Explore the vast range of titles available.

Understanding and identifying drivers of local population declines are important in mitigating future risks and optimising conservation efforts. The Knysna elephants have, after being afforded protection since the early 1900s, declined to near extinction today. We propose three hypotheses as to why the Knysna elephant population declined. The refugee hypothesis suggests that anthropogenic activities forced the elephants to take refuge in the forest and that the low-quality food acted as the primary driver of decline. The illegal killing hypothesis suggests that the elephants adapted to the forest and its immediate fynbos habitat, with the decline being a consequence of illegal kills. The stochastic founder population hypothesis postulates that the population size and structure left it vulnerable to demographic stochasticity. We critically reviewed available evidence for these hypotheses and found that, although the historical elephant range decline most likely resulted through the refugee hypothesis, the weak demographic and life-history information limits elimination of either of the other hypotheses. We touch on the implications for decision-makers and draw attention to information requirements. Significance: • We highlight the knowledge and management challenges which exist for small, threatened populations of which long-term demographic data are sparse. • We provide the first unbiased evaluation of multiple drivers that may have caused the decline of the Knysna elephants.

Ever since the Swedish botanist Anders Sparrman1 commented in 1786 on the state of overgrazing brought about by sedentary trekboer pastoralists in the southwestern Cape, the optimal use of rangelands in South Africa has been the subject of debate. Two centuries later, Hoffman and Ashwell2 painted a bleak picture of our stewardship of this precious resource. These rangelands are not merely a source of fibre and food production, but are also key for biodiversity conservation and rural livelihoods. The prospects of global change, and its impacts on these rangelands, are now being explored in the ongoing debate about the sustainable use of rangelands (e.g. Gillson et al.3). Part of this discussion has to be on how we can develop new ways of using these rangelands that are both sustainable and of value to society. It is fitting that, in going the full circle of the Swedish connection, a recent workshop was held under the auspices of the 2019 South Africa–Sweden University Forum’s (SASUF) Research and Innovation Week that focused on innovative and out-of-the-box ideas around future rangelands.

The Government Gazette No. 42464 dated 17 May 20191 amended Table 7 of the Animal Improvement Act (Act no. 62 of 1998), which lists breeds of animals, to include at least 32 new wild animal species, including 24 indigenous mammals. The list includes threatened and rare species such as cheetah, white and black rhinoceros, and suni. Some alien species such as lechwe, various deer species and rabbits are also included. The cornerstone of the original Act is ‘To provide for the breeding, identification and utilisation of genetically superior animals to improve the production and performance of animals in the interest of the Republic; and to provide for matters connected therewith.’

After at least two millennia of human-wildlife conflict over the predation of livestock in South Africa, the recently completed scientific assessment on livestock predation (PredSA) brings the power of a formal scientific assessment to focus on the topic. PredSA represents a global first in terms of applying this increasingly recognised approach to informing policy to the issue of livestock predation at a national level. Here we explore the process behind the assessment, its structure and policy relevance, and some lessons learnt and suggest some avenues for the way forward. Scientific assessments are a relatively recent societal tool. Operating at the science-policy interface, they serve to collate and interrogate transdisciplinary information relating to a complex problem and, through consensus, evaluate the relevance of the findings to policy development. The Minister of Environmental Affairs and the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries formally endorsed PredSA at its launch in 2016.

Measuring and comparing activity patterns provide key insights into the behavioral trade‐offs that result in animal activity and their extrinsic and intrinsic drivers. Camera traps are a recently emerged source of data for sampling animal activity used to estimate activity patterns. However, nearly 70% of studies using such data to estimate activity patterns apply a time‐to‐independence data filter to discard appreciable periods of sampling effort. This treatment of activity as a discrete event emerged from the use of camera trap data to estimate animal abundances, but does not reflect the continuous nature of behavior, and may bias resulting estimates of activity patterns. We used a large, freely available camera trap dataset to test the effects of time to independence on the estimated activity of eight medium‐ to large‐sized African mammals. We show that discarding data through the use of time‐to‐independence filters causes substantial losses in sample sizes and differences in the estimated activity of species. Activity patterns estimated for herbivore species were more affected by the application of time‐to‐independence data filters than carnivores, this extending to estimates of potential interactions (activity overlap) between herbivore species. We hypothesize that this pattern could reflect the typically more abundant, social, and patch‐specific foraging patterns of herbivores and suggest that this effect may bias estimates of predator–prey interactions. Activity estimates of rare species, with less data available, may be particularly vulnerable to loss of data through the application of time‐to‐independence data filters. We conclude that the application of time‐to‐independence data filters in camera trap‐based estimates of activity patterns is not valid and should not be used. A rapidly growing body of literature is using data from camera traps to describe and compare activity patterns in animals, but most such studies arbitrarily apply an inappropriate data filter of removing activity records for a time after each sample used, the so‐called time to independence. Using data for eight African large mammals, we show that this approach is not conceptually valid and leads to biases in the estimated activity patterns and that tests for interactions (overlap) using such estimates may not be useful.

Despite extensive evidence that African buffalo Syncerus caffer are grazers, De Graaff et al. using rumen content analysis of animals that had starved to death proposed that buffalo in grass-limited Eastern Cape thicket should be considered browsers. Although these anomalous findings were initially accepted, but later challenged, the browse-dominated diet continues to be used as a foundation for hypotheses on the diet of healthy animals. Consequently, the debate around buffalo as browsers or grazers in thicket has not yet been settled. We describe the diet of buffalo in the Addo Elephant National Park and include data from other published work from the region to test the importance of grass in buffalo diet. We show that the diet is dominated by grasses, even in grass-limited thicket, and that browse species are seldom dominant foods. Thus, there is no empirical evidence to corroborate the notion that buffalo switch their diet to browse when grass availability is low. In an attempt to advance our understanding of buffalo foraging in thicket, we reiterate that De Graaff’s work is not a valid measure of buffalo diet in succulent thicket and that additional testing of the browser–grazer hypothesis is not needed. Conservation implications: Our results confirm that buffalo are grazers, rather than browsers, in grass-limited Eastern Cape thicket. Thus, additional testing of the browser–grazer hypothesis for buffalo in the region is not needed.

1. There is a growing theoretical basis for the role of predation risk as a driver of trophic interactions, conceptualized as the 'ecology of fear'. However, current ungulate management ignores the role of nonlethal risk effects of predation. 2. We introduce the concept of 'hunting for fear' as an extension of the more classical 'hunting to kill' that is typically used in large herbivore management. Hunting for fear aims to induce a behavioural response in ungulates, for example, as a way of diverting them from areas where their impact is undesired. 3. Synthesis and applications. Hunting for fear asks for novel, potentially controversial, ways of hunting to induce strong enough risk effects, including more hunting on foot and with dogs, extended hunting seasons (ideally year-round) and increased hunting of calves. Hunting for fear may offer novel opportunities to help manage the growing human–wildlife conflicts that we experience globally.

Animals and humans regularly make trade-offs between competing objectives. In Addo Elephant National Park (AENP), elephants (Loxodonta africana) trade off selection of resources, while managers balance tourist desires with conservation of elephants and rare plants. Elephant resource selection has been examined in seasonal savannas, but is understudied in aseasonal systems like AENP. Understanding elephant selection may suggest ways to minimise management trade-offs. We evaluated how elephants select vegetation productivity, distance to water, slope and terrain ruggedness across time in AENP and used this information to suggest management strategies that balance the needs of tourists and biodiversity. Resource selection functions with time-interacted covariates were developed for female elephants, using three data sets of daily movement to capture circadian and annual patterns of resource use. Results were predicted in areas of AENP currently unavailable to elephants to explore potential effects of future elephant access. Elephants displayed dynamic resource selection at daily and annual scales to meet competing requirements for resources. In summer, selection patterns generally conformed to those seen in savannas, but these relationships became weaker or reversed in winter. At daily scales, resource selection in the morning differed from that of midday and afternoon, likely reflecting trade-offs between acquiring sufficient forage and water. Dynamic selection strategies exist even in an aseasonal system, with both daily and annual patterns. This reinforces the importance of considering changing resource availability and trade-offs in studies of animal selection.Conservation implications: Guiding tourism based on knowledge of elephant habitat selection may improve viewing success without requiring increased elephant numbers. If AENP managers expand elephant habitat to reduce density, our model predicts where elephant use may concentrate and where botanical reserves may be needed to protect rare plants from elephant impacts.

Comparisons of recent estimations of home range sizes for the critically endangered black rhinoceros in Hluhluwe-iMfolozi Park (HiP), South Africa, with historical estimates led reports of a substantial (54%) increase, attributed to over-stocking and habitat deterioration that has far-reaching implications for rhino conservation. Other reports, however, suggest the increase is more likely an artefact caused by applying various home range estimators to non-standardised datasets. We collected 1939 locations of 25 black rhino over six years (2004-2009) to estimate annual home ranges and evaluate the hypothesis that they have increased in size. A minimum of 30 and 25 locations were required for accurate 95% MCP estimation of home range of adult rhinos, during the dry and wet seasons respectively. Forty and 55 locations were required for adult female and male annual MCP home ranges, respectively, and 30 locations were necessary for estimating 90% bivariate kernel home ranges accurately. Average annual 95% bivariate kernel home ranges were 20.4 ± 1.2 km(2), 53 ± 1.9% larger than 95% MCP ranges (9.8 km(2) ± 0.9). When home range techniques used during the late-1960s in HiP were applied to our dataset, estimates were similar, indicating that ranges have not changed substantially in 50 years. Inaccurate, non-standardised, home range estimates and their comparison have the potential to mislead black rhino population management. We recommend that more care be taken to collect adequate numbers of rhino locations within standardized time periods (i.e., season or year) and that the comparison of home ranges estimated using dissimilar procedures be avoided. Home range studies of black rhino have been data deficient and procedurally inconsistent. Standardisation of methods is required.

SIGNIFICANCE : The current initiative to export African cheetahs to India has a limited scientific basis, placing the Asian subspecies and the translocated animals at risk. There is no evidence that this will benefit African cheetah conservation. We call for a globally coordinated approach to cheetah conservation, based on sound science.