https://www.dailymaverick.co.z...unt-a-super-tusker/#



Timbavati risks tourist backlash to hunt a super tusker

DON PINNOCK SOUTH AFRICA 08 MAR 2017 11:39 (SOUTH AFRICA)

Synecdoce is an interesting but seldom used word of Greek origin which means a part of some object or action which represents the whole. An example is the application by the Timbavati reserve to hunt a super tusker and its approval by Kruger National Park. There are only about 25 to 30 such elephants left in the world. That single request, in a long list of other animals to be hunted, embodies a much bigger story. By DON PINNOCK.

The private reserves of the Lowveld alongside Kruger Park are redolent of ancient Africa: spectacular unfenced vistas of bushveld and wild animals with minimal human interference. In the early 1990s the Kruger National Park and the Associated Private Nature Reserves (APNR) – which consists of Timbavati, Klaserie, Balule and Umbabat – began the process of dismantling the fences between each other, allowing animals to retrace their ancient east/west migration routes.

Within these reserves are many privately owned luxury lodges which cater for tourists who pay high rates to experience some of the most exciting wild animal sightings in the world. What’s not well known, especially by guests attracted by beautiful marketing websites, is that a reserve like Timbavati is, in terms of its income, primarily a hunting destination, this accounting for 61% of the reserve’s income against tourism’s 17%.

There are reasons. Many of the APNR blocks that were not bought as peaceful bushveld refuges were originally prime hunting areas. As lodge development became increasingly profitable, association between owners and with Kruger Park became a rational move. But to support reserve integration and the widening of tourist experience, SanParks allowed them hunting rights, even though some of the animals would undoubtedly be from the national park.

So hunting is perfectly legal: the reserve applies to Mpumalanga or Limpopo’s conservation agencies and, after Kruger Park oversight, its allocation generally gets approved with just a few amendments.

Of course, tourism and hunting are not good bedfellows, so over the years the reserves have managed to keep them apart, with almost zero public visual crossover. Tourists, who pay top prices to stay at Timbavati’s lodges plus a R215 a person a day conservation fee (which nets many millions of rand), would not know that many of the animals they come to see and photograph fall to hunters’ guns when they are out of sight.

For those unaware of this arrangement, the latest hunting quota application by Timbavati, Klaserie, Balule and Umbabat might come as a shock. It includes 193 buffalo (including 76 classic bulls), 34 elephants (including a super tusker), two white rhinos, two lions, two leopards (despite a national moratorium on hunting leopards), 29 kudu, 5,162 impala, 25 waterbuck, 10 hippos and a hyena, a giraffe, a zebra and a wildebeest. It also requests the capture of 30 white rhino and eight hippos. As in the past, many of the carcasses will probably go to Timbavati’s abattoir, which presently sells impala and buffalo meat.



Game counts for the APNR show that, apart from blue wildebeest, zebra and giraffe, all other animal numbers went down between 2016 and 2017 – elephants by 142 and buffalo by 1,797. Apart from deferring the rhino quota and a warning that there is a moratorium on leopard hunting, Kruger signed off on the quota, but appears to have become uneasy with APNR’s non-compliance with hunting protocols.

In correspondence with the APNR in January and again in March, Kruger conservation management complained that the APNR hunting protocol had not been signed and warned that no further requests would be considered until this is done. Its officials sounded irritated:

“The fact that hunting and live-animal off-take is the major income for APNR should have ensured the highest due diligence to get any protocols concluded and formally signed within and between entity structure, but this is still not the case. This simply demonstrates ineffective governance and decision-making between entities within the APNR system.

“KNP… will not support future off-takes unless the necessary co-operative agreements and the associated hunting/animal off-take protocols have been formalised.”

If quotas are an indication, Timbavati – which is congruent with Kruger – is the prime hunting area. And while shooting animals to raise money is accepted by APNR owners in general – they have high anti-poaching overheads – its scale now sits uncomfortably with a number of them who see hunting an iconic trophy bull elephant and rhino as a bridge too far. This may explain why some of them have not signed the hunting protocol called for by Kruger.

Information about why Timbavati wished to hunt an iconic tusker – over 50 years old with tusks in excess of 100 pounds – proved elusive. Lodge owners within the reserve said they didn’t want to be named or quoted because it would make their association difficult. One of the country’s top elephant specialists said he “is well known for his objection to hunting trophy bulls” but couldn’t be named because he still does work for Timbavati.

Timbavati Warden Bryan Havemann said approval to hunt the bull had not yet been obtained from the provincial authorities. He said “the ability to find such a bull that will fit all the criteria could take many years and even though it may be put on the quota, the chance of finding such an elephant remains remote”.

Dr Michelle Henley, a long-term elephant researcher in the APNR, said that between 2004 and 2014, 40 different large tuskers (80 pounds or more tusk weight) had been seen to enter and leave the APNR, though many of them had only been sighted once and never again. That’s an average of four trophy tuskers a year.

APNR chairman, James Campbell, said hunting quotas were up to individual reserves within the association, but that hunting took place “within the context of an environment of high quality ecotourism and sustainable coexistence”. He noted that “the overwhelming numbers of the proposed off-take are for impala [5,162] with the majority of the meat going to the employees of the reserves as an important source of protein with no financial gain to the landowners”. A number of lodge owners, however, said they served impala (among other wild animals) to guests.

The issue, according to some conservationists, is not so much about hunting Kruger animals that may wander across the fenceless boundary – or hunting at all – but going for a super tusker. Elephant numbers in Africa are crashing, with around 30,000 poached a year. It’s only a matter of time before the tsunami hits Kruger Park. It may, indeed, have begun; since September 2015, more than 80 have been poached in the park – the highest in its history.

According to a source who asked not to be named, by targeting a trophy bull Timbavati is pushing towards an ethically flawed hunting economy. This is causing uneasiness between it and other reserves within the APNR:

“Timbavati is risking the co-operative strength of the APNR. Neighbouring reserves don’t follow the same line of thinking; they’re more tourist oriented. If they push this, they’ll be undoing a valuable history and risk alienating tourists. This could rebound on the many people in the APNR who rely on camera safaris and tourist goodwill. Landowners need to become more proactive about decisions like this,” the source said.

According to Dr Lucy Bates, an elephant researcher at Sussex University in the UK, poaching numbers in Kruger may be relatively low now, but a serious threat is imminent.

“South Africa cannot act in isolation, claiming that its elephant populations are not at risk,” she said. “They are at risk. Kruger is one of the last bastions of large-tusked bull elephants in the whole of Africa. South Africa should be duty-bound to protect and preserve these super tuskers and their genes for the benefit of the entire continent.

“Arguments that trophy hunting removes old males that are ‘past their prime’ and ‘no longer breeding’ are entirely false and deceptive in the case of elephant hunting. We know from long-term studies and genetic paternity tests that male elephants show a different pattern of reproductive output to most mammals. Large, older bulls are the most reproductively active. Bulls aged between 40 and 54 years are the most likely to sire calves.

“In my opinion, the very argument on which elephant trophy hunting is based is scientifically proven to be false. Carefully collected long-term scientific data clearly shows it cannot be justified. Hunting ‘trophy’ bull elephants absolutely does interfere with natural mating strategies and absolutely will reduce the biological fitness of the remaining population.”

According to Dr Vicki Fishlock, a scientist at Amboseli Trust for Elephants, a research and conservation organisation in Kenya, “Old and experienced individuals are crucial. They’re so much more than ‘a breeder’. By the time these animals reach this size, they’ve been part of social networks for five or six decades and have accumulated social and ecological experience that younger animals learn from.”

A comment by Lucy Bates underlines the problem these lodges could face if hunting of Kruger’s iconic animals becomes widely known:

“I first visited Timbavati on a family holiday that I arranged some 15 years ago. I had no idea then they hunted in the APNR, and if I had, I certainly wouldn’t have spent my or my parents’ money on staying in a lodge there.

“Since I learned they hunt, I’ve not paid to go back to Timbavati. I am sure I'm not the only tourist who would feel like this. Is hunting really that much more profitable than photo tourism that they continually risk alienating photo tourists? Or do they rely on the ignorance of these tourists? Both would be unwise.” DM 7

Here is an argument they cannot disprove. The economic engine that makes the APRN viable. That allows it to set aside 100s of thousands of acres for funa and mega funa is hunting.

This one elephant that will be dead in the not too distant future will bring extensive funds that allow real Africa to survive in a developed nation-state.

The Timbervit is expensive place to hunt. However, that money pays anti poaching espicalliy for rhino and those 100s of thousands of acres.

Without hunting and its revenue there would no elephants, rhino, buffalo, cheetech, leopard, lion, and lessor game. It would be all in cattle, if we were lucky. At the rate SA is going it would be slum tenant sprawl redistributed to the masses.

I am sorry. I needed to vent. I am off the soap box. One last thing, if this elephant dies another one will breed in his place. This is not lions were killing a breeding male, kills that generation of off spring.

I really hate these folks who preach evolution, role in the natural order, and are too stupid to realize they evolved from a species that was and is a predator. That species has always prayed on mega fauna; including elephants. Like a good capitalist use that truth to work about a greater good. Instead, they are the worst of the science disbelievers. They act like man is this special being that was dropped off here and told not to engage in the comments conflict for survival.

Now in am done.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Here is an argument they cannot disprove. The economic engine that makes the APRN viable. That allows it to set aside 100s of thousands of acres for tuna and mega funa is hunting.

This one elephant that will be dead in the not to distant future will bring extensive funds that allow real Africa to survive in a developed nation-state.

The Timbervit is expensive place to hunt. However, that money pays anti poaching espicalliy for rhino and those 100s of thousands of acres.

Without hunting and it's revenue there would no elephants, rhino, buffalo, cheetech, leopard, lion, and lessor game. It would be all in cattle, if we were lucky. At the rate SA is going it would be slum tenant sprawl redistributed to the masses.

I am sorry. I needed to vent. I am off the soap box. One last thing, if this elephant dies another one will breed in his place. This is not lions were killing a breeding male, kills that generation of off spring.

I really hate this folks who preach evolution, role in the natural order, and are to stupid to realize they evolved from a species that was and is a predator. That species has always prayed on mega fauna; including elephants. Like a good capitalist use that truth to work about a greater good. Instead, they are the worst of the science disbelievers. They act like man is this special being that was dropped off here and told not to engage in the comments conflict for survival.

Now in am done.

But who cares about reality and that money is needed to keep these animals protected against poachers?

Who cares that this elephant is going to die soon, and no value attributed to it?

Great example why these two sides butt heads. Once hunting is stopped it's almost impossible to get back, due to emotion and misplaced sympathy. As a result hunters are very wary of any talk of halting or restricting hunting, even when it may ultimately benefit. Both sides could get a shit ton of work done if the pillow biters stuck to logic and reality. In the end ANTI-hunting has no place in real world conservation models. Hunting has zero problems allowing and promoting a species rebound to sustainable levels. But the threat of being off limits forevermore ultimately thwarts good intentions from NON-hunter conservationist.

Hunters hasten an inevitability. Not hunting does not prevent it. This fact is lost on just about everyone who does not like hunting. There was the big bull that was killed by a poacher near Voi a bit ago. $0 generated from his death, but still dead nonetheless.

I killed my first buffalo just across the Crocodile River from Kruger. At night I could hear the lions roaring from KNP.

Most tourists won't know the difference between a 40 pounder and a 80 pounder. Just as long as they are elephants.

BH63

One thing I noticed is the author's statement that "tourism and hunting are not good bedfellows". Apparently, hunting and tourism worked so well side side by side he did not realize hunting was been conducted while he was their.

quote:

According to Dr Vicki Fishlock, a scientist at Amboseli Trust for Elephants, a research and conservation organisation in Kenya, “Old and experienced individuals are crucial. They’re so much more than ‘a breeder’. By the time these animals reach this size, they’ve been part of social networks for five or six decades and have accumulated social and ecological experience that younger animals learn from.”

Seriously a researcher from Kenya of all places is talking about South Africa and their elephants. Hypocrite.

All discussion and disagreement would be eliminated if they auctioned off the elephant -on an open platform with pre-screened budders who would be of course kept anonymous - anyone can buy it and when bought it could either be

1/hunted
2/collared
3/moved to a private game reserve
4/left alone

within the offering they should say what the money generated will be used for xxxx (anti poaching specifics)

that way when a hunter bids more than anyone else, nobody can cry foul because right there in front of them was the option and the hunting community (once again) stood up and was counted -

there are several people who would pay HUGE money for that opportunity -

That is what they did with the black rhino in Nanimbi (sp) a few years ago, and the antis forced the bid down with negative press. They also did not bid on the rhino. I would much rather see the old man hunted hard and shot well in fenceless Africa where he has reigned for decades than moved to some private and fenced preserve. But that is just me. H

quote:

Originally posted by ivan carter:
All discussion and disagreement would be eliminated if they auctioned off the elephant -on an open platform with pre-screened budders who would be of course kept anonymous - anyone can buy it and when bought it could either be

1/hunted
2/collared
3/moved to a private game reserve
4/left alone

within the offering they should say what the money generated will be used for xxxx (anti poaching specifics)

that way when a hunter bids more than anyone else, nobody can cry foul because right there in front of them was the option and the hunting community (once again) stood up and was counted -

there are several people who would pay HUGE money for that opportunity -

Good point

quote:

“In my opinion, the very argument on which elephant trophy hunting is based is scientifically proven to be false. Carefully collected long-term scientific data clearly shows it cannot be justified. Hunting ‘trophy’ bull elephants absolutely does interfere with natural mating strategies and absolutely will reduce the biological fitness of the remaining population.”

Hope all poachers are aware of this and if not they need to be informed immediately.

quote:

"The world is a book, and those who do not travel read only one page."

QUOTE from Kathi
"The world is a book, and those who do not travel read only one page."

……………..And those who think they know what is best for elephants,and wildlife in general, like Kathi, have read nothing but Walt Disney’s comic nonsense cartoon movies scripts!

……………………………………………………

The simple fact is that hunting in the reserves mentioned will continue indefinitely, and for one good reason: it is essential to help pay the bills.

The writer of the article did a reasonable job but the article was still written through reading glasses with a green tinge. The reserves mentioned actually have a relatively low hunting quota, considering the vast amounts of game they carry. The quotas are set in conjunction with Kruger staff and in some instances, Kruger staff members are actually on some of the reserves' management boards and the like. The fact that the one "expert" that was quoted stated plainly that she didn't know that hunting took place on the reserve that she visited is proof positive that the model of sustainable utilisation coupled with photographic tourism actually works.

The idea of auctioning off a really big elephant for big, big money has been kicking around for a while now. As Ivan mentioned, there are people who would be willing to pay really big money for a 100-pound ele and those funds will go a long way towards funding various conservation projects and initiatives on the ground.

I really do find it strange that some or other rabidly green "expert" in Kenya or the UK should be allowed to have anything to say on this subject. A 55-year-old-plus elephant bull, the bracket in which all 100-pounders fall into, is most certainly not a breeding bull and has long since had his chance to pass on his genes. But twisting science to fit personal agendas sounds better, I guess.

In any event, Kruger has a very healthy population of really big elephants, and in addition to the known ones that are either collared or monitored, every now and then one shows up that nobody knew about previously. Taking off one such bull for the greater benefit cannot be a bad thing at all, notwithstanding that it goes against the grain of the Kenya conservation "model".