Can Livestock and Wildlife Co-Exist? an Interdisciplinary Approach

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Can Livestock and Wildlife Co-Exist? an Interdisciplinary Approach Can Livestock and Wildlife Coexist? An Interdisciplinary Approach Edited by David Bourn and Roger Blench -*r •#**• ERGO This book grew out of a review commissioned by the Animal Health, Livestock Production and Natural Resources Systems Programmes of the UK Department for International Development's Renewable Natural Resources Knowledge Strategy. The Environmental Research Group Oxford was established in 1985 to provide consultancy services relating to environmental assessment, planning and management, including natural resource surveys, rural appraisal and geographical information systems. The Overseas Development Institute is an independent think-tank on international development and humanitarian issues. ODI provides research support and policy advice on development issues to governments, international agencies and non-governmental bodies. David Bourn is an environmental biologist and founding Director of ERGO. He is a graduate of Edinburgh and Oxford Universities, and has wide-ranging experience of Africa, specialising in natural resource surveys, environmental assessments and interdisciplinary studies. Roger Blench is a social anthropologist and a Research Fellow in the Rural Policy and Environment 'Programme at ODI. He has extensive field experience in Africa exploring issues relating to the interface between policy, the environment and traditional natural resource management. 00016953 Overseas Development Institute Can Livestock and Wildlife Co-exist? An Interdisciplinary Approach edited by David Bourn and Roger Blench GDI Research Study Can Livestock and Wildlife Co-exist? An Interdisciplinary Approach Livestock, Wildlife and People in the Semi-Arid Rangeland of Eastern Africa edited by David Bourn and Roger Blench with contributions from Charlotte Boyd Liz Drake Peter Stevenson Overseas Development Institute The Environmental Research Group Oxford A CIP Publication data record for this publication may be obtained from the British Library ISBN: 0 85003 408 6 © Overseas Development Institute 1999 Published by the Overseas Development Institute Portland House, Stag Place London SW1E 5DP All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Cover photograph reproduced with permission from Oxford Scientific Films. Printed by Russell Press Ltd, Nottingham. Contents Summary vii Preface xiii Abbreviations and Acronyms xv Acknowledgements and Contributors xviii T Introduction 1 Historical and Geographical Perspectives 2 Document Structure 6 2 Regional Setting and Population Trends 7 National Statistics and Development Indicators 7 Human Population Growth 8 Nationally Protected Areas and Management Authorities 8 Livestock and Wildlife Population Trends 11 3 Disease Risks Associated with Livestock and Wildlife Co-existence 20 Pastoralists' Strategies for Limiting Disease Risks to Livestock 20 Changing Circumstances 20 Animal Diseases of Current Concern 22 Disease Information and Monitoring 22 Status of Livestock/Wildlife Disease Research 26 4 Pastoral-Wildlife Relationships: Past and Present 27 Changing Conceptions of Rangeland Ecology 27 Diverse Impacts of Demographic Pressure 28 Evolution of Conservation Philosophies 33 5 Livestock and Wildlife in Sustainable Rural Livelihoods 38 Sustainable Rural Livelihoods 38 Role of Livestock 38 Wildlife/Livestock Interactions 40 6 Integrated Management of Livestock and Wildlife 42 Tenure and Access Rights 42 National Ownership 43 Private Ownership 44 Communal Tenure and CBNRM Systems 48 National and International Wildlife Institutions 56 7 Conclusions and Recommendations 57 Population Trends, Environmental Change and Potential Target Zones 57 Disease Risks 58 vi Can Livestock and Wildlife Co-exist? Conflict or Co-existence? 58 Policy Considerations 59 Priorities for Technical Support and Further Study 60 "Wider Relevance 61 Appendix 1 Maps 62 Map 1. People, Protected Areas and Tsetse in East Africa 63 Map 2. Agro-Climatic Zones 64 Map 3. Standard Vegetation Types 65 Map 4. Satellite Derived Land Cover Classes 66 Map 5. Pastoral Peoples of Africa 67 Map 6. Mean Annual Rainfall Range: 400-1200mm 68 Appendix 2 Brief Notes on Diseases Affecting both Livestock and Wildlife 69 References 85 Annotated Bibliography 105 Useful Websites 250 Tables Table 1. Summary of National Statistics and Development Indicators 7 Table 2. Kenya Rangeland Livestock and Wildlife Population Estimates: 1970-1990s 12 Table 3. Some Animal Diseases of Current Concern in East Africa 24 Table 4. Characteristics of Case Study Areas 29 Table 5. Chronology of Donor Initiatives 35 Table 6. Multi-Species Ranching in Kenya 46 Figures Figure 1. Human Population Density Trends: 1950-2025 9 Figure 2. Changes in Kenyan Rangeland Livestock & Wildlife Populations: 1970s-1990s 15 Figure 3. Population Trends in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area 16 Figure 4. Tanzanian Livestock Census Population Estimates:1971-1994 17 Figure 5. Land Cover Changes in Selected Areas of Kenya: 1948-98 30 Text Boxes Box 1. Brief History of Galana Ranch 31 Box 2. Views of the African Wildlife Foundation 36 Summary vii Summary Population Trends, Environmental Change and Potential Target Zones 1. Human population growth, agricultural expansion, deforestation, hunting and the ramifications of economic development have had profound, cumulative impacts on the environment, natural habitats and wildlife populations all over the world. East Africa is no exception. The number of people in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda has doubled over the past 20 years, and is set to double again in the next 30-40 years. 2. Settlement and cultivation are concentrated in areas of higher rainfall and greater agricultural potential, around Lake Victoria, in the highlands, and along the coast. Mean population density is highest in Uganda and lowest in Tanzania. Agricultural land scarcity, however, is greatest in Kenya because of generally lower rainfall. Nevertheless, the general trend in all three countries is for agricultural expansion and the transformation of natural habitats to farmland. 3. Extensive habitat conversion and unauthorised hunting, exacerbated by a proliferation of high-powered automatic weaponry in recent years, has hastened the long-term decline and disappearance of wildlife from many areas. Population estimates for the Kenya rangelands indicate that the overall number of wildlife has fallen by a third over the past two decades. Wildlife has been eliminated from much of Uganda, including many protected areas. In Tanzania, wildlife has also declined, but because of the country's size and relatively low human density, substantial wildlife populations survive in the extensive wildlands that still remain. 4. Livestock trends are less clear. Monitoring surveys indicate that cattle and small ruminant populations in the Kenya rangelands have fluctuated widely over time, but no significant long-term trends are evident. Low- level aerial surveys suggest that livestock out-number wildlife by a factor of 10:1. Limited data from the Ngorongoro Conservation Area in Tanzania indicate that cattle numbers have decreased over the past 40 years, whilst there has been a substantial increase in small ruminants. National livestock population estimates for Tanzania indicate increases of between 150-250% from 1971 to 1994. 5. The best prospects in east Africa for demonstrating the sustainable co­ existence of livestock and wildlife are: in zones adjoining protected areas; in regions with relatively low rainfall and limited potential for arable farming; where human population density is relatively low; and where livestock owners predominate, or are a major component of local viii Can Livestock and Wildlife Co-exist? communities. Potential zones of interest include: Maasai Mara, Meru, Tsavo and Samburu in Kenya; Mikumi, Mkomasi, Ngorongoro, Tarangire, Ruaha, Serengeti and Udzungwa in Tanzania; and Kidepo Valley and Lake Mburo in Uganda. Disease Risks 1. Diseases need not be a major constraint to wildlife and livestock co­ existence in the semi-arid rangelands. 2. Although there are many diseases that can affect both wildlife and livestock, only a few are considered to pose a significant risk to livestock production. 3. The majority of game animals are not involved to any significant extent in the transmission of disease to livestock. Exceptions include the African buffalo and the wildebeest, both of which can, under certain circumstances, transmit serious disease to livestock. 4. With increasing human population, altering land use and changing farming systems, the relevance and importance of diseases involving wildlife and livestock are changing. Strategies to manage the diseases must, in some situations, be altered to take account of these changes. 5. With increasing human populations and encroachment into areas bordering wildlife reserves, there is an increasing risk of disease spreading from domestic animals to wild animals. Strategies to protect valuable wildlife species from introduced disease need to be developed. 6. There is a general scarcity of information on the occurrence and importance of the various diseases affecting livestock and wildlife in the semi-arid rangelands. Better disease surveillance is required, with improved systems of information management and dissemination. 7. In-country expertise on wildlife diseases is limited and resources for research are lacking. Socio-economic
Recommended publications
  • The Kenya Wildlife Service at Its Best
    ihe Kenya wild Life service Iru the 2±st century: "Protective cqlobally significant Areas and Resoutrces The George Wright Forum The GWS Journal of Parks, Protected Areas & Cultural Sites volume 29 number 1 • 2012 Origins Founded in 1980, the George Wright Society is organized for the pur­ poses of promoting the application of knowledge, fostering communica­ tion, improving resource management, and providing information to improve public understanding and appreciation of the basic purposes of natural and cultural parks and equivalent reserves. The Society is dedicat­ ed to the protection, preservation, and management of cultural and natu­ ral parks and reserves through research and education. Mission The George Wright Society advances the scientific and heritage values of parks and protected areas. The Society promotes professional research and resource stewardship across natural and cultural disciplines, provides avenues of communication, and encourages public policies that embrace these values. Our Goal The Society strives to be the premier organization connecting people, places, knowledge, and ideas to foster excellence in natural and cultural resource management, research, protection, and interpretation in parks and equivalent reserves. Board of Directors BRENT A. MITCHELL, PRESIDENT • Ipswich, Massachusetts MOLLY N. ROSS, VICE PRESIDENT • Arlington, Virginia DAVIDJ. PARSONS, SECRETARY • Florence, Montana GARY E. DAVIS, TREASURER • Thousand Oaks, California BRAD BARR • Woods Hole, Massachusetts NATHALIE GAGNON • Ottawa, Ontario BARRETT KENNEDY • Baton Rouge, Louisiana FRANKJ. PRIZNAR • Gaithersburg, Maryland JANW. VAN WAGTEN'DONK • El Portal, California JOHN WAITHAKA • Ottawa, Ontario LYNN WILSON • Cobble Hill, British Columbia GRADUATE STUDENT LIAISON TO THE BOARD CARENA J. VAN RIPER • College Station, Texas Executive Office DAVID HARMON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR EMILY DEKKER-FIALA, CONFERENCE COORDINATOR P.
    [Show full text]
  • PLAAS RR46 Smeadzim 1.Pdf
    Chrispen Sukume, Blasio Mavedzenge, Felix Murimbarima and Ian Scoones Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences Research Report 46 Space, Markets and Employment in Agricultural Development: Zimbabwe Country Report Chrispen Sukume, Blasio Mavedzenge, Felix Murimbarima and Ian Scoones Published by the Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies, Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences, University of the Western Cape, Private Bag X17, Bellville 7535, Cape Town, South Africa Tel: +27 21 959 3733 Fax: +27 21 959 3732 Email: [email protected] Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies Research Report no. 46 June 2015 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior permission from the publisher or the authors. Copy Editor: Vaun Cornell Series Editor: Rebecca Pointer Photographs: Pamela Ngwenya Typeset in Frutiger Thanks to the UK’s Department for International Development (DfID) and the Economic and Social Research Council’s (ESRC) Growth Research Programme Contents List of tables ................................................................................................................ ii List of figures .............................................................................................................. iii Acronyms and abbreviations ...................................................................................... v 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Promotion of Climate-Resilient Lifestyles Among Rural Families in Gutu
    Promotion of climate-resilient lifestyles among rural families in Gutu (Masvingo Province), Mutasa (Manicaland Province) and Shamva (Mashonaland Central Province) Districts | Zimbabwe Sahara and Sahel Observatory 26 November 2019 Promotion of climate-resilient lifestyles among rural families in Gutu Project/Programme title: (Masvingo Province), Mutasa (Manicaland Province) and Shamva (Mashonaland Central Province) Districts Country(ies): Zimbabwe National Designated Climate Change Management Department, Ministry of Authority(ies) (NDA): Environment, Water and Climate Development Aid from People to People in Zimbabwe (DAPP Executing Entities: Zimbabwe) Accredited Entity(ies) (AE): Sahara and Sahel Observatory Date of first submission/ 7/19/2019 V.1 version number: Date of current submission/ 11/26/2019 V.2 version number A. Project / Programme Information (max. 1 page) ☒ Project ☒ Public sector A.2. Public or A.1. Project or programme A.3 RFP Not applicable private sector ☐ Programme ☐ Private sector Mitigation: Reduced emissions from: ☐ Energy access and power generation: 0% ☐ Low emission transport: 0% ☐ Buildings, cities and industries and appliances: 0% A.4. Indicate the result ☒ Forestry and land use: 25% areas for the project/programme Adaptation: Increased resilience of: ☒ Most vulnerable people and communities: 25% ☒ Health and well-being, and food and water security: 25% ☐ Infrastructure and built environment: 0% ☒ Ecosystem and ecosystem services: 25% A.5.1. Estimated mitigation impact 399,223 tCO2eq (tCO2eq over project lifespan) A.5.2. Estimated adaptation impact 12,000 direct beneficiaries (number of direct beneficiaries) A.5. Impact potential A.5.3. Estimated adaptation impact 40,000 indirect beneficiaries (number of indirect beneficiaries) A.5.4. Estimated adaptation impact 0.28% of the country’s total population (% of total population) A.6.
    [Show full text]
  • LAN Installation Sites Coordinates
    ANNEX VIII LAN Installation sites coordinates Item Geographical/Location Service Delivery Tic Points (List k if HEALTH CENTRE Site # PROVINCE DISTRICT Dept/umits DHI (EPMS SITE) LAN S 2 services Sit COORDINATES required e LOT 1: List of 83 Sites BUDIRIRO 1 HARARE HARARE POLYCLINIC [30.9354,-17.8912] ALL X BEATRICE 2 HARARE HARARE RD.INFECTIO [31.0282,-17.8601] ALL X WILKINS 3 HARARE HARARE INFECTIOUS H ALL X GLEN VIEW 4 HARARE HARARE POLYCLINIC [30.9508,-17.908] ALL X 5 HARARE HARARE HATCLIFFE P.C.C. [31.1075,-17.6974] ALL X KAMBUZUMA 6 HARARE HARARE POLYCLINIC [30.9683,-17.8581] ALL X KUWADZANA 7 HARARE HARARE POLYCLINIC [30.9285,-17.8323] ALL X 8 HARARE HARARE MABVUKU P.C.C. [31.1841,-17.8389] ALL X RUTSANANA 9 HARARE HARARE CLINIC [30.9861,-17.9065] ALL X 10 HARARE HARARE HATFIELD PCC [31.0864,-17.8787] ALL X Address UNDP Office in Zimbabwe Block 10, Arundel Office Park, Norfolk Road, Mt Pleasant, PO Box 4775, Harare, Zimbabwe Tel: (263 4) 338836-44 Fax:(263 4) 338292 Email: [email protected] NEWLANDS 11 HARARE HARARE CLINIC ALL X SEKE SOUTH 12 HARARE CHITUNGWIZA CLINIC [31.0763,-18.0314] ALL X SEKE NORTH 13 HARARE CHITUNGWIZA CLINIC [31.0943,-18.0152] ALL X 14 HARARE CHITUNGWIZA ST.MARYS CLINIC [31.0427,-17.9947] ALL X 15 HARARE CHITUNGWIZA ZENGEZA CLINIC [31.0582,-18.0066] ALL X CHITUNGWIZA CENTRAL 16 HARARE CHITUNGWIZA HOSPITAL [31.0628,-18.0176] ALL X HARARE CENTRAL 17 HARARE HARARE HOSPITAL [31.0128,-17.8609] ALL X PARIRENYATWA CENTRAL 18 HARARE HARARE HOSPITAL [30.0433,-17.8122] ALL X MURAMBINDA [31.65555953980,- 19 MANICALAND
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife and Forest Biodiversity Conservation in Taita, Kenya Njogu, J.G
    Community-based conservation in an entitlement perspective: wildlife and forest biodiversity conservation in Taita, Kenya Njogu, J.G. Citation Njogu, J. G. (2004). Community-based conservation in an entitlement perspective: wildlife and forest biodiversity conservation in Taita, Kenya. Leiden: African Studies Centre. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/1887/12921 Version: Not Applicable (or Unknown) License: Leiden University Non-exclusive license Downloaded from: https://hdl.handle.net/1887/12921 Note: To cite this publication please use the final published version (if applicable). Community-based conservation in an entitlement perspective African Studies Centre Research Report 73 / 2004 Community-based conservation in an entitlement perspective Wildlife and forest biodiversity conservation in Taita, Kenya James Gichiah Njogu This PhD project was part of the research programme Resources, Environment and Development Research Associates (REDRA) of the Amsterdam Research Institute for Global Issues and Development Studies (AGIDS). It also formed part of Working Programme 1, Natural resource management: Knowledge transfer, social insecurity and cultural coping, of the Research School for Resource Studies for Development (CERES). The Netherlands Foundation for the Advancement of Tropical Research (WOTRO) jointly with the Amsterdam Research Institute for Global Issues and Development Studies (AGIDS) of the University of Amsterdam funded this research. The School of Environmental Studies of Moi University (Eldoret, Kenya) provided institutional support. Published by: African Studies Centre P.O. Box 9555 2300 RB Leiden Tel: + 31 - 71 - 527 33 72 Fax: + 31 - 71 - 527 33 44 E-mail: [email protected] Website:http://asc.leidenuniv.nl Printed by: PrintPartners Ipskamp B.V., Enschede ISBN 90.5448.057.2 © African Studies Centre, Leiden, 2004 Contents List of maps viii List of figures viii List of boxes viii List of tables ix List of plates x List of abbreviations x Acknowledgements xii PART 1: THE CONTEXT 1 1.
    [Show full text]
  • TREATMENT SITES — Southern Africa HIV and AIDS Information LISTED by PROVINCE and AREA Dissemination Service
    ARV TREATMENT SITES Southern Africa HIV and AIDS Information LISTED BY PROVINCE AND AREA Dissemination Service MASVINGO · Bulilima: Plumtree District hospital: · Bikita: Silveira Mission Hospital: Tel: (038)324 Tel. (019) 2291; 2661-3 · Chiredzi: Hippo Valley Estates Clinic: · Gwanda: Gwanda OI Clinic: Tel: (084)22661-3: Tel: (031)2264 - Mangwe: St. Annes Brunapeg: · Chiredzi: Colin Saunders Hosp. Tel: (082) 361/466 AN HIV/AIDS Tel: (033)6387:6255 · Kezi-Matobo: Tshelanyemba Mission Hosp: · Chiredzi: Chiredzi District Hosp.: Tel: (033) Tel: (082) 254 · Gutu: Gutu Mission Hosp: · Maphisa District Hosp: Tel. (082) 244 Tel: (030)2323:2313:2631:3229 · Masvingo: Morgenster Mission Hosp: MIDLANDS Tel: (039)262123 · Chivhu General Hosp: Tel: (056):2644:2351 TREATMENT - Masvingo Provincial Hosp: · Chirumhanzu: Muvonde Hosp: Tel: (032)346 Tel: (039)263358/9; 263360 · Mvuma: St Theresas Mission Hosp: - Masvingo: Mukurira Memorial Private Hospital: Tel: (0308)208/373 Tel. (039) 264919 · Gweru: Gweru Provincial Hospital: ROADMAP FOR · Mwenezi: Matibi Mission Hospital: Tel. (0517) 323 Tel: (054) 221301:221108 · Zaka: Musiso Mission Hosp: · Gweru: Gweru City Hospital: Tel: (054) Tel: (034)2286:2322:2327/8 221301:221108 - Gweru: Mkoba 1 Polyclinic, Tel. MATEBELELAND NORTH - Gweru: Lower Gweru Rural Health Clinic: · Hwange: St Patricks Mission Hosp: Tel: (054) 227023 Tel: (081)34316-7 · Kwekwe: Kwekwe General Hospital: ZIMBABWE · Lupane: St Lukes Mission Hosp: Tel: (055)22333/7:24828/31 Tel: (0898)362:549:349 · Mberengwa: Mnene Mission Hospital: · Tsholotsho: Tsholotsho District Hosp: Tel. (0518) 352/3 Tel: (0878) 397/216/299 A guide for accessing anti- PRIVATE DOCTORS retroviral treatment in MATEBELELAND SOUTH For a list of private doctors who have special Zimbabwe: what it is, where · Beitbridge: Beitbridge District Hosp: training in ARV treatment and counselling, ask Tel.(086) 22496-8 your own doctor or contact SAfAIDS.
    [Show full text]
  • Mashonaland Central
    Name Address Qualification Mashonaland Central Environmenal Health Technicians x 35 1 Phiri Rizzymore Kaziro Primary Bag 1029 Bindura National Diploma in Environmental Health 2 Chirimuta Marimo 6196,Sunningdale 2,Harare National Diploma in Environmental Health 3 Nyatsanza Obey 603 Nketa 6 Bulawayo National Diploma in Environmental Health 4 Muberekwa Monica Tendai 376 Cleverhill Bindura National Diploma in Environmental Health 5 Musakanya Rashwence 7195 Chiwaridzo Bindura National Diploma in Environmental Health 6 Kuutsi Endrew Batsirai 20 Gwe new mabvuku National Diploma in Environmental Health 7 Chinyanga Priscilla Matirasa 1609 mutsabvi Chivaridzo.Bindura National Diploma in Environmental Health 8 Mahuda Timothy 106 Fura Mt Darwin National Diploma in Environmental Health 9 Kateguru Cloud Chitemamuswe Pri. Box 18 Centenary National Diploma in Environmental Health 10 Mupesa Simbarashe 678 Plum Close Bindura National Diploma in Environmental Health 11 Mubaiwa Andrew Guruve District Hosp Box 5 Guruve National Diploma in Environmental Health 12 Mwaemudzeni Precious Tafadzwa 6 Longford Qeensdale National Diploma in Environmental Health 13 Matiyinga Primrose Mazani 7935 Chipadze Infill Bindura National Diploma in Environmental Health 14 kudakwashe Jokonya 1854 Dandamira Concession National Diploma in Environmental Health 15 Tumbare Munyaradzi Morgan Min of Education Box 2 Guruve National Diploma in Environmental Health 16 Kaguna Phillip 4056 Chivaridzo 2 Bindura National Diploma in Environmental Health 17 Rundare Tererai 39 Dumuka St Mabvuku
    [Show full text]
  • Crossbreeding of Cattle in Africa
    Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences June 2018, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 16-31 ISSN: 2334-2404 (Print), 2334-2412 (Online) Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved. Published by American Research Institute for Policy Development DOI: 10.15640/jaes.v7n1a3 URL: https://doi.org/10.15640/jaes.v7n1a3 Crossbreeding of Cattle in Africa R Trevor Wilson1 Abstract Africa is endowed with a very wide range of mostly Bos indicus indigenous cattle breeds. A general statement with regard to their performance for meat or milk is that they are of inferior genetic value. Attempts to improve their performance have rarely relied on within-breed improvement but have concentrated on crossing to supposedly superior exotic Bos taurus types. Exotic types have not always – indeed have rarely -- been chosen on objective criteria and the imported breeds generally indicate the colonial past of individual African countries rather than on use of “the right animal in the right place”. Most attempts at increasing output have been undertaken under research station conditions. Results on station have been very variable but the limited success achieved has rarely been carried over in to the general African cattle population. This paper documents a number of attempts to alter the genetic make-up of African cattle in several countries and discusses the reasons for the failure of most of these. Keywords: Bos indicus, Bos taurus, livestock experiments, milk production, meat production 1. Introduction African countries differ greatly in climatic, ecological and agricultural conditions and in socioeconomic factors. In many countries, nonetheless, cattle are the most important livestock species.
    [Show full text]
  • Mangrove Conserva and Preserves Change Adaptation Belize, Central Ame Mangrove Conservation and Preserves As Climate Change Adap
    Brooksmith Consulting Mangrove Conservation and Preserves as Climate Change Adaptation in Belize, Central America A case study 6/30/2011 Mangrove Conservation as Climate Change Adaptation in Belize Central America: A Case Study Table of Contents Execut ive Summary 2 Introduction 4 Mangrove conservation and climate change 4 Status of mangrove habitat 5 Climate change in Belize 6 Placencia Village 6 Threats to mangrove habitat 10 Coastal residential development 10 Agriculture and aquaculture 11 A programmatic response to climate change 12 The progression of mangrove conservation activities 13 Mangrove Challenge Contest 16 Mangrove Reserves 21 Bibliography 31 2 Mangrove Conservation as Climate Change Adaptation in Placencia, Belize: A case study Executive Summary The effects of climate change present growing challenges to low-lying developing nations in the Caribbean Basin. Sea level rise, increasing frequency of large tropical cyclones, loss of reef-building corals and other effects are projected to result in direct economic losses consuming over one-fifth of the gross domestic product of nations in the region by 2100. Resilient mangroves shorelines provide multiple buffers against climate change effects. In addition to serving as habitat for marine species and wildlife, mangroves also provide storm protection for coastal communities, a buffer against coastal erosion, carbon sinks, and additional resiliency for economically important habitat such as coral reef. The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) in Belize has initiated community-based adaptation projects to educate local populations and stakeholders about these emerging problems and to implement “no regrets” adaptation to climate change effects. Understanding of climate change science varies among demographics and opinion leaders within Belize but the value of mangrove habitat for storm protection and fish habitat is generally accepted.
    [Show full text]
  • Private Lands Conservation in Belize
    University of Colorado Law School Colorado Law Scholarly Commons Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Books, Reports, and Studies Resources, Energy, and the Environment 2004 Private Lands Conservation in Belize Joan Marsan University of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/books_reports_studies Part of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons, Environmental Law Commons, Environmental Policy Commons, Estates and Trusts Commons, Land Use Law Commons, Legislation Commons, Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, Natural Resources Law Commons, Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, Property Law and Real Estate Commons, and the Tax Law Commons Citation Information Joan Marsan, Private Lands Conservation In Belize (Natural Res. Law Ctr., Univ. of Colo. Sch. of Law 2004). JOAN MARSAN, PRIVATE LANDS CONSERVATION IN BELIZE (Natural Res. Law Ctr., Univ. of Colo. Sch. of Law 2004). Reproduced with permission of the Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy, and the Environment (formerly the Natural Resources Law Center) at the University of Colorado Law School. AVAILABLE ONLINE ====================; • •~ ~ ...... ~ ~ ~ .­~ PRIVATE LANDS CONSERVATION IN .~ BELIZE •_. -­~ • ~ ..­ A Country Report by the Natural Resources Law Center, ...... University of Colorado School of Law ~ 4 .­~ September 2004 ~ Sponsored by The Nature Conservancy Primary Author: Joan Marsan, NRLC Research Assistant KGA [email protected] 576 • M37 2004 Private Lands
    [Show full text]
  • The Status of Kenya's Elephants
    The status of Kenya’s elephants 1990–2002 C. Thouless, J. King, P. Omondi, P. Kahumbu, I. Douglas-Hamilton The status of Kenya’s elephants 1990–2002 © 2008 Save the Elephants Save the Elephants PO Box 54667 – 00200 Nairobi, Kenya first published 2008 edited by Helen van Houten and Dali Mwagore maps by Clair Geddes Mathews and Philip Miyare layout by Support to Development Communication CONTENTS Acknowledgements iv Abbreviations iv Executive summary v Map of Kenya viii 1. Introduction 1 2. Survey techniques 4 3. Data collection for this report 7 4. Tsavo 10 5. Amboseli 17 6. Mara 22 7. Laikipia–Samburu 28 8. Meru 36 9. Mwea 41 10. Mt Kenya (including Imenti Forest) 42 11. Aberdares 47 12. Mau 51 13. Mt Elgon 52 14. Marsabit 54 15. Nasolot–South Turkana–Rimoi–Kamnarok 58 16. Shimba Hills 62 17. Kilifi District (including Arabuko-Sokoke) 67 18. Northern (Wajir, Moyale, Mandera) 70 19. Eastern (Lamu, Garissa, Tana River) 72 20. North-western (around Lokichokio) 74 Bibliography 75 Annexes 83 The status of Kenya’s elephants 1990–2002 AcKnowledgemenTs This report is the product of collaboration between Save the Elephants and Kenya Wildlife Service. We are grateful to the directors of KWS in 2002, Nehemiah Rotich and Joseph Kioko, and the deputy director of security at that time, Abdul Bashir, for their support. Many people have contributed to this report and we are extremely grateful to them for their input. In particular we would like to thank KWS field personnel, too numerous to mention by name, who facilitated our access to field records and provided vital information and insight into the status of elephants in their respective areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Full
    Proceedings of the World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, 11.550 Genetic variability and relationships among nine southern African and exotic cattle breeds L. van der Westhuizen1,2, M.D. MacNeil1,2,3, M.M. Scholtz1,2 & F.W.C. Neser2 1 ARC-Animal Production Institute, Private Bag X2, 0062, Irene, South Africa [email protected] (Corresponding Author) 2 Department of Animal, Wildlife and Grassland Sciences, UFS, P.O. Box 339, Bloemfontein, 9300, South Africa 3 Delta G, 145 Ice Cave Road, MT 59301, Miles City, USA Summary An existing 11 microsatellite marker database that resulted from parentage verification in response to requests from industry, was used to assess genetic diversity among nine breeds of cattle. These breeds were drawn from B. indicus (Boran (BOR) and Brahman (BRA)), B. taurus (Angus (ANG) and Simmental (SIM)), and B. taurus africanus (Afrikaner (AFR), Bonsmara (BON), Drakensberger (DRA), Nguni (NGU), and Tuli (TUL)). Due to the cost of genotyping, genetic diversity studies using SNPs rely on relatively low numbers of animals to represent each of the breeds. Large numbers of animals have been genotyped for parentage verification using microsatellite markers, therefore, the microsatellite information on large numbers of animals has the potential to provide more accurate estimates of genomic diversity. A minimum of 300 animals were randomly chosen from each breed and were used to assess within- and between breed genetic diversity. All breeds had high levels of heterozygosity and minimal inbreeding. There were distinct differences among the three groups of cattle, but also support for the notion of taurine influence in some of the Sanga and Sanga-derived breeds.
    [Show full text]