Slider

Co-existing with wildlife: Prof Gandiwa’s insights on mitigating human-wildlife conflicts in Africa

Published

1 month ago

August 20, 2025

BY NOKUTHABA DLAMINI

VicFallsLive Managing Editor, Nokuthaba Dlamini sat down with Professor Patience Gandiwa to discuss the issue of human-wildlife conflicts as she assumes her new role as Chairperson of the African Group of Negotiators on Wildlife.

As Africa’s human population continues to increase in areas where people are already co-existing with wildlife, so does the frequency of human-wildlife conflicts due to the inevitable spatial overlaps that happen. This complex issue affects not only conservation efforts but also the livelihoods of local communities. Sometimes a landscape of fear is created affecting the social life for both humans and wildlife.

Professor Gandiwa shed light on the challenges and potential solutions to this pressing problem.

Gandiwa emphasized the need for objectivity and inclusivity in addressing human-wildlife conflicts. At Africa level, context is very important as the situation is not homogenous across the continent. “I look at these issues objectively, without taking a solely Zimbabwean perspective. I need to understand the context of my colleagues in other sub-regions in Africa, to appreciate the situation in their countries, the threats they face, and options at their disposal to address the challenges. By doing so, we can determine what’s best for Africa (as a whole) without running the risk of being too prescriptive. I remember talking to a friend from Gabon Dr Lea-Larisa Moukagni (Gabon National Parks Agency) who shared many increasing human-elephant conflict challenges her country is facing with increasing elephant population as well as increasing human population. Zimbabwe is facing similar challenges and there are opportunities to learn from each other

Matetsi woman attacked by a crocodile

We sometimes make difficult decisions at global level to accommodate African countries unique situations, such as listing species in different appendices. That alone also comes with itsown challenges.

She highlighted the complexity of human-wildlife conflicts, citing the growing population of both humans and wildlife. “Africa’s population is growing, and in some parts of Africa, we have seen significant increase in wildlife populations. Coupled with that, we have also seen an increasing trajectory in livestock populations in the same landscapes dominated by wildlife, but the land areas of these places or countries have not necessarily been expanding. Therefore this is really one of the serious challenges of our time, where the whole–of–society and whole-of-government approach must be demonstrated. It’s not just a nice thing to adopt or a nice approach, but it’s actually a necessity.”

Gandiwa stressed the importance of investing in technological applications to better understand wildlife movement patterns and spatial overlaps. “We need to invest in technology, for example, that brings in tech companies and technopreneurial innovators to say, ‘How can we take advantage of biotelemetry and invest in satellite collars so that we understand and do more research to understand the movement patterns and map the conflict hotspots, targeting those species that are actually coming into conflict?’ How can we innovate, for example, to explore sustainable financing that support implementation of livelihood diversification strategies and alternatives in the face of climate change?”

Lion beheaded by poachers

She also emphasized the need for innovative approaches to addressing human-wildlife conflict. “If the wildlife constituency was not necessarily engaging with agriculture and water, this is the time to talk to each other and say, ‘Hey, out of the 370 people that have lost their lives in Zimbabwe due to human wildlife conflicts since 2019 and the 453 seriously injured, 939 cattle, 166 donkeys and 203 goats lost to carnivores, maybe the majority of victims that died have been attacked by crocodiles. Why are people losing their lives at these life-giving rivers? Yes, they are monsters – monster crocs in these rivers. There are hippos too and hippos are dangerous animals too. Hippos and crocs are dangerous fauna listed under the Parks and Wildlife Act, despite their Appendix II listing under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES). How can we bring water to the people then if people are dying or being maimed trying to fetch water from the rivers? What can we do to prevent livestock loses each time they are taken to the river for water? Perhaps drilling boreholes, again, being mindful of safe-yield principles and safeguards on managing the risk of aquifer depletion. There are other novel means of mitigating human wildlife conflicts which have been tested successfully in various parts of Africa, from participatory landuse planning to use of bees as recognition of traditional ecological knowledge. Now, these are the kinds of discussionswe need.

Africa still requires more investment in sustainable and long-term measures. Mitigation of human-wildlife conflicts is usuallymuch less costly and much more effective and sustainable if we invest more in mitigation initiatives such as conservation agriculture, awareness raising, avoiding a the problem is better than trying to address it when it has already happened for example when someone who has lost their limb or worse still, dies.” There is no compensation scheme that can ever replace someone’s life, we can only talk of some relief.

Gandiwa highlighted the importance of empowering local communities and involving them in decision-making processes. “We really need to explore other non-conventional approaches of providing livelihoods such as innovation hubs in the wildlife-rich areas, promotion of the Arts and Crafts industry, support for sustainable tourism and green energy investments.”

Instead of someone going to the river to catch that fish only. How can we innovate in the space of cage-culture and aquaculture? Zimbabwe has over 10,000 dams outside the protected area network, for example, where viable projects in fish farming or even crocodile farming can be explored and unlock new opportunities for jobs, economic emancipation, and also mitigating human-wildlife conflicts.”

The issue of human-wildlife conflicts is further complicated by the need for international cooperation and fair-trade practices. Gandiwa noted that the decline in international donor assistance has led countries like Zimbabwe to seek alternative solutions. “This is why, when there is a decline in international donor assistance, countries in facing budget shortfalls on conservation financing might say, ‘Okay, if there is no aid, what about legal trade opportunities in line with Africa’s wildlife economy growth aspirations?’ African countries can unlock the value of what they have already, sustainably sweating their own natural capital assets through clean and secure legal markets, perhaps the funding gap can be bridged?“ Financial resource constrains often limit what African countries can do for themselves without holding a begging bowl.

Rescued snared elephant in Victoria Falls

Gandiwa also emphasized the need for local communities to have a voice in decision-making processes that affect them. “It’s actually quite a highly emotive issue, and it’s such a sensitive and multi-dimensional issue related to human-wildlife conflictswhen we mirror it in international discourse on trade and CITES-listed species. There’s been quite a pushback in terms of the participation of local communities in the decision-making and advisory framework of the governing bodies and processes, which has also been viewed as not so nice or not so progressive.”

As the Chairperson of the African Group of Negotiators on Wildlife, Gandiwa is committed to work closely with all African countries in finding sustainable solutions to human-wildlife conflicts, particularly conflicts involving endangered species listed under CITES as well as migratory species listed under the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Fauna

Slider

VicFallsLive Editorial Policy

Published

13 hours ago

October 2, 2025

VicFallsLive

Preamble:

As VicFallsLive and its staff, we commit ourselves to the highest standards of independent journalism. We serve the public’s right to know in line with Section 20 of Zimbabwe’s donstitution which guarantees this fundamental right in order to allow citizens to make informed decisions and judgments about their society. We pledge to exercise our role with care and responsibility to safeguard public trust in our integrity.

1. Accuracy & sourcing

Our first duty is to report accurately. We will take care to evaluate information provided to us and to cross-check it as much as possible before publishing. We will show readers the chain of evidence we have.

1.1 The more serious and controversial a claim is, the more corroboration will be required before it can be published. A single source will not usually be sufficient. Secondary sources like other newspaper reports will be treated with caution, and clearly identified.

1.2 Anonymous sources will be avoided unless there is no other way to handle a story and there is extensive additional evidence available. Where sources cannot be named, they will still be identified as closely as possible by reference to their organisation, position, relevance to the story or similar safeguards.

1.3 Anonymity will only be granted if the source can persuade us that they have sound reasons for the request. It is not available to people peddling rumour, comment or spin. However, once it has been granted, the newspaper will protect the identity of the source.

1.4 We will take particular care with information that is passed on to us in furtherance of a particular agenda, and will seek additional corroboration in the light of the motives and interests of a source.

1.5 Plagiarism will not be tolerated.

1.6 Headlines, captions and posters will fairly reflect the content of articles.

1.7 Special care will be taken with details like numbers, dates, names and words from languages other than English.

2. Fairness

We will treat the sources and subjects of our reporting fairly, making sure they have a full opportunity to respond to reporting that may affect them.

This means actively seeking out all relevant views and giving people sufficient time to formulate a response. A report can only go ahead without relevant responses if the opportunity to comment has been declined, or if the editor is satisfied that all reasonable measures have been exhausted. In this case, the situation will be explained to readers.

3. Independence

Our journalistic duty to inform the public trumps all other considerations, whether they are financial, political, personal or any other non-professional interests. This includes the business interests of the platform itself. We will avoid conflicts of interest as well as the appearance of conflicts of interest.

3.1 Editorial material will be kept clearly distinct from advertising or any paid-for content. Any outside support for editorial work, such as through sponsored travel, will be declared in the relevant report.

3.2 Gifts, favours and freebies will be handled in accordance with the platform‘s policy, which is designed to underline that our goodwill cannot be bought through these means.

3.3 Journalists may only take on outside paid work if it does not impact on their primary responsibilities or create a perception of a conflict of interest, and then only with the permission of the editor.

3.4 Journalists will bear in mind that their private activities can impact on their and the platform‘s reputation. This extends to opinions expressed on public or semi-public social networking platforms.

4. Minimising harm

We recognise that the media can have a harmful impact on the subjects of our reports, our sources, our audiences and society in general, and pledge to minimise it. We will take particular care when dealing with vulnerable people and groups.

4.1 We will not fuel racism or racist stereotypes and will not tolerate any form of hate speech. However, we will not shy away from reporting issues involving race.

4.3 We will avoid racial labels unless they are essential to understanding. Similarly, we will avoid other labels that may feed into social prejudices of various kinds, around religion, culture, gender, sexual orientation, HIV status and many others. We will be careful to avoid anything that fuels xenophobia.

4.4 We will take note of social sensitivities around religion, death, the portrayal of nudity, sex and violence, the use of strong language and others. We will not offend these sensitivities gratuitously.

4.5 Any infringement of an individual’s privacy – a right guaranteed by law – must be fully justified by a clear and strong public interest. It must be carefully considered, and proportionate to the level of public interest. We recognise that people in positions of importance or who have sought a life in the public eye have a reduced right to privacy and indeed require greater scrutiny.

4.6 We will take great care to avoid the possibility of direct harm to a source. Where this seems possible, extra steps will be taken to make sure the source understands the dangers and gives informed consent, and steps to mitigate the danger are put in place.

4.7 We will take particular care to avoid harm to children. While it is important to seek out the views of children, we will not do anything that may expose them to abuse, discrimination, retribution, embarrassment or any other risk. We will make sure that we consult with a parent or guardian about any impact our reporting may have on the child. We will not use sexualised images of children.

4.8 We will take great care when publishing pictures of children, the disabled, and people in difficult circumstances.

4.9 We will avoid wherever possible publishing photos of corpses or other gruesome pictures which readers may deem offensive. Publication of such photos will only be done when there is a compelling reason to do so.

5. Reporting methods

We will use open, honest means to gather information. Exceptions can only be made when there is strong public interest in a story and there are no alternative methods available.

5.1 We will identify ourselves as reporters to potential sources. We respect the law, and our reporters are required to have a good understanding of relevant legal provisions.

5.2 We will respect off-the-record and similar arrangements. Agreements with sources must be clear, and are binding on the newspaper and its journalists.

5.3 We do not pay for information.

5.4 We do not allow sources to vet our reports before publication. Sometimes, however, it is advisable for reporters to check back to ensure the accuracy of technically complex information, quotes and the like.

5.5 We will keep detailed records of all interviews we conduct, either in note form or preferably as a recording.

6. Accountability

We accept the same level of public scrutiny and accountability as we subject others to. At all times, responses to complaints will be generous, helpful and governed by the need to make sure readers get the fullest information available.

6.1 We will correct errors with due prominence as soon as we become aware of them. Errors online will not be invisibly corrected. Instead, a note with the correction will be posted with the original article.

6.2 In addition to corrections of factual errors, the platformoffers the following corrective measures:

• A clarification, where an article may have led to a mistaken impression even though it does not contain factual mistakes;

• A right of reply, where a full response was not initially included;

• An apology; where justified.

These measures can be used in conjunction, and are at the editor’s discretion.

6.2 We accept the jurisdiction of the Voluntary Media Council

7. General

7.1 VicFallsLive reviews of artistic work are written fairly, in order to help readers decide what to see and how to understand it. They do not offer an opportunity to degrade or humiliate.

7.2 Columnists and commentators are expected to write fairly and honestly, but this does not suggest a bar on strongly opinionated writing. Fact and opinion will be clearly distinguishable. The platform will seek out a wide range of views, including particularly voices not often heard.

7.3 The platform will encourage readers’ involvement in discussion through the feedback on social media pagesetc. Criticism of the platform and its approach is welcome, but basic standards of decency will be enforced.

7.4 This code applies to all staff. Where there is doubt about how to proceed, journalists must take advice from section heads or the editor.

: Gifts, freebies and outside interests policy

This policy is designed to manage the issue of gifts and freebies, in order to avoid an impression of conflicts of interest impacting on the reputation of VicFallsLive and its staff.

1. Gifts and freebies:

1.1 In general, staff are not allowed to accept gifts with a value of over $20.

1.2 Gifts can include cash, items of value, loans, travel, hospitality or other things. Where they are offered for review purposes, tickets to events, books, computer games or similar are not seen as gifts.

1.3 Where practicable and where it would not cause offence, a gift should be returned promptly and with a polite explanation.

1.4 PR handouts that come into the newsroom or to individual journalists must be handed to the managing editor. From time to time, s/he will organise an auction in the newsroom, and the proceeds will be donated to a charity.

1.5 An offer of funded or subsidised travel or hospitality for an editorial purposes can only be accepted with the permission of the editor, who will decide which reporter will take up the offer. Such offers will only be accepted if there is a legitimate news story to write, which the paper otherwise would not be able to afford to cover. Where such an offer is accepted, a note at the end of the report will explain the situation.

1.6 A staffer may not solicit free or discounted food, drink, gifts or similar benefits on the basis of his or her employment as a journalist.

2. Register of interests:

2.1 The managing editor will be in charge of a register of interests, where all editorial staff are required to declare any outside interests, including but not limited to:

• Outside work;

• Shareholdings;

• Family involvements in business;

• Organisational memberships.

In the community

Painted Dog Conservation and Uncommon bring free coding school to Gwai Valley Primary

Published

21 hours ago

October 2, 2025

VicFallsLive

BY NOKUTHABA DLAMINI

Painted Dog Conservation (PDC), in partnership with technology-driven organisation Uncommon, is set to establish a free coding school at Gwai Valley Primary in Lupane District, marking a new chapter in community empowerment and education.

Speaking during an interview with VicFallsLive, PDC operations director, David Kuvawoga said the initiative stems from the organisation’s long-term work with local schools through its children’s bush camps.

“In our quest to find solutions to the poaching crisis, and building on the work we’ve done with schools over the years, we identified Gwai Primary as a good location to start a coding school,” he explained. “We partnered with Uncommon, which already runs facilities in Harare and Victoria Falls, to bring this opportunity closer to rural communities.”

The school will be housed in container units equipped with computers and other necessary technology. According to PDC, the project will be led by youths from the Gwai community who underwent year-long training in Victoria Falls and are now prepared to teach children — and adults — the fundamentals of coding.

“This is not just for schoolchildren,” the operations director said. “Anyone in the community with the passion to learn can join. What matters is the interest and commitment, not formal qualifications.”

Importantly, the programme will be free of charge. Both organisations confirmed that tuition, equipment, and running costs are fully covered through fundraising efforts.

“No one is going to pay a cent,” he said. “Just like our bush camps, which host over a thousand children every year without charge, this coding school is fully funded. All the community needs to do is embrace it.”

PDC has previously supported communities through projects such as boreholes and gardens, but this marks its first major investment in technology. The director said the initiative has the potential to address unemployment, improve education, and give local youth world-class digital skills.

“Coding is a highly sought-after skill across the world,” he noted. “If young people here can learn it, they can secure jobs or even create employment for others. This is a brick in the foundation of uplifting Lupane, Hwange, and beyond.”

The coding school is expected to open in December at Gwai Valley Primary.

Slider

591 rangers killed in Africa — New report warns of urgent need for Better Protection

Published

2 days ago

October 1, 2025

VicFallsLive

BY NOKUTHABA DLAMINI

At least 591 rangers were killed in Africa between 2006 and 2021, making the continent the deadliest place in the world for those on the frontline of protecting wildlife. This stark statistic was revealed by conservation charity Tusk in a press statement issued to mark World Ranger Day, warning that without urgent reforms, more lives will be lost — and Africa’s biodiversity will pay the price.

“Being a ranger extends far beyond conservation. You are educators, community leaders, researchers, mentors and protectors of cultural and historical heritage, yet this remains one of the most dangerous jobs on Earth,” said Prince William, Tusk’s Royal Patron, in a video message to rangers.

Despite their sacrifices, fewer than 40% of rangers worldwide have access to life insurance, and only 63% receive basic medical services. Many are still underpaid, under-equipped, and exposed to deadly risks from armed poachers, human-wildlife conflict, and hazardous terrain.

Nick Bubb, CEO of Tusk, said: “Too many rangers risk their lives without even the most basic protection. If we are serious about delivering the global biodiversity targets, we must further professionalise the ranger role – with insurance, fair pay, and recognition – so that it becomes a career young Africans aspire to join.”

The White Paper, Protecting Rangers to Protect Nature, stresses that Africa currently has just 65,000 active rangers — far short of the 345,000 needed to meet international biodiversity targets, including the 30×30 goal to protect 30% of land and seas by 2030.

Louise de Bruin, CEO of the Game Rangers Association of Africa, added: “Our priority is to stand with rangers on the ground and support the organisations that employ them. The RWSI gives us a practical way to listen to rangers, assess their needs, and work alongside partners to improve welfare standards.”

The statement calls for governments, donors, and conservation organisations to embed reforms through the Ranger Welfare and Standards Initiative, launched last year. Measures include affordable insurance, professional training, fair pay, and continent-wide emergency systems to ensure no ranger is left vulnerable.

Senior ranger Benson Kanyembo from Zambia captured the human cost: “Ranger recruitment is low because the job, as it stands, is not attractive enough. Rangers face extreme personal risk while their families live one accident or illness away from destitution. This is not acceptable.”

The report concludes that protecting rangers is inseparable from protecting nature. Without them, Africa risks losing not only its iconic elephants, rhinos, and lions — but also the ecosystems that provide food, water, and livelihoods for millions.