Download Lion Management Fact Sheet

Lion Management Fact Sheet
HISTORY OF LION MANAGEMENT:


In South Africa, lions had disappeared from most of their historical range, and have
subsequently been reintroduced into smaller, fenced areas across the country
This has resulted in several free-ranging populations that are isolated from one
another in these smaller areas. Karoo NP is one such area.
LION CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT






The management of lions in Karoo NP forms part of a broader predator management
approach for the Frontier Region and other smaller parks within SANParks.
Management of carnivores in parks in the Frontier Cluster is guided by park-specific
objectives primarily aiming at the conservation and promotion of the unique
landscapes represented in four parks: Addo Elephant National Park, Karoo National
Park, Mountain Zebra National Park and Camdeboo National Park
Carnivore management in the Frontier Cluster encapsulates four key management
aspects.
1. SANParks wishes to restore the ecological processes driven and influenced by
large carnivores.
2. Restricted size and fragmentation of these Parks may accentuate localized
carnivore impacts on prey as well as reduced genetic integrity of individuals
living there.
3. Restricted park size may also accentuate predator conflicts with neighbours.
4. Given that the Frontier Cluster is a key wildlife viewing attraction apparently
enhanced by large carnivores, a fourth aspect relates to how the absence or
inconspicuousness of certain species may influence the Frontier Cluster’s
capability of generating revenue through tourist experiences and expectations.
The restoration and maintenance of predation is a key objective for SANParks in
achieving ecosystem objectives.
The main aim of the predator management plan is to restore the ecological role of
large carnivores as apex predators in the terrestrial ecosystem, and has associated
benefits for tourism
The plan explicitly recognises that smaller, fenced parks pose particular constraints
on predator management. For example:
o smaller parks have lower/reduced habitat diversity and suitability, and hence
lower species diversity of prey as well as predators;
o fences limit dispersal and movement opportunities and can therefore often
lead to artificially increased predator abundances through altered social
dynamics;
o these spatial constraints reduce the likelihood of normal predator-prey
relationships, increase the likelihood that related individuals can breed with
one another, and reduce the possibility of other normal social interactions
between individuals
In addition, the plan recognises that these issues are confounded by the
expectations and attitudes of stakeholders, both positive (e.g. the assumption that
the presence of large carnivores enhances a tourism experience) and negative (e.g.





through livestock losses after breakouts), and tries to balance these by means of
four primary objectives (see table at the end of this document)
Overall, the management approach focuses on managing ecosystem processes,
rather than on managing species based on defining a “carrying capacity”
Specifically, the approach hinges on mimicking the natural behaviour around social
dynamics of predators, including sex-specific dispersal events, dominance
hierarchies, socially-induced reductions in birth rates, and socially-induced mortality
events, all of which have been based on published scientific literature
For example:
o Female lions live in groups either to defend cubs from nomadic males, or to
defend their territories from other groups
o Defence is associated with conflicts with other lions and may induce stress
and carry risk for individual survival
o In small, confined areas, nomadic males are often absent and these areas
often contain only one pride
o The drivers of group living are therefore reduced in such small, confined
areas, and it is predicted that mortality risks and social stress are weaker.
Adult females lose body condition, and younger females that may never have
bred may not be in adequate condition to do so, thereby increasing the age
at first reproduction in larger areas. Coalition take-overs are a key driver of
cub mortality, but cannot occur in areas with only one coalition. Therefore,
 To mimic the social dynamics of female lions, five management
options are available: (i) increase the age at first reproduction using
contraception of subadult females; (ii) establish longer intervals
between births using contraception of adult females; (iii) reduce agespecific birth rates through reduced litter sizes using uni-lateral tubetying of fallopian tubes; (iv) mimic female dispersal by removing as
well as introducing subadult females; (v) mimic higher death rates of
old females by removing the oldest females in the pride.
 SANParks managers and scientists together use modelling
approaches to define a particular combination of the five options to
achieve an average pride size of four in smaller, fenced parks.
o Similarly, three management options are available for males: (i) mimic male
dispersal through removal and introductions of subadults; (ii) mimic pride
take-overs by switching males with those from other populations of lions
(tenure is on average three years); (iii) mimic higher death rates of old males
by removing the oldest males.
 SANParks managers and scientists again use modelling approaches
to identify individuals to achieve a coalition tenure of at least three
years, allowing each coalition to have only one breeding opportunity.
No active switching of coalitions may be required if subadult male
introduction and removal of old males are staggered. A pride takeover should then follow naturally, with subsequent consequences for
cub mortality.
This systems-based approach provides opportunities for ecological processes to
play out, restoring these ecological processes and/or mimicking the outcomes of
ecological processes, including the maintenance of genetic variability.
It also provides opportunities for improving the regional conservation of lions,
through the switching of male coalitions and reintroduction of individuals


The possibility of behavioural changes or other surprise or unexpected outcomes
associated with this approach have been recognized, and have been structured as
hypotheses for evaluating the consequences of a socially-based approach to
carnivore management, embedded within SANParks’s Strategic Adaptive
Management framework. Learning achieved by observing these outcomes is used to
fine-tune future management interventions.
This sophisticated approach to lion management is in line with contemporary
scientific and conservation thinking, and is supported by the Lion Management
Forum in South Africa. This approach has placed SANParks at the forefront of
predator management internationally, with many conservation organisations
following suit. Several peer-reviewed scientific papers are testimony to this
KAROO NATIONAL PARK LIONS










For Karoo NP, 4 adult (2 male and 2 female) and 4 juvenile (3 female, 1 male) lions
were initially introduced from Addo Elephant NP in 2010.
This group was subsequently supplemented by additional animals from different
parentages (to maximize genetic integrity), as part of the mimicking of lion social
dynamics and dispersal outlined above.
Periodically introducing new males mimics the dispersal of new males into the
population, thereby potentially leading to coalition swaps which happen in large
systems like the Kgalagadi and Kruger National Park. In the process new genes are
also brought into the population. It should also be noted that the size of the park is
such that several numbers more of lions could be easily accommodated in the park.
For example, two young males (about 2 years old at the time) were introduced in
November 2012 as part of the Frontier cluster carnivore management plan.
The lion (called Sylvester by the public) was born in the park to one of the original
adult males, and one of the females who had been brought to Karoo NP from Addo
Elephant National Park as a cub. He is a young dispersing male that has not been
able to bond with another male because his only sibling was a sister and there were
no other single males in the lion population in Karoo NP with which he could possibly
form a coalition. This is not an unusual situation in the larger systems whose
dynamics are being mimicked in Karoo NP.
After the lion’s first escape, the park introduced another two lions in November of
2015. The decision to bring in these two lions was made solely on the basis of trying
to provide the lion (Sylvester) with a coalition partner (they were only brought in after
he was already in the boma after the first escape).
Being a single, young male, there is every chance that, on leaving his mother and
sister, Sylvester may have come into conflict with the other adult males present in the
park by that time, and that this precipitated his desire to get as far away from them as
possible.
His ousting from the park was therefore most likely prompted by conflict with two
older coalition males. However, this behaviour is not unexpected by the approach of
mimicking lion social behaviour. Rather, it was facilitated by a small wash-away area
underneath the boundary fence after heavy rains
After his capture, he was fitted with a combination satellite/VHF collar to find his
location should he manage to get out again
He was kept in a boma for approximately 5 months in an attempt to keep him
separated from any conflict from rival males while awaiting a potential coalition


partner. Unfortunately this partner died under anaesthetic while having a collar fitted
prior to releasing them from the boma.
“Sylvester” was released from the boma nearly 4 months ago and no signs of
conflict with other males was observed since then. He was observed during the
aerial census in February 2016, feeding on an eland that he had brought down by
himself and was in good condition.
His latest escape was detected by means of the regular monitoring of his satellite
collar, and a helicopter and SANParks veterinarian were immediately dispatched to
immobilise him while various options for his future could be considered (these
options were outlined in the SANParks press release of 30 March 2016).
Carnivore management objectives for the Frontier Region.
Objective 1
To restore the large carnivore species assemblages typical of the Frontier Region
by mimicking the re-colonization of Addo, Karoo and Mountain Zebra through
species introductions
Objective 2
To maintain sustainable predator-prey relations by inducing social limitations
through:

Mimicking changes in carnivore survival associated with social stress and
prey biomass limitations
 Mimicking changes in carnivore fecundity by increasing the age of first
reproduction and/or interval between births
 Mimicking high mortality in young cubs and old individuals
Objective 3
To maintain carnivore genetic integrity by inducing social limitations through
dispersal and changes in dominance hierarchies.
Objective 4
To align and manage the carnivore management programme with stakeholder and
affected parties’ expectations and concerns where appropriate
Objective 5
To evaluate, inform and revise carnivore management through collaborative
research and monitoring agreements