As both countries grapple with severe droughts, their governments have announced decisions to cull wildlife populations in an attempt to alleviate the worsening hunger crisis. Zimbabwe plans to kill 200 elephants for meat, while 83 elephants will be culled in Namibia.

Our hearts go out to everyone affected by the drought — and those struggling must be supported. However, we adamantly oppose the Namibian and Zimbabwean governments’ decisions to cull elephants as a purported solution to widespread hunger. Killing wildlife populations is an ineffective band-aid for a much larger crisis, and it sets a dangerous precedent.

In this day and age, there are better solutions to address hunger than the mass slaughter of endangered species. We urge the governments of Namibia and Zimbabwe to work with international aid organisations to provide their citizens with the help they need. An elephant cull will not solve a national hunger emergency, but it will have long-term adverse ramifications on a vulnerable population of animals.

Furthermore, the consumption of bushmeat [wild animals] is a public health hazard. A government-sanctioned cull of elephants for consumption poses enormous risk to its citizens through disease and will likely open the floodgates to even greater demand for bushmeat.

Both Zimbabwe and Namibia justify their actions by stating that elephants are destined to die in the drought, while Zimbabwe adds that their parks are over-capacity. That may be the case, but instead of culling elephants — and in doing so, providing people with potentially disease-ridden food, igniting the bushmeat trade, and damaging elephant societies that have evolved over generations — nature should be left to take its course.

Throughout history, severe droughts have led to mass die-offs of wildlife. The old and the weak succumb, while the strong prevail. It is nature’s way of regulating populations without decimating a species. We saw this in Tsavo in the 1970s, again in 2017, most recently in 2020-22, and we will no doubt see it again. A cull, however, kills indiscriminately, disrupting nature’s balance.

As a Kenya-based organisation, we have no input in Namibia or Zimbabwe’s decision-making. While we share the same continent, we are distinct countries separated by some 3,000–4,000 kilometres. Southern African nations have traditionally taken a more consumptive approach to conservation. Here in Kenya, we feel fortunate to have a government that places great importance on its wildlife.

We have been watching this latest chapter unfold with deep concern, hoping that Namibia and Zimbabwe would reconsider their decisions. Worryingly, that does not seem to be likely.

Sheldrick Wildlife Trust has devoted the better part of a century to African elephant conservation. We understand just how important these remarkable creatures are. As stewards of the African elephant — a species that our entire continent, and indeed the world, must rally to protect, especially in the face of challenges brought about by climate change and habitat loss — we feel compelled to make our voices heard. African elephant conservation has made tremendous progress in recent decades. Namibia and Zimbabwe’s decisions to cull mark a significant step backwards.