Thesis (MSc (Zoology)) -- University of Pretoria. / Includes bibliographic references (leaves 48-54).

Thesis (M.A.(Anthropology))-University of Pretoria, 2003. / Includes bibliographical references.

The savanna elephant is a flagship species for conservation in Maputaland, a biologically diverse centre of endemism. At present Maputaland’s elephants are fragmented into two sub-populations, those confined to the Tembe Elephant Park (TEP) and those roaming across the Maputo Elephant Reserve (MER) and along the Futi Corridor. Fragmentation may have affected the sub-populations by skewing age and sex ratios, decreasing survival, isolating the sub-populations, and restricting landscape selection. My evaluation of historical population estimates suggest that the size of the elephant populations has been under estimated both before and after the construction of an electrified fence that fragmented the population. The application of a series of mark-recapture models to sight-resight data collected in TEP resulted in a population estimate of 179 (95% CI=136-233). The Bowden’s estimator was the most suitable model under prevailing conditions. My results confirmed that small populations of elephants are difficult to census in closed habitats. Estimates derived from aerial counts significantly under-estimated minimum population size determined from a registration count.Estimates derived from mark-recapture models approach or exceed those from registration counts. Both population fragments are increasing in numbers: TEP’s at 4.6% per year, MEP’s at 3.1% per year. Demographic variables are significantly different, age at first calving is 11.5 years and 9.9 years, and calving interval is 4.2 years and 2.2 years for TEP and MER respectively. Age distribution was similar for females but not for males, as TEP showed a bias for adult males. At the population level bulls in TEP favoured sand forests while breeding herds preferred reedbeds, but these preferences did not prove to be statistically significant. Individual bulls appeared to select for closed woodland landscape type but no statistical significance could be determined. My study highlights the inconsistencies inherent in using historical data to determine population trends. Caution must be used when management decisions are based on such estimates. Sight-resight models are suitable for the enumeration of elephant populations. My results do not support landscape selection in elephants. The differences between population variables for the sub-populations are probably due to age and sex ratios imposed when the population was fragmented and the different levels of protection afforded to the sub-populations. / Thesis (PhD (Zoology))--University of Pretoria, 2007. / Zoology and Entomology / unrestricted

Thesis (MA)--University of Stellenbosch, 2003. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: History is often manipulated to achieve contemporary goals. Writing or narrating history is not merely a recoding or a narration of objective facts, but a value-laden process often conforming to the goals of the writer or narrator. This study examines the ways in which the history of the Mabudu chiefdom has been manipulated to achieve political goals. Through an analysis of the history of the Mabudu chiefdom and the manner in which that history has been represented, this study illustrates that history is not merely a collection of verifiable facts, but rather a collection of stories open to interpretation and manipulation. In the middle of the eighteenth century the Mabudu or Mabudu-Tembe was the strongest political and economic unit in south-east Africa. Their authority only declined with state formation amongst the Swazi and Zulu in the early nineteenth century. Although the Zulu never defeated the Mabudu, the Mabudu were forced to pay tribute to the Zulu. In the 1980s the Prime Minister of KwaZulu, Mangusotho Buthelezi, used this fact as proof that the people of Maputaland (Mabudu-land) should be part of the Zulu nation-state. By the latter part of the nineteenth century Britain, Portugal and the South African Republic laid claim to Maputaland. In 1875 the French President arbitrated in the matter and drew a line along the current South Africa/ Mozambique border that would divide the British and French spheres of influence in south-east Africa. The line cut straight through the Mabudu chiefdom. In 1897 Britain formally annexed what was then called AmaThongaland as an area independent of Zululand, which was administered as ‘trust land’ for the Mabudu people. When deciding on a place for the Mabudu in its Grand Apartheid scheme, the South African Government ignored the fact that the Mabudu were never defeated by the Zulu or incorporated into the Zulu Empire. Until the late 1960s the government recognised the people of Maputaland as ethnically Tsonga, but in 1976 Maputaland was incorporated into the KwaZulu Homeland and the people classified as Zulu. In 1982 the issue was raised again when the South African Government planned to cede Maputaland to Swaziland. The government and some independent institutions launched research into the historic and ethnic ties of the people of Maputaland. Based on the same historical facts, contrasting claims were made about the historical and ethnic ties of the people of Maputaland. Maputaland remained part of KwaZulu and is still claimed by the Zulu king as part of his kingdom. The Zulu use the fact that the Mabudu paid tribute in the 1800s as evidence of their dominance. The Mabudu, on the other hand, use the same argument to prove their independence, only stating that tribute never meant subordination, but only the installation of friendly relations. This is a perfect example of how the same facts can be interpreted differently to achieve different goals and illustrates that history cannot be equated with objective fact.

Please read the abstract in the section 00front of this document / Dissertation (MA (Anthropolgy))--University of Pretoria, 2005. / Anthropology and Archaeology / unrestricted