Commercialization As an Emergent Threat to Ungulates in South Africa
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Emerging threats to ungulates in South Africa Graham I H Kerley Structure • Background to the decline and recovery of wildlife in South Africa • Protectionism vs sustainable use: contrasting Kenya and South Africa • Challenges to ungulates in protected areas in South Africa • Commercialization as an emergent threat to wildlife Extant ungulates of South Africa Skinner & Chimimba 2006 Pre-historic top-down regulation by humans limited? Status: South African species and subspecies Near Critically Least Concern Threatened Vulnerable Endangered Endangered Extinct 1 3 1 1 27 1 6 2 3 Aepyceros melampus Impala Raphicerus sharpei Sharp's Grysbok Damaliscus pygargus pygargus Bontebok Damaliscus lunatus Tsessebe Diceros bicornis bicornis Black Rhinoceros Hippotragus leucophaeus Blue antelope Alcelaphus buselaphus Red Hartebeest Diceros bicornis minor Black Rhinoceros Equus zebra hartmannae Hartmann's Mountain Zebra Equus quagga Quagga Antidorcas marsupialis Springbok Equus zebra zebra Cape Mountain Zebra Ourebia ourebia Oribi Phacochoerus aethiopicus Cape warthog Cephalophus natalensis Red Duiker Hippotragus equinus Roan Antelope Ceratotherium simum White Rhinoceros Hippotragus niger Sable Antelope Connochaetes gnou Black Wildebeest Neotragus moschatus Suni Connochaetes taurinus Blue Wildebeest Philantomba monticola Blue Duiker Damaliscus pygargus phillipsi Blesbok Equus burchellii Plains Zebra Giraffa camelopardalis Giraffe Hippopotamus amphibius Hippopotamus Kobus ellipsiprymnus Waterbuck Loxodonta africana African Elephant Oreotragus oreotragus Klipspringer Ceratotherium simum White Rhinoceros Oryx gazella Gemsbok Pelea capreolus Grey Rhebok Phacochoerus africanus Common Warthog Potamochoerus porcus Bushpig Raphicerus campestris Steenbok Raphicerus melanotis Cape Grysbok Redunca arundinum Reedbuck Redunca fulvorufula Mountain Reedbuck Sylvicapra grimmia Common Duiker Syncerus caffer Cape Buffalo Tragelaphus oryx Eland Tragelaphus angasii Nyala Tragelaphus scriptus Bushbuck Tragelaphus strepsiceros Kudu Endemics: • Extinct = 3 • Extant = 5 A brief, conceptual history of the collapse in wildlife Firearms Export markets Rinderpest Records of wildlife Tsetse control Approx numbers Wildlife recovery Is this sustainable? 1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 Year Bottlenecked taxa Populations declined to < 100 during 1900s Bontebok All three taxa initially Cape Mountain zebra protected by private Black wildebeest landowners White rhinoceros Black rhinoceros Wildlife recovery in South Africa Wildlife numbers are now higher than they have been in the last 150 years and growing • Establishment and expansion of conservation areas • ~ 6.5% of the area of South Africa • Development of a privately-operated wildlife industry • Wildlife may be owned, traded and harvested privately • ~ 15% of the area of South Africa Protectionism vs sustainable use: contrasting Kenya and South Africa Kenya: Wildlife has been strictly protected since 1980s, with no exploitation allowed ????? South Africa: Wildlife is managed under sustainable use approaches Masai Mara National Mara pastoral ranches Reserve • Most wildlife species declined in both • the nature reserve, and • the adjacent pastoral areas • The contribution of wildlife to the (wildlife + livestock) biomass declined by 50% from 1977 - 2009 Protectionism vs sustainable use: • South Africa’s wildlife is exploited and increasing • Similar pattern in Namibia and Zimbabwe • Kenya’s wildlife is declining, despite aggressive protectionism • Globally, similar patterns emerged at the “Workshop on Ungulate Management in the World, Erice, Italy” Oct/Nov 2013 use it or lose it? How effective are South African National Parks at conserving ungulates? How big is big enough? • Kruger National Park ~ 2 000 000 ha • Conservation > 100 years • But 7/12 ungulate species modelled suggest risks of decline by an order of magnitude Nichols, A.O., Viljoen, P.C., Knight, M.H. & van Jaarsveld, A.S. 1996. Evaluating population persistence of censused and unmanaged herbivore populations from the Kruger National Park, South Africa. Biol. Cons. 76:657-67. • Most parks are much less than this half this size, but limited research on ungulate population viability or persistence How effective are South African National Parks at conserving ungulates? • Rhino poaching 2006 -2015: Rhinos poached in South Africa = 5097 How effective are South African National Parks at conserving ungulates? • Rhino poaching is a bigger issue than conservation agencies can handle • Value of the asset in Kruger National Park @US$70 000/kg ~ US$ 2 billion Needs global socio-political interventions Commercialization as an emergent threat to wildlife Estimated ungulate numbers The wildlife industry (millions) 7 6 5 Extent 4 3 . > 8 979 registered game farms 2 1 . 170 419 km2 0 1964 2015 . 15% of SA Fencing . Legally required for some wildlife activities . Over 6 700 fenced game farms . Average size: ~ 1 900 ha Du Toit 2007 Tayler et al. 2016 The growing wildlife industry • Hunting US$183 million/yr • Meat production US$ 43 million/yr • Live trade US$305 million/yr • Ecotourism ? Tayler et al. 2016 Does commercialization conserve ungulates? Risks • Population fragmentation • Introduction of alien species • Hybridization • Selective stocking of high value species • Artificial selection for trophies • Artificial selection against trophies • Aberrant colour morphs • Overharvesting Risk: population fragmentation Average fenced game farm ~ 1 900 ha - Too small for maintenance of ecological processes of dispersal, migration, habitat selection …………. - Predict stressed wildlife populations - Predict habitat transformation - Too small to support viable populations of wildlife - Predict high levels of inbreeding - Predict high genetic drift - Predict stochastic demographics - Problems exacerbated by internal fencing Risk: population fragmentation Adjacent fenced game farms create landscape scale barriers - Loss of dispersal, migration, habitat selection - Loss of metapopulation processes Predict that fencing impacts extend to unfenced populations Risk: Introduction of alien species 1. Sambar Rusa unicolor 2. Chital Axis axis 3. Fallow deer Dama dama 4. Red deer Cervus elaphus 5. Père David's deer Elaphurus davidianus 6. Wild boar Sus scrofa 7. American bison Bison bison 8. Wild water buffalo Bubalus arnee 9. Indian hog deer Hyelaphus porcinus 10. Blackbuck Antilope cervicapra 11. Scimitar-horned oryx Oryx dammah 12. Arabian oryx Oryx leucoryx 13. Sitatunga Tragelaphus spekii 14. Southern lechwe Kobus leche 15. Puku Kobus vardonii 16. Himalayan tahr Hemitragus jemlahicus 17. Mouflon Ovis aries 18. Addax Addax nasomaculatus 19. Nubian ibex Capra nubiana 20. Barbary sheep Ammotragus lervia 21. Pygmy hippopotamus Choeropsis liberiensis Ecological impacts? Risk: Hybridization Species • Black wildebeest X blue wildebeest • Red hartebeest X blesbok • Roan X sable • Cape mountain zebra X plains zebra • Black rhino X white rhino Subspecies • Blesbok X bontebok • Cape X Hartmann’s mountain zebra Risk: Selective stocking of high value species 50 45 40 35 • 30 Driven by market for some species over 25 others 20 • 15 Results in lesser value species being Number of Game Farms Farms Game of Number 10 underrepresented in game ranch communities 5 • 0 Oribi Lion Bias in conservation effort Kudu Sable Hippo Nyala ElandImpala Buffalo Bushpig Giraffe Blesbok ElephantCheetah Lechw e WarthogBontebok SteenbokGemsbokGrysbok Waterbuck Bushbuck Black Rhino White RhinoKlipspringerFallow dear Blue Duiker Black Impala Grey Rhebok White Blesbok Mountain Zebra Black Springbok Blue WildebeestRed Hartebeest Common Duiker White Springbok Black Wildebeest Burchell's Zebra Southern Reedbuck Mountain Reedbuck Common Springbok Game Species Risk: Artificial selection for trophies • Driven by demand for exceptional trophies. • Achieved through selective breeding US$ 11.96 million for a buffalo = domestication bull Risk: Artificial selection against trophies • Caused by selective harvesting of trophy phenotypes • Extent and variation between populations and species unknown • Leads to loss of genetic diversity decline in fitness? = domestication Risk: Aberrant colour morphs • Driven by market demand for odd/unusual trophies • Extreme form of artificial selection Risk: Aberrant colour morphs • Aggressively pursued by game ranchers • > 20 “forms” being bred = domestication Risk: overharvesting Risk: overharvesting • Poor understanding of the population demographics and drivers on private land • Potential collapse of populations • Requires rigorous science and adaptive management to reduce the risk Conclusions • Ungulates have shown a significant recovery in South Africa • But not for the extinct species • Recovery may reflect sustainable use approach and valuation of wildlife • Many of the conservation areas are probably to small for viable populations • Rhino poaching will not be solved by conservation agencies Conclusions (continued) • Commercialization is taking the “wild” out of South African ungulates • Domestication will • Reduce fitness • Reduce adaptive potential • Many of the risks are genetic, which will be • Difficult to detect prior to demographic collapse • Difficult to reverse • Formal protected areas will be increasingly important for ungulate conservation • Need science, education, policy and well-informed management The future of commercialised “wild”life?.