Transcript No Slide Title

MOB 743
Game ranching in South Africa
Prof. G.N. Smit
Dept. of Animal, Wildlife and Grassland Sciences
Copyright: Prof. G.N. Smit
The contents of this presentations is for use by MOB743 students only. It may not
be distributed or altered without the permission of the copyright holder.
INTRODUCTION
- Game ranching in South Africa is the commercialization of
wildlife by private landowners.
- The establishment of game ranchers’ organizations on
provincial level in the seventies and a national organization in
1982 resulted in game ranching being acknowledged as part of
the agricultural industry in 1986.
- The enforcement of the Game Theft Act in 1991 vested the
ownership of game, which was under the control of
ranchers on their farms, in the game rancher.
-The rich wildlife resource of southern Africa is unique and the
South African game product in relation to a specific natural
environment is without competition in the world.
SOME STATISTICS ON GAME RANCHING
- Currently about 5 000 game ranches and more than 4 000
mixed game and livestock ranches in South Africa. These
cover 16.8 % of the country’s total land area, compared with
5.8 % for all officially declared conservation areas.
- Index of the growth of the game ranching industry:
- During 1991 the sale of wildlife amounted to R 9 million,
of which 68.0 % were sold by conservation authorities.
- During 2000, the income from live animal sales was R 180
million, with most of the animals sold by private owners.
- During 2008, the income from live animal sales was R 94
million, with an average price increase of 4% per year.
-These live sales contributed only 2 % of a total estimated
value of R 4.7 bil. of the game ranching industry of SA in
2008.
SOME STATISTICS ON GAME RANCHING
- The other sources of income were:
Recreational hunting - R 3.1 billion (66 %)
Trophy hunting
- R 510 million (11 %)
Translocation of game - R 750 million (16 %)
Taxidermy
- R 200 million (4 %)
Meat production
- R 42 million (1 %)
-The region in South Africa with the most wildlife ranches is
the Limpopo Province, with almost half (49.0 %) of all South
Africa’s exempted wildlife ranches. It is is followed by the
Northern Cape (19.5 %) and the Eastern Cape Province
(12.3 %).
GAME RANCHING AND CONSERVATION
- Formal conservation areas comprise a very small percentage
of South Africa (< 6%), with more than 80 % of South Africa
(105 million hectare) available for agriculture and forestry.
- Land under private ownership potentially very important in
conserving specific plant and animal species, unique
ecosystems.
- Conversion of cattle/sheep to game NOT synonymous with
conservation.
- With the correct scientific approach and sound management,
game ranching can be highly economical and contribute to the
conservation of our valuable natural resources.
- Game ranching is often perceived as “an easy farming system”.
There are no camps and thus no grazing system to be applied.
The truth, however, is that game ranching is far more complex
than generally anticipated.
GAME RANCHING AND CONSERVATION
- With a multi-species system the number of variables is much
higher and thus require a broad knowledge base and an active
rather than a passive approach to management.
- There is growing concern among some conservationists about
the over commercialisation of wildlife and the impact that this
may have on conservation of species and ecosystems.
- Some concerns are:
- Cross breeding of closely related species and subspecies,
GAME RANCHING AND CONSERVATION
- With a multi-species system the number of variables is much
higher and thus require a broad knowledge base and an active
rather than a passive approach to management.
- There is growing concern among some conservationists about
the over commercialisation of wildlife and the impact that this
may have on conservation of species and ecosystems.
- Some concerns are:
- Deliberate breeding of colour mutations,
GAME RANCHING AND CONSERVATION
- With a multi-species system the number of variables is much
higher and thus require a broad knowledge base and an active
rather than a passive approach to management.
- There is growing concern among some conservationists about
the over commercialisation of wildlife and the impact that this
may have on conservation of species and ecosystems.
- Some concerns are:
- Breeding of scarce and endangered species for trophy
purposes by people without the necessary knowledge, and
GAME RANCHING AND CONSERVATION
- With a multi-species system the number of variables is much
higher and thus require a broad knowledge base and an active
rather than a passive approach to management.
- There is growing concern among some conservationists about
the over commercialisation of wildlife and the impact that this
may have on conservation of species and ecosystems.
- Some concerns are:
- Introduction of game into areas and habitats where they
did not naturally occur before.
REASONS FOR THE SWING TO GAME RANCHING
Non-ecological reasons
- Cessation of control boards and protection of the red meat
industry (importing of cheap red meat and suspension of
subsidies to cattle farmers).
- The increase in stock theft (small stock more susceptible than
large stock and also area-bound).
- Labour legislation and labour problems.
- Greater possibility for a secondary income (non-consumptive
utilisation) from game ranching, which is independent from
animal production (eco-tourism and accommodation fees).
- The possible income of foreign exchange by foreign hunters and
tourists (especially important due to a decrease in the Rand
exchange rate and our unique game product).
Ecological reasons
- Decreased production of stock due to the gradual deterioration
of the natural veld subject to continuous over utilisation of veld
and climatological droughts.
- The whole plant spectrum can be utilised with a larger variety of
game species, often without direct competition to each other.
- Game is more disease- and parasite resistant.
- Game is also less susceptible to the effect of droughts than
stock.
- Game can cover longer distances with less energy loss to look
for food.
WARNING LIGHTS IN THE GAME INDUSTRY
- Slow down in the establishment of new game ranches that
decrease the demand for live game / more animals on offer .
- Political instability of the region that influence foreign visitors
(hunters).
- Rumours of limiting the establishment of new game ranches
through legislation.
- Children, especially those in cities, grow up without the traditional
rifle and hunting culture (hug them don't kill them).
- New legislation on gun ownership - negative influence on local
hunters and hunting industry.
- Biodiversity legislation and TOPS (Threatened or Protected
Species) regulations.
- Too many small "game ranches" and the perception that game
ranching is easy - not ecological sustainable.
ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE, SCIENTIFICALLY
BASED GAME RANCHING
Two important questions
- With what type of game species can I stock my ranch with its
unique opportunities and limitations, and
- How many of every game species can I keep?
Factors determining which species can be kept
- Habitat suitability
- Maintaining genetic integrity
- Purpose of the ranch
- Fencing requirements
- Buying costs
Factors determining the number of game
- Availability of food, water and shelter
- Social behaviour of game species
HERBIVORE GAME SPECIES – HABITAT
REQUIREMENTS AND DIET SELECTION
PRINCIPLES, TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
High-density and low-density game species
- Largely determined by the social structure of different
species.
-Herds vs. small family groups or solitary.
Classes of consumers
- Bulk feeders,
- Concentrate feeders,
- Grazers,
- Browsers,
- Mixed feeders.
Classification based on impact on vegetation
Type I: Species which are capable of causing an initial
drastic change in the vegetation and in the physical
environment.
Type II: Those sensitive species that are negatively
influenced by the actions of the Type I and Type III species.
Type III: Those species that are favoured by the actions of
the Type I species. They further modify the vegetation and
perpetuate this new state by their selective feeding habits.
Type IV: Species that are influenced by the actions of Type I
and III species, but which have little further impact on the
vegetation.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BODY SIZE
AND TIME SPENT ON FEEDING
- Body size often closely related to metabolic rate.
- Small species have a faster metabolic rate than larger species,
subsequently also a higher food requirement.
- Smaller species may thus spend more time feeding than larger
game species.
- A positive relationship exists between the size of an animal and
the daily food intake in relation to body mass.
- As a rule the smaller the animal the larger the daily food intake
in relation to body mass.
Daily food intake in relation to body mass
THE IMPORTANTANCE OF PLANTS AS FOOD
RESOURCE
THE ECOSYSTEM
THE CONCEPT OF PLANT SUCCESSION
THE CONCEPT OF PLANT SUCCESSION
Prisere
Pioneer
Rainfall runoff losses
Infiltration
of rain
water
Sub-climax
Climax
THE CONCEPT OF PLANT SUCCESSION
- Plant succession has been defined as a progressive
development of vegetation in an area through a series of
different plant communities, finally terminating in a climax
community:
PRINCIPLE OF STABILITY, RESILIENCE AND
DOMAIN OF ATTRACTION
Stable
Unstable
TECHNIQUES TO DETERMINE THE
PRODUCTION OF THE GRASS LAYER
INTRODUCTION
- Estimates or actual measurements of the production of
the grass layer are often required for:
- Evaluating the productivity of the grass layer,
- Calculation of the grazing capacity for grazers.
- It is a quantitative measurement.
- Can be measured directly (harvest method), measured
indirectly or estimated.
TECHNIQUES
HARVEST METHOD
- Sampling is done by harvesting all rooted grasses in quadrats
of a known size (0.25 m2 - 1.0 m2).
- Harvested plant material is dried to a constant mass (usually
at 70oC) and weighed.
- Grass dry matter (DM) per total quadrat size is then expressed
as kg DM per hectare.
TECHNIQUES
HARVEST METHOD
Advantages of the harvest technique
(i) Probably the most accurate technique,
(ii) The contribution of individual species can be determined.
Disadvantages of the harvest technique
(i) Labour intensive and time consuming,
(ii) Specialized apparatus like a drying oven and an accurate
scale is required,
(iii) It is a destructive technique that results in the removal of
plant material.
TECHNIQUES
THE DISC PASTURE METER
TECHNIQUES
THE DISC PASTURE METER
- Based on non-destructive indirect measurements.
Advantages of the disc pasture meter
(i) Once the calibration is done it is a fast and simple method
that can be done by unskilled persons,
(ii) The large area that can be covered ensures good
representative sampling,
(iii) Except for the calibration procedure it is non-destructive.
Disadvantages of the disc pasture meter
(i) Yield estimates cannot be done on a species basis,
(ii) Less accurate in multi-species heterogeneous grass stands,
(iii) Difficult to use in uneven terrain,
(iv) Calibration procedure requires specialized apparatus like a
drying oven, an accurate scale and some statistical knowledge.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLING
- A simple, yet effective method of estimating the minimum
sample size is the use of successive cumulative mean values
TECHNIQUES TO DETERMINE THE
PRODUCTION OF WOODY PLANTS
INTRODUCTION
- BECVOL = "Biomass Estimates form Canopy VOLume"
- Trees important for the following agro-ecological reasons:
- Competition with herbaceous vegetation for soil water and
nutrients
- Food for browsers
- Creation of sub-habitats suitable for desirable grass
species
BECVOL: "Biomass Estimates from Canopy VOLume"
- The calculation of the leaf dry mass is based on the relations
between the spatial volume of a tree and its true leaf dry mass and
leaf volume
(1) Tree height (A)
(2) Height of maxcimum
canopy diameter (B)
(3) Height of first leaves or
potential leaf bearing
stems (C )
(4) Maximum canopy
diameter (D)
(5) Base diamter of the
foliage at height (C )
FIELD DATA, CALCULATION CONCEPTS ….
FIELD DATA, CALCULATION CONCEPTS ….
FIELD DATA, CALCULATION CONCEPTS ….
CALCULATION OF GRAZING CAPACITY AND
BROWSE CAPACITY FOR GAME SPECIES
INTRODUCTION
- The grazing capacity can be defined as the area of land required
to maintain a single animal unit (AU) over an extended number of
years without deterioration of the vegetation or soil (ha/AU).
- The ability to balance the true grazing capacity of the veld with
the applied stocking rate sounds simple, but due to various
reasons it can be difficult to achieve.
TERMS AND DEFINITIONS
- An animal unit (AU), also commonly referred to as a large
stock unit (LSU), is defined as an animal with a mass of 450 kg,
which gains 0.5 kg/day on forage with a digestible energy
percentage of 55%.
- A grazer unit (GU) is defined as the metabolic equivalent of a
blue wildebeest (100% grazer) with a mean body mass of 180 kg.
- A browser unit (BU) is defined as the metabolic equivalent of
a kudu (100% browser) with a mean body mass of 140 kg.
Game species
Aver.
mass
Intake
%
grass
%
leaf
GU
BU
Mountain Reedbuck
232
3.0
100
0
0.2
0
Blesbok
612
2.8
100
0
0.4
0
Gemsbok
2102
2.7
100
0
1.3
0
Red hartebeest
1202
2.7
100
0
0.7
0
Black wildebeest
1402
2.5
100
0
0.8
0
Blue wildebeest
1801
2.5
100
0
1.0
0
Burchell’s Zebra
2162
4.1
100
0
1.9
0
Sable antelope
2152
2.8
100
0
1.3
0
Waterbuck
2282
2.8
100
0
1.3
0
Buffalo
7152
2.4
100
0
3.8
0
1 727
1.4
100
0
5.4
0
Steenbok
122
4.1
50
50
0.05
0.07
Springbok
372
3.0
70
30
0.2
0.1
Impala
522
2.7
70
30
0.2
0.1
Eland
4602
2.4
30
70
0.7
2.2
Duiker
212
4.0
0
100
0
0.2
Nyala
622
2.6
0
100
0
0.5
Kudu
1401
2.5
0
100
0
1.0
Giraffe
8282
2.2
0
100
0
5.2
Black Rhinoceros
8652
1.5
0
100
0
3.7
White rhinoceros
CALCULATION OF THE GRAZING CAPACITY
- If the amount of herbaceous dry mass per hectare is known the
grazing capacity can be calculated using the formula proposed by
Moore et al. (1985):
y = d / [ DM x f ]
r
where y = grazing capacity (ha GU-1)
d = number of days in a year (365)
DM = total grass DM yield ha-1
f = utilization factor
r = daily grass DM required per GU
(2.5 % of body mass = 4.5 kg day-1)
- The utilization factor, expressed as a decimal value, represents
that part of the available grass material that can be consumed.
Actual consumption is limited by grazing preferences of the
animals and losses due to trampling and environmental factors.
CALCULATION OF THE GRAZING CAPACITY
- With the DM production of individual species known it is now
possible to assign a different utilization factor to each species in
order to compensate for differences in the palatability and
grazing value of different grass species:
y = d / [ (DM1 x f1) + (DM2 x f2) + (DM3 x f3) ….. ]
r
where DM1 = grass DM yield ha-1 of species 1
DM2 = grass DM yield ha-1 of species 2
DM3 = grass DM yield ha-1 of species 3
…
F1 = utilization factor for species 1
F2 = utilization factor for species 2
F3 = utilization factor for species 3
CALCULATION OF THE BROWSING CAPACITY
CALCULATION OF THE BROWSING CAPACITY
- If the amount of leaf dry dry mass per hectare is known the
browsing capacity can be calculated with a similar formula:
y = d [ DM x f x p ]
r
where y = browsing capacity (ha BU-1)
d = number of days in a year (365)
DM = total leaf DM yield ha-1
f = utilization factor
P = phenology
r = daily grass DM required per BU
(2.5 % of body mass = 3.5 kg day-1)
- The above formula will, at best, render an average browsing
capacity value for the year.
A. erioloba
LEAVES
FLOWERS
PODS
Aug S
O
N
D
J
F
M
A
M
J
July
J
July
A. mellifera
LEAVES
FLOWERS
PODS
Aug S
O
N
D
J
F
M
A
M
CALCULATION OF THE BROWSING CAPACITY
P-value
(leaf phenology)
Calculated
browse capacity
(ha/GU)
Adjusted
browse cap.
January
1.0
8.20
8.20
February
1.0
8.20
8.20
March
1.0
8.20
8.20
April
0.9
8.20
9.11
May
0.8
8.20
10.25
June
0.7
8.20
11.71
July
0.6
8.20
13.67
August
0.3
8.20
27.33
September
0.2
8.20
41.0
October
0.6
8.20
13.67
November
0.9
8.20
9.11
December
1.0
8.20
8.20
Month
Practical game ranch management
MANAGEMENT UNITS
Calculation of game numbers - a
simplified practical example
Grass production was determined and established on 900 kg DM/ha.
Total grass DM on 1 050 ha = 900 x 1 050 ha
= 945 000 kg (production of season)
Only 30 % available for actual consumption = 945 000 x 0.30
= 283 500 kg
Fodder requirement per GU for the year = 4.5 x 365 = 1 642 kg
Number of grazer units that the grassland can support = 172.65 GU
Number of browser units that the grassland can support = 0 BU (no trees or
other woody plants in the grassland area).
Total ranch area = 1 450 ha
Open grassland
(1 050 ha)
Dense riverene bush
(300 ha)
Rocky outcrops
(100 ha)
Which species should be introduced
and species combinations
• Potential game species
• All those species adapted to the specific habitat available
• Designated game species
• Depending on the purpose of the ranch/reserve
• Maintenance of genetic integrity
• Fencing requirements
• Buying cost
Calculation of game numbers ….
Game species
Aver.
Mass
(kg)
Intake
% of
mass)
%
grass
%
leaves
GU
BU
Black wildebeest
1801
2.5
100
0
1.0
0
Blue wildebeest
1401
2.5
100
0
0.8
0
Plains Zebra
2161
4.1
100
0
1.9
0
White rhino
1 727
1.4
100
0
5.4
0
1401
2.5
0
100
0
1.0
8 2822
2.2
0
100
0
5.2
Eland
4602
2.4
30
70
0.7
2.2
Gemsbok
2102
2.7
70
30
0.9
0.5
Springbok
372
3.0
80
20
0.2
0.05
Mountain
reedbuck
231
3.0
80
20
0.12
0.03
Kudu
Giraffe
Ecologic carrying capacity vs. Economic
carrying capacity
Grazers
Mixed feeders
Browsers
Blesbok
Springbok
Duiker
Black wildebeest
Impala
Bushbuck
Zebra
Lich hartebeest
Kudu
White rhino
Eland
Giraffe
Grazing capacity
Browsing capacity
VELD CONDITION ASSESSMENT
- An assessment of the condition of plant communities
constitutes a convenient means of comparing them, as well as of
providing a way to quantify and observe spatial and observe
spatial and temporal changes within a particular plant community
or vegetation type.
- Veld condition has been defined as the “state of health of the
veld in terms of its ecological status, resistance to soil erosion
and its long-term potential for animal production”.
- Veld condition and trend.
THE USE OF FIRE
Why use fire?
Control over animal movement
- Many herbivore game species, especially grazers, are attracted
to burnt areas.
- Should area selective grazing result in some areas being heavily
and continuously grazed, while other areas are not utilized, the
burning of the tall, ungrazed areas may attract the animals while
the heavily grazed area are allowed some time to recover.
Removal of accumulated old organic material
- In the absence of sufficient grazing, dead plant material may
accumulate over time to such an extent that the grasses become
moribund. A fire may then be used to remove all the dead
organic material and restore the vigour of the perennial grass
plants.
-The control of bush encroachment (and other undesirable plants)
WATER PROVISION AND LOCATION OF WATER
POINTS
- Herbivore game species differ in their dependence on the
availability of surface water. Some game species, which are
not dependant on surface water, may drink if water is available,
while others have to drink on a daily basis.
- Some high-density game species like elephant, zebra, buffalo
and to a lesser extent blue wildebeest, which are all water
dependant, can modify the vegetation surrounding water points
to the detriment of game species that are not water dependant.
WATER PROVISION AND LOCATION OF WATER
POINTS
- Herbivore game species differ in their dependence on the
availability of surface water. Some game species, which are
not dependant on surface water, may drink if water is available,
while others have to drink on a daily basis.
- Some high-density game species like elephant, zebra, buffalo
and to a lesser extent blue wildebeest, which are all water
dependant, can modify the vegetation surrounding water points
to the detriment of game species that are not water dependant.
- By providing too many artificial water points the sphere of
influence of the high density, water dependant species may be
at the cost of the water independent species and to the
detriment of fodder reserves.
- The use of water points to control the movement of game is
often limited to large game ranches/game reserves.
WATER PROVISION AND LOCATION OF WATER
POINTS