Zimbabwe is authorising the culling of 200 elephants as a response to food shortages driven by an unprecedented drought in the region – but is this really the best solution?
Undoing Zimbabwe’s Conservation Successes
In recent decades, Zimbabwe has made significant efforts to protect its elephant population, with the country’s elephant numbers growing to an estimated 100,000, putting Hwange National Park beyond its perceived capacity. This achievement reflects years of dedication to conservation and the long-term survival of a species that has faced widespread threats. However, by resorting to culling, Zimbabwe risks undoing these gains.
The decision to slaughter 200 elephants marks a sharp reversal of Zimbabwe’s previous conservation policies, which were focused on preservation, not elimination. The conservation of elephants has brought international recognition, funding, and tourism. Undermining these efforts with mass culling sends a troubling message, not only about the current crisis, but also about the country’s long-term commitment to protecting one of its most iconic species.
The Risk of Creating a Market for Bushmeat
One of the most concerning aspects of this cull is the potential creation of a legal market for elephant bushmeat. While Zimbabwe intends to use the meat to feed hungry communities, history shows that opening the door to bushmeat trade could have far-reaching consequences. In regions where poaching already thrives, legitimising the sale of elephant meat may lead to a surge in illegal hunting, making it more challenging to regulate what is legal and what isn’t. Once demand for bushmeat takes root, it could fuel ongoing, unsustainable hunting practices, not just for elephants but for other endangered species as well.
Using wildlife as a short-term solution to hunger risks destabilising fragile ecosystems further, with long-term damage that could outweigh the temporary benefits. In the fight against hunger, focusing on alternative, sustainable solutions seem far more responsible than relying on wildlife culling, which could erode conservation gains and worsen biodiversity loss. Investing in climate-resilient agriculture could help communities become less vulnerable to drought, while governments and NGOs work together to provide emergency food relief without damaging conservation efforts.
Devaluing Elephants’ Right to Exist
At the heart of this issue is a deeper moral question: do elephants have an inherent right to exist, free from human-driven threats? The narrative that elephants are “overpopulated” and thus expendable reduces these intelligent, social beings to mere numbers, overlooking their intrinsic value as sentient creatures and their essential role in ecosystems. Elephants are keystone species, and their survival directly impacts the health of other species and habitats.
By framing elephants as expendable resources, Zimbabwe’s government is devaluing their right to exist and diminishing their cultural and ecological importance. Elephants are more than just tools for alleviating human crises—they are beings with their own place in the world, and their survival should not be determined solely by human needs. Finding a solution that respects both the needs of humans and the rights of wildlife to thrive is critical in times of crisis.
Instead of culling, alternative measures include mitigating human-wildlife conflict through fencing and early warning systems, and relocating elephants to less populated areas or cross-border parks. Additionally, eco-tourism offers economic incentives for conservation, providing long-term benefits to both local communities and wildlife.
While it’s unlikely the Zimbabwean government will relent on this decision, we can only hope for a future where sustainable solutions are prioritised over culling.