To many Namibians and tourists alike, Voortrekker the elephant was a hugely popular animal.

He was probably the country’s most famous bull, although he was shot last week by trophy hunters on a “problem elephant” permit.

Sadly, it looks like the granting of that permit was a grave mistake, “as a letter from three communal conservancies opposing the hunt sent to the Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) earlier in the week shows”.

Reporting below via IOL:

“We understand that complaints have been received from communities living in the Omatjete area. The Ugab west population of desert elephants do not cross into those communities,” wrote a group calling itself the  Ugab Concerned Conservancies to MET deputy-director Christoph Munwela.

“It is not correct that elephants from areas outside of the zone of complaints are shot,” they noted, warning that frightened elephants posed a far greater threat to their local communities.

“These elephants are our resources, and we object to them being hunted for problems caused by different populations of elephants,” the people of Otjimboyo, Sorris Sorris and Tsiseb conservancies protested…

“It is our belief that the shooting of elephants does not solve the problem. In fact, this only makes it worse. We want to keep our communities safe and to do this we need to ensure that our elephants are calm and relaxed when entering villages. It is our belief that the shooting of elephants or scaring them off with gunshots, screaming or chasing them off results in aggressive animals and this cannot be tolerated.”

Those protests fell on deaf ears, and Voortrekker was shot and killed by a hunter who paid N$120 000 (Namibian dollars, which equates to just under R120 000).

MET public relations officer Romeo Muyanda said Voortrekker was shot “to generate funds for the affected communities”, but that’s not really the case:

…it appears that the life of a magnificent elephant, worth an incalculable amount as a tourist attraction was sacrificed for a mere N$120 000, much of which will go to the Professional hunter and in licence fees to MET, with little trickling down to the communities, and that to the wrong communities.

The picture up the top shows Voortrekker when he still had both tusks, with both snapping off a few years back.

Here’s what he looked like seven weeks before his death:

Voortrekker dodged a bullet back in 2008 when the MET granted permission for his hunting, only for supporters to raise the US$12 000 needed to save him from professional hunters.

Africa Geographic reports that, according to Johannes Haasbroek of Elephant Human Relations Aid, he’s been living on borrowed time ever since:

…in the period since then, “the hunting outfitters and their sick clients conspired to get this gentle giant declared a problem to justify a hunt”. He went on to say: “We remember Voortrekker as an incredibly gentle, peaceful and magnificent elephant. His presence has often calmed other inexperienced elephants around him. He was known locally as the ‘Old Man’, that was always welcome because he never caused any problems or induced fear.”

…Voortrekker was a pioneer elephant for the desert-adapted elephant population in the Ugab and Huab rivers region. This giant elephant was one of the first to venture back to the region after populations were decimated during the turbulent warfare years in southern Africa.

There were two herds in the area of late, with Voortrekker leading the larger of them:

A geologist who often works in the area and knew the two herds said he suspected the smaller herd, aggressive and frightened by farmers shooting at them, may be the real cause of the Omatjete constituency’s complaints that led to Voortrekker’s death warrant being issued.

Not only is the death a blow to those who loved the elephant, but vital big elephant genes have now been removed from the population.

Following the backlash, the MET released photos showing the damage that caused to property and infrastructure by Voortrekker.

Many, such as this one below, show poorly neglected fences and other infrastructure, “but some easily-replaced water pipes and tanks do appear to reflect damage”:

A number of private investigations are now underway to try and pinpoint exactly how and why permits were granted.

Sadly, nothing will bring this giant back.

[source:iol&afgeo]