Zebra farts

[johan db]

Problem is that controlled fires are often getting out of control Didn't I read that these uncontrolled fires were also one of the causes for the decline of wildlife?

 

Don't think most of these fires are having a natural cause ...

[madaboutcheetah]

what about controlled fires killing off smaller critters that are not able to get out the situation?

[Game Warden]

Another question, what if controlled fires in a photographic area drives wildlife into a hunting area? (though it is not my suggestion this is the case here.) Sorry the thread is going way off topic, apologies Jochen.

[Jochen]

Hey Russell,

 

I know they do it in a lot of places, but mostly outside protected areas as far as I know. To yield better crops. To get green grass for their cattle. And to poach, let's not forget. I've seen half of Matopos go up in flames like that. And a big part of Chobe. And game rangers working day and night to extinguish the fire, while poachers use that moment to do their dirty deeds without much fear of getting caught.

 

From a conservation/naturalist standpoint, AND as a photographer (that doesn't like smoky skies), I do not agree that it is "sound management".

 

Get rid of the unpalatable grasses that build up in an area for the benefit of both wildlife and tourists.

 

Get higher ungulate densities by providing more palatable grasses, and by doing so get a higher predator density is not natural.

Better for wildlife? What wildlife? The species we can see? What about all that's living in the grass that we don't see?

Better for tourists? Well, perhaps for people who see a safari as "just another holiday". But certainly not for a person with a true fondness of nature. If I visit a wild area, I want it to be wild. Personally, I'd rather leave fires to nature itself. If nature decides to start a fire by lightning, that's fine by me. But I'm sure that happens quite less than what homo sapiens is doing now.

 

But this is becoming a pro-contra grass burning discussion now. We should start a separate thread for this.

 

Your assumption is based on the area being viable for wildlife prior to the fire, with no build up of unpalatable grasses etc.

 

All our best sightings (rhino, ellies, and even zebra, who normally enjoy short grasses) were had in the high grassy plains in the western part of Umkumbe.

 

 

I imagine a number of other lodges in the SS burn, though you may have missed it.

 

I am quite sure most don't. Too much work. Too much responsibility. Too dangerous. Too small plots. I assume only the bigger farms could do it. Granted, then Sabi Sabi would be one of them. But look a bit beyond Sabi Sands. I am looking at maps of Timbavati and Klaserie right now. Plots are considerably smaller there. No wonder that in those reserves I have never seen any burned area, nor any part where the grass is notably shorter and greener than elsewhere.

 

You know, I don't want to make this into a black-and-white thing. I am well aware that most (if not all) private game reserves and national parks need some management. Fencing. Water works. Vaccination. In some cases (smaller reserves) even culling. And burning may be a tool as well, in rare cases. But my bottom line is that in Sabi Sands this short football grass stood out like a sore thumb. Unnatural. In my view clearly done for tourists.

 

Something else; this whole discussion has now basically been about burning to keep grass short. But why use burning? You could as well cut the grass, or flatten it. Herman did this in a small part. It looked much more natural. And it was a much smaller area. It did not look ugly.

 

Edit; good points made by Hari & Matt, above.

@Matt; in the private reserves around Kruger that would not be much of an issue though, as hunting properties are fenced.

 

Ciao,

 

J.

Edited June 19, 2011 by Jochen

[Alex The Lion]

Another question, what if controlled fires in a photographic area drives wildlife into a hunting area? (though it is not my suggestion this is the case here.) Sorry the thread is going way off topic, apologies Jochen.

 

If Wildlife is pushed into a hunting area, it only temporary. Areas will start to regenerate and attract wildlife within a week of the burn.

 

Fire is a tactic often used by hunters to draw in and concentrate wildlife. This is particularly true where a hunting concession adjoins a national park.

[Alex The Lion]

Hey Russell,

 

I know they do it in a lot of places, but mostly outside protected areas as far as I know. To yield better crops. To get green grass for their cattle. And to poach, let's not forget. I've seen half of Matopos go up in flames like that. And a big part of Chobe. And game rangers working day and night to extinguish the fire, while poachers use that moment to do their dirty deeds without much fear of getting caught.

 

From a conservation/naturalist standpoint, AND as a photographer (that doesn't like smoky skies), I do not agree that it is "sound management".

 

Get rid of the unpalatable grasses that build up in an area for the benefit of both wildlife and tourists.

 

Get higher ungulate densities by providing more palatable grasses, and by doing so get a higher predator density is not natural.

Better for wildlife? What wildlife? The species we can see? What about all that's living in the grass that we don't see?

Better for tourists? Well, perhaps for people who see a safari as "just another holiday". But certainly not for a person with a true fondness of nature. If I visit a wild area, I want it to be wild. Personally, I'd rather leave fires to nature itself. If nature decides to start a fire by lightning, that's fine by me. But I'm sure that happens quite less than what homo sapiens is doing now.

 

But this is becoming a pro-contra grass burning discussion now. We should start a separate thread for this.

 

Your assumption is based on the area being viable for wildlife prior to the fire, with no build up of unpalatable grasses etc.

 

All our best sightings (rhino, ellies, and even zebra, who normally enjoy short grasses) were had in the high grassy plains in the western part of Umkumbe.

 

 

I imagine a number of other lodges in the SS burn, though you may have missed it.

 

I am quite sure most don't. Too much work. Too much responsibility. Too dangerous. Too small plots. I assume only the bigger farms could do it. Granted, then Sabi Sabi would be one of them. But look a bit beyond Sabi Sands. I am looking at maps of Timbavati and Klaserie right now. Plots are considerably smaller there. No wonder that in those reserves I have never seen any burned area, nor any part where the grass is notably shorter and greener than elsewhere.

 

You know, I don't want to make this into a black-and-white thing. I am well aware that most (if not all) private game reserves and national parks need some management. Fencing. Water works. Vaccination. In some cases (smaller reserves) even culling. And burning may be a tool as well, in rare cases. But my bottom line is that in Sabi Sands this short football grass stood out like a sore thumb. Unnatural. In my view clearly done for tourists.

 

Something else; this whole discussion has now basically been about burning to keep grass short. But why use burning? You could as well cut the grass, or flatten it. Herman did this in a small part. It looked much more natural. And it was a much smaller area. It did not look ugly.

 

Edit; good points made by Hari & Matt, above.

@Matt; in the private reserves around Kruger that would not be much of an issue though, as hunting properties are fenced.

 

Ciao,

 

J.

 

Jochen,

 

I don't want to hijack your trip report, so will make this my last post.

 

Cutting the grass does not regenerate the grasses like fire, which kill will off plant species like wild sage, which outcompetes grass in many areas of Botswana etc. I also think your under-estimate its use. Though your negative reaction is a reason why is it not widely publicized.

 

In terms of convservation, controlled burns are used to maintain the environment, and most conservationists agree with its use. There was a controlled burn in the Mara last week in prepartion for the migration. Most of these eco-systems that we see today were shaped by mans use of fire throughout history, as hunter gathers or trying to establish cattle. This documentary noted how when many of these 'wild places' like the serengeti were established, it was based on our perception right after the rinderpest disaster. So what we saw as natural and wild, was a area where the Masai cattle and population had been decimated.

 

I also think that calling an area like the Sabi Sands wild is not realistic. It may feel wild, though ultimately, it is a controlled environment that requires managing.

 

It is not about getting more animals or predators, but ensuring that the current populations are well managed.

 

In terms of people fighting fire, of course they will when it is uncontrolled, as fire a tool should be used on a controlled rotational basis. When you apply to the Botswana government to burn in concessions for example, there is a restritcion on the area you can burn.

 

If you want to relay this back to 'Jochen's Law', creating an environment that sustains wildlife population and in the process allow for better game viewing will bring in the revenues.

 

As for your sightings at Umkumbe, zebra and elephants are two of the species that can digest the more unpalatable grasses. A good general rule, if the grasses are long, then they are often the least palatable.

 

From a selfish photographers point of view you are right, though is that at the greater cost to the environment.

 

(on an Iphone, so excuse typos)

Edited June 19, 2011 by russell

[madaboutcheetah]

Isn't the Sabi Sands controlled to the extent where, there are big dams and artificial water holes in all the private properties that allows for game to be present year round?

[Jochen]

Hey Russell,

 

I don't mind a going off topic for a very good discussion. But you are right; this is supposed to be a topic on my last trip to the Kruger area. So I will make this a last reply on the matter too. Better start a new thread if we want to go on about this.

 

In terms of conservation, controlled burns are used to maintain the environment, and most conservationists agree with its use.

That is a generalization that is also a bit of a discussion-stopper, isn't it? What do you want my reply to be now? "In terms of conservation, culling was considered a good tool as well"?

 

I'm not tempted to make that statement. The next step is someone juggling around with terms such as "bunny hugger". The point I'm trying to make is that the "negatives" I voiced are just an attempt to restore the balance. But my personal opinion towards burning is not completely negative, rest assured. I just think it can me misused, or over-used if you will.

 

I don't know about the Mara. It's use may be well justified there. But in general I do dare to say that I've come to mistrust documentaries. It's hard to find a non-biased one these days. Sometimes the truth is bent a bit - or a lot - for the good of the story (if I see one more docu about Hyena as malignant, annoying scavengers I'm going to puke). Sometimes there's a political agenda behind it (a government trying to get income from tourism up). Sometimes it's about personal gain (a lot of famous wildlife film makers focus on an area in order to lure more customers to that area, and even perhaps to start their own safari business in that area). You know how it is.

 

I also think that calling an area like the Sabi Sands wild is not realistic. It may feel wild, though ultimately, it is a controlled environment that requires managing.

Well if you can't call the greater Kruger area "wild" then what place can you still call wild?

As for your second sentence; there are those who say that the Kruger was (and still is) over-managed, and who would like to see the old-school practices (involving a lot of culling) go. As usual, I think the truth is somewhere in the middle.

 

It is not about getting more animals or predators, but ensuring that the current populations are well managed.

This can be interpreted as "ensuring the current over-population stays alive"

 

If you want to relay this back to 'Jochen's Law', creating an environment that sustains wildlife population and in the process allow for better game viewing will bring in the revenues.

You make a very good point here. It is indeed about the money. But you have to understand that over time, opinions and expectations change, and the "provider of wild areas" will have to adapt to what the customer demands. To give but one example; if it were not for the increasing disapproval of their customers, Mala Mala might still have had that semi-arena where they put out bait for the lions.

 

Who is to say that people will not regard burning in the same way in the future? Time will tell. The only thing I'm saying right now is that that one particular area of Sabi Sabi - however it came to be that way, burning or not - looked out of place. It looked zoo-like, not reserve-like.

 

B.Regs,

 

J.

Edited June 19, 2011 by Jochen

[Alex The Lion]

Just as a reference, this was posted here the other day somewhere.

 

Great watch, though only available in the UK. Very balanced and not a wildlife documentary per se.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mobile/iplayer/episode/b011s4k0

[Gary T]

Without responding to every quote:

 

- the burns (in Sabi Sands) are done by most lodges. They aren't done to 'attract' new grazers per se but rather from a safety view point. Fires occur naturally and this an attempt to make sure if one does occur it cannot spread like er...wildfire i.e the entire property isn't full of years worth of tinder dry vegetation and everything is devastated (guests and lodge included) in a couple of hours.

 

- the other reason they are done is to prevent scrub encroachment so you could argue that is artificial in this reagrd. But when a natural fire breaks out all attempts are made to douse it and it doesn't get chance to engulf the whole property...so the burn has to happen somehow. The 'managed' method is far better than risking an Australian-tye wild fire once every few years.

 

- they are done very slowly and methodically and a great deal of thought and care goes into when they are done, especially with regards the weather.

 

Isn't the Sabi Sands controlled to the extent where, there are big dams and artificial water holes in all the private properties that allows for game to be present year round?

 

Yes, just like Savuti. Etosha and the rest of Kruger. the lodges themselves would argue that the Sand and Sabi rivers flow at a massively reduced rate compared to 50 years ago due to upstream extraction of water in the catchment area (wood plantations etc)

[Jochen]

I know what you wrote last time Gary, and you may well be right that they do it a lot, and it could be that I simply missed these burned areas the times I was there

 

Let me tell you; that "fire break" at Sabi Sabi border is very safe then as it goes on for at least 2kms away from the cutline. Seriously; in this case, I have a hard time getting my suspension of disbelief to work, mate.

 

Cheers,

 

J.

[Jochen]

Gals & guys,

 

Sorry if I disappoint you but you are all going to have to wait one more week for the final part (on Simbavati River Lodge). No time...

 

 

Ciao,

 

J.

[twaffle]

A whole week!!!!!!

[Jochen]

Don't feel bad, Twaffle!

 

Especially for everyone who is waiting; here's a little video to entertain you xhile you wait.

 

Credit goes to DikDik, who found this on the web. Thanks Bugs!

 

 

Enjoy, all.

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRirBXKqcQk

[johan db]

 

Jochen, I hope you didn't have a similar experience.

[Jochen]

Well, there was this elephant...

[Gary T]

I know what you wrote last time Gary, and you may well be right that they do it a lot, and it could be that I simply missed these burned areas the times I was there

 

Let me tell you; that "fire break" at Sabi Sabi border is very safe then as it goes on for at least 2kms away from the cutline. Seriously; in this case, I have a hard time getting my suspension of disbelief to work, mate.

 

Cheers,

 

J.

 

Yeah, alright 'mate', whatever. If you somehow believe Sabi Sabi (never been there and won't be doing so - therefore have no ulterior motive) cut their 'grass' 2km into the property to give better photo opportunities then dream on.

[Game Warden]

Let's try and keep this to a trip report. If you want to carry on the fire break discussion, open a new topic. Also, a bit more respect is in order. Thanks, Matt.

[Bugs]

[Jochen]

Yeah, alright 'mate', whatever. If you somehow believe Sabi Sabi (never been there and won't be doing so - therefore have no ulterior motive) cut their 'grass' 2km into the property to give better photo opportunities then dream on.

 

Gary,

 

Umkumbe flattened a very small part of the grass for that very purpose. And Elephant plains cuts the grass on the little plain in front of the lodge for that very purpose. What makes you believe Sabi Sabi are saints?

 

As I said before; I have no problem with a little landscaping. After all, the whole area is getting bushier by the year. At least it is like that in the places I know; from south Sabi Sands wildtuin to north of Klaserie.

 

The point is that there are limits. Whatever they do, it should at least look natural. In Sabi Sabi it did not look like that at all. Not only because they used the worst possible technique for this (burning), but also because it was such a huge area.

 

B.Regs,

 

J.

[Atravelynn]

This is turning into Fart Fest! Sort of like intermission from the report.

[tumba]

Getting back to the trip report, thanks for the info on nthambo, looks really good. Getting married there on the 5th September so glad you gave it such a glowing report. I think we are going to be their first wedding, although not sure if my fiancee will be coming after that spider shot, not sure I would be to keen to retrieve that one from the shower either!

 

Looking forward to the next instalment

 

Cheers

[Jochen]

Right...

 

Last minute decision by my employees friday noon; "let's go to Werchter Festival". Problem; sold out. Black market tickets will be expensive. And then one guy gives us the solution; "why don't we go to the festival in Arres, France". They've got about the same bands, there's still tickets, it's actually just as far as Werchter, and 1/3rd cheaper." (see http://www.mainsquarefestival.fr/)

 

To cut a long story short, I'm typing this with a bit of a hang over (more from lack of sleep), and a head full of music (we saw Limp Bizkit, Eels, QOTSA, Linkin Park, Triggerfinger, White Lies, Kaiser Chiefs, The National, Arcade Fire and Moby).

 

But a promise is a promise so here goes...

[Jochen]

First off; again same remark as with the first part of the trip report; I reread the second part and noticed as well that I forgot to mention a few things.

 

Like the fact that on our night drives we spotted serval, civet and genet. Actually it was only when checking our video footage that I realized.

 

And that on that last morning drive, we also saw to jackall and a cheetah. The cheetah was calling for it's companion which was obviously in the neighborhood, but we didn't see it. We've got good video footage of that. The call is almost bird-like. Not a sound you would expect from a cheetah at all. Here's the pics I forgot to post;

 

 

 

 

One last thing I forgot to mention is that it was Mira's birthday that day. So we had some Champagne on our last breakfast. May sound a bit strange, but in France they do it quite a lot. It was a cool way to end our stay at nThambo.

 

I also noticed some spelling mistakes. Post #34 (on traverse) should read "Some with camPs, some without."

Edited January 3, 2012 by Jochen

[Jochen]

On to our third lodge; Simbavati River Lodge

 

Before I tell you a bit more about SRL, you should perhaps reread on what I wrote about Elephant Plains in Sabi Sands. When we came there, we found the differences between Pungwe bush camp and EP to be huge. EP was a huge lodge with a reception+shop that was bigger than the total central area of Pungwe. It had rooms that blocked out the environment and which had a lousy view. Some things were really over the top, like the whole evening dinner thing. The gamedrives were an (over-)orchestrated affair as well.

 

So we were a bit scared to find the same at SRL as well.

 

But we need not have worried. Yes, the central part of the lodge is big. Yes, they have rooms with stone walls. And yes, they give you these little cloths to wash your face after a gamedrive. But in totality it is a lot different than what we got at EP. Here's the details:

 

First; the rooms. As I said, you can opt for stone walls, if that's your thing. But further away from the central part of the lodge, there are also tents. So of course we took one of those. The location of these tents is amazing; under big trees, and in front of the river, (which is dammed further up so there's quite a bit of water).

 

 

 

The tent itself; the interior had elements which we surely could have done without. Like carpet on the totality of the floor, and the white cloth draped all over the interior of the tent (nothing wrong with a nice wood floor and green canvas in my eyes). And like the airco. But it's not as if any of it bothered us. The airco simply remained off, and we heard plenty of noises at night, and in the morning. At one point there were hippo grazing next to our tent, and in the morning we woke up to their woooot-huphuphup sounds. So another good thing; SRL is not game-fenced.

 

 

 

The bathroom was really nice, with a double walk-in shower.

 

 

 

There was also an open air part of the bathroom. We didn't use ours, as it had a bathtub. But we noticed some had showers instead of tubs. So if you like an out-door shower; just male sure to ask for the right tent when booking.

 

 

 

The central part of the lodge had a big salon-and-bar with a thatched roof, and was under the shade of big trees as well. Best part was a big terrace with chairs to enjoy the river view. The restaurant was right next to it, with equal views. And behind the restaurant, at river-level, was a place for a camp fire, with a very low fence. Great for eye-level photography of hippos as well.

 

 

 

 

The food was equally great, and as I said; without the blah-blah that we got at EP. Here, you get to see the sights while enjoying dinner (instead of a brick wall). And you can have a conversation with your fellow customers, at a regular table. The first night we ate dinner with three people from Holland (again a boboti, and a close contender to the one we got at nThambo - not that I did mind eating boboti two nights in a row; I could eat that every night ). The first evening they did not forget Mira's birthday, and the whole staff came out to sing. We were a bit overwhelmed, to be honest. The night after that we were alone, so they set up a private table on the deck of our tent, which was fantastic as well.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Jochen