LIONS, COOL... BUT SHOW ME THE AFRICAN WILD DOGS

Despite having little experience with African Wild Dogs, and zero of them in the wild, they have come to be one of my favourite species you might find in Africa. They are resourceful, resilient  and often very misunderstood. They are also stunningly beautiful. 

African Wild Dog - N/a'an ku se Wildlife Sanctuary

Why I love Wild Dogs:

1) Family means everything to them; their social order is fundamental to their survival. 

They usually live in packs of around 10 individuals made up mostly of brothers, sisters and offspring. Only the Alfa pair breed and the whole pack works together to raise the young, bringing in food and working as babysitters in turn. Sometimes a non-Alfa female will breed, and in many situations it has been recorded that the Alfa will either raise the pups as her own or kill them. Wild Dogs produce the biggest litter of any of the canine family bearing up to 16 pups at a time! 

2) They are epic hunters.

Wild Dogs have an unusually high hunting success rate of around 80% - which means if you see them hunting you are quite likely to see them make a kill... If you can keep up. In comparison  Cheetahs on average are around 50% successful. This is because they are endurance hunters and work together as a pack. Incredibly they can keep up a speed of 40 km/hour for about an hour and often chase their prey to exhaustion before grotesquely disembowelling and eating it alive. Although this seems cruel the death is actually quicker and more humane than cheetah and lions' strangle grip. Their main prey is medium sized antelope such as impala and springbok. 

A herd of impala: average food source for Wild Dogs - Shamwari 

3) They can't be domesticated.

Most people hear the name "dog" and simply thing that these are animals that were once pets but now run free. NOT TRUE! This is one of the most ancient species of canids on Earth and developed on a completely separate lineage to domestic dogs. Unlike Wolves, Wild Dogs will not accept a human as part of the pack as their structure relies so strongly on family lineage - instead they will completely ignore a human (unless for food) and would never be able to be domesticated. They defy humanities desire to have control over everything! 

4) They know no boundaries. 

Wild Dogs love to run - they will run for miles and miles and very few reserves can contain them. They really are true wild animals and I love them for that. 

5) They have individual personalities. 

I haven't spent nearly enough time with these animals and I would love a chance to really study them properly. But the small amount of time I have seen them, and what I have watched on Wildlife Documentaries (although there are few that feature Wild Dogs) you can really see that each animal is an individual, bringing different skills and abilities to the pack. They speak to each other and greet each member of the pack individually after being separated. They really are highly intelligent creatures. 

The Wild Dogs of N/a'an ku se

Sadly the African Wild Dogs are under great threat and are the second most endangered carnivore in Africa (behind the Ethiopian Wolf)... There is currently an estimated population of between 3,000-5,000 left in the wild. So many of the things I love about them is what drives them towards extinction:

1) Family means everything to them; their social order is fundamental to their survival. 

Close pack life means that disease spreads through the family like wild-fire. Many packs die of diseases such as rabies - often passed on from local domestic dogs. 

2) They are epic hunters.

Successful hunting in the past has often brought them in to competition with other hunting animals - lions will kill them. They are also habitual livestock killers so farmers will kill whole packs of Wild Dogs in an effort to protect their livelihood. 

3) They can't be domesticated.

Many animals survival has relied on their abilities to live alongside, and even amongst human beings. Animals that can be domesticated and benefit the human population will always survive.

4) They know no boundaries. 

Most African animals now purely survive in protected game reserves where a fence stands between them and poachers. The fact that Wild Dogs don't survive in these smaller fenced off areas means that they are harder to protect. 

It breaks my heart that these animals face such difficult times, and I hope that I get my chance to really see and get to know them in the wild before they are gone. 

Please let me know what you think about this article and what you know about African Wild Dogs. You can also see more of my pictures of the Wild Dogs at N/a'an ku se in my post "Feeding the African Wild Dogs". 

 

OPERATION SNOW TIGER

On Sunday night BBC's latest Wildlife Film, 'Operation Snow Tiger',  aired for the first time, and as we have come to expect from anything BBC it was a fascinating and eye-opening program. 

Young tiger cub rescued by Siberian Tiger experts in Russia

The program, which is presented by Liz Bonnin (who you may remember from programs such as 'Stargazing Live' and 'Bang Goes the Theory'), follows the Russian conservationists who have dedicated their lives to saving the Siberian Tiger species. The tigers are under threat mainly from habitat loss and poaching and now their numbers dwindle dangerously towards extinction. 

Siberian Tiger

The first episode really highlighted just how tough the job of the Russian conservationists is, with the team ploughing through snow up to their waists, digging out the cars and knowing just how small the chance of seeing a tiger really is (conservationists who have worked for many years on the reserve, specifically protected for the tigers, have only had up to 4 sightings of the elusive creatures). But they continue with their fundamental work despite the little reward and with no complaints. You really understand these peoples' passion for their work when they catch a glimpse of the tigers on the BBC's own camera traps. There is no doubt that these are truly dedicated conservationists. 

In the middle of their filming the group get a phone call from a local village - a tiger cub has been captured that is alleged to have killed a dog. The team race up to the rescue and to their dismay realise it is one of three who's mother appears to have been killed; one cub is safe but there are still two out there, unlikely to survive long without the care they need. Cameraman Max Hug Williams joins the team to hunt for the babies and soon finds himself on 12 mile marches through the snow, desperate to get any sign that they might rescue these that represent 1% of the entire Siberian Tiger population. 

The program is well put together and despite not seeing nice clear footage of the tigers, as you normally expect of BBC Wildlife documentaries, you get an incredible glimpse into this rare world that few will ever have the opportunity to see. And you couldn't get a better presenter than Liz who studied a masters focussed on tigers. As ever the BBC team have pulled it out of the bag, despite the difficulty of the project and I cannot wait for the next episode next week.

If you didn't catch the program on Sunday you can catch up here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p019cy5k/Operation_Snow_Tiger_Episode_1/

And don't miss the next episode - 8pm Sunday on BBC 2

CONSERVING SPECIES - WHERE DO WE DRAW THE LINE?

Yesterday I came across this article about a successful conservation effort to save the "California Dwarf Fox": 

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/05/130528-santa-cruz-island-foxes-endangered-species-california-nature-conservancy/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social&utm_content=link_tw20130609news-foxrev2&utm_campaign=Content

The article outlines how the foxes (which reside on the Channel Islands off the coast of California) were on the brink of extinction due to a long series of events which  link back, once again, to humans.

In recent years there has been an increase of Golden Eagles breeding on the Channel Islands. This increase is thought to be linked to the decrease of Bald Eagles, which are intensely territorial and would have previously chased off Golden Eagles from the area. However the Bald Eagles main food supply of fish had, decades earlier, been contaminated by the insecticide DTT which had been pumped into the ocean by chemical companies during the 1940s - 70s, thus the Bald Eagles no longer reside in the area, allowing Golden Eagles to become local residents. Alongside this there was a huge increase in non-native feral pigs, descended from domestic pigs brought to the islands by farmers; this provided a huge food source for Golden Eagles who also began snacking on the endemic California Dwarf Fox... Still with me? 

In order to save the California Dwarf Fox, who's numbers were down to just above 100 individuals, conservationists took action and over a course of events removed the Golden Eagles and feral pigs, and re-introduced Bald Eagles. It proved a huge success and now the species number is up to 2,500 individuals residing on the islands. As a biologist of the National Park Services, Timothy Canoon stated, "In the park services, we're mandated to save everything entrusted to our stewardship. If we let the island foxes go extinct, we might as well not be here managing anything."

However, there is now the issue in mind that since the foxes numbers decreased so dramatically there is little genetic diversity which could impact on the species abilities to deal with disease or environmental change. The controversial solution to this would be to interbreed the dwarf foxes with another subspecies island fox to bolster the genetic health of the animals. 

My initial thoughts on the article were fantastic! It's great to see that when we put our minds to it we can actual do something to save a species. But as the day moved on I thought more about it, and began to consider what the costs of some conservation could mean... Do we, in our efforts to save a species at whatever cost, actually hinder the natural processes of life? Are we in fact stopping the process that has created the world as we know it today, evolution? The thoughts slipped to the back of my mind, until that evening my sister linked me to the very same article and began to ask very similar questions. To what extent should we be conserving species, where is it that we should draw the line? 

Now don't get me wrong, there is not a single doubt in my mind that where humans have played a part in the demise of a species - be it destroying it's natural habitat, hunting it, poaching it  - we must be doing everything we can to restore what we have damaged. In such cases as Rhinos, Elephants, Siberian Tigers, Orang-utans and so many other species I implore the world to stop it's destruction and fix what it has done. Even in the case of the Californian Dwarf Fox, which set my mind on this issue, I think we have done right to save it. 

But aren't there species out there that are supposed to die out? It has been such a natural course of events throughout the history of the Earth, but as humans have we messed and muddled things up so much as to prolong, perhaps even prevent, natural evolution? 

To try to organise my thoughts somewhat I read an online essay, Preserving genes, species, or ecosystems? Healing the fractured foundations of conservation policy by Brian Bowen. Here he discusses the different approaches to conservation and concludes that:

 "...conservation is not about protecting objects, it is about protecting a process: life.”

I think this is a fundamental mindset that should be constantly considered by conservationists - Are we saving an animal just for the sake of preservation? We should be considering WHY this animal is moving towards extinction and not just the sad fact that it is going to be extinct. 

What most concerns me in the case of the Californian Dwarf Fox is the consideration to interbreed it with another subspecies. This is, in my opinion, human interference gone too far. It is a practice that has already taken place with the Florida Panther, in which the species declined so far that conservationists brought in Texas Cougars to interbreed and thus create "Hybrid Panthers". This new species lives longer, and acts differently to the original species, and humans have created an animal that would not naturally occur in the area. This could severely upset the balance of natural life processes in that area.  

My mind is still not set - I could not be the one to make a decision on whether a species should be preserved or not. But one thing I am clear on is that as conservationists we should not allow our minds to be marred by the devastating fact that species do die out as a process of natural selection and we must not allow ourselves to interfere to the point that we are preventing this from happening. 

Leopard Luck

This is a series of photographs of a leopard that I took on Shamwari Game Reserve. Leopards are a very rare to see as they keep themselves hidden away, so to be lucky enough to sit with this leopard for around 45 minutes was like a dream. She was very relaxed in our presence which allowed me to take these beautiful shots. Leopards are listed as "Near Threatened" on the Red Data book, and this is due to habitat loss, trophy hunting and poaching. 

MIGRATION ROUTES IN AFRICA... WHAT HAVE WE DONE?

Since the dawn of time animals have migrated. Be it to escape an unforgiving landscape, to search for new food and water resources, or for the purpose of breeding, it has been an essential part of their survival. But, as we do so often, humans have interfered and many of the natural migration routes have been cut off with fences, roads and building construction. One of the latest disasters humans have bestowed on our natural world is the plans to build a major highway through the Serengeti National Park and straight through one of the last migratory strongholds left in Africa, so called 'The Great Migration'.

'The Great Migration' is made up of millions of Blue Wildebeest, Zebra and Thompson's Gazelles who travel across the Serengeti over the border into the Masai Mara every year. Their journey begins on the Serengeti plains where from around December to June the Wildebeest breed and graze. They set off in late May or early June and over the course of several months make their way across the Masai Mara boarder where they graze on highly nutrient rich grasses. Then after spending time feeding and fattening up they turn around and go back. 

You can see the progression of their journey here: www.rhinoafrica.com/east-africa/great-migration.

It is not clear why the wildebeest make this journey and when it began, however it is perilous and over 250,000 wildebeest are killed, the majority of which from drowning whilst crossing the river.   

Little is known about the origins of migratory animals but it is clear that it is a phenomenon that has taken place for millions of years. Before human habitation in Africa, 2.6 million years ago, animals would have been free to roam with no borders. Around 100,000 years ago humans began to adapt and became hunters; one of the few predators which could follow migratory animals and rely on them as a food source. However this would have had little impact on the animals who would continue to move as they needed to. Then, 2,000 years ago, traders began to bring cattle into East Africa and many hunters became pastoralists. Initially this would have

impacted the migratory animals very little, even though the pastoralists likely followed the same routes. However it wasn’t long before cattle diseases began to spread to wild animals and the numbers of these animals dropped dramatically. It wasn’t until around 150 years ago that humans began to truly impact on their migratory neighbours as people began to fence off protected game reserves and private property. Alongside this farming was discovered to be a more profitable way of life and many pastoralists turned to farming, leaving much of the previous migratory land into agricultural farms. Shockingly between 1975 and 1995 the amount of agricultural land across Africa increased by an average of ten times.   

Across the globe humans have made an enormous impact on natural habitats, and in Africa this has had a devastating effect. Africa currently has the highest population growth with figures doubling every 24 years. This means a huge increase in forests clearing for firewood, living space, crops and domestic livestock. In the Masai Mara between 1970– 1995 agricultural land use increased from 4875ha to around 50,000ha. This had a direct impact on local wildebeest populations which dropped by a shocking 81%. In a similar circumstance it is believed that, under the unregulated agricultural land expansion adjacent to Tarangire National Park between 1988-2001, wildebeest populations dropped by 88%, hartebeest by 90% and gemsbok by 95%. Just to give a better picture in South Africa 12% of the land space is devoted to agricultural uses compared to the 3% which makes up natural reserves. 

Fencing of game reserves has had the greatest impact on migratory animals. The picture above shows a map of reserves in South Africa, the green sections are those which are fenced off. There are many good reasons for reserves to put fences up, and too often it has been only because of these fences that some species have been saved from complete extinction. However there are many areas where fences between reserves could safely be removed but the human obsession with money has meant that this is unlikely to happen any time soon.

The impact of these fences in some cases has been appalling. For instance between Botswana and Namibia in the 1960s after a series of droughts the numbers of wildebeest in fenced areas decline from 380,000 individuals to around 20,00. During the same period zebra disappeared from the Northern Kalahari as fencing blocked their access to water. This was repeated in the 1980s in the Southern Kalahari when more than 80,000 wildebeest and 10,000 hartebeest perished because fences cut off their access to water during severe droughts. Springbok, which are naturally migratory animals, no longer migrate at all because of fencing. 

In the Serengeti/Masai Mara the great migration route changes from year to year. Although the fence lines are currently suited to how the wildebeest and zebra move it is unclear whether this will still be suitable in ten, twenty or fifty years from now. In areas where reserves are surrounded by farms and settlements there may be nothing that conservationists can do to fix this situation; the land is already damaged and will take many years to recover (if it were ever handed back to nature). This could mean that in years to come animals will no longer migrate, and in some areas this could cause extinction of the local species.   

What is being done to help?

One way of allowing animals to exist as naturally as possible without preventing human progression is to create Wildlife Corridors which connect wildlife populations that have been separated by human activities such as roads, towns and buildings. This picture shows the first elephant corridor to be made in East Africa in 2011 which has reinstated an old migration route and allowed separated populations of elephants to re-join with one another. By creating wildlife corridors across Africa reserves that were once separated from one another because of major roads may be able to re-join and allow animals to move over a larger area.

Transfrontier National Parks are a relatively new idea which understands that animals do not understand country borders and is set to remove human barriers between National Parks so that animals can roam further. The Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park, for example, is set to be 35,000km2 (to put in perspective Wales is 20,780km2). The plan is to remove fences between Limpopo National Park, Kruger National Park, Gonarezhou National Park, Manjini Pan Sanctuary and Malipati Safari; it will link across Mozambique, South Africa and Zimbabwe. There are currently new plans to increase the park to 99,800km2. I think where this is feasible reserves should be linked allowing animals to migrate as they need to.   

But is all this progression really worth while when government's just turn around and make decisions such as building major highways through such fundamentally important areas such as the Serengeti? I understand that progression must happen, and we as Westerners have no right to demand others don't damage their wildlife, since we have so much damaged our own. But there are other options, the ability to build around the park...  yet again the human race won't take the harder route, all at the cost of our wild world. And in 100 years time, when all we have is concrete and glass, people will turn around and say "What have we done?".

This post was based on a presentation I did during my Field Guide Course. 

I know this is a long post, and if you have read it thank you so much! I hope you have found it interesting and will continue to check out my blogs. I promise not all will be so long!