Human
Wildlife Conflict
Background
Conflict
between wildlife and the Namibian people is a significant
and well-documented problem. Human Wildlife Conflict (HWC)
is particularly common on the communal lands in northern Namibia,
where elephants, for example, destroy crops and damage water
installations, and large carnivores regularly prey on domestic
livestock. These conflicts result in financial losses and
disrupt the lives of the local people. Community-based natural
resource management programmes (CBNRM) in Namibia, and the
emergence of communal conservancies have contributed to growing
wildlife populations. Although local communities on communal
land and owners of freehold land benefit from wildlife, the
increasing numbers of many wildlife populations lead to high
levels of HWC. The individual farmers and pastoralists that
live on the land are the ones that bear the actual costs of
living with wildlife, but they seldom share equally in the
benefits from wildlife. They generally receive no compensation
for their losses, and little assistance in managing conflicts.
This imbalance may lead to a perception that wildlife are
conserved at the cost of the rural people, which may promote
negative attitudes towards conservation and wildlife as a
whole.
The involvement
and empowerment of rural people in natural resource management,
in combination with economic and financial incentives through
sustainable use, and linked with skills development and capacity
building, have been driving forces behind changes in attitudes
towards wildlife on communal land in Namibia. The commitment
shown by Namibians has led to the remarkable recovery and
increase of wildlife populations. Despite this success, the
Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) has recognised that
living with wildlife often carries a cost. Increased wildlife
populations and expanded ranges into communal and commercial
farming areas have resulted in more frequent conflicts between
people and wildlife.
The philosophy
of the CBNRM approach assumes that local communities will
conserve wildlife, and bear the associated costs of living
with these wildlife populations when the benefits they derive
from the wildlife outweigh the costs. However, it is important
to consider that individuals generally have to absorb the
direct costs of HWC, whilst the community as a whole receive
the benefits. Despite extensive monitoring of HWC incidents
over the past decade, the implementation of several management
systems, and the recognised significance of the problem, HWC
is poorly understood and persists with increasing regularity.
There is an urgent need to evaluate the status and levels
of HWC in Namibia, and to implement a national policy framework
for HWC management. Guidelines are needed to ensure objective
monitoring and sensible measures to mitigate the conflict
and increase the benefits of living alongside wildlife.
9
April 2009:
Torra Conservancy.
A meeting was held with the Torra Conservancy to discuss the
future of lion conservation in the area and the management
of conflicts with lions. Mr Bennie Roman opened the meeting,
explaining the Conservancy’s commitment to conservation
and the need to find workable solutions to the problem. Mr
Vitalis Florry gave a detailed account of the problems they
experienced with lions during the latter half of 2008. It
was a productive meeting and Desert Lion Conservation agreed
to develop a draft management plan that will include livestock
management, lion eco-tourism, the training of Conservancy
members to monitor lions, compensation protocols, and options
to manage problem lions. Photos by Lez Weintrobe.
Purros
Conservancy - Case study. See
2008 Research Report for latest
update.
During
2006 conflicts between humans and lions were assessed in the
area north of, and including, the Hoanib River. The distribution
of lions overlap with five conservancies: Anabeb, Sesfontein,
Purros, Sanitatas, and Orupembe (see Figure 10). There were
14 incidents of lions attacking or killing livestock. They
occurred in four of the conservancies and mainly between July
and November 2006 (Figure 40). The community in the Anabeb
Conservancy shot one adult male lion. This lion was marked
with a radio collar (Xpl-32) and belonged to the Aub pride.
Possible solutions to HLC are addressed further under the
Eco-tourism section.
Figure
40. Monthly frequency of HLC in conservancies north of the
Hoanib River in 2006.
Managing
HLC in the Purros Conservancy
Coinciding with the Eco-tourism
project, there is also a need to develop and implement
a Human Lion Conflict Management Strategy for the Purros Conservancy.
Limiting the amount of overlap between the areas used for
livestock farming and the distribution of the lions, is arguably
the most effective management option available to the Purros
Conservancy. Lion movements in the Purros Conservancy is restricted
to the southwest corner of the conservancy, but includes most
of the Hoaruseb River (Figure 44). If this area where to be
set aside by the Purros Conservancy for wildlife and not used
cattle farming, the conflict with lions can be limited, if
not avoided altogether. A wildlife zone (1,090 km2), that
includes most of the current range used by lions, is proposed.
The Hoaruseb River, however, is a critical zone with high
potential for conflict as the Purros Conservancy depend on
it for water and grazing. An assessment of lion movements
in the River revealed that they seldom moved beyond a specific
bend in the River, approximately 8km west of Purros (Figure
45). This point is therefore proposed, for consideration by
the Purros Conservancy, as the boundary between their wildlife
zone and the area used for cattle farming. The proposed boundary
is 9.6 km west of Purros when following the course if the
River, and 7.7 km when measured in a direct line. Click to
view enlargements.
| Figure
44. A proposed wildlife zone in the Purros Conservancy
that include the areas utilised by lions. |
Figure
45. The proposed boundary (blue line) in the Hoaruseb
River of a wildlife zone, aimed at limiting Human Lion
Conflict in the Purros Conservancy. |
 |
 |
Last
data analysis & update - March 2007
|
