Tourism and Environment

Zimbabwe relocates 2,500 wild animals to save them from drought made worse by climate change

Published

2 years ago

September 2, 2022

Staff Writer

BY FARAI MUTSAKA

A helicopter herds thousands of impalas into an enclosure.

A crane hoists sedated upside-down elephants into trailers.

Hordes of rangers drive other animals into metal cages and a convoy of trucks starts a journey of about 700 kilometers to take the animals to their new home.

Zimbabwe has begun moving more than 2,500 wild animals from a southern reserve to one in the country’s north to rescue them from drought, as the ravages of climate change replace poaching as the biggest threat to wildlife.

About 400 elephants, 2,000 impalas, 70 giraffes, 50 buffaloes, 50 wildebeest, 50 zebras, 50 elands, 10 lions and a pack of 10 wild dogs are among the animals being moved from Zimbabwe’s Save Valley Conservancy to three conservancies in the north — Sapi, Matusadonha and Chizarira — in one of southern Africa’s biggest live animal capture and translocation exercises.

“Project Rewild Zambezi,” as the operation is called, is moving the animals to an area in the Zambezi River valley to rebuild the wildlife populations there.

It’s the first time in 60 years that Zimbabwe has embarked on such a mass internal movement of wildlife. Between 1958 and 1964, when the country was white-minority-ruled Rhodesia, more than 5,000 animals were moved in what was called “Operation Noah.”

That operation rescued wildlife from the rising water caused by the construction of a massive hydro-electric dam on the Zambezi River that created one of the world’s largest man-made lakes, Lake Kariba.

This time it’s the lack of water that has made it necessary to move wildlife as their habitat has become parched by prolonged drought, said Tinashe Farawo, spokesman for the Zimbabwe National Parks and Wildlife Management Authority.

The parks agency issued permits to allow the animals to be moved to avert “a disaster from happening,” said Farawo.

“We are doing this to relieve pressure. For years we have fought poaching and just as we are winning that war, climate change has emerged as the biggest threat to our wildlife,” Farawo told The Associated Press.

“Many of our parks are becoming overpopulated and there is little water or food.

“The animals end up destroying their own habitat, they become a danger unto themselves and they encroach neighboring human settlements for food resulting in incessant conflict,” he said.

One option would be culling to reduce the numbers of wildlife, but conservation groups protest that such killings are cruel.
Zimbabwe last did culling in 1987, said Farawo.

The effects of climate change on wildlife is not isolated to Zimbabwe.

Across Africa, national parks that are home to myriad wildlife species such as lions, elephants and buffaloes are increasingly threatened by below-average rainfall and new infrastructure projects.

Authorities and experts say drought has seriously threatened species like rhinos, giraffes and antelope as it reduces the amount of food available.

For example, a recent study conducted in South Africa’s Kruger National Park linked extreme weather events to the loss of plants and animals, unable to cope with the drastic conditions and lack of water due to longer dry spells and hotter temperatures.

The mass movement is supported by the Great Plains Foundation, a non-profit organization that works “to conserve and expand natural habitats in Africa through innovative conservation initiatives,” according to its website.

The organisation is working with the Zimbabwe National Parks and Wildlife Management Authority, local experts, the University of Washington-Seattle’s Center for Environmental Forensic Science and Oxford University’s Department of Zoology, according to the website.

One of the new homes for the animals moved in Zimbabwe is Sapi Reserve. the privately-run 280,000-acre private concession is east of Mana Pools National Park, a Unesco World Heritage Site known for its splendid setting along the Zambezi River that forms the border between Zimbabwe with Zambia.

Sapi “is the perfect solution for many reasons,” Great Plains chief executive officer Dereck Joubert said on the foundation’s website.
“This reserve forms the middle-Zambezi biosphere, totaling 1.6 million acres,” wrote Joubert. “

“From the 1950s until we took it over in 2017, decades of hunting had decimated wildlife populations in Sapi Reserve.
“We are rewilding and restoring the wild back to what it once was.” – Associated Press

Hwange

Hwange residents petition parliament over coal mining health risks

Published

1 week ago

December 11, 2024

VicFallsLive

BY NOKUTHABA DLAMINI

The Greater Whange Residents Trust has presented a petition to the Parliament of Zimbabwe, drawing attention to the health risks associated with coal mining in Hwange.

The trust, which advocates for the welfare and interests of people in Hwange, highlights the need for urgent action to protect residents from the harmful effects of coal dust pollution.

According to the trust, the Pneumonoconiosis Act (Chapter 15:08), which was enacted to protect workers in dusty occupations, does not provide adequate protection for ordinary residents who are also affected by coal dust pollution.

The trust argues that the Act is “exclusionary” and was not designed to benefit ordinary residents, who are not eligible for regular medical checks to determine the impact of coal dust on their health.

Below is the full petition that was submitted to Parliament:

DRAW the attention of the House to the following:

1. The Constitution mandates the Parliament of Zimbabwe to make laws, carry out executive oversight and discharge a representative role, as well as protect the Constitution and democratic governance in Zimbabwe.

2. Section 117(2) of the Constitution, inter alia, mandates Parliament to make laws for the peace, order and good governance of Zimbabwe.

3. Section 8 of the Constitution sets out the objectives to guide all institutions and agencies of the State in the formulation and implementation of policies that will lead to the establishment, enhancement and promotion of a sustainable, just, free and democratic society in which people enjoy prosperous, happy and fulfilling lives.

4. Greater Whange Residents Trust is a Hwange-basedTrust which advocates for the welfare and interests of people in Hwange.

5. The town of Hwange is home to over 50 000 residents. These include men, women and children that are not employed as miners.

6. Coal mining is a key industry in that town and impacts on both the residents and the environment of Hwange town and beyond. Hwange is also surrounded by land which falls under the National Parks.

7. The Pneumonoconiosis Act (Chapter 15:08) came into operation on 1 August 1971. The Act remains in force. The long title of the Act gives as its objects the following: An Act to provide for the control and administration of persons employed in dusty occupations; and to provide for matters incidental to or connected with the foregoing. (emphasis added).

8. The Act was designed to respond to health issues affecting those employed in dusty occupations. Naturally,it is ill-equipped to respond to issues of stakeholders beyond this categorisation as stated by the lawmaker.

9. Mining in Hwange consists of both open cast and underground mining operations. Coal mining creates dust and dusty conditions that affect not just those employed by the coal mines. It affects communities that live on and around the mines.

10. Section 56 of the Constitution provides that all persons are equal before the law and have a right to equal protection and benefit of the law.

11. Your petitioners submit that ordinary residents of Hwange that are not employed in the coal mines are not benefiting from the provisions of the Act as currently framed. For instance, those directly employed in coal mines are eligible for regular medical checks under the Act to determine the impact of coal dust on their health, particularly the heart and kidneys. Ordinary residents are not beneficiaries of such tests. The Act was not designed for their benefit. It was exclusionary from the start.

12. Residents that are not employees of coal mines are therefore susceptible to health risks associated with coal mining, without the protection of the law. With the increase in coal and related mining activities, the number of persons that are not subject to the protection of the law thanks to the crafting of the Act has also increased. It is desirable that the Act be reviewed to embrace the protection of all persons that stay or live in environments that are subjected to coal mining dust. It may also be worthwhile for Parliament to consider how the Act could enjoin coal miners to contribute towards the reduction of coal dust, to enhance the health of residents.

13. Your petitioners are aware that section 73 of the Constitution guarantees their right to an environment that is not harmful to their health or well-being, and to have their environment protected for the benefit of present and future generations. In this regard, the State must ensure the progressive realisation of this right by residents of Hwange.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray as follows:

That the Parliament of Zimbabwe to exercises its constitutional mandate to

1. Inquire into the nature and extent of the threat posed to residents due to the dust pollution;

2. Review the fairness of the Pneumonoconiosis Act [Chapter 15:08] to non-employees of the coal mining industry that reside in coal mining areas; and

3. Make recommendations on the review of the Act given the current situation in coal mining areas.

Slider

Zimparks defends elephant culling: ‘Conservationists are greedy and misinformed’

Published

3 weeks ago

December 2, 2024

VicFallsLive

BY STAFF REPORTER

In a recent interview with VicFallsLive reporter Nokuthaba Dlamini, Tinashe Farawo of the Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority (Zimparks) addressed the controversy surrounding elephant culling in Zimbabwe.

Farawo responded to criticism from conservationists on social media, who have condemned Zimparks for their handling of problem elephants in communities.

The debate sparked after an incident in Victoria Falls two months ago, where an elephant was killed in the suburbs, and others were killed in Hwange town.

Farawo defended Zimparks’ actions, stating that communities are under distress due to elephants causing unwarranted curfews, disrupting daily life, and even resulting in fatalities.

He criticized conservationists for slamming the idea of shooting to kill problem elephants, accusing them of being “greedy lots” who are more interested in fundraising than providing solutions.

Below are excerpts from the interview, where Farawo shares his perspective on the matter:

We don’t deal with activists, this is activism they are not conservationists, they are just activists

What we do, let me give you an example we have a hunting quota of 500 elephants every year, and this hunting quota has been in place since 1991, we have never exhausted that quota

We have a management quota that is in place there are many things that we can do. Do they know the definition of culling for example?

When we react to distress calls when communities tell us that there are elephants and lions there and we respond and when we respond we do an assessment and when human life is under threat we are left with no option, but to eliminate

In respect of the two incidences one which happened here in Victoria Falls and the other incident which happened in Hwange, you can actually see that the elephants were in the streets in communities and when we go there, we do an assessment.

Communities in Hwange last month were put on an unwanted curfew by the elephants. For two weeks, no one was going to school, no one was leaving his or her homestead

We receive those distress calls and we go there to restore order and the options that we have is either we scare the animals away, but if human life is under threat, we are left with no option.

We are no apologetic, that’s our job, our laws provide for that.

But because they don’t that and they don’t know the definition of culling and because they are activists and if they were conservationists they would understand what l am saying.

They are just raising their own money in the name our elephants, for their benefits.

They are just greedy and they have never given us options or alternatives to say what is it can we can do with the crisis.

We have a lot of biodiversity projects around our parks, do they say anything about it.

Communities lose their lives l, we have never heard them, even a condolence message.

Hwange

Wildlife Conservation: A double-edged sword for Hwange communities

Published

3 weeks ago

November 28, 2024

VicFallsLive

Hwange woman attacked by a crocodile in Matetsi River. She is footing her own medical bill

BY BRENDA NCUBE

In the heart of Matabeleland North’s Hwange district, wildlife conservation has become a contentious issue.

While the area is renowned for its rich biodiversity and generating substantial revenue, local communities are struggling to reap the benefits.

For communal farmers like Binwell Sibanda, the presence of wild animals has become a constant threat to their livelihoods.

“We rely heavily on farming, but these animals destroy our crops and livestock every year,” Sibanda lamented.

“We expect National Parks and CAMPFIRE (Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources) to control wildlife and not let them roam freely in communal areas.”

Nicholas Tembo, another affected farmer, emphasized the need for compensation for losses incurred due to human-wildlife conflict. “We should be reimbursed for our losses if wildlife destroys our crops or kills livestock,” he said.

The communities are also demanding that park authorities take responsibility in cases of human-wildlife attacks, including paying medical bills, funeral expenses, and supporting victims’ dependents.

Furthermore, the villagers are advocating for a quota for game meat to alleviate hunger and reduce poaching. “The park rangers can cull the animals and share the meat with the community,” Tembo suggested.

However, the communities are frustrated with CAMPFIRE, feeling that the program benefits the association running it rather than the communities themselves.

They are calling for CAMPFIRE to devise programs that channel funds from hunting trophies to benefit the communities, such as rural electrification and drilling boreholes.

The villagers are also seeking a more nuanced approach to addressing poaching, considering the motivations behind it. “If someone is caught poaching or snaring, the law should consider what they plan to do with the animal,” Tembo said.

As the debate surrounding the Parks and Wildlife Amendment Bill (H.B.1, 2024) continues, communities are keep on voicing concerns over compensation for victims of wildlife attacks and seeking clarity on how the Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Authority plans to handle these compensations.

They are also demanding sovereignty over wildlife management, advocating for local authorities to take the lead.

Amidst the thriving tourism activities in the area, it is ironic that communities bordering national parks live in poverty. As Tembo emphasized, “It’s time for us to benefit from wildlife conservation and tourism.”