Increase Community Involvement to Curb Poaching ???

[Toko]

Sounding the Horn: Rhino Poaching and the Legacy of ‘Apartheid Conservation’ in South Africa

Sounding the Horn: Rhino Poaching and the Legacy of ‘Apartheid Conservation’ in South Africa
Friday, 7 December 2012 / capetownglobalist

Over the course of 2012, more than 550 rhino have been brutally and unnecessarily butchered for their horns in South Africa’s national parks, comfortably eclipsing last year’s total of 448. 321 of these deaths were within the supposedly heavily-protected boundaries of the famous Kruger National Park. These numbers are particularly frightening when you consider that there are only an estimated 5,000 black rhino left in the whole of Africa, most of which are in, you guessed it, South Africa.

Not surprisingly, campaigns and agencies looking to stop this scourge have proliferated, just as public feeling towards poachers has grown into an increasingly angry fervour. Farmers have been known to boast of taking the law into their own hands and gunning down poachers they find on their land, while stickers that say things like “Drinking the blood of rhino poachers cures HIV/AIDS” are an increasingly common sight in the back windscreens of cars on the streets of Cape Town.

But are such attitudes in any way productive? As well-meaning as many individuals and groups may be in their quest to save one of Africa’s oldest and most revered beasts, their angry reaction often renders them blind to the social issues and legacies that have helped South Africa become so fertile for poachers in the first place. Like Mary Shelley’s Dr Victor Frankenstein, South Africa must consider the role it has had to play in creating this monster it now finds itself so repulsed by.

At the heart of the problem – as is so often the case in a country still struggling to convincingly cast off the shackles of apartheid – are longstanding geographical, social and economic divides. In fact, even some decades before the institutionalised segregation of apartheid, the former British administration had used a similar method to create many of South Africa’s present day National Parks, a method that would later come to be known as “fortress conservation” or, perhaps more appropriately, “apartheid conservation”.

Put simply, spaces that were generally considered ‘useless’ for anything else, were used for, in theory at least, the containment and protection of South Africa’s wildlife, whatever its former natural habitats and migration patterns may have been. Meanwhile, any indigenous groups and communities who fell within these newly ‘protected’ zones were forcefully removed, and new groups were not allowed to migrate into said areas.

It becomes clear then that not only South Africa’s land but even her wildlife became the possession and property of the colonialists, and both the revenue from this and the enjoyment of it were theirs alone. Even today, many poor rural communities on the outskirts of South Africa’s safari parks still refer to them as “white man’s parks”. Some of these communities stem from those aforementioned groups who had not only their land but their very way of life ripped from them, and have continued to struggle to adapt to the change.

In many of these communities, alcoholism and unemployment are rife. These communities have reaped little if any benefit from the droves of tourists that pour into their former land on expensive safari holidays and they receive little help from the central African National Congress government that is floundering in its attempts to provide basic services like electricity and running water even on the outskirts of South Africa’s major cities, let alone far into the bush.

With all of this in mind then, it should become easier to understand why people from these sorts of communities might be tempted into poaching. Firstly, rhino horn can fetch up to $65,000 a kilo on the black market (more than gold), and the poachers can receive sums of money that sometimes equate to more than ten years of basic salaried work. Although more rangers and new anti-poaching measures are constantly being introduced into parks like Kruger, the potential payoffs are too much to resist for many within the poor local communities, whilst the sheer size of some of these parks and the locals’ intimate knowledge of their geography make the potential deterrent of being caught and convicted relatively inconsequential at times (it has been estimated that more than 90% of poaching cases result in no convictions).

Any future conversation on tackling the scourge of rhino poaching must consider these issues, and look at how the walls of “apartheid conservation” might be gradually dismantled to allow a more integrative and harmonious approach to conservation that benefits and includes all, from the indigenous and rural communities in poaching-affected areas, to the South Africa National Parks organisation, all the way to the central government.

Again though, the main emphasis should remain on the rural communities that have, to date, often been drawn in on the wrong side of the battle. By including them in rather than separating them from the conservation of South African wildlife, they may well begin to feel an increased sense of affiliation towards, ownership of and therefore responsibility for endangered species like the rhino, especially if there were evident economic and social benefits that might come from not poaching.

In this regard, South Africa might look across the border at Namibia for inspiration, where a government program helps ensure that rural and indigenous communities have a vested interest in protecting rather than poaching rhinos in their region. These local communities are given the power to license both hunting and tourism enterprise to private companies who must agree to pump revenue back into those very same communities. Most lodges either have to pay a bed levy or must employ 50% of their staff from the local community.

In fact, even within South Africa there have been somewhat similar initiatives to return tracts of land within national park boundaries to indigenous communities who had previously been forcefully removed, and to help these communities to benefit both economically and socially from these initiatives. The Kgalagadi Transfronier Park is a good example. In 2002, a settlement was reached with South African National Parks that saw 50,000 hectares of the park’s land returned to the indigenous Khomani San and the more recently arrived Mier community, both of whom had long called the region their home before they were removed. A lodge called !Xaus was also built on this land on behalf of the Khomani and Mier, with employees recruited predominantly from the same communities. These communities also receive a substantial share of the revenue from the lodge.

Whether such initiatives are the answer when it comes to the particular case of rhino poaching remains to be seen, but moving the conservation conversation further in these kinds of directions surely can’t hurt. After all, for all the other measures that have been introduced in the past few years, the number of dead rhinos continues to grow. South Africa needs all the help it can get to turn this situation around. Paradoxically then, with a little more open-mindedness, the poor and disenfranchised rural-dwellers so often condemned as the villains might come to be the best hope of saving the day.

Christopher Clark is a member of Global21, a student-run network of international affairs magazines and a partner of FutureChallenges.

[Richprins]

Best case scenario is that Christopher is actually a concerned yet befuddled student.

Worst case scenario is that "he" is just someone spinning the rhino crisis to Europeans...

No more comment from me, as the contradictions in the article speak for themselves...

[iNdlovu]

When are we going to stop blaming apartheid for every thing that is wrong in Africa. There is no apartheid anymore (thank goodness) but I don't see our government or SanParks making much effort in putting a stop to poaching.

[Toko]

Namibia offers model to tackle poaching

January 26 2013 at 06:00pm
By Brigitte WEIDLICH

Windhoek - Faced with poachers who are ravaging elephant and rhino populations, African nations could do worse than look to Namibia for a game plan to combat the scourge.

Wildlife poaching is on the rise across Africa's vast savannahs and in the jungles and outmanned and outgunned governments have struggled to keep up.

Last year saw a record 668 rhino killed in South Africa, according to the government, while in east Africa elephant killings increased apace.

The blame has been directed toward Asia, where demand for rhino horn, held to have medicinal value, is on the increase. Elephants are prized for their ivory tusks.

After several quiet years, Namibia too has been touched by the bloody uptake.

Late last year a black rhino cow was killed and dehorned in the south African country's remote and scenic northwest, her helpless calf left to die.

Though an isolated event, for Namibians, it was a rare and fearsome echo of the past.

For decades under South African rule, the country endured profligate poaching that threatened to exterminate wildlife populations and to discourage tourist dollars.

Today things are different.

Within days of the rhino's death, a culprit was arrested. A trial is now pending.

The apparent overnight success in tracking down the poacher was in fact due to decades of work.

It began 30 years ago when Garth Owen-Smith, a pioneer of community-based conservation, visited rural homesteads to encourage residents to cherish local wildlife.

His argument was simple: wild animals and farming people with livestock can not only co-exist but actually benefit each other.

Owen-Smith recalls his point in a recent book, “An Arid Eden,” writing that “if the wildlife was conserved, it would one day attract tourists, creating jobs and bringing money to the area.”

Local communities were initially reluctant to cooperate, but eventually the plan worked.

In 1980, Namibia had an estimated 300 black rhinos left. Today their numbers total some 1,700 animals.

Desert elephants were reduced to some 155 animals in the early 1980s and now they number around 600.

According to Pierre du Preez, current rhino coordinator for the ministry of environment and tourism, the policies worked partly because tracking animals for tourists provided well-paid jobs.

“Rural neighbours to rhino populations are far more pro-conservation, making it more difficult for individuals in these communities to become poachers as this might harm the whole community,” he said.

“Better cooperation and trust exists between the (ministry), police, non-governmental organisations and the communities, thus the risk for illegal activities increases as the community will report to authorities.”

The rhino poached in December was found by local people and immediately reported to officials.

This cooperation on the ground is being augmented with high-tech tactics.

“Security devices were implanted in a significant percentage of all rhino in high-risk areas, security personnel (are) specially trained and high-tech security systems are in place,” Du Preez said.

An even more drastic measure may be on the cards. In 1989, Namibia was the first country in sub-Saharan Africa to dehorn black rhinos to prevent poaching. “This might become a possibility again,” Du Preez added.

Namibia's success also shows the importance of tackling the politics that underlie and enable poaching.

In the 1970s and 1980s, Namibia’s vast open spaces were effectively used as private hunting grounds by officials from the ruling South African government and top army personnel.

Officers visiting the war zones on Namibia’s northern borders, where guerrillas of the South West Africa People's Organisation (SWAPO) were waging an independence struggle, would be treated to hunting trips with army planes and helicopters.

Temporary tent camps were set up and cabinet members from Pretoria including defence minister PW Botha - later South Africa's president - could even enjoy ice-cubes in their rum and coke or whisky.

The result was that hundreds of elephants, rhinos, giraffe and thousands of antelopes were shot for the pot, for illegal trade and for trophies.

Former prime minister John Vorster is thought to have shot an elephant by the Ombonde River in 1973.

When Namibia won its independence from South Africa in 1990, the government laid the groundwork for a new approach on poaching - “community-based natural resource management,” a clumsy name for an effective policy.

Today, politicians may be able to set the stage for similarly successful polices by addressing demand for rhino horn at the source in Asia when signatories of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) - a treaty to protect wildlife - meet in Thailand in March. - Sapa-AFP

[nan]

I think it's a good way, involve population into the defense of their livelihood
but must bring more than a horn

but can't compare Namibia and Kruger where there is much more population in a more little space, all are not really involved in the benefice...

and dehorned... expensive, but will save the Rhinos for a long time = save tourism...
sorry a bit confuse... my expose

thanks Toko for this interesting article

[Mel]

The concept of involving the local communities and thus making them independent
and not relying on poaching as means of income is nothing new. But it needs to go
together with understanding and believing in this concept by everyone. That's very
difficult to achieve when people are driven by greed.

Although the de-horning might be a way to stop poachers, I wonder whether
tourists with their much needed money aren't put off by the sight of rhingos without
horns in the long run.

[Toko]

Community-based natural resource management in Namibia is nothing else than a model for joint ventures between the private sector and land owner communities. A "successful" example is Damaraland Camp in Torra Conservancy.

The approach of the CBNRM programme in Namibia

The CBNRM programme has three main elements:

A natural resource management and conservation programme. It promotes wise and sustainable management of natural resources, encouraging biodiversity conservation by creating the necessary conditions for sustainable use.
A rural development programme. It seeks to devolve rights and responsibilities over wildlife and tourism to rural communities, thereby creating opportunities for enterprise development and income generation.
An empowerment and capacity building programme. It encourages and assists communities and their local institutions to develop the skills and experience to sustainably develop and pro-actively pilot their own futures.

NASCO


It's pretty much the same as Tembe Elephant Park in South Africa (where there is no poaching )

[iNdlovu]

I have to say this and will probably get nailed for it, but here goes...... Namibia is an awesome country where everything works. The people have taken their independance seriously and they all have imense pride in their country and so they should, this is one of the few countries in Africa that have got it right.

Now take a look at South Africa and its close neighbour, Mozambique. In SA we have the situation where people have been granted their freedom and rightly so, the problem is that too many have grabbed this freedom without demonstrating any responsibility that freedom requires. We have so many poor people and an example has been set by their leaders that it OK to grab wealth by whatever means. Corruption and theft is the name of the game and regularly practiced and demonstrated by people in the highest echelon of government. Murder and political killings go on all the time. The result is that everyone follows suite in the scramble for personal gain and to hell with the country, the environment and the welfare of its normal citizens. We are a sick nation consumed by the rush for personal riches and the way is demonstrated by the leaders of this country. It's ok to rob, steal and kill to get there.

SanParks and the government have often appealed to communities to pass on information on susspected poachers and dealers, and some communities behave admirably in this regard, but if the powers that be in this country set the example that they do, how can we expect its citizens to be upstanding, honest and worry about the good of the whole.

Namibia has got it right and will succeed in getting it's citizens to protect its wild life, but in SA its wildlife and protected areas are a road to riches to plunder as some leaders plunder the coffers of this country.

[Toko]

KNP communities concerned about the scourge of rhino poaching - study shows

Posted on 24 September 2013
In a recent innovative research study conducted by Resource Africa for WWF South Africa in partnership with Nedbank, through the WWF Nedbank Green Trust, communities living in the Bushbuckridge and Malelane areas of Mpumalanga were engaged on issues of rhino poaching to gain an understanding of the socio and cultural dynamics affecting this issue. These areas border Kruger National Park and the surrounding Associated Private Nature Reserves and are hot spots for poaching.

Results revealed that communities in the area have a great desire and willingness to contribute towards rhino conservation. This stems from the recognition that rhinos are part of our natural heritage.

The message from the communities was clear; the rhino has a spiritual and heritage significance connecting them to their ancestry; and 90% of individuals are willing to contribute towards rhino conservation. It was further evident that 16% of individuals were aware and knew of rhino poachers living within their community. However, the elderly within the community were less open to identifying or talking about the identity of poachers as they feared repercussions.

Trust remained a high risk issue of contention where 68% of the community would rather consider supplying information on poachers if their identities are protected and an incentive is paid.

The study further discovered that these communities do not think that enough has been done to curb this issue because there has been little or no engagement with them – the very same people who have a vested interest in the survival of this species. Further to this, communities view youth, religious and traditional leaders, as major influencers on the communities (57%); providing opportunities for rhino efforts to establish ground with these influencers and have a clear focus on where these efforts could be targeted.

Dr Jo Shaw, Rhino Co-ordinator for WWF-SA explains “As a fundamental element of establishing a National Rhino Programme, WWF-SA saw it vital to involve local communities in addressing the issue of poaching and establish a common voice with the community that will curb the decreasing numbers of our national heritage - the rhino”. “Local people can be the connective tissue in informing authorities about wildlife crime happening in their community and in turn enabling the community to act as the first critical line of defense against poaching,” adds Dr Shaw.

Maseda Ratshikuni, Head of Cause Marketing at Nedbank, says, “Nedbank recognises the severity of rhino poaching in SA, and as we celebrate Heritage Day, the losses we as a country and certainly as a continent continue to experience, is a constant reminder that appropriate and unified efforts are required. Nedbank is privileged to have contributed to nature conservation through its more than 20 year journey in sustainability; and through the Nedbank Green Affinity Programme, the Trust has afforded us the opportunity to see rhino poaching through the lens of communities in aid of establishing a suitable rhino programme.”

The rhino population in South Africa is drawing ever closer to the critical tipping point where populations start to decrease; to date over 635 rhinos have been illegally killed across South Africa in 2013. This is a global issue which has local relevance to communities living in the poaching ‘hotspots’.

[Richprins]

Excellent! A few months behind KZN, but still!

Communities are recognising the potential tourism impact of poaching too, IMO.