No hunting permit for Kebbel the lion, says Namibian minister

Amidst international and local pressure, Namibian Minister of the Environment and Tourism (MET) Pohamba Shifeta has stated to the Republikein newspaper that he has not issued a permit to trophy hunt Kebbel, the last remaining adult lion in the Sesfontein Conservancy in Namibia.

Kebbel ('XPL81') ©Inki Mandt

Kebbel (‘XPL81’) ©Inki Mandt

He also stated that even if a permit was issued, he would withdraw it. This, despite the ‘problem animal’ permit being confirmed last week by Sesfontein officials because Kebbel the lion supposedly killed two donkeys in June. Read our post from last week about the background to the situation.

British anti-hunting activist group Spots & Stripes yesterday delivered a petition to the Namibian Embassy in London, requesting that Kebbel the lion not be hunted. The petition was signed by more than 8,000 people. It is believed that this, and other pressure, convinced the minister to change his mind.

Reacting to the minister’s decision, the Namibia Professional Hunting Association (NAPHA) President Danene van der Westhuysen released a stinging rebuke of the decision on Facebook, labeling the public ‘ill-informed’, ‘factually incorrect’ and referring to what she terms ‘a general ignorance of landscape ecology’. In a rather bizarre finale to her diatribe she suggested ‘In this case, please blame the donkey’.

Africa Geographic Editorial

We're the Africa Geographic editorial team – a diverse set of editors, designers and social media natives, all united by our passion for this addictive continent.

  • There is quite a bit to say about this, firstly this is in my opinion the right decision because research requested by MET proved that adult male lions older than 4yrs of age should not be hunted. However to correct 2 incorrect facts, 1) Kebbel is not the only or last remaining adult male in that whole area, he is rather one of the few remaining dominant breeding males. 2) Most of us are actually “ill-informed”, including NAPHA, the ARA movement, the pro-hunting and the anti-hunting lobby, because aside from one report available from EIS, very little of the research outcomes have been released for public viewing by MET, perhaps this would go a long way towards becoming “informed”.

    • Gail Potgieter

      Very good points, Charlie!

      • Gail from what I have heard there have been 2 adverts for an trophy adult black maned lion in that general area! Both included a bait fee, the first was for the Torra conservancy hunting concession and the second was for the Sesfontein Conservancy, both have since been withdrawn, I have heard this does not mean that another possibly younger lion will not be legally hunted…..only not a black maned adult lion over the age of 4yrs! Unfortunately, it seems Kebbel moves in and out of one of conflict zones, (as discussed in the HWC report for the North West). It also seems he has a fondness for donkeys! Are donkeys also suitable for predator proof kraaling? There has been feedback of aggrieved communal livestock farmers tracking him down, keen on a revenge killing! Fortunately, to date this has been thwarted by interventions. While this may be a reprieve for Kebbel I fear his days are numbered,he may not die in a legal hunt, but the livestock farmers will continue to seek retribution to be rid of a problem lion and earn the income at the same time? Sadly, it is just a matter of time before we hearhe has been poisoned, or killed as a result of HWC..that is the brutal truth….Therefore in my humble opinion the purpose here, is to keep him alive as long as possible, data shows his home territory crosses 5 different female headed prides…so he can service them and pass on his valuable DNA for future cubs. In the meanwhile live trophies as you suggest, i.e. buying the lion to keep them alive, in a way that the conservancy still earns the BIG money is a good solution pending of course mitigation strategies working that reduce the lion predator livestock conflict!

        • Gail Potgieter

          Yes, it seems that whenever a “problem animal” is declared, the hunters label the biggest male around as the “problem”. As far as I know, the hunters pay less for the “job” of getting rid of a “problem” than they would for hunting a trophy. It works out nicely for the hunters, and short-changes the community. They want fewer lions, I get that, but I think we need to find a way to make a lion like Kebbel more valuable to the community than 50 donkeys. So if they’re going to pick a lion to “get rid of”, they don’t select pride males, and they don’t allow hunters to go after them, either. As you say, just preventing this hunt from going ahead is unlikely to save Kebbel, as the communities may simply kill him themselves. Some money needed to change hands for this lion, and it hasn’t, so Kebbel remains a low-value nuisance in the eyes of the only people who really determine his fate.

          • Exactly this is a typical case of having won the battle but still losing the war……it is a stop-gap short term victory and not a long term workable solution. I agree a huge amount needs to be done to effectively mitigate HWC. Changing the value of the lion to those who really determine its fate is a good mitigation with potential

          • Gail Potgieter

            Oh, and to answer your question about kraaling donkeys. Of all the livestock out there, donkeys are the least valued. When I was building kraals, the farmers were mostly interested in using them for their small stock, as they kraal them every night anyway (i.e. no extra effort required). Only in areas with high human-lion conflict was there interest for kraaling cattle, as they are highly valuable, and thus worth the extra effort of kraaling (to some farmers, at least). When it came to donkeys, the idea of rounding them up and kraaling them at night was laughed off. Why would you spend all that effort to kraal donkeys? They’re just donkeys, after all! That makes this situation, where a valuable pride male lion is targeted for killing “just donkeys”, particularly sad. Farmers in the area are generally unwilling to take extra steps to protect their donkeys – it is much easier to shoot the donkey-killing lion. If a lion’s life is worth less in the eyes of the community than those of their least-valued livestock, then there is something wrong with the way these lions are valued.

          • So they are really just wanting to get rid of the lion and old excuse will do…mind lets be honest is a lion pitched up in commercial livestock farming areas anywhere in the world it would be exterminated immediately! Perhaps the messages here are getting mixed up, I know when we did the Integrated Regional Land Use Plans in Kavango and Zambezi there were strong forthright “right to land” calls for small scale commercial farms, (mainly livestock). However whether the 535 SSCF in the Kavango Regions utilizing 138,000 hectares of land will be economically viable and contribute anything to the remaining 199465 communal residents now squashed into much less land..well is unlikely! There has been a call over the years for small scale livestock farms between Western Etosha and the 150mm Rainfall isohyet..along with a continuous interest in iron ore mining and gemstone mining! Perhaps if they rid the area of competing wildlife, then they can rezone that area which will of course exclude the Ovahimba and other local residents who should be given first consideration. I have being saying for years and I repeat this now, it is critical that the conservancies in this area DO NOT FAIL……..if and when the redline vet fence is removed…they will be the only defense remaining. Had it not been for Khaudum National Park, Mahangu Game Reserve and the Conservancies in the Kavango Regions trust ALL the land would have gone to SSCF!

          • typing a bit fast forgive the typos but you get my drift

          • Gail Potgieter

            Indeed, Charlie. I think what you have touched on here is a much more serious threat to wildlife conservation (not limited to lions) than most people realise. Land use is absolutely crucial. Habitat loss, poaching, and human-wildlife conflict are the three main threats to wildlife conservation, with poorly regulated trophy hunting coming a distant fourth place. It would be a very bad move to convert the Kunene region into small scale commercial farms. With the rainfall they have there, anything on a small scale would be doomed to fail. The Kavango region at least has enough rainfall to do something, but the Kunene is simply not suitable for farming on anything less than thousands of hectares. Dividing up the land also tends to benefit the wealthy, influential people, and overrun the poor and marginalised.

            As it pertains to the lion hunting debate, this is the context that very few people see. If conservancies are vilified on the international stage because they battle to coexist with lions and elephants (although none of those vilifying them would want to be in their shoes for a moment), then that is a major threat. Conservancies need all the support and practical, constructive, help they can get. Simply condemning them for not being as tolerant as the Western world (in their cushy predator-free environment) would like them to be is not helpful.

          • Exactly

          • Denine Mishoe

            Gail, I agree with all you’re saying except for one. Yes, I live in the Western World – the Great Northwest of America and believe me, we have wildlife and predators (Grizzly Bears, Black Bears, Cougars, Bobcats, Wolves, Coyotes, etc) and we fight tooth and nail with our Villianous US Wildlife Services that seeks to murder them because our ranchers cry wolf – we give them HELL! We learn to co-exist with wildlife; especially those of us that choose to build our homes farther from the cities. Those that don’t like the risk, well they move into the cities.
            So my question is… why can’t these villagers do the same? Especially for the younger set, herding cattle is not the only livelihood and the cities offer far more opportunities. PERHAPS they need to hear about these options… showing the younger set in these villages these other opportunities (pamphlets, brochures of colleges, trade colleges, etc) could be a small, but possible benefit to slow down the out-reaching growth of villages.
            Another thought and I hope I’m not stepping on toes, but BIRTH CONTROL. These people don’t currently have enough places to live and yet they continue to have children without regard for that.

          • Gail Potgieter

            When there is no longer human-wolf conflict in the States, then Americans are welcome to come to Africa and tell us how you did it. You say you live with predators, but do you farm livestock? It is easy to live in the heart of the African bush if one has enough money to not need to live off the land, and the same can be said for the rural parts of the States.

            Namibia has a huge unemployment problem – last time I checked, the unemployment within their capital city (Windhoek) was around 40%. The other major towns have a similar problem. There is a general urbanisation trend, but most who decide to move to the city land up in dire poverty. Not exactly “great opportunities” one would want to ‘educate’ them about (they are not quite as stupid and uneducated as you imply). Those that stay in the rural areas don’t have much, but at least they have some livestock, and can maintain a more traditional lifestyle.

            As for birth control – there are about 2.4 million Namibians, it is the second least densely populated country in the world. Compare that to about 320 million Americans (maybe birth control should start at home?). This particular part of Namibia is semi-desert, so it is even less densely populated than the rest of the country. With the general urbanisation trend, I would guess that the human population out there is either stable or declining. Finally, how many people do you know who, before they start a family, sit down and say “what about the poor wolves/lions/cougars?”- even conservationists have families. To suggest that rural Africans should not be allowed to have children because the Western world loves lions is a colonial attitude that would make even an apartheid-era Afrikaner blush.

          • Denine Mishoe

            Wow! Gail, you’ve really seemed to take what I said personally and have gone off the deep end with your last comments. First of all, the people of Namibia, both city and rural residents, could learn a hell of a lot from America when it comes to all matters (livelihood, human/wildlife conflict and even family lifestyles). Like it or not… we’re not one of the top nations for nothing.

            You bring up the family planning method, oh my dear, you better believe people sit down and determine their financial status vs. having children vs. buying homes, etc. in this country and there are half a dozen ways to do it (have many or have none) and all are proven to work! As a rule of thumb, I don’t normally compare the USA with other countries; however, your comparison of the population of Namibia vs. The United States is quite humorous and begs a response. America is able to financial support its population and indeed, also provides ‘financial/food aid’ to several other countries as well (Africa definitely being one of them)! On the other hand, Namibia cannot say the same and why I first said the lack of population control should be a HUGE CONCERN. Your apparent shock at such a recommendation says quite a lot about the attitude and mentality of the people of Africa – almost as if they’re unwilling to looks at all options to better themselves and their lives. The African Continent has become such buddies and looks to welcome all things from CHINA, they would be the PERFECT EXAMPLE to answer your question about family planning since the Chinese are allowed one child per family unit and there are even incentives if they DECIDE to have none… so YES, to answer your question, responsible people, communities and nations, DO plan into the future and that does include population control.

            Again, I’ve not seen neither you nor Charlie Paxton address the “consequences” that should be in place with regard to your rural population and commercial ranchers alike. You coddle them and that is one of your biggest problems and it CLEARLY is NOT WORKING in any positive fashion. People that don’t have structure and/or consequences to their actions will run amuck and it becomes a recipe for disaster as can be proven all over the African Continent. You ask if we live with predators and livestock… of course, especially here in the Great Northwest. We have plenty of farmers and ranchers and there are some wildlife/livestock conflict; however, there are rules and regulations in place and both the ranchers/famers as well as the animal activists BOTH know the rules, regulations and the consequences. There is also government support for our ‘welfare ranchers’ when they lose a couple cows or sheep, etc. Again, another chapter that Namibia could definitely read and learn from the USA.

            Your comment about rural villagers “… not quite as stupid and uneducated as you imply.” I NEVER made such a comment or even implied they were stupid… but I would say SPOILED and CODDLED way too much. Even our youth, here in America, need to be “educated” about what awaits them in the next decade, the next city or next state so they can weigh their options as they become young adults…. good and/or bad… stay at home or go see and challenge the unknown. You completely took what I said out of context and threw in biased feelings with your response.

            In one of your replies you stated that these rural villagers have the right to “use” the wildlife as “resources” as they see fit. This is most definitely a one-sided recipe for disaster from people that don’t care about the wildlife, but let’s look at this logically. I agree, they should be able to catch and kill what they need to feed their families and village, i.e. a resource, but please explain to me how poisoning an animal and/or murdering and burying it is considered using it as a resource? They certainly can’t eat meat that has been poisoned and I’ve heard that lion meat isn’t even very tasty… or certainly not the first choice as sustenance. Sounds just like vindictive murder to me from people that have no rules and regulations, no structure, no consequences and are coddled way too much. As far as the Western World loving the lions… every person on this planet can trace their heritage/roots to Africa and so, really… the wildlife in Africa are truly humanity’s heritage and yes, the world populations get terribly upset when they’re being murdered by the current inhabitants of Africa just because it’s the easiest solution and/or most profitable. It’s been going on for so many years now, without respite and is actually getting worse to the point that some of these animals are almost extinct… and still the murdering doesn’t stop. It’s also a part of why many nations provide ‘AID’ to Africa… for whatever good it does.

            Many environmentalist groups set up and provide the LED Lights free of charge and are willing to work with a community to make them successful, so no out-of-pocket costs – unless again people are not willing to do the work and prefer to just murder instead.

          • Gail Potgieter

            I invite you to come and live in rural Namibia, without any financial savings, or a formal job. I’m sure the community would even give you a few cows and goats for the sake of the experiment. Having lived where they live, and walked a few miles in their shoes (or hitch-hiked a few hundred miles to the nearest town), for at least five years, I would like to ask you if you feel at all ‘coddled’ or ‘spoiled’. I am passionate about this, because I have lived out there, and have observed first-hand how they live and the daily challenges they face. I love Namibia and have deep respect for the rural Namibians who eke out a living in this harsh environment.

          • Denine Mishoe

            That is so frustrating. Again, I submit, just as there are benefits to these villagers, there should also be penalities. Not protecting the donkeys, not valuable enough… fine… but then don’t complain or retaliate when they go missed. They should not have it both ways! But if the villagers know that no one will stop them, why would they listen?

            I know this is the LEAST desirable method, but has anyone talked about fencing/bricking certain areas that are protected habitat yet villages sit on the edges and cause conflict? In an effort to deter the lion from the straight path to the village. Has it been considered to sedate Kebbel and remove him to one of the other 5 areas he’s known to roam? Especially since there are those looking to murder him! Preferably to the farrest area from those intent on his distruction at the moment? Is he radio-collared so that he can be tracked and appropriate action taken when he comes close to any villages?

            Also, why are villages even allowed to set up on the edges of protected habitat? Seems like common sense that there should be buffer zones at the very least. So, to the on looker, it’s almost as if the villagers knew the risks and didn’t care – they seem to know they can do whatever they want to, including murdering the wildlife, without penality. In some areas of Africa it has been documented that villagers are actually letting their livestock graze inside protected habitat and that is where the predators get them… is this an issue here? I admire all the work being done to try and protect the wildlife, but I haven’t read much at all in the way of villagers and commerical ranchers really doing their part to protect wildlife – again, no reprecusions, so why should they care?

            I understand what you said earlier about the livelihood of these village & commerical ranchers, but there just doesn’t seem to be any reprecusions if they ignore common sense. So, until they know their actions have consequences, why would they stop the poisoning and hunting of lions? Who is there to tell them no, it’s not acceptable. At what point do people stop coddling them and set the rules – good and bad?

          • Gail Potgieter

            This area – Sesfontein Conservancy – is not a formally protected area. A communal conservancy in Namibia is an area which a local community has designated as a place where they live, and its surrounds. The point of a conservancy was to allow rural people to benefit from wildlife in the same way that commercial farmers do on private land. It basically means that the wildlife within the conservancy boundaries belong to the people living there, and they can use that wildlife as a resource.

            Originally (before there was much tourism up there), conservancies made all their money from hunting wildlife. The income from regulated hunting provided enough incentive for the community to stop poaching, which led to an increase in the populations of game. The local people mainly wanted antelope species to increase, so they could use them as a “second cattle” – i.e. another natural resource. The increase in lions was an unintended consequence of their success. Now they have to find ways of living with lions, and they are not all that keen on doing so.

            Before the predator populations increased, they had little need for protecting their donkeys and cattle, so they did not pay anyone to look after them. Considering how little cash these farmers have, not having to pay a herder is a big saving. Now they need to start investing in livestock protection, and if they don’t, then they lose a lot of livestock. Either way, they bear the costs of living with lions.

            With that background, I hope you understand that the only way to deal with human-lion conflict in this particular area is to work with the community, not against them. If they decide that lions cost them more than their perceived worth (i.e. the value individual farmers attach to lions), then the lions in that area are in trouble. History has shown (specifically the history of this region, before conservancies) that if the community sees no value to the wildlife they live with, then there will be no wildlife – irrespective of how many laws you make, or how rigorously you try to enforce them.

    • Kaz Cobb

      Actually Kebbel is the only male. There was one other that was poisoned. More has to be done about HWC. And before anyone moans, it was my petition, I hand delivered it and am in daily contact with people on the ground.

      • Entirely agree that more, much more needs to be done to reduce HWC. The most recent data on record shows that he is not the only male lion mature enough to mate in the area….Up until recently though he was one of 2 dominant breeding males in this area Xpl 81 (Kebbel) and Xpl 87…when was Xpl 87 poisoned?

      • Lionlivesmatter

        Great job on the petition ! The vanishing kings of Namibia is well documented. whether he was the last one or not does not matter. There are so few lions left in the world, all hunting of lions must stop! None of the money is used for conservation and there is nothing to be gained by killing lions except using its head as a trophy in some ruthless bastards man cave.

    • Denine Mishoe

      You bring up the point, ‘…very little of the research outcomes have been released for public viewing…’ – BUT STILL, those in power continue to issue permits to hunt/murder for trophies, supposed ‘problem wildlife’ without having facts to make those INFORMED decisions. Which begs the question, “Who the Hell is running that place? The baboons? Kindergarten educated administrative individuals?”

      • Hi Denine, In a perfect world where there are no grey areas what you say is true! While I am not MET nor in possession of the research, data and reports, I have been stomping around conservation and tourism in Namibia for the last 36yrs and I have worked with poverty reduction in rural communal areas in Namibia for 24yrs, so I have a 360 view on all points of reference. I am on the side of wildlife, however, wining a battle does not mean you have one the war, it also requires strategy and understanding of all the complexities involved to find the middle road that win-win. Ask yourself this question, if your livelihood depended on farming livestock, would you tolerate a lion, or any predator killing your livestock? On commercial livestock farms there are no lions, as soon as one ventures into these areas throughout africa, they are destroyed! MET who is responsible for issuing permits does have all the data and information, however they have to take into consideration the available wildlife habitat in which these lions range, the benefit distribution and sources of income generation that enables communal wildlife conservancies to operate, in which local residents live with the wildlife they have utilisation rights over, please note these are legislated in state law rights of utilisation! The where, who, what and how the income is generated and what happens when large carnivores move into communal livestock areas as well as when these communal farmers with their livestock move into core wildlife areas particularly during periods of prolonged drought! These are highlight as conflict areas, where the cross over and threats most commonly occur in the Human Wildlife Conflict Report for the North West, which is a comprehensive document with research outcomes published available if you do a google search!……It is well worth reading!

        • Denine Mishoe

          Thank you for responding and what you have to say does give food for thought. I submit the following…

          1) Have LED Systems been tried with village and commerical ranchers/farmers in this area? They have proven to be an excellent deterant of lions. Please read these 2 articles:
          There are environmentalist groups in Africa that install and monitor these systems all to help the villagers protect their cows while not killing the wildlife.

          2) Again, I think it quite a simple addition to the rules of hunting lions to require said hunters to produce the lion they killed to the proper authorities (those that issued the permit?) for proper documentation so that the killing of the wrong lions and the reproduction-age lions (male and female) can better be controlled.

          I don’t know if your villagers also produce local trinkets (necklaces, bracelets, rings, ear rings, etc) and such for sale to the tourists (could be another source of income if not currently being done), but without wildlife (especially lions which EVERYONE wants to see) the tourists will stop coming to their area and that will hurt their economy too.

          Too many times I read over and over where commerical and village ranchers don’t try any deterents and just poison and/or kill the lions without doing their part to better protect their livestock. How is this fair to the wildlife in which the humans are the intruders?

          Notice I don’t suggest anything at the government level because the world’s population all know just how corrupt the entire African Continent is on that score. However, is there any type of program in place to compensate the rancher (in the form of another cow or funds to purchase another at fair market value), if all deterents were honestly used and they still lost a cow? Perhaps penalties imposed on those commerical/village ranchers that don’t use non-lethal methods first, before committing the murder.

          • Agree with everything you say here,

            1) in the conflict areas where kraaling lights etc have been successfully used, which of course includes a commitment and buy in from the villagers the incidents of livestock kills is dramatically reduced. However the kraals need to be correctly done and also the villagers need to wholeheartedly participate. This particular lion known as Kebbel apparently had a fondness for donkeys as as Gail pointed out there was a reluctance to kraal the donkeys.

            2) there is a lot of craft and gemstone selling in these areas generally speaking, I did a craft livelihoods income survey there in 2009, the Ova-himba even charge tourists when they pose for photos!

            3) Poisoning, trapping, wounding, snaring, gin-trapping and then pouring diesel over the animal to burn them alive are some of the inhumane and deplorable methods communal and commercial livestock farmers use, it goes with a mentality of revenge or gaining retribution the killing of livestock, quite often the wrong lion, crocodile, hippo, leopard, wilddog, hyeana, jackal, caracal, cheetah or whatever it it is that they are killing is not even the culprit it just so happens to be in visible at that time.

            4) MET control and management with permit issuing and how it is done is critically important, unfortunately animals are buried, collars are burnt, evidence is hidden and blame is pushed onto everyone and anyone else.

            5) I ask anyone who does not really get HWC and who has fixed dogged opinions, that does not look towards innovative workable solutions this one question…….have you ever or would you kill a venomous snake if it was in your house or threatening your family? The snake was there before your house was built and you moved in. It is very easy to allocate blame without looking at the alien plants in our own gardens and what we have displaced by occupying that space, this is only made worse if the species you have displaced impact your livelihood. HWC is far more complex than most people understand

            6) Lastly governments are elected by the people, including the communal livestock farmers, the % of wildlife conservation proactive people is very small compared to everyone else!

          • Denine Mishoe

            Hello Charlie Paxton,

            Again, can I ask about the availability of darting Kebbel and relocating him to one of the other 5 areas you stated he’s known to frequent? Perhaps a location to where other lioness’ are at as an incentive for him to stay there. I know this is only a temporary solution but it would preserve the immediate danger of his death, but it would allow for tempers to calm down and for possible other incentives and ideas to be put in place (I’ve shared a few ideas with you below). I’m quite sure you’re aware of most, but have any of them been contacted to help with this immediate concern – i.e. Kebbel’s life?


            Here are a few website/companies that provide free LED Lights/Kraaling systems (or practically free or with other type of incentives) for rural areas across South Africa. My hope is that you’re able to investigate and share pertinent information with those in power in Namibia to get such things to the HWC areas and help convince them to participate fully. There are also new NON-PROFIT’s that are springing up in South Africa dedicated to the prevention of poaching and tracking down violators. Might be an idea to ask one of them to become involved too.


            Government elected officials… I’ve read a lot of these elections are very corrupt, but I’m unsure at the moment if Namibia is one of them (do you know?). Second, why aren’t more officials motivated to saving wildlife? Why aren’t there more of them that believe conservation of wildlife can be very good for the economy? To know that once the Big 5 are gone, so is the tourism. Many people across the world are already calling on their governments to pull all financial aid and support to the whole African Continent. I only point this out because I come across posts like this so much and everyone knows that would be disastrous if government officials in other nations started to bow to public pressure.

            As far as your analogy regarding a snake in the house… we would remove and relocate it – not take the simplest of routes, which would be to chop off its head. I don’t understand why so many humans find it so hard to do good/the right thing, but find it so damn easy to do bad/evil.

          • Denine Mishoe

            Dear Charlie,

            Another amazing group of people dedicated to saving wildlife. It’s worth a read:

          • There are several NGOs, NPOs and volunteer organisations, as well as tourism and hunting operators all working with the communities and conservancies where the HWC occurs.

          • Hi Yes in all of these situations there is always room for improvement Denine! Darting and moving the lions out of a conflict zone is quite often used by MET with the desert Lion project. It has saved lions in the short term, but these males have such enormous home ranges and are often right back where there is easy prey within days or weeks of their relocation. Even the last Muskateer Tullimore was translocated like to the further-est end of his and his deceased brothers range, he slowly started trekking home when he was up and about to be killed some weeks later? Most of solutions are known, (I say not all, obviously, because there are always new potential ideas no-one has thought of yet). It is making the solution work that is challenging, getting cooperation, understanding and support from those most affected by lion livestock conflict. In Freehold commercial farming areas world wide large carnivores are simply not tolerated and destroyed straight away, yet we expect communal, marginalised livestock farmers to embrace carnivores and tolerate livestock losses even if they are not deriving any benefits from tourism?

  • Ellen Perkins

    Disgusting trophy hunters do not care about the law!

Africa Geographic