Red List of South African Species

Alternatively, Explore species
Least Concern (LC)

Rationale

This species is listed as Least Concern on account of its wide distribution and perceived abundance within the assessment region. However, as local subpopulations have been shown to be threatened with extinction and the population in KwaZulu-Natal Province (KZN) was estimated to be less than 10% of the expected population size, more population-level spatial and demographic data are needed before any level of confidence can be given to this assessment status. The most severe threat to this species is human–wildlife conflict, with baboon-specific electric fencing suggested as the primary intervention to mitigate this threat.

Regional population effects
: Given that Chacma Baboons are listed as Least Concern, there is no scope for downlisting this species to a lower extinction risk category. However their adaptability and wide distribution afford them a substantial rescue effect.

Distribution

Chacma Baboons are widely distributed across southern Africa, ranging in South Africa, Swaziland, Lesotho, Mozambique, Botswana, Namibia, Zimbabwe, southern Zambia, and southern Angola. The combination of their dietary and behavioural flexibility (Bronikowski & Altmann 1996; Swedell 2011) allows these baboons to occupy a diverse range of habitats including deserts, savannahs, grasslands and forests (Altmann & Altmann 1970; Swedell 2011). Within their range, the only areas where Chacma Baboons are notably absent are in the dune fields of the Kalahari and Namib deserts.

Recent studies of specific subpopulations indicate that, despite their wide distribution, Chacma Baboons use the landscape selectively (Hoffman & O’Riain 2012a). Furthermore, high levels of habitat transformation in South Africa may have altered their distribution patterns (Stone et al. 2012).

Comparisons of current and historical distribution records do not indicate any major shift in Chacma Baboon distribution patterns. However, neither dataset is spatially comprehensive, nor are these records directly comparable given inconsistencies in data collection protocols

Population trend

Trend

To date, there has been no attempt to calculate the overall population size of Chacma Baboons in the assessment region, and only a few studies conducted since 2004 have observed (Beamish 2010) or estimated the sizes of subpopulations. For example, Stone et al. (2012) estimated a meagre population of approximately 11,000 baboons in KZN with a density in occupied areas of c. 1.8 animals / km2. Similarly, local subpopulations in KZN have been shown to be threatened with extinction (Uys 2011a, 2011b, 2012). These findings have been troubling. Stone et al. (2012) noted that the baboon population in KZN was less than 10% of the expected population size, highly fragmented and largely dependent on protected areas.

Extrapolation of information from the subpopulation to the population level – to deduce either population size or population trends – is both difficult and contentious. Estimations are hindered due to both the behavioural adaptability and large size differences of baboon troops (even those ranging within the same subpopulation), demographic structure (for example, ratio of mature individuals to immature individuals, Beamish 2010), and ranging patterns (Hoffman & O’Riain 2012b). In the absence of more comprehensive empirical information across the mammal assessment region, it is not possible to give an accurate measure of population size or to deduce an accurate population trend.

Threats

There are no major threats to this species, although problem animals may be shot as vermin. Animals are also hunted locally as parts of dead baboons are offered for sale in markets in South Africa for traditional medicinal use, but this is not considered a major threat

Uses and trade

Non-human primates, including Papio, have been widely used as models for human medical research (Bailey 2005). Historically, wild Chacma Baboons were sourced for medical research from within South Africa; however, this practice is now being discouraged, with captive-reared baboons being the preferred subjects for such research.

Across their global range, Chacma Baboons are also utilised for bushmeat and traditional medicine (for example, Minhós et al. 2013), although the extent and trends of this use are neither well documented nor well understood. They have been found in bushmeat markets in Johannesburg (Whiting et al. 2011) and the Eastern Cape (Simelane & Kerley 1998), and are commonly traded at markets across KZN (Ngwenya 2001). Within the assessment region, we suspect neither the bushmeat nor traditional medicine trade make a significant negative impact on the population.

Finally, baboons are hunted both as trophies and for recreation, with minimal hunting restrictions. According to the CITES trade database, an average of 334 ± 67 baboons are hunted in the wild each year (2002–2012). Again, this is not suspected to impact the population negatively, although it may cause local subpopulation declines if not regulated.

Conservation

The greatest hindrance to Chacma Baboon conservation is conflict with humans, particularly in the agricultural sector. People experiencing this conflict have attempted to reduce it through various methods including: lethal removal, translocation, herding, a variety of deterrents, and food provisioning or diversionary feeding (outside of human areas; not to be confused with supplementary feeding). While few studies quantify the efficacy of these measures, the interventions most likely to succeed for high quality concentrated resources (for example, vineyards, citrus farms) are (in order of long-term effectiveness): baboon-specific electric fencing, dynamic noise (for example, bear bangers) and dynamic pain aversion (for example, paintball markers; Kaplan 2013) paired with the presence of field rangers (van Doorn 2009). It is critical to note that, when dealing with an animal as adaptable and intelligent as a baboon, any intervention will fail unless it is implemented conscientiously and adaptively. Where lethal control is practiced on either individual damage-causing animals or whole populations of damage-causing animals then best practice demands that the impacts of the removal on the sustainability of the population are assessed, and that the factors driving the conflict are addressed to reduce the need for long-term lethal control. Further, it is imperative that damage is correctly ascribed to particular individuals or troops if lethal control is to be effective and not impact on the population more broadly.

A rare but alternative intervention to lethal control of baboons is translocation. This is a costly method that requires extensive financial and professional resources, long-term post-translocation monitoring and available habitat in an area where conflict is predicted to be negligible and competition with conspecifics limited. An example of a successful translocation of a baboon troop is available for Papio anubis, a close relative of the Chacma Baboon (Strum 2005).

Recommendations for land managers and practitioners:

  • There are no national or provincial management plans for Chacma Baboons. Any management plans that exist are area specific (for example, Cape Peninsula).
  • To conserve baboons across the assessment region efforts should be made to minimise the overlap of baboons and humans, so as to reduce human–wildlife conflict, the threat most pertinent to their conservation. Achieving this requires (a) restricting access to the resources (food, water and sleeping sites) that draw baboons into human-modified areas and (b) ensuring that sufficient natural habitat with suitable resources (food, water and sleeping sites) is left undeveloped for use by baboons (Hoffman 2011; Kaplan 2013).

Research priorities: Despite their widespread occurrence, current distribution data are not available across the geographic range of Chacma Baboons. Furthermore, as there is no national monitoring of population numbers and only one province (KZN) that conducts annual population counts, population data are typically only available at local scales. Also, threats to this species – which are potentially large – are poorly monitored and poorly documented. These factors make it difficult to accurately measure the extinction risk of this species.

Under the primary supervision of Prof. Justin O’Riain, the Baboon Research Unit at the University of Cape Town has conducted research on the demography, ecology and management of the Chacma Baboons of the Cape Peninsula. This research is nearing completion, having made a notable impact on baboon management locally, and having provided useful information for baboon management and conservation on a larger scale.
A second ongoing study under the supervision of Prof. O’Riain is focusing on the abiotic and biotic factors influencing damage to plantations in Mpumalanga. This study is comparing the levels of damage to trees both before and after a culling event aimed at reducing baboon densities within these plantations.

Finally, research predicting past distributions of the Chacma Baboon at a continental scale has been undertaken by Olivia Stone (University of New South Wales, Australia). In addition, in collaboration with Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, a review of the population and distribution of baboons within KZN, has found the population to be greatly reduced.

More research is needed on:
  • The distribution, numbers and population trends of Chacma Baboons throughout their range.
  • The effects of human persecution and human-wildlife conflict on Chacma Baboon populations.
  • The extent and impact of use of baboons in the traditional medicine markets (both local and international). With such information, we would be better informed about whether conservation actions are needed for Chacma Baboons.

Encouraged citizen actions: People can aid baboon conservation by the following strategies to minimise human–baboon conflict in their areas (Kaplan 2013):
  • Restricting baboon access to human refuse in residential and recreational areas through the use of baboon-proof refuse bins.
  • Restricting baboon access to human food sources (for example, removing/protecting vegetable gardens).
  • Utilising the following deterrent techniques to exclude baboons from human-modified environments (for example, crop fields or residential areas):
  • Baboon-specific electric fencing.
  • Bear bangers or similar noise aversion techniques deployed adaptively.
  • Paintball markers (non-lethal) used adaptively.
  • Educating residents and tourists about responsible behaviour inside, or adjacent to, baboon habitats.
  • People can also collect distribution and demographic information about baboons to help improve our understanding of this species. This information can be submitted to virtual museum platforms (for example, iSpot and MammalMAP).

Lead agencies, Partners and Funders

See the partners page