Is this the death sentence for Nkosi?
IZAK SMIT, DESERT LION HUMAN RELATIONS AID (DELHRA) WRITES:
In response to the following report from the Desert Lion Project we have the following questions and comments:
https://www.desertlion.info/news/20/incidents-of-human-lion-conflict-increased-in-the-white-lady-area-of-brandberg
Ever since the Huab Lions splinter group arrived in the Ugab valley around January 2015 we have warned/requested/begged the Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) and the Desert Lion Project (DLP) publicly for them to be collared and monitored for human wildlife conflict (HWC) purposes.
It has now only been done in January 2018 after conflict that was caused by a substandard kraal of a lodge owner we were not aware of, as well as many livestock being left out overnight despite warnings to the locals that lions were in the area (it was three years conflict free due to us upgrading the De Rust farm kraals before low prey density drove the lions this far East).
Since January there had been zero monitoring or any form of warning to stakeholders (despite appeals to the MET in writing) even though the lions had now been equipped with satellite/VHF collars which had been fitted and sponsored for this very purpose?
We have offered the Tsiseb Conservancy on two occasions free material to upgrade kraals of their affected members which would have enabled them to secure livestock overnight whereby the irresistible lure would be removed. The minister himself strongly advised farmers to kraal their livestock at night in order to mitigate human-lion conflict as directed in the National HWC Policy introduced on 2 July 2018.
Twice we have not received the courtesy of an answer from the conservancy. What is the true agenda here if not serving the interest of the communal farming community and tourist operators in partnership with the conservancy?!
The Tsiseb gorge had been closed on occasion in the past due to elephants and an incident involving a leopard recently also occurred. The lions very rarely visit this gorge but are now made out to be severely life-threatening?
Everywhere else in the country as well as in other countries like Botswana you will rarely find lodges that are fenced in and camping/lodging amongst wild animals is par for the course, popular and not uncommon at all. This is also true for Damara/Kaokoland where lodges like Palmwag are often visited by leopard, hyena, lions, and elephant without incident or casualty.
SUDDEN DANGER
Why in this instance is the lion, and only Nkosi of trophy quality, singled out as “posing a danger to public safety” whilst there are seven sub adults and females in the pride as well? Is this part of a strategy to set up a trophy whilst justifying the kill in the meanwhile, pre-empting the inevitable public outcry?
The translocation from a place where the lion has recently successfully killed two zebras in the Ugab River away from conflict areas, to the mouth of the Ugab, which is familiar territory to him whilst stating he might be removed from the northwest area or destroyed should he return, which we all know he will, appears to be a smokescreen for the eventual killing/trophy hunting (he is a prime male only just in reproductive stage at younger than 6 years old).
Moved where to? Etosha, which is overpopulated and where 8 lions recently were killed straight after translocation there, or Erongo, which is now no longer allowed/desirable according to MET?
Killing this male will result in second generation in-breeding/incest where the young sub adult males will naturally breed with their mothers and aunts. No outside male has been known to come into the Huab or Ugab valley for the last four years to introduce new blood/genetic diversity.
MANY OPTIONS
Why are all the other options as introduced by the new national HWC policy to mitigate, prevent and manage the situation (i.e. kraaling overnight, early warning position system and monitoring and most importantly removing the live bait, i.e. hobbled donkeys, left out near the camp overnight) not even attempted at all to solve the problem? Is this not tantamount to admitting incompetence by not pursuing this directive by the Ministry?!
Should destroying such an animal not be only considered when all these measures have failed? Is that not the spirit of the policy and good conservation practice?
There are many able and willing volunteers in the area from Uis with vehicles and know how that could be deployed as quick response units so why exclude them and instead use new, as yet untrained units from as far as Opuwo and at great cost instead?
Why refuse the upgrading of kraals and campaign against it? Do you need trophies under the doubtful cloak of fabricated “Problem Animals” to deliver on some promises to some daisy chain?
The thinly veiled threat of destroying this lion is not consistent with the new HWC policy in many instances and seems to reflect poorly against the undertakings given in and the spirit of the policy.
The sustainability of killing one of the few remaining males especially in his prime should be seriously questioned.
What is the true agenda here?
In response to the following report from the Desert Lion Project we have the following questions and comments:
https://www.desertlion.info/news/20/incidents-of-human-lion-conflict-increased-in-the-white-lady-area-of-brandberg
Ever since the Huab Lions splinter group arrived in the Ugab valley around January 2015 we have warned/requested/begged the Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) and the Desert Lion Project (DLP) publicly for them to be collared and monitored for human wildlife conflict (HWC) purposes.
It has now only been done in January 2018 after conflict that was caused by a substandard kraal of a lodge owner we were not aware of, as well as many livestock being left out overnight despite warnings to the locals that lions were in the area (it was three years conflict free due to us upgrading the De Rust farm kraals before low prey density drove the lions this far East).
Since January there had been zero monitoring or any form of warning to stakeholders (despite appeals to the MET in writing) even though the lions had now been equipped with satellite/VHF collars which had been fitted and sponsored for this very purpose?
We have offered the Tsiseb Conservancy on two occasions free material to upgrade kraals of their affected members which would have enabled them to secure livestock overnight whereby the irresistible lure would be removed. The minister himself strongly advised farmers to kraal their livestock at night in order to mitigate human-lion conflict as directed in the National HWC Policy introduced on 2 July 2018.
Twice we have not received the courtesy of an answer from the conservancy. What is the true agenda here if not serving the interest of the communal farming community and tourist operators in partnership with the conservancy?!
The Tsiseb gorge had been closed on occasion in the past due to elephants and an incident involving a leopard recently also occurred. The lions very rarely visit this gorge but are now made out to be severely life-threatening?
Everywhere else in the country as well as in other countries like Botswana you will rarely find lodges that are fenced in and camping/lodging amongst wild animals is par for the course, popular and not uncommon at all. This is also true for Damara/Kaokoland where lodges like Palmwag are often visited by leopard, hyena, lions, and elephant without incident or casualty.
SUDDEN DANGER
Why in this instance is the lion, and only Nkosi of trophy quality, singled out as “posing a danger to public safety” whilst there are seven sub adults and females in the pride as well? Is this part of a strategy to set up a trophy whilst justifying the kill in the meanwhile, pre-empting the inevitable public outcry?
The translocation from a place where the lion has recently successfully killed two zebras in the Ugab River away from conflict areas, to the mouth of the Ugab, which is familiar territory to him whilst stating he might be removed from the northwest area or destroyed should he return, which we all know he will, appears to be a smokescreen for the eventual killing/trophy hunting (he is a prime male only just in reproductive stage at younger than 6 years old).
Moved where to? Etosha, which is overpopulated and where 8 lions recently were killed straight after translocation there, or Erongo, which is now no longer allowed/desirable according to MET?
Killing this male will result in second generation in-breeding/incest where the young sub adult males will naturally breed with their mothers and aunts. No outside male has been known to come into the Huab or Ugab valley for the last four years to introduce new blood/genetic diversity.
MANY OPTIONS
Why are all the other options as introduced by the new national HWC policy to mitigate, prevent and manage the situation (i.e. kraaling overnight, early warning position system and monitoring and most importantly removing the live bait, i.e. hobbled donkeys, left out near the camp overnight) not even attempted at all to solve the problem? Is this not tantamount to admitting incompetence by not pursuing this directive by the Ministry?!
Should destroying such an animal not be only considered when all these measures have failed? Is that not the spirit of the policy and good conservation practice?
There are many able and willing volunteers in the area from Uis with vehicles and know how that could be deployed as quick response units so why exclude them and instead use new, as yet untrained units from as far as Opuwo and at great cost instead?
Why refuse the upgrading of kraals and campaign against it? Do you need trophies under the doubtful cloak of fabricated “Problem Animals” to deliver on some promises to some daisy chain?
The thinly veiled threat of destroying this lion is not consistent with the new HWC policy in many instances and seems to reflect poorly against the undertakings given in and the spirit of the policy.
The sustainability of killing one of the few remaining males especially in his prime should be seriously questioned.
What is the true agenda here?
Kommentaar
Republikein
Geen kommentaar is op hierdie artikel gelaat nie