Empty Reserves a Double-Edged Sword for Wildlife Conservation in Africa
By: Julian Mok
Elephant walks in a national park. Photo by Schwingi
Lexington — The $40-billion wildlife industry in Africa is at a standstill. Reports throughout the country from safari hotspots like Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Botswana and South Africa depict parks and wildlife reserves empty of tourists and vehicles. As the coronavirus cripples the safari industry, it may not be as beneficial to the wildlife as previously thought.
Safari guides, like Hamza Raza Visram who works for Asilia Africa, love their job. Before the pandemic, Hamza would go on stretches for 45-60 days “in the bush,” guiding a small group of tourists to game reserves, wildlife spotting and sightseeing. He would have a predictable source of income and his company would be able to expand its funding of conservation efforts. Basic safaris start at around $3,000 per person for a 10-day excursion while a more luxury package can top out at around $10,000 a head, making it a highly profitable industry for those who do it well. Flourishing safari operations are also indispensable for the wildlife who depend on them for protection against poachers.
Guides drive tourist close to a lion, who is seemingly unbothered by the vehicle’s presence. Photo by Adrega
Tourists and their guides pay fees to enter nature reserves; these fees go to local communities for development projects and conservation measures. In Zambia, 90% of the anti-poaching scouts are paid through tourism fees. Without tourists, there can be no scouts to guard against illegal poaching.
It is quickly becoming a concern that poaching will increase during the pandemic – unemployment and poverty can drive some families to poach, either for food or money. Normally, the presence of vehicles and safari guards would be enough to ward off potential poachers, but now they can operate unhindered. This is especially devastating for species sitting on the brink of extinction, who rely on human conservation to protect the few preciously remaining.
Profit from safaris also go directly towards compensating locals for crops destroyed by wild herbivores or livestock killed by predators. The policy in place discourages local families from killing wildlife who damage their crops and wildlife because they are reimbursed by conversation organizations, money that comes directly from tourism fees. Now, without the promise of compensation, wildlife that trespass into villages and damage farmland will be left to the mercy of the farmers.
It is, however, not all bad. The reduced number of tourists and vehicles that drive through nature reserves has allowed animals to roam more freely.
In a livestream by WildEarth, a safari operation, a camera caught a pride of lions and elephants roaming freely along a dirt road previously used for vehicles. Frederic Dimanche, the director of the Ted Rogers School of Hospitality and Tourism Management at Ryerson University, noted, “This travel hiatus of several months will give a chance for resilient natural environments to recover from the stress inflicted by tourism.” Wildlife will have an opportunity to resume their normal breeding patterns, feeding habits, migration without the presence and pollution from humans.
Some conservation efforts are trying to balance of the double-edged sword of a crippled safari industry. While it is obvious that some wildlife will benefit from reduced human presence, almost 50% of the conservation funds come from tourism.
Companies like the Loisada Wildlife Conservancy in Kenya has suspended operation of its luxury guest lodges and put some of its savings towards continued conservation efforts. Some operations are forgoing the renewal of contracts with some safari guides to have enough funds to go towards protecting the species that need the most help. In many cases, there is no government assistance, and lockdown is voluntary.
Those in the industry predict that business could bounce back in six months; others believe that it would take somewhere between one to two years to stabilize. Some companies, like the one Hamza works for, has bookings for June.
He, like many other in the industry, foresee there being major changes to safari business in the future. Animals may become more skittish around vehicles after not seeing them for so long; locals could become distrustful of foreigners who they might believe to be carriers of infectious diseases. Some countries may temporarily quarantine foreigners or require expensive health insurance for those interested in doing safaris. All these factors can be a massive hindrance on an industry that was once flourishing and provided livelihood for thousands of families. It would also deal as a devastating blow to conservation efforts and the wildlife that depend on them for survival.