Parks Authority boss reappointed

From the Bulawayo Chronicle-April 14, 2007

Harare Bureau

THE Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority Board has reappointed Dr Morris Mtsambiwa as the authority’s director-general for another three years.

Dr Mtsambiwa’s three-year term expired on 1 April this year after it had been extended for another year last year.
The ecologist and former directorgeneral of Swaziland National Parks was appointed the first directorgeneral of the local parks authority in 2002 when it transformed from a Government department under the Environment and Tourism Ministry to stand alone as an authority.
The transformation has improved revenue generation and generally enhanced operations owing to the authority’s ability to now put in place antipoaching mechanisms which include highpowered equipment and technology.
Dr Mtsambiwa said his reappointment would go a long way in ensuring that the development of the projects he started four years ago are completed.
“I am happy that the board afforded me an opportunity to complete the work I started especially in the area of ensuring that we become a world leader in sustainable utilisation of natural resources.â€
“There is a raging debate in the region at the moment on whether we can benefit from sustainable utilisation of our wildlife. As the chairperson of the regional elephant taskforce, I still need to continue spearheading the proper functioning of several committees we set up to ensure that we market and sell the idea,†Dr Mtsambiwa said.
Conservationists yesterday said the task that lay ahead of the authority was not mean adding that Dr Mtsambiwa should brace for more emerging challenges in the wildlife sector.
Apart from battling to develop several transfrontier parks involving several countries within the region, the authority still needs to further enhance its human and technical capacity for it to effectively deal with poaching in some conservancies and parks situated on the peripheries of the country.
The need to urgently develop the Gonarezhou National Park that forms a component of the world’s largest wildlife sanctuary is also critical.
Resources have been trickling in and recently the Government injected $10 billion in the development of infrastructure ahead of the 2010 World Cup to be hosted by the region.
However, conservationists maintain that lack of serious approaches by various stakeholders in resolving the dispute between the Chitsa people who remain settled within the parks’ area and the authority remains a major concern and a blow to the spirit of conservation.
Dr Mtsambiwa last year confirmed that they were grappling with the growing population of rhinos and had identified an area they wanted to turn into an intensive protection zone.
The area later turned out to be the site where the Chitsa people are at the moment settled.
Dr Mtsambiwa yesterday said they had set aside significant resources to ensure the Chitsa people are relocated to another area this year.
“The modalities were cumbersome and the fact that we are dealing with people meant that we had to be careful, humane and ensure we achieved a winwin situation,†Dr Mtsambiwa said.
But not only are the Chitsa people a problem to the authority, human settlements in the south of the Save Conservancy and the blocking of wildlife corridors has restricted their movement and drove many to the northern part and congesting the area.
Dr Mtsambiwa said the authority is now in the process of implementing the Wildlife Land Reform Policy, which will see them addressing challenges brought about when some indigenous people were afforded an opportunity to venture into wildlife farming.
“There is nothing wrong in giving a chance to indigenous people to practice wildlife farming, but this is a very delicate sector where we would like to ensure that all people involved are professional enough to understand the serious impacts of blocking animal corridors.â€
“We are moving in to assess the situation to establish how best we could help those who acquired conservancies.â€
Dr Mtsambiwa also confirmed the proposal by Kenya and Mali to ban elephant trophy hunting in Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe was a major cause for concern not only for the four countries but also for the whole international hunting fraternity.
“They view this as a potential threat to the whole industry because hunters are different people who share the same ideals when it comes to hunting,†he said.
He said Zimbabwe, facing other adverse proposals, was not giving up against forces fighting to disturb its tourism sector.
“We want the world to know that hunting and trade in ivory will in no way disturb or deplete the number of elephants in Zimbabwe.
“We have already set aside funds meant for projects targeted at trying to improve on our marketing strategies. We have also considered participating not just on the Reno Convention in America but also other hunting conventions that are held every year in France, the Middle East, Russia and Australia.â€
He added that conservation was a business that demanded cooperation by the Government and the private sector.
“We are content with the overwhelming support we are receiving at the moment and we would like to thank all our cooperating partners,†Dr Mtsambiwa said.

Zimbabwe: Jumbo Losses for Country


Financial Gazette (Harare)

March 21, 2007
Posted to the web March 22, 2007

Synodia Bhasera And Christella Langton
Harare

ZIMBABWE will lose over US$15 million each year for the next 20 years if a proposed ban on ivory trade succeeds, parks officials say.

Kenya and Mali have proposed a trade ban in raw or manufactured ivory in Zimbabwe, arguing that allowing any further trade in ivory would spur elephant poaching.


According to the Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority, if the proposal succeeds, the lucrative trophy hunting business would be badly hurt.

"We have opposed the proposal considering how much we are going to lose. Already we have lost much through research and travel. A single (hunted) elephant gives us about US$30 000. Imagine how much the authority is likely to lose if the proposal succeeds," said Morris Mutsambiwa, the authority's director.

Kenya and Mali will present their proposals on the ban at this year's Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) meeting, which is to be held in the Netherlands in June.

Zimbabwe is currently battling an overpopulation of elephant, with the estimated annual population growth rate of 5 percent. Parks fears that the animals would pose a further threat to the environment and human life if hunting is banned. A survey conducted by the World Wide Fund for Nature showed that Zimbabwe's elephant population stands at more than 100 000, against a carrying capacity of 47 000. Hwange National Park alone has an elephant population of 45 000.


The authority has set up a national technical committee comprising experts from the public and private sector to produce a document on elephant management and sustainability, which would be used to counter the ban campaign.

"We are preparing documents that will answer issues raised as justification for the proposal. We will have meetings with Namibia, South Africa and Botswana to discuss strategies. We will then move into SADC (the Southern African Development Community) to form a common position," Mutsambiwa said.

CITES banned international commercial trade in ivory in 1989 but in 1997, after recognising that some southern African elephant populations were healthy and well managed, permitted Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe to make a one-time sale of ivory to Japan.

I wonder if Kenya which banned LEGAL elephant hunting years ago has double its carrying capacity of elephants now. I'd be quite surprised if the countries who banned it have suffered a decrease while countries hunting legally have obviously seen an increase. In the first place, how could Mali and Kenya force a ban on hunting in Zimbabwe anyway? That would be like us banning sheep hunting in British Columbia.

According to the article, Kenya's elephants have declined. I think Kenya and Mali are going to introduce the proposal at this year's C.I.T.E.S. Convention.


Kenya: Sport Hunting Has Its Gains, Too


The Nation (Nairobi)

OPINION
March 17, 2007
Posted to the web March 17, 2007

Karol Boudreaux
Nairobi

Kenyans are debating whether the Government should lift its 30-year ban on trophy hunting. While the talk continues, the elephant population in Kenya continues to drop.

Meanwhile, elephant populations in countries such as Namibia and South Africa are increasing, a resurgence that is due surprisingly, in part, to trophy hunting. More importantly, our research in Namibia has found that as elephant populations rebound, so do the fortunes of the people.


What can Kenya learn from Namibia?

In the early 1990's, the Namibian government instituted a policy known as Community -Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM). CBNRM gives people who live on communal land the rights to manage wildlife and to build businesses based on ecotourism and similar activities.

WHILE TROPHY HUNTING IS A major source of cash income for conservancies, other forms of direct wildlife utilisation provide important cash and noncash benefits for conservancy members.

In 2005, there were 12 trophy hunting concessions across 16 Namibian conservancies, providing approximately US$495,000 in income to conservancies, making trophy hunting the second highest source of income for conservancies.

In Namibia's programme, the ministry of Environment and Tourism sets quotas to hunt threatened or problem animals. Conservancies that have these quotas can then contract with professional hunters, who bring paying hunters to the area to track and shoot the animals. In the contracts, conservancies can specify what benefits trophy hunting will give the conservancy and its members beyond just income.

The Namibia Association of Community Based Natural Resource Management Support Organisation (NACSO) reports that by providing some jobs, income, and meat to conservancy members, trophy hunting can "strengthen local support for wildlife and conservancies because people see the link between wildlife and conservation in the form of a tangible, immediate benefit." Strengthening these links is vital for countries seeking to protect endangered species.

The ministry also requires conservancies to develop plans to distribute benefits. Conservancies may pay out cash benefits after they have paid out conservancy operating costs, which may include vehicle maintenance, salaries, and other expenses, such as relocating wildlife or maintaining water holes. Some conservancies have distributed cash to households.

As valuable as trophy hunting is to the conservancies, it is not only activity that conservancies undertake. In fact, as the Namibian conservancies work to diversify their sources of income, trophy hunting is playing a smaller, though still important, role in conservancies' management strategies.

Even though trophy hunting can provide important economic and social benefits, the practice also creates tension and conflict if there isn't a transparent process for using the income or distributing the meat. In addition, because hunters often place a premium on hunting potentially destructive animals, such as elephants, local people may experience human/wildlife conflict from having animals that outsiders desire in their conservancies.


THE KEY TO NAMIBIA'S SUCCESS in managing the tension over trophy hunting lies in the fact that the local people of an area decide whether to permit trophy hunting. With CBNRM the Namibian government has recognised that those most affected should have the right to decide their fates, a right currently denied to the people of Kenya.

While lifting the trophy hunting ban in Kenya could be a vital step in increasing the fortunes of both the elephants and the people, it is just a step. With greater legal empowerment and a devolution of rights to manage wildlife, Kenyans too would experience what the people of Torra Conservancy, Namibia, are now experiencing: an improving environment and economic development.

Karol Boudreaux is lead researcher for Enterprise Africa, a joint project of the Mercatus Centre at George Mason University, Virginia, US