Activists protest in Simon’s Town on 19 July against the culling of baboons — but authorities say they are still assessing what the best baboon management methods are. (Photo: Gallo Images / Brenton Geach) 
The proposed removal of five groups of baboons from the Cape Peninsula has been met with mixed emotions and opinions. Some are celebrating an end to the decision paralysis of the conservation authorities and a potential reprieve from sustained damage to property, and others are decrying the decision as inhumane and a threat to the sustainability of the population.
Irrespective of where you sit on the spectrum of opinion, being apprised of the facts is important, particularly as they pertain to the current status of the Peninsula baboon population and the welfare of individuals and groups.
In 1998, the Peninsula baboon population numbered only 365 individuals living in 10 troops. At the time, there were troops with no adult males and local scientists were concerned that the population was at risk of local extinction.
However, over the next 27 years, the population exhibited sustained growth and has increased by almost 70% to 618 baboons with seven new troops. In the same period, the human population of Cape Town has doubled from 2.5 to five million.
The removal of 121 baboons in five groups will thus reduce the Peninsula population to about 500 baboons in 12 troops, which is still a 37% increase from the baseline count in 1998, and with the addition of two troops.
Thus, articles and media posts suggesting the planned removals threaten the population with extinction are simply false. The first decade (1998-2009) of baboon management on the Peninsula operated with a fraction of the current financial and human resources, but despite this, the population grew steadily. Fewer baboons managed with more resources (the current plan) can only grow.
Humane management challenge
The challenge, therefore, will always be how to humanely curb numbers in a finite and decreasing space, and how best to keep baboons out of urban areas to ensure a healthy population as part of the natural ecology of Table Mountain National Park – and not residential gardens.
A failure to keep baboons out of urban areas results in their being killed by vehicles, guns, dogs and poisons. These causes of death are associated with extreme suffering. Successful management seeks to reduce the frequency of such deaths and with that, improve the welfare of the baboons.
Urban causes of death were initially (2000-2009) very high for Peninsula baboons. This period was defined by limited funding, with some troops completely unmanaged, visiting urban areas daily. It is thus not surprising that urban causes of death peaked in 2007 at an alarming 76% of all deaths.
From 2010 to 2020, urban causes of death declined dramatically to a low of 10% of all deaths. This era saw much better funding and the non-lethal toolbox expanding to include noise and pain aversion, which were more effective at keeping baboons out of urban areas.
Read more: Establishing a baboon ethic based on flourishing and coexistence
By removing the baboon, you prevent the damage it causes, limit the chances of negative behaviour (eg, entering houses for food) being passed on to other troop members, and replace a protracted, painful death with a comparatively good one – one that millions of people choose to alleviate the suffering of pets.
The Kataza effect
Alarmingly, from 2020 to 2025, urban causes of death have risen steadily, and 2025 is potentially on record as the worst year in the history of baboon management from a welfare perspective, with 66% of all deaths being from urban causes. This is the cumulative effect of management paralysis since 2020 and the “Kataza affair”.
In 2020, a baboon called Kataza was used as a symbol of alleged inept and cruel management by the authorities. While the data on baboon welfare and population growth do not support these allegations, the damage on social media was done.
City officials faced with an annual budget of more than R10-million per annum for the 10 troops under their management, were no longer willing to invest so much money and effort only to be serially abused in the media and served legal papers for alleged mismanagement.
What ensued was an undignified and reprehensible retreat from making difficult management decisions. The management budget stagnated despite inflation and the formation of new troops. The outcome was predictable – the number of baboon deaths associated with extreme suffering increased dramatically.
Authorities act
So here we are in July 2025 with soaring levels of the worst kind of deaths – urban causes with immense suffering. To prevent further suffering, the authorities are now acting.
They have proposed the removal of troops that formed when there was either no management (eg, pre-2009 in Simon’s Town, the Waterfall troop) and when management was largely paralysed (post 2020, the two Constantia troops and the Seaforth group in Simon’s Town).
Importantly, they have not said they are going to cull 121 individuals as is being used for clickbait in both mainstream and social media.
Rather, they are assessing the best methods, namely those with the least welfare harms, for removing these troops, only one of which is killing.
Other options include translocation to a suitable site for release into the wild, or translocation to a sanctuary. All three approaches have different welfare outcomes for baboons, and these must be weighed against killing them humanely or leaving them to be killed inhumanely in urban areas.
Baboon-proof fences are long overdue as an important additional deterrent to baboons, and their delayed deployment is also a function of previous indecision and lack of duty by the authorities. More fences are now in the new action plan, but logistical and financial constraints mean they cannot be rolled out everywhere at once.
Leaving the baboons in these five troops to roam urban areas for the three years it will take to build fences in areas like Simon’s Town is simply consigning them to a demise with extreme suffering and ongoing conflict with homeowners in affected areas. They are too habituated to be deterred by the current non-lethal means.
So, it is decision time, and meaningful debate on the relative welfare merits of the approaches on offer would be infinitely more valuable than focusing erroneously on culling and making false claims that their removal will lead the populations to extinction. DM
Esme Beamish did her MSc on the management and population dynamics of the Cape Peninsula baboons under Prof Justin O’Rian at the University of Cape Town. She has been involved in the development of the urban baboon programme for more than 15 years and represents the researchers in the Cape Peninsula Baboon Advisory Group meetings.