What Role Did Wild Animals Play In The Establishment Of Agricultural Communities?
Contents - 
Previous - Next 
Affiliate 5. - Can wild animals contribute to nutrient security in Africa? Issues and conclusions
5.1. Why carp almost wild animals production
5.two. Production from wild populations
5.3. Production from game ranches and game farms
v.4. Wild fauna domestication
5.1. Why bother about wildlife production
In the preceding chapters, information technology has been shown that wildlife is a meaning source of food in Africa. All species of wildlife, ranging from insect larvae through rodents, antelopes and monkeys, are exploited for food and in a considerable number of cases in rural communities, wildlife constitutes the major or only source of animal poly peptide available to the people. Bushmeat exploitation and consumption, yet, is not dictated solely past lack of culling meat sources, but arises from a complex combination of factors including also financial limitations, preference and cultural values. These factors underscore the value of wild fauna to the people of Africa and the urgent need for investment in the development of the resource.
Data have besides been presented on the contribution of wild fauna to both household and national economies. Hunting and bushmeat trade provide the main source of income for a large net-piece of work of people ranging from hunters and farmers to market women and helpers in both urban and rural communities. In many areas the gathering and marketing of wildlife, even species such as snails which may be considered to be of little value, provides a significant proportion of the household greenbacks income and determines whether or not a child gets education. Wildlife based industries such equally tourism, sport hunting and trade in wild animal products have been shown to be a major strange currency earner in eastern and southern African countries, contributing significantly to the national economy and providing jobs for a big number of people.
Wildlife populations in many parts of the African continent are declining every bit a upshot of overexploitation and destruction of wildlife habitat caused by increasing human populations and the associated demands for agricultural lands and land for development of human settlements. Current levels of wild animal exploitation are not sustainable anywhere on the continent and areas where large populations of wildlife nonetheless occur coincide with the enforcement of protection measures. The depression populations of wild animal species, particularly those of larger mammals, has led to a situation where in parts of West Africa where dependence on bushmeat is highest, people now resort to eating species which in the by were not acceptable every bit comestible. In these areas, although bushmeat is all the same very popular, it is inaccessible to those who in the by depended on this form of meat. For case in the surveys of contribution of bushmeat to the protein intake in Republic of ghana (Ntiamoa-Baidu, unpbl. data), the majority of the people interviewed answered in the affirmative when asked the question "do you swallow bushmeat?'' (Doryum, 95.5% of responses; Accra, 92.five%; Mankesim, 86%;). In nearly cases, yet, the answer volition be followed by a argument like, "but I haven't eaten whatever for a long fourth dimension because I cannot get it". Information technology is clear that the diminishing wild fauna resources on the continent has caused a full general decrease both in the quantity of bushmeat bachelor and in :its importance as a source of food for the rural population.
There is ample evidence that wildlife product is a feasible and viable class of land use in Africa, whether managed as wild populations in protected areas, farmed as wild populations on game ranches or intensive farms, or every bit domesticated species. In southern Africa where game ranching is most developed, the number of game ranches and total land area given to wildlife production has increased dramatically over the final decade. This is attributed to two factors: i) the alter in buying policies which granted state owners the responsibility to manage wildlife resources on their lands and permitted them to derive benefits from the wildlife and ii) the profitability of wild animals production. According to Martin (1994) wild animals on commercial farms in Zimbabwe began to increment merely after farmers were granted user rights over the wild animals on their farms, and some farmers are reported to exist reducing cattle numbers on their lands to allow introduction of high value species such as Zebra (Muir 1989). Ostrich and crocodile farms are condign more and more popular and are generating substantial income in a few countries. In western Africa, the feasibility of producing small wildlife species such as grasscutters, giant rats, guinea pigs and snails as possible alternative sources of brute poly peptide to feed the household has been amply demonstrated.
The nutritional value of bushmeat is comparable to meat of domestic species in many respects and in some aspects such equally low levels of fatty, bushmeat is actually superior to many domestic species. Wild animals also possess several added advantages over domesticated species in terms of range usage, physiological and ecological adaptations to the African environs, illness tolerance and productivity. The rational underlying the advancement for game production in Africa is that indigenous wild species accept evolved inside the African environment and should therefore be amend suited to the conditions on the continent. The proffer, however, is not to replace cattle, sheep or goats with wild fauna; just to employ wild species which are ethnic to Africa in areas where they would exist most productive and complementary. Many parts of Africa are unsuitable for domestic brute production and large tracts of savannah grasslands on the continent remain under-utilised. These marginal lands concord considerable promise for wildlife production as a class of land utilize.
In terms of economic returns, at that place is a large torso of data which indicate that net financial returns from wild animals production can far exceed what is possible from cattle ranching. The potential for increasing returns is also far greater for wildlife production than information technology is for cattle. The reason for the higher returns from wildlife is due to the fact that wildlife has added value and tin be marketed for more than just meat and products such as skins. The highest potential return per unit land area is offered where the land is used for wild animals production for touristic use. It has been shown that the greater proportion of acquirement from game ranching ventures comes from alive fauna sales, sport hunting and tourism, and not meat sales.
Many rural areas of Africa are plagued with chronic food shortages and malnutrition. The real problem is not so much scarcity of carbohydrate foods but inadequacy of high quality poly peptide food supply. Kwashiorkor (a status resulting from protein/calorie imbalance) is rife in Africa and in many areas the total animate being protein intake is far below the recommended levels. Despite the heavy investment in conventional agronomics by governments, aid agencies and multilateral organisations, domestic livestock product has not succeeded in meeting the protein demands in Africa. The situation is compounded by the increasing human population pressure. Nether these circumstances, all types of food and all food sources become significant and people in rural Africa today are actually exploiting most of the wild resources traditionally known to be edible. The situation in Africa conspicuously indicates that conventional forms of agronomics alone will not be sufficient to solve the growing food insecurity and at that place is an urgent need to evolve more holistic and innovative strategies to accost the lack of nutrient security on the continent. This is where, the continent'southward wild fauna resources concord much hope. Wildlife is contributing to food security in Africa and can contribute most effectively if adequate investments are made into production, marketing and research and technical back up.
The value of wildlife equally a resource has always been recognised by African people. The demand to requite recognition to wildlife production as a grade of land utilize in its own right and the integration of wild fauna into food production strategies on the African continent has been advocated by African governments and international organisations such as the FAO for decades (see for case Riney, 1964; 1967; 1979). Unfortunately, data to demonstrate exactly how much people depend on bushmeat as a food resource in Africa or the contribution of wildlife to African economies are woefully inadequate.
The question then is why is this so? Why take all the very convincing arguments on the feasibility of developing wildlife equally a resources to compliment conventional forms of nutrient production non been pursued more vigorously? Is information technology lack of political will, lack of required resource or simply lack of conviction about the potential of wildlife to effectively contribute to nutrient security? In the terminal sections of this document, we discuss the potential of the three chief wildlife production systems (protected area management, game ranches and wild brute domestication) in dissimilar parts of the continent. Issues which are considered crucial in the development of the potential of wildlife to contribute to the attainment of food security on the African continent are also highlighted.
5.two. Production from wild populations
McNeely east' al. (1994) gauge that 240 million ha of country in Africa south of the Sahara is under protection. Although this figure includes forest reserves with nature protection functions, it does not include the numerous reserves and other state lands whose primary aim for protection may not exist wildlife conservation simply which have obvious biodiversity conservation functions and which oftentimes agree large numbers of wildlife. This means that a substantial portion of sub-Saharan Africa is under some sort of protection and has potential for management for wild fauna product. The system advocated requires the enhancement of the direction of protected areas in Africa for the realisation of their full potential both in terms of biodiversity conservation and meeting the needs the people in Africa.
The objectives of establishment of various categories of protected areas in Africa during the colonial era included the protection of wildlife resources either for the sake of conservation, or to preserve spectacular wild animate being species which had perceived artful values. Some forest reserves, on the other hand, were established for timber production, while others had the objective of protecting ecological processes such as hydrology and local climatic atmospheric condition. The needs of the local people who lived with the wildlife and whose livelihood were inter-linked with the resources bachelor in their natural environment were certainly not part of the equation and the protective strategies pursued often actively sought to proceed the people away from the wildlife and timber resources in some cases. Hunter-gatherers became poachers overnight and were denied admission to lands which were theirs past correct and on which they and their ancestors had lived. This situation naturally led to antagonism and in some cases very serious conflicts betwixt local communities and government wild fauna officials. In some areas local people were made to feel people who ate bushmeat were of low-status. The strategy succeeded in closing off an important food sources in many parts of Africa particularly in the eastern southern African countries. Unfortunately, for many of the rural communities in these areas, the system did not provide acceptable alternatives with the end result that such rural communities lost essential dietary items which in the by ensured a balanced diet. In other areas, notably western Africa, the arrangement failed completely to cease people from using protected resources, in actual fact in some areas hunting was intensified equally soon as an area was declared as protected. People in these areas still depend heavily on wild resources which continue to exist exploited at a rate that is clearly unsustainable. The nowadays level of exploitation and use of wild animals resources, if allowed to continue, will not just lead to loss species, habitats and biodiversity but to loss of productive systems and resources vital to rural communities in Africa.
A loftier proportion of protected areas in Africa exist on paper with little or no protective or management activities on the ground. In-land resource are woefully inadequate and with such limited resources and the many other more pressing national socio-economic problems. it becomes near impossible for African governments to pay adequate attention to wildlife conservation and protected expanse management. The degree of priority given to protected area management in national monetary allocatiuons might, notwithstanding, change if wildlife product was recognised as a form of land use in its own right and equally an action which can contribute to national evolution and the improvement of the quality of life for people.
The value of wildlife resources in a well managed protect surface area has been amply demonstrated by projects in countries such as Kenya, South Africa and Zimbabwe. These projects have proven that wildlife is tin can pay its way, contribute significantly to national economies and as well provide benefits to raise the living standards of rural communities. The focus of these projects. nonetheless has been on loftier income generating activities: recreational apply and tourism. This is all well and good, simply the question is how many rural communities actually benefit straight from the income generated from these activities? Populations of a number of wild brute species in protected areas in these countries could sustain some exploitation. A typical example is the case of the elephants in South Africa's Kruger National Park, the proposed alternative of which has created such a huge outcry from the some international conservation movements over the past twelvemonth. What is interesting is that most of these conservation activists deed on their emotional attachment to animals. Some of them have never been to Africa, practise not know and will never know what it means to accept your crops, holding and fifty-fifty the life of a family unit fellow member destroyed by raiding wild fauna, when you hardly have enough to eat.
What is needed therefore, is the creation of the appropriate policy environment and the establishment of institutional and technical structures which let people to manage and use wildlife resources in protected areas sustainably, i.e., a organisation that volition enable protected areas to contribute to development of nutrient security in Africa. The big challenge is to use wild animals protection and protected area direction as ways to meet the needs of rural African populations. while ensuring the survival of Africa's biodiversity resources. The crux of the result is that people in rural Africa use wildlife resources, they will continue to do so for a long time to come and therefore due recognition must be given to this in the quest to marry biodiversity conservation with sustainable evolution . Some of the critical steps that will have to exist taken to get to this goal include:
i) Recognition of wildlife and protected area direction past African policy and decision makers equally a class of land-use in its own right.
ii) Long term delivery by African governments and donor agencies to protected area management and provision of adequate resources for the effective management of these areas.
3) Re-focusing of management objectives and goals to include addressing the needs of the local communities and evolving strategies for delivery of benefits.
iv) Revision of protected area management policies in appropriate categories of protected areas to allow sustainable exploitation of species whose populations can withstand exploitation, i.due east., sustainable harvesting of wildlife resources from a totally non-domesticated system.
v) Creation of appropriate policies and enabling environments that encourage participation and involvement of local communities in the management of their wild fauna resources. A number of projects around Africa are already experimenting with "people and government partnerships" in wildlife resource management, where the people are given responsibleness for the resource and likewise derive direct benefits from the management of the resource.
vi) Developing of advisable technology for sustainable harvesting, processing an marketing. In that location would exist a demand to re-visit the roots of African people and re-discover those indigenous harvesting techniques and regimes, including subsistence hunting systems, that ensured sustainability.
The organization existence advocated hither is, obviously not going to be like shooting fish in a barrel to implement or without problems. For instance, at that place is no incertitude that given the opportunity to hunt and get together resource from a hitherto protected surface area, people will tend to exploit at a level that meets their firsthand needs without due consideration to futurity generations or bug of sustainability. There will therefore be a need for the development of strict controls for the harvesting including the establishment of quotas to exist taken and constructive systems for monitoring. In areas such as w Africa where animal populations are far from recovering from the heavy exploitation they take been subjected to in the past, sustainable harvest of wild animals from protected areas volition remain a long term dream. Heavy investments in protection and management will be required before this dream becomes a reality, all the same, the Nazinga Game Ranch clearly shows that this is feasible.
5.three. Production from game ranches and game farms
Game ranches and farms have been amply proven to be feasible, viable and profitable and with a lot of potential for increasing returns in many areas in Africa. The cattle industry has been heavily supported in nearly countries in terms of product, marketing and fifty-fifty consumption (as in the instance of some countries where the cost of beef is subsidised by central government) and therefore has more allure to farmers. It is articulate, however, that wildlife can compete favourably with cattle production in Africa if the necessary investments are provided. In the longer term the inherent biological, ecological and physiological advantages of wild animals, and the fact that wildlife has added value in terms of products other than meat, may make wild animals product more profitable than beef in many areas in Africa.
What is required now for the full realisation of the potential of game ranches in Africa are:
• the political will;
• long term fiscal support from donor agencies;
• the wooing of private businessmen to invest in wild animals production ventures;
• research into and evolution of and transfer appropriate technologies in management, harvesting and processing techniques;
• development of appropriate infrastructure for storage and marketing that meets international meat marketing requirements.
Production of good quality products (meat, skins etc.) which can be marketed for loftier financial returns would obviously require heavy capital investment and special technical support. The potential financial returns from high quality goods marketable in western countries and the benefits of improved poly peptide product locally, certainly justifies the capital investment required. It is suggested that organisations which are charged with the fostering of global food security focus more than of their development and research efforts on sustainable wildlife product.
v.4. Wild animal domestication
Within the west African sub-region, the tradition of bushmeat consumption is firmly established and bushmeat is the favourite meat of a large number of people. Prices of bushmeat are known to be higher than domestic meat in most areas, and the indications are that there is an unlimited market place bushmeat. Under these circumstances managing small, prolific wild animal species for meat production purposes offers high prospects and may be even more profitable than conventional livestock. The feasibility and economic viability of farming species such every bit grasscutters and the African giant snails has been well demonstrated. The rationale is to farm such species in captivity for the purposes of producing inexpensive, readily available meat to feed local communities and also possibly for sale. The advantages of these farming systems is that they can be undertaken in people's backyards, thus providing a readily available food source, and the fact that the unit size of the brute is small plenty to be used for a single household meal without the bug of storage. Issues requiring attention in this area include:
• the development and transfer of technical knowledge (including care of animals, handling, diseases etc.,) to farmers:
• development of cheap production methods, including housing and feed;
• institution of a system of extension services to support farmers.
The crucial upshot here is to evolve product systems where the costs and efforts are much lower than what is required to obtain bushmeat through hunting and gathering and which will also yield returns that are comparable or fifty-fifty better than that which pertains in the traditionally accepted livestock industry. It may as well be necessary that fifty-fifty at the depression cost of product the initial uppercase investment required will have to exist provided to rural communities equally an incentive/encouragement for them to embrace such projects. Aspects of small wild creature production which withal crave enquiry efforts include diseases, dry out season feed, and in the case of species being intended for domestication, development of breeding stocks to remove reliance on re-stocking from wild captures.
In conclusion, what can we say to the question posed in the title of this Chapter: can wild fauna contribute to food security in Africa? Wildlife has always contributed and continues to contribute significantly to the socio-cultural and economic life of rural African communities, as a food resource, as a source of employment and income and as a source of medicines. Wildlife does indeed contribute to the nutritional well-being of people in Africa, and tin can be fabricated to contribute more than significantly to the attainment of food security on the continent if adequate investment is made in the areas of research and technology development establishment of appropriate institutional structures and policy environment; and development of appropriate harvesting and marketing systems.
Dissimilar wild animals production systems may be more feasible and/or more appropriate in specific areas on the Africa continent and we should not expect that any i particular approach will provide the answer to Africa's food problem. However, there are a number of basic issues which crave to be addressed in order to realise the total potential of wildlife as a factor in the search for food security in Africa. These bug include:
• land tenure systems and evolution of systems that let people command over land and access to wild fauna resource on the land;
• economic incentives to people for sustainably managing wild animals on their lands;
• development of enabling policies;
• equity in revenue sharing;
• Iong term commitment and significant investment into the development of sustainable wildlife production systems;
• the willingness of donor agencies to invest substantially in wild fauna research.
In add-on to research into appropriate techniques for sustainable product, harvesting and marketing other areas where research effort are urgently needed include assessment of the current usage and dependence of people on wildlife as a nutrient resource, the contribution of wildlife to national economies; sustainable levels for subsistence hunting and potential levels of product from wild sources.
These are some of the areas where the Food and Agriculture Organisation has a role to play! in encouraging and supporting the establishment of wildlife production systems in the context of rural evolution; promoting enquiry into bug related to wildlife product and mobilising African governments and donor agencies to provide the long term delivery and financial resources required.
Contents - Previous - Next
Source: https://www.fao.org/3/w7540e/w7540e0j.htm
Posted by: brigantitherl1975.blogspot.com
0 Response to "What Role Did Wild Animals Play In The Establishment Of Agricultural Communities?"
Post a Comment