Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
04 July 2025 | Story Martinette Brits | Photo Ruan Higgs, Van Tonder Photography, and Tanya Scherman
Barn Owl
A quiet presence with a powerful impact – the barn owls nesting in the UFS Sasol Library have become unexpected ambassadors for conservation, inspiring hands-on research, community care, and a deeper connection between people and nature.

High above the shelves and silent study spaces of the Sasol Library at the University of the Free State (UFS), a quiet conservation success story is unfolding. A pair of barn owls have been nesting in the library’s roof space – raising chicks, hunting on campus grounds, and becoming an unexpected symbol of ecological balance and cross-departmental collaboration.

More than just a charming tale of urban wildlife, their presence is also prompting reflection on the evolving purpose of academic spaces.

Prof Vasu Reddy, Deputy Vice-Chancellor: Research and Internationalisation, whose portfolio includes libraries, sees the owls as part of something much deeper. “If we consider Shakespeare’s play, All’s Well That Ends Well, then the presence of the owls in the Sasol Library confirms another meaning of that play.”

“Love,” Prof Reddy says, “is not always considered noble, but is something persistent, and our library is not just a building, but a living ecosystem where precious documents, people, and even animals can interact, shape, and nurture our lives.”

The owls had been observed roosting at the library since 2016, but their fate took a turn in 2023 when a distressed owl was spotted outside the building. Tanya Scherman from the Centre for Teaching and Learning was the first to respond. “It appeared that the owl had been poisoned, most likely secondary poisoning from a contaminated rodent,” she explains. That moment became the catalyst for a grassroots conservation initiative – one that brought together concerned staff, students, and wildlife researchers.

“I phoned around trying to find more knowledgeable people who could help,” says Scherman. “I consulted with a local vet, the Owl Rescue Centre in Pretoria, and Prof Francois Deacon from our Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences. I wanted to know how we could keep the owls safe on campus.”

Prof Deacon, who lectures in the Department of Animal Sciences, immediately saw the potential. “As someone passionate about urban wildlife conservation, I saw a great opportunity – not just to support the owls, but to involve students in hands-on learning,” he says. “These projects offer rare chances to study natural animal behaviour in real time, outside the confines of a lab.”

Together with his postgraduate students, Ruan Higgs and Kaitlyn Taylor, the team assessed the owls’ behaviour and advised on the design of a suitable nesting structure. They also installed a motion-triggered, infrared field camera to monitor the owls’ activity safely and without disruption.

But first, the nesting box had to be built. That part of the project became unexpectedly personal. “I worked with my dad to build it,” says Scherman. “He’s an avid animal lover too, and we spent a weekend sawing, sanding, and assembling the box using a blueprint we found online.” With the help of Prof Deacon’s team, the completed structure was carried up into the roof space and secured on a ledge that the owls already favoured. “It was such a special moment to share with my family,” she adds.

 

A window into wildlife on campus

Scherman and Prof Deacon’s efforts have already yielded encouraging results. In 2023, a breeding pair successfully raised two owlets. “This year we found six eggs,” Scherman shares. “Of those, we are currently able to see three owlets.”

For Prof Deacon and his students, the camera has opened a window into the birds’ world. “It captures feeding events, chick development, and parental behaviour,” he explains. “This kind of passive monitoring is invaluable – it provides long-term data without human interference.” The footage has already formed the basis of student research into owl diet, chick growth, and even nesting material preferences – insights that could guide future conservation projects both at the UFS and beyond.

“These owls are teaching tools,” he says. “They bring textbooks to life for students studying ecology, animal behaviour, and sustainable land use.” He adds that the project also demonstrates how scientific knowledge can directly benefit local ecosystems. “It shows that biodiversity and human development can coexist with the right approach. Even a university library can become a habitat.”

Barn owls also play a practical ecological role on campus. “A single owl pair can eat hundreds of rodents in a breeding season, reducing the need for poisons and pesticides,” says Prof Deacon. And it’s not just rodents. “We found remains of small birds and insects in their regurgitated pellets,” Scherman notes, “which shows just how active and adaptive they are in an urban environment.”

Still, their survival is not guaranteed. Urban owls face risks ranging from road traffic to poisoning. “If you ever find an injured owl or have concerns, don’t try to help it yourself,” Scherman advises. “Rather contact Prof Deacon or me. We’re here to assist.”

“Awareness builds respect,” Prof Deacon adds. “When people know that these owls are quietly raising a family above their heads, it shifts how they interact with the space. We ask people to avoid making loud noises or using flash photography near the nesting site. Simple behaviours, such as keeping windows closed at night near the roost, go a long way towards protecting them.”

 

A library as a living ecosystem

As the project gained momentum, so did its symbolic weight across campus. Prof Reddy reflects on how a seemingly disruptive moment became something much more valuable:

“It is clear that what may be seen as a disruptive incident with an owl swooping into our library space is also a pedagogical and deeply conservation touchdown.”

For Prof Reddy “it inspires us to bring science and the love of books to become a teachable opportunity. If libraries are stereotypically perceived to be the quiet corner of academia, then our barn owl event tells us that our library is also a space where silence meets storytelling. The barn owls sparked a conversation about nature, knowledge, and care. It tells us that our library has become an ecosystem of compassion, where not simply books and knowledge matter, but where every creature’s story has a rightful place. This event has mobilised so many different parts of both the university and external communities. We are greatly inspired”.

 

Changing perceptions, protecting heritage

The project also touched on a deeper cultural significance. Owls are often misunderstood, linked to myths or fear in some communities. “It’s understandable,” Scherman says, “with their eerie calls, white faces, and ghost-like flight. But they are also messengers, protectors, and symbols of wisdom in many traditions.”

She believes education is key to changing these perceptions: “Let us embrace the opportunity to coexist respectfully with nature and wildlife. The presence of owls among us is a living testament to the rich biodiversity that thrives even in urban spaces.”

For Scherman, the project was far more than a conservation effort. It was a passion project rooted in her own family history. “My grandparents also had a special connection to owls, so this felt very close to home,” she says. “Observing their habits and individuality made me feel like their caretaker. When we saw the baby owlets, I naturally felt like I was being promoted to an owl-granny!”

Prof Deacon reflects on how the project has enriched campus relationships. “What’s been most rewarding was how many people came together around this – from librarians to students to scientists. We built friendships, not just a nest box.” He adds that librarian Hesma van Tonder even joined one of their giraffe capture excursions. “That kind of connection – between research and real-life adventure – is what makes conservation come alive.”

Looking ahead, he hopes that this project will inspire more cross-campus initiatives. “We’re exploring green corridors, rooftop biodiversity zones, and opportunities to conserve other species such as bats and pollinators,” he says. “It’s only the beginning. Hopefully, other departments such as Zoology and Botany can also come on board in the future.”

 

A space for stories – and for nature

As the owls continue to thrive above the Sasol Library’s quiet corners, their presence invites the university to see its own spaces differently – as places where knowledge, nature, and compassion can coexist.

Prof Reddy reflects on this shared journey:

“The owls invited themselves because they were disoriented and distressed. As a caring university, we demonstrate through our tangible actions that their arrival further ignites our curiosity as a university with a heart. In this way, our library shows how we connect to the world by sheltering not just precious books and knowledge, but that we are an important ecosystem of empathy. Our aspirations for research excellence and impact gains new ground as a vehicle for innovation, equity, and community. My heartfelt appreciation goes out to all our colleagues who are working tirelessly on their thoughtful and dedicated interventions.”

And in closing, he offers a final reflection on what this small but meaningful story reveals about the university’s future:

“If our university matters and is to remain meaningful, our accidental visitors have given new impetus to the fact that our library space holds our stories, and they are making places for new ones as part of our responsible societal futures.”


News Archive

Bloemfontein's quality of tap water compares very favourably with bottled water
2009-08-04

The quality of the drinking water of five suburbs in Bloemfontein is at least as good as or better than bottled water. This is the result of a standard and chemical bacterial analysis done by the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Centre for Environmental Management in collaboration with the Institute for Groundwater Studies (IGS).

Five samples were taken from tap water sources in the suburbs of Universitas, Brandwag, Bain’s Vlei, Langenhoven Park and Bayswater and 15 samples were taken of different brands of still and unflavoured bottled water. The samples were analysed at the laboratory of the IGS, while the interpretation of the analysis was done by the Centre for Environmental Management.

“We wanted to evaluate the difference in quality for human consumption between tap water and that of the different brands of bottled water,” said Prof. Maitland Seaman, Head of the Centre for Environmental Management.

“With the exception of two samples produced by multinational companies at their plants in South Africa, the different brands of bottled water used for the study were produced by South African companies, including a local small-scale Bloemfontein producer,” said Prof. Seaman.

According to the labels, the sources of the water vary from pure spring water, to partial reverse osmosis (as an aid to standardise salt, i.e. mineral, content), to only reverse osmosis (to remove salts). (Reverse osmosis is a process in which water is forced under pressure through a pipe with minute pores through which water passes but no – or very low concentrations of – salts pass.)

According to Prof. Seaman, the analysis revealed some interesting findings, such as:

• It is generally accepted that drinking water should have an acceptable level of salt content, as the body needs salts. Most mineral contents were relatively higher in the tap water samples than the bottled water samples and were very much within the acceptable range of drinkable water quality. One of the bottled samples, however, had a very low mineral content, as the water was produced by reverse osmosis, as stated on the bottle. While reverse osmosis is used by various producers, most producers use it as an aid, not as a single method to remove nearly all the salts. Drinking only such water over a prolonged period may probably have a negative effect on the human physiology.

• The pH values of the tap water samples (8,12–8,40) were found to be slightly higher (slightly alkaline), like in all south-eastern Free State rivers (from where the water is sourced) than the pH of most of the bottled water samples, most of which are sourced and/or treated in other areas. Two brands of bottled water were found to have relatively low pH levels (both 4,5, i.e. acidic) as indicated on their bottles and as confirmed by the IGS analysis. The health implication of this range of pH is not significant.

• The analysis showed differences in the mineral content given on the labels of most of the water bottles compared to that found by IGS analysis. The possibility of seasonal fluctuation in content, depending on various factors, is expected and most of the bottling companies also indicate this on their labels. What was a rather interesting finding was that two pairs of bottled water brands claimed exactly the same mineral content but appeared under different brand names and were also priced differently. In each case, one of the pair was a well-known house brand, and the other obviously the original producer. In one of these paired cases, the house brand stated that the water was spring water, while the other (identical) “original” brand stated that it was spring water treated by reverse osmosis and oxygen-enriched.

• Nitrate (NO3) levels were uniformly low except in one bottled sample, suggesting a low (non-threatening) level of organic pollution in the source water. Otherwise, none of the water showed any sign of pollution.

• The bacterial analysis confirmed the absence of any traces of coliforms or E.coli in any of the samples, as was also indicated by the bottling companies. This is very reassuring. What is not known is how all these waters were sterilised, which could be anything from irradiation to chlorine or ozone treatment.

• The price of the different brands of bottled water, each containing 500 ml of still water, ranged between R3,99 and R8,99, with R5,03 being the average price. A comparison between the least expensive and the most expensive bottles of water indicated no significant difference in quality. In fact, discrepancies were observed in the most expensive bottle in that the amount of Calcium (Ca) claimed to be present in it was found to be significantly different from what the analysis indicated (29,6 mg/l versus 0,92 mg/l). The alkalinity (CaCO3 mg/l) indicated on the bottle was also found to differ considerably (83 mg/l versus 9,4 mg/l). The concentration of Total Dissolved Salts (TDS) was not given on the product.

“The preference for bottled water as compared to Bloemfontein’s tap water from a qualitative perspective as well as the price discrepancy is unjustifiable. The environmental footprint of bottled water is also large. Sourcing, treating, bottling, packaging and transporting, to mention but a few of the steps involved in the processing of bottled water, entail a huge carbon footprint, as well as a large water footprint, because it also requires water for treating and rinsing to process bottled water,” said Prof. Seaman.

Media Release
Lacea Loader
Deputy Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za  
3 August 2009

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept