grounds.=D3 But the new policy shift has also prompted strong criticism from=20 conservationists inside South Africa and in other neighbouring states who=
see the parks board as capitulating to sentimental demands from animal=20 rights organisations. Groups in favour of elephant culling argue that animal products are an=20 important source of revenue for conservation programmes and rural=20 development programmes in and around national parks.=20 They point out that Kenya recently abandoned the practice of culling=20 elephants in order to obtain foreign funds and that this source of revenue =
notoriously fickle =D1 especially in a situation where massive amounts are=
required to maintain and protect wildlife areas. =D2Colleagues in Zimbabwe and others feel we are embracing these=20 organisations and turning our backs on those African states which insist on=
the right to make sustainable use of their natural resources,=D3 said Hall-
=D2This is not the case. If Rozanne Savory can co-ordinate funds from NGOs=
to increase the National Parks Board=D5s capacity to relocate elephants to=
other national parks we will be delighted. To what extent this will impact=
on the elephant culling programme in the Kruger National Park will be=20 determined by how much money is forthcoming.=D3 He denied the move was in response to a threatened consumer boycott from=20 groups overseas, saying this was =D2a small group of people=D3 who had litt=
impact on the credibility of the parks board overseas. The South African=20 Tourism Board has, however, come out against the cull because of its=20 possible negative impact on tourism arrivals. Care For The Wild, one of the largest NGOs opposed to the culling, has=20 already sent an appeal for its members to foster a baby elephant called=20 Aitong who was orphaned in the Kruger cull.=20 In exchange for about R120 (=A320) members are offered =D2an adorable photo=
of Aitong and a video =D2featuring Aitong and all the other orphans=D3.