South Africa’s baboon crisis — how bureaucracy became a death sentence

When you look at the lives of the 39 baboons abandoned on a farm near Burgersdorp in the Eastern Cape, you see more than an animal welfare crisis. You see the consequences of provincial policies and institutional inertia that allow – indeed facilitate – the neglect and potential destruction of indigenous primates. The case of the so‐called Stormberg baboons is not simply an isolated incident. It is a stark indictment of how human governance intersects with wildlife protection – and fails.

The roots of the problem

According to the Wildlife Animal Protection Forum South Africa (WAPFSA), national and provincial legislation, policies and attitudes towards indigenous primates are largely responsible for the persecution and extirpation of baboons across South Africa. They are trophy hunted, shot, poisoned on pylons, run down by vehicles, trapped for traditional medicine or bushmeat, killed by dogs. Many infants and juveniles are orphaned when their mothers are murdered.

A true sanctuary is required, one that can rehabilitate and provide safe refuge for orphaned and injured baboons. But that vision has repeatedly faltered under weak oversight, underfunding and provincial permissiveness towards wildlife‑killings.

The Stormberg collapse

Enter the Stormberg case. A facility known as the Stormberg Conservation Baboon Rehabilitation Centre and Sanctuary (NPC 2020/1148708) received official sanction from the provincial authority, the Department of Economic Development, Environmental Affairs and Tourism – Eastern Cape (DEDEAT). Yet, in 2024 the sanctuary dissolved without warning, leaving 39 chacma baboons stranded on Klipfontein Farm, Witkop, near Burgersdorp.

At that point, several nonprofits from WAPFSA – including Primate C.A.R.E. (in Limpopo) – stepped in to provide emergency support: food, staff salaries and electricity. It was agreed that the baboons could remain at that farm for up to 12 months or until a new permanent facility could be found.

The NSPCA is aware of the situation, since it has acknowledged receipt of communications, but has not publicly commented.

When policy becomes a weapon

But here is where policy and practice grind to a halt. Despite logistical and financial commitments, and despite the fact that the Eastern Cape authorities had granted interim permits, the relocation plan to move the baboons to Primate  C.A.R.E. in Limpopo (and then eventually return them to a release site in the Eastern Cape) has stalled. The Eastern Cape authorities were reportedly not willing to release the rehabilitated baboons into any provincial reserve within their own jurisdiction.

Furthermore, the permit currently held by Primate  C.A.R.E. prohibits importation of baboons from other provinces – yet this is precisely what is proposed (and understood as a temporary relocation). WAPFSA has questioned the legality and rationale of denying such a move under these emergency conditions.

And then we reach the bitter climax: the farm owner, whose property the animals occupy, requested their removal because the permit had lapsed. The provincial authority (DEDEAT) reportedly suggested that the animals be killed within 72 hours, and offered the “cost-effective” option that the landowner “open the cages, chase the animals out and have a competent hunter dispatch the animals as humanely as possible”.

Ministerial appeal for mercy

In an emergency appeal sent directly to Environment Minister Dion George, WAPFSA implored the national government to intervene, noting that a viable and fully funded relocation plan already exists. The appeal stressed that the killings could occur within hours unless the minister uses his discretionary powers to authorise a temporary transfer of the 39 baboons to Limpopo.

Questions that demand answers

This crisis raises several urgent questions.

First: If a sanctuary is permitted and established with provincial backing – and that backing then evaporates without oversight – who bears responsibility?

Second: What does rehabilitation mean if we cannot guarantee release? Rehabilitation without release is a halfway house to nowhere.

Third: Why do provincial authorities treat indigenous species protections so differently from international commitments or public sentiment?

Fourth: Where is the accountability and transparency? The NGOs stepped in, the farm owner got involved, permits were issued, promises were made – and yet the authorities sidestepped urgent meetings and moved towards the kill option. WAPFSA reports that the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism refused to meet. That level of institutional avoidance is unacceptable.

Beyond the Stormberg 39

This isn’t just about baboons in the Stormberg region. It’s a mirror on our relationship with our wildlife heritage. South Africa is home to a unique biodiversity. If indigenous primates are abandoned, sanctuaries collapse and killing is proposed as a solution, how can we claim to be custodians of our wildlife?

The WAPFSA warning could not ring truer: “national and provincial legislation, policies and attitudes… are largely responsible for the persecution and extirpation of baboons in South Africa.” It is incumbent on all levels of government, plus the public and conservation sector, to reject the default route of death and abandonment and push for the alternative: intervention, rescue, rehabilitation and release.

A call to conscience

For the 39 baboons on Klipfontein Farm, time is slipping away. Their fate should not rest on permits lapsing, jurisdictional buck‑passing or the suggestion that “killing is the cost‑effective route”. It should rest on the fundamental principle that wildlife deserves protection – not only when it is convenient, but always.

Ultimately, the Stormberg case is an emergency alarm – a clarion call for reform, empathy and realignment of wildlife policy with dignity and responsibility. Because how we treat the baboons today will reflect how we bequeath our natural heritage to tomorrow.

In short: the baboons deserve better. Our laws, our policies, our institutions should, too. DM

Dr Adam Cruise is an investigative environmental journalist, travel writer and academic. He has contributed to a number of international publications, including National Geographic and The Guardian, covering diverse topics from the plight of elephants, rhinos and lions in Africa to coral reef rejuvenation in Indonesia. Cruise is a doctor of philosophy, specialising in animal and environmental ethics, and is the editor of the online Journal of African Elephants.