Traditional leaders call for Campfire intervention

TRADITIONAL leaders in human-wildlife conflict hotspots of Hwange district have called for government intervention in the administration of the Zimbabwe’s Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources commonly known as Campfire, which they argue is now serving individuals and certain institutions’ interests instead of benefiting the communities where the resources are.

The traditional leaders who recently gathered for a training workshop in conservation and anti-poaching accused Hwange Rural District Council (HRDC) of monopolising and abusing the Campfire funds while they shouldered the consequences of human-wildlife conflict.

The training which was organised by the traditional leaders with support from Zimbabwe National Parks (Zimparks) and Painted Dog Conservation (PDC) was meant to re-enforce the roles played by the chiefs, headmen and village heads in wildlife conservation. Humanwildlife conflicts hotspots are common in areas close or adjacent to Hwange National Park stretching from Gwayi to Jambezi. Affected areas are those in Mabale, Dete, Dopota, Lupote, Songwa, Jambezi and Gwayi under chiefs Nekatambe, Nelukoba, Dingani and Shana. The areas record high incidences of conflicts with Zimparks responding to an average of eight cases of human-wildlife conflict per month.

According to the traditional leaders the Campfire project was not doing much to enhance the need to motivate conservation efforts in communities as their subjects continued to bear the brunt of wildlife conflict.

“We want the director general to come down here and proffer solutions on the issue of compensation for victims of human-wildlife conflict. We are not benefiting anything from our efforts in conserving wildlife instead we are losing crops and livestock. Campfire is not doing what it’s supposed to. The Hwange Rural District Council continues to benefit out of it ahead of communities affected by the conflict. In other areas such as Tsholotsho, Campfire is being implemented well and communities are benefiting however, this side it’s different. We are beginning to think that its better Campfire to be stopped this side,” said Chabasichana village head, Mr Johane Nyoni.

Another Tholiwe Mudenda from Mabale said their pleas for the erection of a fence to demarcate communities and wildlife areas were not being attended to and yet they were losing life, property and crops to wildlife.

“We have several times appealed to relevant authorities such as National Parks and council to facilitate the establishment of a fence to ensure wild animals don’t stray into communities. However, no action has been taken by the authorities leaving us exposed and vulnerable to attacks and starvation as elephants invade our fields. Does it mean that these animals have greater value than us to an extent of getting such protection,” she asked Zimparks officials that were in attendance of the training.

Ward 17 headman, Mr Oliver Chuma said Government should intervene in the administration of Campfire and called for the setting up of a compensation fund to assist victims of human-wildlife conflict.

“Campfire needs to be reviewed as it is losing its relevance. For starters the reaction time by either Zimparks or council to animal attacks or invasion is slow and by the time they get there which at times can be after two or three days the damage would have been done. The issue of the fence is not being implemented as urgently as we expect. We want a fence that will separate the wildlife areas from communities. As traditional leaders, we will ensure that it won’t be vandalised. Government should come and investigate the way the fund is being used we want to be like Tsholotsho were 60 percent of wildlife proceeds goes back into the community.”

One of the participants of the training, Dingani community headman, Mr Dumisani Mpala said though traditional leaders were willing to assist in conservation efforts; continued disregard for their communities’ welfare where wildlife took precedence over human life was adversely affecting development.

“As traditional leaders we appreciate the need to conserve our wildlife which is assisting in our economy and for posterity hence this training which was meant to foster that sense of responsibility in our leaders.

“As custodians of these areas we have a big role of ensuring that communities play their part in the conservation of our animals. However, the challenge comes when more value is placed on the very animals we are trying to protect ahead of people. We need to canvas for support from these communities and hence they must be deliberate steps to enhance their livelihoods through proceeds from these animals,” he said.

Painted Dog Conservation (PDC) Community and Conservation Liaison Manager, Mr Dominic Nyathi said they valued the role played by traditional leaders and communities in their conservation efforts.

“As an organisation we respect the institution of traditional leaders and the community in general. They are as valuable to us as they play an important role in conservation efforts. Remember some of the poachers come from these communities hence when you empower traditional leaders you get a buy in from the communities they lead. Alongside conservation initiatives we also run community projects such as construction or rehabilitation of clinics, school, nutrition gardens, boreholes and carrying out free vaccinations of dogs.”

PDC is an organisation dedicated to the conservation of the endangered painted dog through research, monitoring and education. It also carries out community outreach programs and runs Bush camp which is visited by over 1 000 school children annually.

Campfire is a community-based natural resource management programme in which rural district councils, on behalf of communities on communal land, are granted the authority to market access to wildlife in their district to safari operators.

These in turn sell hunting and photographic safaris to mostly foreign sport hunters and eco-tourists. The District Councils pay the communities a dividend according to an agreed formula. The programme has been widely emulated in southern and eastern Africa as a model in which communities can derive benefits from the resources that are within their areas.

In practice however, there have been some underpayments and frequent delays and the communities are not usually amused, leading to more conflicts in these areas as they (the communities) will not have a feeling of ownership and involvement in the conservation of the wildlife.