Jump to content




See all Safaritalk Special Offers

Message to Guests.

Welcome to Safaritalk where we have been talking Safaris and wildlife conservation since 2006. As a guest you're welcome to read through certain areas of the forum, but to access all the facilities and to contribute your experience, ask questions and get involved, you'll need to be a member - so register here: it's quick, free and easy and I look forward to having you as a Safaritalker soon. Matt.


Photo

Should East African countries adopt the Namibian and South African conservation models?


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

Poll: Should East African countries adopt the Namibian and South African conservation models? (20 member(s) have cast votes)

Should East African countries adopt the Namibian and South African conservation models?

  1. Yes. (8 votes [40.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 40.00%

  2. No. (9 votes [45.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 45.00%

  3. Unsure at present. (3 votes [15.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 15.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 pault

pault

    Order of the Pith

  • Members
  • 4,185 posts
  • Local time: 10:08 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bangkok
  • Category 1:Tourist (regular visitor)
  • Category 2:---

Posted 08 January 2014 - 11:59 AM

Only 14 votes?

Including mine.

Do we not like surveys?

Or did (like me) we not notice them?

Waiting again... for the next time again


#22 Soukous

Soukous

    Order of the Pith

  • Members
  • 3,028 posts
  • Local time: 04:08 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:It's flat, it's windy, it's Suffolk
  • Category 1:Tour Operator
  • Category 2:Resident in Africa/Former resident

Posted 08 January 2014 - 02:07 PM

I voted NO.

Mostly because I think that the circumstances in each country are different.

 

In Kenya there are some very good examples of conservation that work well - Ol Pejeta is just one example - but overall, the effort is impeded by lack of commitment from, or corruption within, the government. In Tanzania I believe it is even worse.

 

Before anything can succeed in either country it is necessary to get government ministers to buy into the goal of preserving wildlife rather than feathering their own nests.

 

Hey @Anita  it is quite a while since anybody called us 'Britishers' and I don't think Roosevelt was ever a 'Britisher' but it has a nice ring to it, maybe we can re-introduce it.  :P 


"if you think you're too small to make a difference, try spending the night in a closed room with a mosquito."

Martin Dunn FRGS

 

website: www.wildlifephotographyafrica.com

facebook: Wildlife Photography Africa

twitter@wildphotoafrica


#23 Game Warden

Game Warden

    Administrator

  • Root Admin
  • 16,465 posts
  • Local time: 04:08 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sat by the PC
  • Category 1:Tourist (regular visitor)
  • Category 2:---

Posted 05 October 2015 - 02:03 PM

I have resigned myself to the fact that in 50 years, the only places in Africa that will be worth going to [for wildlife] will be Botswana, Namibia and South Africa. All the rest will be gone.

 

So states Craig Packer in a recent newspaper article which we discuss on Safaritalk here.

 

Why is that? Unchecked population increase? Pressure on wilderness spaces for agricultural needs, firewood and charcoal harvesting etc?

 

It may be that Botswana's relatively low human population density, high cost low impact tourism model and strong willed Government's stand on poaching will play a part, but what about Namibia and South Africa? Does it come down to sustainable use, private ownership, sport hunting etc? Will those of us still around in 50 years look back to this topic and Craig's piece and lament the fact that elsewhere in Africa wildlife numbers have dwindled due to the fact that they didn't base their wildlife policies on the Namibian and South Africa model?


  • Tom Kellie likes this

"Return to old watering holes for more than water; friends and dreams are there to meet you." - African proverb.

 

How to create your gallery album and upload images.

 

How to post images in the text.

Want to tag another member in a post? Use @ before their display name, eg @game warden


#24 Dam2810

Dam2810

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 427 posts
  • Local time: 03:08 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Category 1:Tourist (regular visitor)
  • Category 2:---

Posted 05 October 2015 - 08:11 PM

Probably, they could buy some time. But over the long term, wildlife in those countries is doomed.

 

Increasing agricultural needs, firewood, charcoal, bush meat are all related to the increasing African population.  

 

Where there are humans, there is no/little wildlife. It is a fact. Do we see much wildlife in the UK or in France? In France, there are only a few bears left and it s already too much. In the UK, we have a few deers. In Africa, humans and wildlife are often competing for the same resources (think about the Mara or look at how dry the Ruaha river is). Anyway thinking about the elephants population for instance, we have to remember that in less than in a century, its population has decreased by 97%, from 10Million to 300,000. Sorry to be so downbeat, the Africa we all love has been disappearing for a long time

 

If Africans continue to breed like rabbits, there will be absolutely nothing left in Kenya and Tanzania. I really do not understand why nothing is done to stop that ridiculous population growth. 


Edited by Dam2810, 05 October 2015 - 08:11 PM.

“Africa’s human and natural resources have been pillaged and plundered for generations by people from far off lands. From slavery to archaeological artifacts, minerals, fauna and flora, the continent and its people have for so long been victims of other continents’ selfish interests, and today it is continuing…our elephant ivory and rhino horn are going to countries where they are used for God knows what! Only to satisfy ridiculous outdated beliefs whilst we remain with carcasses, as proof we once owned these magnificent animals.” President Khama


#25 Tom Kellie

Tom Kellie

    Order of the Pith

  • Members
  • 6,486 posts
  • Local time: 11:08 PM
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Central CHINA
  • Category 1:Tourist (regular visitor)
  • Category 2:---

Posted 13 October 2015 - 08:20 AM

 

I have resigned myself to the fact that in 50 years, the only places in Africa that will be worth going to [for wildlife] will be Botswana, Namibia and South Africa. All the rest will be gone.

 

So states Craig Packer in a recent newspaper article which we discuss on Safaritalk here.

 

Why is that? Unchecked population increase? Pressure on wilderness spaces for agricultural needs, firewood and charcoal harvesting etc?

 

It may be that Botswana's relatively low human population density, high cost low impact tourism model and strong willed Government's stand on poaching will play a part, but what about Namibia and South Africa? Does it come down to sustainable use, private ownership, sport hunting etc? Will those of us still around in 50 years look back to this topic and Craig's piece and lament the fact that elsewhere in Africa wildlife numbers have dwindled due to the fact that they didn't base their wildlife policies on the Namibian and South Africa model?

 

~ @Game Warden

 

As I won't live to see half a century hence, I'll never know the outcome.

 

The visit to South Africa earlier this month was eye-opening.

 

Not at all what I expected. The privately managed Sabi Sands area was well worth visiting.

 

Agricultural needs — herding and charcoal harvesting — are understandable, but reduce the attractiveness of wildlife areas.

 

I'm sorry to read such a dire assessment. I wish that the trends weren't going that way, if indeed they are.

 

Thank you for posing this question.

 

Tom K.







© 2006 - 2016 www.safaritalk.net - Talking Safaris and African Wildlife Conservation since 2006. Passionate about Africa.

Welcome guest to Safaritalk.
Please Register or Login to use the full facilities.