The delicate balance

[ChanelR]

Hi there,

 

So these days, it seems pretty easy to say things like, 'over 7 billion people and counting? I think it's time we put baby tax into play.'

But socioeconomics will beg to differ.

In the past, it was easier for people to manage their natural resources, but with the population booming, resources are not only dwindling, but running out.

How does one begin to justify nature conservation when there are millions of Africans who need water, land for growing crops, houses etc? How does one approach a village of hunger- and poverty-stricken people and ask them to limit their cattle grazing?

I was naive to once think that people in rural areas had as many kids as they did because it was a symbol of honour, fertility and wealth. Granted, that is true in some cases, but having spoken to some villagers, I've also seen the bigger picture.

To put it bluntly, it's a game of chance. The chance that while some of your kids are able-bodied to take care of the farm and livestock, there will be one or two who can make a future for themselves. Earn money, real money. Get them and the family out of poverty.

As a conservationist pushing for more protected areas and more stringent policies against bio and enviro crime, I'm having trouble excluding humans from this.

 

The rhino-poaching saga is one of many cases that I'll touch on. The henchmen doing the dirty work are by no means pardoned, but they are not entirely to blame. When you have seen your family suffer and you need the money so your child can go to hospital, it is not surprising that so many rhinos are disappearing.

The ones we really need to clamp down on are the syndicate bosses overseeing the operation. But that's another story.

 

One strategy game reserves have employed is a pact with local villages. If they do not hunt in the game reserve, and coexist peacefully with the animals, then every month, they are given x number of animals for meat.

 

How can we maintain better relations with villages whilst still being able to conserve habitats?

[jeskill]

You seem to point to the answer (that I think is correct, anyways) at the end of your post. Humans are part of the ecosystem. Conservation plans don't work unless we take into consideration the role of the human population in the ecosystem.

 

I work for a not-for profit that conserves wetlands. They are very successful, in part because they're supported by hunters. In essence, wetlands are being conserved so that hunters will have enough game to hunt. Some of my friends think this is immoral. I don't at all -- I think it's an entirely appropriate way to do conservation. If you get local people involved who have a stake in making sure the resource is conserved, then the resource will be more likely to be conserved.