Elephant culling...

[Boerseun]

Here in South Africa, the culling of elephants was banned in 1995, due mainly to the 'Elephants are cute, intelligent, and endangered' argument.

 

Today, there are 20,000 elephants in the Kruger Park. The last time I posted about this issue was about two years ago, and then there were 16,000. In 1995 when scientific culling was banned, there were 8,000 elephants in the park. In 1900, there was a Grand Total of 200 elephants in the whole of South Africa, mostly due to tusk poaching.

 

My point is that government understood at last that a piece of land twice the size of Israel is simply too small for 20,000 megaherbivores. And the elephants simply cannot be removed or shipped to other game farms, because they are free ranging animals and will trample any fences to get back to their previous ranging area. The elephants, being too numerous, are busy destroying the environment not only for themselves, but for thousands upon thousands of other species sharing the park with them.

 

If elephants can increase their numbers so quickly and successfully, they clearly are not endangered. But a sudden population crash not only of the elephant population, but of other species as well will ensue if culling is not allowed and done scientifically, like it was done in the past. In the past, scientists maintained the population figures at around 8,000, removing from the population the surplus which were processed into elephant products and sold. The profit from this then went into the elephant protection fund, the whole thing paid for itself, and maintained and ensured a healthy environment for the elephants.

 

So, why exactly the whole argument against culling? I don't get it - how we can moan about the killing of elephants and using its carcass to pay for the protection of the rest of the species because of reasons a,b and c, and then merrilly order a T-bone steak at the restuarant. What's the difference? The 'Elephants are intelligent' argument won't float, because intelligence is not only arbitrary and subjective, but was a similar test done to cows?

 

Why is the scientific killing of elephants such a big no-no?

 

Greenpeace should embrace the whole concept, seeing as its better for the environment as a whole. But they simply say its off and completely wrong without offering alternatives. Contraception is no solution, either, because there are now 12,000 elephants too many from the ideal, and if all the bulls are castrated (for the sake of the argument), it'll take many, many years before the population figure came down to what it should be through natural deaths, by which time the environment is completely destroyed in any case.

 

Thoughts?

[pgrmdave]

I agree with the idea of culling the herd. It should not be an environmentalist's goal to keep everything alive, but to keep things in balance.