comments

Advert

Advert – scroll down

Displaying the 5 latest comments.

view more ...
Submitted
first-name
support
concern
top-concern
message
2026-10-08 00:11:27 +02:00
PAUL
Yes I do
Other
2026-10-07 23:36:42 +02:00
Colleen
No I do not
All of the above
3. Extreme Spatial Compression: 292x Territory Reduction and Welfare Harm
The proposed solution is NOT a solution - it is very bad public policy, very bad wildlife management, and most of all inhumane and unbecoming from a country which has one of the most advanced constitutions in the world..Cape Town can and must do better.
2026-10-07 23:07:55 +02:00
Paula
No I do not
All of the above
3. Extreme Spatial Compression: 292x Territory Reduction and Welfare Harm
the loose of baboons in the cape floristic region which is under sever stress due to fires. The baboons are the ecological engineers of this flora, without them the entire fynbos area is going to be negatively affected. The are the seed disperses AND the soil regeneration gardeners. We need them for a healthy ecosystem. There are solutions to have them wild and free in the mountain AND away from urban areas. That is the way forward wild and free and away from urban areas.
2026-10-07 22:50:00 +02:00
Barry
Yes I do
Other
I support the sanctuary because I believe the welfare of the baboons themselves should be at the centre of this discussion.
2026-10-07 22:48:39 +02:00
Stephanus
Yes I do
Other
- The two troops will be moved as intact family groups into two large enclosures, with the facility designed to maximise space, natural behaviour and welfare.
- The sanctuary will have natural vegetation, water features, sleep structures, enrichment, limited human interaction and dedicated welfare monitoring.
- The baboons will not be allowed to breed as breeding in captivity is discouraged under global welfare standards, and the aim is for baboons to breed in natural areas, not in captivity. The sanctuary as an animal-welfare intervention rather than a conservation intervention.
These baboons are currently exposed to high levels of human-caused harm such as shootings, poisoning, carcass collection and euthanasia, and the current urban situation is failing the individual baboons.
- While people may say the baboons should remain “free”, the key question is who that freedom is actually better for if the animals are being shot, injured and exposed to continual conflict.
- human–wildlife conflict is fundamentally about people: people’s behaviour, perceptions, waste, expectations and willingness to follow rules. The wildlife itself is simply behaving naturally.
- stronger enforcement of things like waste rules us desirable but it is not realistic to rely on perfect law enforcement or perfect public compliance.
- The broader goal is not more intensive management, but less hands-on, less aversive management: healthier baboons living in natural areas, fewer human-caused deaths, and less need for rangers to continually chase them out of town.
- the two urban troops are not currently fulfilling much of their ecological role, because they spend so much time in urban areas eating human food rather than foraging naturally.

In short permanently housing these two urban baboon troops is an imperfect but practical animal-welfare response to a situation in which remaining “free” in town is exposing them to sustained human-caused harm, while the wider management goal remains to keep Cape Peninsula baboons wild, thriving and living in natural areas.

Lastly a fence above Simonstown will not only take many years to build due lot's of different land owners agreements required and stakeholders but also due to EIA processes and there is no guarantee that the troops simply wont run across Redhill road to enter Simonstown from Harbor Bay mall side in which case those troops would then most likely have to be permanently removed due to the fence not being effective.

What Authorities and Proponents Say

    • Mitigating Severe Human-Wildlife Conflict:
      The Joint Task Team maintains that the Waterfall and Seaforth troops have become chronically urbanised in Simon’s Town, creating substantial human-wildlife conflict, property damage, and safety risks that previous management methods have failed to resolve.
    • Non-Lethal Management Solution:
      Authorities argue that permanent confinement in a purpose-built “semi-wild” Urban Wildlife Centre is preferable to euthanasia or leaving troops in urban environments where they face dog attacks, vehicle collisions, illegal pellet-gun shootings, and poisoning.
    • Protecting Regional Genetic Lines:
      Proponents state that purpose-built enclosures provide shelter, water, and veterinary care while preventing troops from raiding residential waste and human food attractants.
    • Established Strategy:
      The JTT asserts that baboon management has been continuously informed by extensive consultation, including the 2023 Strategic Management Plan public-participation process and review by an independent expert panel.

What Conservationists, Experts, and Opponents Say

    • Regulatory Prematurity & Missing Permits:
      CapeNature confirmed on 29 September 2026 that a completed captivity permit application has not been submitted and the operational management plan remains unfinalised. Capturing, transporting, and caging protected wildlife without completed statutory permits violates the Nature Conservation Ordinance 19 of 1974.
    • Severe Spatial Confinement:
      Spatial tracking by primatologist Dr David Gaynor shows the Waterfall troop’s natural territory spans 736.1 hectares. Caging them in a 2.52-hectare enclosure (with the JTT enclosure specified at 2.3 hectares) reduces their living range by ~292 times, which experts warn constitutes a monument to management failure and an unviable welfare outcome.
    • Procedural Unfairness under PAJA:
      The authorities substituted the announced November 2025 Plateau Road staged trial (which included a 6-month review and EIAs) with permanent confinement at Kogelfontein without conducting a specific notice-and-comment process under Section 4 of PAJA.
    • Refusal to Mitigate Waste Attractants: The City rolled out 2,200 baboon-proof bins across the Peninsula in September 2026 but intentionally excluded Simon’s Town on the grounds that the troops are earmarked for removal. Opponents argue the City is manufacturing a justification for removal by refusing to secure municipal waste.
    • Viable Coexistence Alternatives Ignored:
      A fully costed, funded alternative developed by WAPFSA and Dr Gaynor—incorporating strategic exclusion fencing, waste securement, and shepherding—has been bypassed without formal, transparent comparative assessment.
    • Animal Welfare Objections:
      The Cape of Good Hope SPCA formally stated in July 2026 that it opposes placing healthy, free-roaming, wild-caught baboons into long-term captive sanctuaries.
have your say