As Namibia scrambles to solve its raging hunger crisis, wildlife conservationists have condemned the government’s decision to cull wildlife to ensure food, arguing that the measure fails to address the root causes of drought and food insecurity.
In response to the hunger crisis, the Namibian government announced a controversial plan on August 29 which entailed culling of 723 wild animals, including 83 elephants, hippos, buffaloes, impalas, wildebeests, and zebras, to feed the starving populations.
The move has sparked criticism from wildlife conservationists and nature lovers, who argue that it fails to address the root causes of drought and food insecurity and could potentially disrupt wildlife breeding patterns.
In a harrowing documentary aired on Namibian television on August 29, viewers witnessed the grim reality of hunger in the drought-stricken village of Omulangi. Groups of malnourished villagers waded through rugged terrain, desperately searching for food and water. The landscape, once teeming with life, is now littered with the carcasses of livestock, a proof of the affliction caused by the drought.
Desperate times, desperate measures?
Maria Nangolo, a 38-year-old mother of four, narrated her daily struggle to find food and water for her family.
“We have nothing left. Our crops dried up, and our cattle are dying,” she was quoted in the documentary.
For Maria and others in the drought-hit village, the prospect of receiving free wildlife meat is a blessing to quell their food insecurity.
“We love our wildlife, but our children must eat,” the mother of four spoke.
The prolonged drought has devastated crops and livestock, officials say. Romeo Muyunda, spokesperson for Namibia’s Ministry of Environment and Tourism, defended the decision to cull wildlife.
“This is not a decision we made lightly; it is driven by necessity. Our country is experiencing severe drought. Our priority is to help those facing food shortages,” Muyunda told DTE.
He explained that wildlife culling is part of a broader strategy to alleviate food shortages and reduce the risk of human-wildlife conflict. “These animals are competing with humans for dwindling resources. By reducing their numbers, we can ease the pressure on people and the environment,” he added.
The Namibian government stated that reducing elephant populations is necessary to quell human-wildlife conflicts triggered by the drought.
“With the severe drought, conflicts are expected to increase if no interventions are made. To this effect, 83 elephants from identified conflict areas will be culled, with the meat allocated to the drought relief program under the Office of the Prime Minister,” the government statement noted.
The culling aims to reduce the adverse impacts of drought on wildlife conservation in national parks and protected areas. “This will help manage the current grazing pressure and water availability by reducing wildlife numbers in areas where they exceed the available resources,” the statement added.
Criticism amidst conservation concerns
Wildlife groups in east and southern Africa have strongly criticised the decision, questioning the reasoning behind mass wildlife culling.
“This is a tragic and short-sighted approach,” said Emmanuel Kankara, an activist working for the Namibian Wildlife Conservation Trust.
“Killing wild animals will not address the problem of food insecurity in this country. It will only disrupt ecosystems and endanger already vulnerable species,” he opined.
Also, Arafat Mtui, a wildlife conservationist working with the Southern Tanzania Elephant Program, echoed these concerns. “The impact of this culling could be far-reaching. Wildlife plays an important role in maintaining ecological balance. Killing such a large number of animals could have serious consequences for biodiversity,” he warned.
Mtui urged Namibian authorities to find sustainable solutions rather than resorting to ad hoc measures that may cause ecological losses.
What caused the hunger crisis in Namibia?
Namibia is facing its worst drought in decades.
Data from the Namibia Meteorological Service shows a 30 per cent decrease in annual rainfall over the past decade. This prolonged dry spell has drastically affected water resources and agriculture, worsening the desert country’s food insecurity.
Crop harvests have been severely impacted by low rainfall. The Ministry of Agriculture, Water, and Land Reform’s July 2023 Crop Prospects, Food Security, and Drought Situation Report indicates that the total cereal production for 2022-23 was 153,000 metric tonnes, down from 168,200 metric tonnes in the previous season.
Notably, 81 per cent of this production came from the commercial sector, with only 19 per cent from crop production regions — a nine per cent drop from the previous season.
The report also highlighted a severe decline in food security due to adverse agricultural conditions during the 2022-23 agricultural season.
Thousands of farmers are reeling from crop failures, severely impacting their ability to replenish food reserves. Households in major crop-producing regions reported significant losses of their previous harvests and now rely heavily on market purchases and drought-relief measures.
Samuel Wangwe, a principal research associate at the Tanzania-based Economic and Social Research Foundation (ESRF)offered a broader economic perspective on the situation in Namibia.
“Culling wildlife to alleviate immediate hunger may have long-term economic consequences,” Wangwe noted.
“The loss of wildlife impacts tourism, a vital sector for Namibia’s economy. This situation highlights the urgent need for sustainable agricultural practices and better drought management strategies,” he pointed out.
Wangwe stressed the importance of enhancing agricultural resilience and improving water management.
“While culling may provide short-term relief, it’s crucial to invest in long-term solutions that will mitigate the effects of future droughts and protect Namibia’s natural resources,” Wangwe told DTE.
Critics in Namibia have challenged the government’s justification for culling wildlife.
“There has been no comprehensive environmental impact assessment, no game counts, and no food insecurity evaluations,” Izak Smit, a conservationist working with Namibia Desert Lions Human Relations Aid told Down To Earth (DTE).
“The latest move by the government is an election ploy where meat seems to be earmarked for contested constituencies,” he added.
Political ramifications of culling in election season
The timing of the decision to cull wildlife, coinciding with the upcoming elections in November, has led to speculation that the move is designed to gain support in rural areas like Kavango and Caprivi, where the ruling party is struggling.
“This isn’t about feeding people; it’s about winning votes,” said Edgar Toivo, another conservationist.
“The government’s focus on these key regions, known for their importance in the electoral map, raises concerns about the true motive behind the cull,” he stated.
The government has also faced criticism for its approach to addressing food shortages, with experts pointing out that culling livestock—not elephants—would be a more practical and sustainable solution.
“Elephants are adapted to survive droughts, unlike livestock,” said Justin Ndlovu, an agricultural expert in Namibia.
“If the government were serious about helping farmers, they would implement a livestock purchase program, not a cull of wild animals,” Ndlovu added.
Wide-ranging implications for rest of Africa
The proposed culling could have far-reaching implications beyond Namibia’s borders. Conservationists warn that allowing this cull to proceed could set a dangerous precedent, encouraging other governments across Africa to exploit wildlife under the guise of humanitarian relief.
“If Namibia gets away with this, what’s to stop other countries from doing the same?” Ndlovu said.
The environmental impact of the cull is also a major concern, particularly for species like Namibia’s desert-adapted elephants.
“These elephants are critical to the ecosystem, and their loss would be devastating,” said Matana Ng’weli, a wildlife scientist at Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute specialising in elephant conservation.
The cull could disrupt not only elephant populations but also other species like lions, leopards, and vultures that depend on the ecosystem’s balance.
In the wake of the ongoing debate over wildlife culling for human consumption, experts cautioned that such measures could inadvertently facilitate the spread of highly contagious zoonotic diseases.
“Culling wildlife might seem like a straightforward solution to control disease reservoirs, but it poses significant risks,” said Mtui.
“The process of handling and processing these animals can create opportunities for pathogens to leap from animals to humans.”
Mtui further explained, “When wildlife populations are culled, the stress and environmental disruption can exacerbate the risk of zoonotic diseases spilling over into human communities. It’s important to consider these consequences before thinking of taking such measures.”
