Leon Marshall
February 24 2006 at 03:33PM

Conservationists are trying to rekindle an age-old aspect of life in Africa where, before reserves, lions and communities co-existed in relative peace with one other.

They admit it is going to be tough as much has changed that makes conflict practically inevitable.

But they say it is about the surest way of preventing the species - for many, the symbol of Africa's wildlife - from becoming even more endangered than it already is.

Research documents from the the World Conservation Union (IUCN) say that while lion numbers have remained relatively stable inside reserves, it is outside that the trouble lies.

'A more mutually beneficial relationship going between lions and people'
These areas form about half of the species' range and this is where the biggest decline has been recorded.

The African lion's status was last year classified as "vulnerable" on the IUCN's Red List of Threatened Species, estimated to have declined by 30 percent -50 percent over the past 20 years.

Numbers are put at between 23 000 and 39 000. The sizeable variation is precisely because of the many lions occurring outside protected areas where it is difficult to count them.

In West Africa there are now thought to be fewer than 1 500 left, meeting the Red List's criteria for "regionally endangered".

Dr Gus Mills, a senior South African National Parks (SANParks) researcher, confirms that the problem is that their roaming area has become so cramped.

"We are going to have to find ways of expanding lions' living room if we want to improve their lot.

"The only way is to identify areas surrounding wildlife reserves where it will be possible for people and lions to co-exist and then to find ways to bring this about.

"There cannot be hard and fast rules, because circumstances differ from place to place and country to country.

"But where possible, we must see if we cannot get a more mutually beneficial relationship going between lions and people."

The key would be to make such communities see lions not as a liability but as something of value that could secure them an income through ecotourism or sustainable hunting practices.

In turn, people would have to adopt the necessary safety precautions.

This does not mean that there would not be times when lions would have to be killed when they become a danger to people or made a habit of killing livestock, but it would better to do so in a regulated manner rather than through indiscriminate hunting or poisoning.

Another way to expand the lions' space would be to create corridors between parks.

The growing plight of the lion was discussed at a recent workshop in Johannesburg, convened by the IUCN and the Wildlife Conservation Society after sharp disagreement at the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species conference in Bangkok last year where Kenya had to back down in the face of fierce opposition from other African states when it proposed that the lion be given more protection than it already had.

The change would have slapped tough restrictions on commercial trade in lions, notably hunting trophies.

A statement issued afterwards said consensus was reached on the political commitments necessary for conserving lion populations.

Among the aims were to create better legal and institutional frameworks for wildlife-integrated land use, reducing human-lion conflict, preventing illegal trade in lions and lion products, improving lion management and developing incentives to build stronger community support for lion conservation.

From all I have read, and it is considerable on this subject, the notion that lions and people ever co-existed in "relative peace" with one another is a myth.

Unless, of course, your definition of "relative peace" includes such lion behavior as recurrent and often ruinous livestock depredation and regular episodes of man-eating.

From what I've read relative peace Africa style is considerably different from what most Americans would consider acceptable.

Kathi:

On my one and only trip to Africa (in 1993) my outfitter had a reputation with the Zimbabwe Ministry of Parks and Game (as it was known in those days) as a "lion man". It meant that when ever there was a problem with lions in the Chirisa District (translation - lions killing livestock and any human being who interfered with them) he was called in.

He told me then in 1993 that sport hunting for lion would be gone in Africa in 20 years. I was astonished to hear him say so. He said that we humans can't stand having a wild beast seize our livestock.It drives us crazy because that "wild beast" is taking money out of our pockets. He commented on how we Americans wiped out mountain lions in the Eastern US and wolves across the map of the continental US as an example.

Sadly, I'm afraid he was right.

I wonder what a lion population would have been in the beginning of the century.

The farms bordering Etosha NP in Namibia have numerous problems with lions. They do not hesitate to shoot them. If the lion is on the wrong side of the fence it is subject to being shot on sight.

The problem with preserving wildlife populations today is about money.Keeping a lion alive is about providing for all that meat it requires in a lifetime,including space.That is extemely expensive today.It seems that only a Safari cost can support the life of a lion.