Sitting on the fence? policies and practices in managing human-wildlife conflict in Limpopo province, South Africa

Protected Areas: Conservation Cornerstones or Paradoxes? Insights from Human-Wildlife Conflicts in Africa and Southeastern Europe

“…To complicate matters, the border fence is under the responsibility of the Department of Animal Health, which is obliged to maintain it in order to prevent transmission of disease from wild animals to domestic livestock. However, despite the provincial government being the lead agency responsible for controlling animals outside the park, it currently suffers from under'funding and under' staffing, and is therefore a weak actor with little capacity to solve local problems (Anthony et al, 2010). This is exacerbated by poor communication, slow response times, weak reporting and monitoring, and vulnerability to illegal hunting practices by professional hunting outfitters tendered by the province to control animals, involving the luring of lion from the park with livestock and/or poached zebra (Anthony et al, 2010).…”

“…However, despite the provincial government being the lead agency responsible for controlling animals outside the park, it currently suffers from under'funding and under' staffing, and is therefore a weak actor with little capacity to solve local problems (Anthony et al, 2010). This is exacerbated by poor communication, slow response times, weak reporting and monitoring, and vulnerability to illegal hunting practices by professional hunting outfitters tendered by the province to control animals, involving the luring of lion from the park with livestock and/or poached zebra (Anthony et al, 2010). This lion luring is a man'induced population sink, which may increase the prevalence of 'edge effects' along KNP's border (Woodroffe & Ginsberg, 1998), and subject lions to a change of prey preference if they have increased cattle'killing opportunities (van Dyk & Slotow, 2003).…”

“…KNP is perceived by many neighbours as contributing to current injustices by harbouring dangerous animals causing extensive damage and threatening livelihoods of the very communities it seeks to empower. Based on their questionnaire, Anthony et al (2010) reported that 12.1% of their respondents had experienced HWC between 2002 and 2004. If one considers all households within 15 km of the park border, an estimated 2,216 households had been affected.…”

“…Finally, HWC are potentially socially corrosive, creating and reflecting larger conflicts of value and class and other interests (McGregor, 2005). Especially in less developed countries and countries in transition, such conflicts have the potential to undermine both biodiversity conservation efforts and human security, and further weaken the effectiveness and legitimacy of state institutions including national parks and other PAs (Anthony et al, 2010). These aforementioned complexities are also juxtaposed within contextual PA management regimes.…”

“…Conflicts between humans and wildlife are the product of socio'economic and political landscapes (Graham et al, 2005) and the institutional architecture designed to manage these conflicts, and are controversial because the resources concerned have economic value and the species involved often have high profile and are legally protected (McGregor, 2005;Treves & Karanth, 2003). While humans and wildlife have a long history of co'existence, the frequency of HWC has grown in recent decades (Decker et al, 2006;Graham et al, 2005;Mishra, 1997;Wang & Macdonald 2006), mainly because of (i) extension of human presence and activities into wildlife habitat and shrinking prey populations (Linnell et al, 2001;Woodroffe, 2000;Woodroffe et al, 2005), (ii) expansion of some wildlife distributions including into the matrix surrounding PAs (Bisi & Kurki, 2005;Breitenmoser, 1998;Cozza et al, 1996;Stahl et al, 2001;Zedrosser et al, 2001), as well as (iii) a frequent inability of institutions that are meant to mediate such conflicts to respond effectively (Anthony et al, 2010;Hewitt & Messmer, 1997). Moreover, particularly in developing countries, poor and politically marginalised people frequently come into conflict with wildlife and are pitted against the state and its wildlife agencies in strongly unequal power relationships.…”