|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
1 From the Editor’s Desk In this issue of African Indaba we continue the discussion about hunting inside protected areas with an article by Cleve Cheney, a former Kruger Park Ranger, and the statement of the Game Rangers’ Association of Africa. With the contributions in earlier issues we are moving towards a broad-based dialogue. There are questions regarding what to do with proliferating game populations on finite land and my article on the last page, “Development of Game Prices in South Africa”, highlights some concerns. There is also the burning issue of funding African protected areas in view of other important national issues like poverty relief and empowerment of disadvantaged Africans who live next to protected areas. Most importantly, we have to recognize that government funds are scarce and much more needed for instance for pressing health issues like the HIV pandemic. I have made already some proposals in “Hunting in South Africa: Facts, Risks, Opportunities” especially with regards to broad based black economic empowerment and how incentive-driven-conservation can assist including the majority of South Africans into the future of biodiversity conservation. A number of voices from the hunting community will certainly claim that hunting within protected areas and selling live game originating from there constitutes unfair competition for the private game and hunting industries. There will also be outcries from many quarters claiming the “sacrosanct” status our protected areas. Many ecotourism stakeholders will protest, citing their perception of a range of global repercussions. But the problems cannot be wished away – we do not live in a utopian paradise where the lion sleeps next to the lamb. We need to be pragmatic and veer from single-minded or single-species preservationist objectives towards a comprehensive triple-bottom-line conservation approach tackling the complicated array of social, economic and ecological issues. Look at Namibia’s northeastern Caprivi Region and the protected areas of Bwabwata, Mudumu and Mamili. Trophy hunting has played an important income-generating role there, but during the past two years the program has been put on ice unnecessarily. However, according to reports received only days ago, hunting is to resume in August. There are other examples from Europe – for instance Germany, France, Spain and Switzerland were conservation hunting plays its role inside protected areas. The International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC) could be a partner in the search for solutions and I intend to bring this topic to the attention of the delegates during the CIC General Assembly in Cyprus in the first week of May. The “ Draft Regulations on Threatened and Protected species and Draft Norms and Standards for the regula tion of the hunting industry” which the South African Department of Environmental Affairs& Tourism will present on May 2 nd will certainly also be discussed there.. Venison or game meat is still a largely underdeveloped, and more often than not an undeveloped, resource. Be it as low-cost protein supply, for instance from elephant culls, for those living in and around protected areas, or as an income and employment generating industry on private land. The wholesome qualities of venison, its proper preparation and acceptance on the table and its importance in providing food security still leave opportunities to explore. African Indaba has published a couple of topical articles by Dr L Hoffman ( University of Stellenbosch) and Dr D Lewis (WCS) already in 2003. There are other important lessons to be learned from Germany, were more than 1.7 million ungulates (roe, deer, wild boar, etc.) are harvested every year by the country’s 330,000 hunters. This venison finds its way into tasty dishes on the tables in private households and restaurants. In this African Indaba, readers will find for the first time articles about falconry, one of the oldest and most traditional forms of hunting, and about the conservation and sustainable use of the sandgrouse. Especially the sandgrouse article by AGRED Director Dr Aldo Berruti coincides nicely with the topic “Conservation of Migratory Birds: A Shared Responsibility” which will occupy the delegates at the CIC general assembly. Our readers will also be interested to know of another CIC initiative in support of sustainable hunting tourism. During the first week of March 2006, six CIC experts met at the IUCN offices in Bonn/Germany to discuss the complicated interactions of global hunting tourism and international sustainability standards. The outcomes of the discussions sketched the first features of a project with the title “supporting a hunting tourism which contributes to wildlife and habitat conservation, benefits people and assures the future of hunting”. The final objective will be an evaluation system for conservation hunting or incentive-driven-conservation based on international sustainability standards, accepted by international organizations, and practical proposals for its implementation. A second three-day conference with global expert attendance will be held in Brussels in July this year. The symposium on recreational hunting on October 12 th and 13 th, 2006 in London (see African Indaba 4/2) organized by the IUCN Sustainable Use Specialist Group, the Zoological Society of London and supported by CIC (with CIC Director Kai Wollscheid on the organization committee) will certainly be a logical and essential continuation of this discussion. Last not least I would like to use a little of your time for some thoughts on hunting trophies and trophy hunting! In this respect the anthropocentric aspects of the hunt and the underlying motives of the hunter are important. Historically these motives may have been subsistence, spiritual sustenance, initiation rites or the manifestation of power, and so on. In a modern context it is, besides subsistence, mainly the wish for an individualistic outdoor pastime. The hunter’s desire to record (as in remembering) an experience which is individually valuable and important by keeping what is commonly called a trophy is certainly legitimate. Such a trophy may be a photo, taxidermy, the preserved skin, horns or other tangible items. The tasteful display of a trophy is a reminder of the hunt and of intensely lived moments; a way of extending the appreciation of the experience and the animal. Therefore, every animal taken is a trophy. It is all the more valuable, if the difficulties associated with acquiring it are exceptional. The earliest surviving hunting trophies are amazingly beautiful prehistoric cave paintings of hunting scenes in the Grotte Chauvet, Altamira and Lascaux. In the third century before Christ, the Greek historian, and Socrates’ disciple, Xenophon, described the first hunting safaris to foreign countries in his book Kynegeticos (Study on Hunting). Trophy hunting isn't a recent invention of the Euro-American male ego! The trophy must be the result and not the primary objective of the hunt . The pursuit of an animal that has grown to maturity by having survived both nature's limitations and many hunting seasons reduces the hunter's chances. He needs to invest extra time and energy to take a better specimen, and it means that he could come home empty-handed. This degree of uncertainty, whereby results are subject to opportunity and chance, is of essence. With a self-imposed restriction to hunt uncommon, individual animals, the trophy hunter elevates his personal standards. Thus, the selective seeking of a trophy is consistent with a sensitive hunting ethic. Yours in Hunting and Conservation 2 Hunting in Protected Areas Editor’s Note: With Cleve Cheney’s article we continue the discussion about hunting in National Parks. Cleve Cheney is a regular contributor to magazines like Game & Hunt, Africa’s Bowhunter, African Archer & Adventurer. He has been in conservation for 27 years. Almost 20 years were spent with the South African National Parks Board - most of this time in the Kruger National Park as a wildlife researcher and wilderness ranger. Cleve has extensive experience in wildlife management, game capture, and hunting, both with bow and rifle. He has been an avid bow hunter for 22 years and his recognized bow hunting course has a reputation for setting the highest of standards. Apart from this, Cleve offers a series of CD-ROM based interactive learning material with individual CDs dealing with issues like tracking skills, dangerous African game, shot placement for guides and hunters, bow hunting guide to Africa, advanced field guiding, managing game farms for bowhunting, wilderness survival, etc. The individual CDs can be ordered directly from Cleve Cheney at cceagleswing@mweb.co.za. As a trails ranger working in the Kruger National Park, I was often asked the following question: “why can a quota of elephants that are to be culled not be set aside for legal hunting purposes?” I found it very difficult to answer – for three reasons: firstly I owed loyalty to SANParks, secondly the National Parks Act states that no hunting may be allowed in a National Park, and thirdly, I found it very difficult to defend an issue for which there was no real logic. Emotions aside and looking at the issue realistically one sees that African conservation bodies are in a financial crisis. The main reason for this is that conservation funding by central governments has become a low priority issue in comparison to the pressing social needs of burgeoning human populations. As a result under funded national and provincial conservation agencies are forced to become self-sufficient. This leads to conservation compromises and the very mandate of conservation bodies to manage wild systems responsibly becomes a political casualty as sacrosanct ecological principles are sacrificed to meet budgets. The foundation principle of habitat preservation should never have been sacrificed on the altar of mammon. Destroy habitat and all that follows will die! Instead of keeping wild areas undeveloped and wild the relentless monster of development rolled on, destroying and devouring more and more habitat. Concessions were sold to the highest bidders and they developed wild lands that were once untouchable. Tourist lodges were built (often in the most unspoiled wilderness areas) and by their very presence destroyed the wilderness essence. More roads opened up for game drive vehicles to traverse and to provide access to hitherto inaccessible wild places – inaccessible, other than on foot, that is. More gravel pits were excavated for soil to maintain roads, sewage systems put in place and rubbish disposal pits dug to accommodate the human waste created by the lodges. Traffic levels increased with game drive vehicles and to keep the lodges supplied with guests and provisions. The impact of ecotourism development and operation is significant – a pervasive cancer eating away at wilderness atmosphere and physical habitat. Accepting the fact that conservation will never again be a high priority in the eyes of African political leaders and that funding from central governments will never amount to much, it is time to get real and do some environmental auditing. What hangs in balance is something that is almost irreplaceable – unspoiled habitat! Animals can be introduced into an area but it is very difficult, if at all possible, to restore pristine habitat. Conservationists and wildlife managers are now faced with a dilemma. How can the biggest amount of money be generated to fund conservation with the least environmental impact? The time has come to making pragmatic decisions. Wise environmental and wildlife management principles dictate that habitat must enjoy the highest priority. Degraded habitat equates to biodiversity impoverishment. Wise wildlife management practice also suggests that the natural resources should be utilized in a sustainable way. Let us go back to the surplus elephant and to our original question. What is going to generate the greatest income with the least environmental impact? A hunter shooting an elephant, or a tourist lodge/camp? Let us play with some figures (Rand-Dollar ex-rate based on 6.50): We assume that the powers that be allocate 100 elephant a year for controlled hunting in the Kruger National Park. The hunter would take the trophy and the meat would be sold to neighboring communities at a very reasonable price. In this way poor communities could also benefit directly from conservation and there would be less animosity towards protected areas. At a trophy fee of $20,000 per elephant the accrued income would be two million dollars; with 100 hunters hunting for a seven day safari each at $200 per day an additional $140,000 would flow in and the meat sales from 100 elephant at $2.00 per kilo would generate another $400,000. Makes a total of 2.54 million dollars, or $25,400 per hunter. This again translates into a daily revenue per hunter of $3,628 (equals Rand 23,582). The average ecotourist would not generally spend more than 1,250 Rand per day. To generate the same amount of income, one would need just about 20 ecotourists for every hunter! The significantly higher environmental impact of the ecotourist as compared to the hunter becomes quite plain to see when the figures of the following table are extrapolated over a year.
Ecotourism creates much more sewage and waste, needs much more water and leads to higher traffic volumes. More traffic brings elevated sound and emission pollution and the spotlights form the game drive vehicles at night are reminiscent of London during the Blitz. A tourist lodge is a large semi permanent to permanent structure that will deface natural habitat for a long time. A tented hunting camp can be moved and will leave behind very little long lasting impact. Tourist lodges almost without exception – require electricity which has to be carried by power lines crisscrossing and defacing the environment. A tented hunting camp, much like a wilderness trail camp, can happily get by on paraffin or gas lighting. Logic clearly indicates that allocating a hunting quota of animals which would have to be culled anyway makes good ecological and yes (perish the thought) financial sense. It would be wise for Park officials to administrate and run such hunting operations themselves and not put it out to tender for private outfitters. Allowing private outfitters a foot in the door would open the door to corruption and related malpractices. National Parks would appear to have learned a lesson in this regards. A number of years ago, SANParks decided to put one of the most successful ventures on record, wilderness trails, out to tender for private operators. The concession period is soon to expire and reports I have heard indicate that SANParks would like to take wilderness trails back under its wing. Wise move! Bold decisions have to be made in the interest of long term conservation. Assigning hunting quotas from animals that might have to be culled makes ecological and financial sense, but sometimes people allow emotions to overrule good sense. As conservationists we take no delight in having to consider and sometimes implement culling as a wildlife management option. Unfortunately we are faced with the reality of an ever increasing human population and declining space for wildlife which has to be fenced into ever smaller enclosures. It does not require a high IQ to understand that the habitat of fenced game populations has a carrying capacity limit. When this threshold is exceeded game populations have to be reduced. If wildlife managers are prevented to implement sound management by politicians or well meaning but naïve animal rights pressure groups, what remaining wild land there is, will itself be destroyed. Whether in the long term we, as South African wildlife managers, will have the freedom to make choices based on scientific/ecological principles remains open. International politics will in all likelihood have the final say. If you don’t believe me, have a look at an extract from a report recently submitted by TRAFFIC to the South African Government on the hunting industry in South Africa via the Panel of Experts on Hunting: “The actions of organizations and governments outside of South Africa have the potential to impact both negatively and positively on the hunting industry. In 1999, TRAFFIC East & Southern Africa was subcontracted by the US Agency for international Development (USAID) …” (Editor’s note: the full text can be downloaded on http://www.environment.gov.za/HotIssues/2005/29062005/07October/PoE_research_report_Status_quo_of_hunting_industry_2st_draft.doc) What is the association between USAID and TRAFFIC? The words “actions and governments OUTSIDE of South Africa potentially impact …” have an ominous ring to them. Do we make our own conservation decisions? I think not! Not the way we were able to do so in the past. Watch the press as the culling debate unfolds and you will see what I mean. Perhaps the readers have now a more balanced perspective with regards to the issues and should make a point of sharing their knowledge with others. A version of this article was previously printed in Game & Hunt, Vol12/4 (2006). 3 Game Rangers Association of Africa: Position on Hunting in South African Protected Areas This statement was prepared by members of the Executive Committee of the GRAA and was circulated to its members for comment. While the majority of members support the contents of this statement, there are some who may not be in complete agreement, and the statement may thus not represent the opinions of all GRAA members. (The text has been shortened by the editor of African Indaba) There is more wildlife on private land in South Africa today than there was before wildlife became an economically viable form of land use. In areas that are not suitable for non-consumptive tourism, the hunting industry has created the basis for many livestock production units to convert to extensive wildlife production. Hunting is both a revenue-earner and a tool to support conservation management objectives. The societal, economical and environmental gains that this industry has created merits support and protection. In the African Indaba eNewsletter and elsewhere there has been an increased level of lobbying for hunting inside protected areas in South Africa. Opposition to these views has come from various quarters, including the SA Hunters' and Game Conservation Association (SAJWV) who published an official statement totally rejecting hunting in national parks. SAJWV also mentioned that only about 0.5% of South Africans are hunters and that the parks system belongs to all people. In their official statement SAJWV cited, inter alia, ecological impacts of hunting in national parks and ethical considerations as reasons why they can not endorse the proposed hunting in national parks. The Panel [of Experts on Hunting] emphasized that the system of national and provincial parks in South Africa accords the highest level of conservation to areas of unique biodiversity significance. These parks are mostly on publicly owned land, although the Protected Areas Act does provide for the incorporation of privately owned land into such parks on a contractual basis. The national and provincial parks systems are vitally important for biodiversity conservation and they also provide a unique experience for the persons visiting them. There is "sense of place" and an experience of nature that should be protected in these areas. In principle the GRAA supports the recommendation of the Panel (on which the Professional Hunters Association of South Africa was represented) that commercial hunting practices should be prohibited on publicly owned land in national and provincial parks - this includes special nature reserves, national parks and nature reserves as per the Protected Areas Act definitions. However, commercial hunting has already been allowed in some publicly owned protected areas in South Africa for some time, such as in former Bophutatswana (apartheid era independent state) national parks which are now managed by the relevant Provincial protected area agency. In recognition of the important role that hunting plays in these areas, the GRAA therefore recommends that the principle should be applied that there should not be hunting in protected areas except in those that were/are originally established with hunting as one of their primary founding objectives. In determining a hunting policy for South Africa it is fitting to compare and consider the policies in other African countries. Tanzania is Africa's leading hunting destination. In that country a clear distinction is made between Game Reserves (i.e. Selous), where hunting is allowed, and National Parks (i.e. Serengeti), where hunting is prohibited. In Kenya, hunting is not allowed in any public protected area. In Namibia hunting is recognized as a legitimate land use that makes an important contribution to the economy - it creates jobs and funds the management of areas that are not suitable for non-consumptive tourism - but hunting is also not allowed in national parks. In the case of South Africa where hunting is allowed in certain protected areas, perhaps a clear distinction should be made between these parks and other protected areas, as is the case in Tanzania? The GRAA supports the views of the Panel which acknowledges that there is a need to manage population numbers in protected areas and recommends that where culling is required it should be undertaken by the public authority in charge and not made available on concession. Furthermore, that where contractual parks have been established with private landowners and community, or where fences between private land and national and provincial parks have been removed, limited forms of hunting can be allowed on that private land, subject to the agreement of the conservation authority in charge of the park, the establishment of a proper management plan, and scientifically based off-take. Similar arrangements should apply to hunting in protected environments outside of the parks system. 4 News from Africa Angola The illegal ivory trade has doubled over the last 12 to 18 months, according to a WWF/TRAFFIC report. Over 1.5 tons of worked ivory products, representing the tusks of at least 300 African elephants, were observed during the June 2005 survey. To support elephant conservation, CITES Parties adopted an action plan to shut down Africa's unregulated ivory markets at the 13th CoP in October 2004. However, of the 37 countries that still harbor wild populations of African Elephants, Angola is the only one that remains a non-Party to CITES and is, in fact, the only nation in sub-Saharan Africa to remain outside of the Convention. Botswana Richard Root (68), a professor at the University of Washington Medical School who moved to Botswana to help alleviate a shortage of doctors there, was killed when a crocodile dragged him from a canoe, whilst on a wildlife tour of the Limpopo River in remote north-eastern Botswana Root taught at Penn in the early 1970s before moving on to Yale and then, in 1982, to Seattle. He was in a lead canoe with the tour guides when the crocodile rose out of the water and grabbed him. He was not seen again. The tour guides were wary of hippos, but there had been no reports of crocodile attacks in the area. 5 PHASA Presence at Major US Hunting Shows Courtesy: PHASA Safari Club International The support PHASA received from SCIwas tremendous. Not only did SCI make a $3000 donation to the PHASA Conservation and Empowerment Fund, they also auctioned the PHASA hunt at the Friday night banquet. The outfitters who were chosen for the hunt by way of a draw, were Phillip Bronkhorst and Abie Steyn. The hunt fetched $10,000 of which $9,000 goes into the PHASA fund. This effort is a significant gesture by SCI, PHASA and our members in showing government back home that as an industry, we are committed to transformation. We hope that this hunt package will become an annual item on the SCI evening auction and that PHASA builds it up both in value and prestige, perhaps with support too from government in way of some animals from their reserves! Dallas Safari Club Once again Dallas Safari Club welcomed PHASA as VIP guests. DSC continues to support PHASA on all fronts. PHASA approves all SA outfitters on the DSC show and Dallas Safari Club in turn limits the number of donated hunts offered at auction. The DSC convention has grown tremendously in size in recent years and draws visitors from the area and surrounding states. The number of PHASA members exhibiting was the same as previous years. Dallas Safari Club supported the PHASA Conservation and Empowerment Fund with a $5,000 donation. PHASA is extremely grateful for all the support received from DSC and from Gray Thornton, their CEO, in particular. Houston Safari Club Held at the Woodlands about 40 minutes north of downtown Houston this show was also their biggest yet. The Houston Safari ClubShow was oversubscribed by PHASA members. Houston Safari Club also cooperates with PHASA to regulate who gets booths on the HSC show. 6 Dieter Ochsenbein Receives SCI McElroy Award By Gerhard R Damm “Named for SCI’s founder and chairman emeritus, the C.J. McElroy Award honors a hunting industry person of the world’s community who has made great contributions to the sport of hunting, achieved excellence in worldwide hunting, displayed a dedication to the conservation of wildlife, and has a history of service to the global hunting community and to Safari Club International’s goals. Potential nominees must have shown exemplary ethics in business and be committed to SCI’s programs.” During the 2006 Convention in Reno the C J McElroy Award Committee of Safari Club International selected Dieter Ochsenbein of South Africa as 11 th recipient. Dieter is the first person from Africa to be honored with the McElroy Buffalo. A long-standing live member and avid supporter of SCI, Dieter did not miss the SCI Annual Hunters’ Convention for almost two decades. Since the inception of the SCI Special Hunters’ Award Program for physically disabled hunters, now named the SCI Pathfinder Award, Dieter Ochsenbein was amongst the program’s most generous supporters. In 1997 Lance Norris selected Dieter for the “SCI President’s Award”. According to Lance, the main award criteria were his expert advice in hunting and conservation matters and especially his singular dedication in the yearlong struggle to obtain the release of hundreds of confiscated trophies from over fifty hunters held by the Tanzanian Authorities because of financial irregularities committed by a safari operator during the season. Thanks to Dieter’s efforts, these hunters not only got their trophies, but also saved considerable additional expenses. From 2000 to 2005 Dieter served as SCI International Director and was subsequently appointed Honorary Director. The PHASA Executive Committee would not have been complete without Dieter – almost fifteen years until 2005 he volunteered sound advice and ample time to the professional hunting industry and he served as the Association’s president in 2003 and 2004. PHASA presented Dieter with the “Wildlife Utilization Award” for his dedication. Dieter Ochsenbein was and is an untiring proponent of Fair Chase and ethical hunting and his African hunting achievements were recognized by the South African Hunting & Conservation Association with the Musgrave Award in 2003 – an honor reserved for only the most distinguished South African hunters of African game. Dieter’s museum-like trophy room bears witness to his adventurous exploits in Botswana , Zimbabwe, Benin, Tanzania, Kenya, Central African Republic, South Africa and the Republic of Congo with many outstanding trophies. More than a decade ago, Dieter got bitten by the “mountain-hunt-bug”; the only remedies for this serious disease are constant trips to the world’s most remote mountain ranges and a continuous quest for the elusive Ovis and Capra species. His trophy room shows proof of these exploits, with wild sheep and ibex from the remotest regions of Asia and North America. Dieter’s quest for the North American Grand Slam for Wild Sheep is still ongoing and will keep his body and mind fit. Dieter Ochsenbein’s hunting career started in his native Switzerland at the tender age of eight. It was the yearning for safari adventures which brought him and his wife Erika to African shores – and their plans of returning to Europe after a year or two were quickly scuttled as soon as they had drunk from African waters. After a stint in the engineering business, Dieter seized an opportunity when Highveld Taxidermists came up for sale in 1984. Last not least, taxidermy was his long standing hobby and he was already quite proficient in the art. His astute business acumen and singular dedication soon turned the derelict taxidermy company which he took over into a premier enterprise. His clients come from all corners of the world – not only hunters, also a number of museums have selected Dieter’s intimate knowledge of the African animals to create truly lifelike representations. Now, after more than 20 years, Dieter, his wife Erika and their son Thomas have transformed Highveld Taxidermists into one of the leading taxidermy enterprises of the world. Dieter and his family live near Pretoria in a picturesque bushveld setting.
4 News from Africa Angola The illegal ivory trade has doubled over the last 12 to 18 months, according to a WWF/TRAFFIC report. Over 1.5 tons of worked ivory products, representing the tusks of at least 300 African elephants, were observed during the June 2005 survey. To support elephant conservation, CITES Parties adopted an action plan to shut down Africa's unregulated ivory markets at the 13th CoP in October 2004. However, of the 37 countries that still harbor wild populations of African Elephants, Angola is the only one that remains a non-Party to CITES and is, in fact, the only nation in sub-Saharan Africa to remain outside of the Convention. Botswana Richard Root (68), a professor at the University of Washington Medical School who moved to Botswana to help alleviate a shortage of doctors there, was killed when a crocodile dragged him from a canoe, whilst on a wildlife tour of the Limpopo River in remote north-eastern Botswana Root taught at Penn in the early 1970s before moving on to Yale and then, in 1982, to Seattle. He was in a lead canoe with the tour guides when the crocodile rose out of the water and grabbed him. He was not seen again. The tour guides were wary of hippos, but there had been no reports of crocodile attacks in the area. Botswana Conservation biologist Cheryl-Samantha Owen has conducted research into the sustainability of elephant trophy hunting in Botswana. The results suggest that the current level of trophy hunting of mature bulls is sustainable and unlikely to threaten future availability of trophy sized tusk. She also writes “that in terms of numbers, the population could support double the current hunting pressure, although within two decades the supply of larger trophy animals would dry up. However, given that on average only 68% of the hunting quota is used, it is highly unlikely that an increased quota will ever be fully utilized”. African Indaba has information about the 2005 elephant hunting results of one of the largest outfitters in Botswana. This company hunted 59 elephant bulls during the 2005 season and the average tusk weight was 63 pounds. Ethiopia A senior expert in Ethiopia's Wildlife Conservation Department stated that the Ethiopian red fox may be wiped out unless it is protected from domestic animals bringing rabies into national parks. He said there are fewer than 500 red or simien foxes left, most of them found in Bale Mountains National Park and over the past two months five out of a population of 200 red foxes had died in the park, suspected of being infected with rabies from dogs accompanying livestock to the area. Mozambique Over a period of 18 months, between 2001 and 2002, lions killed 70 people in Cabo Delgado province. Most of these were people out at night protecting their crops from elephant. Crocs are responsible for most deaths. Many croc deaths are not reported, simply because of the logistics involved for many people in getting to a government office. A rough estimate would be around 300 people a year nationwide. In 2004 thirty people were taken in the Mutarara district on the north bank of the Zambezi. Probably a similar number were killed on the south bank. Mozambique There were a number of elephant shot on problem animal control with tusk weights of over 40 lbs a side and a couple over 70 lbs a side. This could be interpreted that the illegal hunting that has taken place has not been so heavy that it has depressed the average tusk weight. Namibia A study by the University of Namibia found that sections of the Etosha National Park fence along the northern border are deteriorating; those sections bordering the Omusati Region were in the worst condition. Lion, hyena, elephant and jackal wandering out with lion the major problem animals in the Oshana Region, while hyenas and jackals cause problems in Oshikoto. Namibia An analysis of Human Wildlife Conflict (HWC) in the country has found that between 2001 and 2004, there was a marked increase in incidents of conflict between humans and wildlife. Now MET will look into measures that will mitigate the impact. The Caprivi region records an annual loss of about N$5.6 million to GDP. Caprivi, according to Dr Flip Stander, by far outweighs all the other regions regarding conflict frequency. A draft National Policy on Human-Wildlife Conflict Management Policy will look into the economic impact of HWC on communities, identify an appropriate level of decision making for managing the problem, prevent conflict and minimize the damage and also develop stakeholder skills to manage HWC efficiently and effectively. Namibia By the time this African Indaba reaches your computer, the Namibian authorities should have finalized the auction of the big game concessions; for more than two years the global hunting community waited for this. It is said that hunting is about to commence as early as August 2006 and you can look forward for some very interesting packages. Kenya A report commissioned by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and published during a scientific seminar on avian influenza in Nairobi in April says that intensive poultry operations along migratory wild bird routes are incompatible with protecting the health of ecosystems that birds depend upon. They also increase the risks of transfer of pathogens between migrating birds and domestic fowl. The report focuses on the environmental factors underpinning the re-emergence of old diseases and which are likely to be triggering the rise of new ones like highly virulent avian influenza or H5N1. The report concludes that current "heroic efforts" focusing on "isolation, quarantine, culls and medications" are likely to be quick fixes offering limited short term benefits and recommends that governments, the United Nations and public health experts back environmental measures like massive restoration of wetlands in order to counter the spread of H5N1. Restoring tens of thousands of lost and degraded wetlands could go a long way towards reducing the threat of avian flu pandemics by dispersing wild birds away from domestic ones. Kenya Kenya Wildlife Conservation and Management Network co-coordinator, Wilson Mwang'ombe, said the management of the Tsavo East and West National Parks by local authorities would enable the locals to benefit from wildlife resources. The proposal was made at a Mombasa hotel during a workshop sponsored by ActionAid, which focused on inequality in Kenya. The State should withdraw the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) from managing the two parks, and give the local councils the authority to run them. He recalled that during the Kanu regime the locals were promised that they would get 25% of the park revenue and later President Mwai Kibaki promised that 10% would go to the local authorities, but nothing happened so far. South Africa Benkoe Lions, a company based in Coligny/South Africa, claims in an advertisement in African Sporting Gazette that it is “rated as one of the largest lion breeding projects in South Africa” and invites readers to a so-called “Conservation Protected Hunt” (whatever they mean with this expression remains obscure). A quick check at their website reveals that Benkoe is obviously a canned shooting operation offering a photo catalogue of lions at prices according to sex, mane and age. Certainly it is not hunting what they offer – and it is not conservation what they practise. Might have something to do with making money, though! South Africa The Department of Environmental Affairs & Tourism (DEAT) will publish the draft hunting regulations on May 2 nd for public comment. Interested parties should check the DEAT website on or after this date and submit comment. South Africa A Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) Scorecard Task Team has been established for the hunting industry of South Africa. On this team are PHASA President Stewart Dorrington, Gary van den Berg, Executive Committee Member of Wildlife Ranching South Africa (WRSA), Lorraine Kretzschmar from the Taxidermists Association of South Africa (TASA), Constant Hoogkamer from the Nature Conservation Department in the North West Province and Dr Pieter Botha from the national Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT). Zimbabwe Wayne Dietrechsen has been caught in possession of an irregularly issued PH license with the number 472. The license has been confiscated by National Parks investigators and Dietrechsen has been informed he may not hunt lion, elephant, hippo or buffalo. The case was further complicated with Jacob Mudenda writing to the Hunting Report in January saying “on 21st December 2005 I, in my capacity as the National Chairman of the Safari Operators Association of Zimbabwe - which is an amalgamation of Zimbabwe Indigenous Safari Operators (ZISOA) and Zimbabwe Association Of Tour & Safari Operators (ZATSO), personally went to the National Parks and Wildlife Authority Headquarters in Harare to confirm if [sic] Mr Dietrechsen was issued with a Professional Hunter’s License. That was confirmed. His Professional Hunter’s license is Number 472. I have also personally examined the said license and am satisfied that it is a full license without any restrictions at all.” At a meeting between National Parks and the Safari Industry on 2nd of March the withdrawal of Dietrechsen's fraudulently obtained license has been confirmed and Mudenda was asked to explain his actions. (The Zimbabwean PH master list can be obtained from fishunt@zol.co.zw.)
African Indaba eNewsletter Opinions expressed in African Indaba are not necessarily those of the publisher and editor. Whilst every care is taken in the preparation of this newsletter, we cannot accept any responsibility for errors. African Indaba eNewsletter
is published every two months as a free service to the sustainable
use community. Please share it with others who may be interested
in the topics covered by African Indaba. 7 Rebuilding the Wildlife Sector in Zimbabwe (Part 1) A pre-feasibility study with action proposals for donors and NGOs By Dr. Rolf D. Baldus and Dr. Graham Child Introductory Note: It is with great concern that we have observed the wanton destruction of wildlife and wildlife areas in Zimbabwe over the last decade. However, we are positive that the present political nightmare will come to an end and that the people of Zimbabwe will be allowed to rebuild their country. It should not be forgotten which important role wildlife has played in the economy of the country and the potential wildlife can have again in the future. “People and Wildlife e.V.”, a small German pro-wildlife NGO, has commissioned a study which should assist donors from the international, Governmental and private sectors to identify the potential and plan future assistance for the reconstruction of the wildlife sector. The study was written by Graham Child, now a consultant, and formerly Director of the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Management in Zimbabw e , and Rolf D. Baldus, a German economist with many years experience in wildlife management in Africa. Both have written the paper in their personal and private capacity only. African Indaba publishes this document in three parts starting with this issue. 1. Executive Summary A decade ago Zimbabwe was one of the leading countries inwildlife conservation and management. The sector earned over US$ 300 million per year through conservation generated by protected areas belonging to the state, rural community run wildlife management areas and private game ranches andreserves. Sadly most of this has been destroyed or severely damaged within a few years ofpoliticallawlessness and corruption led by the Mugabe regime. Wildlife however, has a great ability to recover within a relatively short period oftime, provided the natural habitats remain intact, sound protection and wise management can be reintroduced. The formerly thriving wildlifesector can be restored, but to achieve this, a newly established democracy will need the assistance of bilateral and international donors and “hands-on” conservation NGOs. The future political decision-makers of Zimbabwe as well as donor institutions must not overlook the conservation and sustainable use of wildlife once a new start is possible. Reconstruction of Zimbabwe will certainly drawsubstantial international support. Wildlife conservation is not a luxury that may be taken up at a later stage after the most urgent tasks of rehabilitation have been achieved. Zimbabwe’s wildlife heritage is the draw card of the country’s tourist industry, which is a sector that can quickly be turned around and play an important role in the reconstruction of the country. For the recovery of the wildlife sector, it must be incorporated in economic development and poverty reduction strategies from the start of the reconstruction effort. Many tracts of land formerly devoted to wildlife are now occupied or resettled. Appropriate action is needed fast or the remaining wildlife in these areas will be lost forever. Past experience shows that these areas are unsuited to conventional agriculture, and that wildlife production is the most appropriate form of land use. It is therefore sensible to restore the wildlife populations for the benefit of community-based and/or private management regimes. As is shown, these wildlife-based land use systems mutually benefit one another and are not exclusive. Furthermore, the sustainable use of wildlife is in line with the Convention on Biodiversity and the ruling principles of the World Conservation Union (IUCN), of which Zimbabwe is a member. This paper takes a firm stand of zero cooperation with the current Government of Zimbabwe, which is responsible for country’s current state of affairs. It is intended as a pre-feasibility study from where a future democratic Government and interested donors may initiate their own more detailed planning. Also, this paper is not a detailed analysis of that current state of affairs. Instead, the authors put forward a range of ideas, but not project proposals in the fields of:
2. Introduction Zimbabwe had a proud record in the field of wildlife conservation and had developed an economically and ecologically sustainable wildlife sector by the early 1990s. The country had contributed significantly to southern Africa’s pre-eminence in the conservation of wildlife and its habitats and had achieved strong private sector growth. Areas supporting wildlife increased rapidly in support of a significant and diversified wildlife industry guided by free market principles within a progressive institutional framework. The CAMPFIRE programme was one of the first institutionalised systems of community based wildlife conservation and use in Africa. From being a world leader in the wildlife field Zimbabwe has been reduced to a non-entity in the last five years. The impressive progress the country once had was nullified by inept and corrupt administration, coupled with politically motivated lawlessness. In the case of the lucrative wildlife industry the resource base was squandered through wanton poaching and habitat degradation in which the Party and Government officials entrusted with the stewardship of the resources were often prominent. Halting and reversing this trend will be a massive undertaking, but one well justified by the ability of African wildlife to maximise long-term rural production on a broad front, especially in disadvantaged areas unsuited to sustainable agriculture. It will require a focused programme to salvage the Parks and Wildlife Estate and allow the resource outside to resume contributing, as it should, to long-term human well-being and the alleviation of rural poverty. This paper suggests a prioritised holistic approach to rehabilitating the wildlife sector in Zimbabwe as soon as possible after the inevitable political change. Urgency in mounting such a programme is stressed because significant political change can be expected to result in a period of confusion as a new order establishes. Past experience shows that such periods are fraught with both dangers to and opportunities for the proper management of fugitive resources like wildlife. It is proposed that donors include wildlife conservation into their assistanceprogramme when Zimbabwe’s reconstruction becomes an international task. This would contribute to biodiversity preservation aswell as poverty reduction through sustainable wildlife use. Planning for such projects should start now. 3. Past Achievements of the Wildlife Sector In Zimbabwe 3.1 From 1960 to 1990 Until 1960 wildlife was in serious decline in Zimbabwe but the pattern was common in much of Africa. Colonial legislation focused responsibility for managing wildlife in top-down bureaucracies, denied its inherent economic value and prevented people on the land from managing it in conjunction with the rest of the ecosystems of which it was a part. As a result, decision makers over looked its value, from politicians and civil servants to landholders who decided its fate on the ground. Population numbers and wildlife habitats declined through overt action to eliminate a worthless competitor for the benefit of agriculture or simply from benign neglect. The decline in the wildlife resources of the country were halted and reversed with the introduction of the Wildlife Conservation Act (1960). Inauguration of the Act heralded a period of 15 years of adaptive institutional reform. Landholders were allowed greater discretion over the management of wildlife on their land and could market its products with increasing freedom. Landholders were encouraged to maximise their profits from using wildlife sustainably. Benefits from the resource and accountability for conserving it were brought close together where they could interact positively and serve as a positive incentive for landholders in whom authority over the management of wildlife was now centred. Institutional frameworks immediately halted and reversed the downward trend in large wild mammal populations. Furthermore, with the institutional framework in place, wildlife was able to benefit from the declining terms of trade for ubiquitous agricultural commodities that commenced in the mid 1970s. Farmers who had complained that they could not “farm in a zoo” now accepted that they could not farm sustainably and profitably “outside the zoo”. In switching to wildlife alone or in combination with livestock they demonstrated the economic importance of having conserved the biological diversity inherent in a spectrum of large indigenous mammals and their habitats. Co nfidence gained and lessons learned by the institutional reform process were consolidated and extended in the Parks and Wildlife Act, 1975 that replaced it. This Act recognised National Parks and five other classes of ecological reserve and provided for the better management of the reserves and wildlife, including fish, outside their borders. Landholders were allowed considerable freedom in the management and marketing of the wildlife and its derivatives from their land, without Government abrogating its responsibility for ensuring the proper conservation and use of the resource. Discriminatory implicit taxation, such as through the imposition of government hunting licence fees, and high transaction costs through an unreasonable requirement for permits, were effectively abolished. Instead, landholders including the State on State Land were encouraged to maximise the benefits earned by the resource within the limits of the land use policy for each property. Within a decade, land with significant wildlife exceeded 30% of the country, with that in the private and communal agricultural sectors exceeding the area of the Parks and Wildlife Estate. A financially important industry dominated by recreational hunting and tourism and their ancillary services had grown up around the two, and the private sector was demonstrating improved environmentally friendly land use. Socio-economically sound institutional development had been integrated with ecologically sustainable resource management towards creating a self-supporting and holistic conservation programme. CAMPFIRE grew from the confidence in wildlife, as a productive, profitable
and competitive land use, that had been tested on commercial land.
The two sectors remained mutually beneficial with communal farmers benefiting
from the scales of operation, marketing strategies, examples, and
standards provided by commercial game producers. They in turn benefited
from the complementary range of trophy animals available on Communal Land.
Piggybacking wildlife use in Communal Areas on that in Commercial Areas
was largely responsible for making the former viable and able to help counter
land degradation and mitigate the resulting poverty vortex, even where
the resource was limited. CAMPFIRE’s biggest shortcoming was that benefits
did not reach directly to the communities, but were channelled through 3.2 Destruction of a Thriving Sector of the Economy Profitable game ranching increased often to the exclusion of other forms of agriculture on commercial farms and ranches and the internationally renowned CAMPFIRE programme grew and flourished in the communal areas, despite covert Government opposition. On commercial land, wildlife was seen as a ruse to evade taxes, while on communal land it was resented because it was a powerful democratising force eroding central authority over the people. Success in both cases depended on individual landholder families benefiting directly in financial terms from having wildlife on their land. Use of wildlife in the two land classes remained highly complementary and its strength in the face of growing political adversity confirmed the soundness of the approaches to conservation that they embodied. The wildlife sector became the fourth major strut in the national economy and continued to grow until the early 1990s when political circumstances caused it to falter. New appointments with limited competence and hence confidence began to curtail the liberalisation that had led to the growth of the sector, because they saw it as a threat to their power base. Ordinary landholders paid a high price for this political patronage and the incompetence and corruption it nurtured. The strength of the wildlife sector based on commercial and communal land and the Parks and Wildlife Estate showed considerable resilience in the face of the abnormal politically motivated challenges. This occurred despite considerable discrimination in favour of incompetent and corrupt party supporters in the award of concessions and other permissions, and in the appointment of officials. It was not until the countrywide politically sponsored lawlessness accompanying the redistribution of land that the wildlife sector succumbed. The land redistribution exercise encouraged widespread poaching, which extended to the military and the Parks Authority itself. Law enforcement agencies often refused to take action against it, on the spurious pretext that the offences were a political act and thus outside their jurisdiction. Objective data as to the extent of the countrywide poaching is difficult to assemble, but knowledgeable observers believe 60 to 80% of the wildlife outside the Parks and Wildlife Estate has been slaughtered, with the situation in some parts of the country worse than in others. Additionally, there has been serious poaching in the Estate and the Party paid destitute people to destroy habitats on many farms through the wanton felling of woodland and its destruction with fire. It is of little surprise that the tourism and to a lesser extent recreational hunting previously supported by wildlife has been greatly depressed. In the absence of reliable economic data it is impossible to determine the extent of this collapse or the loss to the national economy that it represents. Both are, however, considerable. Some recreational hunting has continued as international hunters are less prone to being put off from visiting a trouble torn country than are ordinary tourists, but generally both sub-sectors of the tourism industry are in a depressed state. Many private sector ventures have closed down, patronage of others is minimal, and many highly qualified Professional Hunters, Guides and other essential staff have emigrated in the massive brain drain that is afflicting Zimbabwe and depriving it of skills and people with the right attitude towards tourism in all its forms. There is reliable information that many hunting blocks have been taken over by political cronies of the party and government and that they exploit these areas in cooperation with unscrupulous operators and professional hunters unsustainably. The good news is that wildlife has a remarkable ability to recoverin a relatively short timeprovided some protection is reintroduced and the habitat has not been lost. It will be possible to reverse the present trends in the industry provided law and order is brought back ad the sector receives the necessary support. Rebuilding the wildlife and tourism sector in Zimbabwe following political change will be a considerable undertaking. It will present both opportunities and challenges and will be difficult without carefully directed and prioritised external assistance to recreate an effective system suited to local Zimbabwean conditions. These conditions are changing all the time so that a new management system should seek to combine considerable appropriate past experience with new innovative measures to accommodate the future. Urgency is important as a measure of confusion is bound to occur during the political transition, especially as the new hierarchy will probably lack experience in managing wild resources at the national level. This period will be one of opportunities and risks for wildlife. Opportunities will arise because the new government is likely to have an open mind on many day-to-day actions before its position with respect to particular issues becomes entrenched. At the same time there is a risk that if there is a vacuum of indecision, unscrupulous elements, many of which are already in position, will continue to abuse the resource and will entrench themselves. Radical realistic action is needed quickly to halt abuses and set the direction for an effective and efficient phased recovery of the wildlife industry, based on sound socio-economic and ecological principles acceptable in the country and to the new government. The aim must be to halt and root out corruption and simultaneously to replace it with action to promote recovery of the resource and the industry it supports. This should commence with a review of policy and the setting and prioritising of goals within a realistic time frame; apportioning accountability to recognisable individuals and organisations to achieve measurable objectives; and allowing those responsible to act within a policy agreed by the new Minister. This is bound to be influenced by the nature of future land tenure and in particular the extent to which a new government will reinstate the former pre-eminence of commercial agriculture. The revival of wildlife production outside the Estate will then depend on:
The resulting action program should be flexible, opportunistic, and sensitive to the independent variables that are bound to emerge as it is implemented. It is not possible, at this stage, to predict the opportunities that will arise as the result of future land tenure and other political changes. The availability of skills to exploit the various options is also not known as many potentially valuable skills that emerged during the growth of the industry have left the country. Because of this lack of information and the many variables likely to impact on the revived wildlife sector, this initial strategy for action omits detail and concentrates on the general form that the action should take, stressing important priorities. It must concentrate in the wildlife sectoron a few priority areas, the following in particular:
A number of ideas for actions to be taken in those fields after change to a majority rule government committed to democratic representation, the rule of law, good governance and economic reconstruction will follow in the second and third part of this paper. Abbreviations CAMPFIRE – Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources, CBNRM – Community Based Natural Resources Management, CEO – Chief Executive Officer, DNP – Department of National Parks and Wildlife Management, NPA - National Park and Wildlife Management Authority, IUCN – World Conservation Union The authors Dr Graham Child was the Director of the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Management in Zimbabwe from 1971 to1986 . He has been an independent wildlife consultant since retirement and has a wide experience international experience in all aspects of wildlife and protected area management Dr. Rolf D. Baldus has worked for 13 years in wildlife management, CBNRM and the rehabilitation of degraded protected areas in Eastern Africa. In Zimbabwe he was responsible for planning a donor funded wildlife project in the early nineties (www.wildlife-baldus.com) “People and Wildlife” e.V. is a registered NGO and charity in Germany. Its objective is to foster community based wildlife conservation in Africa. Disclaimer The paper reflects the personal opinion of the authors only and not necessarily the views of institutions they work for. We thank a number of persons who have received and commented on earlier drafts, without bearing any responsibility for the content. (End of part 1 – to be continued in the next issue) 8 Pierre van der Walt’s International Big Bore Cartridge Load Data Collection Reviewed by: Kenneth Richardson This 168 glossy page, A-4 (210mm x 297mm), full color, coffee table quality paperback could just as well have been called the International Hunter’s Manual of African Big Bore Cartridges. This is not a book filled with anecdotes in the Pondoro Taylor fashion. It is a definitive reference manual par excellence, which provides the reader with the history, plus an abundance of technical and dimensional specifications, application ranges, performance thresholds, sighting and the reloading principles and tricks of 31 of the most loved African big game cartridges. The incredibly extensive information is beautifully conveyed by means of a logical, flowing writing style. 106 full color photos and 150 tables prompted former game warden, David Sutherland, now director of Sutherland Hunting Academy to state: ‘You will spend thousands of Rands on other reference books and still not have the information concentrated in this one publication.’ Starting with the 9,3x62mm Mauser and ending with the .585 Nyati, the book offers more than 1,700 loads for all popular international propellants brands – including South African Somchem propellants. It is a publication written to be a useful, everyday companion to every international hunter, irrespective of whether he is American, Scandinavian, African or Australian, professional or amateur. It is a book that will settle virtually all campfire arguments because it is factual – not emotional. You do not find references to cartridges that penetrate seven eland and a tree in this one. But it offers even more than just fantastic specific cartridge information. It contains the most sensible Propellant Burning Rate Chart I have seen, as developed by the author over a period of 20 years. This is augmented by a short, easy-to-understand thesis on solid bullet terminal performance and instability which opened my eyes. It introduces readers to the concepts of Green- and Amber bands of cartridge application on African big game; something I have never seen in a book before, but which should have been published decades ago. It is therefore not surprising that the PHASA Chairman commented on the back cover: ‘A world class reference work for every hunter, collector and big bore enthusiast … worthy of PHASA`s full endorsement. I would strongly recommend that every serious big game hunter … get himself a copy.’ Although it is a reference work, it is something you can pick up and read from cover to cover with a bit of perseverance - but it was clearly not intended to be used that way. Even so it tempts one to at least read up on every cartridge incorporated over a short period of time Like all other books this one is not perfect. I would have liked to have seen even more cartridges included even if I understand the cost considerations. I miss the .425 Westley Richards, the .376 Steyr, the .450 No.2 and the .476 Westley Richards. The odd grammatical or spelling error that slipped through the net is there, but hard to find and not bothersome at all. I also hope that this publication will one day make it to hard cover as it deserves such treatment. Like PHASA’s chairman, I unreservedly recommend International Big Bore Cartridge Load Data Collection to every serious hunter, reloader or collector. It is the most informative book on big bore cartridges I have ever read. International Big Bore Cartridge Load Data Collection retails for R 270-00 (US$ 43.78) plus shipping and it is worth every cent and more. It is published by Zimbi Books, Pretoria, South Africa. Tel & Fax: +27-12-3462326. E-mail: zimbi@mweb.co.za. For more information visit Zimbi’s website www.zimbibooks.com
9 Achim Steiner Nominated New UNEP Chief UN News Service Achim Steiner, the head of the world’s largest environmental network, was today nominated by Secretary-General Kofi Annan to be the next Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), succeeding Klaus Toepfer on 15 June. Mr. Steiner, a German national who is expected to be elected to a 4-year term by the General Assembly, is the Director-General of the World Conservation Union (IUCN) which has over 1,000 members in 140 countries. “He has worked both at grassroots level and at the highest levels of international policy-making to address the connections between environmental sustainability, social equity, and economic development,” a spokesman for Mr. Annan said. Prior to his assumption of the directorship of the Conservation Union in 2001, Mr. Steiner served as head of the World Commission on Dams and as Senior Policy Advisor of IUCN’s Global Policy Unit, where he developed partnerships between the environmental community, the World Bank and the UN system. During Mr Toepfer’s tenure, the Program was restructured into 5 priority areas: environmental assessment and early warning, development of policy instruments, enhanced coordination with environmental conventions, technology transfer and support to Africa. Mr. Toepfer has also been instrumental in integrating environmental concerns and economic development.
“Positioning the Game Industry for Competitive Advantage”
This will be the theme of a game management conference at the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University Conference Centre (North Campus), Port Elizabeth on 4 & 5 September 2006. The target audience is game ranchers, tertiary institutions, organizations affiliated to game ranching and Government Departments related to the industry. A number of high profile speakers have been invited to speak at the conference. African Indaba will inform you about details once the list of speakers and topics has been finalized. In the meantime the organizers have issued a Call for Abstracts for consideration and inclusion into the program. Abstracts must be presented in the prescribed form before May 26 th.
Please support Bishops Lodge, the main sponsor of the African Indaba Website during your stay in Port Elizabeth. Continued from Page 7 7 Rebuilding the Wildlife Sector in Zimbabwe 7 Rebuilding the Wildlife Sector in Zimbabwe (Part 1)A pre-feasibility study with action proposals for donors and NGOs By Dr. Rolf D. Baldus and Dr. Graham Child Introductory Note: It is with great concern that we have observed the wanton destruction of wildlife and wildlife areas in Zimbabwe over the last decade. However, we are positive that the present political nightmare will come to an end and that the people of Zimbabwe will be allowed to rebuild their country. It should not be forgotten which important role wildlife has played in the economy of the country and the potential wildlife can have again in the future. “People and Wildlife e.V.”, a small German pro-wildlife NGO, has commissioned a study which should assist donors from the international, Governmental and private sectors to identify the potential and plan future assistance for the reconstruction of the wildlife sector. The study was written by Graham Child, now a consultant, and formerly Director of the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Management in Zimbabw e , and Rolf D. Baldus, a German economist with many years experience in wildlife management in Africa. Both have written the paper in their personal and private capacity only. African Indaba publishes this document in three parts starting with this issue. 1. Executive Summary A decade ago Zimbabwe was one of the leading countries inwildlife conservation and management. The sector earned over US$ 300 million per year through conservation generated by protected areas belonging to the state, rural community run wildlife management areas and private game ranches andreserves. Sadly most of this has been destroyed or severely damaged within a few years ofpoliticallawlessness and corruption led by the Mugabe regime. Wildlife however, has a great ability to recover within a relatively short period oftime, provided the natural habitats remain intact, sound protection and wise management can be reintroduced. The formerly thriving wildlifesector can be restored, but to achieve this, a newly established democracy will need the assistance of bilateral and international donors and “hands-on” conservation NGOs. The future political decision-makers of Zimbabwe as well as donor institutions must not overlook the conservation and sustainable use of wildlife once a new start is possible. Reconstruction of Zimbabwe will certainly drawsubstantial international support. Wildlife conservation is not a luxury that may be taken up at a later stage after the most urgent tasks of rehabilitation have been achieved. Zimbabwe’s wildlife heritage is the draw card of the country’s tourist industry, which is a sector that can quickly be turned around and play an important role in the reconstruction of the country. For the recovery of the wildlife sector, it must be incorporated in economic development and poverty reduction strategies from the start of the reconstruction effort. Many tracts of land formerly devoted to wildlife are now occupied or resettled. Appropriate action is needed fast or the remaining wildlife in these areas will be lost forever. Past experience shows that these areas are unsuited to conventional agriculture, and that wildlife production is the most appropriate form of land use. It is therefore sensible to restore the wildlife populations for the benefit of community-based and/or private management regimes. As is shown, these wildlife-based land use systems mutually benefit one another and are not exclusive. Furthermore, the sustainable use of wildlife is in line with the Convention on Biodiversity and the ruling principles of the World Conservation Union (IUCN), of which Zimbabwe is a member. This paper takes a firm stand of zero cooperation with the current Government of Zimbabwe, which is responsible for country’s current state of affairs. It is intended as a pre-feasibility study from where a future democratic Government and interested donors may initiate their own more detailed planning. Also, this paper is not a detailed analysis of that current state of affairs. Instead, the authors put forward a range of ideas, but not project proposals in the fields of:
2. Introduction Zimbabwe had a proud record in the field of wildlife conservation and had developed an economically and ecologically sustainable wildlife sector by the early 1990s. The country had contributed significantly to southern Africa’s pre-eminence in the conservation of wildlife and its habitats and had achieved strong private sector growth. Areas supporting wildlife increased rapidly in support of a significant and diversified wildlife industry guided by free market principles within a progressive institutional framework. The CAMPFIRE programme was one of the first institutionalised systems of community based wildlife conservation and use in Africa. From being a world leader in the wildlife field Zimbabwe has been reduced to a non-entity in the last five year |