Namibia to Slaughter More Than 80 Elephants as Protesters Call It a ‘Colossal Disaster’

Plans by the Namibian government to kill 83 elephants and 640 other wild animals to feed the meat to people have sparked a fierce international row.

The British High Commissioner to the country is among those backing the idea, but ecologists are warning of a “colossal disaster” for Africa’s wildlife.

Hunters are being brought in to shoot the animals dead because of a severe drought across southern Africa, which has left many people struggling with food shortages, according to the Namibian Ministry of Environment. The mass cull is reportedly already underway, with elephants scheduled to be shot this week.

So far, 157 animals have been hunted by professional hunters and government-contracted companies, yielding over 56,800 kg of meat. Officials say nearly half of Namibia’s population is expected to face food insecurity in the coming months due to the drought. In addition to the 83 elephants, other animals targeted for culling in national parks and communal areas include 30 hippos, 60 buffalo, 50 impalas, 100 blue wildebeest, 300 zebras, and 100 eland antelopes.

Setting out regions where the elephants will be killed, the Ministry of Environment, Forestry and Tourism said: “This offtake will assist in reducing the negative impact of drought on the conservation of wild animals in both our national parks and communal areas.”

They also warned that human-wildlife conflicts are likely to increase without intervention.

Killing 723 animals including 83 Namibian elephants will help offset the effects of this year’s drought, the government says.

British High Commissioner Charles Moore wrote on social media: “Namibia is very responsible in its use of natural resources. None of the species involved are endangered, so it’s a good/rational solution to help 300k+ people in desperate need. Sheltering animals won’t help.” However, the status of Namibia’s elephants remains disputed. Adam Cruise, a wildlife investigative journalist in Cape Town, says elephant numbers in Namibia are declining, and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of conservation classifies African elephants as either endangered or critically endangered.

However, according to the World Population Review, the most recent estimate shows that Namibia’s elephant population exceeds 24,000, marking a 5.36% increase over the past year.

A report by African conservationists and scientists argues that the cull is politically motivated by upcoming national elections and lacks thorough environmental or food security assessments. The experts in the report are anonymous because they say they face considerable risks, with many receiving threats or facing actions such as “the revocation of permits, deportation, or worse.”

“This oppressive environment tragically results in media outlets often publishing government statements and strategies without the benefit of opposing views from the conservation community,” the report warns. The authors warn that the cull could damage tourism, and argue that since cattle do not graze in national parks, culling within these areas will not benefit livestock farmers outside the parks, contrary to the ministry’s claims.

“Elephants who witness culling, which typically targets entire families including young calves, is well established to exacerbate human-elephant conflict, rather than alleviate it. Elephants who escape are known to experience lasting trauma from witnessing family members being shot,” the report says.

The ministry said in its announcement: “This exercise is necessary and is in line with our constitutional mandate where our natural resources are used for the benefit of Namibian citizens. It demonstrates that wildlife conservation can be highly beneficial. Not only will Namibians receive meat for drought relief, but the ministry has, over the years, supplied meat for national, regional, and traditional events, in accordance with our policies and laws.”

“Game meat benefits are also extended to rural communities, particularly those in conservancies,” the ministry said.

Dr. Adam Cruise, speaking to the BBC, criticized this approach, saying, “It’s a bit insulting to toss a bit of game meat in the direction of starving, impoverished people, living on subsistence basis without any kind of meaningful developments in terms of employment opportunities and general social development.”

According to elephant biologist Dr. Keith Lindsay, the cull will provide only short-term relief and sets a dangerous precedent of reliance on wildlife to solve human problems.

An African elephant, surrounded by zebras, drinks from a water hole in Etosha National Park in Namibia.

He said: “This practice, if adopted and normalized, is very likely to create a continuing demand on vulnerable wildlife populations that would be unsustainable in the dwindling areas of natural habitat. “There is also the risk that it will give neighboring nations a strong case for doing so as well, triggering a colossal disaster.”

The UK-based organization Action for Elephants echoed these concerns, cautioning that “unscrupulous governments across Africa may implement similar schemes on an even larger scale.” They added, “If other African nations with declining wildlife populations see that no action is taken or protests raised, they may feel encouraged to do the same.”

Izak Smit, of the Desert Lions Human Relations Aid organization, voiced his concerns in a letter to the ministry, stating, “It’s become evident that the concept of human-wildlife conflict has become a convenient tool and scapegoat to justify exploitation and unethical agendas, including providing hunting trophies in cases where sustainability cannot be reasonably justified.” He also noted that communities in the west are facing greater poverty and hunger than those receiving the meat.