There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
I think that the northern part of Kruger is a bit of a lost cause, it is a gigantic area with great mobility difficulties, which can facilitate illegal hunting and make enforcement difficult, in addition to having a high cost in trying to increase this enforcement. Human intervention would be like trying to put out a fire with drops of water, as the main problem is much bigger. In my opinion the only solution in the future would be to lease the area and establish private reserves, even if this affects the natural vegetation a little, creating roads would be more beneficial in the long term as the Kruger area could end up suffering invasions like the Maara, with established reserves tend to minimally guarantee the presence of inspection and the reduction of illegal hunting in these areas, even if some private reserves are not the best of examples such as manyeleti
No, no change (assuming it is working as declared). Any intervention is potential at the expense of somebody else intraspecific or interspecific. We are not talking about last individuals of a species or vast unoccupied space to re-colonize by the species. Intervention how they do it elsewhere is selfish self-serving commercial decision to artificially create "legends" and traffic and income while other animals unfairly get short end of the stick by not having usual number of vacant spaces to fill for their generation or even being outright killed by (in this case) other lions with assistance on their side who would in many cases perished before without human intervention. It promotes conflict (that sells too) and I imagine in the long run the genetic diversity suffers as the "successful" long-lived* males thus sire and rear more litters they normally should.
And even artificially boosting density of a predator species will create stress on prey species likely disproportionately on some with potential unforeseen ecological impact on local level. Although the system is skewed from the start anyway with artificial dams as water source and animals living on repurposed former farms.
Focus on human-wildlife conflict (if there is actual will to deal with that).
(8 hours ago)Gavskrr Wrote: I think that the northern part of Kruger is a bit of a lost cause, it is a gigantic area with great mobility difficulties, which can facilitate illegal hunting and make enforcement difficult, in addition to having a high cost in trying to increase this enforcement. Human intervention would be like trying to put out a fire with drops of water, as the main problem is much bigger. In my opinion the only solution in the future would be to lease the area and establish private reserves, even if this affects the natural vegetation a little, creating roads would be more beneficial in the long term as the Kruger area could end up suffering invasions like the Maara, with established reserves tend to minimally guarantee the presence of inspection and the reduction of illegal hunting in these areas, even if some private reserves are not the best of examples such as manyeleti
Manyeleti is not private. It is run by the local regional government/institutions IIRC. The safari model seems to be the same but it is not privately owned. And that seems to make the difference...
Found out something about that giraffe carcass K4 was seen on too, the carcass, according to Mel, was outside a lodge and the stench was ‘unbearable.’ They decided to move it and it just so happened they moved it close to K4, they didn’t do it for his own benefit. I guess K4 was just extremely lucky on the day.
(8 hours ago)RookiePundit Wrote: Manyeleti is not private. It is run by the local regional government/institutions IIRC. The safari model seems to be the same but it is not privately owned. And that seems to make the difference...
Is this the reason why Manyeleti is riddled with snares and other stuff?
(8 hours ago)RookiePundit Wrote: Manyeleti is not private. It is run by the local regional government/institutions IIRC. The safari model seems to be the same but it is not privately owned. And that seems to make the difference...
Is this the reason why Manyeleti is riddled with snares and other stuff?
I would believe that it plays a part. Also Manyeleti has very long outer border in comparison to other reserves/lodges and especially that southwestern corner (close fo Gowrie gate) is very close to human settlements and the potential for human-wildlife conflict there seems to be high (also in cases a leopard gets out and sees their goats and easy prey).
There were cases of broken fence after storms etc., sometimes it might come down to lack of funding rather than ill will.
I want to clarify that I don't question guides, vets and other ground level staff having their heart at the right place.
I'd only support it in very specific cases, being them:
- Snares or human related injuries which is the current policy;
- Darting is potentially dangerous for the animal, so if you're gonna dart a lion to remove a snare or something, and the lion has some other natural injury, may as well take the opportunity to treat that as well;
- Some "complex" situation. For example many years ago in the Western Sector, a leopard mother and cub left the reserve under pressure of a hostile male leopard, so they captured them and released them in a part of the Western Sector the mother leopard was familiar with but that the male leopard hadn't invaded yet;
- Another one of those "complex" situations was the Othawa drama in 2022, they were backed against a corner, with everything fenced towards the only path they could potentially run to and avoid Birminghams and PCM. Then the last adult lioness was shot when she deteriorated and became aggressive towards the vehicles ( though the last sighting of her showed her standing and far from a near death condition ), she left 3 cubs on their own, the major pride of the Sector about to get extinct so and all things considered I think they should have helped the cubs to whatever degree was possible, until they were at least 2yo and fully independent, with reliable hunting skills, but not even then they helped at all;
- There's also TB, it's a human caused disease, not natural at all, so they should work on developing a vaccine ASAP ( dunno how much effort is put into it ), there's also basically no reliable way to treat it in the wild so I understand not doing it.
Now if some male lions fought, there's no reason to help anyone, it's just they doing their thing.
4 hours ago( This post was last modified: 4 hours ago by Rabubi )
(9 hours ago)sunless Wrote: This comes to my mind again as seeing K4 injured, what do you guys think about the policy of non-intervention in Greater Kruger should be change like in the Mara or other policy can be implimented?
*No intervention at all unless human cause.
*Fast Intervention like in the Masai Mara.
*Or other policy like wait until a week or days if the lion/leopard survive in that time then intervene and treat the said injury.
What you guys think would be the best in Greater Kruger as lion/leopard population is decreasing in the Greater Kruger especially in the Northen part of the Kruger?
No intervention at all unless human caused.
Personally, I believe that policy is the most ethical, practical and sustainable when managing large ecosystems such as the Greater Kruger, Okavango, Serengeti-Mara, etc because wild animals in their natural habitat are always at risk of injury and injuries are inevitable in the wild so it's best to let Mother Nature take its course.
That being said, Northern Kruger is facing a lot of challenges in terms of human-wildlife conflict, hunting and poaching so the best case scenario in my view is to first get that under control and then work on restoring the ecosystem where necessary (land rehabilitation, wildlife reintroductions, etc.). To intervene in Northern Kruger right now (like rangers and vets do in the Mara) would just be putting a small bandage on a gaping wound.
Also, I don't like the intervention policy in the Mara for the same reasons everyone else here mentioned above. It focuses on named individuals at the expense of lesser-known lions trying to establish themselves, as Nature intended (with implications on genetic diversity since pride males are living and ruling longer than what naturally would have been the case). This consequence also spills over to other predators that lions compete with, such as spotted hyena, leopard and especially cheetah and painted wolves so now those predators are under even more pressure from lions now that their mortality rates have been artificially increased.
(9 hours ago)sunless Wrote: This comes to my mind again as seeing K4 injured, what do you guys think about the policy of non-intervention in Greater Kruger should be change like in the Mara or other policy can be implimented?
*No intervention at all unless human cause.
*Fast Intervention like in the Masai Mara.
*Or other policy like wait until a week or days if the lion/leopard survive in that time then intervene and treat the said injury.
What you guys think would be the best in Greater Kruger as lion/leopard population is decreasing in the Greater Kruger especially in the Northen part of the Kruger?
Agreeing with what others have said as well, I believe the best way to approach nature is to allow it to run it's course in the same way it would if we (humans) were not present at all. If humans cause an injury that can be treated, then I believe we should intervene in those instances, but only if/when it can be done with minimal harm to the animal. But, animal on animal violence is best left to nature to sort out. Diseases such as the current scourge, TB, which was introduced by people, should be researched until we are able to develop a cure for it, as it, too, was caused by us.
