Zimbabwe’s plan to cull 200 elephants and Namibia’s intention to kill 1,002 wild animals, including 100 elephants, has ignited international condemnation.
Conservation organisations and experts argue that the move threatens Zimbabwe’s third-largest economic sector: tourism, valued at US$433 million.
“The slaughter of elephants results in the stockpiling of tusks, increasing the pressures to undermine international bans on ivory trade and open up ivory markets.
“We are concerned that Namibia and Zimbabwe have been at the forefront of efforts to reverse the international ban on ivory trade in order to generate income.
“This would inevitably fuel demand and increase poaching pressure with devastating consequences for remaining elephants across their entire range,” the organisations noted.
“Killing wild animals that are the basis for the tourism economy would threaten sustainable livelihoods. In Zimbabwe, tourism is the third largest economic sector and contributes US$433 million to the country’s GDP.
“This industry is heavily reliant on healthy wildlife populations and intact protected areas and could suffer significantly from the culling of wild animals.”
The proposed cull, justified by drought relief, human-wildlife conflict mitigation and population control, is deemed unsustainable. African savanna elephants, categorized as Endangered on the IUCN Red List, have declined 60% continent-wide over 50 years.
Culling exacerbates human-wildlife conflicts, fuels poaching and undermines international ivory bans.
They noted that claims of population growth lack scientific basis. Instead, experts advocate sustainable agriculture, conflict resolution through non-lethal measures and food security via staple food provision.
A 57-member coalition, including Action for Elephants and Born Free Foundation, has urged Zimbabwe and Namibia to abandon culling plans. They argued that adopting humane solutions ensures food security, human-wildlife coexistence and wildlife protection.
“The current drought affecting parts of southern Africa is devastating for both people and wildlife. Nevertheless, the governments of the countries concerned are not devoid of resources to implement effective measures to address the problem and should use the drought as an opportunity to employ stronger land governance and prioritise sustainable agricultural production among smallholder farmers in rural areas.
“We note that experts have suggested a number of rational and sustainable alternatives to address the effects of the drought, most importantly the provision of staple food such as grain to ensure food security.
“Also, a wide range of measures and policies are available that have been proven to be effective in preventing and solving human-wildlife conflict without resorting to the indiscriminate killing of wild animals.
“These measures should be explored and implemented before any lethal interventions are considered,” the organisations noted.
What scientific facts do you need to prove a big elephant population? They just do a census dummy!