Evolve or die: Time is running out for plants and animals
Conservationists focus on elephant and rhino poaching, but there’s a far greater threat to all species and it’s also caused by people
The temperature this summer regularly hovered above 40°C in Skukuza, the main camp in Kruger National Park, which is emerging from two years of drought. Hundreds of animals died in what park authorities say is an insight into the sorts of problems that will be brought on by climate change. That change could wipe out 60% of the species in the park.
Kruger is the jewel, and cash cow, of South Africa’s public conservation network but climate change-induced problems face all parks across Southern Africa. Balancing the need to look after species of plants and animals and people’s needs is going to be a tough task for the region.
For now the attention is on the wave of poaching threatening the survival of elephant and rhino across the continent. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (Cites) estimates that an elephant is killed every 15 minutes — more than 100 000 in the past decade. Rhino have been wiped out in 22 of the 33 range states where they used to thrive.
With about 9 000 white rhino in Kruger, the park holds the fate of 40% of the species in its hands. More than 800 were killed in the park last year, in a conflict that is becoming increasingly militarised. Poachers work overtime to get more spending money over the festive season, according to the anti-poaching crews faced with the onslaught.
Kruger is using every method it can to stop the poaching, deploying helicopters, drones, spotter planes, tracking dogs and the army. It has just launched Postcode Meerkat, a wide-area surveillance system that tracks movement across large areas and warns its operators when it detects humans.
This multipronged approach is working, with rhino deaths holding steady. Kruger is the darling of international aid efforts — Meerkat exists as a result of United Kingdom lottery funding.
Other parks are also dealing with poaching and face dramatic changes in their climate but have little funding. The smaller the country, the more acute the problem faced by conservation groups.
Few come smaller than Swaziland. In its last national communication to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the country said temperatures have increased by “way above 3°C” since 1960. Exotic species planted there have thrived, displacing indigenous species and sucking up scarce water.
The country predicts that half its grassland and bushveld biomes will disappear. Its entire lowlands will be too hot for human habitation by the end of the century. It said: “This has significant implications on biodiver- sity and people’s livelihoods as most of the country’s vegetation types and species are likely to experience notable declines.”
Swaziland noted in the communication that 69% of its population lives in poverty, so it “does not have the financial capacity to fund climate projects without external assistance”.
This is why developing countries are so adamant that the developed world help them to adapt to the climate change that was caused by the Global North.
Without outside funds, the landlocked kingdom is putting its money into adaptation for people instead of conservation. National parks have to make their own way.
In desperation, these tabled a proposal at the last Cites meeting in October for permission to sell its rhino horn stockpile. This noted: “Proceeds from horn sales will also provide for a host of other important conservation needs, while benefiting a wide diversity of other wildlife species as well.”
The proposal was defeated. Ted Reilly, from the country’s parks authority, said this was a “huge blow” for Swaziland’s conservation efforts in a rapidly changing world.
That problem is echoed across Southern Africa. The United Nations Environment Programme — based in Kenya — says Southern Africa will get the same amount of rainfall, but this will come with increased variability. More water will fall in shorter and more violent spells, followed by drought. Central and Eastern Africa will have more rainfall and less frost, temporarily aiding vegetation growth.
The programme notes that these changes — coming too quickly for species to adapt — will lead to “significant extinction of plants and
animals”. Island states and cities around the continent will be hardest hit, with rising sea levels, storm surges and warm oceans bleaching coral.
The intergovernmental panel on climate change’s fifth assessment report echoes this fear, saying that change is “occurring at a faster than expected rate”, particularly in Southern Africa. It concludes that the number of mammal species in national parks in the region could drop by between 24% and 40% this century. But even this is a guessti-
mate, because data on current animal populations is hard to come by. Most national parks outside South Africa and Botswana have little information on species within their boundaries, or the effect climate change will have on them.
With its resources, Kruger Park does have the data. The first comprehensive research, done in 2001 by the South African National Biodiversity Agency, said temperatures in the park would increase by 3°C by midcentury. This could kill off 59% of mammals, 40% of birds, 70% of but-
terflies, 80% of other invertebrates, and 45% of reptiles in the park.
In 2008, then environment and tourism minister Marthinus van Schalkwyk warned: “The damage to one of South Africa’s most celebrated and conservation areas could be shattering.” This was under a business-as-usual scenario.
New projections, based on better adaptation plans and lower global emissions, project less of a die-out in Kruger.
The biggest problem is changing rainfall patterns. The park’s north, along the border with Mozambique and Zimbabwe, is projected to become much drier. Large mammals, such as elephant, won’t have enough water to survive. Its south will get hotter and more humid, which will kill off cold-blooded animals.
Similar changes are a problem across the countries along the Tropic of Capricorn. Botswana’s Okavango Delta, sprawling across the north of that mostly desert country, holds 10-trillion litres of water in a wet year. That accommodates vast herds of elephant, gnu, hippopotamus and other large and small species. These attract 50 000 visitors a year and make tourism the second-largest sector of the economy.
But the rivers that supply the Okavango, such as the Chobe, are projected to dry up. According to research by the University of Botswana’s Department of Environmental Science, rainfall has been steadily dropping, shifting water channels and changing flooding patterns.
Less rainfall means the delta’s swamps will dry out, and forests will be replaced by grasslands. Without these biomes, species will die out, as will the tourism industry.
In its national communications to the UNFCCC, Botswana has said continuing global carbon emissions will make it increasingly hard for the country to make its conservation sector resilient to climate change.
The loss of income from climate change overtaking species has not been quantified for Southern Africa. But there is a current example that gives an insight into that future: elephant poaching. Research published in the peer-reviewed journal Nature last month estimated that the continent’s tourism industry was losing R343-million a year.
That leaves conservation in a bind. Most countries cannot afford to keep species alive unless they pay their own way. Human pressures and the changing climate mean it will become harder, and more expensive, to ensure the survival of those species.
Skukuza’s 42°C will be a mild day by future standards, with temperatures predicted to float into the 50°Cs on a more regular basis. The scale of change brought about by that increase might be something the park cannot adapt to.