Conservation by choice or by chance: Understanding human-nature interactions in SA

Mar 23, 2026 · 2149 words · By Jeanetta Selier; Sam Ferreira

📰 Original article: https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2026-03-23-conservation-by-choice-or…

Fact-Check Results

“Recent commentary in Daily Maverick has questioned South Africa’s proposed hunting quotas for elephants, leopards and black rhinos.”

❓ INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE — No evidence found in archive to confirm or refute Daily Maverick's publication on hunting quotas.

“Almost nobody goes hunting for conservation.”

❓ INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE — No evidence found in archive to verify hunting motivations across populations.

“People hunt because it is exciting, challenging and, for some, a deeply meaningful experience.”

❓ INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE — No evidence found in archive to assess primary motivations for hunting activities.

“Most people do not go on a game drive primarily for conservation either.”

❓ INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE — No evidence found in archive to evaluate motivations behind wildlife tourism.

“Exceptional animals, whether seen through a camera lens or pursued by a hunter, require healthy populations.”

❓ INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE — No evidence found in archive to verify dependency of wildlife experiences on population health.

“Every form of enjoying or using biodiversity comes with hidden costs.”

❓ INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE — No evidence found in archive to assess environmental costs of biodiversity use.

“Tourists travel across the world, often by plane, producing carbon emissions.”

❓ INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE — No evidence found in archive to confirm tourism-related carbon emissions.

“The legal framework for hunting quotas in South Africa is extremely strict.”

❓ INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE — No evidence found in archive to evaluate South Africa's hunting quota regulations.

“All three species [elephant, leopard, black rhino] fall under the Threatened or Protected Species Regulations of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act.”

❓ INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE — No evidence found in archive to verify species classifications under regulations.

“South Africa has completed Non-Detriment Findings (NDFs) for elephant, leopard and black rhino.”

❓ INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE — No evidence found in archive to confirm completion of Non-Detriment Findings.

“Quotas must be supported by scientific evidence that such use does not threaten the species or its role in the ecosystem.”

❓ PENDING