Buitron, D., 1991. Namibia: leading the way in wildlife conservation. Swara 14 (2): 29-31, figs. 1-6
|
|
|
|
| |
| Location: |
Africa - Southern Africa - Namibia |
| Subject: |
Distribution - Records |
| Species: |
African Rhino Species |
 |
|
These rhinos have in recent years become a main focus of, wildlife conservation efforts in the country. Their importance was first recognized at the 1987 meeting of the African Elephant and Rhino Specialist Group (AERSG) in Kenya, during which all the remaining black rhino populations in Africa were assigned priority ranking for conservation action. The initial ranking, was based on the biological importance of each population, taking into account present and potential size, genetic rarity, the diversity of the ecosystem occupied, and the likelihood of success for any conservation efforts that might be undertaken on its behalf.
Of the 38 populations studied, Etosha and the Kaokoveld were ranked first and fourth respectively. But in a subsequent ranking for field action priority, which took into account other considerations, including the perceived need for urgent action, the Kaokoveld rhinos were ranked second after those in the lower Zambezi Valley in Zimbabwe.
One of the long term management goals of rhino conservationists in Africa is to breed up minimum populations of 2,000 of each sub-species, and in Namibia there is already more than sufficient habitat for this under protection. Yet rhinos here are again under threat from poachers, and it is feared that if the Kaokoveld rhinos were to be erradicated it would be difficult, if not impossible, to re-introduce rhinos not already adapted to the very and environment. Hence some of the importance attached to the remaining desert rhinos.
The AERSG was however also encouraged by the apparent success of some of the more innovative conservation programmes being carried out in Namibia. One of these, the Auxiliary Game Guard programme, was begun in Damaraland in 1982 to help counteract the poaching of rhinos, whose numbers in Damaraland and Kaokoland (the two regions are collectively known as the Kaokoveld) had dropped from about 300 to 60 since 1970. Funded mainly by private businesses and non-governmental organizations, this programme provided for the appointment of game guards by chiefs and other community leaders from among the Himba and Herero tribes resident in the region. The guards were then supplied with uniforms, rations of food, and small cash salaries in return for helping Nature Conservation rangers monitor the wildlife population. Althouah not empowered or equipped to take direct action acainst poachers, the guards worked closely with the rangers and reported any illegal activities.
The Auxiliary Game Guard programme was largely the creation of Namibian conservationist Garth Owen-Smith who is one of the originators of the concept known as conservation extension. In simple terms this means involving rural communities in conservation efforts in ways that produce tangible benefits for these communities while at the same time encouraging them to take an interest in the protection of their wildlife heritage.
The success of the programme is evident in the remarkable resurgence that occurred in the Kaokoveld's badly depleted wildlife population after 1982, particularly among the rhinos. This was such that it even allowed the re-introduction of some controlled hunting of game and the extra meat which this made available to the local people was a benefit much appreciated. This is exactly how conservation extension is intended to work, and a crucial factor undoubtedly was that the extra wealth and status acquired by the men who became game guards resulted from their havina been chosen and appointed by their own community leaders rather than by outsiders from Nature Conservation. This in turn also bolstered the authority and prestige of the local community leaders, thereby encouraging their continued cooperation in the fight against poachers.
Unfortunately, just as the Kaokoveld rhino population was beginning to make real gains in numbers, severe poaching pressure on the rhinos began anew. Being thinly scattered over a huge area they were very difficult to protect in anv direct way, and when several were killed in Damaraland over a brief period early in 1989, some kind of urgent action was called for. This resulted in the decision by Nature Conservation officials to launch Operation Bicornis, a programme involving both the de-horning and translocation of a certain number of rhinos (the exact figures are not being disclosed).
According to Peter Tarr, an official of the Directorate of Nature Conservation based in Swakopmund, the de-horning side of the programme was a last ditch measure, undertaken only after it was agreed there was nothing to lose. It was done by darting the rhinos from helicopters, sawing the horns off with hand saws, trimming the stumps carefully with hoof-clippers and files, and then sealing them with Stockholm Tar to prevent infection.
As the Kaokoveld rhinos had been closely monitored for a decade, it was easy to select certain areas for the experiment where the resident rhinos could be dehorned, and then continue to monitor them to determine any possible effects of the dehorning on their behaviour. At the time of this writing, no ill effects have been observed, three calves that have since been born to de-horned rhinos are doing well, and the poachin. of rhinos in Damaraland has stopped.
The notion of de-horning rhinos in order to protect them from poacher had only been a topic of debate prior to Operation Bicornis, but Namibia's decisive action has now given conservationists a case study to look at. From this, decisions might be made as to the applicability of de-horning to small and threatened rhino population elsewhere in Africa.
|
|
|
Namibia: leading the way in wildlife conservation
File available
details
Original text on this topic: