How much must man intervene in the animals domain ?
I agree completely with Ndloti. Its his home. Not ours
OK, curve ball. Now, the snake is in a bird hide, which if we are not intervening in the animals domain, should not be there ....... bird hides do not grow naturally in the african veld ...
Realism is that working with nature is a compromise, we interfere in nature just by being there, let alone roads camps etc. So there has to be active interference in order to protect both nature from us, and us from nature. A BM is a nasty snake, in a potentially dangerous area - a top down strike by the snake on a human will likely mean the person is stuck in the head/neck region or upper thorax - that means that person will very likely not survive the strike, or be very very badly injured.
To remove the snake, and the next one that may move in, is a simple, non harmful matter, releasing them some distance away.
So the compromise is - remove the snake without harm, to prevent harm, and bad publicity that would come with a snake bite, in order to protect the snake, and the people.
wrt to the section ranger - remember that many people have a personal, and sometimes a cultural fear of some animals, even if they are nature conservators (guess how many spiders have been turned into flat spiders by nature lovers?
) That fear can often override any rational thoughts that one may have, and even override training.
Personally my belief is that the harm that could be caused by the death or serious injury to a person in that hide by that snake, out weighs the "value" of that snake. If it can only be removed by death, so be it. It is not perfect - but a compromise - and remember.... above all technically that hide should not be there as its not naturally grown