The Origins Foundation Podcast
Episode 600 – Solutions For Madikwe?
Date: October 16, 2025

Episode Overview

This episode delves into the ongoing controversy and decision-making challenges surrounding elephant population management in South Africa’s Madikwe Game Reserve. The host reacts to a recent Prime Media Plus radio interview between John Maam and Dr. Don Ross, critiquing its perspectives and offering insight into ecological realities, policy dilemmas, and practical implications for conservation. With input from leading scientists, journalists, and the host's own extensive experience, the episode investigates whether culling, contraception, or other approaches could offer viable solutions for Madikwe’s elephant dilemma.

Key Discussion Points

1. The Debate Framing and Media Coverage

• The host critiques the absence of a pro-sustainable use voice in the referenced radio interview, stating:

  “That is from Prime Media Plus... he does not bring on somebody who is from the other side, right? The pro sustainable use.” (01:07)

• The episode is structured around a reaction to this radio segment, with frequent pauses for in-depth analysis.

2. Elephant Population: How Many is Too Many?

• Dr. Don Ross (radio guest) asserts that scientific consensus finds no evidence the population is too high.

  “No, there is no basis for drawing that conclusion at this time.” (03:31, Dr. Don Ross)

• Host disputes this, referencing data (2.1–2.7 elephants/km²; ~1,600–1,700 animals) as the highest fenced density in South Africa.

  “1600 elephants is the most dense elephant population. Fenced and open range almost in Africa. There is no greater density in South Africa right now.” (03:45, Host)

• Ecological impacts observed:
  • Reference to Tau Game Lodge as an “oasis of trees in a desert of no trees”—clear sign of habitat pressure. (05:10)

3. Carrying Capacity and Ecological Paradigms

• Dr. Ross dismisses “fixed” carrying capacity as outdated in larger reserves.

  “It's come to be recognized... that's just a much too simplified understanding of how ecosystems work.” (07:27, Dr. Don Ross)

• Host mostly agrees but counters that enclosed reserves necessarily have upper limits, and resource scarcity will force population checks, whether by management or natural die-off.

  “You can't have indefinite growth of a species, especially an elephant. You cannot have indefinite growth.” (08:02, Host)

4. Culling vs. Hunting—Definitions and Misunderstandings

• The radio host and Dr. Ross appear to conflate culling with hunting; the podcast host repeatedly clarifies:

  “He's mixing it all together. He's talking about Roger saying no to culling. When he said yes to culling, Roger said no to hunting.” (12:30, Host)

• Culling: Population control, often entire herds/families.
• Hunting: Selective, typically for trophy or meat, with different economic and ethical implications.

5. Non-Lethal Solutions: Contraception and Translocation

Immunocontraception:

• Dr. Ross supports, calling it “the best objective.”

  “Immunocontraception is under these circumstances the best objective.” (13:55, Dr. Don Ross)

• Host is skeptical:
  • Logistically daunting for a population of 1,600 (vs. 100–250).
  • Need to repeatedly dart the same females across herds for a decade, during which population continues to grow.

  “Logistics of contracepting a population are quite astronomical.” (14:03, Host)

Translocation:

• Generally dismissed as unfeasible due to lack of demand for elephants and high costs.

Habitat Expansion:

• Land acquisition, restoration, and temporary corridors posited as ideal but impractical due to legal, financial, and socio-political barriers.

  “Land acquisition... is arguably the most expensive restoration conservation technique you can undertake.” (19:03, Host)

6. The Ethics and Practicality of Culling

• Dr. Ross: Culling is “atrocious…horrendous” due to the killing of entire family groups. (24:45)
  • Also, culling is only to be considered as a “last resort” per policy and public sentiment.
• Host: Points out the hypocrisy or emotional bias in objecting to management culling but accepting starvation during drought as "natural."

  “So he just mentioned culling a baby being atrocious... But... seeing a baby elephant... starve to death... doesn't see that as horrendous or atrocious.” (25:27, Host)

7. Policy, Public Sentiment, and the Risk of Inaction

• The North West Parks and Tourism Board has withdrawn the hunting tender and paused culling amid public opposition (“revulsion”).

  “Maybe on this occasion... the popular revulsion against the prospect of culling looks as if it's going to work and that there won't be a cull in Mardiqui.” (27:56, John Maam)

• Host cautions that avoiding tough choices will kick the can down the road:

  “You're going to have this animal welfare issue grow and grow and grow as we go through different climate cycles and resource availability.” (28:32)

• Catch-22: Not culling leads to natural die-offs (which are also unacceptable to animal welfare advocates); logistical/financial obstacles block alternatives.

8. Science, Vegetation Endpoints, and Adaptive Management

• The host advocates for vegetation-driven management:

  “There needs to be an idea of a vegetation endpoint put in place... let the vegetation drive the need or lack of management for elephants.” (32:39)

• The science remains incomplete; lack of long-term monitoring data hinders truly informed decisions.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On scientific expertise and miscommunication:
  “He's not an ecological individual... He's not a scientist. He doesn't even know that the word the term is carrying capacity.” (07:11, Host)
• On the limitations of immunocontraception:
  “With 1600 elephants. Right now, the logistics of contracepting a population are quite astronomical.” (14:03, Host)
• On culling and animal welfare:
  “When you cull elephants you have to slaughter entire families... it's awful for the people who must do it and it's horrendous for the elephants.” (24:45, Dr. Don Ross) “Many, many, many more elephants will probably starve to death and suffer and die.” (30:48, Host)
• On political and societal dynamics:
  “In South Africa, there was a big uproar, obviously mainly from an animal rights perspective... there was a major uproar of utilizing the resource, utilizing the elephant meat, utilizing the elephant leather, all of the economic upliftment that came from it.” (26:35, Host)
• On shifting the problem:
  “You're kicking this can, this problem of elephant density and management down the road.” (28:32, Host)
• On the need for clear management goals:
  “What do the ecotourism lodges want? Open grassland, open savannah, maybe, but there's going to be a point where even the open grass and savannah gets denuded because there's too many elephants.” (22:01, Host)
• On scientific uncertainty:
  “I don't know what the number is scientifically. I don't. We. Nobody knows. Nobody's done the, the population estimates. They don't even know what the actual number could be should be for Kruger based on vegetation dynamics. That is an incomplete science.” (32:40, Host)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [03:31] – Dr. Ross on expert consensus regarding elephant numbers
• [05:10] – Host's explanation of real-world impact on vegetation
• [07:27] – Dr. Ross on outdated static carrying capacity
• [08:02] – Host elaborates on dynamic carrying capacity in fenced reserves
• [12:30] – Differentiation between culling and hunting
• [13:55] – Dr. Ross proposes immunocontraception as best objective
• [14:03] – Host lists practical obstacles to contraception
• [18:43] – Discussion on corridors and land expansion
• [24:45] – Dr. Ross on ethical horror of culling family groups
• [26:35] – Host on South Africa's past and socioeconomic aspects of culling
• [28:32] – Host summarizes the impasse and future risks
• [32:39] – Host's final proposal for science- and vegetation-driven management

Conclusion

This episode highlights the complexities—and often the uncomfortable trade-offs—embedded in wildlife management, especially where high-profile species like elephants are concerned. The host emphasizes the necessity of integrating real-world constraints and ecological monitoring into management strategies, challenging both theoretical solutions and emotionally-driven policy. Ultimately, the debate over Madikwe’s elephants stands as a microcosm for broader conservation challenges: reconciling biodiversity, animal welfare, community benefit, and scientific uncertainty in a world where simple answers rarely exist.