Kruger elephants
Heather Hogan
While environmentalists and animal lovers remain emotional about the culling of elephants, research conducted at the Kruger National Park indicates it may be the only viable option for effectively controlling large elephant populations.
According to a document written by University of Pretoria (UP) Professor Rudi van Aarde, UP PhD student Ian Whyte – conducting research for the South African National Parks Board – and Stuart Pimm of the University of Tennessee: “Kruger has four management options. It has chosen the option of killing up to thousands of elephants each year for decades to protect its woodland ecosystems.
“The other three options are to let elephants increase and lose its woodland, kill or sterilise 250 pre-breeding females, or administer contraceptives to 75% of all the breeding females.”
A fifth option would be to relocate elephants but according to Whyte: “The translocation of juvenile animals is inhumane and therefore undesirable. This will no longer be practised – only animals in intact family units should be transferred live from now on.” Unfortunately the limited market for live elephants is unable to cope with the overabundant population.
While the Kruger Park hasn’t culled since 1994 – when they envisaged the ideal elephant polulation to be about 7 000 – it has steadily climbed to 9 152.
Kruger Park has not decided when it will start culling again but with a growing elephant population, it is definitely on the cards. As Whyte says: “Rather sooner than later, as the longer it is left the greater the number of elephants that will have to be culled.”
The park tried using two kinds of contraceptives on elephants, hoping one would be a workable option, but neither proved feasible.
“All of the methods currently under test have known or predicted serious consequences to the health of the cows, their behaviour, and those animals around them,” the researchers conclude.
Furthermore, the desired zero population growth rate would only be achieved through contraceptives after 11 years as 75% of Kruger’s reproductively active cows would have to be placed on contraceptives.
Elephant vasectomies and castration are also out of the question because, unlike other mammals, the bulls’ testes are located in their abdomen near their kidneys. Such a step would require major abdominal surgery.
“Culling, unfortunately, is the only way at this stage,” says Whyte.
While many believe surviving elephants suffer trauma after seeing other elephants culled, Whyte believes research indicates there are no long-term effects on survivors.
Whyte has researched the movement and population dynamics of the Kruger elephants with regard to culling since 1989. According to him, each elephant group has its own home range of about 1 400km2. Some suggest that after a cull, nearby surviving elephants move from their home range because of the culling.
Whyte suggests that while elephants do sometimes move away, it is not always the case. “Some show no response at all and remain in the same area or return to the area afterwards. In Kruger Park, they have not been known to leave their home range.”
The park is implementing a new elephant management plan. It intends to let elephants in certain areas breed unchecked and decrease the population in other zones. The ultimate aim is to promote the biodiversity of natural fauna and flora.
Whyte adds that elephants can affect biodiversity positively as well as negatively.
The document concludes: “Unfortunately, the use of contraceptives on this scale is completely impractical and they are likely to have severe behavioural and psychological side effects.
“Should one unnaturally shoot or sterilise female elephants prior to calving for the first time, or let them die naturally of thirst in dry years? This is an ethical issue we are not equipped to judge. Nature is not likely to be so squeamish.”