What happened to the Selous elephants?

[Neil-PH]

Honestly, I don't think the dam would affect the elephants much at all, I'm more concerned about the rhinos.

I've read many negative comments about the dam, and cannot agree. It has nothing but positivity about it.

Tanzania needs more electricity, which this dam will provide. No argument there.

Let's look at Lake Kariba. One doesn't hear negative comments about the lake and what it's existence does for the animals or the people living in the area. Animals have thrived.

The spin-offs of this build are immense. Lodges, fishing, water-borne sports, and maybe more importantly it's a natural barrier for poaching movements, provided the lake is policed efficiently.

I surveyed almost 6 million acres between Selous and Ruvuma years ago. The prevalence of elephant skulls painted a dim reality of poaching activity. Communication with numerous villagers all pointed to easy transportation of the ivory to waiting ships on the East Coast, void of security, and destined for the Far East.

Another aspect of the vast poaching is the advent of the rains in November and the end of any hunting season. It blocks the movement of armed people (clients etc) which are a natural deterrent to poaching activity. When the rains commence vehicle movement is next to impossible, affording the on-foot poachers free reign to do what they want. It was easy and they took advantage.

Another comment above relates to ivory mass. As attractive as they are in terms of length, the density of ivory related to less weight, and body size of the elephant is way less than those of northern Tanzania/Amboseli corridor, borne of nutrition. Drier areas with more thorny browse tend to support more nutrition than areas of higher rainfall like the miombo woodlands of Selous, and in fact Niassa in northern Mozambique. This nutritional observation holds true for most species too. The Selous buffalo are small bodied too.

I hope the hunters of the future get to see the improvement of elephant numbers and ivory sizes; it won't happen in the years I have left.

 

[WilhelmM]

I've read many negative comments about the dam, and cannot agree. It has nothing but positivity about it.

Tanzania needs more electricity, which this dam will provide. No argument there.

Let's look at Lake Kariba. One doesn't hear negative comments about the lake and what it's existence does for the animals or the people living in the area. Animals have thrived.

The spin-offs of this build are immense. Lodges, fishing, water-borne sports, and maybe more importantly it's a natural barrier for poaching movements, provided the lake is policed efficiently.

I surveyed almost 6 million acres between Selous and Ruvuma years ago. The prevalence of elephant skulls painted a dim reality of poaching activity. Communication with numerous villagers all pointed to easy transportation of the ivory to waiting ships on the East Coast, void of security, and destined for the Far East.

Another aspect of the vast poaching is the advent of the rains in November and the end of any hunting season. It blocks the movement of armed people (clients etc) which are a natural deterrent to poaching activity. When the rains commence vehicle movement is next to impossible, affording the on-foot poachers free reign to do what they want. It was easy and they took advantage.

Another comment above relates to ivory mass. As attractive as they are in terms of length, the density of ivory related to less weight, and body size of the elephant is way less than those of northern Tanzania/Amboseli corridor, borne of nutrition. Drier areas with more thorny browse tend to support more nutrition than areas of higher rainfall like the miombo woodlands of Selous, and in fact Niassa in northern Mozambique. This nutritional observation holds true for most species too. The Selous buffalo are small bodied too.

I hope the hunters of the future get to see the improvement of elephant numbers and ivory sizes; it won't happen in the years I have left.

Honestly, I agree with your point. Initially, I was extremely angry that Tanzania had decided to build a dam in the reserve. As of now, building one would actually make sense in the long run. I'd much rather have the reserve's "raw" nature be damaged rather than have an entire species wiped out from the area. After all, it's only a small section of the reserve that's being developed and only the northern half. Here's hoping that the electricity generated by the dam would help decrease poaching to a manageable level because we all know that the vast majority of poachers in Africa are poor people. Hopefully, Tanzania will eventually adopt Namibia's conservation model. Though, being a socialist country, the chance of it happening anytime soon is small.

Another thing that could potentially help with anti-poaching is "dividing" the reserve into manageable portions, making it easier for the anti-poaching patrol to scout the areas. Being a reserve the size of Switzerland is cool but very hard to manage as one huge landmass. Thank you for your kind words. It’s a dream of mine to harvest a trophy tusker from the Selous though I’ll wait until conditions have improved significantly.

 

[spike.t]

Disagree with your comments about animals and people thriving on the edges of Kariba....they are now inhabiting hilly rocky land that is nowhere near as good as the land in the flood plains they were moved from...the soil replenished each year from silt deposited by the river...so better for them to grow crops....and flat flood plains not rocky hills for the animals...on the zambian side there are bugger all animals apart from some on private land as too many people...and from what I have heard...could be wrong ...mana pools land is degrading as no flooding yet again means no silt and nutrients being deposited from flood waters....plenty of kapenta rigs making a racket at night though....and the kapenta are only there due to being introduced to start up an industry to provide jobs and income...without the kapenta most of the lake would be barren as lots of it not suitable for bream etc....to the selous on the poaching side the new roads will provide easy access and transport availability for poachers.....also what is going to be the cost down river ....amongst other things how will the rufiji delta be affected which is the biggest mangrove forest in east Africa....yeah power is needed but as is being shown around the world there are massive negative costs to people and wildlife ,and the ecosystems down river from dams....so

 

[WilhelmM]

Disagree with your comments about animals and people thriving on the edges of Kariba....they are now inhabiting hilly rocky land that is nowhere near as good as the land in the flood plains they were moved from...the soil replenished each year from silt deposited by the river...so better for them to grow crops....and flat flood plains not rocky hills for the animals...on the zambian side there are bugger all animals apart from some on private land as too many people...and from what I have heard...could be wrong ...mana pools land is degrading as no flooding yet again means no silt and nutrients being deposited from flood waters....plenty of kapenta rigs making a racket at night though....and the kapenta are only there due to being introduced to start up an industry to provide jobs and income...without the kapenta most of the lake would be barren as lots of it not suitable for bream etc....to the selous on the poaching side the new roads will provide easy access and transport availability for poachers.....also what is going to be the cost down river ....amongst other things how will the rufiji delta be affected which is the biggest mangrove forest in east Africa....yeah power is needed but as is being shown around the world there are massive negative costs to people and wildlife ,and the ecosystems down river from dams....so

I understand your concern and even agree with it on an emotional level, but what else can we do to protect the reserve? Even with anti-poaching patrols from the government and hunting companies, the poachers always find a loophole that they can exploit. Initially, poachers start off as poor people desperate for money, but then over time, they become more and more greedy to the point where it's no longer about supporting their families. Not only that but they're extremely brutal with their methods towards wildlife and even humans. A documentary from Carte Blanche came out last year about rhino poaching and the ivory trade. The f*ckers broke into a rhino sanctuary in South Africa, held the employees hostage as well as gang raped one of the female employees, and then hacked a tiny piece of the horn off the baby rhino and left it for dead. The reason they targeted the sanctuary and not one of the reserves is due to the anti-poaching patrols' effective methods as they had eventually learnt the poachers' patterns.

Again, I'd much rather have the Selous untouched nature *slightly* damaged rather than have an entire regional population of elephants wiped out all because the reserve was too rugged for the anti-poaching patrols to traverse through. Yes, there are going to be consequences when the project is finished, but they're going to minimal in comparison to the potential benefits if Tanzania does it well. The people that will be negatively affected will be drawn to the urban sectors due to electricity being more readily available to the population. If there is another solution to the problem, then count me in, but I don't think there is. Hopefully, I'm wrong.

 

[PeteG]

I understand your concern and even agree with it on an emotional level, but what else can we do to protect the reserve? Even with anti-poaching patrols from the government and hunting companies, the poachers always find a loophole that they can exploit. Initially, poachers start off as poor people desperate for money, but then over time, they become more and more greedy to the point where it's no longer about supporting their families. Not only that but they're extremely brutal with their methods towards wildlife and even humans. A documentary from Carte Blanche came out last year about rhino poaching and the ivory trade. The f*ckers broke into a rhino sanctuary in South Africa, held the employees hostage as well as gang raped one of the female employees, and then hacked a tiny piece of the horn off the baby rhino and left it for dead. The reason they targeted the sanctuary and not one of the reserves is due to the anti-poaching patrols' effective methods as they had eventually learnt the poachers' patterns.

Again, I'd much rather have the Selous untouched nature *slightly* damaged rather than have an entire regional population of elephants wiped out all because the reserve was too rugged for the anti-poaching patrols to traverse through. Yes, there are going to be consequences when the project is finished, but they're going to minimal in comparison to the potential benefits if Tanzania does it well. The people that will be negatively affected will be drawn to the urban sectors due to electricity being more readily available to the population. If there is another solution to the problem, then count me in, but I don't think there is. Hopefully, I'm wrong.

Just curious why you believe the dam will increase governments anti poaching patrols?

 

[WilhelmM]

Just curious why you believe the dam will increase governments anti poaching patrols?

Better roads, easier to traverse. Pretty simple. Again, if there are any better methods, please let me know. So far I haven't been shown any.

 

[Neil-PH]

Disagree with your comments about animals and people thriving on the edges of Kariba....they are now inhabiting hilly rocky land that is nowhere near as good as the land in the flood plains they were moved from...the soil replenished each year from silt deposited by the river...so better for them to grow crops....and flat flood plains not rocky hills for the animals...on the zambian side there are bugger all animals apart from some on private land as too many people...and from what I have heard...could be wrong ...mana pools land is degrading as no flooding yet again means no silt and nutrients being deposited from flood waters....plenty of kapenta rigs making a racket at night though....and the kapenta are only there due to being introduced to start up an industry to provide jobs and income...without the kapenta most of the lake would be barren as lots of it not suitable for bream etc....to the selous on the poaching side the new roads will provide easy access and transport availability for poachers.....also what is going to be the cost down river ....amongst other things how will the rufiji delta be affected which is the biggest mangrove forest in east Africa....yeah power is needed but as is being shown around the world there are massive negative costs to people and wildlife ,and the ecosystems down river from dams....so

Curious...... How would the Zambezi region, now encompassing Kariba, look like if no Lake had ever been built?

Nobody can adequately answer that, it's all hypothetical. We humans are programmed to "improve" things, and don't willfully build things to destroy existing systems.

We need to believe the Kariba ecosystems have been improved upon, even the introduction of Kapenta having provided a source of protein, and it's economic benefits. There will be eternal arguments for and against. In my opinion and what I have experienced in my decades of working these areas is Kariba was a brilliant addition.

 

[PeteG]

Better roads, easier to traverse. Pretty simple. Again, if there are any better methods, please let me know. So far I haven't been shown any.

I won’t debate with you about better methods because there will be countless options as well as pros and cons.
regarding the roads and access, that will be more detrimental to the wildlife unless anti poaching operations are stepped up and funded significantly. Otherwise it will simply be an easier conduit to conduct poaching.
If your assumption is based upon relying on the same anti poaching funds from government that are insignificant and allowing poaching, then you may be disappointed in the end result.

 

[Royal27]

Better roads, easier to traverse. Pretty simple.

Same would apply for the poachers, don't you think ? If the answer was "pretty simple" it would have been accomplished long ago. The issues around poaching are anything but simple.

 

[WilhelmM]

I won’t debate with you about better methods because there will be countless options as well as pros and cons.
regarding the roads and access, that will be more detrimental to the wildlife unless anti poaching operations are stepped up and funded significantly. Otherwise it will simply be an easier conduit to conduct poaching.
If your assumption is based upon relying on the same anti poaching funds from government that are insignificant and allowing poaching, then you may be disappointed in the end result.

This isn't a debate as I never intended it to be one. You say there are countless other options yet you refuse to mention any? Why is that? If you read Neil-PH's post you'd find that most poachers do so on foot, building better roads would make it easier to spot them, therefore they would be less likely to poach. Because after all, no one wants to go to jail.

How are the anti-poaching funds allowing poaching, exactly? I can understand them being insignificant compared to the funds raised by trophy hunting but you seem to be implying that they're somehow directly helping them which I find to be ridiculous. The government having a few mixed-feelings about trophy hunting doesn't equate to them helping poachers. The world doesn't revolve around sportsmen, unfortunately.

Same would apply for the poachers, don't you think ? If the answer was "pretty simple" it would have been accomplished long ago. The issues around poaching are anything but simple.

Then what do you propose we do? Also, poachers mostly traverse on foot. I highly doubt they're stupid enough to travel in a vehicle for everyone to see in broad daylight.

 

[PeteG]

This isn't a debate as I never intended it to be one. You say there are countless other options yet you refuse to mention any? Why is that? If you read Neil-PH's post you'd find that most poachers do so on foot, building better roads would make it easier to spot them, therefore they would be less likely to poach. Because after all, no one wants to go to jail.

How are the anti-poaching funds allowing poaching, exactly? I can understand them being insignificant compared to the funds raised by trophy hunting but you seem to be implying that they're somehow directly helping them which I find to be ridiculous. The government having a few mixed-feelings about trophy hunting doesn't equate to them helping poachers. The world doesn't revolve around sportsmen, unfortunately.

Then what do you propose we do? Also, poachers mostly traverse on foot. I highly doubt they're stupid enough to travel in a vehicle for everyone to see in broad

I have personally seen government vehicles being used to carry illegal game meat.
Vehicles, which by the way, travelled with free unhindered access.
Numerous times have wildlife scouts been implicated in poaching.
If there is not substantial investment into the anti poaching programmes, generally by the likes of African parks or Frankfurt zoological society or others, unfortunately the status quo will not change.

Some poachers may travel on foot, many will use bicycles and any other form of transport to get them in and out as quickly as possible.

Poachers are likely to cover tracks when crossing roads, they will not leave their tracks there to be found.
you will have better luck finding their tracks around obstacles or leading up to game trails or water holes than finding tracks on a road.

 

[Royal27]

Then what do you propose we do? Also, poachers mostly traverse on foot. I highly doubt they're stupid enough to travel in a vehicle for everyone to see in broad daylight.

Sigh... Again, not simple like you're making it out to be. Poachers take the easiest route, like everyone else. Roads lead to more people, people lead to more poachers. And you're right, poachers aren't stupid. They will use the roads to get there initially, not to poach from . Leaving your government funded on the road anti-poaching efforts wondering where the poachers are. Heck those government anti poaching units can be some of the biggest poachers as no one above them has any vested interest in saving the animals, as opposed to hunting units.

What roads do NOT lead to is more government funded anti-poaching. If you believe this then show me a truly wild area where this has occurred successfully.

There is no one size fits all answer to poaching or conservation and it certainly isnt criss crossing a wild area with roads.

The answers lie in people like us, not the government. I'd advise you to get out and see some truly wild areas and talk to the folks that manage them before suggesting that something like roads everywhere are the simple answer.

 

[WilhelmM]

I have personally seen government vehicles being used to carry illegal game meat.
Vehicles, which by the way, travelled with free unhindered access.
Numerous times have wildlife scouts been implicated in poaching.
If there is not substantial investment into the anti poaching programmes, generally by the likes of African parks or Frankfurt zoological society or others, unfortunately the status quo will not change.

Some poachers may travel on foot, many will use bicycles and any other form of transport to get them in and out as quickly as possible.

Poachers are likely to cover tracks when crossing roads, they will not leave their tracks there to be found.
you will have better luck finding their tracks around obstacles or leading up to game trails or water holes than finding tracks on a road.

I'm sure we're all aware that the wildlife sector in Tanzania is corrupt in many places, however, that doesn't mean that every single person involved is out for money. There are people who generally care about wildlife and are doing their best to make it safe from poaching. As for government vehicles carrying illegal game meat, I'm not sure as to when that happened but I'm more than willing to know when it did from you. I guess Tanzania arresting the so-called "Ivory Queen" is them being uncaring? All of Africa is corrupt when it comes to wildlife, Tanzania not being a special case.

I've been to game parks all over South Africa and I have yet to see any poachers that have used vehicles. And I mean that I've literally seen poachers handcuffed on the side of the road, none of them had any form of motor transport. Bicycles? Yes, but those aren't nearly as efficient as a vehicle. Yes, poachers will cover tracks on roads, however, the likeliness of them being spotted from a vehicle is much greater than it was in the past few decades.

Look, I'm not saying that I enjoy the idea of a dam being built in a pristine wilderness. However, if it happens to good in the long run then I'm all for it. I think part of the surge in poaching in Tanzania is due to the CITES regulations. The majority of hunters who go to Tanzania are American and if they can't bring home their trophies then there's no point in going, which I think is kind of sad considering that having a taxidermy mount isn't the Be-all And End-all. Because of this, prices have greatly increased in Tanzania because they're not getting the funding they used to.

 

[PeteG]

I'm sure we're all aware that the wildlife sector in Tanzania is corrupt in many places, however, that doesn't mean that every single person involved is out for money. There are people who generally care about wildlife and are doing their best to make it safe from poaching. As for government vehicles carrying illegal game meat, I'm not sure as to when that happened but I'm more than willing to know when it did from you. I guess Tanzania arresting the so-called "Ivory Queen" is them being uncaring? All of Africa is corrupt when it comes to wildlife, Tanzania not being a special case.

I've been to game parks all over South Africa and I have yet to see any poachers that have used vehicles. And I mean that I've literally seen poachers handcuffed on the side of the road, none of them had any form of motor transport. Bicycles? Yes, but those aren't nearly as efficient as a vehicle. Yes, poachers will cover tracks on roads, however, the likeliness of them being spotted from a vehicle is much greater than it was in the past few decades.

Look, I'm not saying that I enjoy the idea of a dam being built in a pristine wilderness. However, if it happens to good in the long run then I'm all for it. I think part of the surge in poaching in Tanzania is due to the CITES regulations. The majority of hunters who go to Tanzania are American and if they can't bring home their trophies then there's no point in going, which I think is kind of sad considering that having a taxidermy mount isn't the Be-all And End-all. Because of this, prices have greatly increased in Tanzania because they're not getting the funding they used to.

Frankly you have second guessed actual experiences explaining how your thought process may be flawed and dismissed them in favour of your own. You’re entitled to do so but then there is no point in me responding any further.

 

[WilhelmM]

Sigh... Again, not simple like you're making it out to be. Poachers take the easiest route, like everyone else. Roads lead to more people, people lead to more poachers. And you're right, poachers aren't stupid. They will use the roads to get there initially, not to poach from . Leaving your government funded on the road anti-poaching efforts wondering where the poachers are. Heck those government anti poaching units can be some of the biggest poachers as no one above them has any vested interest in saving the animals, as opposed to hunting units.

What roads do NOT lead to is more government funded anti-poaching. If you believe this then show me a truly wild area where this has occurred successfully.

There is no one size fits all answer to poaching or conservation and it certainly isnt criss crossing a wild area with roads.

The answers lie in people like us, not the government. I'd advise you to get out and see some truly wild areas and talk to the folks that manage them before suggesting that something like roads everywhere are the simple answer.

The poachers that use vehicles in places like the Kruger are guaranteed to be stopped by local authorities, that's why most of them go on foot around the outskirts of the parks. And yes, I'm aware that many of the wildlife authorities in Tanzania are corrupt but that's a different issue. You tell me that I'm making it out to be simple yet you're doing the same. More people does not always lead to more poachers. If there are more people in the park, like photographic tourists, then the poachers know they are taking significantly higher risks than they did before. That doesn't mean it's going to go away completely, not at all, but if there are more people on the ground protecting the wildlife then poaching will most definitely go down.

I never implied that roads lead to more government-funded anti-poaching, only that it would be significantly easier to patrol the reserves. Yes, I have been in truly wild areas before and have met the people protecting them. I'm well aware that stopping poaching isn't simple but using the same methods over and over even when poaching surges doesn't help.

 

[neil.prohunter]

Effective anti poaching operations need long term commitment from landowners; in our discussion let's stick to the Selous and it's blocks.

As it is, a block is only dedicated to a company (via auction etc) for a relatively short few years which in itself is a deterrent in providing sufficient resources to any accompanying efforts, and whilst operators do implement a program it is generally deemed inefficient.

I speak from experience now. As part of an antipoaching operation on a concession with a 50 year lease we were afforded the opportunity to create a system that works.

Time was on our side, sadly we lost elephant and rhino, BUT the data we collected over the years resulted in dramatic changes.

Initially we monitored the concession perimeters, picking up entry and exit points of poachers, as well as movements within the concession. What we learnt was that the intruders were creatures of habit, and generally used the same points of entry and exit, the same observation points and the same number of days to perform their actions.

Our success was immense, despite continual problems. Incursions were limited and poaching all but eradicated.
It took a dedicated crew, an efficient financial model and more importantly the long term lease to viably implement our plans.

 

[WilhelmM]

Frankly you have second guessed actual experiences explaining how your thought process may be flawed and dismissed them in favour of your own. You’re entitled to do so but then there is no point in me responding any further.

Again, you make little effort to refute what I'm saying and oddly choose to personally insult me. I'm more than willing to hear other suggestions but I'm not being given any. Being smug doesn't help your argument in the slightest.

 

[WilhelmM]

Effective anti poaching operations need long term commitment from landowners; in our discussion let's stick to the Selous and it's blocks.

As it is, a block is only dedicated to a company (via auction etc) for a relatively short few years which in itself is a deterrent in providing sufficient resources to any accompanying efforts, and whilst operators do implement a program it is generally deemed inefficient.

I speak from experience now. As part of an antipoaching operation on a concession with a 50 year lease we were afforded the opportunity to create a system that works.

Time was on our side, sadly we lost elephant and rhino, BUT the data we collected over the years resulted in dramatic changes.

Initially we monitored the concession perimeters, picking up entry and exit points of poachers, as well as movements within the concession. What we learnt was that the intruders were creatures of habit, and generally used the same points of entry and exit, the same observation points and the same number of days to perform their actions.

Our success was immense, despite continual problems. Incursions were limited and poaching all but eradicated.
It took a dedicated crew, an efficient financial model and more importantly the long term lease to viably implement our plans.

Thank you for actually bothering to give an explanation. What you said about hunting blocks, would it be better if the government allowed the outfitters to use the hunting blocks for longer? Let's say for a minimum of 10 years.

 

[Tubby’s Canteen]

Apples and oranges but the same basic principle, there are fields owned by the government here that get leased for making hay. Because they have to be bid on every year no one is willing to invest the furtilizer to sustain them and at this point there so run out there not cropping enough to be viable.

 

[Royal27]

You tell me that I'm making it out to be simple yet you're doing the same. More people does not always lead to more poachers. If there are more people in the park, like photographic tourists, then the poachers know they are taking significantly higher risks than they did before

Actually, I'm not. More local people do lead to more poaching all else being equal. And again,.you're simplifying by making everything into a park. Is that what you want ?

never implied that roads lead to more government-funded anti-poaching, only that it would be significantly easier to patrol the reserves.

Easy doesn't help when it isn't effective.

Yes, I have been in truly wild areas before and have met the people protecting them. I'm well aware that stopping poaching isn't simple but using the same methods over and over even when poaching surges doesn't help.

Good. I sincerely hope you listened and learned something in those wild areas. Here you just seem to be reading to respond instead of to comprehend and keep learning. Good luck in your quest. Hopefully you'll open your mind in the future.

It's a complex issue.