--- title: "Cape Town’s baboon crisis a last-chance conservation opportunity — fund coexistence before captivity" description: "International funders could finance targeted Simon’s Town fencing, military fence repairs and Slangkop upgrades to keep Cape Town baboons wild and reduce human-baboon conflict." type: "NewsArticle" publisher: "Daily Maverick" site: "https://www.dailymaverick.co.za" section: "PRIMATE SOLUTION OP-ED" author: "David Gaynor" author_url: "https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/author/david-gaynor/" canonical_url: "https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2026-08-27-cape-town-s-baboon-crisis-a-last-chance-conservation-opportunity-fund-coexistence-before-captivity/" published: "2026-08-27T20:00:24" lang: "en-ZA" word_count: 2108 --- # Cape Town’s baboon crisis a last-chance conservation opportunity — fund coexistence before captivity > International funders could finance targeted Simon’s Town fencing, military fence repairs and Slangkop upgrades to keep Cape Town baboons wild and reduce human-baboon conflict. By David Gaynor · Published 27 August 2026, 22:00 SAST ## Key points - Three Cape Peninsula troops (Waterfall, Seaforth, Slangkop) face removal or long-term captivity under the current Action Plan — with Waterfall’s relocation slated and euthanasia cited as a last resort. - Dr Dave Gaynor argues the conflict is predictable: baboons enter towns, management intensifies, animals are harmed — so the fix is prevention, not reaction. - Practical, low‑tech solutions exist now — a targeted Simon’s Town boundary fence, repairs at Signal School and Sanad, and modest Slangkop upgrades could be funded by international welfare donors (Ifaw, Humane World, others). - He urges a formal partnership with the City, SANParks and CapeNature: fund capital costs, install independent monitoring, test humane exclusion and turn success into a global case study in urban wildlife coexistence. ## Content International animal welfare organisations have spent years campaigning against the removal and killing of Cape Peninsula baboons. Now there is an opportunity to do something even more powerful: put money on the ground to keep three threatened troops wild. For more than 30 years, Cape Town has dealt with baboon conflict in a depressingly familiar cycle. Baboons enter residential areas; residents become angry or frightened; management becomes increasingly intensive; animals are injured or killed; and eventually a troop is judged too difficult to manage. We then argue about euthanasia, relocation, sanctuaries, court cases and petitions. What if, instead, we tackled the problem earlier and more directly? The objective is actually remarkably simple: keep baboons out of high-risk human environments while keeping viable troops wild in the natural landscape around them. That points to a practical Southern Peninsula approach built around a simple principle: keep baboons out of residential areas because this is safer for both baboons and people, while allowing the troops to remain wild in the surrounding natural landscape. We are now running out of time to test it. The approved Cape Peninsula Baboon Management Action Plan provides for the Waterfall and Seaforth troops to be permanently removed from the wild and placed in purpose-built enclosures at Kogelfontein till their death. ![David-Babboon-Fencing](https://cdn.dailymaverick.co.za/i/Uz-xmGvdkwOP2fhHR2xpb4y8Zdo=/200x100/smart/filters:strip_exif\(\)/file/attachments/orphans/WaterfallHomeRangeVsSanctuaryCamp_982883.jpg) *Relocation of the Waterfall troop into a 2.52 ha camp at Kogelfontein (actually, JTT size is 2.3 ha). (Source: David Gaynor)* Healthy males are to be vasectomised; no breeding will be allowed; no baboons will ever be released back into the wild; and if the sanctuary ultimately fails on welfare or financial grounds, the plan provides for euthanasia. Waterfall’s relocation was [scheduled for September 2026](https://www.capetown.gov.za/Media-and-news/Final%20Action%20Plan%20for%20baboons%20includes%20a%20sanctuary%2C%20fencing%2C%20waste%20strategy%2C%20Wildlife%20by-law%20and%20by-law%20enforcement?utm_source=chatgpt.com). Meanwhile, the Slangkop troop, around Kommetjie, is struggling with continuing access to residential and commercial areas. The Action Plan itself could hardly be clearer: without strategic fencing, Slangkop “may not be considered sustainable in the long term” and “fencing is essential to prevent a need for the removal of this troop.” So there are potentially three troops at stake: Waterfall, Seaforth and Slangkop. And, remarkably, the interventions needed to give them a chance are not mysterious technologies waiting to be invented. They are practical pieces of infrastructure and management that can be built, tested and measured. ### **Direct appeal** This is where international welfare funders could change the story I would like to make a direct appeal to organisations such as the International Fund for Animal Welfare (Ifaw), Animal Survival International, Humane World for Animals and to family foundations and individual philanthropists concerned with animal welfare and wildlife coexistence. ![David-Babboon-Fencing](https://cdn.dailymaverick.co.za/i/gWl6m--LbeNypzjC8AmskjccPjc=/200x100/smart/filters:strip_exif\(\)/file/attachments/orphans/DSCN4920_192769.jpg) *Waterfall baboons wake up on the Cliffs Above Simon’s Town. (Photo: Dave Gaynor)* Petitions, demonstrations and legal challenges have an important place. They expose suffering, hold decision-makers accountable and sometimes stop irreversible actions. But at this stage of the Cape baboon crisis, campaigning alone cannot solve the physical problem that keeps driving the conflict: baboons can still get into towns. A court case cannot build a boundary fence. A petition cannot secure a waste facility. A demonstration cannot repair a gate at a military installation. But funders can. And this would hardly be a departure from the work major welfare organisations already support elsewhere. Humane World has funded elephant fencing in South Africa specifically to reduce human-wildlife conflict [and protect both communities and elephants](https://www.humaneworld.org/sites/default/files/docs/HSI-UK-2022-Annual-Report-Final.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com). Ifaw has supported boundary fencing and coexistence projects across Africa; at one Tsavo project, a 33km elephant exclusion fence was associated with an 88.6% reduction in human-elephant conflict. Ifaw itself describes repaired fences, predator-proof bomas and other physical barriers as part of its approach to humane coexistence. ![David-Babboon-Fencing](https://cdn.dailymaverick.co.za/i/KzhCJXGmk2qOoea6sww01LoH1vY=/200x100/smart/filters:strip_exif\(\)/file/attachments/orphans/DSCN4858_811375.jpg) *Baviaanskloof, home of the Waterfall troop in the mountains above Simon’s Town. (Photo: Dave Gaynor)* If such interventions are legitimate tools for keeping elephants, lions and people safe elsewhere in Africa, why should they not be seriously tested for baboons in Cape Town? ### **A practical package is already in front of us** The first project is a targeted Simon’s Town baboon-proof boundary, following the existing urban-mountain edge rather than enclosing the baboons. The principle is: fence the town, not the troop. A preliminary proposal costed the targeted fence at roughly a substantial sum for an individual donor, but modest for a consortium of international welfare organisations. The objective would be to remove the Waterfall and Seaforth troops from the dangerous urban food economy while leaving them free on the surrounding mountains. That fence cannot stand alone. Signal School needs to replace its dilapidated fence to keep baboons out. The South African Naval Ammunition Depot (Sanad) needs a simple upgrade: an electric fence apron to replace the rusting, ineffective barbed wire secure gates, properly terminated fence ends and rapid maintenance. ![David-Babboon-Fencing](https://cdn.dailymaverick.co.za/i/APr5KxoM0_oca7KS-Zx35eTiR4g=/200x100/smart/filters:strip_exif\(\)/file/attachments/orphans/IMG_E8373_493306.jpg) *Fences, Signal School, The South African Naval Ammunition Depot, Kommetjie Road. (Photo: David Gaynor)* These interventions could sit within a wider partnership with the Navy to improve management of the Klawer Valley landscape: remove rubbish and food attractants, rehabilitate degraded areas, clear invasive vegetation and, wherever military security permits, develop the area’s conservation, heritage and tourism value. This is not a proposal to turn secure military facilities into tourist attractions; it is an opportunity to make the wider naval landscape an asset to both conservation and Simon’s Town. Then there is Slangkop. Here the opportunity may be even cheaper. Boundary infrastructure associated with development around the Capri side of the troop’s range creates the possibility of adding the comparatively small elements needed to make it genuinely baboon-resistant. [PRIMATE SOLUTION OP-ED Baboon-proof logic: Why a Simon’s Town fence is better than removing the Waterfall, Seaforth troops July 1, 2026 ![Image](https://cdn.dailymaverick.co.za/i/YwY7XayRA_lxzq6ENJQRh8RjeP0=/450x0/smart/file/dailymaverick/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JK07594.jpg)](https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2026-07-01-baboon-proof-logic-why-a-simons-town-fence-is-better-than-removing-the-waterfall-seaforth-troops/) International funders could pay for those marginal upgrades, cameras and independent scientific monitoring. Every crossing could be recorded. Ranger time could be measured before and after fencing. Welfare effects could be monitored. Weak points could be corrected. Within a year we could know far more about the minimum-cost effective baboon fence at a landscape level at an active interface than we know after decades of argument. Turn the Slangkop boundary into a real landscape-scale demonstration of humane exclusion rather than waiting until the troop follows Waterfall down the road towards removal. ### **This should appeal to the JTT,** **authorities and welfare organisations** The City of Cape Town, SANParks and CapeNature need not regard this proposal as an attack on them. In fact, accepting it could substantially reduce their risk. The Joint Task Team has inherited an extraordinarily difficult human-wildlife conflict. Residents have legitimate interests. Nobody should have to accept baboons routinely entering kitchens, shops or food businesses. Rangers cannot indefinitely be expected to form a mobile human fence along kilometres of urban edge. And authorities cannot simply wish away budgets, occupational safety, legal obligations or public anger. But neither should the only endpoint of management failure be captivity or death. The Action Plan already accepts the principle of strategic fencing. It proposes fencing in the north, fencing for Slangkop and potentially fencing to stop Smitswinkel baboons moving into Simon’s Town once Waterfall and Seaforth are gone. The disagreement is therefore no longer really about whether fences can be part of baboon management. It is about where we invest in them, and whether we do so before or after wild troops have disappeared. ![David-Babboon-Fencing](https://cdn.dailymaverick.co.za/i/7wDxcA7FqC-rKliAbtOjcGkVbjI=/200x100/smart/filters:strip_exif\(\)/file/attachments/orphans/IMG_8704_939677.jpg) *Fences, Signal School, The South African Naval Ammunition Depot, Kommetjie Road. (Photo: David Gaynor)* But this would have to be a partnership where both sides support each other. The JTT could give externally funded projects a defined implementation window with agreed technical specifications and measurable outcomes. But they would have to assist, support and work together for a greater good, rather than seeing welfare organisations as the enemy. Funders could carry much of the capital risk. Independent scientists could assess incursions, ranger effort, welfare, costs and unintended consequences. If a section fails, fix it and learn why. If the whole approach fails despite a fair trial, the authorities will at least be able to demonstrate that a credible non-lethal alternative was properly tested. But if it works, everybody wins. The baboons stay wild. Residents get fewer incursions. Rangers manage a boundary rather than chasing animals through streets. The City lowers long-term conflict costs. SANParks and CapeNature retain wild troops in a functioning landscape. And welfare organisations can point to animals that are still living freely because their money changed conditions on the ground. ### **Cape Town has something bigger at stake** Cape Town’s international identity is inseparable from nature. Table Mountain National Park does not sit hundreds of kilometres from the city: its mountains, valleys and coastline run through the metropolitan landscape. Cape Town Tourism itself promotes the city [as a global biodiversity hotspot and Table Mountain National Park as a central part of that attraction](https://www.capetown.travel/exploring-cape-towns-biodiversity-hotspots/?utm_source=chatgpt.com). The wider Cape Floral Region is a Unesco World Heritage property recognised as one of the world’s great centres of terrestrial biodiversity, containing almost [20% of Africa’s flora on less than 0.5% of the continent’s area](https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1007?utm_source=chatgpt.com). That juxtaposition — a major modern city threaded through extraordinary wild landscapes — is one of Cape Town’s great attractions. It also creates responsibility. There is a considerable reputational difference between saying: “Cape Town had difficult urban baboons, so ultimately we removed the troops from the wild.” …and saying: ![David-Babboon-Fencing](https://cdn.dailymaverick.co.za/i/aV5BtouvlA7A3WskNitoVSUJbZQ=/200x100/smart/filters:strip_exif\(\)/file/attachments/orphans/IMG_8372_950349.jpg) *Fences, Signal School, The South African Naval Ammunition Depot, Kommetjie Road. (Photo: David Gaynor)* “Cape Town had one of the world's most difficult urban primate conflicts, and conservation authorities, residents and international animal welfare organisations came together to redesign the boundary and keep the animals wild.” The second story is not only better for baboons. It is better for Cape Town. It turns a polarising local dispute into a case study in urban wildlife coexistence. It gives SANParks, CapeNature and the City something positive to show other cities facing conflict with adaptable wildlife. It creates research opportunities. It could create employment in fence maintenance, ecological restoration and ranger support, and the proposed Kogelfontein facility need not become a monument to management failure. [OPINION Removing the Simon’s Town baboons: The wealth we cannot buy back August 26, 2026 ![Image](https://cdn.dailymaverick.co.za/authors/18287309852095853129.jpg)](https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2026-08-26-removing-the-simon-s-town-baboons-the-wealth-we-cannot-buy-back/) It could evolve into a genuine Southern Peninsula Baboon Conservation Centre — providing temporary veterinary care, rehabilitation, research, ranger training, education and fence-testing, while supporting the conservation of free-ranging troops. That was the positive alternative envisaged in the Southern Peninsula proposal. Its success could partly be measured by how few wild baboons ever need to enter it. ### **From petition to prevention** There is a tendency in contested conservation issues for every participant to wait for somebody else to move first. Welfare organisations campaign against the authorities. Authorities defend their plans. Communities divide into camps. Lawyers prepare arguments. Money is spent, anger grows — and meanwhile the physical conditions driving the conflict remain largely unchanged. I am suggesting something different. Bring three or four serious funders together. Divide the problem into manageable projects. Fund the Simon’s Town boundary. Fix Signal School. Strengthen Sanad. Support the Navy landscape as a conservation asset. Turn Slangkop into an independently monitored demonstration site. Support the rangers who will operate these boundaries. Put scientists around the project and publish the results openly. This is not asking the authorities to surrender their responsibilities or welfare organisations to abandon advocacy. It is asking both sides to bring something practical to the same table. Waterfall shows us where repeated failure to solve urban access can lead. Slangkop gives us a chance to intervene before we reach the same point. [ETHICS OP-ED Killing is not mitigation: Ethics of baboon management on Cape Peninsula September 25, 2025 ![Image](https://cdn.dailymaverick.co.za/i/YwY7XayRA_lxzq6ENJQRh8RjeP0=/450x0/smart/file/dailymaverick/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JK07594.jpg)](https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2025-09-25-killing-is-not-mitigation-ethics-of-baboon-management-on-cape-peninsula/) After more than three decades of conflict, we know what happens when baboons spend substantial amounts of time in residential areas: sooner or later animals are injured, killed or removed. So the challenge before us is less complicated than the politics surrounding it. Become better at humanely keeping baboons out of residential areas while allowing them to remain wild in the natural habitat around us. The money that could make that possible is not beyond reach. The projects are tangible. The results are measurable. And three wild troops may depend on whether we act soon enough. Before we conclude that free-ranging baboons are impossible to manage, let us properly test whether we can manage the boundary between baboons and people. Keep baboons wild. Keep towns safe. Invest in coexistence before captivity. **DM** *Dr Dave Gaynor (PhD) is a zoologist and Research Fellow at the Mammal Research Institute, University of Pretoria. With Dr Ruth Kansky, he developed the first Cape Peninsula Baboon Management Plan in 2000 and helped design and successfully trial the baboon monitor concept that was subsequently deployed across the Peninsula. He has worked on baboon ecology, conservation and human-baboon conflict for more than 30 years.*