African Wildlife Conservation

Larger than elephants
Inputs for the design of an EU strategic

approach to Wildlife Conservation in Africa
December 2014
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
A joint patrol of Gabonese and Congolese forest guards with seized ivory in a poachers camp on the Ivindo
River, Gabon-Congo border. Photo Victor Mbolo - WWF
Afar herdsman near the Filoha springs in Awash National Park, Ethiopia. The guard post is clearly visible in
the background. Photo M. Murray.
Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Final report
Page 1
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
0
RATIONALE ...................................................................................................................................................................... 6
INTRODUCTION AND SPECIAL FEATURES OF SUB SAHARAN AFRICA ................................................................. 8

1.1
1.2
1.3
1.3.1
1.4
1.5
1.5.1
1.5.2
1.5.3
1.5.4
1.5.5
1.6
2
2.3.1
2.3.2
2.3.3
2.3.4
2.4
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.4.3
2.4.4
2.4.5
2.4.6
2.4.7
Southern Africa ....................................................................................................................................................................... 14

Eastern Africa.......................................................................................................................................................................... 14
Western Africa......................................................................................................................................................................... 15
Central Africa .......................................................................................................................................................................... 15
Madagascar ............................................................................................................................................................................ 16
THE ASIA DIMENSION ................................................................................................................................................. 17
LOSS OF SPECIES ...................................................................................................................................................... 17

LOSS OF ECOLOGICAL SERVICES ................................................................................................................................ 18
DIRECT THREATS ...................................................................................................................................................... 20
Habitat loss and fragmentation ............................................................................................................................................... 20
Overhunting and overfishing ................................................................................................................................................... 22
Illegal wildlife trafficking .......................................................................................................................................................... 22
Alien Invasive Species ............................................................................................................................................................ 22
DRIVERS OF THE THREATS ......................................................................................................................................... 22

Population growth and poverty ............................................................................................................................................... 22
Poor governance ..................................................................................................................................................................... 23
Inadequate land tenure and local resource rights ................................................................................................................... 23
National and regional conflict .................................................................................................................................................. 23
Political indifference and lack of awareness ........................................................................................................................... 23
Climate change ....................................................................................................................................................................... 23
Endemic and emerging diseases ............................................................................................................................................ 24
ONGOING CONSERVATION EFFORTS........................................................................................................................ 24

3.1
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.3
3.2.4
3.3
4
Prioritization approaches .......................................................................................................................................................... 9
THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC SETTING ................................................................................................................................. 11

SPECIAL FEATURES OF THE REGIONS .......................................................................................................................... 13
CONSERVATION ISSUES AND CHALLENGES ........................................................................................................... 17

2.1
2.2
2.3
BACKGROUND TO THE CURRENT STUDY ........................................................................................................................ 8

AFRICA ICONIC WILDLIFE CONTINENT ........................................................................................................................ 8
PATTERNS OF WILDLIFE DISTRIBUTION .......................................................................................................................... 9
INTERNATIONAL, REGIONAL AND NATIONAL PLANNING FRAMEWORKS ............................................................................ 24

STRATEGIC APPROACHES .......................................................................................................................................... 24
Protected areas ....................................................................................................................................................................... 24
Devolution of wildlife management responsibility ................................................................................................................... 25
Landscape and Transfrontier Conservation ............................................................................................................................ 26
Combating illegal trafficking of wildlife. ................................................................................................................................... 27
INTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION PARTNERS ................................................................................................................ 27
LESSONS LEARNED AND PROMISING APPROACHES ............................................................................................ 28

4.1
4.1.1
4.1.2
4.1.3
4.1.4
4.1.5
4.1.6
4.1.7
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
PROTECTED AREAS ................................................................................................................................................... 28

Protected Areas have proved the test of time but require long term support. ........................................................................ 28
Governance and resourcing of PA / NRM agencies ............................................................................................................... 28
PA design: connectivity and the landscape approach ............................................................................................................ 29
Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCA) .............................................................................................................................. 29
Public Private Partnerships for management of PAs .............................................................................................................. 30
Public Private Partnerships for wildlife management in buffer zones ..................................................................................... 30
Monitoring and research ......................................................................................................................................................... 32
ENGAGING WITH LOCAL COMMUNITIES AND CBNRM ................................................................................................... 32

UNDERVALUING OF ECOLOGICAL SERVICES ................................................................................................................. 33
LAW ENFORCEMENT .................................................................................................................................................. 33
WILDLIFE MIGRATION AND DISEASE MANAGEMENT ....................................................................................................... 34
TRADE IN WILDLIFE PRODUCTS ................................................................................................................................... 34

Final report
Page 2
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
4.7
4.8
5
INDICATIVE PRIORITY CONSERVATION ACTIONS ................................................................................................... 35

5.1
5.2
5.2.1
5.2.2
5.3
5.4
5.4.1
5.4.2
5.4.3
5.4.4
5.5
5.6
5.6.1
5.6.2
5.6.3
5.6.4
5.7
5.8
6
BUSHMEAT CRISIS ..................................................................................................................................................... 34

POOR GOVERNANCE AND LACK OF POLITICAL WILL FUNDAMENTALLY UNDERMINE CONSERVATION EFFORTS..................... 35
IN SITU SUPPORT FOR KEY LANDSCAPES FOR CONSERVATION (KLC) AND IMPORTANT INDIVIDUAL SITES ........................ 37
INSTITUTION BUILDING - STRENGTHENING SECTORAL MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION FOR WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ... 41
National level........................................................................................................................................................................... 41
Regional level.......................................................................................................................................................................... 42
FACILITATING LEGAL REFORMS FOR LOCAL OWNERSHIP AND RIGHTS TO WILDLIFE AND NATURAL RESOURCES.................. 42
WILDLIFE TRAFFICKING: DISMANTLING WILDLIFE CRIME NETWORKS AND CURBING THE DEMAND ..................................... 43
Actions to strengthen policies and laws .................................................................................................................................. 44
Actions to stop the killing ........................................................................................................................................................ 44
Actions to stop the trafficking .................................................................................................................................................. 44
Actions to stop the demand .................................................................................................................................................... 46
TACKLING THE ISSUE OF UNSUSTAINABLE WILD ANIMAL PROTEIN USE ............................................................................ 47

RESEARCH AND MONITORING ..................................................................................................................................... 48
Information management ........................................................................................................................................................ 48
Elephants ................................................................................................................................................................................ 49
Natural resource use in the informal sector ............................................................................................................................ 49
Birds ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 50
AWARENESS RAISING AND COMMUNICATION ................................................................................................................ 50

FUNDING .................................................................................................................................................................. 51
APPENDIX 1. LIST OF PROPOSED KEY LANDSCAPES FOR CONSERVATION ..................................................... 54
List of figures
Figure 1. Major African biomes (JRC) ...................................................................................................................................... 10
Figure 2. Countries of the 4 regions as defined in this document. ........................................................................................... 13
Figure 3. Relative trends in mammal population indices in Africa ............................................................................................ 18
Figure 4. Veterinary fences in central Namibia have had a profound impact on migratory species (Eckardt unpubl.) ............ 20
Figure 5. Overlap of oil and gas concessions with protected areas in Africa (source WWF) ................................................... 21
Figure 6.IUCN category i-iv Protected Areas and World Heritage Sites of Sub-Saharan Africa .............................................. 26
Figure 7. Map of proposed KLCs ............................................................................................................................................. 40
List of tables
Table 1. Human Population Trends in sub Saharan Africa (countries covered in this document) ........................................... 12
Table 2. Summary table of terrestrial PA coverage in sub-Saharan countries covered in this document ................................ 25
Table 3. Legal mechanisms through which the private sector may assist governments or communities in PA management
(source WCS) ........................................................................................................................................................................... 31
Table 4. Indicative funding levels for proposed strategic approach (Million Euro over 10 years) ............................................ 53
Table 5. List of proposed KLCs ................................................................................................................................................ 54
List of boxes
Box 1. Criteria used to identify the most important Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLCs)................................................ 38

Final report
Page 3
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
ACRONYMS
AEC
AES
AfESG
AfRSG
AMD
ARREST
AU
BIOPAMA
CAR
CBD
CBFP
CBMRM
CEMAC
CI
CITES
COMESA
COMIFAC
DG
DG DEVCO
DG ENV
DOPA
DRC
EAGLE
EAC
ECCAS
ECOWAS
ECOFAC
ECOFAUNE
EIA
ETIS
EU
GDP
GIS
GIZ
IBA
ICCWC
IFAW
IGAD
INTERPOL
IUCN
JRC
KfW
KLC
LAGA
LIFE/LIFE+
African Economic Community

African Elephant Summit
African Elephant Specialist Group
African Rhino Specialist Group
African Mammal Databank
Africas Regional Response to Endangered Species Trafficking
African Union
Biodiversity and Protected Areas Management
Central African Republic
Convention on Biological Diversity
Congo Basin Forest Partnership
Community Based Natural Resource Management
Economic and Monetary Community of Central Africa
Conservation International
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa
Commission des Forts dAfrique Centrale (Central African Forests Commission)
Directorate General
EU Directorate General for Development and Cooperation
EU Directorate General of Environment
Digital Observatory for Protected Areas
Democratic Republic of Congo
Eco-activists for governance and law enforcement
East African Community
Economic Community of Central African States (Communaut Economique des Etats dAfrique
Centrale - CEEAC)
Economic Community of West African States
Ecosystmes Forestiers d'Afrique Centrale
Ecosystmes Fauniques du Nord-Est RCA
Environmental Impact Assessment
Elephant Trade Information System
European Union
Gross Domestic Production
Geographical Information System
Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit
Important Bird Area
International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime
International Fund for Animal Welfare
Intergovernmental Authority on Development
International Criminal Police organization
International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Joint Research Centre of EU
Kreditanstalt fr Wiederaufbau - Development Bank
Key Landscape for Conservation
The Last Great Ape organization
EU funding instrument for the environment

Final report
Page 4
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
MDG
MIKE
MIKES
NASCO
NGO
NP
NTFP
PA
PPP
RAPAC
REDD/REDD+
SADC
SEA
SSC
TEEB
TFCA
TRAFFIC
UEMOA
UK
UN
UNESCO
UNODC
UNEP
UNWTO
USAID
USFWS
WAEMU
WCO
WCS
WEN
WCMC
WH
WLFC
WWF
Millenium Development Goal

Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants
Minimizing the Illegal Killing of Endangered Species
Namibian Association of CBRNM Support Organisations
Non-governmental Organization
National Park
Non-Timber Forest Products
Protected Area
Public Private Partnerships
Rseau des Aires Protges dAfrique Centrale
Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation/REDD+
Southern Africa Development Community
Strategic Environmental Assessment
Species Survival Commission of IUCN
The Economics of Ecosystems & Biodiversity
TransFrontier Conservancy Aera
The Wildlife Trade Monitoring Network
Union Economique et Montaire Ouest-Africaine (West African Economic and Monetoary Union
- WAEMU)
United Kingdom
United Nations
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
United Nations Environmental Program
United Nations World Tourism Organisation
United States/ US Agency for International Development
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
West African Economic and Monetary Union (Union Economique et Montaire Ouest-Africaine UEMOA)
World Customs Organization
Wildlife Conservation Society
Wildlife Enforcement Network
UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre
World Heritage
Wildlife and Forest Crime
Worldwide Fund for Nature

Final report
Page 5
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
RATIONALE
The impetus for developing the strategic approach proposed in these volumes has come from the growing global
awareness of a wildlife crisis in Africa. Although the much publicised plight of the African elephant and rhino has
placed the issue at the forefront of international debate, conservation practitioners working on the ground in Africa
have known for a long time that the wildlife crisis is by no means limited to a few iconic African wildlife species
which are only the visible portion of an iceberg that hides a steady erosion of wildlife over a wide range of species
in all biomes. The scale of the wildlife crisis is immense and one of the main aims of this document is to underline
(a) just how much needs to be done and why, (b) what are likely to be the most realistic and effective strategic
priorities for saving Africas wildlife heritage, given the rate of human population growth and associated habitat loss.
It is also hoped that the document will serve as a way of federating the different wildlife conservation actors, both
within and outside Africa, around a balanced series of common themes.
One of the key points that emerges from the following is that the pressure on land and natural resources in Africa
has increased conspicuously in recent decades, and is set to increase considerably more as a result of ongoing
demographic and economic trends; more than ever before, Protected Areas have to be at the heart of any strategic
approach to wildlife conservation as these are the areas where the most intact assemblages of Africas wildlife are
found. A second key point is that African people living in wildlife-rich areas need to have tangible benefits in the
preservation of Africas wildlife if they are (a) to accept the costs of living with it and (b) be able to continue using it
sustainably. Thirdly efforts to tackle the international illegal trade require concerted actions to stop the killing, stop
the trafficking and stop the demand for wildlife and forest products. Fourthly good quality and up-to-date information
is essential in order to inform the choice of strategic options and monitor outcomes. Lastly, all of the above will
require a whole raft of institutional, policy and legal improvements or changes to occur in parallel.
Combining the above considerations brings us to an overall objective, or desired outcome, for the strategic
approach to wildlife conservation:
A full suite of viable populations of the unique wildlife heritage of Sub-Saharan Africa maintained in
healthy, functioning and resilient ecosystems supporting livelihoods and human development.
Thus the strategic approach developed herein is primarily targeted at the conservation of large functioning
ecosystems or landscapes supporting key African wildlife populations. It contributes to wider goals of biodiversity
conservation by, for example, protecting many small areas of outstanding importance to particular threatened taxa
where those small areas fall within larger conservation landscapes. A secondary tactic supporting wider biodiversity
goals is to make conservation funds available to agencies and projects protecting small important sites that cannot
be contained in the large key landscapes identified.
The Strategic Approach to Wildlife Conservation in Africa is presented in six volumes as follows:
Volume 1:
Volume 2:
Volume 3:
Volume 4:
Volume 5:
Volume 6:
Synopsis
Southern Africa
Eastern Africa
Central Africa
Western Africa
Additional Sections Elephants, Rhinos, Trade, Madagascar, Birds, Other Wildlife

Final report
Page 6
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
The first five volumes are each arranged according to six chapters (following an Executive Summary): 0. Rationale;
1. Special Features of the Region; 2. Conservation Challenges and Issues; 3. Ongoing Conservation Efforts; 4.
Lessons Learnt and Promising Approaches; and 5. Indicative Conservation Actions. A somewhat different format
is found in Volume 6 which begins with three chapters (Elephants, Rhinos, Trade) that relate to the wildlife crises
currently affecting elephants, rhinos, numerous bushmeat species including many rare forest specialist species,
and various plants and trees that have market value. These three chapters contain relevant background information
and strategic approaches aimed at stopping the killing, the trafficking and the demand. There is a separate chapter
on Madagascar because of its unique conservation status and geographic isolation.
A fifth chapter introduces priorities for bird conservation, highlighting the coordinated conservation of EuropeanAfrican bird migrations. An annex provides additional information on various other wildlife groups (including fish,
amphibians, insects, large carnivores and great apes) that warrant special mention.
We recognise that the wildlife crisis is not confined to the terrestrial environment and that marine ecosystems are
also critically impacted by unsustainable harvesting. Furthermore, we are aware that issues relating to the
impoverishment of the marine environment are as far reaching as those of the terrestrial environment. A separate,
but linked, strategic approach is therefore required for marine ecosystems. Similarly a separate but linked strategic
approach may be required for conservation of freshwater ecosystems which recognizes unique elements of the
aquatic fauna. Some freshwater ecosystems are incorporated into this strategy, particularly those wetlands that
have importance for water birds, or as terrestrial ecosystems in their own right (such as Okavango Delta, swamp
forest areas in Central Africa, Rift Valley Lakes, the Sudd, Lake Chad, Senegal Delta and Inner Niger Delta), or
have exceptional importance for biodiversity (Lakes Malawi and Tanganyika for example).
The European Union wishes to assist in building an inclusive strategic approach to the conservation of African
wildlife that involves all political and organisational stakeholders working for the benefit of Africa, its wildlife heritage
and its peoples. This document may be viewed as a first step in the process of building a consensus, after which
the various strategic elements proposed will need to be translated into action through a series of programmes and
projects for which detailed results and indicators will have to be developed and rigorous performance monitoring
and accountability measures applied. Through cooperation we trust that the long-term future of African wildlife can
be secured and that this will be done in such a way as to provide greatest benefits to the nations and peoples of
Africa, and not least to the local people who live alongside and within some of the most spectacular wild ecosystems
on the planet. The natural heritage of Africa greatly enriches the global natural heritage and we hope this strategic
approach to its conservation will encourage others to adopt compatible strategic approaches in other regions.

Final report
Page 7
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
1
1.1
INTRODUCTION AND SPECIAL FEATURES OF SUB SAHARAN AFRICA

BACKGROUND TO THE CURRENT STUDY
Africa the cradle of human evolution and continent of iconic wildlife such as elephants, rhinos and lions - is facing
an unprecedented wildlife crisis. A combination of habitat loss and degradation, poaching and changing climate
amidst a context of poverty, political instability, weak governance and porous international boundaries is driving a
high proportion of the continents unique fauna and flora towards extinction. This constitutes a tragic loss of
irreplaceable global heritage, a loss of resources desperately required for the livelihood of local communities, loss
of vital ecological services, collapse of unique wildlife migration networks and fuels a vicious cycle of further poverty,
corruption, and illegal operations by terrorist organizations.
The objective of this document is to identify at the scale of Sub-Saharan Africa the principal threats to wildlife
(including animals and plants) and the most appropriate responses. This includes interventions to tackle both broad
wildlife conservation needs and specifically the growing problem of illegal wildlife trade (including ivory, rhino horn,
endemic species, bushmeat and rare timbers). Special attention is also given to improvement of the livelihood of
rural populations in the vicinity of wildlife-areas with a view to reducing their reliance on unsustainable use of wild
resources and illegal use of protected wildlife. A fundamental prerequisite to reach these objectives is to address
indifference and low awareness of civil society at national and international level by communication and education.
The document outlines a proposed strategic approach at global, regional and local levels within an urgency
timescale from immediate to long-term actions to stem the growing wildlife crisis in Africa. It is intended to help
guide inputs and better coordinate programmes for wildlife conservation in Africa. Gaps in current attention are
identified, innovative approaches are proposed and approaches currently showing success are recommended for
up-scaling and wider application.
The full report is structured into 6 documents:
Synthesis
Southern Africa - Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland,
Zambia, Zimbabwe
Eastern Africa - Burundi, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Uganda, South Sudan, Somalia
Central Africa - Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo Republic, DR Congo, Equatorial
Guinea, Gabon, So Tome e Prncipe
Western Africa - Benin, Burkina Faso, Cte dIvoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia,
Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togo
Special Topics - Elephants, Rhinos, Trade, Madagascar, Birds, Other wildlife.
1.2
AFRICA ICONIC WILDLIFE CONTINENT
The word Africa is almost synonymous with wildlife and safari. Here we find vast wild landscapes of forests,
savannahs, mountains, wetlands, coasts, and deserts with a dazzling range of animals from okapi to penguins.
This is the home of the big five elephant, rhino, buffalo, lion and leopard so attractive to safari tourists. Africa is
the cradle of Mankind, origin of our species and ape ancestors. Africa retains the last great migrations of megafauna, literally millions of antelopes trailing over great savannahs between seasonal feeding areas. The continent
is home to many thousands of additional wildlife species which also show a high level of continental endemism as
a result of Africas long geological history of isolation. The island of Madagascar constitutes a unique mini-continent
with its own strange fauna of lemurs and unrivalled levels of endemism in most taxa. The rivers and lakes of Africa

Final report
Page 8
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
contain thousands of unique fish species including the endemic cichlids so familiar in aquaria or on the dining table
as tilapia. The Congo basin alone contains an estimated 1,250 fish species1. Africa contains 3 of the worlds 17
Megadiversity countries Democratic Republic of the Congo, South Africa and Madagascar2.
1.3
PATTERNS OF WILDLIFE DISTRIBUTION
Wildlife is not distributed uniformly across the continent but follows patterns of geography, climate, vegetation,
faunal barriers, Pleistocene refugia and anthropogenic transformations of the landscape. It is clearly not possible
to conserve all parts of the continent. The challenge is therefore to identify the most important areas for wildlife and
focus conservation inputs where they can deliver the best positive impacts.
Overall vegetation distribution shows a core of humid evergreen forests in the tropical zone of the Congo basin,
Guinea coast and eastern Madagascar, whilst deserts prevail across North Africa and in SW coastal Africa.
Between these extremes, vegetation grades from woodlands to savanna to arid scrub. This major pattern is
complicated by a pattern of lakes and wetlands and a few high mountains and plateaus (Figure 1).
Different species are specialized to occupy different vegetation zones but their distributions also reflect factors of
geographic isolation, radiations and refugia. The plants themselves show ancient phytochoria with high levels of
endemism in regions of past floral radiation3. Animal taxa show widely different distribution patterns. Aquatic life
shows great richness and endemism in isolated lakes and large river systems. Insects, birds and primates are best
represented in the forest regions whilst ungulates and large carnivores are mostly distributed in savanna areas.
Many rare endemics are confined to isolated montane regions. Other species, such as the African elephant, have
a broader habitat use and are widespread across the continent.
1.3.1
Prioritization approaches
Many approaches have been developed to assess and prioritize the biological importance of different areas in
Africa with respect to different criteria including diversity, endemism, endangered species, wilderness areas etc. All
have their merits but no single approach comprehensively covers all aspects. They include WWFs global 200
selection of the most important eco-regions4, Conservation Internationals Megadiversity approach for areas with
greatest overall biodiversity, or its Hotspot approach for areas combining high levels of biological importance with
high levels of threat5 ,6, specific efforts to identify sites of plant importance7, bird importance8 or other taxa and the
interesting approach of global irreplaceability9. Reference was made to all these approaches during the present
work and the areas identified (section 5.1) do cover all the major ecosystems and consistently rate as high
Darwall, W.R.T., Smith, K.G., Allen, D.J., Holland, R.A, Harrison, I.J., and Brooks, E.G.E.(eds.). 2011. The Diversity of Life in African
Freshwaters: Under Water, Under Threat. An analysis of the status and distribution of freshwater species throughout mainland Africa.
Cambridge, United Kingdom and Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. xiii+347pp+4pp cover.
2 R.A. Mittermeier, P Robles Gil & C. Goettsch Mittermeier, 1997. Megadiversity. Earths Biologically Wealthiest Nations. Conservation
International
3 White, F. (1983) The vegetation of Africa: A descriptive memoir, UNESCO, Paris.
4 Olson, D. M., Dinerstein, E. 2002. The Global 200: Priority ecoregions for global conservation. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden
89(2):199-224.
5 Myers, N. et al. (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853858.
6 Mittermeier, R.A. et al. (2004) Hotspots Revisited: Earths Biologically Richest & Most Endangered Ecoregions. CEMEX, Mexico City
7 Davis, S.D. et al. (1994, 1995, 1997) Centres of Plant Diversity: A Guide and Strategy for their Conservation. Volumes 13. WWF, Gland,
Switzerland and IUCN, Cambridge, UK.
8 BirdLife International (2013). State of Africas birds 2013. Outlook for our changing environment. Nairobi, Kenya: BirdLife International
Africa Partnership.
9 Le Saout et al 2013. Protected areas and effective biodiversity conservation. Science 342: 803-805.

Final report
Page 9
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
importance for most taxa. For more detailed information on patterns of wildlife distribution in sub Saharan Africa
the reader should refer to Volume 6, chapter 6.
Figure 1. Major African biomes (derived from GLC 2000, Mayaux et al. 2004)

Final report
Page 10
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
The socio-economic setting
As one after another of the former European colonies gained independence the second half of the 20th century has
seen massive socio-economic changes across sub-Saharan Africa. Stability of the fledgling nations has been
questionable with frequent civil wars, coups dtats, rebellions and cross-border incursions. Population rose
dramatically from 220 million in 1950 to 800 million by the turn of the century and is projected to reach 2.1 billion
by 2050 and almost 4 billion by 2100 (Table 1). This exponential rise in the human population on the African
continent will have a profound impact on the distribution and abundance of wildlife. The case of Tanzania
whose GDP is largely dependent on tourism based on wildlife starkly illustrates this point. At current rates of
population growth by the end of the century the population of Tanzania will be two thirds that of the USA but in an
area 10 times smaller. Worse still Nigeria, also with a surface area roughly 10 times smaller than the USA, is
projected to have a population that will be double that of the USA.
New industries have emerged in the form of beef ranching, commercial plantations of traditional crops such as
banana, mangos, yams, groundnuts, cola and oil palm plus new crops such as cocoa, rubber, coffee, tea, sisal.
Forest regions have established timber production industries. Several countries have been able to build up
significant industries based on eco-tourism. Overall, agricultural production (including fisheries) supplies most of
the domestic economy but only c. 30% of African exports. The bulk of exports are derived from oil and gas reserves
and the mining of gold, diamonds, copper, chromate, cobalt, manganese, phosphorus, aluminium and uranium with
rare metals emerging as a new precious resource (eg coltan Columbite and Tantalite metal ore used for producing
tantalum capacitors in the electronics industry).
Despite this great wealth in natural resources, the economic development of the continent has been disappointing.
Although Africa and Asia had similar levels of income in the 1960s, Asia has since outpaced Africa. Of the 49
countries listed globally as Least Developed Countries by UN 34 are in Africa. Poor performance has been blamed
on lack of infrastructure, lack of investment, political instability and corruption. Corruption has involved extracting
profit from trade and industry and exporting this capital overseas rather than reinvesting in local economies.
Researchers estimate that from 1970 to 1996, capital flight from 30 sub-Saharan countries totalled $187bn,
exceeding those nations' external debts10.
Since 2000, the African economy has improved considerably. In 2013, Africa was the worlds fastest-growing
continent at 5.6% per annum, and GDP is expected to rise by an average of over 6% a year between 2013 and
202311. Growth has been present throughout the continent, with over one-third of Sub-Saharan African countries
posting 6% or higher growth rates, and another 40% growing between 4% and 6% per year. China and India are
increasingly important trade partners; 12.5% of Africa's exports are to China, and 4% are to India, which accounts
for 5% of China's imports and 8% of India's. The Group of Five (Indonesia, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, and
the United Arab Emirates) are another increasingly important market for Africa's exports12.
One of the secrets of Africas economic upturn has been the emergence of effective economic trading blocs and
growing political maturity. Since 1975 a variety of different political and economic unions have evolved including
the African Union (AU), African Economic Community (AEC), Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa
(COMESA), East African Community (EAC), Southern African Development Community (SADC), Economic
Community of Central African States (ECCAS), Economic and Monetary Community of Central Africa (CEMAC),
Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU),
and the New Partnership for Africas Development (NEPAD - an economic development programme of the AU).
These structures can play a key role in advancing conservation agendas. For example SADC is closely involved
10
Wrong, Michela (2005-03-14)."When the money goes west". New Statesman. Retrieved 2006-08-28.
http://www.worldbank.org/en/region/afr/overview
12 Economic Report on Africa 2012".United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA).p. 44.Retrieved 2 March 2013.
11

Final report
Page 11
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
with the development of Peace Parks and TFCAs through its Protocol on Wildlife Conservation and Law
Enforcement (Vol. 2, section 4.2.1.1). In Eastern Africa the EAC promulgated a Protocol on Natural Resource
Management and the East African Legislative Assembly passed the EA Community Transboundary Ecosystems
Bill (Vol. 3, section 3.4.2). In Central Africa ECCAS has set up an anti-poaching cellule in response to the upsurge
in wildlife crime and trafficking and its links to national security (Vol. 4, section 3.1).
Table 1. Human Population Trends in sub Saharan Africa (countries covered in this document)
Southern Africa
Angola
Botswana
Lesotho
Malawi
Mozambique
Namibia
South Africa
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Eastern Africa
Burundi
Djibouti
Ethiopia
Eritrea
Kenya
Rwanda
Somalia
Sudan
South Sudan
Tanzania
Uganda
Central Africa
CAR
Cameroon
Chad
Congo
DR Congo
Equatorial Guinea
Gabon
Sao Tome and Principe
Western Africa
Benin
Burkina Faso
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea Bissau
Ivory Coast
Liberia
Mali
Mauritania
Niger
Nigeria
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Togo
Madagascar
Africa & Madagascar
Population Size (Millions)

2013
2050
2100
151
298
525
21
54
97
2
3
3
2
3
3
16
41
85
26
60
112
2
4
4
53
63
64
15
44
124
14
26
33
313
714
1 208
10
27
56
0,9
1
1
94
188
243
6
14
22
44
97
160
12
25
36
10
27
54
38
77
116
11
25
39
49
129
276
38
104
205
114
261
448
5
8
12
22
49
82
13
33
63
4
11
21
67
155
262
0,7
2
2
2
3
5
0,1
0,4
0,6
333
811
1 634
10
22
33
17
41
75
2
5
8
26
46
57
12
24
36
2
3
6
20
42
76
4
9
16
15
45
101
4
8
12
18
69
204
174
440
913
14
33
58
6
10
14
9
14
25
23
55
105
934
2 139
3 920

Final report
Page 12
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
1.4
SPECIAL FEATURES OF THE REGIONS
For convenience it is common to consider sub-Saharan Africa as four regions western, central, eastern and
southern (Figure 2). Madagascar is biologically so distinct as to merit special regional treatment. Each region has
shared features of geography, language and political relations. Each region also has distinctive characteristics in
terms of wildlife and conservation priorities.
Figure 2. Countries of the 4 regions as defined in this document.

Final report
Page 13
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
1.4.1
Southern Africa
The ten countries of southern Africa comprise the wealthiest and most developed region of Sub-Saharan Africa,
although development of countries is rather uneven. They also exhibit very high diversity of habitats and species.
Physically much of the region is a raised plateau edged by a great escarpment on its south eastern edge, including
the dramatic Drakensberg Mountains and flat-topped Table Mountain. This combined with the southerly location
results in colder southern winters than the rest of Africa and indeed penguins can be found at the most southerly
points.
Physical wonders of the region include the great Etosha salt pans, the unique inland delta of Okavango and the
great Victoria Falls on the Zambezi River. The region contains some large deserts such as the Kalahari - home of
the Bushmen or San People. The ancient Namib Desert, which has been arid for 55 million years, is considered to
be the oldest desert in the world. It extends along the coast of Namibia merging with the Kaokoveld Desert in Angola
and the Karoo Desert in South Africa which has the worlds richest flora of succulent plants. Fynbos shrubland forms
a major element of the Cape Floristic Region which is one of the six recognised floral kingdoms of the world with
some 9,000 vascular plant species of which 69% are endemic to South Africa. Another important centre of plant
endemism lies on the eastern coast of southern Africa below the Great Escarpment.
Lake Malawi is the most southerly lake of the East Africa Rift system. It is 570km long. The lake contains more
species of fish than any other lake on earth including an incredible radiation of more than 1,000 endemic species
of cichlid fish. It also contains tilapia, a globally important food species, four mouth-brooding species of chambo
(Nyasalapia), and many endemic molluscs.
With some of the oldest and largest reserves and parks in Africa, southern Africa contains more elephants and
rhinos than the rest of the continent. Parts of the region face great pressure from expanding rural populations;
however Namibia has the lowest human population density. With agriculture limited in arid regions the emphasis is
placed on ranching, leading to the erection of thousands of fences which pose a hazard and barrier to the wildlife
of the dry forest and savanna.
Southern African countries have had a long record of wildlife conservation and game management and have been
pioneers of community-based natural resource use, transfrontier conservation and other innovative conservation
approaches.
1.4.2
Eastern Africa
East Africa is the most complex and diverse of the four regions in terms of physical geography, climate, biodiversity
and human culture and languages. The region includes the highest and lowest points on the continent and a range
of habitats from rain forests and coastal reefs to deserts. Unique features include the montane fauna and flora of
the Ethiopian highlands, the tropical glaciated mountains of Ruwenzori, Kenya and Kilimanjaro, the forested
escarpments of the Albertine Rift valley, the great lakes of Africa including unique soda lakes with their amazing
flocks of millions of pink flamingos, the unique Horn of Africa, the largest and most spectacular migrations of
savanna wildlife wildebeest, zebra and associated antelopes, gazelles and stalking carnivores in the MaraSerengeti region between Tanzania and Kenya or white-eared kob and tiang in Gambella-Boma between Ethiopia
and South Sudan, plus some important relict forests of the East African coasts. The region contains many of the
most famous and spectacular protected areas of the continent.
The famous Ngorongoro crater of Tanzania is a testimony to the volcanism of the region and the Virunga volcanos
that form the border between eastern Africa and central Africa are still active today.

Final report
Page 14
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
The 676 km long rift lake, Lake Tanganyika, is the longest freshwater lake in the world and only exceeded in total
mass and absolute depth by Lake Baikal in Russia. The lake has a maximum depth of 1,470 m. It also harbours
250 cichlid fish and 150 other fish species. 98% of the cichlids are endemic. The much shallower Lake Victoria
covers more area but is not a rift lake, shows less endemism but remains an important fishery for local populations
of three countries.
The region contains many important fossil sites of early man and ancestral hominids with associated animal
remains.
1.4.3
Western Africa
Western Africa comprising 15 countries, exhibits a gradation of aridity from the southern fringes of the great Sahara
desert in the north, through the arid Sahel region, seasonally arid Western African savanna woodlands and very
diverse evergreen rainforests along the Guinea coast region, fringed by tropical mangrove forest. The homogeneity
of these zones is broken by isolated mountain blocks such as Mount Nimba, Loma Mountains, Fouta Djalon, Air
and Jos plateau, some large lakes and rivers. The Guinea rainforests are divided into two distinct blocks by the
Dahomey gap. The forest of southern Nigeria and Cameroon is transitional between Western and Central Africa as
well as being a distinctive and very bio-diverse Pleistocene refuge in its own right.
The region is characterized as having high biodiversity values in a wide range of ecosystems, but weak and
underfunded management for biodiversity protection. Specially significant wildlife of Western Africa include several
key endemics such as pygmy hippo, several other primates, duikers, birds, amphibians and reptiles. More
widespread species of high conservation importance include elephant, lion, chimpanzee, desert cheetah, the Cross
River gorilla, giant eland, giraffe and several northern antelopes (addax, oryx, roan etc.). Wetlands are of huge
international significance for migrating waterbirds as well as local fisheries. Western Africa is the main wintering
area for a large suite of Afro-Palaearctic migrant birds. Biological richness is very high in the small forest zone.
Matched to the climatic zones are patterns of human life patterns. The desert and Sahel regions are characterized
by pastoral herders, whilst the more humid southern sectors are populated by farmers. As Sahel conditions have
become increasingly unproductive as a result of climate change, overgrazing, and unsustainable cutting of its few
trees for fuel and charcoal, herdsmen have been forced to move ever southwards. Meanwhile the creation of
political or national boundaries has changed some of the original pastoral migration patterns. Greatly increased
population density in the agricultural zones has led to the extension of farm clearance of woody vegetation into the
forest zones and further north. The result is a clash of ethnic and religious groupings and life styles and the entire
region has been repeatedly devastated by civil unrest. The region is also characterized by poor institutional
governance and weak monitoring, poor planning and policy and sectorial approaches with unsustainable land and
resources use.
The biodiversity rich forest zone is threatened by fragmentation, bushmeat hunting and conversion to agriculture
whilst the arid savanna zone has been almost stripped of larger wildlife with a system of large but degraded and
almost empty protected areas.
1.4.4
Central Africa
Central Africa contains the most extensive continuous forests in all of Africa. The moist tropical forest block of what
is loosely referred to as the Congo basin, is the dominant feature of the central African region in terms of surface
area, species richness and diversity, carbon sequestration and influence on climate. The Congolian swamp forests
are the largest area of swamp forest on the planet. The Gulf of Guinea islands of Equatorial Guinea and So Tome
and Prncipe (named the Galapagos of Africa for the richness of endemism) also contain small, but biologically

Final report
Page 15
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
important, areas of moist tropical rainforest. To the north and south of the moist forest block the ecological
transitions to woodland and savannahs produce a number of biologically important and unique ecosystems.
Overall diversity, particularly floral diversity, of the central African forests is high, though not as high as the southern
African region. What makes these forests particularly interesting is that much of the fauna and flora is found
nowhere else in the world and this is true not only at the species level but also at the genus and even family levels.
Iconic and endemic species include forest elephant, okapi, four subspecies of gorilla, bonobo, aquatic genet, and
Congo peacock. The montane forests and afro-alpine formations on Mount Cameroon and the Cameroon highlands
in the west and the Albertine Rift in the east are areas of particularly high biodiversity and levels of endemism.
The Congo basin is also a gigantic carbon sink and as such plays a vital role in regulating the planets greenhouse
gases. It has a dominating influence on local weather patterns since over 50% of the rain that falls on the central
Congo basin comes from evaporation and evapo-transpiration from the forest itself. It is important to underline that
average rainfall over the Congo basin is relatively low (c. 2,000 mm) compared with Amazonia and south east Asia
and places it close to the threshold of dry forests. This means that most, if not all, of the moist forest tree species
would likely be lost if rainfall were to decrease slightly through climate change or extensive forest clearance. With
a shift to drier forests fire would start having a devastating impact on the remaining forests, hydrological regimes
would be profoundly affected, and the impact on human livelihoods in the region would be profound. The vastness
and apparent intactness of the moist tropical forests of the Congo basin forests therefore belies the extreme
precariousness of its existence.
A key difference to other regions of Africa is the generally intact nature of vast areas of habitat outside protected
areas, particularly in the moist forest zone, together with the low human densities. This means that it is not too late
to do something for conservation. Elsewhere in Africa much of the natural habitat outside protected areas has
already gone or is severely degraded.
1.4.5
Madagascar
Although separated from the African continent by a gap of barely 400 km, the island of Madagascar has evolved in
isolation from Africa for 165 million years and from India for 65 million years. It exhibits both high species richness
and extraordinary levels of endemism. There are more plant species in Madagascar than the entire Congo basin.
Forests to the north and west are humid whilst those in the east and south are increasingly arid. The island
constitutes a region of disproportionate conservation importance with high levels of endemism and high proportion
of endangered species.
Special fauna of Madagascar include the famous lemurs, tenrec and chameleons. Several of the larger fauna were
exterminated after the arrival of humans, including giant tortoises and the enormous elephant birds, whose fractured
eggs shells can still be found today.
The main threat to forests is slash and burn agriculture, known as tavy in Madagascar. In the East, tavy is principally
for hill rice whereas in the west and south it is practiced to cultivate a mixture of crops, usually cassava and a
mixture of vegetables. As the human population has risen, fallow periods have decreased and more forests have
been cleared. In addition, cutting for charcoal production and illegal harvest of rare timbers such as rosewood
compounds the deforestation problem. Hunting for bushmeat is a direct threat to wildlife whilst mining for ilmenite,
nickel and cobalt is a new and growing threat that is impacting several protected areas including Ankarana and
Isalo national parks.

Final report
Page 16
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
1.5
THE ASIA DIMENSION
The rapid growth of Asian economies and most notably the growth of China over the past few decades profoundly
impacts Africas natural resource base. China is not only now the biggest market for mineral wealth of the continent
but is also the largest market for timber (both legal and illegally sourced), and wildlife parts (both legal and illegal).
Wildlife imports include rare woods, orchids, all types of reptiles, pangolins, primates, parrots, all parts of rhinoceros
and ivory. Japan and Philippines are also important importers of elephant ivory whilst Viet Nam is now the biggest
importer of rhino horn.
CONSERVATION ISSUES AND CHALLENGES
International attention, involving many very high profile individuals (royalty, world leaders, film stars and celebrity
sportsmen), has been highly alerted to the devastating and horrific levels of poaching of elephants and rhino. More
sustained awareness has been focused on the bushmeat trade and killing and eating of rare apes. Politicians and
the UN General Assembly are alarmed at the growing evidence of links between wildlife trafficking, organised crime
and terror organisations13. But these headline-grabbing issues are only the tip of the iceberg that we can call the
African ecological crisis.
Even if we could halt the poaching and wildlife trafficking tomorrow, Africa would still face a much deeper and more
serious degradation of its natural environment, including its entire wildlife heritage and loss of ecosystem services
that are vital for human development on the continent. Failure to tackle the several causes of such degradation
endangers all cherished and iconic animals, migratory birds, important fisheries and possibilities for sustained use
of natural resources including timber, fisheries, soils and grasslands. Loss of ecosystem services would inevitably
lead to poverty, famines, civil strife, wars, spread of uncontrolled diseases, mass movements of refugees and
collapse of many global economic institutions well beyond the confines of the African continent.
2.1
LOSS OF SPECIES
Red Data Lists and specialist reports continue to document a depressing catalogue of species losses and severe
declines across Africa:
African elephants have declined from 5-10 million in the 1930s to a mere 500,000 today. They still occur
in 35-38 range states but poaching for ivory has re-emerged as a serious threat. It is estimated that 35,000
elephants were poached in 2013. Most seriously threatened is the forest elephant Loxodonta africana
cyclotis which lost 62% of its population between 2002 and 2012 (Volume 4, section 2.1.2).
The Southern white rhino was rescued by conservation action from the brink of extinction and now
numbers about 20,000 but its northern race is feared to have gone extinct in its original habitat and the
three races of black rhino have all crashed to a total of a mere 4,000 animals. (See special chapter on
rhinos in Volume 6 of this report).
Africa has lost between 30 and 50% of its lions over the past two decades and may now number as few
as 32,000 animals. In Western Africa the situation is especially desperate. A recent 6-year survey showed
that from a known occurrence in 21 protected areas in 2005, lions are now confirmed in only 4 sites,
roaming in just 1.1% of their historic range in Western Africa (Volume 5, section 1.2.2.4) and are extinct
in all of their former range in northern Africa.
13UN
General Assembly resolution on Illicit Trafficking / Illegal Trade in Wildlife, Nov 2014

Final report
Page 17
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
The great apes are becoming increasingly endangered by bush-meat trade, deforestation, pet trade and
human diseases. All are endangered and survival is realistic in only a few key localities of Western and
Central Africa.
Many other iconic mammals are listed as regionally or globally endangered including such familiar animals
as cheetah, hippo, giraffe, large antelope, anteaters etc.
10% of African birds are listed as globally threatened. Of 119 Afro-Palaearctic long-distance migrant
species (those breeding in Europe and wintering in Sub-Saharan Africa), 48 (40%) show marked declines
in population. Vultures are especially threatened as a result of direct poisoning to remove their tell-tale
evidence of poaching they are killed as a result of carcasses being poisoned to eliminate carnivores and
poisoned by eating the medicine diclofenac in carcasses of domestic cattle.
African amphibians are becoming threatened as a result of spreading diseases and drying of moist habitat.
Africas freshwater fish richness is second only to that of South America and almost totally endemic. These
species are vital for the functioning of freshwater ecosystems and of huge economic importance. Many
millions of people rely on freshwater fish for food and income and many species of perch and tilapia have
become globally important commercial species. 28% of Africas freshwater fish species are listed as
endangered. Main causes are shrinkage of lakes, pollution of waterways, invasive plants such as water
hyacinth, overfishing and introduction of alien fish species.
IUCNs Species Survival Commission (SSC) publish global red lists of threatened species rated as critical (CR),
endangered (EN), vulnerable (V) and least concern (LC) and encourage national efforts to make more detailed
national red lists. Africa lists a high percentage of threatened species in most taxa and each revision or update
adds ever more species to these lists. In historical times several significant animals have become extinct: quagga,
bluebuck, western black rhino etc. Other species have become extinct over a large proportion of their range.
Africa is failing to meet Millenium Development Goals (MDG) and global targets under implementation of CBD to
reduce and reverse such trends of biodiversity loss.
There is evidence of some regional variation in the pattern of species loss. When indices for population abundance
of 69 species of large mammal within 78 protected areas over a 35 year period are compared the results (Figure
3) show sharpest losses in Western (and Central) Africa and a slight rise in southern Africa where species losses
in the previous centuries had been highest.
Figure 3. Relative trends in mammal population indices in Africa14
2.2
14
LOSS OF ECOLOGICAL SERVICES
Source: Craigie, I.D. et al. 2010. Large mammal population declines in Africas protected areas. Biological Conservation 143: 2221-2228.

Final report
Page 18
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Natural capital our ecosystems, biodiversity and natural resources underpins economies, societies and
individual well-being. The values of its myriad benefits are, however, often overlooked or poorly understood. They
are rarely taken fully into account through economic signals in markets, or in day to day decisions by business and
citizens, nor indeed reflected adequately in the accounts of society.
Clearing, fragmentation and degradation of natural habitats has already led to massive losses of ecological services
like decline and pollution of water sources, loss of hunting and grazing habitats (Provisioning services); reduction
of carbon fixation leading to accelerated climate change (Regulating services); recreation, aesthetic enjoyment,
spiritual and tourism potential (Cultural services); desertification, soil formation and photosynthesis production
(Supporting services).
Major losses result from :
Degradation of savannah and grasslands. This is subtle and difficult to monitor but forest loss is very clear.
Climate change, overgrazing, fire, lowered water tables and agricultural expansion have all contributed to
degradation of Africas grasslands;
Water sources drying up and becoming polluted, (resulting in the spread of diseases);
Degradation of grazing areas (resulting in population migrations);
Degradation of soil fertility (resulting in famines, expensive aid programmes and bad loans);
Loss of non-timber products (game meat, fish, honey, medicinal plants etc.);
Loss of tourism revenues and potential;
Elimination of keystone species such as elephants and seed dispersing primates has profound additional impacts
on the regeneration of vegetation. Loss of bees and other pollinators is affecting pollination of fruits and vegetables
as well as wild plants.
The TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems & Biodiversity) programme has compiled and reviewed many studies
evaluating these ecosystem services in economic terms. Some service values of wetlands, forests, pollinating
species greatly exceed conversion values. Globally these services have been valued at 125 trillion $/year in 200815,
up from an estimated 33 trillion $/year in 199716. The figure for Africa, which represents 20% of the global land
area, must be greater than $10 trillion/year, far higher than actual registered GDP. This figure is diminishing rapidly
since ecosystems will continue to deteriorate if no restorative action is taken.
Loss of ecological services drives a vicious cycle of poverty leading to emigration and civil unrest, ethnic and civil
wars, collapse of governance and accelerated plunder of more biological resources.
15 Costanza, R., Rudolf de Groot, Paul Sutton, Sander van der Ploeg, Sharolyn J. Anderson, Ida Kubiszewski, Stephen Farbe, R. Kerry
Turner (2014) Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change 26: 152158
16 Costanza et al. (1997) The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253-260

Final report
Page 19
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
2.3
DIRECT THREATS
Wildlife and ecosystems face a variety of major threats. The following are identified as the most serious:
2.3.1
Habitat loss and fragmentation
Net deforestation in the rainforests is estimated at 0.28% per year between 1990 and 2000 and at 0.14% per year
between 2000 and 2010. Western Africa and Madagascar exhibit a much higher deforestation rate than the Congo
Basin - three times higher for Western Africa and nine times higher for Madagascar17. In the drier ecosystems
deforestation between 1990 and 2000 was estimated at 0.34% per year18. Agriculture and fuelwood are the key
agents of deforestation. Fuelwood and charcoal represent 90% of all wood removal from the forests of Africa19.
Deforestation rates are likely to increase significantly over the next decades as populations grow, new land is
needed for subsistence and commercial agriculture, plantations and mining, and better access is provided by road
networks. Large scale industrial agriculture and ranching in Southern and East Africa is another key agent of habitat
loss and fragmentation. In Southern Africa, a major cause of wildlife decline has been the fragmentation of the
habitat caused by the erection of game fences, as illustrated for central Namibia in Figure 4 below. Such
fencescapes are increasingly found elsewhere including South Africa and Botswana. This situation has been
seriously aggravated by the creation of a Beef Export Zone and subsidies offered under the Lom and Cotonou
Agreements that have led to extensive fencing, habitat fragmentation, and collapse of migratory wildlife
populations20 (Volume 2, section 2.3).
Figure 4. Veterinary fences in central Namibia have had a profound impact on migratory species (Eckardt unpubl.)
17 Mayaux P, Pekel J-F, Descle, B, Donnay F, Lupi A, Achard F, Clerici M, Bodart, C, Brink A, Nasi R, Belward A. 2013. State and evolution
of the African rainforests between 1990 and 2010. Phil Trans R Soc B 368: 20120300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0300.
18 Bodart, C., Brink, A., Donnay, F., Lupi, A., Mayaux, P., and Achard, F. 2013. Continental estimates of forest cover and forest cover changes
in the dry ecosystems of Africa between 1990 and 2000. Journal of Biogeography (2013) 40, 10361047
19 Forests of the Congo Basin. State of Forests, 2010.Page 39.
20 EIA Briefing document for members of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary <assembly Social Affairs and Environment Committee. Ljubiliana,
Slovenia, 15-20 March 2008

Final report
Page 20
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Industrial oil and mineral exploration and extraction are recognised as growing threats, especially in forest and
wetland areas. Many permits overlap with protected areas, including World Heritage Sites. WWF has calculated
that the percentage spatial overlap of leased oil and gas concessions with protected areas for the whole of Africa
is 26.65%. If not yet leased concessions are included the figure rises to 46.57% spatial overlap with protected
areas (Figure 4).
Figure 5. Overlap of oil and gas concessions with protected areas in Africa (source WWF)
Fragmentation of forests has disastrous impacts on forest wildlife populations. Key agents are slash and burn
agriculture, fuelwood collection and charcoal. Fuelwood and charcoal represent 90% of all wood removal from the
forests of Africa. Fragmentation is also caused by industrial logging and mining (with their associated road and rail
infrastructures), agro-industrial plantations (with oil palm plantations becoming an increasingly important threat)

Final report
Page 21
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
and hydro-electric dams. Loss and fragmentation of other wildlife habitats - woodlands, savanna and mangroves due to agricultural expansion and development isolates protected areas and potential corridors.
Populations of many African-Eurasian migrant birds are in serious decline because of threats along their flyways.
In sub-Saharan Africa the key issue is habitat loss and degradation, particularly in the Sahel and humid zones to
the south.
2.3.2
Overhunting and overfishing
Commercial bushmeat trade is emptying vast tracts of seemingly intact forest and savanna. Range of species
includes rare apes and smaller primates as well as ungulates and rodents. It is the key wildlife issue in Western
and Central Africa, and under-recognised in East Africa, Madagascar and some areas of Southern Africa.
Fishing in inland freshwater systems is unsustainable over much of sub Saharan Africa because fishing regulations
(minimum mesh size, seasons, protection of spawning grounds, etc) are rarely respected. Furthermore, as
bushmeat supplies dwindle through overhunting pressure on freshwater fish resources is likely to increase.
2.3.3
Illegal wildlife trafficking
Criminal organizations in ivory and rhino horn trafficking undermine security and good governance and hence
effective conservation. Whilst elephant populations in Southern Africa appear stable, populations in the rest of
Africa are declining dramatically, especially the forest elephant L. a. cyclotis. Rhinos are being exterminated even
in well protected reserves of Southern Africa such as Kruger. Secondary species may be affected. Poachers spread
poison around kills to destroy the tell-tale flocks of vultures.
Trafficking is also endangering numerous less profiled species such as apes (Western and Central Africa), other
primates (all regions), reptiles (especially Madagascar), pangolins (humid regions), parrots (Western and Central
Africa), valuable timbers (Western and Central Africa and Madagascar (rosewood)), orchids (humid regions) and
abalone (marine regions) (see Volume 6, section 3).
2.3.4
Alien Invasive Species
Alien invasive species are a serious and increasing problem in all regions of Africa. Opening of forests, changing
climate and deliberate introductions have resulted in growing lists of species that replace native flora and fauna
and negatively impact ecology. Introduced pines, Australian Acacias, eucalypts, water weeds, fish, insects,
molluscs and some birds and mammals are the main culprits.
2.4
2.4.1
DRIVERS OF THE THREATS

Population growth and poverty
Population growth and increasing poverty levels are inextricably linked in most of Africa. Although human population
density across the Congo basin and in Namibia is low compared to other regions of Africa, overall rates of population
growth are the highest on the planet and the population of Africa is expected to double by 2050 (Table 1). How
Africa will feed this expected enlarged population presents a major challenge but the current agriculture in many
countries of the continent is very inefficient, undeveloped and can be enormously improved. Extreme poverty in
rural areas leads to overexploitation of natural resources because rural populations cannot take a long term view

Final report
Page 22
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
of resource use. The burgeoning human population also leads to increasing levels of Human-Wildlife conflict
resulting in loss of wildlife.
2.4.2
Poor governance
Poor governance is the overriding issue in Western and Central Africa and includes a suite of related failures : weak
legislation and enforcement; dysfunctional health, education, justice and extension services; poor communications;
poor planning; low hygiene; inefficient agriculture; misuse of natural resources and pollution of water resources;
corruption and poverty. Also included is the phenomenon of land grabbing where for example multi-national agroalimentary interests (e.g. oil palm) acquire huge surface areas of land without due process in terms of land use
planning, environmental assessments and transparency of attribution (Volume 4, section 2.1.3).
2.4.3
Inadequate land tenure and local resource rights
The issue of land tenure and the alienation of rural populations from their wildlife heritage is a key driver of threats
to wildlife. Over much of Africa the state is the owner of the land and its wildlife and existing legal and policy
frameworks give little incentive for rural people to protect and sustainably manage the wildlife that they share the
land with. This leads to a situation of tragedy of the commons where open access to the natural resources causes
severe impoverishment, and even disappearance, of species and habitats.
2.4.4
National and regional conflict
Conflict has overwhelmed many countries of Africa and is especially significant in the Central African region. Many
of these conflicts can in fact be described as natural resource conflicts. Conflict and poor governance feed off each
other and result in loss of wildlife.
2.4.5
Political indifference and lack of awareness
Low knowledge of and appreciation of wildlife issues, lack of recognition of the vital ecological services delivered
by healthy ecosystems and poor ecological understanding of the impacts of human activities and developments on
those ecosystems are rife at all levels. Lack of awareness among EU population and leaders, African communities,
planners, developers and leaders and Asian consumers all contribute to unsustainable exploitation and inadequate
protection of African wildlife and ecosystems. When denied rights to use wildlife sustainably, local communities see
wildlife only as a dangerous threat to life, crops and property or a competition to human development.
2.4.6
Climate change
Climate change is a threat with both global and a local causes. Desertification is driven by overgrazing, cutting and
burning of vegetation and misuse of water resources. Opening of forests reduces the rates of transpiration that is
re-deposited as secondary rainfall, often hundreds of miles away. Rising sea level threatens coral reefs and
beaches. Rising temperatures are causing melting of African glaciers and are changing vegetation zones of the
Afromontane regions. Wetlands of Northern and Western Africa are drying up. Droughts have profound impacts on
vegetation, wildlife and humanity. Whilst Africa has already experienced many climate fluctuations during the
Pleistocene period and remaining species have some measure of proven resilience, some botanists expect
significant species losses of between 25-68%, dependent on the severity of mean temperature change21
Sommer, J. H., (2008) Plant Diversity and Future Climate Change Macroecological analyses of African and global species distributions.
Doctoral Thesis, Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakultt, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universitt Bonn
21

Final report
Page 23
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
2.4.7
Endemic and emerging diseases
Endemic diseases affect conservation in two main ways. Malaria (spread by mosquitoes), river blindness, sleeping
sickness and nagana (both spread by tsetse flies), elephantiasis and rinderpest all served as natural defences
maintaining large areas of Africa as wild and undeveloped. Eradication of rinderpest and better control of other
diseases has opened up these regions for human occupation and development. Meanwhile, some diseases that
were stable in wildlife populations, but now given close access to human populations, have been able to make a
host species jump to become serious human zoonoses such as HIV and Ebola (Volume 4, section 2.1.4). Resulting
epidemics create population movements and breakdown of local economies, social services and wildlife protection.
Chytrid disease now found on every continent has wiped out a number of amphibian species. It kills amphibians by
blocking the transfer of vital substances through their skins, eventually causing cardiac arrest. The disease
originated in Southern Africa and was probably spread by the pet trade or export of clawed frogs used in pregnancy
testing.
3
3.1
ONGOING CONSERVATION EFFORTS

INTERNATIONAL, REGIONAL AND NATIONAL PLANNING FRAMEWORKS
Most countries in the sub-Saharan Africa are Party to the major international environmental conventions, in
particular Ramsar Wetlands (1971),World Heritage Convention (1972), CITES (1975), Bonn Migratory Species
(1979), Biological Diversity (1992), UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992), UN Convention to
Combat Desertification (1994). Most countries are also members of IUCN which through its various Commissions
sets the international management criteria and standards for different categories of PA, and coordinates efforts to
conserve a wide range of plant and animal taxa of importance and concern.
Virtually all these treaties and bodies require their Member States to produce some sort of national Action Plan
such as National Biodiversity Strategy Action Plans (NBSAPs) under CBD; Ivory Action Plans under CITES; and a
wide range of species-specific Action Plans at regional and/or national levels driven by the Specialist Groups of
IUCNs Species Survival Commission (elephants, rhinos, lions, hyenas, giraffes, great apes, etc..). Levels of
implementation of these different action plans vary widely across the continent.
The countries overall responses to wildlife issues are also influenced to a lesser or greater extent by the regional
and sub-regional political bodies to which they belong including EAC, COMESA, ECCAS, ECOWAS, SADC,
NEPAD, IGAD, COMIFAC.
3.2
3.2.1
STRATEGIC APPROACHES
Protected areas
Protected areas are at the heart of wildlife conservation in Africa and constitute the earliest strategic approach to
wildlife conservation since colonial times. Today they represent a major form of land-use and, in southern and
eastern Africa, a significant contributor to employment and foreign exchange earnings. Other concepts that have
evolved over the years and have been used to guide and inform wildlife conservation and protected area planning
in Africa include Biodiversity Hotspots, Ecoregions, Water Basins, Conservation for Development, Biosphere
Reserves and Transfrontier Conservation. These and other approaches are described in more detail in Volume 2,
section 3.1 and the Annex of Volume 6.

Final report
Page 24
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Nominal PA coverage of sub-Saharan Africa is now 14,3%, with over 1,000 PAs of IUCN categories I-IV currently
listed on the UNEP-WCMC World Protected Area Database. Category I-IV PAs in Sub-Saharan Africa are shown
in Figure 6 below. Regional proportions are shown in Table 2. These figures leave most African countries somewhat
short of the 17% terrestrial coverage agreed as the Aichi targets of CBD but well above that of many European
countries. Most of the earlier and largest PAs in Africa are established in savanna biomes, targeted at African large
mammals. Over the decades additions were made to cover major gaps in terms of representative coverage of all
the major ecosystems including moist forests, mountain systems, woodlands and Karoo and Fynbos. Several large
moist forest protected areas have been created in the Congo basin over the past 20 years, including a network of
13 National Parks in Gabon, enacted in 2007 (Volume 4, section 4.5, Box 4).
Whilst larger PAs are ecologically more resilient and offer better ecosystem functions, they are the most difficult to
manage and have generally proved unable to resist the gangs of well-armed poachers who cross national borders
with ease to decimate large mammal populations. In most of the countries of Central and Western Africa, and in
some countries of East and Southern Africa, many PAs are paper parks with no real management because of
inadequate staff, capacities and funding. Biodiversity has declined steeply in these areas. The protected areas
where biodiversity is being most effectively protected are those that are receiving direct support from donor
agencies and their technical partners through Technical Assistance, Public Private Partnerships (see 4.1.4 and
4.1.5 below) and other arrangements.
Table 2. Summary table of terrestrial PA coverage in sub-Saharan countries covered in this document
Region
Western Africa
Central Africa
East Africa
Southern Africa
Total
Area of PAs
(km)
675,713
652,318
824,578
1,236,557
3,389,164
Number of PAs
(all categories)
1,934
230
1,676
1,984
5,824
Number
of category I-IV
PAs*
245
216
365
250
1,076
PA % cover
11,0
12,2
13,2
21,0
14,3
* This includes the many National Parks which are not yet reported as Category II protected areas in the WDPA
data base (October 2014).
3.2.2
Devolution of wildlife management responsibility
In East and Southern Africa there have been important moves towards devolution of responsibility for wildlife use
and management in various types of PA (Wildlife Management Areas, Village Forest Reserves, privately or
communally owned Conservancies, etc.) and the results in terms of wildlife protection have been globally positive
with wildlife populations making sometimes spectacular recoveries. In Kenya for example there are several hundred
Community and Private Wildlife Conservancies that engage in the non-consumptive utilization of wildlife (i.e.
tourism). Since ownership and ultimate responsibility for all wildlife is vested in the State, regardless of whether it
is inside or outside the formal PA estate, the Conservancy movement is of great assistance to the Kenya Wildlife
Service which seeks only to register Conservancies and assist in the development of their management
effectiveness (Volume 3, section 3.4.1). Similarly in Namibia non-consumptive and consumptive use of wildlife in
communal area conservancies deliver positive conservation outcomes while generating significant benefits for the
communities (Volume 2, sections 3.1.5). With the exception of Ghana, states in Central and Western Africa have
not yet fully embraced the concept devolution of responsibility for management of wildlife to local communities, and
indeed this kind of approach is probably not yet realistic given the weak state of institutions and civil society and

Final report
Page 25
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
the widespread issue of poor governance. Nevertheless some recent changes in wildlife and conservation laws
(e.g. DRC) have opened the door for the development of this kind of approach in the future.
Figure 6.IUCN category i-iv Protected Areas and World Heritage Sites of Sub-Saharan Africa
3.2.3
Landscape and Transfrontier Conservation
The landscape approach to conservation is one in which complexes of PAs are conserved hand-in-hand with the
eco-sensitive and wildlife friendly development of intervening and surrounding areas. This landscape approach has

Final report
Page 26
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
been widely embraced by conservation agencies in Africa as a way of enhancing ecological connectivity and gene
flows across viable habitats linking PAs.
The Transfrontier Conservation approach is a relatively new conservation initiative, developed initially in Southern
Africa, that brings together a complex and diverse mosaic of land uses spanning international borders under one
shared or joint management structure. It includes national parks and game reserves, forest reserves, wildlife and
game management areas, communal land and private land. It has the role of combining conservation and
development and promotes culture and peace and offers a promising approach to the conservation of iconic African
wildlife within intact ecosystems. In Western and Central Africa the transfrontier conservation approach is also
being embraced although the concept is less developed and does not, for example, bring together management of
a mosaic of land uses under a shared management structure. Instead there are simply intergovernmental
agreements for coordinated management for transfrontier areas where there are in most (but not all) cases
contiguous protected areas. Where the PAs in transfrontier conservation areas of the Congo basin are not
contiguous, the inter-zone areas are largely occupied by logging and/or mining concessions with which the aim is
to build collaborative relationships for conservation (Volume 4, section 4.3).
3.2.4
Combating illegal trafficking of wildlife.
Africa has not escaped the ravages of the global illegal trade in wildlife and its products, the fourth largest illegal
trade after narcotics, humans and counterfeit products (Volume 6, section 3). Of all Africas iconic flagship species
few if any have greater relevance to the conservation of the continents overall wildlife and wilderness than the
elephant and the rhino. An estimated 100 elephants and 3 rhinos are being lost daily and the issue has become a
cause for great international concern, and a key catalyst for the elaboration of the present document. However
many other African plants and animals are also entering the illegal trade from precious woods to apes, birds,
reptiles, amphibians and fish.
Sections 1-3 of Volume 6 examine the current status of elephants, rhinos and the illegal wildlife trade in general.
They summarize the different strategies being developed to combat poaching and illegal trade. Various strategic
approaches for elephants and rhinos are being used including global awareness raising, monitoring of populations
and poaching levels (e.g. MIKES), monitoring the trade (e.g. ETIS), law enforcement (including paramilitary
operations), stopping the demand, forensic investigation to determine the provenance of ivory and rhino horn, and
addressing human elephant conflict. The currently intractable issue of a regulated legal trade in ivory and rhino
horn versus a total ban is also examined. On the general issue of illegal wildlife trade important international trade
regulators and monitors that are of direct relevance to Africa include the ICCWC, CITES, TRAFFIC, INTERPOL,
UNDOC and WCO.
3.3
INTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION PARTNERS
Wildlife conservation in Africa is heavily reliant on external support, particularly in Central and Western Africa where
conservation is generally low on national agendas and state institutions responsible for wildlife conservation and
law enforcement are particularly weak. In these regions biodiversity conservation is delivered predominantly
through international donor agencies, conservation NGOs and other technical partners working in partnership with
the national forestry, wildlife and protected area authorities. NGOs work with funds provided by donor agencies but
also mobilize many sources of private funding.
While the role of conservation NGOs in East and Southern Africa remains very important, national institutions are
generally better organized than in Central and Western Africa and less reliant on them to help manage PAs.
Nevertheless they are still heavily reliant on bi- and multi-lateral aid organizations and private donors to help fund
conservation activities and policy development.
Final report
Page 27
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
African Protected Areas benefit from several global programmes. UNESCO offers support to 41 natural or mixed
World Heritage Sites nominated as containing outstanding universal value. Another UNESCO programme
supports 52 Man and Biosphere Reserves (MAB) in Sub-Saharan Africa, selected for the study of the impacts of
human activities on natural areas. 168 wetland sites of global significance are listed as Ramsar Sites. More than
1,200 sites are identified by BirdLife International as Important Bird Areas (IBAs) and work with local partners to
help protect many of these. The programmes of many international NGOs are geared to support a long list of key
biodiversity areas, biodiversity hotspots and other sites of importance for specific wildlife across the continent. More
details of ongoing efforts are presented in the four regional volumes 2-5 of this document.
The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) provides assistance and sets standards for many
areas of wildlife conservation worldwide, through its several specialized commissions. The World Commission on
Protected Areas provides help in reviewing, planning and management of protected areas and publishes a series
of best practices guidelines to help various aspects of this work. The commission also helps UN in the
implementation of the Programme of Works on Protected Areas under the Convention for Biological Diversity
(CBD). The Global Environmental Facility (GEF) provides funds and projects to support this programme.
Being listed or recognised as globally important may help a site negotiate better investment from its national
government and puts it in a good position to apply for additional funds or projects from international sources but is
no guarantee of adequate support. Indeed 12 of the 41 World Heritage Sites are currently included on the List of
World Heritage in Danger.
Despite these many programmes the level of external support to PAs in Africa falls a long way short of the actual
needs.
LESSONS LEARNED AND PROMISING APPROACHES
Despite several decades of initiatives, projects and programmes by more than 100 conservation agencies and
NGOs, the overall trends of biodiversity status across Africa are continuing deterioration. Why have these efforts
failed and what hope is there that we do have better solutions? From the four regional analyses a number of
common themes emerge as well as themes specific to particular regions.
4.1
4.1.1
PROTECTED AREAS
Protected Areas have proved the test of time but require long term support.
Increasingly wildlife populations and fragile habitats have become confined to protected areas within the wider
landscape. Over much of sub Saharan Africa the areas with the most intact assemblages of biodiversity are in
protected areas, or areas under active management like sport hunting zones. In Western and Central Africa in
particular, the protected areas where biodiversity is being most effectively protected are those that are receiving
support from donor agencies and their technical partners because most national protected area agencies are weak
and under-resourced. It follows therefore that external funding support for PAs needs to be long term. This is
particularly the case in Western and Central Africa, but is also relevant for East and Southern Africa. In Africa the
costs of biodiversity conservation and PA management greatly outweigh the level of resources that most if not all
the African countries mobilize from national budgets, and with a handful of exceptions almost all of African PAs will
never be able to generate sufficient revenue to cover their management costs.
4.1.2
Governance and resourcing of PA / NRM agencies

Final report
Page 28
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
The under-valuation of ecosystem services and biodiversity by governments is a fundamental driver of the
institutional weaknesses that generate inefficient, ineffective and corrupt management practices. These
weaknesses centre on human resources that are too few in number, poorly paid and equipped, ill-trained and
inadequately supervised. Whether for routine operations or capital development, the level of resources made
available to PA / NRM agencies is invariably inadequate. Badly paid and unsupervised field staff in particular will
always be corruptible.
4.1.3
PA design: connectivity and the landscape approach
Recent and developing trends are exposing weaknesses in the designs of PA systems. These include failure to
include representative examples of all major ecotypes, and the erosion of connectivity through the accelerating
transformation of hitherto undeveloped areas between PAs. For example elephants seldom if ever spend a full year
within a PA, and so it is the species most affected by the ongoing appropriation of unprotected habitat, and the one
causing the most serious conflict with man as a result (Volume 3, section 3.3). In response, new PAs and corridors
between PAs must be created wherever possible in order to improve PA resilience and long term system viability.
This is in line with the overall landscape approach to conservation (section 3.2.3) which aims to enhance ecological
connectivity and gene flows across viable habitats linking PAs.
It is widely accepted that veterinary cordon fencing for disease management in Southern Africa has been
environmentally damaging especially in relation to wildlife migration. Environmentally sensitive alternatives are now
being developed such as a Commodity-Based Trade approach and other integrated disease management models
(Volume 2, section 4.1.4) which it is hoped will result in considerably less negative impacts on wildlife migration.
4.1.4
Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCA)
As ecosystems often span international boundaries the landscape approach has led to the emergence of the
concept of Transfrontier Conservation Areas (section 3.2.3). This new conservation paradigm emerged in Southern
Africa with the first Peace Park in 1990. It is defined as an area, or component of a large ecological region, that
straddles the boundaries of two or more countries, encompassing one or more protected areas as well as multiple
resources use areas. The TFCA combines policies on wildlife conservation, community development and the
promotion of culture and peace under one roof. It brings together a complex and diverse mosaic of land uses under
one shared or joint management structure. The concept has been embraced at the highest political level in the
SADC countries where there are currently 18 existing and potential TFCAs in various stages of development.
One of the key advantages of the transfrontier approach to conservation is the opportunity to plan and undertake
both conservation and development at the scale of landscapes which incorporate entire ecosystems. This enables
more effective conservation, more efficient use of natural resources and greater social and economic involvement
of communities. Five levels of TFCA management can be recognised: (i) landscape management for migratory
species (ii) landscape management for livelihoods development (iii) water basin management (iv) PA management
(v) promotion of culture and peace (Volume 2, section 4.2.1.4). In conflict torn Central Africa transfrontier
conservation has the added advantage of providing protection for a shared species in the event of conflict and
breakdown of law and order in one or other of the countries (Volume 4, section 4.3). The most profitable form of
land-use in the TFCAs in Southern Africa is a combination of wildlife-based tourism and full diversification of natural
resource-based enterprises. The various enterprises include non-consumptive tourism, safari hunting, the
sustainable harvesting of meat, crafts and non-timber forest products, and the provision of ecosystem services
such as water and carbon sequestration.

Final report
Page 29
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
In Western, Central and Eastern Africa the transfrontier conservation approach is also being embraced although
the concept is less developed and does not bring together management of a mosaic of land uses under a shared
management structure. The situation also differs in that, unlike in Southern Africa where most TFCAs are situated
in marginal land in terms of productivity and services, the moist forest areas of Central Africa are not marginal lands
and the dominant land use is industrial logging and mining. However the presence of organized industrial private
sector operators opens the possibility for enhancing wildlife conservation through public private partnerships
(section 4.1.6 below).
4.1.5
Public Private Partnerships for management of PAs
One of the major constraints to effective protected area management through classic donor-funded technical
assistance projects for PAs is that the technical partners responsible for project implementation do not have a
strong enough mandate to take the required actions and make the difficult decisions (such as replacing corrupt or
incompetent staff). PPP agreements give the implementing partner a stronger and clearer mandate with greater
decisional independence (including powers to hire and fire) and greater administrative and financial flexibility. In
effect the private partner brings a more business-like approach to park management (Volume 4, section 4.4, Box
2). The involvement of the private sector partner also acts as an important lever for raising other sources of funding.
PPP agreements are particularly pertinent in countries where national capacities for protected area management
are very weak. Table 3 below summarizes the legal mechanisms through which the private sector can assist with
PA management.
4.1.6
Public Private Partnerships for wildlife management in buffer zones
Given that logging concessions will soon cover all of the exploitable forests in the Congo basin partnerships with
well managed logging concessions, particularly if they are adjacent to an actively managed PA, can considerably
increase the surface area over which positive conservation outcomes can be achieved (Volume 4, section 4.4, Box
3). Central African forest laws are generally sound and if implemented correctly can have considerable positive
impacts for conservation. Concessionaires control access to their concessions and are legally bound to integrate
wildlife protection and other conservation measures in their legally binding forest management plans. FSC-certified
companies, of which there are an increasing number in Central Africa, are generally keen to collaborate with
specialist conservation organizations. In large TFCAs such as the greater TRIDOM/TNS in central Africa effective
collaborative agreements of this nature would greatly enhance connectivity between the PAs.
Similarly early engagement with the rapidly expanding mining and oil and gas sectors in Africa is going to be crucial
for conservation. In the TRIDOM landscape of central Africa planned industrial mining concessions cover the
landscape with considerable overlaps with PAs (Volume 4 section 2.1.3, Figure 2). For the oil and gas sector over
26% of PAs in Africa have leased concessions overlapping with them but if yet-to-be leased concessions are added
the figure rises to over 46.6% (Figure 4, section 2.3.1). The key will be early engagement of all stakeholders in the
process of integrated land-use planning. This presents very obvious challenges in countries with limited human and
financial resources, absence of cross-ministerial working, lack of good quality and accessible data, lack of a strong
civil society and in some situations existing or potential conflict, amongst many other reasons. Based on assessed
needs, however, investment in better data, mapping and GIS for land-use decision making and socio-economic
scenario planning is a key pre-requisite. Such investment can help identify the best areas for development and
identify the most necessary areas for protection to conserve vital ecosystems services, biodiversity and major ecosystem processes and wildlife spectacles, such as the annual wildebeest migration in Kenya/Tanzania.

Final report
Page 30
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Table 3. Legal mechanisms through which the private sector may assist governments or communities in PA management (source WCS)
MECHANISM
DESCRIPTION
EXAMPLES
STRENGTHS
WEAKNESSES
TECHNICAL
Private entity provides advice, financial

support, training, and/or assistance with
technical or scientific tasks while management
authority rests with government (or community)
FZS in Serengeti;
WCS in Cross
River
Government managers have legitimate law

enforcement authority; helps build national capacity
Success depends on capacity of government partner and/or

willingness to follow advice of TA; frequent tension between TA and
official PA director so is success largely dependent on human factors;
arrangement may lack transparency, with de facto relationship closer
to co-management or concession
Agreement between government and private

entity divides responsibilities and establishes
mechanisms for joint implementation and for
conflict resolution at multiple hierarchical levels
WCS in Niassa;
Carr Foundation
in Gorongosa
Transparent and legitimate assignment of

responsibilities; leverages authority of government,
capacity of private partner, and opportunities for
capacity building
Frequently complex arrangement with significant transaction costs;

can fail if trust deteriorates; actual power relationship between
partners may be unequal
One or more senior managers simultaneously

hold(s) position(s) in government and private
entity
ACF in Virunga
In principle, seamless co-management partnership
Outcome depends on qualities of and relationships between key

individuals; potential lack of transparency and conflict of interest
Government and private partner (and

potentially other stakeholders) create new joint
venture and delegate management authority to
it
APN in Zakouma;
WCS in Nouabal
Ndoki
Combines national legitimacy of TA with conservation

expertise of concession
High legal and administrative transaction costs. Many governments

will not agree to delegation. Potential long-term loss of capacity /
derogation of responsibility by state. Potential problems with shared
law enforcement responsibility.
Government leases land or grants or sells (or

pays to deliver) conservation authority to
private entity
WCS in Makira;
APN in Garamba
NP
Full authority vested in qualified PA managers; simple

management structure
May face political opposition over questions of sovereignty which can

lead to problems of law enforcement authority; may not build national
PA management capacity
Government sells land to private entity
Ranches in
Kenya,
Zimbabwe, South
Africa
Clear and simple authority with strong incentives for

long-term good management
Same challenges as concessions; may not be legally possible in e.g.

francophone countries. Community participation may be weak. Does
not build capacity of national PA management authorities.
ASSISTANCE
CO-MANAGEMENT
JOINT APPOINTMENT
JOINT LEGAL ENTITY
AGENCY AGREEMENT;
LEASE OR
CONCESSION
PRIVATE OWNERSHIP

Final report
Page 31
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
4.1.7
Monitoring and research
Park ecosystems respond to both internal changes, such as disease outbreaks, fire and vegetation succession,
and to external changes, species introductions, climate change and surrounding land-use change. As the pace of
change quickens, there is even greater need for high quality research and monitoring services to devise and
manage effective conservation responses. Ranger-based management information systems using GPS and GIS
mapping software (e.g. MIST and its successor SMART (Volume 4, section 5.1, Box 6), or Cybertracker22, to give
spatial information on poaching wildlife signs and ranger effort are progressively being mainstreamed into PA
management systems and are proving to be highly useful management tools.
Conservation orientated and fundamental research will always be vital components of PA and buffer zone
management and the range of relevant topics is very wide indeed. Understanding how species and ecosystems
respond to human activities (hunting, logging, farming, fencing, fire, pastoralism, irrigation, etc) will become ever
more relevant as human population growth continues to accelerate.
4.2
ENGAGING WITH LOCAL COMMUNITIES AND CBNRM
Engaging with communities around PAs and promoting sustainable NRM is undoubtedly one of the most
complicated issues that NRM agencies have to face across Africa. The basic premise underlying all CBNRM is that
illegal and unsustainable natural resource use by the rural poor can be halted by giving them ownership of, and
management responsibility for the resource, so that they may directly benefit from its use and their livelihoods
improve accordingly. Consequently they will automatically acquire a vested interest in protecting it from
unsustainable exploitation.
Sport hunting and photo tourism can generate significant benefits for local communities, particularly in the more
open biotopes of Southern and Eastern Africa where access is relatively easy and the iconic African savanna
species abound. It has proved far less easy to develop community based consumptive and non-consumptive
tourism in the moist forest environment where access is difficult, visibility limited, the environment hostile for the
client and the carrying capacity (in terms of numbers of tourists) limited.
Apart from generating benefits directly linked to the utilization of wildlife, CBNRM also addresses other ways of
improving livelihoods while minimizing environmental damage. This can include measures to reduce the costs of
living with wildlife (self-help against Human Wildlife Conflict), as well as to promote alternative crops, or improve
agronomy and livestock breeds. It also involves the introduction of new holistic approaches for the improved
exploitation of rangelands, as well as new techniques of soil and carbon friendly conservation agriculture. In the
forest sector Participatory Forest Management (PFM) approaches include REDD+, Payment for Ecosystem
Services and the use of recognised certification of sustainability to add value to specific forest products in trade.
However CBNRM is not a panacea that alone will neutralize the unsustainable utilization of natural resources that
is driven by poverty. Various factors are at play to ensure that there are no neat solutions:
In many African countries rural populations do not have clearly defined user rights over wildlife and other
natural resources so have no stake in ensuring sustainable use of it. Land tenure law is often complex
and overlaps and contradicts with traditional tenure (e.g. Central Africa). This leads to a situation of open
access to resources resulting in overexploitation. In Southern Africa recognition of use rights has
22
http://www.cybertracker.org

Final report
Page 32
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
progressed much further than in the other regions but even here issues of poor governance at the local
level have imposed limitations on the CBNRM approach in some areas (Volume 2, section 4.1.3).
CBNRM schemes and indeed agricultural expansion cannot escape the fundamental undermining issue
which is that human populations continue to rise everywhere while the resource does not increase. Thus
as the population increases, in order for the harvest to remain steady (ie sustainable), each person will
have to accept a smaller share of the harvest, in other words a declining income. (Volume 3, section 3.7).
CBNRM is therefore more difficult where population pressure on land is already high and governance is
weak.
The notion of community among forest living people in Central Africa is misleading because they have
such individualistic approach to the use of natural resources (Volume 4, section 4.6). Mobilizing forest
people to work together to adopt sustainable methods of natural resource use for the benefit of all is
therefore complex, time consuming and costly and requires expertise from many different fields.
The ultimate solution for sustainable CBNRM must depend on a combination of two things. The first is greater
government efforts to introduce legislation that supports local ownership and rights to wildlife and natural resources
together with assistance for business start-up and for monitoring their sustainable use. The other is to reduce the
population growth rate to the greatest extent possible, thereby minimizing the scale of the poverty alleviation
challenge. Some countries, notably China, have grasped this nettle with albeit unpopular measures but at least
they are not in denial of this fundamental problem, as are most countries in Africa. Family planning within CBNRM
areas is essential if they are to be sustainable in the long term.
Lastly the conservation linked to development paradigm (for poverty alleviation) that dominates modern biodiversity
conservation thinking has resulted too often in conservation projects having to address all the socio-economic ills
of populations living around protected areas, despite rarely having either the financial resources or the expertise to
do this. Conservation projects should be designed in such a way that they are accompanied by properly funded
and resourced socio-economic development initiatives, with objectives compatible with wildlife conservation.
4.3
UNDERVALUING OF ECOLOGICAL SERVICES
Ecological services are grossly undervalued, even in countries in which the link between parks and tourism is
economically important and well recognised. The under-valuation of ecosystem services and biodiversity by
governments is a fundamental driver of ill-considered ecosystem conversions, and of the institutional weaknesses
that generate inefficient, ineffective and corrupt management practices. Clearly a better understanding of
ecosystem values should result in governments investing more heavily firstly in the agencies responsible for land
use planning, SEA and EIA, and secondly in those responsible for protecting natural resources and/or managing
their utilization. The greater investment required has several forms, ranging from policy, legal and structural
reforms, to greater capital investments and operational budgets. Importantly the latter should cover enhanced
manpower; improved salaries, allowances and working conditions (especially in the field); as well as more and
better training (Volume 3, section 3.5).
4.4
LAW ENFORCEMENT
While in situ anti-poaching will always be a key component of wildlife management recent failures to protect
elephants and especially rhinos in areas considered extremely safe underline the fact that in situ protection
measures can never be impenetrable. Conservation outcomes improve significantly if resources are mobilized to
monitor closely the entire judicial process from arrest to prosecution. This requires wildlife authorities to work closely
with all the national law enforcement agencies (forest, police, customs, justice department, national representatives
of INTERPOL) to detect and prosecute wildlife crime. Such national-level multi-agency Wildlife Enforcement
Final report
Page 33
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Networks (WEN) are lacking in most countries (Volume 6, section 3.7). The EAGLE (Eco Activists for Governance
and Law Enforcement) network of wildlife law enforcement NGOs in Central and Western Africa is having success
with their approach of investigations, law enforcement operations, legal assistance for prosecution of cases and
media coverage of the results (Volume 4, section 4.9). In most countries there is also a severe lack of skills in
intelligence-based methods for law enforcement, in particular forensic investigations to determine the origins of
seized ivory (Volume 6, section 1.4.5).
In most countries sanctions for wildlife crime are inadequate, and the ratio of arrests to convictions is very low
because of corruption, dysfunctional legal systems and lack of understanding of the importance of wildlife crime.
4.5
WILDLIFE MIGRATION AND DISEASE MANAGEMENT
Veterinary cordon fencing in Southern Africa has been environmentally damaging especially in relation to wildlife
migration. However there are opportunities to develop environmentally sensitive disease control measures that
include a number of control measures: (a) Commodity Based Trade (Volume 2, section 4.1.4) (b) use of
geographical barriers, such as mountains, lakes and unsuitable habitats to achieve natural separation of livestock
from potential wildlife carriers of disease; (c) vaccines; and (d) certain kinds of control of livestock movements.
4.6
TRADE IN WILDLIFE PRODUCTS
In Southern Africa and no doubt elsewhere in Africa, conservation can be assisted by sustainable use of natural
resources and legal trade. Use tends to be sustainable when the landholder has the full rights to the species; it
tends not to be sustainable when products are harvested by bodies that do not have a direct stake in the resource.
This approach to conservation requires close monitoring and tight management but can be highly successful. In
Central and Western Africa regulated trade in wildlife products such as African grey parrots is completely out of
control because of poor levels of governance (Volume 4, section 2.1.2). High prices in consumer countries drive
unsustainable regulated and illegal trades in many other products including apes, small primates, tortoises
(Madagascar), African blackwood, cichlid fish (for aquaria), to name but a few.
In the special case of ivory and rhino horn, sky rocketing prices in markets in China and SE Asia have overwhelmed
trade restrictions and law enforcement measures to fuel a new wave of elephant and rhino poaching that is out of
control. There is a considerable divergence of opinion amongst professional conservationists as to whether or not
totally banning the trade in ivory is in the elephants best interests or not (Volume 6, section 1.2.3). The debate is
intractable and it is probable that there never will be any single or perfect solution to the ivory trading dilemma. This
underlines the importance of improving in situ protection, while at the same time working to stop demand from the
ultimate consumer.
4.7
BUSHMEAT CRISIS
The commercial bushmeat trade is responsible for significant wildlife declines in most of Africa. In Central and
Western Africa it is arguably the single most important cause of wildlife declines (Volume 4, section 5.4) with
demand greatly outweighing the sustainable level of production of the forest ecosystems. The breakdown of
traditional rules for hunting, and legal frameworks that do not give forest peoples a stake in the management of
their wildlife resources, has led to a situation of open access to wildlife. Development-orientated actors suggest
that a regulated bushmeat trade, which maintains the supplies of appropriate species from forests, can contribute
to economic growth in areas where there are few other options, but conservationists argue strongly that sustainable
offtake can only be achieved where human populations do not exceed about 1 inhabitant/km and where the meat

Final report
Page 34
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
is consumed locally (ie not sold outside the area). This is an increasingly rare situation. The reality is that, because
of the high levels of urbanization, most of the bushmeat is consumed as a luxury item in urban areas.
As long as rural populations remain poor and the demand for bushmeat in urban markets remains high an
unsustainable trade in bushmeat will continue to exist. Establishing a regulated and sustainable system of
harvesting bushmeat will therefore be extremely complex and time consuming to achieve given the fundamental
changes to legal frameworks that must occur and the scale of capacity building of local communities for wildlife
management that will be necessary. The legitimate fear of conservationists is that by the time the regulatory
frameworks are in place and capacities of local communities for sustainable wildlife harvesting have been built,
most of the wildlife will already have disappeared from the forests outside of protected areas. Law enforcement will
therefore remain a necessary activity running in parallel with pilot schemes to test and develop models for the
regulated participatory management of bushmeat harvesting in rural areas. In urban areas, where bushmeat is
generally not a food security issue, the aim should be to reduce consumption by a combination of law enforcement
and strategies to change eating habits.
In Southern Africa the bushmeat problem, while serious, is less acute. Possible reasons for this include the greater
availability of alternative domestic animal protein sources in rural and urban areas and better law enforcement. Also
there are fewer small forest species so the impact of bushmeat trade on biodiversity is less
4.8
POOR GOVERNANCE AND LACK OF POLITICAL WILL FUNDAMENTALLY UNDERMINE CONSERVATION EFFORTS.
No lasting progress in wildlife conservation can be achieved if there is no political will at the very highest level
to mainstream natural resource conservation in national development agendas. In most African countries
there is a serious disconnect between the political discourse regarding wildlife conservation, and the resources that
governments are prepared to mobilize to conserve wildlife. Most protected area agencies are consistently
underfunded and understaffed even in countries where tourism provides a strong economic incentive to value
wildlife. Manpower and operating budgets are inadequate, and flawed human resource management procedures
and lack of career development opportunities for staff leads to low morale and corruption. However, the strong
political backing for the transfrontier conservation movement in southern Africa which from the outset received the
strongest possible endorsement from President Mandela, and is now being spearheaded by SADC, is a notable
exception to this trend and a beacon of hope and faith in the future of African wildlife and conservation. Other
examples of strong political leadership from Heads of State improving conservation outcomes include Namibia,
Botswana, Gabon and Chad.
INDICATIVE PRIORITY CONSERVATION ACTIONS
Despite significant programmes of the UN and many international conservation agencies and including
considerable interventions over three decades by EU (ECOFAC, PAPE, BIOPAMA, MIKE, MIKES, ICCWC,
ECOFAUNE, REDD+ and various public-private partnership initiatives) all reviews indicate that most African
ecosystems face accelerating degradation and growing lists of wildlife species facing extinction, including iconic
and keystone species that define African Wildlife elephant, rhino, hippo, cheetah, gorilla and chimpanzee. High
profile publicity has been given recently to a new crisis of illegal wildlife trade which sees well equipped poaching
units moving across national borders to target key species concentrations and spirit away their valued parts. The
EU joins the recent commitment by several agencies to rise to the new challenges.

Final report
Page 35
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Concern is further sensitized by the emerging links between hunting of rhino and elephant, as well as other natural
resources (e.g. minerals from DRC, charcoal from Somalia) as a source of funds for terrorist and civil rebel groups
in various parts of Africa. Wildlife crime fuels civil strife and corruption as well as robbing local communities of the
natural heritage on which their thrifty livelihoods depend.
Ivory and rhino horn hog the headlines but the less publicized trade in other species and especially bushmeat is
also becoming highly commercialized, including imports to EU countries. Great swathes of habitat are almost
cleared of edible wildlife including elimination of endemic ungulates, rare monkeys and endangered gorillas and
chimpanzees.
Even the immediate loss of wildlife is dwarfed in terms of real long-term losses to the continent by the gradual loss
of functioning ecosystems and their valuable ecosystem services. Given that biodiversity underpins the provision
of ecosystem services that are vital to human well-being and livelihoods, long-term sustainable achievement of the
Millennium Development Goals (MDG) requires that biodiversity loss is controlled as part of MDG 7.
A strong commitment to reversing the ecological degradation of Sub-Saharan Africa is essential for humanitarian,
security, environment, socio-economic and biodiversity reasons. The EU is uniquely placed to provide this essential
support because it has a long history of relevant expertise in this field, large financial resources, delegations in
every country, existing agreements at Pan-African and regional scales, the ability to back up action with political
leverage, ability to integrate actions with other thematic initiatives and, as Chinas largest trading partner,
considerable influence with Chinese authorities.
A stronger EU response is mandated by obligations under several key directives and commitments, including:
EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy targets a bigger EU contribution to averting global biodiversity loss under
CBD and other programmes;
EU commitment to support Bonn Convention on migrating species including Agreement on the
Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds;
EU Thematic Programme on Global Public Goods and Challenges;
EU commitment to combat organised and serious international crime including Europol;
Joint Africa - EU Strategy Action Plan including especially commitments to Peace and Security,
Democratic Governance and Human Rights and Climate change and Environment;
The EU commitment to international efforts to tackle climate change including the LIFE programme;
Commitments under Birds Directive to protect bird populations of all EU natural birds including migrants;
EUs common Foreign and Security Policy;
EU and member states commitments and obligations as members of the UN Convention on Biological
Diversity (CBD) including transfer of technology;
Declaration of the February 2014 London Conference on Illegal Wildlife Trade.
Given the scale of human growth, anticipated development projects and extractive industries and significant
challenges of climate change, it is recognised that we expect a considerable further retreat of nature before rates
of biodiversity loss are halted. It is not feasible to protect all 2000+ existing category I-IV protected areas or
implement all admirable conservation plans for the continent. A prudent strategy for conservation in Africa would
focus on a limited number of key landscapes smartly selected to harbour the highest diversity of species and focus
on keystone species which epitomize the wildlife ecosystems of Africa and which serve as surrogates for total
biodiversity.

Final report
Page 36
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
It should be stressed that EU interventions need to improve strategic approaches to planning and development
across the board, and to apply them not only to protected area management and illegal trade, but to tackling key
drivers of ecosystem degradation (population growth, conflict, weak governance, etc.). These fall outside the scope
of this document but they are highlighted because of the huge impact they ultimately have on the effectiveness of
wildlife conservation. They have to be tackled in parallel with conservation measures and must be designed to be
consistent with conservation objectives. Also required, but beyond the scope of this document, are actions to
support ecosystem conservation on Oceanic islands, Africas critical marine environment and northern Africa
(including the hot issue of large-scale trapping of migrant birds).
The proposed entry points for the EU strategic approach for wildlife conservation for Africa are:
1. In situ support for conservation of Africas Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLC), Transfrontier
Conservation Areas (TFCA) and individual sites of outstanding conservation value including but not
necessarily limited to those recognised by other approved classification schemes eg IBA, RAMSAR etc.;
2. Strengthening sectoral management and coordination for wildlife conservation;
3. Facilitating legal reforms for local ownership and rights to wildlife and natural resources
4. Dismantling wildlife crime networks;
5. Tackling the unsustainable natural resource trade (bushmeat, fishing, fuelwood, charcoal);
6. Research and Monitoring;
7. Awareness raising and communication.
5.1
IN SITU SUPPORT FOR KEY LANDSCAPES FOR CONSERVATION (KLC) AND IMPORTANT INDIVIDUAL SITES
In situ conservation of Africas most important conservation landscapes is placed at the heart of this proposed
strategic approach. These are the sites where the best remaining assemblages of flora and fauna remain and it is
essential that they be secured for posterity in the face of the inexorable intensification of threats. The rationale
here is that the pace of wildlife loss is so rapid that it will outpace efforts to tackle the various drivers of
threats causing wildlife loss (i.e. population growth, poor governance, conflict and political indifference).
KLCs are designed to safeguard wildlife and ecosystems in the medium to long term.
Whilst the balance of respective actions varies between regions, the strategic approach prioritizes support for large,
relatively intact, representative KLCs, containing key protected areas, key species and enabling adequate
connectivity to allow for migration needs and species range adaptations to changing climate. Since functioning
ecosystems and migrating species often span international boundaries many of the KLCs identified form part of
Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCA). In the case of Western Africa ecosystems are so fragmented that specific
strategic approaches are proposed for the four major ecotypes: deserts, savannahs, forests and mangrove/coastal
areas (Volume 5, section 5.1.2) and specific measures proposed to promote the landscape approach (Volume 5,
sections 5.2.1 and 5.2.5). The lack of up to date information, and the highly fragmented and threatened nature of
habitats and species in Western Africa means that special analyses must be a key component of the in situ
conservation work (Volume 5, section 5.1.8).
The priority KLCs are those that met as many of the following criteria as possible (Box 1).

Final report
Page 37
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Box 1. Criteria used to identify the most important Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLCs)
Protects a functioning ecosystem with viable wildlife populations in the face of increasing isolation caused
by an expanding rural population.
Recognised as a World Heritage Site for its global (scientific) importance.
Established as a Transfrontier Conservation Area or in the process of formal development as a TFCA.
Protects a globally important dry-season concentration area for wildlife populations together with their wetseason dispersal zones
Protects a long-distance terrestrial wildlife migration, or the range occupied historically by such a migration
where there is opportunity to recover that migration though barrier removals.
Protects the most important populations of free-ranging elephants in each region
Protects the important populations of the African black rhino or of the Southern White Rhino.
Protects a key population (as rated by the appropriate IUCN SSC Specialist Group) of one or more of the
other iconic large African wildlife species, including predators, primates and ungulates, which are
categorised as endangered or vulnerable according to IUCN Red List Criteria. Particular attention is given
to species that typically occur at low density and/or occupy large home ranges, and which consequently
require large and intact ecosystems for sustaining their free-ranging populations.
Plays an important role in protecting important wintering grounds for Palearctic bird migrants (eg wetlands
recognised as Important Bird Areas IBA).
Protects a regionally important hotspot of endemism and diversity that requires ecosystem-scale (versus
microhabitat-scale) protection.
Contains wildlife landscapes of exceptional scenic interest.
Protects a watershed or aquifer that has direct conservation benefit through tight linkages with downstream
water-dependent ecosystems that are themselves of global importance.
Plays a vital role in sustaining a key natural resource, such as a fishery or source of freshwater, that has
critical national importance through public, commercial, recreational, artisanal or subsistence use
The proposed strategic approach recognises that even a long list of such supported landscapes will miss a lot of
important individual smaller sites of outstanding conservation value and fail to protect many endangered species.
Using similar criteria, but with a greater focus on species or habitats of special attention rather than large landscapes
and functioning ecosystems, the strategic approach also identifies the most important individual PAs from the four
Regions.
Figure 7 below and Table 5 in Appendix 1 summarise the different KLCs and individual sites identified and proposed
for support in the four regions.
At the site level the elements of support will be dictated by the specificities of the different regions, but should
include at least the following:
Protected area management.

This includes management and business planning, capital investment in infrastructures and equipment,
law enforcement, surveillance and intelligence, liaison with local communities, and monitoring of species,
habitats, threats and internal staff performance. It also includes on the job training for field-based PA staff.
Where Public Private Partnerships (PPP) for management of PAs is appropriate these will be encouraged
and supported (section 4.1.4).

Final report
Page 38
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Landscape Management for Conservation.

This involves raising capacities of park management for planning and implementing wildlife management
at the landscape level including buffer zones, wildlife corridors, and restoration of animal migration. In the
Central African moist forest region, where the landscape is dominated by the industrial extractive industries
(logging and mining), opportunities for PPP with the private sector extractive industries to enhance wildlife
conservation in concessions should be actively pursued.
Landscape Management for Livelihoods

This element, which is particularly relevant to Southern and Eastern Africa, will assist with establishing
and overseeing wildlife and natural resource conservancies on private and communal lands. An important
aspect of wildlife conservancies on private land is the removal of internal fences between properties
accompanied by joint management of land and wildlife resources. In communal lands long-term training
in many aspects of CBNRM will include natural resource governance, wildlife conservation, humanelephant conflict (and conflict with wildlife in general), land-use conflicts, livestock disease, ecotourism,
safari hunting, business management, administration of community institutions, and legal issues. Given
the overriding threat to wildlife and habitats posed by population growth particular attention should be
given to strengthening family planning in KLCs. In Central Africa, where successful options for livelihood
activities have proved more difficult to develop, pilot schemes to test sustainable bushmeat and fish
harvesting should be developed. Developing PES and REDD+ projects within KLCs should also be
supported.
TFCA Governance
This involves supporting cross-country cooperation and policy development for TFCA governance
structures. It will also be of assistance to the overall institutional reform processes (section 5.2) and
contribute to greater cooperation in the governance of TFCAs and other PAs.
Awareness Raising and communication

This element supports awareness building in the surrounding communities through training, information,
materials, publications, communications, visits to the protected areas, etc.
At the national level support should be aimed primarily at government departments and agencies responsible for
wildlife conservation and their liaison with institutions in associated sectors (agriculture, logging, mining, education,
etc.). This feeds in to the overall support for institution strengthening and reform processes (section 5.2).
At the regional level The TFCA approach in Southern Africa and beyond requires key reforms in national laws to
give landholders and rural communities the right to manage wildlife, woodlands and other natural resources for
their own benefit. Individual country reforms can take many years to achieve. The most effective approach will be
to offer the relevant expertise at the regional and Pan-African level, the latter possibly through support to NEPAD.
In the other regions where the TFCA concept is less well developed support will focus on building political support
for TFCAs through relevant regional institutions (EAC, ECCAS, ECOWAS, COMIFAC etc..) and developing the
necessary legal and institutional frameworks (section 5.2).

Final report
Page 39
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Figure 7. Map of proposed KLCs

Final report
Page 40
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
5.2
INSTITUTION
BUILDING
STRENGTHENING SECTORAL MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION FOR WILDLIFE
CONSERVATION
This document has underlined the general weakness of government agencies responsible for PA and natural
resource management. The in situ support for KLC therefore has to be accompanied by significant support to
strengthen these institutions. Institution building must be tackled at both the regional level and the national level.
5.2.1
National level
At the national level programmes supporting sectoral reform (including policy and legal), institutional restructuring
and strengthening of management authorities (including the design or re-design of PA systems, and training) are
very cost-effective conservation investments because all PAs, and all wildlife (whether in PAs or not), stand to
benefit. Resources should therefore be made available to support national-level institutional and/or PA system
reforms on an ad hoc, if-and-when requested basis. In some countries, particularly Western and Central Africa
fundamental overhauls of management authorities will be required and this will take many years. For this reason
PPP arrangements for management of PAs (section 5.1) is an advantage as it enables sites to be effectively
secured while institutional reform is in progress. Furthermore PPP arrangements contribute directly to improving
governance in the wildlife conservation sector, with obvious positive spin-offs for the management agencies
(Volume 4, section 4.4, Box 2). Building stronger coordination between agencies within the regions, particularly in
Western Africa (Volume 5, section 5.2.1) should also be supported.
Improved training is required at all levels of seniority in wildlife management and related issues in land-use and
environmental governance, but in most African countries there are deficiencies in training of mid-level officers
(wardens and senior site officers). The percentage of wildlife management staff with formal training in wildlife
management varies considerably amongst African countries. Tanzania leads the way with almost 100%, followed
by countries in southern and eastern Africa, (e.g. Botswana with 50%), to less than 5% in Ethiopia, Burundi and the
DRC23. Furthermore support should be given to ensuring that training curricula better reflect modern approaches
and governance systems for conservation including greater community participation. This is particularly important
for Western and Central Africa. These approaches require new skills particularly for planning and implementation
of cross-sectoral and participatory management for conservation and sustainable use of natural resources in order
to be able to address livelihood issues.
There are therefore obvious opportunities for (i) supporting middle management officers to attend the various
African wildlife training institutes: Garoua Wildlife College (Cameroon), College of African Wildlife Management
(Tanzania), Southern African Wildlife College (South Africa), Kitabi College of Conservation and Environmental
Management (for the Albertine Rift Rwanda, Burundi, DRC), Kenya Wildlife Service Training Institute (Kenya),
Botswana Wildlife Training Institute (Botswana), as well as the various other schools and University departments
that offer degrees and Masters in aspects of wildlife management in the different regions (see regional volumes)
and (ii) modernising the curricula to incorporate the latest approaches to wildlife management. However given the
large number of potential candidates (it is estimated that more than 5,000 middle management staff, wardens and
deputies are needed for Africas protected areas) capacities of existing colleges need to be increased, possibly
new training structures created, and a much larger number of scholarships made available to them to cater for the
greater demand. A stronger emphasis on off-campus training as part of the curricula offered by the colleges is
considered important. Building links with Universities (both within African, and abroad where appropriate) will allow
23 P. Scholte, F. Manongi, T. Sylvina, M. Batsabang, R. Nasasira, G. Otianga-Owiti and F.Tarla. 2014 (draft report). Fifty years of professional wildlife
management education in Africa.

Final report
Page 41
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
colleges to focus on their specific practical training, drawing on larger organisations for more general education and
accreditation management, while also offering college graduates more perspectives to pursue further education.
In the short to medium term the challenge will be to ensure that trained individuals return to their institutes rather
than being attracted away by better career opportunities in the private or NGO sectors. The only way to avoid this
is through the above mentioned support for institution building and reform so that NRM agencies provide attractive
and stable career opportunities. If training can be delivered in a modular and in-service manner, attainment of
specific skills and competence levels can serve as a motivation for career development.
Much of the basic ranger training is currently done on site by specialist training organizations and this should
continue to be a strongly supported element of EU support (covered under section 5.1 above for in situ support for
KLCs). Specific sites in the regions that are particularly suited for field training in terms of ecosystems and facilities
should be identified and developed. With the increasing importance of organized networks of armed wildlife
criminals, para-military techniques and intelligence gathering operation are increasingly important components of
training.
5.2.2
Regional level
Given the importance of the landscape approach and TFCAs for the conservation of African ecosystems it is evident
that concerted efforts at the regional level need to be made to continue developing the concept and supporting the
development of the necessary regional planning and management structures. While the TFCA concept is firmly
entrenched in conservation thinking in Southern Africa the level of political interest and support is weaker in the
three other regions. In Eastern Africa the East African Community, its Secretariat and its NRM Protocol provide a
sound platform on which TFCAs could be developed but greater impetus could be given to the idea by developing
a specific plan for the development of TFCAs in EA and having it endorsed by the EAC. It is proposed that this
should be modelled on the instruments and institutions developed for TFCAs by SADC. A similar approach could
be adopted for the Central and Western African regions. It should be noted that as a member of SADC (as well as
ECCAS) the DRC is well placed to benefit from the Southern African leadership and experience in this field. For
Western Africa it is proposed to support the establishment of a special task force for Institutional Support and
Coordination under WAEMU. This task force, supported by IUCN based in Western Africa, would be responsible
for monitoring and planning, communication, research and management-governance training (Volume 5, section
5.2.1)
5.3
FACILITATING
LEGAL REFORMS FOR LOCAL OWNERSHIP AND RIGHTS TO WILDLIFE AND NATURAL
RESOURCES
The landscape approach to conservation requires key reforms in national laws to give landholders and rural
communities the right to manage wildlife and woodlands for their own benefit. Reforms to policy and law are required
in most countries of Africa. Individual country reforms can take many years or decades to achieve. While not
ignoring the necessity to work on policy and legal reforms at the national level it is proposed that an effective
approach will be to offer the relevant expertise at the regional and Pan-African level through the various political,
economic and development communities (SADC, NEPAD, EAC, ECCAS, WAEMU, COMIFAC etc.) and their
associated technical organs. For example for Southern Africa (Volume 2, section 5.1.3) it is proposed that a SADC
TFCA Joint Programme to Enable Legal Frameworks be established with SADC for the purpose of communicating
to member states the need for reforms in resource rights and land tenure. It would provide advice and practical
assistance in harmonizing relevant legislation, policies and approaches in natural and cultural resource
management across international borders within the TFCA context. In addition a sister programme would be
established within NEPAD so that individual African states can be encouraged to adopt TFCAs, and the linked landInputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa
Final report
Page 42
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
reforms, as a way of implementing NEPAD. Harmonisation of policies and legal frameworks is particularly important
with respect to wildlife crime in order to avoid the migration of wildlife criminal networks to countries where
penalties are weakest. In Central Africa harmonisation of forestry and fiscal policies is a key pillar of the COMIFAC
Convergence Plan (Volume 4, section 3.1, Box 1) and should continue to be supported.
5.4
WILDLIFE TRAFFICKING: DISMANTLING WILDLIFE CRIME NETWORKS AND CURBING THE DEMAND
It is obvious that efforts to curb the trade in any wildlife commodity be it ivory, apes or parrots, will require essentially
the same preventative and investigative procedures and involve the same range of enforcement agencies. It follows
that any action taken to strengthen the capacity of the wildlife enforcement machinery stands to benefit very many
species, and would therefore represent money very well spent.
With so much that needs doing, and with so many other actors also trying to help, these recommendations represent
a conscious attempt to avoid an all-inclusive, over-ambitious programme, and instead to identify a realistic selection
of interventions that have the potential to generate a very good return on investment in terms of ultimate impact.
The plight of two of Africas most iconic species, the elephant and the rhino, has focused world attention on the
massive scale of the illegal wildlife trade in wildlife products and the ramifications that this has not only for
biodiversity conservation but also for governance and national security (since rebel groups across Africa are deeply
involved in it). Volume 6 of this document presents measures required specifically for elephants and rhinos as well
as more generally for the whole issue of the illegal wildlife trade. While there are a number of anti-trafficking
measures that are specific to each of these two iconic species, there is a raft of measures that are equally relevant
for the wildlife trade in general since what works for rhinos and elephants will likely also be beneficial for other
species targeted by the illegal trade. In situ conservation measures for rhino and elephant are covered in section
5.1. The special issue of the bushmeat trade is covered in section 5.4 (and in Volume 4, section 5.4).
It should be underlined that strategies for tackling trafficking and demand reduction have been developed by various
international organizations, notably through the International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC)
which brings together the worlds leading agencies involved with this issue (CITES, INTERPOL, UNDOC, WCO
and the World Bank). UNDOC has also developed its own global programme for combating wildlife and forest crime.
These ongoing initiatives are highly pertinent with respect to the present strategic approach for wildlife conservation
in Africa.
The Wildlife Trade section of Volume 6 presents an analysis of the strategic options for combating the illicit trade
in wildlife. There are 4 strategic approaches which need to be pursued simultaneously at international, regional and
national levels. These are:
Strengthening policies and laws - to make wildlife trafficking a serious crime with appropriate penalties)
Stopping the killing - by strengthening anti-poaching, law enforcement monitoring, PPPs and community
development.
Stopping the trafficking - through international coordination in wildlife trafficking, inter-agency
networking at the national and regional levels, Wildlife Enforcement Networks, information management
and monitoring systems, and specialized tools such as container control programmes, controlled
deliveries, tracking the money, and forensics to determine the origins of wildlife products.
Stopping the demand - educate and influence consumers, develop alternatives, destruction of stockpiles,
legal moratoria and bans, high profile diplomacy and advocacy.
The reader is referred to sections 3.4 3.8 of the Wildlife Trade section of Volume 6 for a detailed analysis of these
strategic approaches.
Final report
Page 43
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
The following actions need support :

5.4.1
Actions to strengthen policies and laws
The EU and its Member States should act on all of the many relevant recommendations arising from its own Expert
Conference on the EU Approach against Wildlife Trafficking of 10 April 2014, whether domestic or international in
nature. However, not all of the suggestions submitted by those consulted in the course of this exercise were
adopted. One that should be included is the need for EU countries to close domestic ivory markets and destroy any
stockpiles of ivory (Volume 6, section 3.9.1).
Several of the actions recommended under the other strategic headings will indirectly support the strengthening of
wildlife trade-relevant policies and laws, either internationally or nationally.
5.4.2
Actions to stop the killing
In Volumes 2-5 of this document, a compelling case is made for the EU to concentrate a greater proportion of its
support for wildlife conservation in Africa on a number of carefully selected Key Landscapes for Conservation or
KLCs. The most effective contribution the EU could make to stop the killing at field level, would be to provide the
necessary inputs (training, equipment etc.) as part of its support packages to KLCs (section 5.1).
Approaches to alleviate rural poverty, which is a fundamental driver of poaching at the field level, can also be
addressed within the context of support to KLCs (see 3.7 in Volume 3 for Eastern Africa, and section 5.1.1.2 in
Volume 2 for Southern Africa for example).
5.4.3
5.4.3.1
Actions to stop the trafficking

Continue and expand support for international trade regulation
The EU should continue as an important financier of CITES core functions and mandated actions, and more
especially should not only continue, but expand also, its support for all ICCWC operations, especially those of
UNODC which is taking the lead in so many relevant fields ranging from forensics to controlled deliveries to
indicators. This overall position with respect to CITES and ICCWC is exactly consistent with that recommended by
the recent Expert Conference on the EU Approach against Wildlife Trafficking. UNODCs Global Programme for
Combating Wildlife and Forest Crime is considered particularly worthy of support as it elaborates on all these
initiatives, and its anti-trafficking components are particularly well thought-out and constructed. Since this is a readyto-go programme, much needed in a crisis situation, which ticks all the boxes with regard to appropriate action, and
is organised regionally, it is strongly recommended to fund its entire African component.
Consideration should also be given to supporting the following more focused interventions which are anyway
consistent with UNODCs Global Programme:
5.4.3.2
Support the establishment of national WENs.
The WEN approach to establishing functional, well-coordinated multi-agency enforcement mechanisms offers a
great deal of promise in the anti-trafficking context. While the need for national WENs is clear, the case for
establishing formal regional WENs does not have full consensus. It is recommended therefore that priority be given
to supporting the establishment of national-level WENs, primarily by funding the application of ICCWCs Wildlife
Final report
Page 44
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
and Forest Crime Analytic Toolkit or other means of capacity self-assessment in any and all countries that would
benefit from this, and secondarily by extending support to facilitate implementation of the resultant National Action
Plans.
5.4.3.3
Develop a cadre of international Wildlife Security Officers.
The structure of the organized groups involved in wildlife trade-related crimes has five different levels, from poacher
to the end consumer:
Level 1: Field (protected area, communal and private land): Poachers (individuals or groups)
Level 2: Local: Receivers/Couriers
Level 3: National: Couriers/Buyers/Facilitators
Level 4: National: Exporters
Level 5: International: Forwarders/Importers/Traders/Consumers
Investigation complexity differs significantly between Levels 1 and 5. Current enforcement activities in
source/supply States address criminal syndicate members from Levels 1 to 2 relatively effectively (although with
varying degrees of success of course). However these individuals are often easily replaced, and the threat will
continue to exist for as long as enforcement activities do not address the driving force behind them at Levels 3 to
5. Organized crime syndicate members on Level 5 are located in transit/consumer countries and beyond the reach
of enforcement authorities in supply countries. It is for this reason that increased international cooperation and
coordination are vital. Thus the main challenge for national enforcement agencies is at Levels 3 and 4. This is
because identifying and catching the king-pins or big fish involved needs inter-agency intelligence-led approaches
that are both proactive and reactive, and which can penetrate the layers of secrecy and corruption that protect
these people and facilitate their activities. Unfortunately these skills are not well developed, in a wildlife context at
least, so it is in this area that national WENs can be expected to add most value provided they are staffed by people
skilled in intelligence analysis methods including social network analysis.
However, development of these skills is not straightforward. Probably the best way to develop them is for selected
WEN officers to work alongside a person already experienced in the relevant methods, i.e. through on-the-job, or
experiential, learning. This could be delivered by embedding - for 2 to 3 years - suitably qualified Technical
Assistants (TAs), or Wildlife Security Advisers, within national-level WENs or WEN-equivalents. It is recommended
therefore that the EU develops an appropriate TA resource that could be supplied on request, and the obvious and
ideal partner to lead this initiative is ICCWC. This resource could consist of former police, military, customs and
intelligence officers from EU member states, especially those who have worked on other similar forms of organised
crime (drugs, human-trafficking, arms etc.).
TA would also help drive many routine aspects of WEN functionality, and optimise links to international agencies
such as INTERPOL, EUROPOL, the proposed AFROPOL and WCO. Any resultant improvement in dealing with
Levels 3 and 4 in the criminal hierarchy would bring disproportionately massive returns on the investment in terms
of saving wildlife. It follows that the deployment of national Wildlife Security Advisers represents a very promising
approach to adopt.
5.4.3.4
Forensic laboratories for Africa
The need forensic capacities to determine the provenance of rhino horn and ivory is arguably most pressing in
Southern and Eastern Africa, these being the regions in which the majority of the continents elephants and rhinos
especially are found today. Even so, a significant amount of seized ivory originates in Central Africa meaning a
facility is needed in that region also. At present there are two facilities with the potential to provide regional forensic
Final report
Page 45
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
services for ivory and rhino horn, namely the VGL lab in Pretoria for Southern Africa, and the KWS lab in Nairobi
for Eastern Africa. For Central Africa, a lab planned in Gabon has regional potential.
Subject to the inputs of other donors, it is recommended that the EU should provide complementary assistance
towards the development and sustainable operations of these labs as a matter of priority and for the following
reasons. Firstly, a substantial amount of investment has already gone into developing a real collaboration between
the VGL and KWS labs, so it makes sense to support and expand the work that has already been done in that
regard. Secondly, all such labs have the potential to determine the identity and provenance of very many types of
wildlife product, not just ivory and rhino horn, thus contributing to the overall effort to address illicit wildlife trading
in general.
5.4.4
Actions to stop the demand
Two approaches are recommended:

5.4.4.1
Support UNODCs demand reduction efforts
Adding further weight to the principal recommendation already made in 5.3.2.1 above to support UNODCs Global
Programme, is that fact that it will also address the demand side of WLFC through awareness raising at global and
national levels. UNODC will build on its existing expertise in running effective global awareness campaigns, such
as the Blue Heart Campaign against Human Trafficking and its successful video campaign against Transnational
Organized Crime. Dedicated media outreach both on traditional and new forms such as social media will be
deployed. To maximise impact, UNODC will learn lessons from other agencies, for instance the anti-trafficking
campaign launched by UNWTO, UNODC and UNESCO in March 2014 titled Your Actions Count Be a
Responsible Traveller.
5.4.4.2
Deploy Wildlife Conservation Envoys
It is generally agreed that the scale and nature of the illegal wildlife trade calls for an effort to sensitise both supply
and consumer Governments at the highest possible level, in order to secure the greatest possible chance of
influencing them to make a determined and effective response. Given the limited success of events like the African
Elephant Summit in actually interacting with Heads of State, there is merit in the idea of the EC dispatching official
envoys to carry this message to them.
Many other international organisations use instantly recognisable film, music and sports stars to promote their
mission. For example the Kenya-based Save the Elephant has effectively tapped into the huge celebrity status of
the Chinese basketball star Yao Ming, and the Chinese actress Li Bingbing to sensitise the Chinese ivory-buying
public. The EU could follow suit, and there are many celebrities of European nationality who would be suitable. In
terms of access to Heads of State (and influential First Ladies) however, the envoy would need appropriate
diplomatic credentials. This would not be an issue if the envoy was royalty for example, and it is notable here that
certain members of the British royal family are already very concerned and closely involved with wildlife
conservation generally, and trade issues particularly.
Irrespective of their identity, an official EU Wildlife Conservation Envoy could not only lobby Heads of State for
action against the illicit wildlife trade, but could at the same time publicise and promote the major new funding
initiative(s) that it is hoped the EC eventually will adopt as a result of the present study.

Final report
Page 46
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
5.5
TACKLING THE ISSUE OF UNSUSTAINABLE WILD ANIMAL PROTEIN USE
Although there is a tendency to focus on the question of unsustainable bushmeat trade (ie meat from terrestrial
wildlife) the unsustainable harvesting of freshwater fish is probably of equal importance. The two are anyway closely
linked with users switching from one to the other as a function of seasons and availability.
As noted in 4.9 wild animal protein is often a food security issue in rural environments but rarely in urban
environments, which is where the great majority of it is consumed. Ideally the ultimate goal should be to achieve
sustainable harvesting of wild animal protein for local consumption in rural areas and eliminate consumption of
bushmeat as a luxury item in urban areas. This will require following three strategic approaches simultaneously:
1. Reducing the demand for wild animal protein by a combination of developing alternative sources of protein
at a cost similar to bushmeat for rural consumers, developing alternative livelihoods to make people less
economically dependent on selling bushmeat, and strict enforcement of laws for protected species for
retailers, urban consumers and transporters.
2. Improving the sustainability of the supply by better management of the resource by developing models of
wildlife management with local communities, research and extension, and engagement with the extractive
industries to integrate conservation measures into their management plans and internal regulations.
3. Creating a conducive and enabling institutional and policy environment so that communities have security
of user rights, and a clear regulatory framework for local marketing of bushmeat and other wildlife products
(from permitted species).
However given the high levels of rural poverty, the relatively low levels of investment needed to hunt and sell
bushmeat and fish, and the pervading problem of poor governance, there is a tendency for villagers in subsistence
economies to use local wildlife as a cash crop24. The unsustainable bushmeat trade will therefore continue to be a
particularly intractable problem for many years to come and for which there is, as yet, no silver bullet solution.
Establishing the appropriate policy and regulatory framework for sustainable harvest for local consumption will take
very many years, particularly in Central and Western Africa, by which time the fear is that many wildlife populations
will have been irreversibly impoverished. It is therefore recommended that in the medium term the EU focuses its
support on establishing a series of pilot projects working with local communities to test models of sustainable
harvest for local consumption. This does not ignore the importance of working at the policy and regulatory level,
rather the idea is that the results of the pilot projects should feed into national debates on policy and law.
Ideally pilot projects should comprise as many of the following components as possible:
Be conducted in an area contiguous with a PA that is receiving long term support from the EU (or other
agency). This would be part of the PAs community conservation/livelihoods programme;
Be conducted in collaboration with a private sector partner (e.g. in Central Africa with an FSC certified
logging company) as part of its community development obligations;
Include, or be associated with, a component for developing alternative and sustainable animal protein at
a competitive price (e.g. or small-scale intensive production of domestic species such as chickens where
chicken feed can be produced locally without involving habitat loss see Volume 4, section 5.4). Reasons
for the lack of success of schemes to raise wild animal species as alternative protein sources, particularly
forest species, should be clearly understood before attempting further such initiatives;
Abernethy KA, Coad L, Taylor G, Lee ME, Maisels F. 2013. Extend and ecological consequences of hunting in Central African rainforests in the twenty-first
century. Phil Trans R Soc B 368:20130494. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0494
24

Final report
Page 47
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Include, or be associated with, a scheme to develop sustainable harvesting of freshwater fish (either wild
caught or fish farming);
A strong research and monitoring component, ideally in association with an experienced research
organisation; sustainable harvesting of wildlife, particularly in the forest ecosystem, is still a very inexact
science.
A strong community relations component for awareness building and local governance structures.
Associating private sector, protected area and research partners with local communities would bring important
added value in terms of scientific method, local governance building, law enforcement and awareness building.
The essential law enforcement component of dealing with the bushmeat trade would be covered within the
framework of in situ support to NRM agencies presented in 5.1. Squeezing the supply lines for bushmeat to urban
areas will be an essential focus of law enforcement activities, but it should be recognised that this will undoubtedly
be socially and politically highly sensitive since many powerful/influential people have vested interests all along the
supply chain.
5.6
RESEARCH AND MONITORING
The research and monitoring activities that are a central component of PA management activities are covered under
section 5.1 (in situ support for KLCs). This section addresses the broader regional and continental aspects of R&M
in relation to wildlife conservation. The special case of elephants is also included in this section.
The following broad areas are considered important and worthy of EU support. It should be noted that they are all
areas where many organisations, including the EU itself, are already involved.
5.6.1
Information management
The EU, in collaboration with several international partners including IUCN, is already heavily implicated in bringing
together a wide range of data sets relating to changing land use, PAs, biodiversity, etc. and placing these in the
public domain. The BIOPAMA project proposes the creation of regional observatories in Africa and then to connect
the collected information in a more general system, DOPA (Digital Observatory for Protected Areas), managed
jointly with IUCN. Similarly the Observatory of Central African Forests (OFAC) promotes good governance and
sustainable forest management by providing Central African stakeholders within the framework of COMIFAC and
CBFP with a powerful tool for data sharing. The remarkable series of reports The Congo Basin Forests: State of
the Forests is a particularly important output. The EU should continue to support these important initiatives.

Final report
Page 48
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
5.6.2
5.6.2.1
Elephants
Monitoring of illegal killing and surveys of key elephant populations
From the outset in 2001 the MIKE programme, managed by the CITES Secretariat and implemented in collaboration
with IUCN, has been supported by the EU. MIKE and its successor MIKES (see Volume 6, section 1.4.3.1) aim to
inform and improve decision-making on elephants by measuring trends in levels of illegal killing of elephants,
identifying factors associated with those trends, and by building capacity for elephant management in range States.
To date MIKE operates in a large sample of sites spread across elephant range in 30 countries in Africa and 13
countries in Asia. There are some 60 designated MIKE sites in Africa which taken together represent 30 to 40% of
the continental elephant population. Long term support for this initiative is absolutely vital as the information it
provides is critical for informed debate within CITES, including the complicated and contentious issue of a legal
ivory trade. However there are many other sites apart from MIKE sites that need to be surveyed, especially forest
sites in Central Africa (details in Volume 4, section 5.1). The need to support objective and repeatable enumerations
of forest populations is really critical, because without the live elephant numbers the strength of MIKES information
will be greatly reduced.
In order to secure full value for money already invested in or committed to the overall MIKE programme therefore,
it is recommended that the EU secures additional and indefinite funding to this end in line with African Elephant
Summit Urgent Measure 5. Similarly the EU should sustain its support indefinitely for the closely related ETIS
programme also. Without continual monitoring, the objective basis on which to decide what trade-related actions
are needed, where, and how urgently, will be lost.
5.6.2.2
Elephant movements
While powerful arguments can be put forward for ecological research on a very wide range of iconic African species
the case of the elephant is particularly compelling because of the very large areas over which they have to range.
These movements, very often far outside the boundaries of PAs, bring them into greater contact not only with
elephant poaching gangs but also with rural farmers. Human elephant conflict is an issue that alienates local
populations and leads to further killing of elephants. Much effort is spent trying to address the problem of elephant
movements outside PAs, including the concept of secure elephant corridors. Care needs to be taken that potential
corridors are not just drawn on maps without taking wildlifes natural movement and habits into account. It follows
that money on research to identify real travel routes would be well spent before millions are invested in corridor
developments that may fail.
5.6.3
Natural resource use in the informal sector
Recent research coordinated by CIFOR has highlighted the hitherto underappreciated fact that the informal sector
exploiting fuelwood, charcoal, timber and other NTFP (including bushmeat) greatly exceeds that of the formal sector
both in quantity and value. Not only is this a lost resource in economic terms but it also hides the full scale of
natural resource loss and the impact that this ultimately will have on livelihoods. Research and monitoring in relation
to bushmeat harvesting has been alluded to in 5.4 above. CIFOR has identified a number of knowledge gaps and
research priorities for bushmeat25 which fall under three general headings:
25
Varun Swamy and Miguel Pinedo-Vasquez. 2014. Bushmeat harvest in tropical forests. Knowledge base, gaps and research priorities.
Occasional paper 114.CIFOR.

Final report
Page 49
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
5.6.4
Livelihoods: better understanding the many socio-economic and cultural factors that influence patterns of
bushmeat consumption;
Game populations (bushmeat species): better understanding of basic ecology and demographics of
hunted species, particularly understanding the difference between forest specialists and forest-fringe
species and the capacity of secondary forest, fallows and other non-primary habitats to sustain bushmeat
species;
Ecosystem function. Understanding the long-term effects of defaunation on ecosystem function.
Birds
Section 5 of Volume 6 describes the status of African birds. Many species are becoming endangered in parallel to
other wildlife taxa as habitat is degraded and fragmented but some species face specific threats such as poisoning
of vultures and pollution and loss of vital wetlands. Of particular concern to the European public is the decline of
many species that migrate to Africa for the winter months. Such species are dependent not only on the suitability
of winter habitat but also the many stopover and replenishment areas along the migration flyways especially in the
Sahel (Volume 2 Section 2.7.2, Figure 11). Many water birds are threatened by the decline in African wetlands
Tackling these issues requires considerable research and monitoring. Additionally, since birds are mostly diurnal,
quite easily recognised at moderate distance without capture and there are large numbers of avid birdwatchers
available to record data, birds are an ideal taxon for monitoring the overall health of wetlands and other wildlife
ecosystems.
Such assistance could be extended by support to the BirdLife International project coordinating protection of AfroPalearctic migrants through its network of African partner organisations.
Key activities to be undertaken under this programme include:
Improved monitoring and tracking of Afro-Palaearctic migrant birds
Identification of mortality factors and causes
Identification and protection of key wintering and stop-over sites.
Ensuring that reforestation efforts in the Sahel under the Great Green Wall for the Sahara and the Sahel
Initiative and forest zones are designed to be bird-friendly/bio-friendly
Strengthen protection of key wetland sites used by migrant waterbirds under Ramsar Convention and
Convention on Migratory Species initiatives
5.7
AWARENESS RAISING AND COMMUNICATION
High importance is attached to this activity because of the overriding need to evolve a conservation policy that is
embedded in African society (Volume 2, section 5.5). Awareness raising, interpretation of conservation, information
and communication require a substantially greater investment than they have typically received in the past. An
important part of achieving this goal is to provide up-to-date and accurate information on conservation issues,
including natural resources management, biodiversity, African cultural traditions that are related to natural heritage,
eco-tourism, protected areas and the TFCA approach.
Awareness raising and communication will be integral parts of all in situ conservation efforts (section 5.1 of this
volume). Here is addressed communication at the regional and international levels. Broadly speaking the EU should
be looking to give added value to existing and demonstrably effective awareness building and communication
activities. For example, in addition to the kind of information made available through the initiatives described in
5.5.1 (Information Management) it is recommended that the EU renews its support for the important work done by
Final report
Page 50
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
the AfESG and AfRSG which have for years, on limited budgets, provided invaluable services and inputs in terms
of: (i) general coordination; (ii) technical guidance and advice given to CITES, managers across the African elephant
Range States, donors, interested parties and the general public; (iii) maintenance of the African Elephant Database
and periodic publication of the Status Reports and the journal Pachyderm. The EUs previous core support grant to
the AfESG was highly successful and its evaluation showed a high level of delivery against objectives. We therefore
recommend not only that the EU should provide fully comprehensive core funding to the AfESG and AfRSG, but
also to all other Specialist Groups with a remit in Africa. A suitably well-endowed programme should be negotiated
with IUCNs Species Survival Commission.
Other regional / international communication / awareness building activities need to be facilitated. Networked
approaches can be particularly effective. There are for example a number of disparate networked approaches to
wildlife conservation in southern Africa including the CAPE partnership for conservation of the Cape Floristic
Region, and NASCO the Namibian Association of CBNRM Support Organisations.
5.8
FUNDING
It is difficult to give a precise calculation of the level of funding required to have significant impact on the success
of wildlife conservation over this large area. Several sources give guidance and all show that the funding
requirements are very high and considerably greater than what is currently being mobilised.
In the period 1980-1984, Leader-Williams and Albon26 showed that a minimum annual expenditure on protected
area conservation of $230 per km2 was required to prevent a decline in rhino numbers from poaching and a
minimum expenditure of $215 per km2 to prevent a decline in elephant. In todays money the rhino figure would be
about $529 per km2 (425 per km2). The 70 KLCs identified in the current document cover approximately 2.5 million
km2 of which PAs make up about half the territory and so the overall minimum cost of protecting those parks would
be approximately 531 million per year.
Martin (2003)27 used information from Zimbabwes National Parks in 1997 to show that protection and management
needs for small protected areas required higher investment per unit area than larger areas e.g. 1,000km2 needed
US$0.3 million for operating costs, 10,000km2 needed US$1.07 million per yr and 100,000km2 needed $6.6 million
per yr. The operating costs included salaries, field allowances, equipment, fuel for transport and maintenance costs
and included provisions for senior field and research staff.
Allowing for variations in salaries and fuel costs from country to country in the SA region, the operational costs were
estimated by the formula:
2
3
Annual Recurrent Expenditure/km2 in US$, C R 501
A
A
For new parks there was a substantial additional cost of capital requirements which was estimated by the formula:
1
1
Total Capital Expenditure/km2 to set up a new park in US$, CC 5001
A
A
(where area A is expressed in thousands of square kilometres for both formulae).
26
Leader-Williams, N. & Albon, S.D. 1988. Allocation of resources for conservation. Nature 336: 533-535.
Martin, R.B. 2003. Conditions for effective, stable and equitable conservation at the national level in southern Africa. A paper prepared for
Theme 4 at a workshop titled Local Communities, equity and protected areas as part of the preparations for the Vth World Parks Congress
of the IUCN held in Durban, South Africa, September 8 17, 2003.
27

Final report
Page 51
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
The 70 KLCs identified in the current document cover approximately 2.5 million km2 and contain about 300
protected areas. Given that PAs occupy only 50% of this KLC area, they average about 4,200 km each. Using
Martins formulaic method, with costs updated to 2015, the total operational costs for a park of 4200 km 2 is 136
per km2, and for 300 PAs of this size the cost would be 171 million per year.
If all the PAs required rebuilding of their entire infrastructure during a ten year period then there would be an
additional one-off capital cost of 1080 million or 108 million per year bringing the total expenditure for operational
and capital expenditure to 279 million per year.
In 2004 Blom28 calculated that the PA needs (capital and recurrent costs) for the Congo Basin and the Niger delta
alone was in the order of US$1.3 billion over 10 years, i.e. US$ 130 million (104 million) per year for an area
roughly equivalent to the Central African region as defined in Volume 4. Extrapolating up to all of Sub-Saharan
Africa gives a rough total of 416 million per year.
Taken together these three methods of estimating required expenditure indicate that the KLC network would require
from 279 million to 531 million per year for effective management (in 2015) assuming that interventions were
restricted to conventional park management and law enforcement techniques alone. Community programmes in
the areas outside the parks are likely to increase costs by at least 50% which would bring the estimated costing
range up to 418 to 796 million. Taking the median value of 607 million per year, roughly 6 billion will be
required over 10 years.
If we now look at the actual expenditure on PAs we can see that it is considerably less than what is required. In
2002, Cumming estimated that southern African states (with the exception of KwaZulu-Natal) were allocating less
than US$50 per km2 per year to their parks which works out at no more than 25% of the expenditure considered
necessary according to Martins (2003) estimation of about 194 per km2 per year for the total annual requirement
(calculated as 136 per km2 for operational costs and approximately 58 per km2 for capital expenditure assuming
complete re-investment in infrastructure every 10 years).
In 2005 BirdLife International reported that approximately US$300 million per year was spent managing around
1,250 protected areas (covering approximately 9% of the continent) and that this was considerably less than the
US$ 800 million per year considered necessary for an expanded and comprehensively managed protected areas
system29.
While recognizing the approximate nature of these estimations, and the fact that there are certainly significant
differences in costs depending on the countries/regions and the habitat types, they nevertheless suggest that
funding requirements for the proposed strategic approach which centres on 70 KLCs is likely to be at least 400 to
500 million euros per year. At this level EU inputs would have a major impact over the most significant areas and
species on the continent, more than doubling the total global investment in African PA conservation but still only
reaching 60% of estimates for conserving the total PA system of the continent.
Table 4 below provides a very general overview of costs for the proposed strategic approach. Precise cost
estimations will require time consuming detailed site by site analyses taking into account the specificities of the
different sites such as levels of local salaries, the contribution of other donors, the state of development of the sites,
etc. This level of detailed analysis is beyond the scope of this document.
Blom, A. 2004. An estimate of the costs of an effective system of protected areas in the Niger Delta Congo Basin Forest Region.
Biodiversity and Conservation 13: 26612678.
29 BirdLife 2008 State of the Worlds Birds. Indicators for our changing world.
28

Final report
Page 52
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Table 4. Indicative funding levels for proposed strategic approach (Million Euro over 10 years)
Strategic
Component
Where
Type of Intervention
1. In Situ support for KLCs and other important sites

All regions
Long-term integrated support agreements for KLC management, closely coordinated
with other agencies, partners and local communities, covering:
- PA management
- Landscape management for conservation
- Landscape management for livelihoods,;
PPP agreements;
Collaborative agreements with NRM agencies;
Grants for species actions by local and international NGOs;
Support for implementation of action plans of respective IUCN SSC groups;
Special site-based elephant and rhino actions (surveys, monitoring, law enforcement);
2. Sectoral strengthening, reform and coordination
All regions
Reform of NRM agencies;
Training (support to training schools, grants to students, on the job training);
Governance structures for TFCAs;
Mainstreaming conservation into national planning processes;
Regional coordination of conservation actions in WA;
3. Facilitating legal reforms for local ownership and rights to natural resources
Supporting individual national policy and legal reforms;
Support at Regional and Pan African level for policy reform;
4. Dismantling wildlife crime networks
Africa,
Support CITES core functions;
Europe, Asia
Support ICCWC and UNDOC actions;
Establishment of national WENs;
Forensic labs;
Wildlife Security Officers;
Site-based actions (covered under 1 above);
Policy and law reform covered under 3 above);
5. Tackling unsustainable animal protein trade
All regions
Demand reduction - law enforcement, alternative livelihoods and protein sources
(covered under 1 above);
Pilot projects to develop sustainable models for harvesting wild protein for local
consumption;
Creating enabling environment (covered under 3 above);
6. Research and Monitoring
All regions,
Information management (BIOPAMA, Forest Observatoires, Remote sensing,
Europe, Asia
TRAFFIC, ETIS, etc...)
Support for MIKES programme;
Understanding ecological impacts of natural resource harvesting in informal sector
(bushmeat, fishing, fuelwood, charcoal etc)
Understanding trade in informal sector
Other specific research topics (birds, migrations, invasive species, diseases, etc);
7. Awareness raising and communication
All regions,
Support demand reduction initiatives in Africa and Asia
Europe, Asia
Wildlife Conservation envoys
Diplomatic leverage and dialogue with African and Asian partners
UNDOC demand reduction actions
IUCN SSC specialist groups
Site-based conservation education and awareness covered under 1 above.
TOTAL

Final report
Indicative
funding levels
(Million )
6.000
300
100
400
200
300
400
7.700
Page 53
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
APPENDIX 1. LIST OF PROPOSED KEY LANDSCAPES FOR CONSERVATION
Table 5. List of proposed KLCs

Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLC) identified as priorities under the current review
Name of proposed KLC
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Kavango Zambezi TFCA
Countries
(ISO2 code)
AO, NA, BW, ZM,
ZW
Size (km2)
400,000
Ecotype/biome
Miombo woodland
Zambezian flooded
grasslands
Savanna
Great Limpopo TP
MZ, ZA, ZW
87,000
Miombo woodlands
Kgalagadi TFNP
BW, ZA
37,256
Desert
Lower Zambezi Mana

Pools TFCA
ZM, ZW
25,000
Miombo woodlands
Maloti-Drakensberg TFCA
LS, ZA
13,000
Montane

Final report
Protected areas
Liuwa Plains NP (ZM)

Kafue NP (ZM)
Matusadona NP (ZM)
Chizarira NP (ZM)
Hwange NP (ZM)
Naxai Pan NP (BW)
Chobe NP (BW)
Moremi GR (BW)
Okavango Delta WHS (BW)
30 additional reserves
Limpopo NP(Moz)
Kruger NP (SA)
Gonarezhou NP (Zim)
+ 2 additional sanctuaries and further Pas
in phase 2
Gemsbok NP (Bot)
Kalahari Gemsbok NP( SA)
+ 1 additional reserve
Mana Pools NP (WHS),
Sapi and Chewore Safari Areas (Zim)
Lower Zambezi NP (Zam)
Maloti Drakensberg Transboundary World
Heritage Site which comprises Sehlabathebe
National Park (LS) and uKhahlamba
Drakensberg Park (SA)
Special features/significance
Unique Okavango delta wetlands

Wildlife migrations
Large elephant population
Other large mammals
Peace Park
Riverine woodlands
Regional endemism
Unique Kalahari
Gemsbok etc.
Zambezi River
Floodplain
Escarpment
Large mammal populations
Southern mountains
Escarpments
Rich endemic flora
Wetlands
Page 54
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Countries
(ISO2 code)
Size (km2)
Ecotype/biome
Protected areas
Ais-Ais Richtersveld TP
NA, ZA
6,681
Desert, riverine
Lubombo TFCA
MZ, ZA, SZ
4,195
Coastal plain
Chimanimani
MZ, ZW
2,056
Mountains and miombo

woodlands
Malawi / Zambia TFCAs
MW, ZM
4,134
Montane grassland and

wetlands
Maiombe Forest TFCA
AO, CG, DRC
to be defined
Tropical rainforest
Niassa Selous TFCA
MZ, TZ
See Eastern
Africa
Dry forest
Etosha Pan NP
NA
22,750
Desert, salt pans
Dimonika Biosphere Reserve (Congo)

Luki Forest Biosphere Reserve (DRC)
+6 other reserve with little protection in
practice
See under Eastern Africa
Selous Game Reserve (WHS) (Tan)
Mikumi NP (Tan)
Niassa Game Reserve (Moz)
Etosha Pan NP
North Luangwa NP
ZM
4,636
Miombo and Mopane

woodlands
Riverine forest
North Luangwa NP
South Luangwa NP
ZM
9,050
Miombo, Zambezian and

Mopane woodlands
Riverine forest
South Luangwa NP
Central Kalahari GR
BW
52,800
Bushland
Grassland
Central Kalahari GR

Final report
Ais-Ais Hot Spring Game Park (Nam)

Richtersveld NP (SA)
Links 5 TFCA projects
Hlana Royal NP (Swa)
Tembe Elephant Park (SA)
Maputo Special Reserve (Moz)
+12 state PAs and other reserves and
private land
Chimanimani NP (Zim)
Chimanimani NR (Moz)
3 PAs including Nyika National Park Vwaza
and Marsh Wildlife Reserve
San culture
Fish River canyon
High biodiversity
5 Ramar sites
Wetlands, Woodlands
Forest, scenery, wildlife and culture
Montane grassland & flora

Wetlands
Restocking programme
South-western part of Congo
Basin rainforest;
Chimpanzees & lowland gorillas
Wide variety of wildlife habitats

Large mammal populations important for elephant, hippo,
buffalo, sable and wild dog
Migration corridor with village wildlife management areas
Unique salt pans, waterholes,

black rhino, elephant, springbok, gemsbok, etc.
Luangwa River and floodplain
Woodlands, Escarpment
Large mammal populations including black rhino
Bushland and grassland over Kalahari Sands;
Traditional home of Bushmen, or San
Page 55
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Mountain Zebra NP
Countries
(ISO2 code)
ZA
284
Grassland
Dry shrubland
Cangandala-Luando
AO
9,366
Miombo
Cape Floral Region

Protected Areas
ZA
c. 2,000
Fynbos
Cangandala NP
Luando Strict Nature reserve
8+ PAs including Cape Peninsula NP and De
Hoop NR. A process is underway for inscription
of Cape Floral Region PAs as a World
Heritage Site)
Madagascar forests
Southern Africa subtotals
MG
Size (km2)
c. 2,000
655,260
Ecotype/biome
Humid to dry forests

Final report
Protected areas
Mountain Zebra NP
16 (2 World Heritage Sites)

114 (6)
Cape mountain zebra (endangered)

Other large mammals
Last refuge of Giant Sable;
other large mammals of miombo
Cape Floral Region is one of the worlds 18 biodiversity hot
spots
69% of the estimated 9,000 plant species in the region are
endemic
1,435 species identified as threatened
Lemurs and other endemic fauna and flora, World Heritage
Page 56
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Countries (ISO2
code)
Size (km2)
Ecotype/biome
EASTERN AFRICA
Mara-SerengetiNgorongoro
KE, TZ
25,000
Savanna
Greater Virunga*
DRC, RA, UG
15,000
Albertine Rift mid altitude

and Montane forest
East Sudanese savanna;
Wetlands
Rift Valley Lakes WHSNatron
KE, TZ
c. 320
Soda lakes
Greater Kilimanjaro*
KE, TZ
c. 40,000
Montane, forest, savanna

Final report
Protected areas
Maasai Mara NR (KE)

Serengeti WHS/NP (TZ)
Maswa GR (TZ)
Grumeti GR (TZ)
Ikorongo GCA (TZ)
Loliondo GCA (TZ)
Ngorongoro WHS/CA (TZ)
+ Conservancies
+ whole Mara Catchment (mostly KE)
Virunga WHS/NP (DRC)
Volcans NP (RW)
Mgahinga NP (UG)
Queen Elizabeth NP (UG)
Bwindi WHS/NP (UG)
Semuliki NP (UG)
Ruwenzori WHS/NP (UG)
Kibale NP (UG)
Kasyoha-Kitomi FR (UG)
Kalinzu-Maramgambo FR (UG)
Kayumbura WR (UG)
L Bogoria NR (KE)
L Nakuru NP (KE)
L Elementeita NWS (KE)
Soysambu Conservancy (KE)
L Natron (TZ)
+ catchment areas
Kilimanjaro WHS/NP (TZ)
Chyulu NP (KE)
Amboseli NP (KE)
Tsavo West NP (KE)
Tsavo East NP (KE)
South Kitui NR (KE)
Major plains game migration,

large carnivores,
elephant, rhino,
unique crater
Albertine Rift Ecoregion

3 WHS;
Entire mountain gorilla population and important
chimpanzee populations;
Majority of Albertine endemics;
Exceptional tourism potential;
Protection of vital freshwater fish stocks;
Watershed protection;
Serial WHS,
flamingos, water birds,
rhino
Glaciated mountain,
montane endemics,
carnivores,
very important elephant area, rhinos
Page 57
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Countries (ISO2
code)
Size (km2)
Ecotype/biome
Selous-Niassa*
TZ, MZ
96,200
Miombo woodland,
wetlands, savannah
Simien Mountains
Lake Turkana National
Parks WHS
ET
KE
c. 5,000
1,615
Montane
Lake, desert
Greater Mt Kenya
KE
c. 22,000
Montane, forest, savanna
Sudd-Badingilu-BomaGambella
ET, SS
250,000
Savanna, wetland
Bale Mountains
ET
c. 5000
Montane, forest
Lakes Tanganyika
and Malawi*
TZ, BI, DRC, TZ,

ZM and TZ, MW,
MZ
63,000
Freshwater lakes, forests
Eastern Arc forests
KE, TZ
c. 10,000
Highland forest

Final report
Protected areas
Taita Hills FRs (KE)

Mkomazi NP (TZ)
+ conservancies and WMAs
Selous WHS/GR (TZ)
Niassa NR (MZ)
Mikumi NP (TZ)
Udzungwa NP (TZ)
Kilombero GCA (TZ)
+ WMAs, conservancies and hunting blocks
Simien NP
Sibiloi NP
Central Island NP
South Island NP
Turkana GR
Mt Kenya-Lewa Downs WHS/NP/FR
Samburu NR
Buffalo Springs NR
Shaba NR
+ NRT Conservancies
Zeraf GR (SS)
Shambe NP (SS)
Badingilu NP (SS)
Boma NP (SS)
Gambella NP (ET)
+ other satellite PAs
Bale Mts NP
Mena-Angetu FR
+ other PAs
Mahale Mountains NP (TZ)
Gombe Stream NP (TZ)
Sumbu NP (ZM)
Lake Malawi WHS/NP (MW)
Udzungwa NP (TZ)
Migration corridor,
very important elephant area,
buffalo, hippo, possibly rhino and many other animals
Montane endemics, gelada baboon, wolf, ibex

Fossil sites,
desert species
Glaciated mountain,
alpine flora,
forests to arid savanna,
very important elephant area, rhino, Grevys zebra and
other game
Major plains game migration
Alpine flora, montane endemics
Endemic fish fauna,

chimpanzees
Endemics. Primates
Page 58
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Countries (ISO2
code)
Size (km2)
Ecotype/biome
Ruaha-Rungwa-KituloKipengere
TZ
c.25,000
Miombo woodland,
southern highland forest
Moyowosi-Kigosi
TZ
c. 40,000
Miombo woodland,
wetlands
Nyungwe-Kibira*
RW, BI
1,400
Mid-altitude forest
Imatongs-Kidepo*
SS, UG
Lantoto-Garamba*
SS, DRC
Eastern Africa
sub-totals
Highland forest and

savanna
15,000
Northern Congolian
forest savannahh
mosaic
c. 676,000

Final report
Protected areas
Usambara Mts FRs (TZ)
Pare Mts FRs (TZ)
Ruaha NP
Muhezi GR
Kizigo GR
Rungwa GR
Mbomipa WMA
Umemarua WMA
Kitulo NP
Mpanga Kipengere GR
Mt Rungwe NR
Moyowosi GR
Kigosi GR
Burigi GR
Nyungwa NP (RW)
Kibira (BI)
Imatong Central FR (SS)
Agora FR (UG)
Kidepo GR (SS)
Kidepo NP (UG
Garamba WHS/NP (DRC)
Lantoto NP (SS)
+ contiguous Domaines de Chasses
52 (excluding Greater Virunga counted in
Central Africa Region)
Very important elephant area and other game, forest,

montane grassland and endemics
Very important elephant area and other game.

Malagarasi river and swamps
Forest and endemics
Forest and endemics, savanna
very important elephant area, buffalo, hippo and many

other important species
Page 59
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS

WESTERN AFRICA
Desert Niger-Chad-Algeria
Countries (ISO2
code)
Size (km2)
NE, TD, DZ
c. 700,000
Senegal Delta (SN Delta/

Diawling Djoudj)
SN, MR
c. 2,465
Banc d'Arguin NP;

Rserve Intgrale de Cap
Blanc NNR and Dakhla NP
MR, Western
Sahara
c.33,850
WAPOK (W, Arly,

Pendjari, Oti MonduriKeran
BJ, BF, NE, TG
35,000
Comoe Mole
CI, GH
16,500
Niokolo-Badiar-BafingBoucle du Baoul Faleme et Fouta Djallon

region
GN, ML, SN
c. 25,000
Ecotype/biome
Protected areas
Termit & Tin Toumma NNR

Ar and Tnr NP
Addax Sanctuary NNR
Ouadi Rim-Ouad NP
Fada Archei NP
Tassili-n-Ajjer NP
Ahaggar NP
Wetlands
Diawling NP
Djoudj NP- Senegal Delta (WL1)
Saint-Louis MPA
Ndiael Wildlife Reserve
Keur Momar Sarr Forest Reserve
Coastal wetlands, coastline
Banc d'Arguin NP
and coastal waters and desert Rserve Intgrale de Cap Blanc NNR
Dakhla NP
Sahel and subtropical
(22 PAs, the more important:)
grasslands, savannahs, and
W transborder parc
shrublands
Pendjari NP
Arly Faunal Reserve
Oti Monduri Faunal Reserve
Keran NP
Tropical and subtropical
Como NP
Mole NP
shrublands
(9 PAs, the more important)
Niokolo Koba NP
shrublands
Badiar NP
Bafing NP
Boucle du Baoul NP
Falm area NC
Fouta Djalon area NC
Deserts and xeric
shrubland and
tropical/subtropical
grasslands, savanna,
shrublands

Final report
Rare Saharan large mammals: Scimitar Oryx, Dama

Gazelle, Addax, Dorcas Gazelle and Saharan cheetah
Coastal wetlands for migratory and water birds
Coastal wetlands for migratory and water birds; coastline

and coastal waters for critically endangered Mediterranean
monk seal; desert sector
Lion, Wild dog, Cheetah, Leopard, Elephant, Giraffe,

Manatee, Roan antelope, Buffalo
Leopard, Elephant, Roan antelope, Buffalo
Lion, Giant eland, Roan antelope, Buffalo, chimp, elephant
Page 60
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Countries (ISO2
code)
BF, ML
23,900

shrublands
LION KCAs
Nigeria
8,200
Volta Trans -Boundary

Ecosystem Wildlife transboundary corridor
BF, GH
c. 3,000

shrublands - West Sudanian
savanna
Tropical/subtropical
grassland, savannahs,
shrublands
Cross River NP; Korup

NP; Mont Cameroon;
Tamakanda NP; GashakaGumti NP; Tchabel Mbabo
Wildlife Reserve and Faro
NP*
CM, NG
c. 19,100
Mount Cameroon Afro

montane
Ta NP; Nzo Faunal

Reserve; Grebo National
Forest; Sapo NP
LR, CI
16,500

moist broadleaf Forests
Nimba / Nimba Nature WH
GN, CI, LR
3,800

Gola- Lofa - Foya Forest

Reserves Trans-border
Park; Mano NF, Wologizi
NF; Wonegizi NF and
Ziama MAB
SL, LR, GN
6,700


Gourma Elephant- Sahel
Faunal Reserve and Inner
Niger IBA
Size (km2)
Ecotype/biome

Final report
Protected areas
Gourma Elephant NP
Sahel Faunal Reserve
Inner Niger Delta (WL2)
Kainii Lake NP
Yankari NP
Ranch de Gibier and Fort classe de

Nazinga
Hunting zones surrounding Nazinga
Cross River NP
Korup NP
Mont Cameroon
Tamakanda NP
Gashaka-Gumti NP
Tchabel Mbabo Wildlife Reserve
Faro NP
Ta NP
Nzo Faunal Reserve
Grebo National Forest
Sapo NP
3 PAs incl.
Nimba Mountains Strict Nature Reserve
in Guinea and Cte dIvoire
East and West Nimba Nature Reserve in
Liberia
Gola- Lofa - Foya Forest Reserves
Trans-border Park
Mano NF
Wologizi NF
Wonegizi NF
Ziama MAB
Elephant and wetlands of critical importance to the

migrating waterbirds
Lion, Elephant
Elephant, Roan antelope, Buffalo
Afro-montane endemics, Cross river sub species of gorilla
Endemic species (pygmy hippo, chimpanzee, Jentinck's

and zebra duikers), more than 1,300 vascular plant
species recorded); 12 endemic birds
Water tower and unique biodiversity. Rich flora, 317

vertebrate species (duikers, big cats, civets, Chimpanzees,
and several types of viviparous toads), many inverts.
Forest Elephant, Pygmy Hippo Jentink's Duiker, Water

chevrotain, Leopard and thirteen species of primate, one of
the highest densities of chimpanzees in WA and CA Africa
(Loma Mountains)
More than 300 forest dependent birds; more than 25 are
threatened or restricted-range species
Page 61
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Countries (ISO2
code)
SL, GN
7,500

GH
1,800
Tropical & subtropical moist

broadleaf forests
Rio Cacheu Mangroves NC; GW, GN

Lagoas de Cufada NC; Rio
Grande de Buba NC;
Cantanhez Forest NC and
Iles Tristao NC
4,800
Mangroves
Mangroves KCAs
c. 3,100

Outamba-Kilimi NP and
Forest Reserves Kuru Hill
(in Sierra Leone) and
Pinselli and Soya
Forest KCAs: Ankasa-Bia
Conservation Areas
Western Africa subtotals
SL, SN, GH
Size (km2)
Ecotype/biome
Mangroves and coastal
c.832,940

Final report
Protected areas
Outamba-Kilimi NP
Forest Reserves Kuru Hill
Pinselli and Soya NC
Ankasa NP
Bia NP
Rio Cacheu Mangroves NC
Lagoas de Cufada NC
Rio Grande de Buba NC
Cantanhez Forest NC
Iles Tristao NC
Sherbro et Turtles Islands NC Sierra
Leone
Saloum Delta NP-Senegal
Basse Casamance NP-Senegal
Keta Lagoon Ramsar site - Ghana
Songor Lagoon NC-Ghana
Forest elephant, Pygmy hippo, Leopard, nine species of

primates, more than 250 species of birds
Endangered monkeys, amphibians and birds

Manatee
Best developed mangroves in western Africa with

migratory and water birds and endangered species
(Manatee and the Pygmy hippo).
Success story of forests governance
Mosaic of delta rivers, rivers, sandy coast and islands and

islets with mangroves, savannahs and forests and marine
areas.
Breeding ground for turtles and wetlands of critical
importance to the migrating waterbirds
115
Page 62
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Countries (ISO2
code)
Size (km2)
Ecotype/biome
Protected areas
CENTRAL AFRICA
Cross River-TakamandaMt Cameroon-Korup*
CM, NG
See Western
Africa
Mount Cameroon
Afro montane
DRC, RW,UG,
15,000
Albertine Rift
Montane and mid
altitude forest
East Sudanese
savanna
Wetlands
(overlaps with West Africa

Region)
Greater Virunga*
(overlaps with Eastern
Africa Region)
Greater TRIDOM-TNS*
CM, CF, GA, CG,
250,000

Final report
Northwest Congolian
Forest
Northeast Congolian
Forest
Sangha Aquatic
ecoregion
Atlantic Equatorial
Coastal Forest
Cross River NP
Korup NP
Mont Cameroon
Tamakanda NP
Gashaka-Gumti NP
Tchabel Mbabo Wildlife Reserve
Faro NP
Virunga NP (DRC) (WHS)
Volcans NP (Rw)
Mhahinga NP (Ug)
Queen Elizabeth NP (Ug)
Bwindi NP (Ug)
Semiliki NP (Ug)
Ruwenzori NP (Ug)
Kibale NP (Ug)
Kasyoha-Kitomi FR(Ug)
Kalinzu-Maramgambo FR (Ug)
Kyumbura WR (Ug)
Minkb NP (Gab)
Ivindo NP (Gab)
Mwagne NP (Gab)
Lop NP (Gab)
Dja WR (Cam)
Nki NP (Cam)
Boumba Bek NP (Cam)
Lac Lobeke NP (Cam)
Odzala NP (Co)
Nouabal-Ndoki NP (Co)
Ntokou-Pikounda NP (Co)
Dzanga-Ndoki NP (CF)
Dzanga SR (CF)
Lac Tele Community Reserve (Co)
Afro-montane endemics, Cross river sub species of gorilla,
3 WHS
Entire mountain gorilla population and important
chimpanzee populations;
Watershed protection
Vast contiguous block of mainly intact moist forest

WHS X 4;(3 Natural, 1 Cultural and Natural)
Majority of Central Africas remaining forest elephants;
Majority of Central Africas lowland gorillas and
chimpanzees;
Endemic sun tailed monkey (Lop)
Ancient rock art (Lop)
Major portion of Congo basin flora;
Good potential for PPPs with logging and mining sector
and with protected area management specialists;
Page 63
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS

Gamba-MyumbaConkouati*
Countries (ISO2
code)
GA, CG
Size (km2)
12,600
Ecotype/biome
Garamba NP (WHS)
Bili-Uere Hunting Domains
Zemongo R
Southern NP
Gounda-St Floris NP (WHS in danger)
Bamingui-Bangoran NP
Zone Pilote de Sangba
WHS
Until recent conflict good CBNRM results from safari
hunting in Zone Pilote de Sangba buffer zone
Salonga NP (WHS)
WHS
Bonobos, endemic small primates,
Okapi WR (WHS)
Okapi, forest elephant, chimpanzee, forest buffalo, Congo

peacock, Aquatic genet
Kahuzi Biega NP (WHS)
Grauers gorilla, forest elephant, small primates, forest

buffalo
Maiko NP
Tayina Community Reserves
Upemba NP
Kundelungi NP
Grauers gorilla (important site for this species given its

very heterogeneous distribution in eastern DRC) and other
endemics including Okapi, Aquatic genet, Congo peacock
Endemic Congo zebra and other plains mammals
Spectacular landscapes
CD, SS, CF
150,000
Northern Congolian
forest savanna
mosaic;
Sudanian savanna
Gounda-St Floris Bamingui-Bangoran and

surrounding hunting
blocks
Salonga
CF
50,000
Sudanian savanna
CD
33,350
Eastern Congolian
swamp forests,
Central Congolian
lowland forest
Northeastern
Congolian lowland
forest
Northeastern
Congolian lowland
forest,
Albertine Rift Afro
montane forests
Northeastern
Congolian lowal
forest
Miombo woodland
Okapi
CD
13,750
Kahuzi Biega
CD
6,000
Maiko-Tayna
CD
11,000
Kundelungu-Upemba
CD
34,000

Final report
Atlantic Equatorial
Forest
Southern Congolian
Savannah Forest
mosaic
Equatorial coastal
aquatic ecoregion
Garamba-Bili UereChinko-ZemongoSouthern*
Protected areas
Loango NP (Gab)
Moukalaba-Doudu NP (Gab)
Mayumba NP (Gab)
Conkouati NP (Co)
Inland wetlands;
Endangered manatee population;
Forest elephant and apes;
Globally important for marine turtles (4sp), whales and
dolphins (17sp)
High tourist potential;
Protects regionally important marine fish stocks,
Potential for PPP with logging and oil (ISO2 codes)
sectors.
Largest DRC elephant population; hippos, giraffe, lion,
savanna ungulates; bongo, giant eland, giant forest hog,
Page 64
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Countries (ISO2
code)
Size (km2)
Ecotype/biome
Lomako-Yokokala
CD
3,625
Tumba-Lediima
CD
7,500
Itombwe-Kabobo
CD
10,000
Protected areas
Wetlands (Lake
Upemba, Zone
Annexe)
Central Congolian
lowland forests,
Eastern Congolian
swamp forests
Central Congolian
lowland forest
Congolian swamp
forest
Zones Annexe (buffer zone)
Tourism potential
Very important watershed protection
Lomako-Yokokala WR
Bonobo, elephant, sitatunga etc.
Tumba-Lediima NR
Albertine Rift mid

altitude forest
Forest savanna
transition
Itombwe proposed PA
Mitsotshi-Kabobo proposed PA
Luama Hunting Domain
Bonobo
Together with Lac Tele in Congo this is the largest area of
protected Congolian swamp forest
Protection of vital freshwater fish stocks
Chimpanzees one of the few viable chimp populations in
the Albertine Rift
Endemic subspecies of Angolan Colobus and red Colobus
Albertine bird endemics
Bonobo, Okapi, Congo peacock, two newly described
species of small primate
Lomami
CD
10,000
Central Congolian
lowland forests
Lomami (in process of gazettment as a

NP)
Mbam and Djerem
CM
4,500
Forest savanna
transition
Mbam and Djerem NP
Buba Ndjida-Benoue
CM
4,000
Northern Congolian
forest savanna
mosaic,
East Sudanian
savanna
Afromontane forest
Buba Ndjida NP
Benoue NP
Oku Floral Sanctuary
Mt Oku Ijim Ridge
CM
200
Zakouma
TD
23,600
Sahelian acacia
savanna
Zakouma NP
Monts de Cristal-Altos
Nsork*
EG, GA
2,500
Atlantic Forests
Monts de Cristal NP
Altos-Nsork NP

Final report
One of largest remaining savanna elephant populations in

Central Africa;
Gorillas, chimps, forest savanna ecotone species,
Savannah elephants, savanna ungulates (23 antelope
species) including giant eland
Largest extent of, and highest, afromontane forest in

Western Africa, the only Alpine bamboo forest and the only
Podocarpus forest in Western Africa.
Exceptional floral, herpetological, and bird endemicity
Savannah elephant, savanna ungulates
High tourism potential
Pleistocene refuge, with the highes species richness and
diversity of any site in western Central Africa
Mandrills,
Page 65
Volume 1
SYNOPSIS
Pico Grande and Pico

Basile
Obo-Zona Ecologica
Principe
Countries (ISO2
code)
EG
STP
Size (km2)
850
300
Ecotype/biome
Protected areas
Gulf of Guinea
lowland and montane
forest
Gulf of Guinea
lowland and montane
moist forest
Pico Grande NP
Pico Basile NP
Obo NP (Sao Tome)

Zona Ecologica (Principe)
Central Africa sub-totals

(km)
GRAND TOTALS (km)
c. 650,000
61
c. 2,800,000
340
Vital water catchment area

On WHS tentative list
Spectacular forest covered volcanic landscapes with a
large altitudinal range (0 3000m);
5 endemic sub species of primate;
Globally important beaches for marine turtles.
On the WHS Tentative List.
Plant and bird endemics;
Vital for watershed protection.
Landscapes of outstanding scenic interest with high tourist
potential;
* Denotes a TFCA shared by two regions

Final report
Page 66
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
SOUTHERN AFRICA
African elephant standing in the shade of a Sycamore fig on the banks of the Zambezi River.
Photo Martyn Murray
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SPECIAL FEATURES OF THE SOUTHERN REGION .................................................................................................... 9

1.1
1.2
1.2.1
1.2.2
1.2.3
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.7.1
2.7.2
3.1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3
3.1.4
3.1.5
3.1.6
3.1.7
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.3
Subsistence Farming .............................................................................................................................................................. 20

Commercial Farming ............................................................................................................................................................... 22
ALIENATION OF THE MAJORITY POPULATION ............................................................................................................... 22

FENCES AND HABITAT FRAGMENTATION ..................................................................................................................... 22
DEMAND FOR IVORY .................................................................................................................................................. 24
DEMAND FOR RHINO HORN........................................................................................................................................ 24
DRIVERS OF WILDLIFE DECLINE ................................................................................................................................. 26
CONSERVATION OF BIRD AND MAMMAL MIGRATIONS ................................................................................................... 27
Mammals................................................................................................................................................................................. 28
Birds ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 28
REVIEW OF STRATEGIC APPROACHES TO WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ............................................................................ 30

National Parks ......................................................................................................................................................................... 30
Biodiversity Hot Spots ............................................................................................................................................................. 31
Ecoregions and the biogeographic approach ......................................................................................................................... 32
Water basins ........................................................................................................................................................................... 34
Conservation for Development ............................................................................................................................................... 35
Biosphere Reserves ................................................................................................................................................................ 36
Transfrontier Conservation ..................................................................................................................................................... 36
CONSERVATION OF ELEPHANTS AND RHINOS .............................................................................................................. 36

Elephant .................................................................................................................................................................................. 36
Rhino ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 37
PIONEERS OF CONSERVATION ................................................................................................................................... 40
LESSONS LEARNT AND PROMISING APPROACHES ............................................................................................... 40

4.1
4.1.1
4.1.2
4.1.3
4.1.4
4.1.5
4.2
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.2.3
4.2.4
4.2.5
DEMAND FOR LAND ................................................................................................................................................... 20
ONGOING CONSERVATION EFFORTS ....................................................................................................................... 30

3.1
Large mammals ...................................................................................................................................................................... 10

Forests and Woodlands .......................................................................................................................................................... 14
Wetlands and Rivers ............................................................................................................................................................... 18
CONSERVATION CHALLENGES AND ISSUES ........................................................................................................... 20

2.1
CONSERVATION FEATURES OF SOUTHERN AFRICA ........................................................................................................ 9

STATUS OF WILDLIFE IN SOUTHERN AFRICA................................................................................................................ 10
LESSONS LEARNT ..................................................................................................................................................... 41

Relating to Protected Areas .................................................................................................................................................... 41
Trade in Wildlife Products ....................................................................................................................................................... 41
CBNRM and Conservancies ................................................................................................................................................... 42
Wildlife Migration and Disease Management ......................................................................................................................... 42
Networks and Sharing Skills ................................................................................................................................................... 43
PROMISING APPROACHES .......................................................................................................................................... 43

Transfrontier Conservation Areas ........................................................................................................................................... 43
Public-Private Partnerships for Park Management ................................................................................................................. 54
Conservancies ........................................................................................................................................................................ 54
Awareness-Raising ................................................................................................................................................................. 54
Council of Elders for the Environment (CEE) ......................................................................................................................... 56
INDICATIVE CONSERVATION ACTIONS ..................................................................................................................... 57

5.1
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.2
5.2.1
5.2.2
5.3
KEY LANDSCAPES FOR CONSERVATION: (I) TFCAS...................................................................................................... 57

Site Level ................................................................................................................................................................................ 57
Country Level .......................................................................................................................................................................... 64
Regional Level ........................................................................................................................................................................ 65
KEY LANDSCAPES FOR CONSERVATION: (II) INDEPENDENT CONSERVATION AREAS ........................................................ 65

Selection of Independent Conservation Areas (ICAs) as KLCs ............................................................................................. 66
ICAs - Country and Site Level Support ................................................................................................................................... 66
TRAINING .................................................................................................................................................................. 66
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
5.3.1
5.3.2
5.4
5.4.1
5.5
Wildlife Training ...................................................................................................................................................................... 67

Research and Monitoring at Conservation Sites .................................................................................................................... 68
DISMANTLING WILDLIFE TRAFFICKING NETWORKS....................................................................................................... 68

Additional Proposed Action ..................................................................................................................................................... 68
AWARENESS RAISING AND COMMUNICATION ............................................................................................................... 69
ANNEXES ................................................................................................................................................................................ 70
ANNEX A. REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................................................... 70
List of figures
Figure 1. Physical features of Southern Africa based on imagery collected by NASAs MODIS satellite in February 2004
during the rainy season ............................................................................................................................................................ 10
Figure 2. Indices for population abundance of 69 species of large mammal within 78 protected areas: A, eastern Africa; B,
western Africa and C, southern Africa. ..................................................................................................................................... 11
Figure 3. White Rhino and Black Rhino population trends 1991-2012 with fitted polynomial trend line Source: IUCN SSC
AfRSG data. ............................................................................................................................................................................. 13
Figure 4. Map of the major ecotypes of Southern Africa .......................................................................................................... 15
Figure 5. Distribution of miombo woodlands in southern Africa ............................................................................................... 16
Figure 6. Distribution of Zambezian flooded grasslands .......................................................................................................... 19
Figure 7. Growth of rural settlement south of Lake Kariba (Cumming 2008) ........................................................................... 21
Figure 8. Fences in central Namibia; note Tswanaland rectangle in Kalahari ......................................................................... 23
Figure 9. The rise in poaching of rhino in South Africa. ........................................................................................................... 25
Figure 10. Poaching of Rhino in South Africa from 2010 2014. ............................................................................................ 25
Figure 11. Approximate flyways to Kruger NP which is celebrated for its migrant birds .......................................................... 29
Figure 12. The national parks of southern Africa, December 2013 .......................................................................................... 31
Figure 13. Ecoregions of Sub-Saharan Africa .......................................................................................................................... 33
Figure 14. Map of AWF heartlands and priority ecoregions. Class 1 -ecoregions of global biological significance which are
highly threatened; Class V - ecoregions of national biological significance which are stable and intact. ..... Erreur ! Signet non
dfini.
Figure 15. The major river basins of southern Africa ............................................................................................................... 34
Figure 16. Regional trends with 95% confidence intervals of elephant poaching levels in different regions of Africa. ............ 37
Figure 17. Increase in arrests for poaching rhino in South Africa ............................................................................................ 38
Figure 18. Relationship between the expenditure on parks and effectiveness of rhino conservation ...................................... 39
Figure 19. Expenditure on parks in southern African countries compared with that in the USA in 1980 and KwaZulu-Natal
(KZN) in 1986 (Cumming 2004) ............................................................................................................................................... 40
Figure 20. Location of eighteen TFCAs in SADC, May 2013 ................................................................................................... 44
Figure 21. Map of transfrontier conservation areas and World Heritage Sites in Africa ........................................................... 46
Figure 22. The Kavango Zambezi TFCA (from Peace Parks Foundation) ............................................................................... 51
Figure 23. Location of Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLC) identified as priorities under the current review ................... 62
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
List of tables
Table 1. Numbers of white and black rhinos in Africa as of 31 Dec 2012 by country and subspecies .................................... 13
Table 2. Forest cover loss in southern Africa: 1990-2000 ........................................................................................................ 17
Table 3. Human Population Trends in Southern Africa ............................................................................................................ 21
Table 4. Reported numbers of white and black rhinos poached in Africa from 1 Jan 2006 to 30 June 2014 .......................... 24
Table 5. Drivers of Wildlife Decline in Southern Africa ............................................................................................................. 27
Table 6. Strategic Approaches to Nature Conservation with some of their protagonists ...................................................... 30
Table 7. First National Parks in Africa ...................................................................................................................................... 31
Table 8. Size and Key Features of TFCAs in Southern Africa including protected areas within TFCAs and land-uses
outside of protected areas but within TFCAs (from Cumming 2011, Cumming et al 2013). .................................................... 44
Table 9. Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLC) identified as priorities under the current review ........................................ 59
List of boxes
Box 1. Southern Africa Conservation in a Nutshell .................................................................................................................... 9
Box 2. Fences, Migration and Livestock Diseases ................................................................................................................... 23
Box 3. Southern Africa Pioneers of Conservation ................................................................................................................. 40
Box 4. Ongoing TFCA support in Southern Africa potential for synergies ............................................................................ 49
Box 5. Vision for African Wildlife .............................................................................................................................................. 55
Box 6. Criteria for identifying Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLC) ................................................................................... 58
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
ACRONYMS
ADMADE
AEAP
AEWA
AfRSG
ARP
AU
AWF
BIOPAMA
CAMPFIRE
CAPE
CAR
CBD
CBNRM
CBO
CBT
CC
CEE
CERU
CI
CITES
CMS
DNA
DRC
EAC
ECOWAS
EU
FAO
FLEGT
GDP
GIS
GIZ
GPS
GMA
IBA
ICA
IFAW
IRDNC
IUCN
KAZA
KfW
LIFE/LIFE+
MAB
MDG
MIKE
MIKES
MIST
Administrative Management Design

African Elephant Action Plan
African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbird Agreement
IUCN African Rhino Specialist Group
African Rhino Programme
African Union
African Wildlife Foundation
Biodiversity and Protected Areas Management
Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources
Cape Action for People
Community Based Organisation
Commodity Based Trade
Climate Change
Council of Elders for the Environment
Conservation Ecology Research Unit
Convention on Migratory Species
Deoxyribonucleic acid
European Union
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade
Gross Domestic Production
Geographical Information System
Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit
Global PositioningSystem
Game Management Area
Important Bird Area
Independent Conservation Area
Integrated Rural Development and Nature Conservation
International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Kavango Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area
Kreditanstalt fr Wiederaufbau - Development Bank
EU funding instrument for the environment
Man and the Biosphere Programme
Millenium Development Goal
Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Endangered Species
Management Information System
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
MODIS
MOU
MTRE
NASA
NASCO
NCA
NEPAD
NGO
NP
NRMP
NTFP
OIE
PES
PIKE
PPF
PPP
RDC
REDD/REDD+
RhoDIS
SA
SADC
SAWC
SAWEN
SMART
SSC
SULi
TAHC
TFCA
TRAFFIC
UN
UNESCO
UNEP
US/ USAID
VGL
WCS
WEN
WCMC
WH
WTO
WWF
Moderate-resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer

Memorandum of Understanding
Masters in Tropical Resource Ecology
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Namibian Association of CBNRM Support Organisations
Northern Conservation Area
New Partnership for Africa's Development
National Park
Natural Resources Management Project
Non-timber forest products
World Organisation for Animal Health
Payment for Ecological Services
Proportion of Illegally Killed Elephants
Peace Parks Foundation
Public Private Partnerships
Rural District Council
Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation/REDD+
Rhino DNA Index System
South Africa
Southern African Wildlife College
Southern African Wildlife Enforcement Network
Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool
Sustainable Use and Livelihoods Specialist Group
Terrestrial Animal Health Code
Transfrontier Conservation Area
Trade Records Analysis of Fauna and Flora in Commerce
United Nations
United Nations Environmental Program
United States/ US Agency for International Development
Veterinary Genetics Laboratory
UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre
World Heritage
World Trade Organisation
See also the list of institutions working in Southern Africa (Annex B)
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The strategy is organised into six chapters: (0) the overall aim of the EU Strategic Approach to Wildlife Conservation
in Africa with some guidance on what it covers and what it omits; (1) an introduction to the wildlife of southern
Africa; (2) an introduction to the main conservation threats and to the drivers of wildlife decline in the region; (3) a
review of conservation approaches over the past half century in southern Africa with a subsection on the
conservation of elephant and rhino; (4) lessons learnt with regard to some key conservation issues of the region
(protected area management, wildlife trade, community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) and
livestock disease management) and an introduction to five promising approaches to conservation (transfrontier
conservation, public-private partnerships for protected area management, conservancies, awareness-raising and
councils of elders for the environment); (5) a plan of indicative conservation actions to achieve long-term wildlife
conservation in the region.
Chapter (0) sets out the recommended objective for the EU launch of a major new initiative in conservation: A full
suite of viable populations of the magnificent wildlife heritage throughout Sub-Saharan Africa maintained in healthy,
functioning and resilient ecosystems supporting livelihoods and human development. It should be noted that this
strategy does not aim directly at the conservation of biodiversity which would include, for instance, the protection
of many small areas of outstanding importance to particular taxa with restricted distribution. This wildlife strategy is
intended for the conservation of large functioning ecosystems with key African wildlife populations; in this way it
makes an important contribution to the wider goal of biodiversity conservation.
Chapter (1) describes the main natural habitats and ecosystems of southern Africa and the status of elephant, rhino
and other large mammals in the region which is uneven but favourable overall by comparison to other regions. It
describes the miombo woodlands and forests, rivers, flooded grasslands, floodplains and other wetlands of the
region and their current status.
Chapter (2) reviews long-term threats to the regions wildlife including the rising demand for land (arising from the
growth in human population), the fencing of grasslands, and the demand for ivory and rhino horn. The different
threats bringing about wildlife decline are categorised as (a) proximate drivers loss of habitat, illegal killing, failure
of protected areas, (b) ultimate drivers human population growth, international demand for resources, and climate
change, and (c) social drivers rural poverty, political indifference, agricultural subsidies, underfunding of protected
areas. Proximate drivers are where much conservation work is currently focussed; ultimate drivers are not
amenable to change; social drivers are difficult to change but key to the long-term future of African wildlife. One of
the main social drivers is the lack of a conservation policy that is embedded in African society. This section also
introduces mammal migrations and the Afro-Palaearctic bird migrations that occur in the region and their special
conservation requirements.
Chapter (3) introduces seven strategic approaches to conservation that have been applied in southern Africa over
the past half century or more: (1) national parks, (2) biodiversity hotspots, (3) ecoregions, (4) water basins, (5)
conservation for development, (6) biosphere reserves and (7) transfrontier conservation. It illustrates each of these
approaches with maps. There is no single approach which is superior to the others, rather they complement one
another and each makes a contribution to conserving wildlife. This chapter goes on to look at conservation issues
regarding elephants and rhinos. Southern Africa has been relatively successful at conserving these species
compared to the rest of the continent but poaching is rising rapidly. The chapter concludes by discussing the
pioneering role that southern Africa has played in developing novel approaches to conservation, some of which
have great importance in the global conservation movement.
Chapter (4) looks at lessons learnt in five areas. (1) Protected Areas protected areas have withstood the test of
time and remain the single most important wildlife conservation tool. Their conservation success, however, is
closely dependent on the level of financial investment in park management which is generally low. Two positive
new influences on protected area conservation are the transfrontier approach and public-private partnerships in
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
park management. (2) Trade in Wildlife Products Wildlife conservation can be assisted by its sustainable use
especially in areas surrounding parks but it requires close monitoring and tight management. There is a putative
link between legal and illegal trade in ivory and rhino horn that is particularly problematic. (3) CBNRM and
Conservancies Private and communal conservancies can bring substantial benefits to wildlife conservation and
local economies if wildlife rights are devolved. (4) Wildlife Migration and Livestock Disease Management Current
agreements on trade in beef have proved damaging to wildlife migration. If the Commodity Based Trade approach
to beef exports is sanctioned, it will enable many veterinary cordon fences in Botswana and elsewhere to be
lowered. This will allow wildlife migrations to be reinstated. (5) Networks and Conservation A number of networked
approaches to conservation in the region, including the CAPE partnership and the Namibian Association of CBNRM
Support Organisations, have proved especially successful. Other examples are found in wildlife law enforcement
which is assisted by the Southern African Wildlife Enforcement Network and, with regard to rhino, by the SADC
Rhino Management Group.
Chapter (4) also reviews five promising approaches to conservation in the region. The first of these is transfrontier
conservation. A brief history of transfrontier conservation areas (TFCAs) is given including the important role of
SADC. One of the key advantages of the transfrontier approach is the opportunity it provides to plan and undertake
conservation and development at the scale of the entire ecosystem. Five tiers of management are recognised: (a)
landscape management for migration (covering protected and non-protected parts of the landscape, and including
issues such as livestock disease management) this tier enables wildlife movement and dispersal across the
ecosystem and creates the potential for old migratory routes to be re-established; (b) landscape management for
livelihoods which enables economic growth from wildlife-based tourism and hunting within TFCAs; (c) water basin
management which links TFCAs to River Basin Management Plans; (d) protected areas management which
improves park management by ploughing back revenue from increased tourism; and (f) promotion of culture and
peace which benefits from the new opportunities for cooperation and promotion of economic goods and services.
The importance of governance issues in successful TFCA development is emphasized and the exceptional
importance of KAZA, the Kavango Zambezi TFCA, is highlighted. The central role of SADC in developing the TFCA
network is described together with the assistance afforded by its European development partners. The other four
promising approaches mentioned are public-private partnerships for park management, wildlife conservancies,
awareness-raising, and the formation of councils of elders for the environment.
Chapter (5) outlines a plan for achieving long-term wildlife conservation in southern Africa. The strategic plan is
based on a small number of Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLCs). These areas will have the capacity to sustain
viable populations of large African wildlife species within functioning ecosystems under the greatly increasing
external pressure on land that is anticipated this century. At the same time, they will act as foci in developing the
rural economy through sustainable use of natural resources. A suitable network of KLCs will protect the well-known
wildlife species of the region and stimulate economic growth. TFCAs are a central part of this strategic approach.
Those TFCAs selected as KLCs will be developed at Site Level with an emphasis on strengthening governance,
management and awareness-raising. They will be supported at the Country Level with an emphasis on policy
reform, institutional strengthening and awareness-raising. This will include expansion of the current national and
regional facilities for mid-level and senior-level training in wildlife management. The selected TFCAs will be further
supported at the Regional Level with an emphasis on key reforms in national laws to give landholders and rural
communities the right to manage wildlife and woodlands for their own benefit. A number of Independent
Conservation Areas (ICAs) that protect intact wildlife ecosystems entirely within one country will also be selected
as KLCs by an expert regional panel. In support of this process, an indicative list of 20 KLCs is presented in this
section. In addition to the KLC approach to conservation and the dismantling of wildlife trafficking networks,
awareness-raising is prioritised. As part of the recommended awareness-raising programme, a communication
strategy will furnish materials and information on wildlife conservation to a range of targeted audiences.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
SPECIAL FEATURES OF THE SOUTHERN REGION
The strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Southern Africa covers ten countries all of which are member
states of SADC. They are Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland,
Zambia and Zimbabwe. A strategy for Madagascar has been prepared separately (Volume 6). The Southern African
strategic approach provides appropriate responses to counter immediate threats to wildlife. It also presents a guide
to the long-term conservation of wildlife in the region which is founded on two overarching principles ecosystem
conservation and sustainable use of natural resources. Ecosystem conservation recognises the need for
ecosystem-scale conservation in order to conserve viable populations of the larger wildlife species over the long
term. This has particular cogency because of the regional trend towards increasing isolation of the remaining areas
of natural habitat. Ecosystem-scale conservation is also needed to protect the ecological processes, such as
migration and ecological succession, which underscore dynamic African wildlife areas. Regarding natural
resources, the natural capital inherent within functioning ecosystems is crucial to the economic growth of
surrounding communities. This strategy seeks to integrate sustainable use of natural resources with ecosystem
conservation to provide synergy between wildlife conservation and rural development. The strategic approach
outlines a process for delivering effective land-use planning to meet these objectives through partnerships between
communities, the private sector and government.
1.1
CONSERVATION FEATURES OF SOUTHERN AFRICA

Box 1. Southern Africa Conservation in a Nutshell1
Southern Africa has great regional diversity in

climate, geomorphology and biodiversity (Figure
1). For the most part its conservation issues
transcend national boundaries, however, the
region does have some notable endemic species
with restricted ranges (Box 1). Fynbos shrubland
forms a major element of the Cape Floristic
Region which is one of the six recognised floral
kingdoms of the world with some 9000 vascular
plant species of which 69% are endemic to South
Africa. Another centre of endemism is the Namib
Desert which has been arid for 55 million years,
and is considered to be the oldest desert in the
world. It extends along the coast of Namibia
merging with the Kaokoveld Desert in Angola and
the Karoo Desert in South Africa which has the
worlds richest flora of succulent plants. The
eastern coast of southern Africa below the Great
Escarpment is another important centre of plant
endemism. Lake Malawi is a further site wellknown for its high endemism of fish and molluscs.
Southern Africa
Conservation in a Nutshell
Wealthiest and most developed region of SubSaharan Africa

Lowland rainforest in Madagascar
Ancient coastal desert the Namib which may be
the oldest desert in the world
Cape Floristic Region one of 6 floral kingdoms of
the world
Many regional endemics
Large areas of intact dry forest and savanna
More elephants than the rest of Africa together
More rhino than the rest of Africa together
14.8% of land protected (SADC 2006)
Many parks severely underfunded
Land under pressure from expanding rural
population
Southern Africa has enormous areas of dry Miombo woodland lying north of the Limpopo River which have
outstanding importance for conservation. The woodlands are occupied by some of the larger mammals of Africa
such as elephant, black rhinoceros, hippo, giraffe, buffalo and zebra, which can utilise the fibrous plant material
References located within boxes can be found in Annex A
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
found on the nutrient-poor soils. Due to the vast size of the ecoregion, its overall importance for such species is
very high even although animal densities are usually low. Consequently about half the elephants and half of the
rhinos left in Africa are found there. Seasonal movements of these animals take advantage of temporal and spatial
variability in surface water and plant nutrients. Consequently, migration and seasonal dispersal of large mammals
are characteristics features of the Miombo.
Figure 1. Physical features of Southern Africa based on imagery collected by NASAs MODIS satellite in February 2004 during
the rainy season
The Okavango Delta is visible towards the middle of the image and in the centre of the subcontinent. Its fingers point southeast towards the
pale patch of Makgadikgadi and neighbouring pans. Etosha Pan further west is shown in dark blue possibly indicating heavy rain immediately
preceding the MODIS scan. Further west still is the coastal Namib Desert. North of the Okavango Delta, a narrow green belt running north
to south is the Barotse Floodplain of the Zambezi River. Further northeast and lying to the west of the south end of Lake Tanganyika is the
small marshy Lake Mweru Wantipa and west again the larger Lake Mweru which drains to the Atlantic Ocean via the Congo River. Further
east is the long finger of Lake Malawi which drains through the Shire and Zambezi Rivers to the Indian Ocean. In the southeast of the region,
the Maloti-Drakensberg Mountains are visible in the centre of a semicircle of mountain ranges roughly paralleling South Africa's coastline.
The humid forests of Madagascars east coast show up clearly as a belt of green.
1.2
1.2.1
STATUS OF WILDLIFE IN SOUTHERN AFRICA

Large mammals
The overall trend in Africa is for a decline in the number of animals not only outside PAs but also inside them. This
has not been adequately studied but reflects a combination of encroachment, illegal hunting and the reduction in
availability of suitable habitat surrounding PAs from human settlement and development. The latter may be
especially significant where former dry season refuges or wet season dispersal zones are entirely removed.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Nevertheless, the assembly of large mammal species in southern Africa is spectacular. For example, the region
supports between 200 000 to 250 000 elephants whilst leopard, buffalo, kudu, zebra and other antelopes also occur
in large numbers. Although cheetah and rhino are present in relatively small numbers, nevertheless the region has
a high proportion of the worlds population of both species. A comparison of trends in three regions shows the
relative success of conservation in southern Africa (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Indices for population abundance of 69 species of large mammal within 78 protected areas: A, eastern Africa; B,
western Africa and C, southern Africa2.
As can be seen, the only region of Africa showing population increases of wildlife is in the south. Partly this is due
to the expansion of protection to new areas such as in southeast Angola where elephant numbers increased rapidly
in the early 2000s and expanded their range into reserves lying on the northern boundary of the Caprivi Strip3. Also
protected areas have tended to be relatively well funded in southern Africa and are often managed specifically for
their large mammals, and primarily for tourism. It is apparent that PAs in Africa are successful in maintaining large
mammal populations if the management is appropriate and has sufficient resources. Conversely, western African
PAs which show the greatest population declines in this study have less financial and personnel resources available
and their large mammals are threatened by hunting for bushmeat.
Craigie, I.D. et al. 2010. Large mammal population declines in Africas protected areas. Biological Conservation 143: 2221-2228.
Chase, M.J & Griffin, C.R. (2011). Elephants of south-east Angola in war and peace: their decline, re-colonization and recent status. African
Journal of Ecology, 49(3), 353-361.
2
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Above: Territorial blue wildebeest pawing ground. Below: Khama (red) hartebeest. Both photos in Etosha
National Park, Namibia Martyn Murray
A number of charismatic wild animals are threatened or endangered in the southern region. The proportion of
threatened wild mammal species ranges from 2.6% in Zimbabwe to 13% in South Africa. However, the figures are
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
on the increase in the region as a whole. In terms of species extinction, the blue antelope and the quagga are the
only mammalian species known to have become extinct in southern Africa in recent times. On the other hand,
species such as the white and black rhino, black wildebeest, crowned crane, velvet gecko and the cape mountain
zebra have come critically close to disappearing altogether. Decisive conservation action has allowed their
populations to recover, but increasing poaching of rhino places both species at risk once again. Figure 3 shows the
trend in estimated numbers of both rhino species in the wild since 1992 and Table 1 gives the final continental rhino
number estimates by country and subspecies for Africa (as of 31 December 2012).
Figure 3. White Rhino and Black Rhino population trends 1991-2012 with fitted polynomial trend line Source: IUCN SSC AfRSG
data.
Table 1. Numbers of white and black rhinos in Africa as of 31 Dec 2012 by country and subspecies
Species
Subspecies
Angola
Botswana
Malawi
Mozambique
Namibia
South Africa
Swaziland
Zambia
Zimbabwe
S. Sub-region
Kenya
Tanzania
Uganda
E. Sub-region
ALL
Source: AfRSG
White Rhino Ceratotherium simum (WR)

C.s.cottoni
C.s.simum
Total WR
Northern
Southern
185
185
1?
524
18,933
84
10
284
20,021
390
1?
524
18,933
84
10
284
20,021
394
4
4
14
404
20,425
14
408
20,429
Black Rhino Diceros bicornis (BR)

D.b.bicornis
D.b.michaeli D.b.minor
SouthWestern Eastern
SouthCentral
1
9
26
0?
1,750
208
68
1,792
18
27
424
1,959
68
2,296
631
100
27
0
1,959
731
799
27
2,323
Total BR
1
9
26
0
1,750
2,068
18
27
424
4,323
631
127
758
5,081
African wild dogs are also endangered in the region, surviving only in large protected areas. Similarly, the bearded
vulture has undergone serious population declines and is now restricted to the Drakensberg range of South Africa
and Lesotho.
Most extant antelope species in Southern and South-central Africa still occur in substantial populations, at least
locally. However certain subspecies, including giant sable (Hippotragus niger ssp. variani), are at danger of
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
extinction in the region4. The long-term persistence of these species within the region will require effective
conservation of the ecosystems in which they occur. Conservation areas within southern Africa of outstanding
international importance for the conservation of antelope communities are listed by East5. The most appropriate
and feasible strategy for antelope conservation will depend on local circumstances but in general it will combine
strict protection of core conservation areas with consumptive and non-consumptive utilisation of antelopes by rural
populations as both play important roles in the development of successful long-term conservation strategies in
southern Africa.
1.2.2
Forests and Woodlands
1.2.2.1
Overview
Forests and woodlands of Southern Africa cover some 39% of the total land area. This ranges from 0.5% in Lesotho
to 56% in Angola. Much of the rest of the region contains savanna, arid or semi-arid scrub (Figure 4). The forest
and woodland types in the region can be summarized as follows.
i) Tropical forests. These are found in parts of Angola and the Congo basin. They harbour a diverse
assemblage of plants and animals with about 400 mammal species, more than 1 000 bird species and over
10 000 plant species of which some 3 000 are endemic to the region.
ii) Afromontane forests. They are found in the high altitude and high rainfall areas of Malawi, Mozambique,
Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe and South Africa. The tree species, that include Podocarpus, are similar to
those found in tropical rainforests. However, one of the few differences with the latter is the occurrence of tree
ferns and conifers.
iii) Mangrove forests. These are found along the coastline of Mozambique and Angola and the north east
coast of South Africa. Tanzania, Namibia and Mauritius also have some Mangrove forests. These forests play
a very important protective function to the coastline and are also key ecosystems for the breeding of marine
fisheries.
iv) Zambezi teak forests. They are sometimes called the Kalahari forests. They occur in parts of Zimbabwe,
Zambia, Botswana, Namibia and Angola. The dominant tree species is Baikeaea plurijuga. This forest type
has a long history of management for commercial timber exploitation, wildlife utilization, cattle grazing and
water catchment.
v) Miombo woodlands. They are the most extensive woody vegetation type in areas north of the Limpopo
river. Dominant tree species are Brachystegia, Julbenardia and Isoberlinia. Thickets of miombo hold little
merchantable timber using current technologies and market preferences. Miombo covers an estimated 3.6
million square kilometres in central and southern Africa. These miombo savanna woodlands are found in
parts of eleven countries (Angola, Botswana, Democratic Republic of Congo, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia,
South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe). Some of the woodlands, especially in Zimbabwe,
Malawi and Tanzania, have been converted into intensive agricultural areas.
vi) Mopane woodlands. They are found in the drier and lower lying parts of Zimbabwe, Zambia, Namibia,
Angola, Botswana, South Africa, Mozambique and Malawi. Where Colophospermum mopane is dominant,
4
East R. 1989a. Chapter 13: Summary of Regional Status of Antelopes in Southern and South-Central Africa. In: Antelopes Global Survey
and Regional Action Plans, Part 2. Southern and South-Central Africa. pp 76-79. IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group.
See also IUCN Red List 2014.
5 East R. 1989b. Chapter 14: R. Status of Antelope Communities and Identification of Regional Conservation Priorities. In: Antelopes Global
Survey and Regional Action Plans, Part 2. Southern and South-Central Africa. pp 80-86. IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
the woodland assumes economic importance especially as a source of browse for both domestic and wild
animals. In addition, the trees coppicing abilities render the woodlands economically important for subsistence
wood fuel, construction poles and mopane worms.
Figure 4. Map of the major ecotypes of Southern Africa
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
1.2.2.2
Miombo
Miombo woodlands are the most extensive woody vegetation type of southern Africa covering over 3.8 million km2
in 11 countries Angola, Botswana, Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South
Africa, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe. The ecoregion is divided into six vegetation types as shown in Figure 4:
Wet miombo woodland, Dry miombo woodland, Burkea - Terminalia open woodland, Baikiaea woodland, Mopane
woodland/shrubland and Acacia - Combretum woodland. In general there is a shift towards wet miombo types as
one goes northwards.
Figure 5. Distribution of miombo woodlands in southern Africa
The human population density over much of the ecoregion is still low and patchy in comparison with other savanna
regions of Africa under similar climatic conditions, although the situation is changing. The density of livestock is
also relatively low, particularly in wetter areas where tsetse fly and trypanosomiasis remain prevalent. The
ecoregion is important for the abundance of woodland products: wood for building, fuel wood, fibre and forest foods
such as bushmeat, fungi, honey and edible insects.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
The Miombo Ecoregion is of outstanding importance to conservation. It incorporates the catchment basins for the
main rivers of southern Africa including the Zambezi, Kavango and Congo, also for two of the African Great Lakes
(Lake Malawi/Niassa and Lake Tanganyika), and the Okavango Delta. Miombo woodlands are occupied by some
of the most charismatic larger mammals of Africa such as elephant, black rhinoceros, hippo, giraffe, buffalo and
zebra, which can utilise the fibrous plant material found on the nutrient-poor soils. Due to the vast size of the
ecoregion, its overall importance for such species is very high even although animal densities are usually low.
Consequently about half the elephants and half of the rhinos left in Africa are found there. The vast size of the
reason brings its own conservation challenges as it crosses national boundaries of 11 countries each with their own
peculiarities of policy and legislation. The birdlife in the ecoregion is particularly rich in species although the rates
of endemism are low. On the other hand, the isolation of Lake Malawi and Lake Tanganyika has given rise to great
diversification of freshwater fish and mollusc with many endemics.
Between 1990 and 2000, the regions indigenous forests were being lost at an average rate of 0.6% per annum.
The figure ranged from 0.1% in South Africa to 2.2% in Malawi (Table 2).
Table 2. Forest cover loss in southern Africa: 1990-2000
Country
Angola
Botswana
DRC
Lesotho
Malawi
Forest cover in 1990 (000ha)

70 998
13 611
Forest cover in 2000 (000ha)

69 756
12 427
Annual change (%)

-0.2
-0.9
140 531
135 207
-0.4
14
14
NS
3 269
2 562
-2.2
31 238
30 601
-0.2
Namibia
8 774
8 040
-0.8
South Africa
8 997
8 917
-0.1
Mozambique
Swaziland
464
522
+1.3
Tanzania
39 724
38 811
-0.2
Zambia
39 755
31 246
-2.1
Zimbabwe
22 239
19 040
-1.4
379 614
357 143
-0.6
Total
Source: FAO (2001).
Three features of the miombo should be born in mind when considering conservation strategy. Firstly, a key
challenge of the ecoregion is to conserve the large-mammal populations with their distinctive seasonal movements
and migrations. Conserving elephants with their requirement for space, potential for human-wildlife conflict, capacity
for causing woodland-habitat change, and attraction for ivory poachers, is perhaps the greatest challenge of all.
Secondly, miombo is a high-carbon landscape, with an abundance of woody biomass. This applies even more to
the wet miombo which has higher density of woody biomass and correspondingly greater capacity to store carbon
than dry miombo. This presents opportunities for conserving areas of wet miombo for carbon storage.
Thirdly, the miombo woodlands cover most of the headwaters in the ecoregion where deep deposits of Kalahari
Sands play a storage role by slow release of water. Flooded grasslands, swamps and dambos within the miombo
have a similar hydrological role. These water retention features create long-distance linkages by feeding water to
downstream areas long into the dry season. Conservation of wet miombo areas can serve the dual ecological
functions of watershed protection and carbon storage, with significant regional and global benefits. It also protects
the albedo effects of extensive woodland canopy cover, which maintains the regional climate.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
1.2.3
1.2.3.1
Wetlands and Rivers

Flooded Grasslands
Photo Roger Brown <http://artofthewildrogerbrown.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/flying-around-okavango-delta.html>
The Okavango Delta of Botswana
The flooded grasslands are a uniquely important habitat for conservation in southern Africa which provides food
and water for wildlife throughout the year. Embedded mostly within the miombo and mopane woodlands of the
Central African Plateau, Zambezian flooded grasslands are recognised as an ecoregion with a discontinuous
distribution between northern Botswana and northern Tanzania (Figure 6). Large populations of waterbirds gather
at these wetlands during the rainy season whilst numerous herd animals utilise the habitat in dry months when it
can form a focus for species undergoing long-distance migrations. The population of Red lechwe exceeds 20,000
in Moremi Game Reserve, Botswana and that of Kafue lechwe exceeds 35,000 in Lochinvar National Park, Zambia.
The largest remaining population of puku is found in the Kilombero Valley in Tanzania and more than 20,000 Cape
buffalo occur in the Moyowosi delta of northwestern Tanzania. Many of the ungulates that inhabit this ecoregion
move seasonally through the floodplain in response to the fluctuating water levels. Tsessebe, which are mostly
restricted to seasonally flooded grasslands, are known to follow the receding waters in the dry season and to retreat
to higher ground when the waters rise. Wildebeest and oribi also frequent extensive floodplains and grasslands,
although the latter favor less waterlogged areas such as termitaries, where herbs and woody growth provide food
and cover. Waterbuck, puku, southern reedbuck, and sitatunga are also common inhabitants of the floodplains,
although these species tend to prefer the reed beds or more wooded vegetation on the margins of the floodplains.
Greater kudu, hartebeest, steenbok, sable and roan antelope are found in fewer numbers, generally preferring the
woodland margins of inundated grasslands. Other herbivores attracted to these pastures include elephant,
Burchell's zebra and eland. Hippopotamus is found in almost all of the prominent floodplains.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Figure 6. Distribution of Zambezian flooded grasslands6
The more extensive floodplains have historically provided important habitat for humans. For example, the Lozi
people have traditionally occupied the Barotse floodplains and their livelihoods have been closely linked to the
seasonal flooding of the area. The Kafue Flats have been used by the Tonga people for cattle rearing and limited
cultivation. However, much of the area comprising this ecoregion falls into areas affected by tsetse flies, vectors of
sleeping sickness or trypanosomiasis, which affects both livestock and humans. This factor, in combination with
the fact that many of the wetlands are at least afforded partial protection, may explain the relatively low overall
human populations in these floodplain regions during the recent past.
In recent years this picture has been changing. Several areas that only used to be seasonally grazed are now
permanently occupied and cultivated. Increased wealth and government/aid inputs, as well as extensive tsetse fly
control have contributed to a large increase in cattle numbers over the past few decades; as many as 250,000 head
of cattle are said to graze only in the Kafue Flats. Other threats arise from repetitive fires, pollution and illegal
hunting. Although many of these floodplains are officially protected, ineffective management and lack of funds has
resulted in uncontrolled poaching of animals such as hippo, elephant, and rhino. In addition, overfishing is becoming
an issue of increasing concern.
1.2.3.2
Rivers
The major rivers of Southern Africa include the Zambezi, Save, Limpopo, Orange, Cunene (Kunene), Cubango
(Okavango) and Cuanza. By far the greatest river system in southern Africa is the Zambezi which rises in
northwestern Zambia on the Central African Plateau, flows south initially and then eastwards for 1600 km across
half the continent before draining into the Indian Ocean, north of Beira in Mozambique. The basin, 1.33 million km2
in extent, incorporates four distinct biomes and drains parts of eight countries (Angola, Botswana, Malawi,
Mozambique, Namibia, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe). The basin has abundant water, fertile land and soils for
agriculture and diverse habitats that are home to large populations of wildlife.
WWF 2013. Zambezian flooded grasslands. <http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/157211/>
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
There are four globally significant areas of biodiversity interest situated within the Zambezi Basin7. These are (a)
Lake Malawi with its radiation of fish groups and freshwater molluscs; (b) the swamps, floodplains and woodlands
of the Upper Zambezi in Zambia and northern Botswana with their radiation of reduncine antelope (black lechwe,
Kafue lechwe, red lechwe, extinct Roberts lechwe and puku); (c) the Middle Zambezi Valley with its worldrenowned assemblage of large African mammals including elephant, buffalo, giraffe, lion and until recently rhino;
and (d) the area incorporating Gorongosa, Cheringoma and the Zambezi Delta in central Mozambique with its
diverse habitats.
In terms of threats, the construction of dams has had probably the greatest effect on biodiversity of wetland and
aquatic species and on wetland ecological processes. These include large dams, such as Kariba, Cabora Bassa,
Itezhi-Tezhi and Kafue Gorge, and the myriad of small dams on almost all tributaries of the Zambezi in Zimbabwe.
Hydrology is changed, flooding regimes greatly modified, and hence habitat and species composition. Two new
major habitats have been created a pelagic (open water) environment and a littoral (shoreline) environment.
Creation of these new environments has led to previously rare species (e.g. freshwater molluscs) becoming
abundant, and to the invasion or introduction of species new to the basin.
2
2.1
2.1.1
CONSERVATION CHALLENGES AND ISSUES

DEMAND FOR LAND
Subsistence Farming
By far the greatest challenge for wildlife conservation in Africa over the course of this century will arise from the
projected growth in the human population (Table 3). The population in the region is projected to treble or quadruple
over the course of this century which will place great demands on natural resources. A particular issue will be the
amount of land turned over to arable production. The growth of arable land in Sub-Saharan Africa from 2000-2030
is projected to rise by 26%8. The question arises as to whether protected areas can be sustained under greatly
increasing pressure for arable land. In 2011, protected areas in Sub-Saharan Africa comprised 11.8% of surface
area9. Much of this area is suitable for agriculture and livestock.
Timberlake, J. 2000. Biodiversity of the Zambezi Basin. Occasional Publications in Biodiversity (Biodiversity Foundation for Africa) No. 9.
FAO (2003) World Agriculture: Towards 2015/2030. Earthscan.
9 IUCN and UNEP-WCMC (2011). The World Database on Protected Areas.
8
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Table 3. Human Population Trends in Southern Africa

Population Size (millions)1
2013
Angola
Botswana
Lesotho
Madagascar
Malawi
Mozambique
Namibia
South Africa
Swaziland
Tanzania
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Southern Africa2
Southern Africa3
Africa
2050
21
2
2
23
16
26
2
53
1
49
15
14
152
224
1.111
2100
54
3
3
55
41
60
4
63
2
129
44
26
300
484
2 393
97
3
3
105
85
112
4
64
2
276
124
33
527
908
4.185
1Medium
variant projection; in: World Population Prospects, The 2012 Revision, UN, NY (2013).
Madagascar and Tanzania
3Including Madagascar and Tanzania
2Excluding
Figure 7 illustrates how rapidly protected areas can become isolated by human settlements. In this case the main
change precipitating immigration was clearance of tsetse fly. Up to 1993, the protected areas had remained free of
settlement.
Figure 7. Growth of rural settlement south of Lake Kariba10 (Cumming 2008)
10
Cumming, D.H.M. 2008. Large Scale Conservation Planning and Priorities for the Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area. A
report prepared for Conservation International.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
However, protected areas in Africa do succumb to population pressure like this, experiencing extensive cattle
grazing, farmed agriculture and settlement, unless they have central importance in socio-economic development
plans for the region.
2.1.2
Commercial Farming
Plantations and commercial farms have significant direct and indirect effects on biodiversity. Oil palm is one of the
most rapidly expanding plantation crops which is having high impacts on moist forest habitat in Central Africa (Vol.
4). Commercial farming of sugarcane can reduce downstream water supplies and displace wildlife directly. It has
completely transformed large tracts of land, especially in the coastal regions north and south of Durban. Other
export crops including vegetables and flowers have similar impacts. Pressure from commercial agriculture will work
in tandem with that from subsistence agriculture to place increasing pressure on wildlife over the course of this
century.
2.2
ALIENATION OF THE MAJORITY POPULATION
In southern Africa, a sense of the intrinsic values of biodiversity is poorly developed at the level of decision making
on land use, and there is almost no consideration given to ecosystem services and biodiversity (DHM Cumming,
pers. comm.). By many measures, protected areas are underfunded. This situation has been aptly summarised by
the African Parks organisation11: State conservation agencies have become seriously underfunded, management
expertise has been lost and proper governance eroded. Coupled with this is the increasing pressure from growing
populations in surrounding communities. With little or no legitimate benefit from a parks existence, local
communities face a set of economic incentives that can only lead to its destruction over time. The scale of
underinvestment in the protected areas of southern Africa is highlighted in Section 2.2.2.3 (Investment in Protected
Areas).
The situation at the local level is no better as the parks are often disliked. In the words of Hulme and Murphree12:
For generations, conservation policy in Africa has been socially illegitimate in the eyes of the continent's
rural people the task of creating a conservation policy that is embedded in Africa society, rather than
imposed from above, will be the work of generations.
If pressure on land is the ultimate driver of wildlife decline then alienation of the majority population from its wildlife
heritage is the ultimate social driver (Table 4, Section 2.6). The birth of community management of natural
resources is creating opportunities for a new conservation policy that is embedded in African society. It is a central
pillar of this wildlife strategy (Section 5).
2.3
FENCES AND HABITAT FRAGMENTATION
When habitat is lost, protected areas are increasingly isolated (Section 2.1). Other factors contributing to this
isolation are longitudinal barriers, principally fences and roads, and the elimination of wildlife in surrounding territory
through overhunting and disease. Isolation of protected areas poses a serious threat to the long-term viability of
many wildlife populations and migrations in Africa13,14. A major proximate cause of wildlife decline has been the
fragmentation of habitat caused by the erection of game fences across large parts of southern Africa, as illustrated
for central Namibia in Figure 8. Such fencescapes are increasingly found elsewhere including South Africa and
11
http://www.african-parks.org/About+Us.html
Hulme, D. and Murphree, M. (Eds) 2001. African Wildlife and Livelihoods The Promise and Performance of Community Conservation.
James Currey Ltd, Oxford.
13 Newmark, W.D. 2008. Isolation of African protected areas. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6: 321328.
14 Ferguson & Hanks (2010) Fencing Impacts. K Ferguson and J. Hanks (eds). Mammal Research Institute,University of Pretoria.
12
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Botswana. This situation has been seriously aggravated by the beef subsidies offered under Lom Conventions
and the Cotonou Agreement that have led to extensive fencing, habitat fragmentation and collapse of migratory
wildlife populations (Box 2).
Figure 8. Fences in central Namibia; note Tswanaland rectangle in Kalahari 15

Box 2. Fences, Migration and Livestock Diseases16
Historically many ungulate migrations in southern Africa occurred in Botswana. The largest existed around the Kalahari Desert,
with water-dependent species spending the dry season around rivers and lakes before moving to seasonal desert grasslands
once rain had filled temporary waterholes and initiated the growth of annual grasses (Williamson et al., 1988). Millions of
wildebeest, hartebeest and springbok moved from the central Kalahari Desert to the schwelle grassland in south-west Botswana
(Williamson et al., 1988) and hundreds of thousands of wildebeest and zebra moved from the Boteti River to the Kalahari and
Makgadikgadi grasslands. Further north, buffalo, elephant, wildebeest and zebra moved from the permanent waters of the
Okavango and Linyanti river systems to the seasonal grasslands of the Savuti marsh (Vandewalle, 2000).
The control of Foot and Mouth Disease in Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe led to the erection of fences across
vast areas to control movements of game and cattle which markedly reduced the sustainable densities of wildlife (Booth &
Cumming 2009). Between the 1950s and 1980s, Botswana erected veterinary cordon fences across much of the country,
especially to protect cattle destined for European export (EIA 2008). Many migratory movements were disrupted. The mass
die-offs and resultant population declines of wildebeest, zebra and other large mammals are well known (Williamson &
Williamson, 1981, 1988; Williamson, et al., 1988). Disruptions of migratory routes, habitat fragmentation and mortalities on
fences continue to be a source of concern and controversy (Gibson 2010). However, recent studies reveal that historical
migrations can be reinstated once barriers to movement are removed (Bartlam Brooks et al 2011).
Despite these control measures and their environmental costs, access to European markets for livestock and livestock products
in the region continues to be constrained by Foot and Mouth Disease (Thomson et al 2013a). As a consequence, southern
Africa faces ongoing losses of biodiversity as well as limited access to high-value markets for animal products. There is a new
willingness in the conservation and livestock sectors of southern Africa to look again at the issue of veterinary cordon fencing
and to seek environmentally sensitive alternatives for controlling disease (Section 3.4).
References may be found in Annex A.
15 Eckardt unpubl. Photograph in: Perkins, J. (2010). Fences and landscape scale degradation. In: Ferguson & Hanks (2010) Fencing
Impacts. K Ferguson and J. Hanks (eds). MRI, University of Pretoria.
16 References within boxes are given in Annex A.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
2.4
DEMAND FOR IVORY
In southern Africa, the main concern with ivory poaching is in Mozambique where the combined elephant population
in the Selous-Niassa Ecosystem lost an estimated 7,000 elephants in the period between the 2009 to 2011 surveys.
Increased poaching is also recorded in Angola, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe but not so far at the levels
reported in Central Africa. PIKE data indicate that Caprivi, Namibia may also be experiencing problems. Zambia is
facing serious challenges from an illicit trade in ivory.
Despite the rise of poaching in the region, a major elephant-related concern in southern Africa is the growing
population of elephants in KAZA TFCA and its impact on woodlands. The central issue there, and across the region,
is the extent to which local communities can realise the full value of wildlife on their land, and whether those benefits
will outweigh the costs of having wildlife on their land. This in turn highlights the importance of successfully
integrated development planning in the context of TFCAs.
2.5
DEMAND FOR RHINO HORN
South Africa conserves 82% of Africas rhinos and it also has experienced the most poaching in absolute terms
since 2009. In 2012 South Africa lost 3.19% of its national herd from poaching putting it on a par with Kenya (2.83%)
and Zimbabwe (4.11%). While poaching in SA and Kenya is currently still at sustainable levels (i.e. not currently
leading to population decline); both are approaching the tipping point where poaching ceases to be sustainable and
deaths will start to exceed births. Encouragingly, Table 4 shows that at a continental level poaching in the first half
of 2014 has levelled off and remains at average 2013 levels (3.00 rhinos poached/day).
Table 4. Reported numbers of white and black rhinos poached in Africa from 1 Jan 2006 to 30 June 2014
Source: IUCN SSC AfRSG, TRAFFIC and CITES Rhino Working Group.
Note that these figures represent the minimum number reported poached, and the true figure is likely to be higher as some carcasses will not have been
detected.
By end of December 2013, the number of rhino killed in South Africa had risen to 1004 (4.78%) (Figure 9). However
the rising trend has stabilised (Figure 10). It remains to be seen whether this apparent levelling off in poaching in
South Africa (and indeed also continental levelling off) will continue, or whether poaching will once again continue
to trend upwards as happened after a period of about a year of relative stability in South Africa 2010/11. Poaching
spiked in Kenya in 2013 reaching 5.76% of the population at the start of the year (Table 4). Poaching of rhino
continued to decline in Zimbabwe accounting for 2.54% in 2013 (Table 4).
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Source: AfRSG diagram based on historical and South African Dept of Envir Affairs/National Wildlife Crime Reaction Unit data, with support from Save the
Rhino International.
Figure 9. The rise in poaching of rhino in South Africa.
Figure 10. Poaching of Rhino in South Africa from 2010 2014.
Kruger National Park continues to bear the brunt of rhino poaching in South Africa with 425 rhino lost in 2012 and
606 in 2013. It has proved necessary to replace the eastern border fence in an attempt to reduce losses of rhino
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
moving into Mozambique. Of the total number of SA rhinos poached in 2013, 114 rhinos have been killed in Limpopo
province, 92 in Mpumalanga, 85 in KwaZulu-Natal and 87 in North West (data from AfRSG).
High prices paid for rhino horn on the international market have stimulated a sophisticated poaching operation
involving criminal syndicates that employ well-equipped ex-military and professional hunters. This is presenting a
serious challenge to prevailing conservation efforts (Section 2.2). The twin goals of conservation are breaking or
disrupting the transnational organised criminal networks and providing alternative economic opportunities in
adjacent poor communities to discourage poaching.
2.6
DRIVERS OF WILDLIFE DECLINE
It is essential to address the current wildlife emergencies over rhino and elephant but also to address the root
causes of wildlife decline in Africa. If the latter is not done, there will be no escape from the cycle of crisis
management. Table 5 arranges the main threats to wildlife under three categories of threat, or drivers of wildlife
decline. Proximate drivers are threats to wildlife that account immediately for its decline; they can be addressed
effectively by a combination of national investment, conservation-development projects, and international
agreements and action. Ultimate drivers derive from the wider changes in society that ultimately bring about the
proximate threats; there is little one can do about these other than to introduce systems that assist adaptation to
the inevitable change.
There is a third category of threat that we identify as Social drivers of wildlife decline. These are socio-economic,
political and institutional weaknesses within society which accelerate wildlife decline and undermine conservation
efforts. They include, for instance. the lack of leadership from politicians on wildlife conservation, lack of awareness
or appreciation of wildlife values in educated classes, and lack of knowledge about wildlife management in rural
communities Such problems may be deep-seated but they can in principle be effectively addressed with the support
of conservation and development programmes. A related problem as previously mentioned is the underfunding of
many parks in the region17.
17
Cumming, D.H.M. 2007. Transfrontier conservation areas, animal diseases and human livelihoods: issues of system health and
sustainability. Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology and AHEAD programme, SA.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Table 5. Drivers of Wildlife Decline in Southern Africa

Category of
threat
Drivers of Wildlife Decline

Demand-driven illegal killing and unsustainable consumptive utilisation of elephant, rhino, bushmeat and other wild
species.
Fragmentation and loss of habitat and species range through alteration and conversion of natural ecosystems.
Proximate
Drivers
Functional failure in protected areas (inadequate coverage, lack of investment in management, encroachment,
degazetting and excision, poaching).
Failure in governance of wildlife estate.
Human-wildlife conflict in the wider sense (pesticides, pollution, road kill, farm-wildlife conflicts).
Human population growth in Southern Africa
Ultimate
Drivers
Rising international demand for land and natural resources. (Demand for land in Southern Africa includes its use for
export crops. Demand for natural resources includes the exploitation of minerals, leading to loss of forest habitat and
increased poaching.)
Climate change.
Political indifference to wildlife issues and the need for leadership
Rural poverty
Social
Drivers
Legal and policy frameworks that promote unsustainable resource-use and fortress management of protected areas
Agricultural subsidies including the EU beef subsidies.
Underfunding of parks
Lack of conservation policy that is embedded in African society. This is undoubtedly the greatest long-term challenge
for conservation.
In summary, proximate drivers are where much of todays conservation work is focussed; ultimate drivers are not
amenable to change; social drivers are difficult to change but key to the long-term future of African wildlife.
It is also worth noting that threats are often interlinked such that one may work in concert with another. In the case
of rhino the impact of increased poaching has increased the cost of protection and increased risks to staff and
families from well-armed and aggressive poaching gangs. This when coupled with declining economic incentives
has resulted in increasing numbers of owners considering or getting rid of their rhino. If this trend continues it
threatens to decrease range and ultimately numbers of rhino as well as revenue for conservation agencies.
2.7
CONSERVATION OF BIRD AND MAMMAL MIGRATIONS
Mass migrations of mammals and birds are some of the most inspiring biological dramas on the planet and yet by
virtue of their long distance movements they are under major threat.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
2.7.1
Mammals
In the case of African mammal migrations, the main causes of decline are unsustainable hunting and loss of
seasonal ranges and/or migration routes through fencing, livestock, agriculture or human settlement18. One of the
principal threats is restricted access to food or water. Migrations of scimitar-horned oryx and hartebeest have
disappeared from the Sahara of Niger and Chad, and the Ogaden of Somalia and Ethiopia respectively. Wildebeest
migrations in the Athi-Kapiti Plains in southeast Kenya are extinct. Wildebeest once migrated northeast of Etosha
National Park in Namibia during dry seasons, but cordon fencing in 1973 closed all movements. Fencing in Kruger
National Park in South Africa blocked wildebeest migration, and populations declined from 6000 to 750. Historical
(1850s) migrations of 10 000s of trekbokke (springbok, black wildebeest, blesbok, eland and quagga), no longer
occur in the Karoo and Highveld of South Africa and quagga are extinct as a species. Reports of extant mass
migrations of springbok in Botswana are unconfirmed.
We know even less about the migrations of bats however the ubiquitous straw-coloured fruit bat travels large
distances in massive colonies. Using satellite-tracking collars, individuals and have been recorded moving from the
colony of several million in Kasanka NP in Zambia over neighbouring Democratic Republic of Congo, covering 1000
km in just a month.
Conserving mass mammal migrations means preserving the animals freedom of movement in response to the
temporal aspects of food and water across seasonal extremes. This requires understanding basic parameters of
the migration (e.g. location, numbers, routes, distances travelled), ecological drivers, habitat needs and threats.
When ungulates are excluded from forage and water resources, their numbers plummet and migrations disappear.
Recent evidence from zebra studies in Botswana reveals that a remnant of the former migratory population may
persist at low density in smaller ranges that have enough resources to maintain them. When barriers are removed
the migration pattern has been recovered19 (also see Box 2).
2.7.2
Birds
Africa is of crucial importance for the survival of millions of migratory birds which depend on the continent for
breeding, resting, feeding and other aspects of their life cycles. Population trend estimates for this region have
remained poor or even become worse. The causes of decline are hard to pin down. A recent review of AfroPalaearctic migrant bird populations indicates that the interacting factors of anthropogenic habitat degradation and
climatic conditions, particularly drought in the Sahel zone, are the most important causes of decline20. It calls for
flyway approach to conservation that combines with an understanding of land management practices that integrate
the needs of birds and people in these areas (Figure 11). Many waterbirds congregate in key estuaries where sitebased conservation can help protect the migrations.
The Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) works internationally to conserve migrations across taxa21. They focus
on species threatened with extinction, but include other species whose migrations would significantly benefit from
international cooperation, including strictly migratory and nomadic species.
18 Review in: Harris, G., Thirgood, S., Hopcraft, J.G.C., Cromsight, J.P.G.M., and Berger, J. (2009) Global decline in aggregated migrations
of large terrestrial mammals. Endangered Species Research, 7: 55-76.
19 Bartlam-Brooks, H.L.A., Bonyongo, M.C. & Harris, S. (2011) Will reconnecting ecosystems allow long-distance mammal migrations to
resume? A case study of a zebra Equus burchelli migration in Botswana. Oryx 45: 210 216.
20 Vickery, J. A., Ewing, S. R., Smith, K. W., Pain, D. J., Bairlein, F., korpilov, J., Gregory, R. D. (2014), The decline of Afro-Palaearctic
migrants and an assessment of potential causes. Ibis 156: 1-22.
21 http://www.cms.int/
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Developed under the framework of the CMS, the African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbird Agreement (AEWA22) is an
intergovernmental treaty dedicated to the conservation of migratory waterbirds and their habitats across Africa and
Europe, parts of Asia, Canada and the Middle East.
The Ramsar Convention23 is an intergovernmental treaty that provides the framework for national action and
international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources.
Source: http://birding.krugerpark.co.za/birding-in-kruger-migration-routes.html
Figure 11. Approximate flyways to Kruger NP which is celebrated for its migrant birds
22
23
http://www.unep-aewa.org
http://www.ramsar.org
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
3
3.1

REVIEW OF STRATEGIC APPROACHES TO WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
Natural resource management is as old as humankind and the protection of sacred sites may have equally ancient
origins. However nature conservation as a major form of land-use and a significant contributor to the national
economy is a much more recent development. In Africa the first parks were established less than a century ago by
colonial administrations wishing to preserve the worlds remaining wildernesses from the inroads of industrial
modernity (Table 7). Beginning with those early national parks, it is possible to distinguish a series of strategic
approaches to the conservation of wildlife (Table 6). Each one can be associated with an emerging conservation
paradigm with global application.
Table 6. Strategic Approaches to Nature Conservation with some of their protagonists
3.1.1
National Parks
Biodiversity Hotspots
Ecoregions
Water Basins
Conservation for Development
Biosphere Reserves
Transfrontier Conservation
Western Tradition, UNESCO

Norman Myers & CI
WWF (FAO)
WWF
IUCN, SADC
UNESCO (MAB)
PPF, IUCN and SADC
National Parks
The earliest conservation paradigm in modern times was the establishment of national parks primarily as
sanctuaries for plants and animals where human intervention should be kept to a minimum. The first parks in Africa
were established in the 1920s (Table 7). Since then the concept of protection has been widened to incorporate a
range of human uses. The area protected has increased steadily up to the present time (Figure 12)24.
Almost unquestionably this paradigm remains the most important approach to conservation today but it faces
considerable challenges: underfunding, isolation from similar areas of natural habitat, hard edges between parks
and agricultural land or settlements, alienation of the local population which may precipitate encroachment within
the parks and unsustainable (illegal) use of wildlife, timber and other natural resources. Whereas the national parks
in some countries and locations in southern Africa effectively conserve large mammal populations and rare species,
in other countries the picture is less favourable. The situation of the Kissama, Cangandala, Iona, Bikuar and Cameia
National Parks in Angola is one of almost total abandon with neither equipment nor staff on site. Part of these areas
are today occupied by people that practice hunting and bush-burning at levels that have caused the disappearance
of large and small mammals. In some cases, large numbers of people live or farm in the protected areas.
24 Bastian Bertzky, Colleen Corrigan, James Kemsey, Siobhan Kenney, Corinna Ravilious, Charles Besanon and Neil Burgess (2012)
Protected Planet Report 2012: Tracking progress towards global targets for protected areas. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and UNEP-WCMC,
Cambridge, UK.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Table 7. First National Parks in Africa

1925
1926
1926
1948
1950
1951
1960
1964
1967
1967
2000
Virunga NP (DRC) established

Kruger NP (SA) established
Matobo NP (Zimbabwe) established
Tsavo NP (Kenya) established
Kafue NP (Zambia) proclaimed
Serengeti NP (Tanzania) established
Gorongosa NP (Mozambique) named
Iona NP (Angola) proclaimed
Chobe NP (Botswana) declared
Etosha NP (Namibia) declared
Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park (Botswana & SA) opened
Useful developments in protected area management over the past half century have included the following: buffer
zones, community conservation, world heritage sites, public private partnerships, GPS management information
systems, remote sensing technologies, and transfrontier conservation.
Source: Peace Parks Foundation
Figure 12. The national parks of southern Africa, December 2013
3.1.2
Biodiversity Hot Spots
An early attempt at the systematic conservation of biodiversity was Norman Myers hotspot concept which identified
regions of the world with high species diversity and high endemism. Today Conservation International recognises
eight hotspots in Africa of which five occur wholly or partly in southern Africa: Cape Floristic Region, Succulent
Karoo, Maputaland-Pondoland-Albany, Eastern Afromontane and Madagascar and the Indian Ocean Islands.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
A related approach is the Important Bird and Biodiversity Area Programme (IBA) of Birdlife International which
identifies areas with bird species that are vulnerable to global extinction and amenable to conservation action. More
than 1,230 IBAs have been identified in Africa.
Groups of species are sometimes used to identify gaps in protected area coverage, for instance with birds25 and
mammals26. In a recent example, the worlds 173,461 designated protected areas were prioritised according to their
irreplaceability for ensuring conservation of 21,419 vertebrate species encompassing all birds, mammals and
amphibians but not freshwater fish or reptiles27.
3.1.3
Ecoregions and the biogeographic approach
The representation of biomes, ecoregions, or other biogeographic areas can be used for detecting gaps in a regions
PA network. MacKinnon and MacKinnon (1986)28 reported the extent to which major vegetation types of the
Afrotropical Realm occur within protected areas at national levels. They used Whites (1983) vegetation map of
Africa29 as the basis for their habitat classification. MacKinnon and MacKinnons findings for the Southern African
region were reworked using a simplified version of Whites vegetation map in which 19 as opposed to 47 vegetation
types were used30. The analysis revealed that habitats with the greatest plant species richness and endemism
(Lowland fynbos, Afro-montane grassland and forests, lowland forest and the Karoo) were the least protected. A
systematic analysis of gaps in global habitat protection (based on ecofloristic zones) revealed that montane dry
habitat in South Africa was inadequately protected31.
The most widely utilised biogeographic classification today is that of biomes and ecoregions developed by WWF.
Ecoregions are now used extensively in conservation planning. Nevertheless the approach has its own limitations.
Although the criteria for mapping ecoregions distinguish areas with distinctive fauna, they are based on vegetation
landscapes. Small technical differences in classification criteria have large effects on ecoregion areas and therefore
on their protection status (Figure 13).
25 de Klerk, H.M., Fjeldsa, J., Blyth, S. & Burgess, N.D. (2004). Gaps in the protected area network for threatened Afrotropical birds. Biological
Conservation 117: 529-537.
26 Fjeldsa, J., Burgess, N.D., Blyth, S. and de Klerk, H.M. (2004). Where are the major gaps in the reserve network for Africas mammals?
Oryx 38: 17-25.
27 Le Saout, S. et al. 2013. Protected Areas and Effective Biodiversity Conservation. Science 342: 803-805.
28 MacKinnon, J and MacKinnon, K (1986) Review of the Protected Areas System in the Afrotropical Realm, IUCN/UNEP, Gland, Switzerland
29 White, F (1983) The vegetation of Africa: A descriptive memoir, UNESCO, Paris.
30 Cumming, D. H.M. 1999. Study on the Development of Transboundary Natural Resource Management Areas in Southern AfricaEnvironmental Context: Natural Resources, Land Use, and Conservation. Biodiversity Support Program, Washington, DC, USA.
31 Murray, M.G., Green, M.J.B., Bunting, G.C. & Paine, J.R. (1997). Biodiversity Conservation in the Tropics: Gaps in Habitat Protection and
Funding Priorities. WCMC Biodiversity Series No. 6 (180 pages).
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Figure 13. Ecoregions of Southern Africa
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
3.1.4
Water basins
It is possible to divide southern Africa more or less into river basins and to implement a conservation strategy based around
the need to protect the basin and its water for wildlife and human welfare (Figure 15)32.
Figure 14. The major river basins of southern Africa33
The river basin perspective is useful as a planning tool for sustainable development; its utility for conservation is
not so clear-cut. In the case of small-to-medium sized ecosystems, the river-basin perspective is clearly vital. For
example, the Okavango Delta depends critically on the flow of water from the Okavango River which is potentially
affected by abstraction along the Panhandle (for settlements) or further upstream (to augment water supplies in the
central area of Namibia); similarly the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem depends critically on the dry season flow of water
in the Mara River which is now threatened by upstream abstraction for irrigation schemes. Securing the water flow
into these wildlife ecosystems is fundamental to their long-term conservation. The correspondence between wildlife
conservation and the immediate river-based threat is high.
In the case of large river basins however, the correspondence between upstream developments and downstream
conservation areas can be weak. It could be argued, for instance, that attempts to conserve the truly vast catchment
of the Zambezi River in Angola and Zambia risks dilution of the slender resource base available for wildlife
conservation. Continuing with that logic, it could then be argued that efficient use of funds dictates that
conservationists look within the Zambezi Basin to identify specific threats which link closely to specific wildlife areas.
In the case of the Zambezi system, an example would be the Kafue Flats floodplain which depends critically on the
WWF 2012. Miombo Ecoregion Home of the Zambezi Conservation Strategy 2011-2020. WWF, Harare, Zimbabwe.
UNOCHA (2009). Web resource: http://reliefweb.int/map/angola/southern-africa-major-river-basins-31-mar-2009. Accessed 27 January
2014
32
33
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
hydrological regime of the lower Kafue River and how it is affected by the operation of two dams34. Regulating the
environmental flow passing through the dams enables improved conservation of Kafue lechwe.
Integrated River Basin Management and Integrated Water Resource Management are vital development goals;
however choices need to be made between interventions at different scales. One of the criteria in the wildlife sector
is efficient use of scarce funds for wildlife conservation at the ecosystem scale. Whole water governance and basinplanning system development may not always pass that criterion for use of wildlife funds. Understanding the nature
of the connection between upstream catchment and downstream livelihoods and wildlife is the key step in making
rational decisions of this kind.
3.1.5
Conservation for Development
In 1980 the publication of the World Conservation Strategy by IUCN, UNEP and WWF signalled the beginning of a
new conservation policy which harnessed the economic potential of sustainable development. The need for this
approach was appreciated early on in Zimbabwe which, in common with most other African countries, had in place
a system of State ownership of wildlife which resulted in a decline of wildlife outside of protected areas 35,36. The
Parks and Wildlife Act of 1975 gave landholders in Zimbabwe the right to manage wildlife for their own benefit and
heralded an immediate reversal in wildlife declines on private land.
During the 1980s the legal provisions of this Act were extended to Rural District Councils (RDCs), and thus partially
to rural communities in communal lands. It enabled them to manage and benefit from wildlife resources through
the emerging Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE). The
programme ran into difficulties through the concentration of power in RDCs37 but the essential model of
decentralization and devolution of administrative powers and responsibilities for communal resources was adopted
elsewhere in southern Africa.
Following the pioneering CAMPFIRE programme in Zimbabwe, Community Based Natural Resources Management
(CBNRM) strategies were formulated and implemented in Zambia in 1988 under the Administrative Management
Design (ADMADE) for Game Management Areas (GMAs). Despite a promising start, ADMADE failed to establish
itself. A major reason for this failure according to one expert was inappropriate understanding of the specific context
of wildlife and its uses by rural residents38.
Namibias Nature Conservation Act of 1996 provided a basis for communal area conservancies and granted
conservancy members the right to consumptive uses of wildlife. Namibias 1998 land policy acknowledged the
rights of local communities to woodland resources. The development of conservancies within communal lands has
been particularly successful in conservation terms with populations of many large mammal species making
spectacular recoveries39. The pioneering work of Namibias NGO, Integrated Rural Development and Nature
Conservation (IRDNC), has led to one of the most progressive policy environments for community-based natural
resource management in southern Africa, with local communities getting significant benefits from the use of wildlife
resources. Government only confers wildlife user-rights to communities in Conservancies, they have no land rights.
This is a much-overlooked weakness which is beginning to be addressed.
34 Sebastian, A.G. 2008. Transboundary water politics: conflict, cooperation and shadows of the past in the Okavango and Orange River
Basins of southern Africa. PhD Thesis, University of Maryland, USA.
35 Parker I.S.C.P (1993). The Natural Justice of Ownership. Commissioned Essay for the Norwegian Government written as comment on
plans for the Serengeti ecosystem in Tanzania and Kenya. 3pp.
36 Martin. R.B. 2008. A Review of Organisational Performance and Development of Strategic Options to Improve the Performance of The
Botswana Department of Wildlife and National Parks.
37 Cambbell, B.M. & Sithole, B. 2000. CAMPFIRE: Experiences in Zimbabwe. Science 287: 41.
38 Marks, S.A. (2005) The legacy of a Zambian community-based wildlife program. In: B. Child and M Lymann (eds) Natural Resources as
Community Assets. The Sand County Foundation and The Aspen Institute, pp. 181-209.
39 Dickson, B., Hutton, J. and Adams, B. (eds.) 2009. Recreational Hunting, Conservation and Rural Livelihoods: Science and Practice,
Blackwells, Oxford.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
3.1.6
Biosphere Reserves
One of the early conservation initiatives to advocate the idea of sustainable development was the biosphere reserve
in which areas are proposed by residents, ratified by national committees and designated by UNESCOs Man and
Biosphere (MAB) programme. The main characteristic of biosphere reserves is that they embraced conservation
and development by using zoning schemes with core protected areas surrounded by development zones.
Conceptually, this model is attractive, with 610 sites currently designated globally. Yet the practical reality of
implementing dual conservation and development goals has proved to be challenging, with few examples
successfully conforming to the models full criteria40. This may partly explain the new emphasis under the Madrid
Action Plan41 to recognise the potential of biosphere reserves to function as learning sites for sustainable
development.
3.1.7
Transfrontier Conservation
The Transfrontier Conservation Area (TFCA) is a relatively new conservation initiative that can bring together a
complex and diverse mosaic of land uses under one shared or joint management structure, including national parks
and game reserves, forest reserves, wildlife and game management areas, communal land and private land. It
shares the concept of joint conservation and development with biosphere reserves but in addition has the role of
promoting culture and peace. It also differs in that it frequently encompasses a much larger area than the biosphere
reserves and usually includes well-recognised national parks. Its central importance to conservation of wildlife lies
in its policy of addressing multiple issues. Section 4.1 outlines the role of TFCAs in more detail.
3.2
CONSERVATION OF ELEPHANTS AND RHINOS
Our proposed strategic approach to elephant poaching, rhino poaching and wildlife trade is given separately
(Sections 1-3 in Volume 6). This section summarises information on distribution and status of elephant and rhino
in Southern Africa, threats and risks, conservation planning, action being taken and recommended future actions.
A key part of the strategy for controlling trade in ivory and rhino horn is the establishment of inter-agency Wildlife
Enforcement Networks (WENs) one for each sub-region, and in all countries individually. Another is development
of the newly agreed Southern African Wildlife Enforcement Network (SAWEN). Some regional features to
conservation of elephant and rhino are outlined below.
3.2.1
Elephant42
Examination of poaching levels based on the Proportion of Illegally Killed Elephants (PIKE), a statistic determined
from data gathered by the programme for Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE), reveals consistent
differences in poaching levels between the different African regions, with Central Africa showing the highest overall
poaching levels, in contrast with Southern Africa, which shows the lowest overall levels (Figure 16). Pockets of
poaching at higher levels in southern Africa occur in northern Mozambique, northern Zimbabwe and in the Caprivi
Strip43.
40 Coetzer, K.L., Witkowski, E.T.F. & Erasmus, B.F.N. 2013. Reviewing Biosphere Reserves globally: effective conservation action or
bureaucratic label? Biological Reviews.
41 UNESCO (2008). Madrid Action Plan for Biosphere Reserves (20082013). UNESCO Division of Ecological and Earth Sciences, Paris.
42 The proposed strategic approach to elephant poaching, including trade, law enforcement and actions needed, is given separately (Volume
6; Section 1). This section summarises some particular regional issues and concerns.
43 CITES 2012. Status of elephant populations, levels of illegal killing and the trade in ivory: A report to the CITES Standing Committee.
CITES Sixty-second meeting of the Standing Committee, Geneva (Switzerland), 23-27 July 2012.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Figure 15. Regional trends with 95% confidence intervals of elephant poaching levels in different regions of Africa.
The MIKE programme has statistically evaluated relationships between PIKE levels and a wide range of ecological,
biophysical and socio-economic factors at the site, national and global levels. Three factors consistently emerge
as very strong predictors of poaching levels and trends: (a) poverty at the site level, (b) governance at the national
level and (c) demand for illegal ivory at the global level. Regarding poverty, sites suffering from higher levels of
poverty (as indicated by infant mortality) experience higher levels of elephant poaching. This suggests that there
may be a greater incentive to facilitate or participate in the illegal killing of elephants in areas where human
livelihoods are insecure. Furthermore, this relationship highlights a close linkage between the wellbeing of people
and that of the elephant populations with which they coexist.
In the context of southern Africa as a whole there is no immediate threat to the elephant population. However the
picture could change depending on market conditions and investment in wildlife law enforcement. Significant
numbers of elephants were killed in 2012 in Mozambique (Niassa NR, Quirimbas NP and Limpopo NP), Zimbabwe
and Angola. Some of the poaching of elephants in Zimbabwe has utilised cyanide procured from a local gold mine.
Despite an increase in poaching recorded in many parts of southern Africa, the main elephant-related problem
outside of Mozambique is the growing population of elephants in KAZA TFCA and the need for mitigation of humanelephant conflicts.
3.2.2
3.2.2.1
Rhino44
Criminal Investigation
An ability to trace confiscated horn back to its natural point of origin through forensic analysis has long been
recognised as a potentially powerful tool for understanding and dismantling the trade networks involved. The same
methods can be used also to register legal stocks, and aid their identification in the event of theft. The Veterinary
Genetics Laboratory (VGL) at the University of Pretoria has emerged as Africas leading forensics lab with regard
to rhinos specifically. The rhino DNA database developed and run from VGL (known as RhoDIS - Rhino DNA Index
System) continues to expand, and DNA analyses are increasingly being used in criminal investigations and
44
Our proposed strategic approach to rhino poaching, including trade and law enforcement and actions needed, is given separately (see
Volume 6; Section 2). This section summarises some particular regional issues and activities.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
prosecutions. DNA profiling would also be an essential component in monitoring legal trade in horn, if this were
agreed.
Many other approaches to criminal investigation are being tested, including DNA profiling as a traceability tool,
drones, tracking devices, spatial monitoring and reporting tools, protected sanctuaries, community involvement and
awareness programmes, dehorning of wild populations, an integrated national electronic database, raising
penalties for those convicted of rhino crimes, and farming of rhinos for their horns in Asia. These efforts are paying
off as indicated by the possible levelling off of poaching in South Africa (Section 2.5, Figure 10). Figures released
by the South African Department of Environmental Affairs, show an increasing number of rhino related arrests over
the past few years (Figure 17). In 2013, some 127 alleged poachers were arrested in the Kruger National Park
alone. The penalties for rhino poaching are becoming increasingly severe and frequent.
Specialist donor institutions and programmes include the following: SADC Rhino Management Group, SADC Rhino
and Elephant Security Group/Interpol Environmental Crime Working Group, IUCN African Rhino Specialist Group,
WWF-funded Black Rhino Range Expansion Project (BRREP), WWF-African Rhino Programme (ARP), WWFSouth Africa, US Fish and Wildlife Service, International Rhino Foundation, Save the Rhino International, African
Wildlife Foundation, Rhino Action Group Effort, Stop-Rhino-Poaching and the Endangered Wildlife Trust. The
Department of Environmental Affairs, in consultation with the National Treasury, is to establish a National Rhino
Fund to coordinate the financing of anti-poaching initiatives in South Africa.
Source: AfRSG, Save the Rhino International and South African Department of Environmental Affairs (2013).
Note that the arrests in SA as of 31 December 2013 reached 345 (AfRSG per com).
Figure 16. Increase in arrests for poaching rhino in South Africa

3.2.2.2
Consumptive Use
Currently, South Africa & Namibia have a quota of five black rhino bulls per year. White rhino hunting is less closely
regulated, as the overall population is bigger, and hunting primarily takes place on private land. In South Africa,
live-sale of White Rhinos on auction, limited sport hunting of surplus males, and ecotourism have provided
incentives for private sector conservation and generated much needed funds which can help pay the high cost of
successfully monitoring, protecting and managing rhino. An influential cadre of conservationists supports
consumptive utilisation, particularly safari hunting, because it brings in large revenues for conservation from a small
number of trophy animals legally shot by wealthy clients. They point out that sustainable use, including through
trophy hunting, is a fundamental pillar of (for example) Namibia's conservation approach, and has been instrumental
in its success. IUCN's own policy has long recognised that sustainable use of wildlife produces social and economic
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
benefits to rural communities which in turn contribute to biodiversity conservation. Elephant and rhino are viewed
no differently. Carefully managed hunting of these and other wildlife species has proven to be an effective means
of encouraging and enabling rural communities, private land holders, and indeed governments in a number of
countries to protect and invest in wildlife45.
Viewed from a continental perspective, the benefits of sustainable hunting in parts of southern Africa do not extend
to the rest of the continent. As noted in Volume 6; Section 2, it is unlikely that consumptive utilisation of rhino will
reduce the illegal killing of wild rhinos and/or the demand for their horns. Sustainable hunting and horn-farming do
not threaten rhino species directly but they can and do open the door to illegal trade. The view is taken that the
institutional and market arrangements needed to manage a legal trade would irrespective of their sophistication
- not only be extremely costly but also, in view of the intractable and price-inelastic nature of the demand, be quite
unable to close the black-market for illegal horn any more effectively than has the current total ban. Consequently,
the basic strategy for rhinos going forward must be to have at least one or two viable populations of each subspecies survive the current onslaught. If that can be done a recovery from the brink, as proved once before, always
remains possible. Nonetheless alternative options, inclusive of a legal trade in horn along with demand reduction,
should be investigated thoroughly.
3.2.2.3
Investment in Protected Areas
One of the weakest elements in the conservation of rhino in southern Africa can be attributed to inadequate
investment in the management of protected areas. Surveys of rhino numbers in nine African countries (1=CAR,
2=Tanzania, 3=Somalia, 4-Mozambique, 5=Zambia, 6=Kenya, 7=South Africa, 8=Namibia, 9=Zimbabwe) from
1980-84 were compared with the spending by central governments on their conservation areas (Figure 18). Stable
populations of rhino (0% change in numbers) had an intercept of $230 per square kilometre. This was the minimum
expenditure for adequate conservation of rhino in protected areas46. In todays currency, the equivalent expenditure
would be $450 per square kilometre.
Figure 17. Relationship between the expenditure on parks and effectiveness of rhino conservation
(Leader-Williams and Albon 1988)47
A survey from ten years ago reveals that the actual expenditure is well below this critical level (Figure 19). It
explained the inability of nations to stem the tide of rhino poaching at that time, except in South Africa. It would be
useful to repeat this analysis today in the context of high levels of rhino poaching in South Africa. Martin (2003) has
modified this rule by linking the expenditure to the size of the area being protected, with larger areas requiring less
45 SULi (2013). Open letter regarding the auction of a permit to hunt a Namibian Black Rhino. Sustainable Use and Livelihoods Specialist
Group, IUCN SSC and CEESP.
46 Equivalent data for elephant indicated that the minimum expenditure for their adequate conservation was $215 per square kilometre.
47 Leader-Williams, N and Albon, SD (1988) Allocation of resources for conservation. Nature 336: 5335.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
per unit area than smaller areas48. Even with this modification, it is clear that most of southern Africa is spending
far less on their protected areas than is required for conservation of elephant and rhino.
Annual budget (US$ per square kilometre)

Figure 18. Expenditure on parks in southern African countries compared with that in the USA in 1980 and KwaZulu-Natal (KZN)
in 1986 (Cumming 2004)49
3.3
PIONEERS OF CONSERVATION
Southern Africa is extraordinarily creative and industrious in conservation having established one of the first national
parks to protect wildlife in 1926 and pioneered many other approaches to its conservation subsequently (Box 3). In
some of these approaches, such as community-based natural resource management and the wilderness
movement, it has influenced the global conservation movement.
Box 3. Southern Africa Pioneers of Conservation
Pioneers in early establishment of National Parks;

Pioneers of CBNRM in its CAMPFIRE programme
Pioneers in raising conservation awareness with its travelling theatre (Theatre for Africa)
Pioneers in establishing the international wilderness movement (The Wild Foundation)
Pioneers of TFCAs as Peace Parks
Pioneers of DNA profiling to track rhino horn and ivory
Can the region pioneer a successful model of long-term conservation for Africa? Its biggest challenge will be to
enable the majority population to develop its own policy for governing wildlife conservation and use a policy it can
identify with and believe in and then manage its incorporation into mainstream conservation.
LESSONS LEARNT AND PROMISING APPROACHES
48 Martin, R.B. (2003). Conditions for effective, stable and equitable conservation at the national level in southern Africa. A paper prepared
for Theme 4 at a workshop titled Local Communities, equity and protected areas as part of the preparations for the Vth World Parks Congress
of the IUCN held in Durban, South Africa, September 8 17, 2003.
49 Cumming, D.H.M. 2004. Performance of Parks in a Century of Change. Pages 105-124. In: Child, B. (ed.) Parks in transition: biodiversity,
development and the bottom line. Earthscan, London.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
4.1
LESSONS LEARNT
4.1.1
4.1.2
Relating to Protected Areas

PAs have proved the test of time. Increasingly wildlife populations and fragile habitats have become
confined to protected areas within the wider landscape.
PAs conserve habitats. PAs have proved to be more successful at protecting wildlife habitats than
conserving large mammal populations. It is because it is easier to apprehend and punish a farmer
expanding his agriculture into a park than a hunter who may be operating illegally at night. Conversely,
once farmers or herders have established their presence in a park, it may be harder to evict them because
squatters can quickly establish political rights to protection.
PAs have mixed success at conserving species. The level of protection that PAs afford wildlife species
depends on the quality of management which is in turn closely linked to the level of financial investment
in parks. Most countries in southern Africa need to raise their annual investment in PAs if they wish to
conserve wildlife and create opportunities for ecotourism and sustainable resource use.
Public-Private Partnerships for Failing Parks. Failed parks with little investment and weak wildlife
institutions suffer from agricultural settlement and wildlife collapse. The most successful management
option in such cases comes from public-private partnerships in park management with the private
involvement of experienced companies and NGOs.
Transfrontier approach. The transfrontier approach to conservation has been accompanied by a
conceptual shift away from strictly protected national parks towards greater emphasis on multiple resource
use by local communities. Although the approach suffers from bureaucratic delays and problems on the
ground, it has been embraced by African Leaders.
Research and monitoring services. Park ecosystems respond to both internal changes, such as disease
outbreaks, fire and vegetation succession, and to external changes, including species introductions,
climate change and surrounding land-use change. As the pace of change quickens, there is even greater
need for high quality research and monitoring services to devise and manage effective conservation
responses.
Management Information Systems. Ranger-based management information systems make use of GPS
and GIS mapping software to give spatial information on poaching, wildlife signs and ranger effort. Two
examples are MIST <www.ecostats.com/web/MIST> & SMART <www.smartconservationsoftware.org/>.
Trade in Wildlife Products
Conservation can be assisted by sustainable use and legal trade. Classic examples are the trade in
crocodile skins and vicua wool. Use tends to be sustainable when the landholder has the full rights to the
species; it tends not to be sustainable when products are harvested by bodies that do not have a direct
stake in the resource. This approach to conservation requires close monitoring and tight management but
can be highly successful.
Markets for ivory and rhino horn. Increased prices of products in existing markets for ivory and rhino horn
in China and SE Asia have overwhelmed trade restrictions and law enforcement measures to fuel a new
wave of elephant and rhino poaching. It is not possible at present to provide close monitoring and tight
management of elephant and rhino populations, or their products, in most of Africa. This means that
benefits from legal trade in ivory and rhino horn are restricted to a small handful of countries in southern
Africa. Legal trade from countries in southern Africa will almost certainly have adverse effects on the black
markets for ivory and rhino horn (procured from wild animals in other parts of Africa) as it opens the door
to endless scams. Nevertheless, the possibility of sharing benefits from legal trade with other rhino range
states with different national policies should be investigated.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
4.1.3
4.1.4
EU beef subsidies. Subsidies instigated by the European Union for beef imports have proved destructive
of migratory wildlife ecosystems.
CBNRM and Conservancies
Private conservancies. Devolution of wildlife rights from government ownership has benefited wildlife
populations on private land through establishment of wildlife conservancies that exploit trophy-hunting and
tourism opportunities.
Communal conservancies. Lessons from Namibias conservancy programme include the following:
decentralization can bring benefits to wildlife and local economies; targeting the poor to achieve greater
equity takes work; land tenure for conservancies remains a challenge; local conservancy committees need
to be fully accountable; and building mature institutions takes time.
Some Limitations. In general, CBNRM works less well in regions where population pressure on land is
high and governance is weak. Even with favourable conditions, there have been multiple cases of
mismanagement, fraud and relatively dysfunction collective governance at the local level, all of which
emphasizes the difficulty in establishing transparent collective local government institutions (AbenspergTraun et al 2011)50. Nevertheless there are few alternatives to sustainable resource use in these settings
and CBNRM will play a vital role in the long-term conservation of African wildlife. One particular
problematic area of conservation in the region that requires successful CBNRM governance is the decline
in Miombo forests in rural areas and the unsustainable production of charcoal.
Wildlife Migration and Disease Management
Veterinary cordon fencing. It is widely acknowledged that veterinary cordon fencing has been
environmentally damaging especially in relation to wildlife migration. Two international organizations are
mandated by the World Trade Organisation (WTO) to provide the standards for food safety and trade in
animal commodities and products: The World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) in Paris which employs
the Terrestrial Animal Health Code (TAHC) and the Codex Alimentarius Commission which operates under
the United Nations World Health Organisation and Food and Agriculture Organisation. Many countries
have adopted the former TAHC standards which require strict separation of uninfected cloven-hoofed
animals from potentially affected populations, usually through fencing.
Commodity-Based Trade. There is a new willingness in both the conservation and livestock sectors of
southern Africa to look again at the issue of fencing and to seek environmentally sensitive alternatives for
controlling disease. The alternative Codex Alimentarius standards are non-geographic and founded
exclusively on management of the risk posed by specific products destined for human consumption. It is
referred to as a Commodity-Based Trade (CBT) approach. The FAO has recently contributed to this
approach by providing guidelines for risk management of animal diseases along value chains (from farm
to fork). Part of the methodology relies on abattoir-based prevention. For instance deboning and removal
of lymph nodes from beef renders it a very safe product irrespective of the FMD-status of the locality of
production (Thomson et al., 2013b)51.
Integrated conservation and disease management. There is an opportunity to jointly develop
environmentally sensitive disease control measures that include a number of control measures: (a) CBT;
(b) use of geographical barriers, such as mountains, lakes and unsuitable habitats to achieve natural
50 Abensperg-Traun, M., Roe, D. and OCriodain, C., eds. (2011). CITES and CBNRM. Proceedings of an international symposium on The
relevance of CBNRM to the conservation and sustainable use of CITES-listed species in exporting countries, Vienna, Austria, 18-20 May
2011. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN and London, UK: IIED. 172pp.
51 Thomson, G. R., M.-L. Penrith, M. W. Atkinson, S. Thalwitzer, A. Mancuso, S. J. Atkinson, and S. A. Osofsky, 2013b: International trade
standards for commodities and products derived from animals: the need for a system that integrates food safety and animal disease risk
management. Transb. Emerg. Dis. 60, 507515.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
separation of livestock from potential wildlife carriers of disease; (c) vaccines; and (d) certain kinds of
control of livestock movements (Ferguson et al 2013)52.
4.1.5
4.2
4.2.1
4.2.1.1
Networks and Sharing Skills

Networked approaches aid conservation. A number of disparate networked approaches to wildlife
conservation in southern Africa have potential. A small sample includes the CAPE partnership for
conservation of the Cape Floristic Region, NASCO the Namibian Association of CBNRM Support
Organisations, and SAWEN the Southern African Wildlife Enforcement Network. With regard to rhino,
SADC Rhino Management Group encourages the direct sharing of knowledge on rhino issues. There is a
need for sharing of intelligence information to assist in breaking transnational criminal networks.
PROMISING APPROACHES
Transfrontier Conservation Areas
Background
The Transfrontier Conservation Area is a relatively new conservation paradigm making its debut in Africa with the
first Peace Park in 1990. It is defined by the Southern African Development Communitys (SADC) Protocol on
Wildlife Conservation and Law Enforcement as:
the area, or component of a large ecological region, that straddles the boundaries of two or more countries,
encompassing one or more protected areas as well as multiple resources use areas
The TFCA is a significant new conservation initiative that combines policies on wildlife conservation, community
development and the promotion of culture and peace under one roof. It brings together a complex and diverse
mosaic of land uses under one shared or joint management structure. It was given an early endorsement by the
late Nelson Mandela, former President of South African and patron of the Peace Parks Foundation:
"I know of no political movement, no philosophy, no ideology, which does not agree with the peace parks
concept as we see it going into fruition today. It is a concept that can be embraced by all.
In May 2013 the Honorary Patrons of Peace Parks Foundation were President Jos Eduardo dos Santos (Angola),
President Armando Emilio Guebuza (Mozambique), President Lt Gen. Seretse Khama Ian Khama (Botswana), His
Majesty King Letsie III (Lesotho), His Majesty King Mswati III (Swaziland), President Robert Mugabe (Zimbabwe),
President Hifikepunye Pohamba (Namibia) and President Jacob Zuma (South Africa).
The 15 Member countries of SADC have now taken the lead in the formal designation, establishment, and political
recognition of TFCAs in Africa. With strong political support, TFCAs are increasingly being embraced at all levels
of society local communities, governments, conservation and tourism organizations, bilateral and multilateral aid
agencies, the private sector and NGOs (Hanks and Myburgh 2014)53. As of 31 May 2013, SADC had 18 existing
and potential TFCAs in various stages of development (Figure 20).
52 Ferguson KJ, Cleaveland S, Haydon DT, Caron A, Kock RA, Lembo T, Hopcraft JG, Chardonnet B, Nyariki T, Keyyu J, Paton DJ, Kivaria
FM. 2013. Evaluating the Potential for the Environmentally Sustainable Control of Foot and Mouth Disease in Sub-Saharan Africa.
53 Hanks, J. and Myburgh, W. (2014). Chapter 9. The evolution and progression of Transfrontier Conservation Areas in the Southern African
Development Community. (In press).
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Figure 19. Location of eighteen TFCAs in SADC, May 2013
There TFCAs range in size from the Kavango-Zambezi (KAZA) TFCA of c. 400,000 km2 (number 3 on the map) to
the Chimanimani TFCA of 2,056 km2 (number 9 on the map). As of May 2013 they together covered an area of
1,006,170 km2. Information on the sizes and other key features, such as number of protected areas, number of
corridors, human population density, and presence of private and/or communal-land conservancies, of fourteen of
these TFCAs is presented in Table 8.
Table 8. Size and Key Features of TFCAs in Southern Africa including protected areas within TFCAs and land-uses outside
of protected areas but within TFCAs (from Cumming 2011 54, Cumming et al 201355).
TFCA
Protected Areas
Land use in Matrix
54 Cumming, D H M (2011) Constraints to Conservation and Development Success at the Wildlife-Livestock-Human Interface in Southern
African Transfrontier Conservation Areas: A Preliminary Review. Technical Report to the Wildlife Conservation Societys AHEAD Program.
37 pp.
55 Cumming, D. H. M., Dzingirai, V. and de Garine-Wichatitsky (2013). Land and natural resource-based livelihood opportunities in
transfrontier conservation areas. In: Andersson, J.A., de Garine-Wichatitsky, M., Cumming, D.H.M., Dzingirai, V. & Giller, K.E. (Eds.)
Transfrontier Conservation Areas: People Living on the Edge. London: Earthscan.
400,000
38
22
<5
2. Niassa Selous
96,200
91
5-25
3. Great Limpopo
87,000
53
5-250
4. Kgalagadi TFNP
37,256
100
<5
5. IonaSkeleton Coast
32,000
100
<1
6. Mana-Lower Zambezi
25,000
80
5-25
7. Drakensberg-Maloti
13,000
0-250
8. Liuwa Plain-Mussuma
10,000?
9. Ais-Ais Richtersveld
6.681
76
10. Greater Mapungubwe
4,872
40
5-25
11. Lubombo
4,195
5-250
12. Nyika-Mwaza Marsh
4,134
70
<5-
13. Kasungu-Lukusuzi
2,316
60
5-250
14. Chimanimani
2,056
5-250
Total
Human
Livestock
Crops
CL
Private
and
Conservancies
Population
Density (people/km2)
Area
2
km
No. Corridors
% of TFCA in
State PAs
1. Kavango-Zambezi
No. Countries
No. State PAs
Shared National
Borders
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
755,910
PAs = state protected areas without resident communities*, CL = Communal Lands.

Symbols: - absent or none, + present, / some park boundaries shared across international boundaries,
and ? status not known or uncertain..
* The six conservation areas in Angola have resident populations within their borders and are not included in the figure of 38 state protected
areas for the KAZA.
The potential for expansion of the TFCA conceptual approach is Pan-African as illustrated by the map of
transfrontier areas in Africa (Figure 21). Not all sites illustrated have formal joint-management arrangements. Many
NGOs are assisting with TFCA development. IFAW, together with its partner CERU (Conservation Ecology
Research Unit at the University of Pretoria, S. Africa), uses an ecological network approach, which essentially
bridges the gap between a traditional National Parks approach and a very broad transfrontier conservation
approach. Ecological networks may come together to form TFCAs.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Source: Peace Parks Foundation
Figure 20. Map of transfrontier conservation areas and World Heritage Sites in Africa
4.2.1.2
Ecosystem Management and TFCAs
One of the key advantages of the transfrontier approach to conservation is the opportunity to plan and undertake
both conservation and development at the scale of landscapes which incorporate entire ecosystems. This enables
more effective conservation, more efficient use of natural resources and greater social and economic involvement
of communities. Five levels of TFCA management can be recognised.
56
Landscape management for migration

Conservation at the landscape scale owes much to the application of island biogeography theory. Wildlife
corridors are widely advocated as the best way to link fragmented ecosystems or isolated habitats to reestablish ecosystem connectivity. However, the success of these schemes relies heavily on animals
moving either permanently or seasonally between the connected areas. Until recently it was assumed
that restoring migrations that had collapsed following construction of fences would prove difficult. Recent
evidence indicates that old migratory routes can be re-established by medium-sized herbivores relatively
quickly once physical barriers have been removed (Bartlam-Brooks et al 2011)56. Use of environmentallysensitive measures for control of livestock diseases will enable fences to be removed within TFCA
allowing wildlife migrations to be reinstated.
Landscape management for livelihoods development

Conservation management at the scale of the landscape aims to take a holistic approach, looking not
just at biodiversity issues, but also at the local economy, agriculture, eco-tourism, and the social and
health benefits of the environment. Much of this economic growth can be associated with nature-based
Bartlam-Brooks, H.L.A., Bonyongo, M.C. & Harris, S. (2011) Will reconnecting ecosystems allow long-distance mammal migrations to
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
or wildlife-based tourism, including photo-safari operations and safari hunting. Travel and tourism is the
fastest growing industry in the world. It is the foremost job creator of all industries within the SADC region
where it is well-placed to maximize foreign exchange earnings and provide new jobs in areas where
there is high unemployment, a relatively unskilled labour-force and few alternative sources of
employment. Creating easier access for tourists to the various constituent areas making up the TFCA
will facilitate regional job creation (Hanks and Myburgh 2014)57. Emphasis will be given to land-use
planning to minimise conflicts and maximise synergy for development.
Water basin management for conservation and development

Wildlife ecosystems are often part of even larger hydro-ecological systems. The TFCA approach has an
important role in contributing to River Basin Management Plans and can play a vital part in protecting
water-dependent natural ecosystems.
Protected areas management

In much of Africa, conservation is undermined by poor quality park management that comes about
because of inadequate budgets and a lack of suitably qualified and motivated staff. TFCA has the
potential to earn considerably greater revenue from increased tourism than if each of the protected areas
continued to operate in isolation. If this increased revenue is ploughed back into the areas concerned,
then park budgets should be adequate for improved management (Hanks and Myburgh 2014).
Promotion of culture and peace.

Civil unrest which has characterized the life of millions of people in many parts of Africa has a better
chance of being reduced when "peace parks" are fully operational. The surrounding communities from
a diverse range of nations and cultures are given a new opportunity to co-operate and promote a wide
range of economic benefits from within the TFCAs. An active commitment to promote a culture of peace
and demilitarisation in these sensitive areas has obvious benefits for all partner countries (Hanks and
Myburgh 2014).
In the marginal drier areas of southern Africa, TFCA development is one of the very few options that offers improved
standards of living in the rural community. Perhaps the greatest achievement of TFCAs is the potential it provides
for raising the intrinsic value of biodiversity in African society. In the past conservation policy has had little legitimacy
in the eyes of the leaders of African states or in those of rural people. TFCAs present wildlife in an exciting new
light that is integral to the economics of land-use and vital to the livelihoods of rural people. The transfrontier
approach is the one conservation policy in Africa that tries to address multiple issues. It is for this reasons that
TFCAs have the potential to spearhead the introduction of a new national commitment to wildlife conservation
across Africa.
4.2.1.3
Governance and TFCAs
SADC Member States and SADC Secretariat have gone to great lengths over the past decade to prepare the
political basis for cross-border cooperation with regard to natural resources management. A number of regional
strategies and programmes, including the Regional TFCA Programme have been developed with the help of
German development cooperation to implement SADC Protocols on Forestry, Wildlife Conservation and Law
Enforcement. In these strategies and programmes, Member States have identified the priority areas for cross border
cooperation which provide the basis for donor support to SADC.
57
Hanks, J. and Myburgh, W. (2014). Chapter 9. The evolution and progression of Transfrontier Conservation Areas in the Southern African
Development Community. (In press).
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
SADC is well positioned to assist Member States in agreeing on Transfrontier Conservation Area boundaries and
their operations and maintenance. Some of the key issues regarding Transfrontier Conservation Areas that SADC
addresses include:
Harmonisation of resource mobilisation, policies, and enforcement;
Promotion of partnerships between public and private sectors; and
Assessment of capacity building needs.
A criticism frequently voiced over TFCAs is that they suffer from an overly bureaucratic top-down management
model which is preventing progress. In fact TFCA governance cannot be the same for every TFCA as the ecological
circumstances, government situations and goals of establishment are quite distinct. The most suitable cross-border
governance structure will depend on the nature of disturbances. Within a country as well, some actions will work
best from the national level and others at a provincial level, some at a policy level and others at a bureaucratic
level, some from within the parks and others from outside (Schoon 2008)58. Designing and implementing
institutional arrangements such as these is difficult and will take knowledge, experience and time. It will also require
an adaptive governance approach which can facilitate adjustment to institutions and refinement of policies.
Fortunately considerable experience in TFCA Development and in training of Wildlife Managers has been gained
by SADC through the implementation of its regional strategies and programmes in cross-border cooperation over
the past 10 years, again with the assistance of German development cooperation. This experience will play a vital
role in designing regional programmes for wildlife conservation (Box 4).
58
Schoon, M.L. 2008. Building Robustness to Disturbance: Governance in Southern African Peace Parks.Ph.D thesis, Indiana University.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Box 4. Ongoing TFCA support in Southern Africa potential for synergies
Transboundary Use and Protection of Natural Resources has been a focal area of German development cooperation with
SADC since 2009. Funds for natural resource management have also been provided to SADC Member States through
German bilateral development cooperation programmes, especially to Namibia, Mozambique, Tanzania, DR Congo and
Madagascar. The objective of the current development programme with SADC is to ensure that the transboundary protection
of biodiversity and functional ecosystems as well as the sustainable use of natural resources secure the socio-economic and
ecological livelihoods of the local population and of future generations. This objective harmonizes well with the objective
proposed by this study for an EU initiative, viz: A full suite of viable populations of the magnificent wildlife heritage throughout
Sub-Saharan Africa maintained in healthy, functioning and resilient ecosystems supporting livelihoods and human
development.
Financial Cooperation (provided through KfW)
1. Great Limpopo Park
Time Frame: Ongoing until 2018
Budget: 33.9 million EUR
Main areas of support:
Financial support and TA for the implementation of TFCAs
Support of development plans, management plans and business plans (including tourism development plans)
Financing of the implementation of the planning frameworks
Financing of park protection and anti-poaching activities
Financing of resettlement activities.
2. Kavango Zambezi Tranfrontier Conservation Area (KAZA)
Time Frame: Ongoing until 2020
Support for the establishment of TFCA governance structures (KAZA secretariat)
Support for the establishment of development plans, management plans and business plans (including tourism
development plans and integrated regional planning frameworks)
Investments in park infrastructure
Streamlining of tender procedures for investments
Development of partnerships with private sector and civil society.
3. Malawi-Zambia Transfrontier Conservation Area
Time Frame: 2014 2019 (in preparation)
Budget: 18 million EUR
Main areas of support: to be defined.
4. Training of Wildlife Rangers and Managers in the SADC region
Time frame: 2014 2018
Establishment and improvement of infrastructure and equipment for mobile, decentralized training units to widen the
regional training offered
Financing of the upgrading of the Southern African Wildlife College, to provide sustainable and cost efficient training
for wildlife managers in the region
Establishment of a mechanism for grants to strengthen access to training by park management of TFCAs and
neighbouring CBOs.
The identified support is based on a training needs assessment conducted by German development cooperation in 2012/13
for the Southern African region which identified training needs for different wildlife management functions in a range of about
60 million EUR.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
5. Support to the Southern African Wildlife College (SAWC)

Time Frame: finalized
Support to the environment-friendly construction of the SAWC
Support to an integrated implementation approach (collaborative planning and implementation)
Financing of bursaries for female students.
Technical Cooperation (provided through GIZ)
1. Sustainable Forest Management and Protection in the SADC Region
Time Frame: 1996-2012 (finalized)
Development and implementation of strategies for income generation from forests in 4 SADC countries (MOZ, MAL,
NAM and BOT)
Development of regional strategies and programmes for the implementation of the Forestry Protocol as well as the
Protocol on Wildlife Conservation and Law Enforcement (Forestry Strategy 2010, Regional TFCA Programme 2013,
SADC Programme on Cross-border Fire Management 2010, regional REDD Programme 2010, FLEGT programme
2013).
Support to the positioning for the international dialogue on Climate Change
2. Transboundary Use and Protection of Natural Resources in the SADC Region
Time Frame: Ongoing 2012-2018
Implementing the Regional TFCA Programme:
- diversifying financing mechanisms for selected TFCAs (private sector involvement, international biodiversity
and climate change funds, financing mechanism)
- enhancing information exchange between stakeholder groups, TFCAs and SADC Secretariat (establishment
of a TFCA Network and a web portal for virtual information and best practice exchange and data management,
training for network members and SADC Secretariat, developing regional guidelines for TFCA management)
- generating best practices for cross-border income generation with communities (3 pilot projects for crossborder tourism and other measures)
- reducing vulnerability of ecosystems and communities to the effects of climate change (training and 2 pilot
projects on cross-border CC adaptation measures)
- developing and implementing mobile (on site) training for 6 TFCAs on TFCA relevant (cross-border) issues
(veterinary, poaching, border control, etc.)
Implementing the regional Programme on Cross-border fire Management
- Documenting of best practices and experiences on community based fire management
- Generating best practices for cross-border fire management with communities and park management (pilot
projects in 4 TFCAs)
- Establishing regional training on integrated fire management with a focus on cross-border fire management
with Regional Centres of Excellence)
Implementing the Regional REDD Programme
- Establishing regional training on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD)
Strategy development support to SADC Secretariat and Member States
- Developing a regional strategy on Green Growth
- Developing a regional Climate Change Strategy.
In designing a Support Programme for TFCAs (Section 5.1), governance needs to be programmed at three levels:
(a) Site-Level governance is concerned with institutions representing the protected areas and surrounding
communities and landholders; (b) Country-Level support will provide assistance for government institutions to
enable reforms and capacity-strengthening at national level; and (c) Regional-Level support will assist SADC and
NEPAD in offering legal and policy expertise to member states.
4.2.1.4
KAZA The Kavango Zambezi TFCA
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
The Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area is so exceptional in terms of its size and diversity of natural
resources that it has become the flagship transfrontier area for Africa. It covers an area of c. 400,000 km2 an area
slightly larger than that of Zimbabwe and four times the size of Malawi. The Victoria Falls forms a well-known central
point in the TFCA and is near the meeting point of four of the five participating countries (Angola, Botswana,
Namibia, Zambia, and Zimbabwe). Two major river basins, the Zambezi and the Okavango contribute major
wetlands, including the Okavango Swamps, to the generally flat to gently undulating landscapes. KAZA also
encompasses large areas of the Miombo-Mopane and the Kalahari-Namib Wilderness Areas (Figure 22).
There are more than 70 protected areas within the KAZA TFCA that range in size from 22,000 km2 (Kafue National
Park) to 19 km2 (Victoria Falls National Park). These protected areas cover a range of types and purposes from
strict national parks under state control (of which there are 17) to multiple use areas under community management
(Cumming 2008)59. The Mosi-oa-Tunya / Victoria Falls is a World Heritage Site and the Okavango Delta has recently
been listed as a second one.
KAZA provides one of the last true wilderness regions in Africa where migratory wildlife populations can move
across international borders between their wet and dry season ranges. The northern conservation area of Botswana
(NCA) is a vast wilderness made up of national parks and wildlife management areas totalling an area of > 80 000
km2 and supporting the largest elephant population on earth of around 150 000 - 200 000 individuals. In addition,
the NCA supports four distinct zebra migrations (Bartlam-Brooks et al. 201160; RWS Fynn pers comm.). Many
buffalo herds forage in the woodlands on the Botswana side during the wet season but move across the border into
the Namibian side of the Linyanti Swamps during the dry season (Fynn et al. in press61).
Figure 21. The Kavango Zambezi TFCA
59 Cumming, D.H.M. 2008. Large Scale Conservation Planning and Priorities for the Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area. A
60 Bartlam-Brooks, H.L.A., Bonyongo, M.C. & Harris, S. (2011) Will reconnecting ecosystems allow long-distance mammal migrations to
61 FYNN, R. W. S., CHASE, M. & RODER. A. Functional habitat heterogeneity and large-herbivore seasonal habitat selection in northern
Botswana. Sth. Afr. J. Wild. Res. In press.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Similarly most of the Chobe River Fronts zebra population relies upon floodplains on the Namibian side.
Additionally, collared elephant herds move from Botswana, through Namibia and well into Angola (Mike Chase,
unpublished data). The region carries two globally threatened large mammals (black rhinoceros and wild dog),
several endemic species of plants, reptiles and amphibians, one endemic mammal and one endemic bird species.
The TFCA includes a human population in the region 1.5 million people but large areas carry population densities
of less than 5 people per km2.
4.2.1.5
Priorities for Development
The mission of the participating countries, expressed in their December 2006 MOU, is:
To establish a world-class transfrontier conservation area and tourism destination in the Okavango and Zambezi
river basin regions of Angola, Botswana, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe within the context of sustainable
development.
And the primary objectives are to:
a. Foster trans-national collaboration and co-operation in implementing ecosystems and cultural resource
management;
b. Promote alliances in the management of biological and cultural resources and encourage social, economic
and other partnerships among their Governments and stakeholders;
c. Enhance ecosystem integrity and natural ecological processes by harmonizing natural resources
management approaches and tourism development across international boundaries;
d. Develop mechanisms and strategies for local communities to participate meaningfully in, and tangibly
benefit from, the TFCA; and
e. Promote cross-border tourism as a means of fostering regional socio-economic development.
The following four large-scale priorities require reform, support and investment:
1. Water flows and wetlands.
The centre piece of the KAZA TFCA is its wetlands. These are focal areas for a large part of the human population
residing in the TFCA. They support a wide range of important wetland-dependent species and play a key role in
the regions tourism development. But the wetlands within KAZA are vulnerable not only because of impending
climate change but also because they depend on water derived from distant highlands. These are large-scale,
multi-faceted and complex issues that will require investment and long term commitment by governments, donors,
NGOs and civil society (Cumming 2008)62.
2. Natural resource governance
The dominant form of land use in the KAZA TFCA is subsistence agriculture under communal tenure in nutrient
poor, mostly semi-arid systems. The potentially rich biodiversity of the area and its wetlands are undervalued,
mostly because those living on the land are unable to realize the full value and benefits of this rich heritage. This is
very largely a result of inappropriate institutions governing resource access rights and benefits streams, and
associated mismatches between social and ecological scales. The success of the KAZA
TFCA as a conservation and development initiative rests squarely on the extent to which rural communities will
benefit from wildlife-based land uses. Reforms in tenure and resource access rights will be crucial to the
sustainability of the KAZA TFCA (Cumming 2008).
62
Cumming, D.H.M. 2008. Large Scale Conservation Planning and Priorities for the Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area. A
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
3. Biodiversity linkages and conservation planning

The broad-scale southwest-northeast rainfall and biodiversity gradients in the KAZA region indicate how habitats
may change along these gradients under climate change. Associated with these projected changes will be the need
to maintain adaptive response corridors along these biodiversity gradients. Investment and support is required for
development of conservation assessment and planning in KAZA (Cumming 2008).
4. Information and participatory science
Little current, sound information is available and accessible on a wide range of topics for the KAZA TFCA. Major
gaps that need to be filled include the current distribution and status of plant and vertebrate taxa throughout the
TFCA, but particularly in Angola and Zambia. The status of the few endemics, particularly the herpetofauna,
urgently needs to be assessed.
Information on protected areas (check lists, numbers or status, distribution, habitats, budgets, staff levels, etc.) is
not generally available. The setting up of an open web-based but quality controlled Wiki directory on the protected
areas in the KAZA region may assist in filling many of the gaps. Similar gaps exist in the information base on forest
areas and on ecosystem services throughout the KAZA region. The development of a more participatory culture
between governments, NGOs, the private sector, universities and research departments, and the range of
stakeholders living within the TFCA is urgently needed (Cumming 2008).
The signing of an MOU by five participating countries to establish KAZA TFCA provides a unique window of
opportunity through which to explore and develop innovative approaches to conservation in large landscapes in the
region it is an opportunity that should be seized by all involved and supported by the international community.
4.2.1.6
Constraints on Development of TFCAs
The potential of TFCAs as a driving force behind conservation and natural resource-based livelihoods is easily
appreciated; bringing this vision to fruition is a much harder task. Most TFCAs in Southern Africa are situated in
marginal land in terms of productivity and services. Were it not so, these areas would long ago have been settled
and used for agriculture. Without change, the future may be one of increased conflict and marginalisation of the
inhabitants. On the other hand, these areas might give rise to diverse natural resource-based enterprises that enrich
the lives of residents. It has been shown that the most profitable form of land-use in the TFCAs is a combination of
wildlife-based tourism and full diversification of natural resource-based enterprises. The various enterprises include
non-consumptive tourism, safari hunting, the sustainable harvesting of meat, crafts and non-timber forest products,
and the provision of ecosystem services such as water and carbon sequestration.
The bottom line is that unless those living in marginal areas benefit from conserving wild natural resources, TFCAs
are unlikely to work as sustainable multiple-use zones. Not only that, but the long-term future of the core protected
areas and their large mammal populations, is likely to be compromised (Cumming et al 2013)63.
A recent assessment of conservation and development in TFCAs found that many of the core protected areas were
inadequately funded and faced ongoing declines in several large mammals and, at the same time, the integration
of agriculture and natural resource management was problematic (Cumming 2011)64. A number of constraints were
holding back progress significantly. They operated at three scales. The first scale, or level, was that of international
laws and conventions, and national management capacities. The second level was at the TFCA scale and included
63
Cumming, D. H. M., Dzingirai, V. and de Garine-Wichatitsky (2013). Land and natural resource-based livelihood opportunities in
transfrontier conservation areas. In: Andersson, J.A., de Garine-Wichatitsky, M., Cumming, D.H.M., Dzingirai, V. & Giller, K.E. (Eds.)
Transfrontier Conservation Areas: People Living on the Edge. London: Earthscan.
64 Cumming, D H M (2011) Constraints to Conservation and Development Success at the Wildlife-Livestock-Human Interface in Southern
African Transfrontier Conservation Areas: A Preliminary Review. Technical Report to the Wildlife Conservation Societys AHEAD Program.
37 pp.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
those constraints that confronted resource managers. The third scale was at the local level, within TFCAs, at the
wildlife-livestock-human interface. These constraints are summarised in Cumming (2011).
4.2.2
Public-Private Partnerships for Park Management
Through partnerships with wildlife authorities, African Parks Network and other non-state actors take one the
primary responsibility for managing protected areas. In the southern region, African Parks is currently managing
Bangweulu Wetlands and Liuwa Plain National Park in Zambia and Majete Wildlife Reserve in Malawi.
Frankfurt Zoological Society is operational manager of the North Luangwa National Park and surrounding GMAs
where they are developing resource protection, institutional mechanisms, governance arrangements and revenue
sharing policy for wildlife management in the community areas. They assist with law enforcement and park
management in Gonarezhou National Park in Zimbabwe.
Wildlife Conservation Society co-manages Niassa Reserve in northern Mozambique with the Ministry of Tourism.
4.2.3
Conservancies
In many parts of southern Africa, a large fraction of the human inhabitants are poor, rural, semi-subsistence
agriculturalists who depend heavily on natural resources for their livelihoods including wildlife, wood products such
as firewood and charcoal, NTFPs and water. These conditions have led to the development of institutions and
programmes supporting community-based natural resource management and sustainable uses of natural
resources, such as CAMPFIRE in Zimbabwe, ADMADE in Zambia, NRMP-Botswana, and Namibias communal
conservancies (Section 2.1.5).
They aim has been to provide a regulatory framework to enable communities and investment partners to commit
to wildlife business and enterprises which are based on sustainable management of natural resources. In the case
of Namibias conservancies, lessons were learnt from CAMPFIRE and ADMADE and a deliberate effort was made
to avoid predetermined administrative boundaries. This helped reinforce devolution of wildlife-use rights and
benefits to community level.
The first four communal conservancies were registered in 1998 a little over a decade later, 64 registered
conservancies serve one in four rural Namibians. Total income from CBNRM to rural Namibians has grown to well
over N$ 42 million in 2009.
As mentioned in Section 4.1.3, there have been many cases of mismanagement of CBNRMs and dysfunctional
governance. The work can be difficult and results may not be achieved overnight but ultimately CBNRM is about
increased democracy, improved governance and increased local rights.
4.2.4
Awareness-Raising
One of the goals of wildlife conservation in southern Africa is to develop a land ethic in society that is centred on
sustainable use of natural resources and an appreciation of cultural and aesthetic values of biodiversity.
Awareness-raising programmes inform the public about wildlife values and issues by tailoring information,
interpretative materials and media communications at specific sectors of society. The key to this approach is to
understand the needs of each sector.
4.2.4.1
Access to Protected Areas
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
The great majority of African children know almost nothing about the national parks or wildlife of their country. Even
if they live near to a national park, few can afford the entry fees. For children who are citizens and aged between
five and sixteen, the price of entry to South African parks is 15 to 35 rand (1.1 - 2.7 euro). It is similar in East Africa
where entry to Kenyan parks is 200 shillings (1.70 euro). Yet a typical rural kid might not even have 10 shillings to
spend. This entry fee obviously excludes the cost of transport and accommodation costs. This barrier contributes
to a lack of awareness of wildlife values. In combination with rural poverty, it is an effective training for generation
after generation of poachers.
Information on wildlife that is on offer in African schools (if indeed there is any on offer) does not address this
problem and it tends to be disconnected from peoples real lives. This is particularly apparent in rural locations as
the school curriculum often promotes suburban and materialistic values which have most relevance to children of
the emerging middle classes. A boy from the rural community aged eight today will be twenty by the time this wildlife
strategy has been fully implemented. By that time he will probably be a hunter and may well be tempted to poach
wildlife.
4.2.4.2
Wildlife Education
Lack of awareness about wildlife heritage extends to the educated and political classes. Only a minority, mainly
wildlife professionals and bird-enthusiasts, are well-informed about wildlife issues and express strong interest in
wild animals. Unfortunately this indifference to wildlife heritage has extended in the past to political leaders who,
with a few notable exceptions, seldom express much interest in wildlife heritage or consider the environment in
their development plans (UNEP 2003)65. Without political leadership on wildlife conservation, corruption has
become a major force across the continent; it undermines environmental equity and destroys ecosystems.
Conservation projects keep failing because of this one paired issue (indifference and corruption). Many factors
contribute but inadequate education, understanding, and positive role models at an early age are surely key factors.
Nevertheless, there are indications of a new vision of wildlife and biodiversity emerging in southern Africa and other
regions that recognizes the value of wildlife and wild ecosystems to African society (Box 5). There are also signs
that governments wish to integrate wildlife into their national and regional development plans.
Box 5. Vision for African Wildlife
65
UNEP 2003. Action Plan for the Environment Initiative of the New Partnership for Africas Development (NEPAD).
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Visions of the Future

The survival of our wildlife is a matter of grave concern to all of us in Africa. These wild creatures amid the wild places they
inhabit are not only important as a source of wonder and inspiration, but are an integral part of our natural resources and
our future livelihood and well being.
Julius K. Nyerere, 1961
I know of no political movement, no philosophy, no ideology, which does not agree with the peace parks concept as we
see it going into fruition today. It is a concept that can be embraced by all. In a world beset by conflicts and division, peace
is one of the cornerstones of the future. Peace parks are a building block in this process, not only in our region, but
potentially in the entire world.
Nelson Mandela, 2001
The preservation of biodiversity is not just a job for governments. International and non-governmental organisations, the
private sector and each and every individual have a role to play in changing entrenched outlooks and ending destructive
patterns of behaviour.
Kofi Annan, 2003
Natural capital our ecosystems, biodiversity, and natural resources underpins economies, societies and individual wellbeing. The values of its myriad benefits are, however, often overlooked or poorly understood... We are running down our
natural capital stock without understanding the value of what we are losing. The rural poor, most dependent on the natural
resource base, are often hardest hit.
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, 2012
An effective education in conservation imparts knowledge and know-how on wildlife and its management. It can
teach children about the place of wildlife in nature and the role of nature in providing services including
ecosystems, food chains and the web of life. It can also teach about practical and economic uses of wildlife in rural
communities, sustainable and unsustainable forms of use, methods to mitigate human-wildlife conflicts, aesthetics
and the part that wild animals play in cultural traditions and in the tourism industry. Conservation education can
continue from primary level to high school. Education in wildlife can also be reinforced by wildlife clubs and
sponsored visits to protected areas.
4.2.4.3
Wildlife Clubs
The creative enterprise shown by wildlife education programmes is extraordinary: travelling theatres from South
Africa, singers from Mali, art competitions, story-telling, school visits from Europe or elsewhere, meet-the-ranger
days, and so forth. The wildlife clubs around a TFCA or national park can be linked through joint park visits,
competitions and get-togethers. There can be national club days and other events. The underlying principle is
simple: if greed, ignorance and carelessness are the underlying drivers of biodiversity decline, then an education
programme that fosters awareness, understanding and care has to be one of the main tools in preventing
biodiversity declining over the long-term.
4.2.5
Council of Elders for the Environment (CEE)
Africa has its own powerful social mechanism for countering antisocial behaviour that is based on meetings of
elders. This cultural tradition could be organized in the service of a land ethic to provide sustainable use of natural
resources and conservation of wildlife heritage. The CEE will bring elders and leaders together in a circle, as in a
traditional village meeting, where anyone can speak and be heard. Its purpose will be to increase transparency of
land- and resource-based decisions and allow a greater opportunity for communities (at grassroots level) to air their
issues and listen to the environmental case. Councils will convene at multiple levels from district to national and
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
regional levels but with a focus on TFCAs and protected areas. Adopting a traditional open and inclusive style of
discussion, the main purpose of the Council of Elders will be to come up with a genuine land and wildlife ethic that
matches the expectations and needs of people in rural communities and which reflects a broader perspective than
that of the market economy alone.
The strategy envisages a programme of awareness-raising that casts light on the main social drivers underlying
the wildlife crisis poverty combined with lack of opportunity in rural communities and indifference in educated and
political classes arising from their historic exclusion from parks and loss of cultural traditions (Section 5.5).
INDICATIVE CONSERVATION ACTIONS
In parts of Southern Africa, the rural population is beginning to view national parks and wildlife with a sense of pride
thanks to enlightened land-use policies that provide communities with certain resource rights. Many wildlife
professionals in the region view conservation of wildlife and rural economic development as synergistic and codependent on sustainable management of natural resources.
In developing this strategic approach to long-term wildlife conservation, arguments have been presented that justify
the need to focus support on world-class management services for a small number of key conservation areas. A
Key Landscape for Conservation (KLC) should have the capacity to sustain viable populations of large African
wildlife species within a functioning ecosystem. At the same time, it should act as focus in developing the rural
economy through sustainable use of natural resources. A suitable network of KLCs has the potential to protect the
well-known wildlife species of the region within natural ecosystems and to stimulate rural economic growth.
The TFCA approach explored in Section 4 encompasses this dual concept for KLCs. It recognizes that
conservation-related industries within TFCAs are likely to have higher economic returns than agricultural activities
in many parts of the region. Furthermore by cultivating a context for socio-economic engagement with wildlife, it
offers the prospect of a resurgence of culturally-creative, wildlife heritage that is uniquely African.
The outline of a plan to develop TFCAs for integrated socio-economic and wildlife-conservation benefits is
presented in Section 5.1. Other components of the strategic approach are then given: conserving Independent
Conservation Areas of outstanding value (Section 5.2); reforming wildlife institutions (Section 5.3); countering
poaching and dismantling wildlife networks (Section 5.4); and reforming education and raising awareness (Section
5.5).
5.1
KEY LANDSCAPES FOR CONSERVATION: (I) TFCAS
Many Transfrontier Conservation Areas are ideal candidates for selection as KLCs. Support for TFCAs that are
selected will take place at three levels. Site-Level support will target the protected areas and surrounding
communities. Country-Level support will provide assistance for government institutions to enable reforms and
capacity-strengthening. Regional-Level support will assist SADC and NEPAD in offering legal and policy expertise
to member states wishing to conserve wildlife and develop natural resources within the TFCA framework. The
following conservation actions for developing TFCAs as Key Landscapes for Conservation are recommended.
5.1.1
Site Level
This support is aimed at the conservation areas and their surrounding communities.
5.1.1.1
Selection of Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLCs)
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
TFCAs have been adopted as a model for development of conservation areas in the Southern African region in
recognition of the opportunity they offer for ecosystem-scale conservation, integrated CBNRM and cultural
engagement with wildlife. Selection amongst TFCAs for inclusion in the list of Key Landscapes for Conservation
(KLCs) in Southern Africa will depend on the match with ecological, socio-economic and conservation criteria (Box
6). A suitable procedure will bring together independent experts and country representatives in SADC to prioritise
KLCs from a list of candidate areas. Suggestions for TFCAs that could be included in this KLC list are given in
Table 9 and their locations are indicated in Figure 23.
Box 6. Criteria for identifying Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLC)
KLCs Key Landscapes for Conservation are areas recognized to be of global wildlife importance with intact ecosystems
capable of sustaining wildlife populations in the face of increasing isolation from other similar areas. The following criteria are a
guide to identifying potential new KLCs. It is not necessary for all criteria to apply to any one candidate KLC. Possession of one
or more criteria does not automatically qualify an area as a KLC.
Established as a Transfrontier Conservation Area or in the process of formal development as a TFCA.

Recognised as a World Heritage Site for its global (scientific) importance.
Protects a functioning ecosystem with viable wildlife populations in the face of increasing isolation caused by an
expanding rural population.
Protects a globally important dry-season concentration area for wildlife populations together with their wet-season
dispersal zones.
Protects a long-distance terrestrial wildlife migration, or the range occupied historically by such a migration where there
is opportunity to recover that migration though barrier removals.
Protects an important populations of free-ranging elephants in Southern Africa
Protects an important population of African black rhino or Southern White Rhino.
Protects a key population (as rated by the appropriate IUCN SSC Specialist Group) of one or more of the other large
African wildlife species, including predators, primates and ungulates, which are categorised as endangered or vulnerable
according to IUCN Red List Criteria. Particular attention should be given to species that typically occur at low density
and/or occupy large home ranges, and which consequently require large and intact ecosystems for sustaining their freeranging populations.
Protects an important wintering ground for Palearctic bird migrants (eg wetlands recognised as Important Bird Areas
IBA).
Protects a regionally important hotspot of endemism and diversity that requires ecosystem-scale (versus microhabitatscale) protection.
Contains wildlife landscapes of exceptional scenic interest.
Protects a watershed or aquifer that has direct conservation benefit through tight linkages with downstream waterdependent ecosystems that are themselves of global importance.
Plays a vital role in sustaining a key natural resource, such as a fishery or source of freshwater, that has critical national
importance through public, commercial, recreational, artisanal or subsistence use.
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Table 9. Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLC) identified as priorities under the current review
Countries
(ISO2 code)
Size (km2)
Ecotype/biome
Protected areas
Southern Africa
Kavango Zambezi TFCA
AO, NA, BW,

ZM, ZW
400,000
37,572
(phase 1)
Miombo woodland
Zambezian flooded
grasslands
Savanna
Liuwa Plains NP (Zam)

Kafue NP (Zam)
Matusadona NP (Zim)
Chizarira NP (Zim)
Hwange NP (Zim)
Naxai Pan NP (Bot)
Chobe NP (Bot)
Moremi GR (Bot)
Okavango Delta WHS
Limpopo NP (Moz)
Kruger NP (SA)
Gonarezhou NP (Zim)
2 additional sanctuaries & further
PAs in phase 2
Gemsbok NP (Bot)
Kalahari Gemsbok NP (SA)
1 additional reserve
Great Limpopo TP
MZ, ZA, ZW
Kgalagadi TP
BW, ZA
33,551
Desert (Kalahari)
Lower Zambezi Mana Pools

TFCDA
ZM, ZW
17,745
Miombo woodlands
Riparian woodlands
Wetlands
Montane
Maloti Drakensberg Transboundary

World Heritage Site comprising
Sehlabathebe
NP
(Les)
and
uKhahlamba Drakensberg NP (SA)
Desert,
Arid Mountain
Maloti-Drakensberg TFCA
LS, ZA
14,740
Ais-Ais Richtersveld TP
NA, ZA
5,920
Miombo woodlands

Final report
Mana Pools NP (WHS), Sapi and

Chewore Safari Areas (Zim)
Lower Zambezi NP (Zam)
Ai-Ais Hot Springs Game Park

(Nam)
Page 59
Wildlife migrations
Large elephant population
Other large mammals are abundant
Unique Okavango Delta listed on World Heritage List
Peace Park
Riverine woodlands
Regional endemism
Unique Kalahari ecosystem

Gemsbok, springbok, blue wildebeest, eland and red hartebeest
Cultural importance (San and Mier)
Peace Park
Zambezi River
Floodplain
Escarpment
350 bird species
Southern mountains
Escarpments
Rich endemic flora
Wetlands
San culture
Fish River Canyon
Centre of floral diversity
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Countries
(ISO2 code)
Size (km2)
10,029
Ecotype/biome
Deep canyon
Coastal plain
Riverine forest
Bushveld
Protected areas
Richtersveld NP (SA)
Links 5 TFCA projects
Hlane Royal NP (Swa)
Tembe Elephant Park (SA)
Maputo Special Reserve (Moz)
12 state PAs and other reserves
and private land
Chimanimani
NP
(Zim)
and
Chimanimani NR (Moz)
3 PAs including Nyika National Park
(Mal) and Vwaza Marsh Wildlife
Reserve (Zam)
Dimonika Biosphere Reserve (Congo),
Luki Forest Biosphere Reserve (DRC)
and 6 other reserves with little
protection in practice
Selous Game Reserve (WHS) (Tan)
Mikumi NP (Tan)
Niassa Game Reserve (Moz)
Lubombo TFCRA
MZ, ZA, SZ
Chimanimani TFCA
MZ, ZW
2,056
Malawi / Zambia TFCA
MW, ZM
4,134
(phase 1)
Maiombe Forest TFCA*
AO, CG, DRC
to be
defined
Tropical rainforest
Niassa Selous TFCA*
MZ, TZ
96,200
Dry forest (miombo)
Etosha Pan NP
NA
22,750
Desert, salt pans
Etosha Pan NP
North Luangwa NP
ZM
4,636
North Luangwa NP
South Luangwa NP
ZM
9,050
Central Kalahari GR
BW
52,800
Miombo
and
Mopane
woodlands
Riverine forest
Miombo, Zambezian and
Mopane woodlands
Riverine forest
Bushland
Grassland
Mountain Zebra NP
ZA
284
Mountain Zebra NP
Cangandala-Luando
Protected Areas
AO
9,366
Grassland
Dry shrubland
Miombo
Mountains
and
miombo
woodlands
Montane grassland and
wetlands

Final report
South Luangwa NP
Central Kalahari GR
Cangandala National Park

Luando Strict Nature Reserve
Page 60
and
Cultural history
High biodiversity
5 Ramar sites
Marine TFCA
Cultural history
Forest, scenery, wildlife, endemic plants and culture

Montane grassland & flora
Wetlands
Restocking programme
South-western part of Congo
Basin rainforest;
Chimpanzees & lowland gorillas
Wide variety of wildlife habitats
Large mammal populations important for elephant, hippo, buffalo,
sable and wild dog.
Migration corridor with village wildlife management areas
Unique salt pans, waterholes, black rhino, elephant, springbok,
gemsbok, etc.
Large mammal populations including black rhino
Bushland and grassland over Kalahari Sands;
Traditional home of Bushmen, or San
Cape mountain zebra (endangered)
Other large mammals
Last refuge of Giant Sable; other large mammals of miombo
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA

IonaSkeleton Coast
Cape
Floral
Region
Protected Areas
Countries
(ISO2 code)
NA, AO
ZA
Size (km2)
32,000
c. 2,000
63,000
Lakes Tanganyika
Malawi*
Madagascar forests
Southern Africa total
and
Ecotype/biome
Desert
Fynbos
Freshwater lakes
BI, DRC, TZ,

ZM, MZ
MG
c. 2,000
655,260
Humid to dry forests

Final report
Protected areas
Iona NP (Ang) and Skeleton Coast NP

8+ PAs including Cape Peninsula NP
and De Hoop NR. A process is
underway for proclamation of Cape
Floral Region PAs as a WHS.
Mahale Mountains NP (Tan)
Gombe Stream NP (Tan)
Sumbu NP (Zam)
Lake Malawi WHS/NP (Mal)
16 (2 World Heritage Sites)
114 (6)
Unique ancient coastal desert

Cape Floral Region is one of the worlds 18 biodiversity hot spots;
69% of the estimated 9,000 plant species in the region are endemic;
1,435 species identified as threatened
Page 61
Endemic fish fauna
Lemurs and other endemic fauna and flora
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Figure 22. Location of Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLC) identified as priorities under the current review

Final report
Page 62
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
5.1.1.2
Elements of Support for KLCs
There are five elements of support that will be provided at each site66.
i.
Protected Area Management

This element will raise the capacity of park management to (a) conserve wildlife and wildlife habitats, (b)
undertake surveillance and intelligence work, (c) enforce the law, (d) liaise with communities and assist
them with their wildlife management issues, including human-wildlife conflicts, (e) liaise with private,
community and state-owned tour operators, assisting them with information about wildlife and park
regulations, and (f) monitor species, wildlife habitats, conservation threats and internal staff performance,
and manage information systems.
ii.
Landscape Management for Conservation

This element will raise the capacity of park management to assist in planning and implementing wildlife
management at the landscape level (including areas surrounding protected areas), by establishment of
wildlife corridors, restoration of animal migration, decommissioning of fenced barriers, and liaison with
community representatives over management of livestock grazing and watering, wildlife disease
transmission and other human-wildlife conflicts.
iii.
Landscape Management for Livelihoods

This element will assist with establishing and overseeing conservancies on private and communal lands.
Private: One of the most important aspects of conservancies on private land is the removal of internal
fences between properties accompanied by joint management of land and wildlife resources. The
amalgamation of ex-livestock farms and other properties into conservancies potentially generates greater
landscape heterogeneity and connectivity. Landowners will be assisted with information and advice on
conservation, wildlife ecology, eco-tourism and legal issues.
Communal: Communities will be provided with long-term training in many aspects of CBNRM, including
natural resource governance, wildlife conservation, human-wildlife conflict, land-use conflicts such as the
overlapping with mining permits, livestock disease, ecotourism, safari hunting, business start-up, business
management, administration of community institutions, and legal issues. Start-up support will be given to
a number of approved CBNRM programmes.
iv.
KLC/TFCA Governance
Institutional development in some parks and TFCAs has struggled operationally because of the top-down
imposition of park management on local-level communities and officials. From a more favourable angle,
the same top-down park management has enabled the bridging of international boundaries and greater
policy-level cooperation. This fourth element of support will provide managers with a wider context in which
to understand the needs of the different parties and determine the optimum structure of KLC/TFCA
institutions. It will also be of assistance to the overall institutional reform process in the country (Section
5.1.2) and contribute to greater operational cooperation in the governance of TFCAs and other PAs.
Support will be provided for instituting a Council of Elders for the Environment at each site (Section 4.1.5).
v.
Awareness Raising
This element will establish wildlife clubs in the schools of the surrounding communities and assist with
awareness-raising through training, information, materials, publications, communications, visits to the
66 In planning for site development, allowance should be made for fewer resources available within lower capacity countries (such as Lesotho,
Mozambique and Zambia) to establish and maintain TFCAs and other KLCs.
Final report
Page 63
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
protected areas, activities, events, competitions and meetings. This is the site-based element of the
Awareness Raising and Communication Programme which is outlined in Section 5.5.
5.1.1.3
KAZA TFCA
The Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area is so exceptional in terms of its size, natural resources and
wildlife that it warrants an exceptional programme of support over the long-term. The high-level objective of this
programme is to develop governance and adaptive management systems for KAZA TFCA that facilitate
international cooperation and ensure fully operational transfrontier conservation, transboundary natural resource
management, ecosystem conservation and sustainable rural development67.
More details of the programme of support for KAZA are given in Section 4.5. It will comprise the following
components68:
i.
Maintain and manage the shared Natural and Cultural Heritage Resources and biodiversity of the KAZA
TFCA;
ii.
Promote and facilitate the development of a complementary network of Protected Areas linked through
corridors to safeguard migratory wildlife species;
iii.
Provide opportunities, facilities and infrastructure that shall transform the KAZA TFCA into a premier
tourist destination in Africa;
iv.
Facilitate tourism across international borders in the KAZA TFCA;
v.
Enhance sustainable use of natural and cultural heritage resources to improve the livelihoods of local
communities and reduce poverty;
vi.
Facilitate public-private-community partnerships, private investment and regional economic integration;
vii.
Share experiences and pool resources and expertise across international borders to facilitate
development;
viii.
Harmonise relevant legislation, policies and approaches in natural and cultural resource management
across international borders; ensure compliance with international protocols and conventions related to
protection and sustainable use of species and ecosystems;
ix.
Build capacity for resource management within the KAZA TFCA through training, enterprise development
and mentoring programmes;
x.
Harmonise relevant legislation, policies and approaches in the area of transboundary animal disease
prevention, surveillance and control.
Indicative support for KLC/TFCA site development:
Please refer to Volume 1 for information on funding.
5.1.2
Country Level
This support is aimed primarily at the government departments and agencies responsible for wildlife conservation
and their liaison with institutions in associated sectors, including community development, education and
awareness-raising.
i.
Policy and legal reforms
Reforms to policy and law are required in most countries of southern Africa to support rural development through
management of natural resources by rural communities and private landowners. The reform process in each
country will receive support and guidance from the regional level (Section 5.1.3).
67
68
KfW development bank currently supports KAZA on behalf of Germanys Federal Government.
These components are identified in the KAZA TFCA Treaty.

Final report
Page 64
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
ii.
Institutional Strengthening of key government wildlife departments
Traditional wildlife departments require new structures, staffing and training in support of a new dual role in wildlife
conservation and community management of natural resources. Training will be given in the regulation of wildlife
businesses established by community and business-sector partners (see Section 4.3). Institutional strengthening
will incorporate specific training in KLC/TFCA governance (including land-use conflicts and environmental
governance), and in international relations.
iii.
Awareness Raising and Communication
Awareness-raising of KLCs, natural resource management, wildlife conservation and ecotourism will be supported
through national level programmes. A support unit will be established within wildlife departments to launch
programmes in the following:
Wildlife clubs (initially in the vicinity of TFCAs)
KLC/TFCA information using multiple media
Establishing an Environmental Council of Elders at each TFCA.
Developing and testing an environmental module for teaching wildlife conservation and sustainable use
of natural resources at primary and secondary school levels in participation with environmental education
partners.
Indicative support for institutional strengthening:
5.1.3
Regional Level
The KLC/TFCA approach requires key reforms in national laws to give landholders and rural communities the right
to manage wildlife and woodlands for their own benefit. Individual country reforms can take many years or decades
to achieve. The most effective approach will be to offer the relevant expertise at the regional and Pan-African level.
i.
SADC TFCA Joint Programme to Enable Legal Frameworks
This programme will be established with SADC for the purpose of communicating to member states the need for
reforms in resource rights and land tenure. It will provide advice and practical assistance in harmonizing relevant
legislation, policies and approaches in natural and cultural resource management across international borders
within the KLC/TFCA context.
ii.
NEPAD TFCA Joint Programme to Enable Legal Frameworks
A sister programme will be established within NEPAD so that individual African states are encouraged to adopt
TFCAs, and the linked land-reforms, as a way of implementing NEPAD.
Indicative support for legal and policy expertise:
5.2
KEY LANDSCAPES FOR CONSERVATION: (II) INDEPENDENT CONSERVATION AREAS
Many areas of outstanding importance and value for wildlife do not lie on the boundaries but entirely within the
central confines of African states. Examples in southern Africa include the Central Kalahari Game Reserve of
Botswana, Etosha Pan National Park in Namibia, North and South Luangwa National Parks in Zambia and Mountain
Zebra National Park in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa (Table 9). Amongst those that do lie at the
Final report
Page 65
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
frontier, not all have the possibility of being twinned with a PA across the international boundary. Such Independent
Conservation Areas (ICAs) have unique attributes that require long-term conservation within the same expanded
framework (i.e. incorporating community conservation and natural resource use in areas surrounding the Protected
Area). They may therefore qualify as KLCs.
5.2.1
Selection of Independent Conservation Areas (ICAs) as KLCs
In supporting long-term conservation of distinctive African ecosystems, this strategy features the same distinctive
elements as are found in TFCAs. It is based on an ecosystem approach where the ecosystem is defined essentially
by emblematic large African mammals and their habitat requirements. It is cognizant of each areas resilience to
fundamental change in land-use in the surrounding landscape, such as that accompanying rural population
expansion. It foresees the need for sustainable natural resource management by surrounding landholders and
communities.
Independent Conservation Areas will need to present globally important conservation attributes of their own in order
to qualify as KLCs. It is possible that clusters of protected areas in the central region of an African state might
become linked within a larger conservation area and developed as a unit in an analogous way to TFCAs. The new
protected land unit could then be re-evaluated for qualification as a KLC. ICAs should be evaluated as potential
KLCs according to the criteria in Box 6.
Indicative support for ICA site development:
5.2.2
ICAs - Country and Site Level Support
Conservation actions for developing ICAs will follow the same format as those outlined for TFCAs at the countrylevel and site-level (Sections 5.1.1 and 5.1.2). Every opportunity will be taken to link effective park management
with community management of natural resources.
5.3
TRAINING
Improved training is required at all levels of seniority in wildlife management and related issues in land-use and
environmental governance, but in most countries of the region there is a particular gap in training of mid-level
officers (wardens and senior site officers) which extends across Africa. A rising demand for mid-level training of
managers of communal lands and managers of nature-based tourism operations is also anticipated.
There is a need for specific anti-poaching training to assist management in tackling organised criminal poaching of
elephant and rhino.

Final report
Page 66
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
There is also a need to improve access to training in Africa at the senior level (for regional wardens, senior
government officers and other wildlife professionals working in conservation, education, tourism and environmental
sectors). The Masters in Tropical Resource Ecology (MTRE) offered by the University of Zimbabwe has provided
advanced wildlife training for conservation professionals from across Africa since its inception in 1972. During the
1990s it received senior-level training-advancement through its partnership with the University of Edinburgh under
EU-SADC support. The MTRE has now been extended back to a two-year course with some additional modules.
Currently the course is only receiving Zimbabwe students. Without a suitable training centre, many graduate
students in Africa are going elsewhere in the world for advanced-level training.
It will be important to ensure that training covers the needs of management within a broader environmentalmanagement system. Mining and oil prospecting for example have considerable direct impact on wildlife and
biodiversity and many secondary impacts. Many of the theses from the MTRE course over the last few years have
covered topics on wider environmental perspectives including issues of water pollution in rivers and underground
water supplies, recovery of mine dumps, land use and disease69.
5.3.1
Wildlife Training
Mid-level training of protected area managers can be increased by expanding facilities at existing training colleges
and/or establishing new ones. At present most training in the region is undertaken at the Southern African Wildlife
College on the western edge of Kruger National Park in South Africa or at the College of African Wildlife
Management, Mweka on the slopes of Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania.
i.
Needs Assessment
A needs assessment will be undertaken to determine gaps in current training and the scale of training expansion
required over the next ten years in the region. The advantage of a single regional centre is that it gives students
the opportunity to meet with others from neighbouring countries taking the same courses which will expose them
to a greater variety of wildlife issues and contexts. It also brings the advantage of scale in terms of the equipment
and facilities available and exposure to visiting experts and specialists. On the other hand, an in-country training
centre enables students to focus on the unique wildlife issues, systems of governance and languages that they will
be facing in their own country on graduation. It will be less expensive to train students in their own country.
Furthermore, a level of competition between neighbouring research centres may act to raise standards. The needs
assessment will examine these issues, identify different options for expansion, and make recommendations.
ii.
Establishment of Training Colleges
A number of mid-level colleges will be established according to the needs assessment. Activities for each college
will fall within 4 components:
a. Design of training college, accommodation block and staff housing;
b. Construction and establishment of the college;
c. Supply of furnishings and equipment;
d. Support to running costs for 3 years.
69
An impression on of the Masters course on Conservation and Natural Resource Management offered by the University of Zimbabwe and
its partners is provided here: http://www.rp-pcp.org/

Final report
Page 67
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
Indicative costs
Please refer to Volume 1.70
iii.
MSc in Tropical Resource Ecology
Many wildlife professionals at a senior level in Africa have benefited from training received from the Masters in
Tropical Resource Ecology at the University of Zimbabwe which forms part of the Tropical Resource Ecology
Programme. As mentioned, the programme has attracted only Zimbabweans since about 2003. There is a need for
senior-level training of wildlife professionals in Africa of the highest international standard, within a research centre
closely linked to wildlife centres throughout the world, which keeps abreast of rapid ongoing advances in
conservation science and management.
Whether such training is based at the University of Zimbabwe or elsewhere, it must overcome two main problems.
The first is the quality of graduates coming for postgraduate education. Presently the brightest of these are being
attracted by more remunerative careers and/or going abroad for their training. There would therefore need to be
provision for competitive bursaries to attract students from the region and beyond. The second problem is to raise
the level of teaching and supervision on offer to the students. The solution to this would be to link support to a
partnership with a UK (or other English-speaking) University. As mentioned, the EU supported the SADC Wildlife
Management Training Project (1997-2001) which partnered with the University of Edinburgh to provide direct
training support to the Tropical Resource Ecology Programme at the University of Zimbabwe. It succeeded in raising
standards to the highest level. A longer term relationship is required which should develop a robust strategy for
ensuring that the quality of training is sustained long after the support programme has ended.
Indicative cost:
Please refer to Volume 1.
5.3.2
Research and Monitoring at Conservation Sites
An effective way to lift standards of mid-level management in the field is through long-term collaborations between
parks and high quality research institutions. Research programmes can assist with monitoring conservation threats,
identifying species and in devising improved management methods that have direct benefits for the parks.
5.4
DISMANTLING WILDLIFE TRAFFICKING NETWORKS
Information on threats and risks to elephants and rhino in southern Africa, and on conservation planning is provided
in Section 3.2 of this Volume. Our proposed strategic approach to elephant poaching, rhino poaching and wildlife
trade is given separately in Sections 1-3 of Volume 6 which include recommendations for investigating and
dismantling wildlife trafficking networks and disrupting their organisations by closing down the flow of money.
5.4.1
Additional Proposed Action
Follow up the study of national conservation spending and rates of decline of rhino (Leader-Williams & Albon
1988)71 with a study of site-specific conservation spending and current rhino poaching in South Africa or southern
Africa. The aim of the study is to investigate the overall effectiveness of conservation spending.
70
By way of guidance, plans can be provided on request for a national wildlife management training centre with accommodation for 60 junior
staff and ten senior staff.
71 Leader-Williams, N and Albon, SD (1988) Allocation of resources for conservation. Nature 336: 5335.

Final report
Page 68
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
5.5
AWARENESS RAISING AND COMMUNICATION
There is an over-riding need to create a conservation policy for Africa that is embedded in society, rather than
imposed from above (Section 4.5). This will require a blue-ribbon education and awareness-raising programme
which not only informs all sectors about the benefits that can be derived from wildlife conservation but helps to
uphold and champion the cultural values of the wildlife heritage. An important part of this programme is to provide
up-to-date and accurate information on conservation issues, including natural resource management, biodiversity,
African cultural traditions, eco-tourism, protected areas and the TFCA/KLC approach. The information has to be
attractively presented and targeted at specific audiences.
The communication strategy will furnish materials and information in the following topics:
Essential ecological facts about nature
Nature conservation values and conflicts
Nature conservation threats (all kinds)
Illegal killing, harvesting and trade in wildlife
Natural resource management and sustainable use of wildlife
Protected areas and the TFCA/KLC approach to conservation
The environment (air, water and soil) and its importance to health.
The strategy will target specific sectors individually, particularly the following:
The news media with a library of briefings, sound recordings, video and news releases;
Diplomatic missions and senior government officials requiring succinct information for effective political
dialogue;
Governmental officers and NGOs involved with wildlife conservation (who require the fullest briefings);
Schools requiring improved curricula and educational materials on environmental issues, including natural
resource management;
Wildlife clubs requiring interpretative materials and equipment to support fun-filled educational activities;
Environmental Councils for Elders which require location-specific information to support political dialogue.
A Communications and Interpretation Support Unit will be based in each country to develop and disseminate
information with the participation of environmental education organisations. Mobile information centres will visit rural
locations to work with wildlife clubs and communities.
Indicative Cost:
High importance is attached to this activity because of the overriding need to evolve a conservation policy that is
embedded in African society. We believe that awareness-raising, interpretation of conservation information and
communication require a substantially greater investment that they have typically received in the past.
Please refer to Volume 1 for details of funding.

Final report
Page 69
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
ANNEXES
ANNEX A. REFERENCES
1.
Abensperg-Traun, M., Roe, D. and OCriodain, C., eds. (2011). CITES and CBNRM. Proceedings of an
international symposium on The relevance of CBNRM to the conservation and sustainable use of CITESlisted species in exporting countries, Vienna, Austria, 18-20 May 2011. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN and
London, UK: IIED. 172pp.
2.
Bartlam-Brooks, H.L.A., Bonyongo, M.C. & Harris, S. (2011) Will reconnecting ecosystems allow long-distance
mammal migrations to resume? A case study of a zebra Equus burchelli migration in Botswana. Oryx 45: 210
216.
3.
Bastian Bertzky, Colleen Corrigan, James Kemsey, Siobhan Kenney, Corinna Ravilious, Charles Besanon
and Neil Burgess (2012) Protected Planet Report 2012: Tracking progress towards global targets for protected
areas. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK.
4.
Booth, V R and Cumming D.H.M. 2009. Pages 282-295, In: Recreational hunting and sustainable use of
wildlife in southern Africa. In: Dickson, B., Hutton, J. and Adams, B. (eds.) Recreational Hunting, Conservation
and Rural Livelihoods: Science and Practice, Blackwells, Oxford.
5.
Byers, B. 2001, Conserving the Miombo Ecoregion: Final Reconnaissance Summary Report. WWF Southern
Africa.
6.
Campbell, B., ed. (1996). The Miombo in Transition: Woodlands and Welfare in Africa. Centre for International
forestry Research (CIFOR). Bogor, Indonesia.
7.
Cambbell, B.M. & Sithole, B. 2000. CAMPFIRE: Experiences in Zimbabwe. Science 287: 41.
8.
Chase, M.J & Griffin, C.R. (2011). Elephants of south-east Angola in war and peace: their decline, recolonization and recent status. African Journal of Ecology, 49(3), 353-361.
9.
Chenje M. (ed.) 2000. State of the Environment Zambezi Basin 2000. SADC/IUCN/ZRA/SARDC,
Maseru/Lusaka/Harare.
10. CITES 2012. Status of elephant populations, levels of illegal killing and the trade in ivory: A report to the CITES
Standing Committee. CITES Sixty-second meeting of the Standing Committee, Geneva (Switzerland), 23-27
July 2012.
11. CITES (2013). Status of African elephant populations and levels of illegal killing and the illegal trade in ivory:
A report to the African Elephant Summit, December 2013. CITES Secretariat, IUCN AESG, TRAFFIC.
12. Coetzer, K.L., Witkowski, E.T.F. & Erasmus, B.F.N. 2013. Reviewing Biosphere Reserves globally: effective
conservation action or bureaucratic label? Biological Reviews.
13. Craigie, I.D. et al. 2010. Large mammal population declines in Africas protected areas. Biological
Conservation 143: 2221-2228.
14. Cumming, D. H.M. 1999. Study on the Development of Transboundary Natural Resource Management Areas
in Southern Africa-Environmental Context: Natural Resources, Land Use, and Conservation. Biodiversity
Support Program, Washington, DC, USA.
15. Cumming, D.H.M. 2004. Performance of Parks in a Century of Change. Pages 105-124. In: Child, B. (ed.)
Parks in transition: biodiversity, development and the bottom line. Earthscan, London.

Final report
Page 70
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
16. Cumming, D.H.M. 2007. Transfrontier conservation areas, animal diseases and human livelihoods: issues of
system health and sustainability. Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology and AHEAD programme,
SA.
17. Cumming, D.H.M. 2008. Large Scale Conservation Planning and Priorities for the Kavango-Zambezi
Transfrontier Conservation Area. A report prepared for Conservation International.
18. Cumming, D H M (2011) Constraints to Conservation and Development Success at the Wildlife-LivestockHuman Interface in Southern African Transfrontier Conservation Areas: A Preliminary Review. Technical
Report to the Wildlife Conservation Societys AHEAD Program. 37 pp.
19. Cumming, D. H. M., Dzingirai, V. and de Garine-Wichatitsky (2013). Land and natural resource-based
livelihood opportunities in transfrontier conservation areas. In: Andersson, J.A., de Garine-Wichatitsky, M.,
Cumming, D.H.M., Dzingirai, V. & Giller, K.E. (Eds.) Transfrontier Conservation Areas: People Living on the
Edge. London: Earthscan.
20. Cumming, D. H. M., and WCS AHEAD Great Limpopo TFCA Working Group, 2004. Sustaining animal health
and ecosystem services in large landscapes-2nd draft-Concept for a programme to address wildlife, livestock
and related human and ecosystem health issues in the Greater Limpopo Trans-frontier Conservation Area.
21. de Klerk, H.M., Fjeldsa, J., Blyth, S. & Burgess, N.D. (2004). Gaps in the protected area network for threatened
Afrotropical birds. Biological Conservation 117: 529-537.
22. Dickson, B., Hutton, J. and Adams, B. (eds.) 2009. Recreational Hunting, Conservation and Rural Livelihoods:
Science and Practice, Blackwells, Oxford.
23. East R. 1989a. Chapter 13: Summary of Regional Status of Antelopes in Southern and South-Central Africa.
In: Antelopes Global Survey and Regional Action Plans, Part 2. Southern and South-Central Africa. oo 76-79.
IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group.
24. East R. 1989b. Chapter 14: R. Status of Antelope Communities and Identification of Regional Conservation
Priorities. In: Antelopes Global Survey and Regional Action Plans, Part 2. Southern and South-Central Africa.
pp 80-86. IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group.
25. Eckardt unpubl. Photograph in: Perkins, J. (2010). Fences and landscape scale degradation. In: Ferguson &
Hanks (2010) Fencing Impacts. K Ferguson and J. Hanks (eds). Mammal Research Institute,University of
Pretoria.
26. EIA (2008). The Construction of Veterinary Cordon Fences in Ngamiland, Botswana. Environmental
Investigation Agency Briefing for ACP-EU JPA Social Affairs and Environment Committee Meeting of March
15 2008.
27. FAO, 2001. Global forest resource assessment 2000: Main report. FAO Forestry Paper No. 140. Rome.
28. FAO (2003) World Agriculture: Towards 2015/2030. Earthscan.
29. Ferguson KJ, Cleaveland S, Haydon DT, Caron A, Kock RA, Lembo T, Hopcraft JG, Chardonnet B, Nyariki
T, Keyyu J, Paton DJ, Kivaria FM. 2013. Evaluating the Potential for the Environmentally Sustainable Control
of Foot and Mouth Disease in Sub-Saharan Africa.
30. EcoHealth DOI: 10.1007/s10393-013-0850-6. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10393-013-0850-6>
31. Fjeldsa, J., Burgess, N.D., Blyth, S. and de Klerk, H.M. (2004). Where are the major gaps in the reserve
network for Africas mammals? Oryx 38: 17-25.

Final report
Page 71
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
32. FYNN, R. W. S., CHASE, M. & RODER. A. Functional habitat heterogeneity and large-herbivore seasonal
habitat selection in northern Botswana. Sth. Afr. J. Wild. Res. In press.
33. Gibson, D. (2010). Environmental assessments of Botswanas fences. In: Ferguson & Hanks (2010) Fencing
Impacts. K Ferguson and J. Hanks (eds). Mammal Research Institute,University of Pretoria.
34. Hanks, J. and Myburgh, W. (2014). Chapter 9. The evolution and progression of Transfrontier Conservation
Areas in the Southern African Development Community. (In press).
35. Harris, G., Thirgood, S., Hopcraft, J.G.C., Cromsight, J.P.G.M., and Berger, J. (2009) Global decline in
aggregated migrations of large terrestrial mammals. Endangered Species Research, 7: 55-76.
36. Hulme, D. and Murphree, M. (Eds) 2001. African Wildlife and Livelihoods The Promise and Performance of
Community Conservation. James Currey Ltd, Oxford.
37. IUCN and UNEP-WCMC (2011). The World Database on Protected Areas.
38. James, A.N., Green. M., & Paine, J.R. (1999). A global review of protected area budgets and staffing. WCMC,
World Conservation Press, Cambridge, UK.
39. Knight, A. T., A. Driver, R. M. Cowling, K. Maze, P. G. Desmet, A. T. Lombard, M. Rouget, M. A. Botha, A. F.
Boshoff, J. G. Castley, P. S. Goodman, K. Mackinnon, S. M. Pierce, R. Sims-Castley, W. I. Stewart, and A.
Von Hase. 2006. Designing systematic conservation assessments that promote effective implementation: best
practice from South Africa. Conservation Biology 20(3):739-750
40. Leader-Williams, N and Albon, SD (1988) Allocation of resources for conservation. Nature 336: 5335.
41. Le Saout, S. et al. 2013. Protected Areas and Effective Biodiversity Conservation. Science 342: 803-805.
42. MacKinnon, J and MacKinnon, K (1986) Review of the Protected Areas System in the Afrotropical Realm,
IUCN/UNEP, Gland, Switzerland
43. Marks, S.A. (2005) The legacy of a Zambian community-based wildlife program. In: B. Child and M Lymann
(eds) Natural Resources as Community Assets. The Sand County Foundation and The Aspen Institute, pp.
181-209.
44. Martin, R.B. (2003). Conditions for effective, stable and equitable conservation at the national level in southern
Africa. A paper prepared for Theme 4 at a workshop titled Local Communities, equity and protected areas as
part of the preparations for the Vth World Parks Congress of the IUCN held in Durban, South Africa,
September 8 17, 2003.
45. Martin. R.B. 2008. A Review of Organisational Performance and Development of Strategic Options to Improve
the Performance of The Botswana Department of Wildlife and National Parks.
46. MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis.
World Resources Institute, Washington, DC.
47. Murphree M.W. (1995). Optimal Principles and Pragmatic Strategies: Creating an enabling politico-legal
environment for community-based natural resource management. Keynote address to the Conference of the
National Resources Management Programme, SADCC Technical Coordination Unit, Malawi, USAID-NRMP
Regional, Chobe, Botswana, 3 April 1995.
48. Murray, M.G., Green, M.J.B., Bunting, G.C. & Paine, J.R. (1997). Biodiversity Conservation in the Tropics:
Gaps in Habitat Protection and Funding Priorities. WCMC Biodiversity Series No. 6 (180 pages).

Final report
Page 72
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
49. NEPAD. (2010). NEPAD Action Plan for the Environment

http://www.nepad.org/climatechangeandsustainabledevelopment/
Initiative.
Retrieved
from
50. Newmark, W.D. 2008. Isolation of African protected areas. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6: 321
328.
51. Owen-Smith, G. 2010. An Arid Eden. Jonathan Ball Publishers, Johannesburg.
52. Parker, ISC (1984) Conservation of the African elephant, in D H M Cumming and P Jackson (eds) The Status
and Conservation of Africas Elephants and Rhinos, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, pp6977
53. Parker I.S.C.P (1993). The Natural Justice of Ownership. Commissioned Essay for the Norwegian
Government written as comment on plans for the Serengeti ecosystem in Tanzania and Kenya. 3pp
54. SADC, 2001. Tourism Annual Report. July 2000-June 2001.
55. SADC 2006. Southern African Development Community: Regional Biodiversity Strategy. IUCN.
56. Schoon, M.L. 2008. Building Robustness to Disturbance: Governance in Southern African Peace Parks.Ph.D
thesis, Indiana University.
57. Sebastian, A.G. 2008. Transboundary water politics: conflict, cooperation and shadows of the past in the
Okavango and Orange River Basins of southern Africa. PhD Thesis, University of Maryland, USA.
58. Sheppard, D. (1999) Conservation without frontiers - the global view. Paper presented at Europarc 99.
Transcending Borders - Parks for Europe.
59. SULi (2013). Open letter regarding the auction of a permit to hunt a Namibian Black Rhino. Sustainable Use
and Livelihoods Specialist Group, IUCN SSC and CEESP.
60. Thomson, G. R., M. -L. Penrith, M. W. Atkinson, S. J. Atkinson, D. Cassidy, and S. A. Osofsky, 2013a:
Balancing livestock production and wildlife conservation in and around southern Africas transfrontier
conservation areas. Transbound. Emerg. Dis 60, 492506.
61. Thomson, G. R., M.-L. Penrith, M. W. Atkinson, S. Thalwitzer, A. Mancuso, S. J. Atkinson, and S. A. Osofsky,
2013b: International trade standards for commodities and products derived from animals: the need for a
system that integrates food safety and animal disease risk management. Transb. Emerg. Dis. 60, 507515.
62. Timberlake, J. 2000. Biodiversity of the Zambezi Basin. Occasional Publications in Biodiversity (Biodiversity
Foundation for Africa) No. 9.
63. Timberlake, J. & Chidumayo, E. 2011, Miombo ecoregion vision report. Occasional Publications in Biodiversity
(Biodiversity Foundation for Africa) No. 20.
64. UNEP, 2003. Action Plan for the Environment Initiative of the New Partnership for Africas Development
(NEPAD). June 2003.
65. UNESCO (2008). Madrid Action Plan for Biosphere Reserves (20082013). UNESCO Division of Ecological
and Earth Sciences, Paris.
66. UNOCHA (2009). Web resource: http://reliefweb.int/map/angola/southern-africa-major-river-basins-31-mar2009. Accessed 27 January 2014.
67.
Vanderwalle, M.E. (2000) Movement of zebra and wildebeest in relation to environmental factors in northern
Botswana. PhD thesis, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Final report
Page 73
Volume 2
SOUTHERN AFRICA
68. Vickery, J. A., Ewing, S. R., Smith, K. W., Pain, D. J., Bairlein, F., korpilov, J., Gregory, R. D. (2014), The
decline of Afro-Palaearctic migrants and an assessment of potential causes. Ibis 156: 1-22.
69. Williamson D. & Williamson J. (1981) An assessment of fences on the large herbivore biomass in the Kalahari.
Botswana Notes and Records 13:9194 and 107110.
70. Williamson, D.T. and Mbano, B. 1988. Wildebeest mortality during 1983 at Lake Xau, Botswana. Afr. ]. Ecol.
26,341-344.
71. Williamson D., Williamson J. & K. T. Ngawamaisoko (1988) Wildebeest migration in the Kalahari. African
Journal of Ecology 26: 269280.
72. White, F (1983) The vegetation of Africa: A descriptive memoir, UNESCO, Paris.
73. World Bank, 2002. African Development Indicators 2002. Washington, DC.
74. WWF 2012. Miombo Ecoregion Home of the Zambezi Conservation Strategy 2011-2020. WWF, Harare,
Zimbabwe.
75. WWF 2013. Zambezian flooded grasslands. < http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/157211/>

Final report
Page 74
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
EASTERN AFRICA
Migratory wildebeest on the Serengeti Plains, Tanzania. Photo Peter Howard

Final report
Page 1
Volume 4
EASTERN AFRICA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
SPECIAL FEATURES OF THE REGION ......................................................................................................................... 8

1.1
1.2
1.2.1
1.2.2
1.2.3
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
2
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
2.2
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.2.3
2.2.4
2.2.5
WOODLAND AND GRASSLAND ..................................................................................................................................... 13

ARID AND SEMI-ARID LAND ......................................................................................................................................... 16
LAKES, RIVERS AND WETLANDS .................................................................................................................................. 16
COASTAL HABITATS ................................................................................................................................................... 18
TRANSFORMED ECOSYSTEMS .................................................................................................................................... 19
THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES ............................................................................................... 20

Unsustainable consumptive utilisation .................................................................................................................................... 20
Human-wildlife conflict ............................................................................................................................................................ 21
Inadequate PA systems .......................................................................................................................................................... 22
Fragmentation, transformation and loss of natural ecosystems ............................................................................................. 22
Climate change ....................................................................................................................................................................... 23
FUNDAMENTAL DRIVERS UNDERLYING THE THREATS .................................................................................................... 24

Market forces .......................................................................................................................................................................... 24
Population growth ................................................................................................................................................................... 24
Poverty .................................................................................................................................................................................... 24
Under-valuation of ecosystem services and biodiversity ........................................................................................................ 24
Weak governance and corruption ........................................................................................................................................... 25
ONGOING CONSERVATION EFFORTS ....................................................................................................................... 26

3.1
3.1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3
3.1.4
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.3
3.3
3.4
3.4.1
3.4.2
3.4.3
3.5
3.6
3.7
4
Montane and highland forests................................................................................................................................................. 11

Mid-elevation and lowland forests........................................................................................................................................... 12
Coastal forests ........................................................................................................................................................................ 13

2.1
HIGH MOUNTAINS ...................................................................................................................................................... 10

FORESTS .................................................................................................................................................................. 11
PLANNING FRAMEWORKS ........................................................................................................................................... 26

International ............................................................................................................................................................................ 26
Pan African.............................................................................................................................................................................. 26
Regional .................................................................................................................................................................................. 27
National ................................................................................................................................................................................... 27
CONTROLLING UNSUSTAINABLE NATURAL RESOURCE UTILISATION AND ILLEGAL TRADE .................................................. 27

Stopping the killing .................................................................................................................................................................. 28
Stopping the trafficking ........................................................................................................................................................... 29
Stopping the demand .............................................................................................................................................................. 30
MINIMISING HUMAN-WILDLIFE CONFLICT ...................................................................................................................... 30

IMPROVING PA SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS..................................................................................................................... 30
Scope and design of national PA systems ............................................................................................................................. 30
Sites of international importance............................................................................................................................................. 32
PA management capacity and effectiveness .......................................................................................................................... 39
VALUING ECOSYSTEMS PROPERLY.............................................................................................................................. 40

ADAPTING TO CLIMATE CHANGE.................................................................................................................................. 43
ALLEVIATING POVERTY .............................................................................................................................................. 43
LESSON LEARNT .......................................................................................................................................................... 45

4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
THE VALUE OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES IS STILL NOT SUFFICIENTLY WELL UNDERSTOOD .................................................. 45
NRM AGENCIES REMAIN UNDER-RESOURCED ............................................................................................................. 45
POACHING CANNOT BE CONTAINED BY IN SITU PROTECTION ALONE ............................................................................... 46
CBNRM IS NOT A PANACEA AGAINST ALL THREATS ..................................................................................................... 46
PA DESIGNS NEED IMPROVING ................................................................................................................................... 46
THE EAC HAS YET TO FULLY EMBRACE A REGIONAL APPROACH TO WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ......................................... 46
DONOR-FUNDED PROGRAMMES TO SUPPORT THE WILDLIFE SECTOR CAN BE EFFECTIVE BUT MUST BE SUSTAINED LONGER
46

Final report
Page 1
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
INDICATIVE CONSERVATION ACTIONS ..................................................................................................................... 47

5.1
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.2
5.2.1
5.2.2
5.3
5.3.1
5.3.2
5.3.3
5.3.4
5.4
5.4.1
5.4.2
ISSUES: LAW ENFORCEMENT AND TRADE CONTROL ..................................................................................................... 47

National ................................................................................................................................................................................... 48
Regional .................................................................................................................................................................................. 48
SPECIES: PROTECTING THREATENED FLAGSHIP SPECIES .............................................................................................. 48

Elephants ................................................................................................................................................................................ 48
Rhinos and other iconic species ........................................................................................................................................... 50
AREAS: KEY LANDSCAPES FOR CONSERVATION .......................................................................................................... 51

East African Key Landscapes for Conservation (Inland) ........................................................................................................ 51
East African Key Landscapes for Conservation (Coastal/Marine) .......................................................................................... 55
Multiple benefits ...................................................................................................................................................................... 56
Scope of possible actions in KLCs.......................................................................................................................................... 57
INSTITUTIONS: STRENGTHENING SECTORAL MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION ............................................................. 58

Regional .................................................................................................................................................................................. 58
National ................................................................................................................................................................................... 59
APPENDIX 1. PROTECTED AREA COMPOSITION OF KLCS PROPOSED FOR EASTERN AFRICA............................... 60
List of figures
Figure 1. Major biomes of Africa ................................................................................................................................................ 9
Figure 2. The Mara-Serengeti-Ngorongoro TFCA.................................................................................................................... 36
Figure 3. The Sudd-Badingilu-Boma-Gambella TFCA ............................................................................................................. 37
Figure 4. The Greater Kilimanjaro TFCA .................................................................................................................................. 38
Figure 5. The Ruaha-Rungwa-Kitulo-Kipengere KLC .............................................................................................................. 50
Figure 6. Map of proposed KLCs ............................................................................................................................................. 53
List of tables
Table 1. Elephant numbers in Eastern Africa by country (2012/3) ........................................................................................... 49
Table 2. Very Important Elephant Areas in Eastern Africa by population size (2012/3) ........................................................... 49
Table 3. Proposed list of inland KLCs for Eastern Africa ......................................................................................................... 51
Table 4. Text sections, boxes and maps providing further information on each KLC .............................................................. 54
Table 5. Potential coastal-marine KLCs for Eastern Africa ...................................................................................................... 55
Table 6. Representation of iconic flagship species in selected inland KLCs ............................................................................ 56
Table 7. Representation of all Eastern African ecotypes in selected inland KLCs ................................................................... 57
List of boxes
Box 1. Mount Kenya ................................................................................................................................................................. 10
Box 2. Afro-alpine flora ............................................................................................................................................................. 10
Box 3. The Bale Mountains ...................................................................................................................................................... 11
Box 4. The Eastern Arc forests ................................................................................................................................................ 11
Box 5. Coastal forests .............................................................................................................................................................. 13
Box 6. The Serengeti ................................................................................................................................................................ 14
Box 7. The Selous .................................................................................................................................................................... 16
Box 8. RiftValley lakes in Kenya ............................................................................................................................................... 17
Box 9. The Lake Victoria basin ................................................................................................................................................. 17
Box 10. Albertine Rift Valley lakes ........................................................................................................................................... 17
Box 11. The Sudd wetland ....................................................................................................................................................... 18
Box 12. The Mafia Island seascape ......................................................................................................................................... 18
Box 13. Wildlife trafficking in Eastern Africa ............................................................................................................................. 21
Final report
Page 2
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Box 14. Inter-regional collaboration in Rhino horn forensics .................................................................................................... 29

Box 15. Wildlife corridors .......................................................................................................................................................... 31
Box 16. The Greater Virunga TFCA ......................................................................................................................................... 34
Box 17. Economic importance of forests .................................................................................................................................. 41
Box 18. Economic importance of the Tana River ..................................................................................................................... 41
Box 19. The Vital Signs monitoring programme ....................................................................................................................... 42
Box 20. Linkages between PFM and REDD ............................................................................................................................ 44
Box 21.Charcoal and deforestation .......................................................................................................................................... 45

Final report
Page 3
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
ACRONYMS
ACP
AMCEN
APN
ASAL
AU
AWF
CA
CAR
CAWM
CBD
CBNRM
CCAP
CITES
COMESA
COMIFAC
CSO
DNA
DRC
EA
EAC
EAGLE
EC
ECCAS
EDF
EIA
ESA-IO
ETIS
EU
EUR
EWCA
FFI
FR
FZS
GCA
GDP
GEF
GHG
GMP
GR
HAWEN
HEC
HoA-REC&N
HWC
HQ
IBA
ICCF
ICCN
ICCWC
ICPAC
IFAW
IGAD
IGCP
IGO
INTERPOL
IOC
ISO
IUCN
KES
Africa Caribbean Pacific

African Ministerial Conference on the Environment
Africa Parks Network
Arid and Semi-Arid Land
African Union
Conservation Area
College of African Wildlife Management
Climate Change Adaptation Plan
Common Market for East and Southern Africa
Central African Forest Commission
Civil Society Organisation
Eastern Africa
Eco Activists for Governance and Law Enforcement
European Commission
Economic Community of Central African States
European Development Fund
Environmental Impact Assessment
Eastern and Southern Africa and Indian Ocean Region
European Union
Euro
Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority
Fauna and Flora International
Forest Reserve
Frankfurt Zoological Society
Game Controlled Area
Gross Domestic Product
Global Environment Fund
Greenhouse Gas
General Management Plan
Game Reserve
Horn of Africa Wildlife Enforcement Network
Human Elephant Conflict
Horn of Africa Regional Environment Centre and Network
Human Wildlife Conflict
Headquarters
Important Bird Area
International Conservation Caucus Foundation
Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature
IGAD Climate Prediction and Application Centre
Intergovernmental Authority on Development
International Gorilla Conservation Programme
Inter-governmental Organisation
International Criminal Police Organisation
Indian Ocean Commission
International Organisation for Standardisation
International Union for the Conservation of Nature
Kenya Shilling

Final report
Page 4
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
KFS
KLC
KWS
LAGA
LRA
MIKE(S)
MoU
NAPA
NBSAP
NEPAD
NGO
NIP
NP
NR
NRM
NRT
NWS
PA
PALF
PES
PFM
RDB
REDD
RhODIS
RIP
SADC
SAGCOT
SEA
TA
TAWA
TEEB
TFCA
TNC
TRAFFIC
UN
UNDP
UNESCO
UNEP
UNODC
US(A)
USAID
UWA
VGL
VIEA
WAVES
WCS
WEN
WHS
WMA
WR
WS
WTA
WWF
Kenya Forest Service

Kenya Wildlife Service
The Last Great Ape Organisation
Lords Resistance Army
Minimising the Illegal Killing of Elephants (and other Endangered Species)
National Adaptation Programme of Actions
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
New Partnership for Africas Development
National Indicative Programme
National Park
Nature Reserve or National Reserve (Kenya)
Natural Resource Management
Northern Rangelands Trust
National Wildlife Sanctuary
Protected Area
Projet dappui lApplication de la Loi sur la Faune sauvage
Participatory Forest Management
Rwanda Development Board
Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation
Rhino DNA Identification System
Regional Indicative Programme
Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor
Strategic Environmental Assessment
Technical Assistant/Assistance
Tanzania Wildlife Authority
Trans-Frontier Conservation Area
The Nature Conservancy
The wildlife trade monitoring network
United Nations
United Nations Development Programme
United Nations Environment Programme
United States (of America)
US Agency for International Development
Uganda Wildlife Authority
Very Important Elephant Area
Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services
World Heritage Site
Wildlife Management Area
Wildlife Reserve
Wildlife Sanctuary
Water Tower Authority
The two-letter country acronyms used in the Tables conform with ISO 3166 alpha-2 codes

Final report
Page 5
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This volume develops a strategic approach for wildlife conservation in Eastern Africa. It is organised into six sections composed
as follows: (0) the overall rationale for an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa; (1) an introduction to Eastern
Africas key ecosystems, their unique features and their values; (2) an outline of the nature and extent of the threats to them
and of the drivers behind those threats; (3) a review of ongoing approaches and efforts to reduce the impact of threats and
drivers; (4) a discussion of lessons learnt and (5) a set of indicative actions recommended as ways in which an EU intervention
could contribute effectively to the long term conservation of Eastern Africas extraordinarily diverse natural heritage.
Section (0) sets out the underlying rationale for preparing an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa, and
outlines the scope and content of the overall study and its constituent volumes. The hitherto under-appreciated scope and
scale of the wildlife crisis across the continent is underlined, as is the fact that with the burgeoning human population pragmatic
strategic choices will have to be made as it will not be possible to conserve everything. Against this background, the desired
outcome of the strategic approach is stated as A full suite of viable populations of the unique wildlife heritage of Sub-Saharan
Africa maintained in healthy, functioning and resilient ecosystems supporting livelihoods and human development. The critical
importance of Protected Areas (PAs) to realising this objective is stressed.
Section (1) opens with the definition of Eastern Africa as used in this study. It goes on to describe the main natural habitats
and ecosystems of the region, and the special features of the flora and fauna in each. It pays particular attention to the glaciated
high mountains unique to this part of Africa, and the grassy woodlands and open savannahs which characterise its most
extensive and productive wildlife habitats. There are descriptions also of forests (montane, highland, mid-elevation, lowland
and coastal); of arid and semi-arid lands; of lakes, rivers and wetlands; and of seashore habitats.
Section (2) reviews long terms threats to the wildlife of Eastern Africa and the factors which drive them. Although the current
poaching onslaught affecting elephants and rhinos is a matter of huge concern, the greatest long term threat to the regions
wildlife overall is the continuous fragmentation and unsustainable use of natural habitat, and the human-wildlife conflict that
follows. Another consequence is that increasingly isolated PAs lose ecological resilience. These threats are driven ultimately
by an inexorable and accelerating increase in the number of poor people. This is driving the emergence of an increasingly
serious bushmeat problem that is still under-recognised in the region. Other threats and drivers discussed include climate
change; market forces; the under-valuation of ecosystem services and biodiversity; and weak governance and corruption.
Section (3) reviews ongoing conservation efforts to overcome the threats and drivers described in the previous section. Context
is provided by an initial review of the global to local planning frameworks that influence the approach to wildlife conservation
in the region. Given the strength of contemporary concern about all types of wildlife and forest crime in Eastern Africa, the
strategic approaches being used to combat this based on stopping the killing, the trafficking and the demand are described.
Other efforts described and discussed are minimising human-wildlife conflict; improving PA system connectivity and
effectiveness; valuing ecosystem services properly; adapting to climate change; and alleviating poverty, particularly in
communities living with wildlife in and around PAs through CBNRM.
Section (4) reviews some lessons learned. Probably the key lesson is that while PAs contain the most intact assemblages of
wildlife and are where biodiversity is being most effectively protected, the responsible management authorities remain underresourced and without the capacity to deal effectively with the scale and sophistication of poaching and trafficking networks.
This situation relates to governments still not fully understanding the value of ecosystem services and, linked to that, poor
governance standards. Another key lesson is that in the face of uncontrolled population growth, the sustainability of CBNRM
schemes is compromised. Much depends on whether and how the last, best wildlife areas many of which are transboundary
in nature - can be secured in perpetuity. To this end Eastern Africa needs to learn from SADC, and greatly strengthen its
political and financial commitment to the development and formal co-management of Transfrontier Conservation Areas
(TFCAs). Acting on any of these lessons will benefit greatly from donor support, but this must be sustained over much longer,
more realistic timeframes than hitherto, and with tighter performance monitoring and accountability features.
Section (5) proposes a selection of indicative actions that would contribute greatly to achieving long term wildlife conservation
in Eastern Africa. These are organised around 4 approaches. The first addresses law enforcement and trade control issues by
proposing support for the development of Wildlife Enforcement Networks (WENs) at the national level in all countries, and for
a forensic laboratory to provide analytical services at the regional level. The second approach centres on elephants and rhinos,
and defers to the specific actions proposed in Volume 6 of this study (sections 1 and 2). At the same time however it argues
that the most important populations of these and other iconic species must feature as criteria in the selection of the priority
areas around which the next approach is centred, making support for those areas a very powerful if indirect way to assist in
their conservation.

Final report
Page 6
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
The third approach proposes long term support for selected Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLC) containing Eastern
Africas most important PAs and the areas linking them (including TFCAs). Of all the strategic approaches recommended, this
is the central pillar since the KLCs are selected so as to capture not only the diversity of the regions ecosystems and important
species, but also those areas that have the greatest chance of surviving the many pressures on wildlife and natural resources
in the coming years. Thus priority is given to sites harbouring the most intact assemblages of Eastern African wildlife; to World
Heritage Sites (WHS) already recognised for their outstanding universal value; and to sites which protect specific globally
important features not found elsewhere. More than 80 PAs are included in the 17 KLCs identified. Several of the most important
ones are also TFCAs, notably the Maasai Mara-Serengeti-Ngorongoro complex between Kenya and Tanzania encompassing
7 PAs including 3WHS; the Greater Kilimanjaro complex between the same countries with 8 PAs including 1WHS; and the
Greater Virunga complex (overlapping with the Central African region) which encompasses 11 PAs including 3 WHS. Between
them, these and the other KLCs almost certainly protect the majority of Eastern Africas floral and faunal diversity. They also
include most of the priority areas identified in the Action Plans for elephants, rhinos, big cats, great apes and numerous other
endangered and endemic species. It is strongly recommended that the EU gives priority to supporting these KLCs, and the
wide range of actions that could be financed to protect and manage them - in both their constituent PAs and the community
areas in between - is described.
The fourth and last intervention approach concerns the strengthening of wildlife management-related institutions. Here it is
recommended that support should be given to the East African Community Secretariat to promote and professionalise the
formal co-management of TFCAs in the region through the elaboration of appropriate policies, procedures and plans. A
programme to strengthen the field skills and overall competence of the regions PA wardens through the development of a new
course and scholarships at the College of African Wildlife Management is also advocated. Finally, it is recommended as a
strategic priority that the EU sets aside resources to enable it to support national-level sectoral, institutional and/or PA system
reforms on an ad hoc, if-and-when requested basis and advertises its willingness and ability to act in this way.

Final report
Page 7
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
SPECIAL FEATURES OF THE REGION
The Eastern Africa region as defined for purposes of this Report comprises 11 countries Burundi, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia,
Kenya, Rwanda, Somalia, Southern Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda (see Fig.2 in Volume 1). Altogether it has an area
of about 6.4 million km2, and a population of some 305.6 million people. It also has some of the most diverse and awesome
ecosystems on earth, let alone Africa.
This diversity owes much to a still evolving geomorphology that has bequeathed to the region some unique features, including
both the highest/coldest1 and lowest/hottest2 points on the continent, as well as rift valleys at a scale visible from space
containing spectacular lakes and active volcanoes. Not surprisingly therefore, there is an astonishing variety of habitats ranging
from the equatorial snow peaks and glaciers of Kilimanjaro, Mount Kenya and the Ruwenzori to the coral reefs and mangroves
of the Indian Ocean coasts; and from the rainforests of Rwanda and Uganda, to the deserts of Sudan, Eritrea and Somalia
(see Fig.1).
1 Mount Kilimanjaro (5,893m) in Tanzania, the highest mountain in Africa and the highest free-standing mountain in the world. Its summit is
presumed to reach the coldest temperatures in sub-saharan Africa but, in continental terms, lower temperatures probably occur in the Atlas
Mountains
2 Lake Asal (-125m) in the Afar Depression, Djibouti, also the second lowest point on earth and the worlds most saline lake. The area is also
the hottest on earth in terms of average annual temperature: daily temperatures range between 25oC and 48oC depending on season

Final report
Page 8
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Figure 1. Major biomes of Africa

Final report
Page 9
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
In between these extremes are the extensive grasslands and savannah woodlands that still harbour the biggest concentrations
of large mammals on the planet. These include the iconic phenomena and species that best epitomise Africa in the popular
mind: herds of antelope and flocks of flamingos migrating literally in millions, huge herds of elephants, lions in prides of dozens,
rhinos, gorillas and so on. Living with these flagship species is a huge and still under-researched diversity of smaller
vertebrates, invertebrates and plants, a high proportion of which are endemic.
All of this astonishing manifestation of biodiversity is threatened to a greater or lesser extent throughout Eastern Africa. The
general descriptions given below are regional in character, and necessarily concise. Similarly, only a few specific examples
out of very many are given. For a summary of biodiversity facts at a national level, the reader is referred to the Country
Profiles available on the website of the Convention on Biological Diversity 3, to which all countries in the region are Party4.
Rainfall, temperature and soils all interact to determine the ecological character of an area, but the most important of these is
rainfall, not just the total amount but also how it is distributed through the year. Total amounts are strongly influenced by
elevation: generally speaking the higher the land, the more rain it will receive, although this relationship breaks down at the
coast where the proximity of the ocean provides high rainfall at sea level. In terms of distribution, most of eastern Africa enjoys
a bimodal rainfall regime, with two rainy seasons, unlike the single season that prevails over most countries to the south. As a
result ecosystem productivity is - all else being equal greater in eastern than southern Africa.
1.1
HIGH MOUNTAINS
Eastern Africa boasts not just the highest mountain in Africa, Kilimanjaro, but also all 20 or so of the highest peaks. The five
highest are distributed amongst five countries, Kilimanjaro (5,893m) Tanzania, Mount Kenya (5,199m) Kenya, Margherita
(5,110) Uganda, Ras Dejen (4,550m) Ethiopia, and Karisimbi (4,519m) Rwanda. Mt Kenya is described as an example in Box
1.
Box 1. Mount Kenya
At 5,199m, Mount Kenya is the second highest peak in Africa. It is an ancient extinct volcano, during whose period of
activity (3.12.6 million years ago) it is thought to have risen to 6,500m. The summit is rock, snow and ice. Above about
3,300m the mountain slopes and most of the Park are above the tree line; below it the rich volcanic soils are clothed in
forests which are part of the largest continuous block of indigenous closed canopy forest in Kenya. The entire mountain
is a vital water catchment for some seven million people and is the source of the great Tana and Ewaso Nyiro rivers.
Plant and animal biodiversity is high, with numerous rare and endemic species
At their very highest elevations, these mountains host Africas only permanent snow fields and glaciers. Below these but above
the tree line (at approximately 3,300m), is found an alpine ecosystem with flora and fauna unique to Africa (Box 2). It is found
most extensively in the Ruwenzori Mountains on the border of Uganda with the DRC; on Mount Kenya and the Aberdares in
Kenya; and in the Simien and Bale Mountains of Ethiopia. Although sharing the same fundamental physiognomy, each locale
has many endemic species found nowhere else, making them all incredibly important biodiversity hot spots. It is thus hardly
a coincidence that mountains high enough to exhibit this ecotype account for four of the ten natural World Heritage Sites in
Eastern Africa5.
Box 2. Afro-alpine flora
www.cbd.int/reports/search
Except South Sudan which has yet to join in its own right
5 Simien National Park (Ethiopia); Mount Kenya National Park/National Forest (Kenya); Kilimanjaro National park (Tanzania); and Ruwenzori
Mountains National Park (Uganda)
4

Final report
Page 10
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Above the tree line a unique afro-alpine ecosystem is found whose fauna and flora contain dozens of endemic species
whose evolution and ecology provide an outstanding example of ecological processes. At its lower elevations (3,300m3,800m) is an alpine moorland zone characterized by high rainfall and a thick humus layer. Waist-high tussock grasses
and sedges predominate. The higher elevations (3,800m-4,500m) contain a more varied flora, including several species
of iconic giant rosette plants in the genera Lobelia, Senecio (Giant Groundsels) and Carduus (Giant Thistle). The
evolution in these plants of adaptations to extreme cold is of particular scientific interest, the rosettes being composed
of a great number of adult leaves surrounding a central cone of developing leaves. Upon onset of the night frost the
adult leaves bend inwards to insulate the central leaf bud which slows cooling long enough to protect it from freezing
until re-warming by the next day's sunshine.
Although not necessarily linked closely to the afro-alpine ecosystem per se, all the highest massifs harbour a wide array of
rare and endangered species, many of them endemic. The Bale Mountains provide a good general example of this (Box 3),
while certain specific animals emphasise the point including the iconic Mountain Gorilla 6, ranging exclusively in the high
volcanoes of Rwanda and Uganda; the Mountain Bongo 7, found in a few mountain forests of Kenya; and the Walia Ibex 8 and
Gelada Baboon9 restricted to the Simien Mountains of Ethiopia.
Box 3. The Bale Mountains
Ethiopia is known as a global centre of biodiversity and the Bale Mountains represent an essential area for conservation
of endemic species and represents the largest Afro-alpine habitat in the whole of Africa. The Bale Mountains, with their
vast moorlands, extensive heathland, woodlands, pristine mountain streams and alpine climate represent an area of
exceptional natural value. With an altitudinal range of 1,600 to 4,377m on Tulu Dimtu (2nd highest in Ethiopia), the Bale
Mountains encompass a range of habitats and contain a great diversity of fauna, including 77 species of mammals (17
endemic) and over 220 species of birds (16 endemic) which have been recorded in the Bale Mountains National Park.
The Mountain Nyala, Ethiopian wolf (the worlds most endangered canid), Bale monkey and Giant Molerat, are just
some of these many species endemic to the highlands of Ethiopia, and the Bale Mountains hold the largest remaining
populations.
Mountains, irrespective of height, are very important also for the closed and evergreen forests they support as described below.
1.2
FORESTS
Continental data on forest extent and rates of depletion are provided Volume 1, section 2.3.
A much simplified description of the main types of forest found in Eastern Africa is given below: montane and highland, midelevation and lowland, and coastal. All are important reservoirs of biodiversity, and all provide important goods and ecological
services. A service common to all (and shared by woodlands too), is that they serve as carbon sinks, thus playing a role in
mitigating global warming.
1.2.1
Montane and highland forests
Because of the relationship between elevation and rainfall, extensive tracts of forest in eastern Africa are usually associated
with mountains and hills, irrespective of their height. Some of these areas are relicts of forests dating back to a time when the
region as a whole was wetter and forest far more expansive. These so-called pleistocene refugia are analogous to islands,
separated by savannah seas, and like islands very often contain unique endemic species. The Eastern Arc Mountains in
Tanzania and Kenya provide a good example (Box 4).
Box 4. The Eastern Arc forests
The Mountain Gorilla Gorilla beringei beringei is found in two isolated subpopulations, Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda, and the
Virunga Volcanoes region of Rwanda, Uganda, and Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). It is chiefly because of its Gorillas that Bwindi is
a World Heritage Site.
7 Eastern Bongo Tragelaphus euryceros isaaci
8 Capra ibex walie, the only wild sheep found in sub-saharan Africa
9 Theropithecus gelada, a species in its own genus
Final report
Page 11
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Eastern Arc is the name applied to an archipelago of a dozen mountains scattered in a chain stretching across
Tanzania between the Kenyan and Zambian borders. Included are the Taita Hills (Kenya) and the Pare, Usambara and
Udzungwe Mountains of Tanzania. Scientists believe that the forests on the Eastern Arc Mountains have survived for
over 30 million years, and were once connected to the forests of the Congo Basin and West Africa. Neighbouring
mountains are much younger, for example Kilimanjaro is estimated to be about 1-2 million years old. Many thousands
of species of plants and animals are found in these forests and nowhere else on earth. This includes at least 100
species of birds, mammals, amphibians and reptiles; at least 800 plants and huge numbers of smaller creatures
including butterflies and millipedes. Many of these species are threatened with extinction. The Eastern Arc is recognised
internationally as an area with an exceptional concentration of endemic species. In addition, at least 25% of Tanzanians
depend on the Eastern Arc Mountains for their water supply
The Southern Highlands of Tanzania also boast important highland forest with high levels of endemism, and provide a
stronghold for Abbottss duiker, the Kipunji monkey discovered in 2003 on Mount Rungwe (Africas rarest primate species and
genus10) and more than a dozen new vertebrates discovered in the last few years. They also harbour the regions most
extensive montane grasslands (EAs rarest habitat type), and an impressive orchid flora (Kitulo NP in particular). Altogether,
Tanzanias mountains contribute to the country having the highest primate diversity of any in the region. Tanzania boasts 27
species including the Chimpanzee (e.g. Mahale Mountains).
The Imatong Mountains of South Sudan provide another example of rich and unique highland biodiversity. The vegetation is
relatively intact and the mountain range still has some of the best conserved Podocarpus forests in East Africa. In addition to
afromontane floral associations, the Imatongs also have vegetation types associated with the lowland forests of the Congo
Basin and the drier woodlands and savannas of northern Sudan and Somaliland. There are no other mountains in East Africa
which have so many floral assemblages converging on them, resulting in at least 21 endemic plant taxa.
There are very many other forested highlands across the region that could be mentioned, almost all of them characterised by
high biodiversity and endemicity. Without exception however, they all provide a range of ecological goods and services to the
often substantial human populations living around them. Goods include fuel, timber and non-timber forest products (fruits, wild
crop relatives11, medicines etc) as for any forest, but the most important service of an upland forest is as a water catchment
area. As highlands they receive higher rainfall than surrounding lowlands, and their forest cover regulates the recharge of
rivers rising in them. Without the forest to retard runoff, the relatively high precipitation received would flood torrentially down
steep slopes, to the detriment of soils and habitats below. Because of this service, key upland catchment forests are often
referred to as water towers.
Kenya for example officially recognises five water towers of critical economic importance namely the Mau Forest Complex,
Mount Kenya, the Aberdares Range, Mount Elgon and the Cherangani Hills12. In Tanzania, the Southern Highlands contribute
water via the Usangu Flats and Ihefu Swamp to the Great Ruaha River, thus providing important ecosystem services to both
people living downstream and to the important wildlife populations of the Greater Ruaha-Rungwa-Kitulo-Kipengere landscape
which now hosts the largest population of elephants in Eastern Africa13. Similarly the Imatongs form the most important
watershed in southern South Sudan, with numerous towns and villages dependent on the maintenance of this catchment area.
1.2.2
Mid-elevation and lowland forests
Compared to west and central Africa, inland Eastern Africa has little true lowland forest on relatively flat terrain. Coastal forests
are described separately below, and the more open woodland formations in section 1.3. The most extensive closed and
evergreen lowland forests in the region are found in western Uganda (e.g. Semuliki National Park, Kibale National Park and
Budongo Forest Reserve), with patches elsewhere (e.g. south-western South Sudan). Also notable are the transfrontier forests
of Nyungwe National Park in Rwanda and Kibira National Park in Burundi. This landscape represents one of the few
substantially intact mid-altitude rainforests in East Africa.
All these areas host a variety of forest animals including elephant, buffalo and giant forest hogs. The primate fauna, including
important chimpanzee populations, is especially diverse with 13 species recorded in Kibale for example. Semuliki is dominated
by the easternmost extension of the great Ituri Forest of the Congo Basin, one of Africas most ancient and bio-diverse forests.
10
Rungwecebus kipunji
e.g. Wild Coffee (Coffea arabica) indigenous to the last patches of cloud forest still found in south-western Ethiopia
12 UNEP (2012) The Role and Contribution of Montane Forests and Related Ecosystem Services to the Kenyan Economy. UN Environment
Programme, Nairobi. ISBN: 978-92-807-3273-3. Note Mt Kenya, the Aberdares and Mt Elgon are all National Parks
13 This includes the following PAs: Ruaha NP, Rungwa GR Kitulo NP, Mpanga-Kipengere GR and Mount Rungwe Forest Nature Reserve
11

Final report
Page 12
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Birdlife is especially spectacular in Semuliki with 441 recorded species, representing 40% of Ugandas total bird species and
66% (216) of the countrys forest bird species. There are numerous rarities; 46 Guinea-Congo biome species are found
nowhere else in East Africa. Similarly, Nyungwe-Kibira is an important centre for primates (including chimpanzees), and
contains many Albertine Rift endemics.
Whilst not quite so critically important as highland forests in terms of water catchment services, mid-elevation and lowland
forests do of course offer a similar range of goods.
1.2.3
Coastal forests
The Coastal Forests of East Africa are found in a chain of relict forest and thicket patches set within savannah woodlands,
wetlands and agricultural land at elevations between 0-500m, extending from Southern Somalia to Southern Mozambique.
Those of Kenya and Tanzania are a part of the Northern Zanzibar-Inhambane Coastal Forest Mosaic, which extends from the
Kenya-Somali border to the Tanzania-Mozambique border along the coast. The ecoregion includes forest patches found on
the islands of Zanzibar, Pemba and Mafia. These forests are characterized by a mosaic of vegetation types including closed
canopy evergreen forest, Brachystegia woodland, scrub forest and dry forest. They are typically found in small fragmented
patches. Mangrove forests are not considered to be Coastal Forest under this definition.
The Coastal Forests of East Africa are a globally recognised area of great biological importance, due to the high levels of
biodiversity and endemism found within the small, fragmented and highly threatened patches of forest (Box 5).
Box 5. Coastal forests
Many species are endemic to these forests, for example 44% of plants are endemic to the coastal forests and 40% of
plant genera are confined to a single forest patch. Forests only 100 km apart may have an 80% difference in their plant
species. The coastal forests are home to five endemic primates: Tana River red colobus (Procolobus rufomitratus,
critically endangered), Tana River mangabey (Cercocebus galeritus), Zanzibar red colobus (Procolobus kirkii,
endangered), Rondo galago (Galagoides rondoensis, endangered) and the Kenya coastal galago (Galagoides cocos).
The coastal forests support populations of (Red List) threatened flagship mammal species: Black rhino (Diceros
bicornis, critically endangered if not locally extinct), Elephant (Loxodonta africana, threatened) and Wild dog (Lycaon
pictus, endangered). Musical instruments, such as the clarinet and oboe, are made from one highly valued hardwood
species, African Blackwood (Dalbergia melanoxylon) which is found in coastal forests and is threatened by
unsustainable harvesting. Coastal forests together with the Eastern Arc Mountains, are home to the African Violet
(Saintpaulia spp) from which 40,000 varieties have been cultivated commercially from 3 species, with a retail trade of
US$100 million per annum1.
The highest levels of biodiversity are found in the closed canopy forest, but this only makes up 2% of the total area of the
Coastal Forest Mosaic. The two largest protected areas in Kenya are Arabuko-Sokoke (417 km2) and Shimba Hills (63 km2).
Arabuko-Sokoke alone hosts an abundance of mammal, bird, reptile and amphibian species limited to that one forest14. The
rare antelope known as the Hirola15 is restricted to the northernmost coastal zones of Kenya (although it might survive in
Somalia also).
In addition to their high biodiversity values, coastal forests provide the same goods and services as any forest. More than
others however, many have an important cultural value to local people. For instance the Kaya forests in Kwale and Kilifi Districts
of Kenya are sacred to local communities, with graves of important elders found within the forest. Sacred forests are also
common in Tanzania where extractive use is closely regulated by communities.
1.3
WOODLAND AND GRASSLAND
14
BirdLife International (2014) Important Bird Areas factsheet: Arabuko-Sokoke Forest. Download from http://www.birdlife.org. Unique and
endangered birds include Sokoke Scops-owl (Otus ireneae) Clarke's Weaver (Ploceus goland)i and Sokoke Pipit (Anthus sokokensis)
15 Beatragus hunter, an Alcelaphine antelope allied to the Topi and Hartebeest
Final report
Page 13
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
The wooded and grassy habitats of Eastern Africa come in many varieties, ranging from vast open grass plains, to the Acacia 16
dominated savannah woodlands found over much of the region, to the sometimes dense Miombo 17 woodlands so typical of
western and southern Tanzania and beyond. The important common feature of them all however, is the availability of grass.
It is in these grassy ecosystems that one finds the amazing, inter-dependent communities of large mammals for which Africa
is so famous, made up of large numbers of grazers especially, but also specialist browsers, all of them supporting an impressive
cast of large and small predators as well as an array of scavengers.
Examples include, for grazers: many species of antelope, zebras, buffalo and hippo; for browsers: rhino and giraffe; for both:
elephant; for predators lion, leopard, cheetah, wild dog and crocodiles; for scavengers hyenas, jackals and vultures.
It is in the vast and productive grassy habitats in Eastern Africa that one still finds the last two great mammalian migrations in
Africa. The most famous of these is undoubtedly that of the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem, in which massive herds dominated by
wildebeest circulate between Tanzania and Kenya (Box 6).
Box 6. The Serengeti
The vast plains of Serengeti National Park, comprising 1.5 million hectares of savannah, support the largest remaining
unaltered animal migration in the world. Over one million wildebeest plus hundreds of thousands of gazelles and zebras
- followed by their predators - engage in a 1,000 km long annual circular trek in search of pasture and water, spanning
the two adjacent countries of Kenya and Tanzania. This spectacular phenomenon takes place in a unique scenic
setting of endless plains: 25,000km2 of treeless expanses of spectacularly flat short grasslands dotted with rocky
outcrops (kopjes) interspersed with rivers and woodlands. This is one of the most productive ecosystems on earth,
sustaining the largest number of ungulates and the highest concentration of large predators in the world. The
ecosystem supports roughly 1.3 million wildebeest, 300,000 Thomsons gazelle and 200,000 zebra which dominate
the migratory herd. Other herbivores include 90,000 impala, 50,000 Grants gazelle, 40,000 buffalo, 40,000 topi, 15,000
eland, 8,000 hartebeest, 10,000 giraffe, 3,000 elephant, but fewer than 40 black rhino. The Park has the highest ostrich
population in Tanzania and probably Africa. This abundance of prey animals supports very important populations of
lions, leopards, cheetahs, spotted hyenas and wild dogs.
Much less well known, but as impressive in scale, is that of the Sudd-Badingilu-Boma-Gambella ecosystem, in which herds
dominated by White-eared kob circulate between South Sudan and Ethiopia. The most recent estimates obtained in 2009 for
the migratory species are 1.67 million White-eared kob (Kobus kob leucotis), 340,000 Mongolla gazelle (Gazella rufifrons
albonotata) and 125,000 Tiang, the Sudanese form of topi (Damaliscus lunatus tiang)18. These species range mostly within
South Sudan: 90% in the case of the Kob, and 100% for Tiang.
16 In 2011 the Latin name Acacia was transferred from the African type genus to one in Australia. All of the African species have new generic
names. However, the name remains so quintessentially African we continue to use it here as a common name.
17 Miombo is a vernacular word that has been adopted by ecologists to describe those woodland ecosystems dominated by trees in the
genera Brachystegia, Julbernardia and Isoberlinia
18 WCS considers the kob estimate to be an over-estimate, and those for gazelle and tiang to be under-estimates; for more detail see
Grossmann, F., Elkan, P., Tiba,C., Moi, J., Awol P. P., Lita, J., Demetry, P. and S. Kenyi. 2011. Aerial Surveys of Wildlife, Livestock, and
Human Activity in and around Existing and Proposed Protected Areas of the Republic of South Sudan 2009 - 2010. WCS Report No. 4 to
USAID and Government of South Sudan

Final report
Page 14
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Tiang migration in Jonglei State, South Sudan. Photo Paul Elkan

The best known of Eastern Africas Parks and Reserves are mostly those which strive to conserve intact, functioning examples
of grassy and open woodland ecosystems. In addition to the Serengeti NP (Tanzania) and Mara Game Reserve (Kenya)
mentioned above, these include Omo-Mago NP in Ethiopia; Samburu National Reserve, Amboseli and the two Tsavo NPs in
Kenya; Ngorongoro Conservation Area, Selous Game Reserve and Ruaha NP in Tanzania; and Queen Elizabeth 19, Murchison
Falls and Kidepo Valley National Parks in Uganda. Unsurprisingly perhaps, several of these protected areas are inscribed on
the list of World Heritage Sites20. Together, they represent the backbone of Eastern Africas economically very important
tourism industry.
Some of those mentioned, notably the Selous GR (see Box 7) and Ruaha NP, are representative of the Miombo
ecotype in which the dominant trees are deciduous. Due partly to the relatively dense canopy prevailing during the
time of year when the trees are in leaf, and partly to much poorer soils, the abundance and quality of grazing is not
as high in Miombo as it is in Acacia savannah. This translates into a significantly lower carrying capacity of large
herbivores. Nonetheless the sheer extent of the habitat means it also supports very important populations of
herbivores, especially elephants, and predators.
19 Biomass densities for this Park exceed those published for any other wildlife community anywhere in the world. During the late 60s, the
year round overage biomass of large mammals in the grasslands of QENP was recorded as 29,490 kg/km2, compared to 6,300 kg/km2 for
the Serengeti.
20 Serengeti NP, Selous GR and Ngorongoro Conservation Area (all in Tanzania)

Final report
Page 15
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Box 7. The Selous
The Selous Game Reserve, covering 50,000 km2, is one of the largest protected areas in Africa. It lies between the
Somalia-Maasai and Zambezian centres of endemism, mostly within the latter. Together with the adjacent Mikumi
National Park and Kilombero Game Controlled Area to the west, and the nearby Udzungwa Mountains National Park
to the northwest, the Selous and its surrounding areas constitute one of the largest continuous protected and
undeveloped wildlife areas in the world, in which ecological and biological processes are relatively undisturbed,
including a diverse range of wildlife with significant predator/prey relationships. Despite a long winter drought and poor
soils, the Reserve has a higher density and diversity of species than any other Miombo woodland area, thanks to its
size, the diversity of its habitats, the availability of food and water and the lack of settlements. More than 2,100 plants
have been recorded and more are thought to exist in the remote forests in the south. Similarly, the Reserve protects
an impressive large mammal fauna; it contains globally significant populations of elephant, black rhinoceros, buffalo,
hippo and wild hunting dog. There are also important populations of ungulates that favour Miombo such as sable
antelope, Lichtenstein's hartebeest, greater kudu and Niassa wildebeest. In addition, there is also a large number of
Nile crocodile.
Miombo woodlands are central to the livelihood systems of millions of rural and urban dwellers in Tanzania. Goods provided
to support the livelihoods of local communities include products such as medicines, fuel, food, fibres and construction and craft
materials. The services include cultural and spiritual values, climate regulation, erosion and hydrological control.
1.4
ARID AND SEMI-ARID LAND
A huge crescent of land that includes northern Kenya, eastern Ethiopia, much of Somalia, Djibouti, Eritrea, and most of northern
Sudan is dominated by dry bushland, semi-desert dwarf shrubland and deserts. Except on mountains or near the coast, proper
woodland is confined to drainage lines of rivers and streams, many of which are seasonal and flow only intermittently. Because
of low rainfall and productivity these arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) have never supported wildlife in abundance, and
nowadays the best areas are anyway heavily utilised by pastoralists. Overstocking and overgrazing in relation to carrying
capacity is common, leading to range degradation and desertification. Consequently, wildlife species adapted to ASAL
conditions are rare and endangered21. Surprisingly, small relict elephant populations survive in a couple of favourable areas,
one in the Babile Sanctuary of northeastern Ethiopia, and another in the Gash-Setit Wildlife Reserve of Eritrea on its southern
border with Ethiopia.
1.5
LAKES, RIVERS AND WETLANDS
The most notable components of Eastern Africas nominally freshwater ecosystems are strongly associated with two very major
geographical phenomena, the Great Rift Valley and the River Nile.
The East African Rift came into being approximately 40 million years ago as the African tectonic plate began to split, and
comprises two distinct arms, the Eastern or Gregorian Rift and the Western or Albertine Rift.
The Eastern Rift holds a string of lakes on the rift floor running south from Ethiopia through Kenya to Tanzania: with few
exceptions these lakes are all saline and alkaline. The Ethiopian lakes from north to south are Zeway, Shala, Abyata, Langano,
Awassa, Chamo, Abaya and Chew Bahir. The Kenyan section is home to eight lakes, of which two are freshwater and the rest
alkaline. From north to south these are Lakes Turkana (largest of the Kenyan lakes and only slightly saline 22), Logipi, Baringo
(freshwater), Bogoria (a National Reserve), Nakuru (a National Park), Elmenteita, Naivasha (freshwater) and Magadi23. The
chain of alkaline lakes continues into Tanzania with Lakes Natron and Manyara.
The shallow soda lakes of the Eastern Rift represent a unique ecosystem based on alkaline-tolerant blue-green algae and
zooplankton whose high productivity in the warm, strongly insolated water supports huge populations of Lesser and Greater
Flamingos respectively, these birds being highly adapted to exploit these resources. Three of these lakes in Kenya, namely
Bogoria, Nakuru and Elmenteita form a serial World Heritage Site called the Lake System in the Great Rift Valley (Box 8).
Together these areas present an exceptional range of geological and biological processes of exceptional natural beauty,
including falls, geysers, hot springs, open waters and marshes, forests and open grasslands concentrated in a relatively small
21 e.g. Grevys zebra, wild ass, dibatag, desert warthog, oryx, beira, Spekes gazelle and Soemmerrings gazelle: some endemic to, and all
formerly widespread in, the Horn of Africa
22 Also inscribed on the list of World Heritage Sites, mainly on account of its paleontological importance for hominid fossils
23 Baringo, Bogoria, Nakuru and Elmenteita are all Ramsar Sites (see below)

Final report
Page 16
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
area. The massed congregations of birds on the shores of the lakes including up to 1.4 million Lesser Flamingos which move
between the lakes against the landscape backdrop of the Great Rift Valley, constitute an exceptional natural phenomenon of
global significance. Lake Natron to the south in Tanzania is the Lesser Flamingos major nesting siteand the aim in due course,
as reflected in the official Action Plan for the species, is to add this lake into the World Heritage Site also.
Box 8. RiftValley lakes in Kenya
The Kenya Lake System is the single most important foraging site for the Lesser Flamingo in the world with about 1.5
million individuals moving from one lake to the other, and provides the main nesting and breeding grounds for Great
White Pelicans in the Great Rift Valley. The lakes' terrestrial zones also contain important populations of many mammal
and bird species that are globally or regionally threatened (e.g. Black rhino and Rothschilds giraffe). They are home to
over 100 species of migratory birds and support globally important populations of Black-Necked Grebe, African
Spoonbill, Pied Avocet, Little Grebe, Yellow Billed Stork, Black Winged Stilt, Grey-Headed Gull and Gull Billed Tern.
The property makes a critical contribution to the conservation of the natural values within the Great Rift Valley, and is
an integral part of the most important route of the African-Eurasian flyway system along which billions of birds travel
from northern breeding grounds to African wintering places
The Western or Albertine Rift contains another chain of lakes running south from Uganda through the DRC to Tanzania and
beyond: with one exception, these are fresh and include the largest, deepest and oldest of all the Rift Valley Lakes. From north
to south these are Lakes Albert, Edward, Kivu, Tanganyika (at 32,000 km and more than 1400m, this is largest and deepest
of the Rift Valley lakes, and the second deepest fresh water lake on the planet), and Rukwa (the alkaline exception). The lakes
continue south out of the EA region with Lakes Malawi, Malombe and Chilwa.
Lake Victoria with an area of 68,800 km, is the largest lake in Africa. It is not in the Rift Valley however, occupying a depression
formed between the two arms by the uplift of the rifts to either side. Its catchment is of huge economic importance (see Box
9).
Box 9. The Lake Victoria basin
The Lake Victoria basin is located in the centre of East Africa and covers an area of 194,000 km2 of which 7% is in
Burundi, 22% in Kenya, 11% in Rwanda, 44% in Tanzania and 16% in Uganda. The lake basin contains Lake Victoria,
the second largest lake in the world with an area of 68,800 km2 and a number of satellite lakes and rivers which are
fringed in many places by extensive wetlands. About 35 million people (about 30% of the entire population of East
Africa) are estimated to live and derive their livelihood directly or indirectly from the basin. Lake Victoria supports one
of the largest freshwater fisheries in the world which by 2007 was producing about one million tons of fish annually
valued between US$ 300-400 million. Until the Nile Perch was introduced, the lake had high fish diversity of over 500
species, most of which were endemic to the lake and of economic and scientific value. The Lake Victoria Basin
Commission maintains an Aquatic Biodiversity Meta-database. The lake provides water for irrigation, hydropower
generation, industrial and domestic use, and modulates local climate.
The fresh water lakes of the Albertine Rift Valley are home to an extraordinary number of endemic fish species, including most
notably some 1,500 Cichlid species. The species radiations of cichlids in these lakes rival radiations of terrestrial fauna in the
Galpagos, and serve as a classic example of evolutionary adaptation (Box 10).
Box 10. Albertine Rift Valley lakes
The Albertine Rift Valley lakes are well known for the extensive radiations of fish species in the family Cichlidae. Large
numbers of cichlid species live adjacent to one another along the edges of the lakes, having evolved specialisations to
take advantage of their environment and to limit competition for resources. For example, one unusual group of fish, the
scale-eaters, feed exclusively on the scales of other fish. Most cichlids are mouth-brooders in which the young swim into
their parent's mouth for protection in the face of imminent danger. Cichlids are not the only fish unique to these lakes,
and copepods, ostracods, shrimps, crabs, and mollusks are also represented by high numbers of endemic species.

Final report
Page 17
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
In addition to their biodiversity and tourism values, all the lakes support commercially important fisheries that sustain the
livelihoods of the millions people living on their shores.
The river systems of Eastern Africa are dominated by the Nile, the longest river in the world and of whose course more than
75% runs through the region before entering Egypt. The White Nile rises in the catchments of Lakes Victoria, Albert and Edward
and flows north through Uganda and the Sudans to Khartoum, where it is joined by the Blue Nile whose source, Lake Tana,
lies in the Ethiopian highlands north of the Rift Valley and so is not a Rift Valley lake24. The regions other major river systems
include the Omo in Ethiopia; Tana, Mara and Ewaso Ngiro in Kenya; and the Rufiji and Pangani in Tanzania.
The East African region contains many wetlands associated with its lakes and rivers. Uganda has the most, including 12
Ramsar Sites. The largest and perhaps the most important is the massive swamp on the Nile in South Sudan known as the
Sudd (see Box 11).
Box 11. The Sudd wetland
The Sudd is one of the largest tropical wetlands in the world, located in South Sudan in the lower reaches of Bahr el
Jebel, a section of the White Nile. It is composed of various ecosystems, from open water and submerged vegetation
to floating fringe vegetation, seasonally inundated woodland, rain-fed and river-fed grasslands, and floodplain
scrubland. Seasonally it hosts the great migratory populations of white-eared kob and tiang. Notable resident wildlife
includes South Sudans largest remaining elephant population, Nile Lechwe and Shoebill Storks. In addition it is an
important wintering ground for migratory birds, and contains a number of endemic fish, bird, mammal and plant species.
The wetland serves as a filter that controls water quality and a sponge that stabilizes water flow. It is a major source of
water for domestic livestock and wildlife and an important source of fish. The socio-economic and cultural activities of
local people are dependent on its annual floods to regenerate floodplain grasses to feed their cattle, as they move from
permanent settlements on the highlands to dry-season grazing around the swamp.
The deltas of the following rivers form important wetlands: Omo (Ethiopia/Kenya) draining into Lake Turkana; Ruvuma and
Rufiji25 (Tanzania), Kagera (Rwanda) draining into Lake Victoria, and Tana (Kenya). The Ewaso Ngiro (Kenya) drains into an
inland delta known as the Lorian Swamp. Other wetlands of note include the Kilombero, Ihefu and Malagarasi (Tanzania) and
Kyoga (Uganda). All contain exceptional biodiversity, of which hippos, crocodiles, shoebill storks and sitatunga antelope are
symbolic.
Some famous wetlands are created by upwellings of groundwater draining off mountains, such as the Amboseli swamps linked
to Kilimanjaro, and Mzima Springs linked to the Chyulu Hills whose waters supply Mombasa and Nairobi cities. The fact that
all the wetlands and mountains just mentioned are in National Parks underlines their importance 26.
1.6
COASTAL HABITATS
Any account of the biodiversity of Eastern Africas Indian Ocean littoral must go beyond the coastal forests and woodlands
already described (1.2.3), and include mangroves, sea grass beds, coral reefs and the inshore marine ecosystem generally.
Mangrove forests constitute a unique inter-tidal ecosystem that not only provides habitat and breeding areas for many species,
some of them economically important (e.g. crabs and prawns), but also building poles much valued for their strength and
durability. They also inhibit coastal erosion, a free service that offsets the huge cost of any engineered solution. Sea grass
beds support turtles and the dugong, a large grazing sea mammal. The dugong was once relatively plentiful off the Red Sea
coasts of Sudan and Eritrea but its present status there and in Somali waters is uncertain. Further south sea grass beds are
discontinuous and dugongs rare. Coral reefs are well known as spectacular hotspots of biodiversity, and those of Eastern
Africa are no exception. The best known reefs are those protected in Marine National Parks such as Kiunga, Malindi and
Watamu in Kenya, and Mafia Island in Tanzania (see Box 12). These and many other reefs are important tourist attractions,
being enjoyed by scuba divers, snorkelers and others in glass-bottomed boats.
Box 12. The Mafia Island seascape
24 Like them however, it supports a unique fish fauna, comprising a group of Cyprinid fish that are all descended from a common ancestor
(called a "species flock"). This Cyprinid species flock is one of only two known in the world, and the only one that is still intact.
25 The Rufiji delta is part of the Rufiji-Mafia-Kilwa Marine Ramsar Site
26 Amboseli, Tsavo West (for Mzima) and Chyulu Hills NPs in Kenya; and Kilimanjaro NP in Tanzania.

Final report
Page 18
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
The Mafia Island seascape arguably contains the finest representative complex of characteristic tropical marine habitats
and species in Eastern Africa. It includes Rufiji Delta which has the largest intact block of relatively well protected
mangrove forest in EA (540 km2). There are extensive and diverse coral reefs around Mafia and the Songosongo
Archipelago which are relatively resilient to coral bleaching. There are also extensive seagrasses, algal beds and
intertidal flats; the area contains habitats important to sharks, rays and turtles; coelacanths have been caught there; and
the number of seabird species is very high. This habitat diversity gives rise to some of the highest marine species
diversity in the region.
The overall diversity of Eastern African coastal waters is astounding, estimated at some 11,000 species of marine life. This
includes many species of marine mammal, including humpback whales, dolphins and dugongs. All five species of sea turtle
living in the Indian Ocean are found along the East African coast, and nest on its undisturbed beaches. Big game fish, such
as marlin and sailfish, are plentiful and attract large numbers of sport fishermen. Whale sharks, the biggest fish in the world,
are common and a tourist attraction in their own right.
Tanzanian coastal waters are renowned for incidental catches of the West Indian Ocean Coelacanth (Latimeria chalumnae).
The Coelacanths constitute a primitive Order of fish found only along the coastlines of the west Indian Ocean and Indonesia.
They belong to the oldest known living lineage of Sarcopterygii (lobe-finned fish and tetrapods), which means they are more
closely related to lungfish, reptiles and mammals than to the common ray-finned fishes. The West Indian Ocean coelacanth is
a critically endangered species, and a marine park to help protect it has been proposed along 100 km stretch of coastline
between the Pangani River and Tanga. Since there are only two species of coelacanth and both are threatened, it is the most
endangered Order of animals in the world.
Amidst this tremendous biodiversity, the coastal zone is also home to millions of mostly poor people, many of whom rely almost
entirely on marine resources. Threats to these resources thus threaten their livelihoods also. The important indigenous tuna
fishing industry of Zanzibar is threatened by commercial operations, to give just one of many similar examples.
1.7
TRANSFORMED ECOSYSTEMS
The descriptions above all relate to the different types of ecosystem in an undisturbed state. The greater proportion of each
however, has already been disturbed and the process continues inexorably. Such transformed ecosystems are generally
overlooked by conservationists. In an African context, ecosystems that have lost their charismatic megafauna are often
dismissed as having little residual biodiversity or other value. This of course is a mistake, because many disturbed ecosystems
continue to host an important variety of plants, birds, small mammals, reptiles, amphibians, insects and invertebrates, some of
significant economic importance (e.g. as pollinators). This does not mean such areas are a priority, but as the process of
habitat fragmentation and transformation continues to erode fully intact ecosystems, depleted habitats will take on an
increasing importance, just as they have historically in the developed nations of Europe in particular. In many of those countries,
conservation of essentially man-made ecosystems, such a wildflower meadows and hedgerows are now a priority. Over time,
the management of biodiversity in transformed ecosystems, including mosaics of undisturbed patches with agricultural land,
will become more important and require greater attention in Africa also.

Final report
Page 19
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
2.1
THREATS TO BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
2.1.1
Unsustainable consumptive utilisation
Natural resources are an important source of food, medicine, clothing, trophies, ornaments, fuel and building materials both
domestically and internationally. Probably the biggest threat to biodiversity conservation in any region of Africa, is the fact that
the consumptive utilisation of natural resources is invariably both destructive and unsustainable. It is also, with extremely few
exceptions, either illegal or very poorly regulated.
This is a huge topic that can only be summarised here, as it concerns both domestic and international demand, involves both
plants and animals, occurs in all types of ecosystem, and operates at both generalised and species specific levels.
Of the three forms of generalised utilisation that have the most serious negative impacts, two involve animals and one involves
plants.
The hunting of terrestrial wildlife for food, or bushmeat as it is more generally known, has long been recognized as a severe
threat to the food resources of indigenous peoples and to wildlife populations in the forests of West and Central Africa, but far
less attention has been focused on the issue in savannah areas, in part due to the misconception that illegal hunting for
bushmeat in savannahs is a small-scale phenomenon practiced for subsistence living. Recent reports confirm that widespread
illegal hunting and the bushmeat trade occurs on a much greater scale in the savannahs of Eastern and Southern Africa than
previously thought27,28,29, and should be viewed with the same levels of concern as it is in other parts of Africa. The analysis of
bushmeat trading and related recommendations given in this Reports volume on Central Africa therefore are very relevant to
the Eastern region also (see Volume 4, sections 2.1.1, 4.10 and 5.4).
The hunting of aquatic wildlife for food, or fishing, is another massive issue that could merit a separate chapter but can only
be touched on here. All Eastern Africas fisheries, whether freshwater or marine, are threatened by unsustainable offtake.
The most important and threatening form of generalised plant-based utilisation is deforestation. The direct consumption of
forest resources occurs to satisfy two principal needs, timber and fuel30. The resulting degradation and loss of forest cover and
diversity then of course impacts all forest dependent animal species also, not to mention the adverse impacts on the ecosystem
services of forests (e.g. as water catchments).
Not only is there a strong domestic demand for timber and poles for building and furniture, but an international one too,
principally from India. The scale of the international timber trade in some countries such as Tanzania, is massive and
contributes to widespread forest degradation and clearance31.
As is the case elsewhere, wood fuels play a major role in supplying the energy needs of the people in Eastern Africa. The need
for wood fuels arises from the low electrification rate in these developing countries, as well as unreliability and expense where
electricity is available. In Tanzania energy from wood fuels account for 90% of the countrys energy consumption. Of these
wood fuels, charcoal is a prevalent choice, especially in urban settings where ease of transport and low storage space are of
high importance. The domestic demand for charcoal is huge and increasing as population growth leads to an even greater
need for energy sources.
27 Jambiya, G., Milledge, S.A.H. and Mtango, N. (2007). Night Time Spinach: Conservation and livelihood implications of wild meat use in
refugee situations in north-western Tanzania. TRAFFIC East/Southern Africa, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
28 Roe, D. (2008). Trading Nature: A report, with case studies, on the contribution of wildlife trade management to sustainable livelihoods
and theMillennium Development Goals (Case study 1: The trade in wild meat in East and Southern Africa). TRAFFIC International and WWF
International
29 Lindsey, P., Balme, G., Becker, M., Begg, C., Bento, C., Bocchino, C., Dickman, A., Diggle, R., Eves, H., Henschel, P., Lewis, D.,
Marnewick, K., Mattheus, J., McNutt, J.W., McRobb, R., Midlane, N., Milanzi, J., Morley, R., Murphree, M., Nyoni, P., Opyene, V., Phadima,
J., Purchase, N., Rentsch, D., Roche, C., Shaw, J., van der Westhuizen, H., Van Vliet, N. and Zisadza, P. (2012) Illegal hunting and the
bush-meat trade in savannah Africa: drivers, impacts and solutions to address the problem. Panthera/Zoological Society of London/Wildlife
Conservation Society report, New York
30 Other causes of deforestation are considered in section 2.1.4
31 Milledge, S.A.H., Gelvas, I. K. and Ahrends, A. (2007). Forestry,Governance and National Development: Lessons Learned from a Logging
Boom in Southern Tanzania. TRAFFIC East/Southern Africa /Tanzania Development Partners Group / Ministry of Natural Resources of
Tourism, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

Final report
Page 20
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
In Somalia however supply exceeds local demand, and huge quantities are being exported illegally through the southern ports
of Kismayu and Barawe. A report by the UNs Somalia-Eritrea Monitoring Group released in October 2014 provides strong
evidence that this trade constitutes a major source of finance for the activities of the notorious rebel militia, Al Shabaab. The
report alleges that attempts to regulate this trade have been ineffective, partly due to the complicity of elements of the occupying
Kenyan forces. Trading in charcoal and taxing the ports have generated an estimated annual total of US$ 3856 million for
this organisation. The overall value of the illicit charcoal exported from Somalia has been estimated at US$ 360384 million
per year32: harvesting at this rate must be unsustainable in the long term.
The ever-growing demand for charcoal all over Africa creates many sustainability challenges. Without intervention, the
business-as-usual model for charcoal will not only rob future generations of their ability to meet their energy needs, but will rob
Africa of its native forests, their biodiversity and their services.
Whether for timber or fuel, deforestation and forest degradation have long been a problem throughout Eastern Africa. Charcoal
production and the use of wood fuels in general are certainly contributors, but it is the illegal harvesting of the trees without
reforestation and the lack of good forest and trade management oversight that are the fundamental causes of forest loss.
Some natural resource value chains are species specific, and the illegal poaching and trafficking activities needed to meet
demand are among the commonest contributory factors to a species becoming endangered. The issue of the trade in wildlife
generally, and endangered species in particular, is of such great and overriding importance to conservation throughout Africa,
not just the east, that it is described and analysed in a separate, dedicated chapter of this Report (see Volume 6; section 3).
Some observations specific to Eastern Africa are given in Box 13.
Box 13. Wildlife trafficking in Eastern Africa
Due to its strategic location, the Horn of Africa has been identified as both a source and transit route for illegal wildlife
trade in ivory, rhino horn, live animals, shark fins, corals and other wildlife products between Africa, the Middle East,
and Asia. The April 2013 issue of Africa Geographic states that Kenya is a principal exit point for ivory leaving Africa,
and this is acknowledged by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and INTERPOL1. The majority of
recent large seizures of illicit ivory made anywhere in the world were exported from either Kenya or Tanzania, largely
through massive container ports in Mombasa and Dar es Salaam. Since ivory comes from many places and is
distributed to buyers across Asia, these ports represent a vital checkpoint in the trafficking network. Addis Ababa in
Ethiopia and Khartoum in Sudan contain two active ivory markets and have also been identified as key source and
transit smuggling routes.
The trade in some items is driven by the extraordinarily high prices consumers are prepared to pay. Elephant ivory can fetch
more than $3,000 a kilo, unworked billets of African Blackwood sell at $20,000 per cubic meter, and rhino horn over $60,000
per kilo. Because they are so gravely threatened by the trade in their parts, and because of their great economic and ecological
importance, the conservation of Elephants and Rhinos is covered also in separate chapters dedicated to each (see Volume 6;
sections 1 and 2).
It can be noted here, that the consumptive utilisation of wildlife is not limited to dead materials. The trade in live specimens for
zoos, laboratories and the pet trade generally has a serious impact on some species. Examples from Eastern Africa include
many primate species, including Gorillas and Chimpanzees, birds and reptiles, and the supply of Cichlid fish for aquaria.
State-sanctioned hunting based on official quotas is supposedly sustainable, and so it not discussed here. The licensed
hunting of certain big game species is available in Tanzania, Uganda and Ethiopia, but not Kenya where it was banned in
1977 and only certain game-birds may still be shot.
2.1.2
Human-wildlife conflict
The continuing fragmentation and conversion of natural habitats leads to reduced space and food for wildlife, which in turn
generates human-wildlife conflict (HWC). As habitat conversion increases, so does HWC and its impacts on crops, livestock
and humans themselves. Many lives, principally animal but also human, are lost in the process.
32 See - Nellemann, C., Henriksen, R., Raxter, P., Ash, N., Mrema, E. [Eds] (2014) The Environmental Crime Crisis: Threats to Sustainable
Development from Illegal Exploitation and Trade in Wildlife and Forest Resources. UNEP and INTERPOL

Final report
Page 21
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Crop damage in Eastern Africa is caused by many species including insects (locusts and army worms), birds (quelea) and
mammals (rodents, monkeys, pigs). By far the most serious problems however are caused by the largest of all, the elephant.
Not only does it either consume or damage on a grand scale, it is also a direct danger to humans many of whom lose their
lives to crop raiding elephants. The main impact on livestock comes from large predators which are the first to be affected by
a shortage of natural prey, namely lion, leopard and hyena, and occasionally cheetah and wild dog.
Control measures frequently done illegally - include shooting, trapping, poisoning, repelling, scaring and fencing. Predators,
especially lions, are baited with poisoned meat, and their carcasses are then consumed by vultures and other scavengers all
of which perish in turn.
The concept of HWC can also be extended to issues such as pollution (both industrial and agricultural), and the indiscriminate
use of pesticides and herbicides, both of which can have devastating impacts on biodiversity.
Introduced and invasive species too are a form of HWC because, in the final analysis, their introduction is invariably
anthropogenic. The most potent invasives threaten biodiversity on an ecosystem scale. A few notable examples of great
contemporary concern in Eastern Africa, include Parthenium which threatens grassland productivity (thus threatening livestock
as well as wildlife)33, Mesquite (Prosopis juliflora) and Prickly-pear (Opuntia spp) both capable of transforming bushlands, and
the Water Hyacinth (Eichornia crassipes) which has affected both fish and fishermen in the lakes, with huge economic
consequences. Of historical note is the fact that the introduction of the predatory Nile Perch (Lates niloticus) into Lake Victoria
in 1956 led directly to the extinction of that lakes own unique Cichlid fish fauna.
2.1.3
Inadequate PA systems
The traditional State-led approach to wildlife conservation common to all Eastern African countries has been through the
establishment and management of protected areas (PAs, such as national parks, forest reserves etc). In many countries PA
systems date back to colonial times, when the criteria used for selection were not as well developed as they are today. Ideally
a PA system should include examples of all significant ecosystems in the country, and provide protection to all its endemic and
rare species. Looked at this way, most PA systems have gaps which governments are slow to fill. Apart from gaps, it is
increasingly being realised that many PAs are poorly sited, and less than ideal in terms of size and shape. Thus, especially in
cases where a PA protects only part of an ecosystem, insufficient thought was given to possible future scenarios in which it
might become an isolated island. Consequently, opportunities to create optimal ecological connectivity were and still are being
ignored, rendering PAs far less resilient than they might otherwise be.
Apart from such shortcomings in design, many PAs exist only on paper with few if any staff assigned to manage them. This is
certainly true of the countries most affected by chronic civil strife, like Somalia and South Sudan, but is also true to differing
extents of countries that have been slow to invest in PAs for lack of economic and/or political incentive, which means all of
them other than Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. Even the latter, whose PA systems underpin extremely important tourism
industries, find it difficult to keep their management authorities well enough resourced to enforce wildlife policies and laws to
their full effect (see also 2.2.5).
2.1.4
Fragmentation, transformation and loss of natural ecosystems
No ecosystem is immune to fragmentation and transformation: it follows that such processes constitute the most important
threat to ecosystem-level services. One of the most obvious and important examples is provided by forest where degradation
results in soil erosion, ecological instability due to loss of biodiversity, and ultimately loss of functionality as a water catchment.
The degradation and loss of forest cover caused by the demand and supply of timber and fuel was discussed above (2.1.1),
but it is also caused by outright clearance at different scales. Forest encroachment by peasant farmers who clear small
subsistence farms is an insidious and near universal phenomenon strongly correlated with human population growth: as such
it is cumulatively massive.
33 Parthenium hysterophorus is an aggressive and toxic weed that has the potential to harm people and animals, as well as drastically reduce
the productivity of rangelands. It has been recorded in the Serengeti-Mara and Ngorongoro Crater, thus threatening these highly important
World Heritage Sites

Final report
Page 22
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Overstocking and overgrazing in relation to carrying capacity is common, and has led to range degradation, desertification and
biodiversity loss over vast areas of arid, semi-arid and savannah land (see 1.4). Invasive species too can transform
ecosystems, and their susceptibility to invasion can be increased by overgrazing and climate change (see 2.1.2).
Large scale clearances and land use conversions occur as part of the formal development agenda, and can affect any type of
ecosystem, not just forest. For example, the massive SAGCOT project in southern Tanzania will fragment and transform a
huge swathe across the south of the country, much of which is still in a natural condition 34: in addition to immediate local
extinctions, this threatens to create many problems relating to isolation and lack of connectivity between existing PAs. Similarly,
the Galana/Kalalu food security project in Kenya will bring a million acres under irrigation in an area adjacent to Tsavo East
NP and formerly noted for the development of game ranching: the impacts of abstraction on the Tana river and its nearby delta,
a wetland of national and international importance, will be significant. There are dozens of other examples of big schemes that
could be quoted involving crops as varied as sugar cane, rice, maize, soya, oil palm and even controversial biofuels like
Jatropha.
Large scale habitat impacts are not limited to agricultural schemes. Extraction and infrastructure projects also invariably incur
negative impacts on ecosystems and their inherent biodiversity35. Among controversial examples from Eastern Africa is the
excision of nearly 20,000 ha from the Selous Game Reserve, Tanzania to mine uranium - despite its being a World Heritage
Site. Also in Tanzania, and also in a World Heritage Site, a proposal to build a major highway right across the path of the
Serengeti migration threatens the viability of that amazing phenomenon, one shared by Kenya also. Measures to develop a
large oil field in the middle of Murchison Falls National Park and adjacent conservation areas in Uganda are far advanced, and
a similar threat hangs over the Sudd, in South Sudan, the EA regions biggest wetland. Proposals to develop a soda ash plant
on Lake Natron, Tanzania recur frequently, despite the threat this poses to the one and only flamingo breeding ground on
which the entire Rift Valley population depends. Many more examples of similar non-agricultural development threats could be
cited, including major dams in Ethiopia especially.
Habitat fragmentation is a particularly serious threat to wide-ranging species that need very extensive home ranges, such as
elephants wild dogs and cheetahs. The same applies to the migratory populations of certain species (e.g. wildebeest).
2.1.5
Climate change
Global warming will induce climate change in Eastern Africa as elsewhere, but its impact over so large an area will vary from
place to place. A general prediction however, is that while mean annual temperature will increase, rainfall will remain much the
same quantitatively, although its temporal distribution will change. Rainy seasons will alter (short rains getting longer, long
rains shorter) and become more intense. An increase is expected in the frequency and intensity of extreme events, primarily
droughts and floods, and these will occur in new locations.
To date in the EA region, adverse climate change impacts have been observed through sea level rise, which has already led
to infrastructure destruction along the coast, submergence of some small islands in the Indian ocean (e.g. Maziwe and Fungu
la Nyani), intrusion of sea water into fresh water wells along the Tanzanian coast, beach erosion in Kenya, and inland, rampant
floods and droughts across the region.
Various studies indicate that deepwater temperatures of lakes Edward, Albert, Kivu, Victoria, Tanganyika and Nyasa, which
reflect long-term trends, have risen by 0.2 to 0.7C since the early 1900s. Since 1912, the area of Mt Kilimanjaros ice fields
has decreased between 50-80% to date. It has been estimated that if current trends persist, the remaining ice fields are likely
to disappear between 2015 and 2020. Moreover, the Ruwenzori ice cap field has decreased from 563ha to now less than
50ha.
As noted, the glaciers of Africa are already all in retreat and as general warming proceeds, the band in which climatic conditions
remain compatible with the afro-alpine ecosystem will get smaller and smaller as it moves upwards over an ever-diminishing
surface area. Thus these uniquely biodiverse and important ecosystems are highly endangered by climate change, as are the
many rare and endemic species found only in them.
With a more intense rainfall pattern, dry intervals may become longer, rains may also fail more often, and bush fires become
more common. This will have a variety of consequences, but one likely scenario is that the already great extent of over-grazed
rangeland in the EA region will become even greater, essentially driving desertification and pushing pastoralists more and
more into woodlands and forests.
34 The Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania (SAGCOT) is an inclusive, multi-stakeholder partnership to rapidly develop the
regions agricultural potential and improve food security and livelihoods
35 See also the discussion of industrial oil, gas and mineral exploration and extraction in Volume 1, section 2.3.1

Final report
Page 23
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Climate change related phenomena also threaten marine ecosystems, notably coral reef death due to bleaching associated
with rising sea temperatures and ocean acidification. This phenomenon has been noted in East African waters.
2.2
FUNDAMENTAL DRIVERS UNDERLYING THE THREATS
While the topics discussed in the preceding section represent the major immediate, on-the-ground threats to biodiversity, the
existence of each can be explained in terms of drivers. These are the often inter-related forces or circumstances that create
the threats in the first place. It follows that if the fundamental drivers can be identified, and work done to reduce or remove
them, biodiversity and species loss will be slowed and in some cases halted.
2.2.1
Market forces
The increasingly high value being put on natural resources as they become scarcer generates powerful market forces, as
exemplified by ivory and rhino horn. As is fully discussed in Volume 6 (sections 1, 2 and 3), counter-acting these forces requires
action all along the value chain, but so long as there is demand protective action at the supply end will remain an essential
pre-requisite.
The high demands and prices generated by end-consumers has encouraged certain rebel militias and terrorist groups to enter
the value chain36. Such groups often hide out in wilderness areas, and are always in need of funds to support their operations.
For outlawed organisations such as these, the risk-return ratio for poaching wildlife is such as to be irresistible. This is a notable
problem in Eastern Africa where there is evidence that the Somali faction Al Shabaab trades opportunistically in, and runs
protection rackets involving charcoal (definitely), ivory (probably) and rhino horn (possibly). The Lords Resistance Army (LRA)
of Uganda has been for many years hiding in and around the Garamba NP in the eastern DRC, and is heavily implicated in
not just a crash in elephant numbers, but also the total extinction of the worlds biggest, and almost certainly last, population
of wild Northern White Rhinos.
Sudan also provides examples of this type of operation. The horse-mounted arab militia known as the Janjaweed which
operates out of Darfur is known to have mounted elephant poaching raids far to the west, including into Chad, the CAR and
even Cameroon where they massacred 450 elephants in the Bouba NDjida NP. Ivory is particularly attractive to Sudanese
groups, as there is still a domestic ivory market in Khartoum that proves the existence of established trade routes. The coasts
of Sudan, Eritrea and Somalia offer innumerable means of export in dhows to middle-eastern entrepots.
2.2.2
Population growth
Whether directly or indirectly, inexorable human population growth underlies not only all the threats outlined in the section
above, but the other fundamental drivers described in this section also. Population trends for the continent as a whole are
given in Volume 1, sections 1.4 and 2.4.1. More people need more food, more water, more energy and more space. All these
can only be found at the expense of natural ecosystems, a fact emphasised in all Volumes of this study. Volume 2, section
2.1.1 provides a good example from Southern Africa of how population can, and ever increasingly will, build up around
protected areas37.
2.2.3
Poverty
Poverty is a fundamental driver of forest encroachment and poaching. It is also a function of population growth: the larger the
number of people sharing a finite resource, the poorer they become. It is this reality that drives the big Government food, water
and energy development programmes that reinforce the impact of population growth on natural resource depletion. It
represents also a long-term threat to the success of community based natural resource management approaches (see 3.7).
2.2.4
Under-valuation of ecosystem services and biodiversity
An appreciation of natural ecosystem service values has gained much ground over the past decade, thanks especially to
awareness of climate change issues. Consequently the value of forests in particular which, in Eastern Africa especially, provide
such an important water catchment function, is increasingly well understood. Despite this, such services continue to be undervalued when it comes to a confrontation with a development project. In other words, the real costs of degrading and destroying
36 The involvement of militias and rebel groups in ivory poaching and smuggling is nothing new. During the late 1970s and 1980s both the
National Union for the Total Independence in Angola (UNITA) and the Mozambican National Resistance (RENAMO) were heavily involved
in the killing of elephants and the export of illegal ivory
37 The map presented there as Fig.7 shows settlement trends around Lake Kariba and the Matusadona NP in Zimbabwe

Final report
Page 24
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
natural ecosystems are still not properly or accurately reflected in the economic analyses on which development decisions are
based.
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) procedures are anyway often flawed and corruptible. Thus cases for considering
alternative less costly, more sustainable solutions are continually avoided, meaning the attrition of natural ecosystems remains
biased towards being far greater than it need be.
Other less tangible, non-economic values, such as existence values attributable to particular species, have no real impact on
the development agendas of most East African countries. An existence value remains an essentially western concept that has
very little momentum beyond some elements of the emerging middle class in countries like Kenya.
2.2.5
Weak governance and corruption
All the threats to ecosystems and biodiversity outlined earlier could be prevented, mitigated or rectified but for weak
governance. The term governance as used here embraces all of the policies, laws, areas and institutions established for the
purpose of biodiversity conservation and management.
Inevitably, the importance of these various weaknesses varies between countries. Generally speaking within Eastern Africa at
least, wildlife and forest authorities are consistently underfunded and understaffed. This is true even of countries like Kenya
and Tanzania where tourism provides a strong economic incentive to value wildlife, to the extent that some authorities generate
much more for Treasuries than is ever re-invested in them. This means there tends to be a constant shortage of transport,
equipment and recurrent operating budgets. Obtaining significant investment capital for new buildings for example, is always
a struggle. Similarly the manpower available is always less than is needed to do the job properly and in terms of training, skill
levels are generally better aligned to responsibilities among lower ranks, and much less so at middle (e.g. PA manager) and
director levels. This is partly due to flawed human resource management procedures (e.g. for recruitment, in-service training
and performance-based promotion), and partly due to the prevalence of political appointees in top jobs. Last but not least, the
salaries paid to field staff in particular are seldom commensurate with the hardship and dangers involved, let alone the simple
cost of living.
These weaknesses are not limited to wildlife and forest authorities, they apply also to those other agencies that are becoming
increasingly involved in the enforcement of wildlife policies and laws, including customs, police, the military and the judiciary.
Many officers find themselves in roles they are not competent to fulfil, and dissatisfaction with conditions of service and personal
benefits leads to corruption which is common within all the services mentioned and can occur at all levels.
Whether by deliberate neglect, or active participation, corruption is a fundamental driver of the illegal consumption of, and trade
in, wildlife. Key officials at different levels are easily bribed to facilitate crime, and wildlife rangers are often found to be complicit
in poaching and even engage in it themselves. EIA officials can suppress negative impacts. Even military units engaged in
anti-terrorism will succumb to the same temptations as their quarry: units of the Ugandan army searching for the LRA in
Garamba NP allegedly killed elephants and rhinos there, and removed the trophies by helicopter. Similarly, the Kenyan military
in Somalia is now said to be benefiting from the export of charcoal from Kismayu, a trade formerly controlled by Al Shabaab.
Wars, rebellions and insecurity are strong indicators of poor governance, and will often take a direct as well as indirect toll on
wildlife. In sustained conflict this can be huge, as in Uganda throughout the 1970s when the entire national park system was
vandalised and elephants, rhinos and all other species decimated by the warring factions. As recent events in South Sudan
and CAR remind us, the spectre of civil war is never too far away in Africa.

Final report
Page 25
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
This section considers the conservation approaches and actions that have been, are being and could be taken to counter the
threats to ecosystem and biodiversity conservation in Eastern Africa, and to lessen the prevalence and power of their underlying
drivers.
Research carried out for this Report revealed that not only is the amount of relevant action already initiated in all countries of
the region immense, but that the number of actors is also, ranging from Regional bodies, national Governments, InterGovernmental Organisations (IGOs) and multi-lateral donors, bilateral donors, Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and
Civil Society Organisations (CSOs). For example as of November 2013, the database maintained by the Development Partners
Group on Environment (DPG-E) in Tanzania held 125 records of active programmes and projects in five categories38, with a
total value of EUR 561.6 million.
Necessarily therefore, this section provides a succinct overview of what is going on in theregion, using a selection of examples
relevant to the different approaches being applied.
3.1
PLANNING FRAMEWORKS
The overall response of countries in the EA region to environmental management issues relevant to biodiversity conservation
is influenced and guided by a number of international, pan African, regional and national agendas.
3.1.1
International
Most countries in the region are Party to a number of Multi-lateral Environmental Agreements. Some of the most relevant and
influential of these Conventions are (short titles only):
Ramsar Wetlands 1971

World Heritage Convention 1972
CITES 1975
Bonn Migratory Species 1979
Marine and Coastal Environment of the Western Indian Ocean 1985
Biological Diversity 1992
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change 1992
International Tropical Timber Agreement 1994
UN Convention to Combat Desertification 1994
The EA countries are also members of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (aka IUCN, previously known as
The World Conservation Union) which through its various Commissions sets the international management criteria and
standards for different categories of PA, and coordinates efforts to conserve a wide range plant and animal taxa of importance
and concern.
Virtually all these treaties and bodies require their Member States to produce some sort of national Action Plan: a few examples
include National Biodiversity Strategy Action Plans (NBSAPs) under CBD; Ivory Action Plans under CITES; and a huge range
of species-specific Action Plans at regional and/or national levels driven by the Specialist Groups of IUCNs Species Survival
Commission. Thus many EA countries have Action Plans relating to these and many other taxa: Elephants, Rhinos, Lions,
Hyenas, Giraffes, Great Apes and so on.
Whilst external assistance in the preparation of all these multiple types of Plan is generally forthcoming, that is not necessarily
the case when it comes to their implementation.
3.1.2
Pan African
The EA countries overall response is also influenced by the pan African and regional political bodies to which they belong.
The African Ministerial Conference on the Environment (AMCEN) for example has developed an Action Plan for the
Environment Initiative of the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD), and commissions UNEPs Africa
Environment Outlook, a comprehensive regional report on the state of Africa's environment.
38
Natural Resources Sector support; Biodiversity; Environment; Climate Change; and NGO support

Final report
Page 26
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
3.1.3
Regional
The principal regional groupings to which the EA countries as recognised in this Report belong are the East African Community
(EAC)39, the Common Market for East and Southern Africa (COMESA) 40, Central African Forest Commission (COMIFAC)41,
Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD)42, the Southern African Development Community (SADC)43. The most
relevant in a conservation context are the East African Community (EAC) and the Inter-Governmental Authority for
Development (IGAD).
The EAC recognises an environment and natural resource management sector 44, for which it has instituted both a Sectoral
Council and a Committee, and for which it hosts regular Meetings at both Ministerial and Permanent Secretary levels. The
focal topics are climate change, biosafety, water resource management, and mines and mining. The dominant statutory EAC
institutions in the sector are the Lake Victoria Basin Authority and Lake Victoria Fisheries Organisation. In 2005 the EAC
promulgated an EA Protocol on Natural Resource Management which has still not been ratified by all Parties 45. In 2012 the
East African Legislative Assembly passed the East African Community Transboundary Ecosystems Bill, and in August 2013 it
passed a Resolution urging partner states to take concerted action to end the massacre of elephants and trafficking of ivory.
Within the EAC Secretariat, wildlife management issues are grouped with tourism, and implementation of all related decisions
is guided by the Sectoral Council on Tourism and Wildlife Management. In 2009, a decision was made to develop a legal and
regulatory framework for collaboration in the tourism and wildlife sectors. To this end, two main activities are in the process of
being implemented:
The development of a Protocol for Tourism and Wildlife Management

Harmonisation of policies and laws in tourism and wildlife management
The EAC Secretariat considers the Protocol to have reached an advanced stage, but the current draft is very heavily biased
towards tourism and remains extremely weak with respect to wildlife management, not least because it fails to seize the
opportunity to establish clear policies and procedures for the co-management of transfrontier conservation areas (TFCAs).
Regarding the harmonisation of polices and laws, the EAC had by mid-2014 just finalised a study to analyse and compare the
relevant policies and laws in each Partner State to inform the process of drafting harmonized legal instruments. Eventually, the
establishment of an East African Tourism and Wildlife Coordinating Agency is envisaged to act as a regulatory body for the
EAC.
IGAD evolved from a drought-focused body and now has an Agriculture and Environment Division which has a natural
resources management programme with three components: rational utilization of trans-boundary natural resources; promoting
the development and use of renewable energy resources; and promoting rational management of fresh water resources. The
Division also coordinates the programme activities of the IGAD Climate Prediction and Application Centre (ICPAC) based in
Nairobi Kenya. The main objective of ICPAC as a specialized centre is to provide climate information, prediction products and
services, for early warning, and related applications to reduce climate related risks for disaster management, environment
management and poverty reduction in support of sustainable development efforts of the member countries.
3.1.4
National
National Plans generated by international agendas are discussed in 3.1.1 above.

All EA countries have a range of Ministries and Departments responsible for environment and different natural resources, some
of which generate their own development strategies and action plans which may involve policy and legal reform, and
institutional restructuring. All forest and wildlife management agencies produce site-specific Management Plans. These
matters are discussed further in section 3.4.3 below.
3.2
CONTROLLING UNSUSTAINABLE NATURAL RESOURCE UTILISATION AND ILLEGAL TRADE
Gaining control over the illegal consumption of, and trade in, natural resources rests very much on tackling the fundamental
weaknesses of governance driving these issues. It requires also, for each commodity involved, action all along the relevant
39
Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda

Burundi, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda
41 Burundi and Rwanda
42 Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan and Uganda
43 Tanzania
44 with its own website http://www.eac.int/environment/index.php
45 Indeed in September 2014, Tanzania wrote to the EAC to say it would not do so due to certain contentious clauses
40

Final report
Page 27
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
value chain. This approach is elaborated in section 3 of Volume 6 which is devoted to Africas wildlife trade in general 46. It is
built around three sets of actions at the supply, transit and consumer points in the chain, their respective objectives being to
stop the killing, stop the trafficking and stop the demand.
Much of the response noted below has been catalysed by the trade-related crises surrounding elephants and rhinos (for further
detail see the sections devoted to these two species in Volume 6), but which stands to benefit all species. Of relevance here
are the National Ivory Action Plans produced for CITES by Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, with a similar plan under preparation
by Ethiopia.
Actions in relation to the trade in bushmeat generally are elaborated in Volume 4 of this Report (section 5.4), which is devoted
to that topic.
The promotion of legal and sustainable utilisation schemes is covered in section 3.7 below.
3.2.1
Stopping the killing
The cutting and killing of trees, and the poaching of animals, is primarily an issue of in situ protection. It follows that controlling
these activities depends on the capacities of the responsible enforcement personnel. All countries in the EA region have forest
and wildlife ranger forces, but all of them need strengthening. Actions taken to reinforce law enforcement capacity at the field
level vary.
Action by Governments include increasing the number of rangers, and the creation of special highly-mobile anti-poaching
strike forces able to move in to supplement staff resident in the area of an incident. Some members of these units are being
trained as wildlife-specific Crime Scene Investigation officers.
For example, in 2013 the Kenya Wildlife Service recruited an additional 750 rangers and formed a special 120 man-strong
inter-agency body known as the Elite Inter-Agency Anti-Poaching Unit comprising security officers from the Kenya Wildlife
Service (KWS), the Administration Police and the General Service Unit. This is now deployed to three strategic poaching
hotspot areas in different parts of the country (Narok, Tsavo and Isiolo) and has been facilitated with equipment and aerial
surveillance support. The unit is supported by the governments of Kenya, United States, China and the United Kingdom. As a
further measure, the security forces of KWS and the Kenya Forest Service (KFS) have both been placed under the overall
command of the Inspector General of Police.
In times of crisis, Tanzanias wildlife agencies favour mounting country-wide operations jointly with the countrys Defence
Forces: the latest such exercise in 2013, Operation Tokomeza Jangili, eventually proved most successful (see section 1.4.4.1
of the Elephant chapter in Volume 6). From 9-10 May 2014, the Government hosted a Tanzanian Wildlife Summit to Stop
Wildlife Crime and Advance Wildlife Conservation: A Call for Action at the conclusion of which a Partnership Framework to
Support Combating Poaching and Illegal Wildlife Trade was signed between the Government and nine development partners
(including the EU). The Government announced at the summit that it would be recruiting 900 additional rangers in 2014, with
approximately 1,000 more each year until the need is met at 5,000 by 2018.
At the same time as boosting field level protection, Uganda and Tanzania are moving to revise their respective Wildlife Acts,
with a view to greatly enhancing statutory penalties for wildlife crime as a deterrent and, in the case of Tanzania, to allow the
adoption of a paramilitary system among the employees of the wildlife sector, including those of a new Tanzania Wildlife
Authority (see 3.4.3).
Kenya recently completed this process: its new Wildlife Conservation and Management Act (2013) enacted on 10 January
2014 includes provision for penalties of life imprisonment or a minimum fine of KES 20 million, equivalent to about EUR 180,000
(c. US$ 230,000) for poaching rhinoceros or elephant or trafficking their parts or derivatives. Unfortunately, the clause in the
section that contains these new sentences has been is considered ambiguous by some. What this means is that the new
Wildlife Act, though far better than the old one, is unlikely in practice to provide any deterrent to the big dealers. Currently there
are deliberate efforts between some NGOs, Kenya Wildlife Service, the Directorate of Public Prosecutions, Judicial officers
and legal experts, to amend the Act to operationalise the clause containing these new sentences (Section 92), through a motion
in parliament to strengthen it even further.
Action by NGOs takes many forms. The Frankfurt Zoological Society (FZS) for example, has prepared specific Security Plans
for the PAs it supports: in Eastern Africa these include the Serengeti NP and Selous Game Reserve. Support for
implementation of the plans is included. The African Wildlife Foundation (AWF) has set up a Species Protection Grant Fund to
implement a number action plans including one for Law Enforcement.
46
but includes many examples from Eastern Africa not repeated here

Final report
Page 28
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
In South Sudan, the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) is working closely with Government to re-constitute, re-train and redeploy an effective ranger force to the countrys premier protected areas (see 3.4.1).
3.2.2
Stopping the trafficking
The principal Government-led approach being recommended here is the formation of inter-agency Wildlife Enforcement
Networks (WENs) at the national level. A key feature of these is the incorporation of a more deliberate intelligence gathering
effort, proactive as well as reactive. The Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) has already set up an Intelligence Enforcement Unit
which can serve as a founding component of a national WEN.
In countries where the relevant Government machinery is particularly weak or compromised, an NGO-dominated approach
known as EAGLE (Eco Activists for Governance and Law Enforcement) has proved effective. This has been pioneered in
Central and West Africa by NGOs like LAGA and projects like PALF 47 (see also Volume 4, section 4.9). In East Africa, the
country most suited to this approach is South Sudan where WCS has been working with the Ministry of Wildlife and LAGA to
develop a WCS implemented LAGA model for South Sudan. WCS Uganda has anti-trafficking program development with the
Uganda Wildlife Authority which includes intelligence-led enforcement and LAGA-type components. For further details of the
WEN and EAGLE approaches to stopping the trafficking of wildlife and their applicability, see section 3.5 of the Trade chapter
in Volume 6.
Much could be done to identify and then dismantle both internal and external trade routes if the true identity of bushmeat for
example, or the provenance of ivory seizures, could be determined scientifically. This can be done through DNA and isotopic
analysis, but the capacity for this within Eastern Africa is very low. Although Tanzania and Uganda are said to be considering
the establishment of wildlife forensic laboratories, Kenya already has one.
The lab referred to is run by the Kenya Wildlife Service, and was developed originally to address bushmeat seizure and public
health issues48. As such, the need to produce evidence in court introduced security elements into its design that pre-adapt it
to handling high value products like rhino horn and ivory. In fact it is already being prepared to provide a regional service with
respect to rhino horn analysis. With funding from WWF, its technicians are getting training in the relevant techniques from the
Veterinary Genetics Laboratory (VGL) in Pretoria (see Box 14).
Box 14. Inter-regional collaboration in Rhino horn forensics
Three Kenyan scientists visited the VGL in Pretoria during 2012, 2 from KWS and 1 from Jomo Kenyatta University,
including the person in charge of technical work in the KWS forensic laboratory. The aim of their visit was to establish
a collaboration between Pretoria and KWS labs, and train the personnel on the RhODIS methodologies to ensure
standard and credible tests. This standardisation means that the Kenyan rhinoceros DNA profiles can be uploaded to
the RhODIS database and all recovered horns can be compared to both Kenya and South Africas poached animals.
This means that the RhODIS tool is utilized as a powerful and cross continental anti-poaching investigation tool. This
training is to continue under a signed formal MOU between KWS and the University of Pretoria, in 2013. The lead KWS
technician visited the VGL again in November to analyse poaching cases from Kenya and returned with a mirror of
their data as well as updated methodologies to apply in his own laboratory. In future it is envisaged that visits and
sample transfer will no longer be necessary but that the KWS laboratory will be able to produce DNA profiles from
rhino samples using the standard methodology and upload and compare these directly to the RhODIS database.
The potential for the KWS lab to provide DNA-analytical services to the EA region is discussed further in 5.1.2 below.
Other agencies involved in counter-trafficking operations include Customs, which are being trained to detect wildlife contraband
and are being given sniffer dogs and scanners to assist in this. Help with such measures is coming from the US and a number
of NGOs.
47
LAGA: The Last Great Ape Organisation. PALF: Project for the Application of Law for Fauna operates in the Republic of Congo where it
runs investigations, assists in operations, does legal follow-up and has a communication department to publicise convictions and other
successes
48 Particularly as regards screening of samples for zoonotic pathogens, especially from areas where there is considerable mixing of wildlife
and livestock on the landscape. In this connection KWS is partnering with the Barcode of Wildlife Project based at the Smithsonian Institution
which aims at providing DNA-based species identification of things like powders and bushmeat.

Final report
Page 29
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
3.2.3
Stopping the demand
The need for anti-poaching and anti-trafficking measures would be greatly curtailed if the principal market force driving the
trade, namely consumer demand, could be reduced or even eliminated. As detailed in the Elephant, Rhino and Trade sections
of Volume 6, considerable effort is going into this approach in relation to commodities of special concern, like rhino horn and
ivory. The approach involves conducting scientific surveys of consumer behaviour and attitudes; raising awareness among
consumers of the cruelty of the trade and its role in endangering species; and - for some commodities - debunking their alleged
medicinal properties. Since consumers in the international trade will be far removed from suppliers, these efforts are
implemented mostly by NGOs, usually ones of global repute working with local counterparts.
At the same time, some NGOs within Eastern Africa have mounted campaigns to raise awareness of the international crises
their country is caught up in, and so generate extra pressure on home governments to take appropriate action. A good example
is Kenyas Hands Off Our Elephants campaign led by an indigenous NGO called WildLife Direct. The campaign has published
strong-impact advertisements in the national press, and has benefited from the direct involvement and support of the countrys
First Lady.
3.3
MINIMISING HUMAN-WILDLIFE CONFLICT
The fundamental drivers of HWC are population growth leading to habitat fragmentation and loss. As noted earlier, control
measures include shooting, trapping, poisoning, repelling, scaring and fencing. Official Government efforts to prevent or
compensate for HWC are generally inadequate, and often corrupted: game control officers are responsible for huge areas but
have no transport, and they often have to be bribed just to verify and forward claims thus negating the whole purpose of
compensation. Kenyas new Wildlife Act 2013 has improved procedures however, and compensation of up to KES 5 million
will now be paid against fatalities.
None of the non-destructive remedial measures are completely effective. Many animals soon learn to ignore scare tactics
based on noise or fire. NGOs in several countries are working in pastoral communities to provide them with movable and reusable lion-proof bomas49 (made of metal rather than thorn bushes), and/or subsidise and manage local compensation
schemes.
Because of its strength and intelligence, the application of any measure to control human-elephant conflict (HEC) is particularly
difficult and expensive, notably fencing. Rhino Ark is a Kenyan NGO whose sole agenda is building hugely expensive elephantproof electric fences to protect wildlife and people from each other in mountain forest areas 50. To date they have put a fence
around the entire perimeter of the Aberdares NP (400km), and are now doing the same for Mt Kenya NP (450km) and Eburu
(50km), a component of the Mau forest complex: all of these areas are important water towers. Chemical repellents based on
Capsicum (chilli) have had mixed results, but the discovery made in Kenya that elephants actively avoid bees holds promise.
Trials based on the use of beehives along farm boundaries are underway in several countries, but have yet to be scaled up.
Obviously the costs of living with wildlife are for rural people a major disincentive for them to conserve it. Measures to maximise
the benefits of living with wildlife can therefore be seen partly as another, important way of compensating for HWC (see 3.7).
The securing of strategically aligned wildlife corridors is another way of preventing or mitigating HWC (see 3.4.1).
3.4
IMPROVING PA SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS
Measures and actions designed to improve PA systems revolve around two issues, firstly their overall design, and secondly
the effectiveness with which the systems component PAs are managed. The latter cannot be separated from the capacity of
the management authority responsible.
3.4.1
Scope and design of national PA systems
In most countries of the EAregion, the array of formal PAs such as National Parks and Game Reserves has been established
for decades. Details regarding the PAs in each are available from the World Database of Protected Areas maintained by
UNEPs World Conservation Monitoring Centre and accessible through www.protectedplanet.net. Fig.7 in Volume 1 provides
a continental overview of PA coverage.
It is very likely that in every country of EA examples could be found of gaps where some hitherto unprotected ecotype or
endemic species would benefit from the creation of a new PA, but each of these would generate additional overheads for the
49
50
fenced livestock enclosures

Much of the money required has been raised from leading Kenyan private sector companies

Final report
Page 30
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
management authority, so - unless they can pay their way - internal motivation for their addition to the PA system will remain
elusive.
Of more interest and priority are the situations in which whole PA systems are more or less paper systems, such as is the case
in South Sudan and Somalia. In these countries re-development of their PA systems offers opportunities to re-design them
significantly by retaining old PAs but redefining their boundaries perhaps, and by adding entirely new areas that would fill gaps
in the old system and provide the connectivity essential to protecting whole eco-processes rather than just a part. Such work
has been underway in South Sudan since 2007 through a major USAID and UNDP/GEF-funded programme implemented by
WCS51. This and a smaller-scale PA-support programme managed by FFI continue despite the very recent outbreak of civil
conflict. Somalia as a whole is not yet ready for any serious PA development work.
In the stable countries of the EA region, there have been some very important additions to the PA systems inherited from
colonial times. These include the various types of area in which responsibility for the utilisation and management of natural
resources has been devolved to communities, such as Wildlife Management Areas, and Village Forest Reserves, and these
are discussed further in section 3.7.
Other important additions to PA systems include Conservancies, in which the owners of land - be they communal or private elect to dedicate that land to conservation. There are several hundred Community and Private Wildlife Conservancies in Kenya
that engage in the non-consumptive utilisation of wildlife (i.e. tourism). Since ownership and ultimate responsibility for all wildlife
is vested in the State, regardless of whether it is inside or outside the formal PA estate, the Conservancy movement is of great
assistance to the Kenya Wildlife Service which seeks only to register Conservancies and assist in the development of their
management effectiveness.
Another Kenyan example of an effective addition to a PA system in terms of the diversity of constituent parts, is the designation
of five areas as official Water Towers (see 1.2.1 above). This designation has been given power through the establishment of
a Water Tower Authority (WTA) to oversee and coordinate the actions of the various pre-existing management agencies and
stakeholders in these areas, including the Forest and Wildlife Services. The EC has approved for launch in 2014 an intervention
to support to the WTA and its forests entitled the Kenya Water Tower Protection and Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation
Programme. The type of addition to established PA systems in which there is currently most interest is the Corridor, that is a
PA created to prevent the isolation, and improve the resilience, of existing PAs. Corridors providing habitat continuity between
PAs have many potential values (see Box 15), and this has caused them to gain much prominence in Tanzania, where megaschemes such as SAGCOT (see 2.1.4) threaten to disrupt existing ecological integrity and isolate established PAs thus
compromising their viability52.
Box 15. Wildlife corridors
Some Protected Areas, designed decades ago for varying reasons, do not encompass the range of ecosystem
requirements needed by certain flora and fauna. Migrating species, for example, especially large mammalian herbivores
and associated carnivores, move outside and/or between protected areas. They may also use corridors as dispersal
areas. Wisely set-aside and well managed corridors can reduce human-wildlife conflict including crop-raiding, and thus
increase agricultural yield over the long-term. If an animal or plant population declines to low levels or becomes extinct
in one area or habitat patch, individuals from another patch can immigrate and rescue that population from local
extinction. If a small population is isolated, it will lose genetic variation over the long term and suffer from inbreeding. A
corridor allows immigrants to import new genetic variation into isolated populations. If the habitat of one area becomes
unsuitable (e.g. because of climate change), organisms (both plants and animals) can move along corridors to reach
more suitable habitat, and thus be rescued.
The website http://www.tzwildlifecorridors.org/info documents 31 corridors in Tanzania, and indicates that the majority of these
now seem to be in a critical condition. That is, based on current rates of habitat change, they are estimated to have less than
3 years remaining before they disappear. Five corridors are in extreme condition and could either disappear within 1 year
unless immediate action is taken, or have already been closed.
Kenya too is alert to the need for corridor linkages between PAs. A much lauded example is the one whose recent creation
enlarged the Mt Kenya World Heritage Site by linking it to the privately owned Lewa Wildlife Conservancy, which then became
51 WCS has an overall estimated annual budget of $5 million per year for this initiative in South Sudan over the past six years and will be
continued into future with long term commitments.
52 Jones T., Caro T. and T.R.B. Davenport Eds (2009) Wildlife Corridors in Tanzania. Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute

Final report
Page 31
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
part of the WHS. A critically important feature of this corridor is a tunnel under a main road, big enough for elephants which
are indeed using it. The move greatly enhances species and habitat diversity and resilience in the WHS, the new whole being
greater than the sum of its parts.
The northern Mount Kenya corridor is successful largely because it follows a real ancient elephant travel route that had been
well researched. Care needs to be taken that potential corridors are not just drawn on maps without taking wildlifes natural
movement and habits into account. It follows that money on research to identify real travel routes would be well spent before
millions are invested in corridor developments that may fail.
3.4.2
Sites of international importance
Some national PAs gain additional recognition and status under internationally coordinated schemes with their own
accreditation criteria. These include World Heritage Sites, Ramsar Sites, Man and Biosphere Reserves and Important Bird
Areas, of which there are many distributed among all the countries of EA. This recognition carries additional responsibilities,
for which the scheme usually offers technical and sometimes financial assistance.
All these categories are relevant, but probably the most important for present purposes is the World Heritage Site (WHS), a
designation based on strict criteria that establish Outstanding Universal Value. The World Heritage Convention administered
by UNESCO sets out the duties of State Parties in identifying potential sites and their role in protecting and preserving them.
The Parties are encouraged to integrate the protection of the cultural and natural heritage into regional planning programmes,
set up staff and services at their sites, undertake scientific and technical conservation research and adopt measures which
give this heritage a function in the day-to-day life of the community. To this end they are required to produce National Heritage
Action Plans, the latest being for 2012-2017. Technical assistance comes in the form of guidance for achieving maximum
management effectiveness53, while financial assistance is available to developing countries through access to the World
Heritage Fund and a similar fund for World Heritage in Danger.
At present there are 10 natural WHSs in EA, as follows:
Ethiopia
Simien Mountains National Park54
Kenya
Lake Turkana National Parks

Mount Kenya National Park/National Forest
Lake System in the Great Rift Valley
Tanzania
Kilimanjaro National Park

Ngorongoro Conservation Area55
Selous Game Reserve
Serengeti National Park
Uganda
Bwindi Impenetrable National Park

Ruwenzori Mountains National Park
53 UNESCO (2008) Enhancing our Heritage Toolkit: Assessing management effectiveness of natural World Heritage Sites and UNESCO
(2012) Managing Natural World Heritage
54 Listed as a Site In Danger
55 A joint Natural and Cultural site

Final report
Page 32
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Simien Mountains National Park and WHS. Photo Peter Howard
In addition, the following countries have submitted Tentative Lists of sites to be considered for future inclusion: Burundi,
Ethiopia, Kenya, Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda56.
The Rift Valley Lakes site in Kenya is known as a serial site because its components are separated from one another. The
intention if possible to add Lake Natron, which is in Tanzania, would create only the second transboundary WHS in Africa 57.
Lake Naivasha and Hells Gate NP could perhaps also be added, and they are already on Kenyas Tentative List. The latter
list includes also the Maasai Mara Reserve, which would also create another transboundary WHS with the contiguous
Serengeti NP in Tanzania.
Taking a cue from the above to go beyond national PA systems, there is considerable interest in promoting the concept of
Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCAs), where contiguous PAs that straddle an international border are developed and
managed in a highly integrated, well coordinated manner. The Southern African region is by far the most advanced in terms of
TFCA development, as detailed in Volume 2, section 4.2.1 of this Report.
There is much potential for the concept in Eastern Africa, and although interest is growing real progress is hampered by two
constraints. The first is the mistrust between potential partners based on unfamiliarity with each others policies and procedures.
This could more easily be dispelled but for the second, which is a lack of really energetic political support at the level of the
EAC. Compared to SADC which has come powerfully behind the concept by actively facilitating the conclusion of formal
Treaties to establish specific TFCAs, and the creation of permanent bodies to coordinate their development and management,
the EAC has done little more than pay lip service to the concept although all countries in the region do have some guiding
mechanism that would allow its advancement (e.g. policies, treaties, strategies and MoUs).
For historical reasons relating to the personal interests of individuals who helped establish the EAC and its organs, its
orientation with regard to intra-EA cooperation in natural resource management has always been heavily biased towards the
Great Lakes. The EAC did host in 2012 with USAID funding the EAC Regional Workshop on Transboundary Ecosystems
Management and Conservation in East Africa, but seemingly this was driven more by the organisers (WCS and the US Forest
Service), rather than any internal sense of importance or priority on the part of the EAC itself. Thus neither the workshop nor
its conclusions and recommendations were mentioned to a late-2013 mission that visited the EAC to develop the natural
resource management pillar of the ECs next Regional Investment Programme.
56
57
http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/
The other is Trinational Sangha (TNS) shared by Cameroon, CAR and Congo

Final report
Page 33
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Both the EA Protocol on Natural Resource Management and the East African Community Transboundary Ecosystems Bill
provide a policy and legal platform on which TFCAs could be developed, but the clear intent of the Bill is to harmonise law and
practice as concerns national environment management agencies, including for EIAs, and is not explicitly geared towards
wildlife or transboundary PA management. Again the Bill stems from fundamental concerns about pollution and other negative
impacts on the shared resources of the great lakes. As noted earlier, the draft EA Tourism and Wildlife Protocol fails to establish
policies and procedures for the co-management of TFCAs (see 3.1.3).
Probably the closest EA has got to a truly SADC-like TFCA, is in the Greater Virunga Landscape shared by the DRC, Rwanda
and Uganda, and which thus falls partly within the jurisdiction of the East African Community (EAC) and partly in the Economic
Community of Central African States (ECCAS). For further detail see Box 16 below, and section 5.1.1.1 in Volume 4 which
includes a map.
Box 16. The Greater Virunga TFCA
The Greater Virunga Transboundary Collaboration (GVTC) is a mechanism for strategic, collaborative management of
the Greater Virunga landscape, one of the most biologically diverse ecosystems in the world. IUCN rates the afromontane forests of the Virunga as of global biodiversity significance and amongst the highest priority for conservation
in Africa. The area is made up of eight national parks and three reserves in three countries1. Between them the Virunga
National Park (DRC), Volcanoes National Park (Rwanda), and Mgahinga Gorilla and Bwindi Impenetrable National
Parks (Uganda) provide key habitat and sanctuary to the endangered Mountain Gorilla. At the policy level the Chief
Executive Officers of Rwanda Development Board (RDB), Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature (ICCN),
Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) and International Gorilla Conservation Program (IGCP) form the Transboundary Core
Secretariat (TCS) which is the Board of the Executive Secretariat headquartered in Kigali Rwanda. A Transboundary
Strategic Plan (2006 2016) has been prepared by the stakeholders to guide in implementation of activities by all
stakeholders in the landscape.
Another TFCA involving the DRC exists between Lantoto NP in South Sudan, and the contiguous Garamba NP
and nearby Bili Uele Reserve in DRC. Good transboundary technical collaboration between Garamba and Lantoto
already exists, driven by the WCS-South Sudan programme and the APN project in Garamba, resulting in several
major arrests in 2012, 2013 and 2014. In addition, formal transboundary meetings between ICCN and South Sudan
were initiated in 2008 with support from APN and WCS. This complex is part of a formerly very important elephant
and rhino58 range which, it has been proposed, should be linked also with the Southern NP in South Sudan and
the Zemongo WR and Chinko hunting zones in CAR to form a mega-TFCA. The merits and feasibility of this idea
are discussed more fully in Volume 4, section 5.1.1.4.
Another important TFCA initiative concerns the 1500km Nyungwe-Kibira landscape that includes the transfrontier
forests of Nyungwe National Park in Rwanda and Kibira National Park in Burundi. Apart from its important
biodiversity (see 1.2.2), this forest also is key to providing watershed services to a large population in both the Nile
and Congo basins. The site is pioneering efforts to develop payment for ecosystem services schemes as well as
having made great strides in transboundary cooperation and ecotourism development. It is a primary focus for
external support by the governments of both Rwanda and Burundi, who have developed transboundary agreements
and are implementing a transboundary action plan.
There are two other TFCA-related programmes of note ongoing within the EA region. The first is the EU/IGAD Biodiversity
Management Programme aimed at building overall regional capacity for biodiversity and ecosystem management with a strong
emphasis on trans-boundary management through the strengthening of regional, national and community level institutions.
The validity of this approach is to be showcased through 4-year grant contracts with three specialised implementation
partners59, each working in one of the following three pilot cross-border ecosystems:
The Boma-Gambella Landscape (SE South Sudan and SW Ethiopia)
58
Notably for the now nearly extinct Northern White Rhino

Horn of Africa-Regional Environment Centre and Network (HoA-REC&N), International Union for the Conservation of the Nature (IUCN)
and World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF)
59

Final report
Page 34
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
The Tana-Kipini-Laga Badana Bushbush Land and Seascape (NE Kenya and SE Somalia)
The Lower Awash-Lake Abb Landscape (NE Ethiopia and SW Djibouti)
The second is the USAID-funded Boma-Jonglei-Equatoria Landscape Programme implemented by WCS whose inputs to the
South Sudanese side of the Boma-Gambella Landscape complement those of the EU programme which are limited to the
Ethiopian side (where HoA-REC&N is working with EWCA): even prior to this involvement WCS initiated the ongoing
discussions for a formal co-operation agreement between the two countries.
WCS has already helped secure a still active inter-Government MoU signed between South Sudan and Uganda in 2007 with
respect to co-management of the following specific areas:
Kidepo Landscape: Including Kidepo Game Reserve, Didinga and Dongotona mountains in Southern Sudan and the
Kidepo Valley National Park, Nyangea-Napore, Morungole, Zulia and Rom Forest Reserves and Karenga
Community Wildlife Reserve in Uganda
Imatong Massif Peace Landscape: Including the Imatong Mountains in Southern Sudan and Agoro-Agu Forest
Reserve in Uganda
Otzi-Nimule Landscape: Including Nimule National Park in Southern Sudan and Otzi and Era Forest Reserves in
Uganda
Mt Kei-Aloma Plateau Landscape: Comprising Aloma plateau (including Iwatoka Mountain) in Southern Sudan and
Mt Kei Forest Reserve in Uganda
Other areas within, or partly within the EAC, with potential for development as formal TFCAs would be complexes
centred on, and providing connectivity between, the following core PAs, some of them of iconic importance in
continental as well as regional terms:

Final report
Page 35
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Maasai Mara (Kenya)-Serengeti-Ngorongoro (Tanzania): The key components of this TFCA are shown in Fig.2
Figure 2. The Mara-Serengeti-Ngorongoro TFCA
Zeraf-Shambe-Badingilu-Boma (South Sudan)-Gambella (Ethiopia)-Machar Marshes (proposed PA in

South Sudan). The key components of this TFCA are shown in Fig.3

Final report
Page 36
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Figure 3. The Sudd-Badingilu-Boma-Gambella TFCA

Final report
Page 37
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Kilimanjaro (Tanzania)-Amboseli-Chyulu-Tsavo West-Tsavo East (Kenya)-Mkomazi (Tanzania). The key

components of this TFCA are shown in Fig.4
Figure 4. The Greater Kilimanjaro TFCA

Final report
Page 38
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Selous (Tanzania)-Niassa (Mozambique)

Elgon (Kenya)-Elgon (Uganda)
Loelle (proposed PA in South Sudan60)-Omo-Tama-Mago (Ethiopia)
Several of the more important TFCAs mentioned in this section feature in the selection of Key Landscapes for Conservation
recommended to the EU for priority support (see 5.3.1).
3.4.3
PA management capacity and effectiveness
Nowadays all PA management agencies either produce, or intend to produce, a General Management Plan for each of their
areas. Since the effectiveness of entire PA systems rests on the effectiveness with which these individual plans are
implemented, it is instructive to consider the constraints to effective management in a bottom-up sequence.
At the PA level management effectiveness is dependent on adequate funding and manpower, and both typically are in short
supply. Funds must cover operational and recurrent expenditure (salaries, fuel, maintenance) as well as any capital
investments needed (vehicles, buildings, roads). Whilst most rangers receive adequate training, the same is not true of the
senior staff in charge of PAs. Even in relatively advanced countries, persons are recruited as Wardens on academic grounds
(e.g. a degree in a relevant subject) and then simply posted to the field without further training for the task. Analyses have
shown that the range of skills needed is greatest for Wardens-in-charge than at any other level. In years gone by the preparation
of recruits for this role involved a formal probationary period in the field working alongside an experienced Warden, followed
by a course at the College of African Wildlife Management (CAWM) in Mweka, Tanzania, attended by personnel from all EA
countries and beyond. Nowadays, career progression is only weakly linked to performance (if at all), and courses tailor-made
for trainee wardens have died out, because they necessarily take years not months if they are to convey the full set of skills
required and are therefore expensive. Consequently, courses now offered at CAWM and national colleges tend to be short,
and more scientific than practical. As a result of all this, poor leadership is common at the PA level.
At the headquarters level, management agencies inevitably suffer similar problems of funding and manpower, but since they
have greater power to look after themselves they are often bloated. Again the lack of rigorous performance-based career
progression procedures is a problem, and again a lack of appropriate skills is evident at the senior-most level. This is due to
the common practice of assigning political appointees - often academics - to head agencies, rather than experienced sector
professionals. Since direct responsibility for a surprisingly large proportion of needed actions identified in the GMPs of individual
PAs is vested in the Director, many important decisions and dependent actions get delayed or blocked as a result.
Donor partners, very often working through NGOs have always favoured working at the PA and PA management agency level
to overcome the constraints outlined above. At the PA level, assistance is often given with the production of GMPs, with the
equipment and operations needed to implement them, and with measuring the effectiveness of these and other measures61.
Quite often ranger salaries are augmented with allowances designed to incentivise maximum patrol effort. A good example of
this type of approach is FZSs decades-long programme in support of Tanzania National Parks.
An elaboration of the passive support approach is the Co-Management Agreement in which some actual management
responsibility is vested in the NGO partner with respect to one or several named PAs. An example for EA is that concluded
between WCS and the Government of South Sudan in 2007 with respect to Zeraf GR in the Sudd, Badingilu NP and Boma
NP. In its most extreme version, total management responsibility for a PA will be contracted out to an organisation like African
Parks. These approaches present sustainability problems, but are a necessary last resort if official capacity is totally inadequate
and no intervention at all would result in a complete breakdown in law and order, followed by loss of the PA and all it is
supposed to protect.
The latter, total management-contract approach has been more prevalent in other regions, although there is one example in
EA where the Rwanda Development Board has a contract with African Parks to manage the Akagera NP. This is an interesting
and rare example of a relatively well-resourced government being willing to contract out park management. Less surprisingly
perhaps, a similar agreement between the Government of Ethiopia and African Parks to manage the problematic Gambella
NP on the western border with South Sudan is under discussion. Similarly, WCS is talking to the Government of South Sudan
about moving from co-management contracts to full Private Public Partnership agreements for the above mentioned PAs, as
well as the central and eastern parts of Southern NP.
60
Much of this proposed PA falls in the so called Ilemi Triangle, a disputed area claimed by both Kenya and South Sudan
Stolton S, Hockings, M, Dudley, N, MacKinnon, K, Whitten, T and Leverington, F (2007) Reporting Progress in Protected Areas: A Site
Level Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool. World Bank/WWF Forest Alliance published by WWF, Gland, Switzerland
61

Final report
Page 39
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Another fairly typical approach taken by donors and NGOs in EA is the provision of resident park management Advisors, of
which there are many examples. At a national, HQ-level also, the deployment of senior technical assistants as Advisors is quite
common and usually effective. Contemporary examples include the individual Advisors provided by the German Government
to the Wildlife Division in Tanzania, by the Frankfurt Zoological Society to the Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority, and
by the African Wildlife Foundation to the emerging South Sudan Wildlife Service 62.
Projects, or rather programmes, in which a whole team of TAs based at HQ help build management capacity throughout the
organisation, or even the sector as a whole, can be very effective in situations where a complete overhaul and restructuring is
necessary and appropriate. The initial merger between the former Kenya National Parks and the Game Department to form
the Kenya Wildlife Service faltered until a major investment programme was drawn up and implemented with US and EC
support.
In the late 1970s after a long period of devastating civil war, the EC funded the Uganda National Parks Programme which
helped overhaul the PA system by rehabilitating key old parks, and catalysing the upgrading of several PAs to national park
status. Also in Uganda, the World Banks Protected Areas Management for Sustainable Use (PAMSU) programme helped
draw up and implement a massive investment programme for both the forestry and wildlife sectors, including technical support
to the newly formed Uganda Wildlife Authority. Since 2007, USAID and UNDP/GEF have been funding very similar PA and
sector rehabilitation programmes in South Sudan implemented by WCS.
Approaches of this sort continue to be highly relevant throughout EA. The Tanzanian Government has decided to transform
the Wildlife Division from a rather inefficient, allegedly corrupt, Government organ in charge of Game Reserves, into the
Tanzania Wildlife Authority (TAWA), a parastatal entitled to retain revenue (mostly from hunting) and manage its own finances.
TAWA is to be based in Morogoro, with a start to the organisational changes involved scheduled for June 2014. The TAWA
Director General is to be selected via an international tender subject to Presidential approval. This transformation is to be
effected with bilateral technical and financial assistance from the German Government. A similar transformation is on the cards
in Kenya, where the Government is seriously considering a merger between the Wildlife and Forest Services. If implemented,
external technical and financial assistance will be needed and welcomed.
All other national wildlife management authorities in the EA region, with the possible exception of Uganda, would benefit from
the sort of game-changing capacity building that only a major donor support programme could deliver. A leading candidate is
Ethiopia, a country of incredibly important but still poorly protected biodiversity, whose huge tourism potential remains virtually
untapped. The reasons for this are complex, but a major investment programme is needed to turn things around before it is
too late for some areas and species.
3.5
VALUING ECOSYSTEMS PROPERLY
Even in countries in which the link between parks and tourism is economically important and well recognised, the environmental
sector remains under resourced. The under-valuation of ecosystem services and biodiversity by governments is a fundamental
driver of ill-considered ecosystem conversions, and of the institutional weaknesses that generate inefficient, ineffective and
corrupt management practices. Clearly a better understanding of ecosystem values should result in governments investing
more heavily firstly in the agencies responsible for land use planning, SEA and EIA, and secondly in those responsible for
protecting natural resources and/or managing their utilisation. The greater investment required has several forms, ranging
from policy, legal and structural reforms, to greater capital investments and operational budgets. Importantly the latter should
cover enhanced manpower; improved salaries, allowances and working conditions (especially in the field); as well as more
and better training.
Making such investments in the key environmental and natural resource management agencies would have massive knockon benefits by addressing the common root causes which underlie unsustainable resource utilisation, the relentless
degradation both legal and illegal - of natural ecosystems whether protected or not. These are ill-qualified, poorly motivated
and often corrupt officials, and the approval of development actions whose environmental impacts are not being minimised to
the extent possible.
Clearly, before governments in particular, and consumers in general, will attach proper and higher value to ecosystems, they
must be presented with robust supporting economic analyses that convincingly demonstrate that value. As conservationists
increasingly realise that environmental economics therefore must be mainstreamed into the work of ministries of finance and
planning, so more and more initiatives are being taken by both IGOs and NGOs to show how this can and should be done.
62 This, as yet, does not operate as a parastatal as the name might imply, but functions as a Department within the Ministry of Interior and
Wildlife Conservation

Final report
Page 40
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
These include UNEPs The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) programme (with funding from the EU and
some Member States); the Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services (WAVES) partnership led by the World
Bank (involving also the EU); and the UNEP-GEF Project for Ecosystems Services (ProEcoServ). All these are designed to
help countries incorporate the value of natural capital in national accounts. They work to develop scientifically credible methods
for ecosystem accounting and promote their use in decision making among a wide range of stakeholders.
Although only WAVES is active in EA (Rwanda), other activities using a Natural Capital Accounting approach have delivered
facts that are compelling EA governments to move in the right direction, particularly in the closely linked forestry and water
sectors (see Box 17).
Box 17. Economic importance of forests
Forestry in Tanzania officially contributes about 2.3% of GDP, but research indicates that if the wider benefits of
ecosystem services are factored in, the real contribution is over 4% of GDP. A similar percentage has been calculated
for Uganda, at a value of US$136 million per annum. In Kenya too, similar economic valuations of its forests have
catalysed a response to conserve and rehabilitate that resource. A recent UNEP-Kenya Forest Service report12 shows
that deforestation deprived Kenyas economy of an estimated US$69 million in 2010, far outstripping the revenue
earned from forestry and logging. It concludes that the official contribution of forests is undervalued by some 2.5%,
putting its real annual contribution at 3.6% of GDP. Between 2000 and 2010, deforestation of the countrys main water
towers amounted to c. 50,000ha, leading to a reduced water availability of approximately 62 million m3 per year. This
has affected Kenyas macro-economy which is vulnerable to inflation spikes during periods of drought. In response to
these data, the Government is now working to rehabilitate key water towers, and between 2011 and 2012 more than
21,000ha were repossessed, and some 10,000ha were rehabilitated. A number of programmes and activities also
were launched to improve the livelihoods of people living in and around the forests (see also section 3.7). Rwanda has
committed all of its GEF funds to forest landscape restoration throughout the country.
A number of other IGOs and NGOs are taking similar action to promote the conservation of ecosystems on the grounds of the
value of the services they provide.
REDD+63 projects in particular hold great promise as a means of conserving forest biodiversity and services and enhancing
livelihoods locally, while mitigating CO2 emissions and climate change globally. Unfortunately the procedures involved are
complex and costly, so fully certified schemes are still few and far between, but one of the first in the world was in Kenya64.
Nonetheless assistance in preparing REDD schemes features in more and more programmes (see also 3.6). Similarly
Payment for Ecosystems Services (PES) schemes are gaining a lot of interest and attention. This approach revolves around
the principle that remote beneficiaries of an ecosystem service should pay the people living in the ecosystem to keep it in its
naturally functional state, rather than putting it to some other use. A large scale example is a project of The Nature Conservancy
(TNC) to establish an Upper Tana-Nairobi Water Fund (see Box 18), while at a smaller scale there is the Conservation
International-led initiative to enhance water for people and wildlife through a PES scheme for part of the Chyulu Hills catchment
that feeds Mzima-Mombasa pipeline and serves as a corridor linking Chyulu NP with Tsavo West and Amboseli NPs.
Box 18. Economic importance of the Tana River
The 1,000km long Tana River gets most of its water from the forested catchments of the Mt Kenya and Aberdares water
towers. Tana water supports most of Kenyas important power and urban water needs, including over 90% of Nairobi
citys requirements. Water Funds engage large public and private urban water consumers utilities, downstream
industries, agricultural producers, and/or private donors and aid agencies to invest in a fund that pays for the protection
of water quality and quantity upstream, and protects the supply to millions of people living in towns and cities
downstream.
63
Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation

The Kasigau Corridor Project managed by Wildlife Works is the first ever to be issued Voluntary Carbon Units (VCUs) for REDD under the
Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS), the most widely used carbon accounting standard among projects issuing credits in the voluntary market
64

Final report
Page 41
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Many conservation NGOs are extending the principles of Natural Capital Accounting and PES, by developing different ways
of making the private sector more cognisant of, and responsive to, ecosystem values. This is considered a good strategy
because businesses are much easier to make headway with than the other actors, government (that tends to be short-sighted
and corrupt), and civil society (that is generally weak). This is because for extractive and agricultural industries especially,
incorporating environmental concerns into their Corporate Social Responsibility programmes is now considered vital to both
the production and marketing aspects of any sustainable business model65, if only to avoid litigation for negative impacts (e.g
pollution).
WWF has appointed an Adviser on Green Economy for the whole of Africa, and in this connection is engaging with the foreign,
especially Chinese, banks that provide loans to finance huge development schemes in Africa in order to make sure they insist,
as a precondition to any loan, on state-of-the-art, independent EIAs that take full account of the true economic value of any
negative impact on ecosystem services.
Conservation International has finalised a programme entitled VITAL SIGNS AFRICA: Integrated Monitoring System for
Ecosystem Services in African Agricultural Landscapes, to be funded through a grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation. This programme, launched in 2014 in Tanzania, Ethiopia and Ghana initially, will provide data and diagnostic
tools to guide agricultural development decisions and monitor their outcomes (see Box 19).
Box 19. The Vital Signs monitoring programme
The Objectives of the Vital Signs Africa monitoring system are to: Minimize unintended consequences of agriculture on
nature by providing key data and analytical tools for evaluating trade-offs and informing decisions; Establish reference
levels and a tracking system for land cover, carbon stocks, hydrology, biodiversity and ecosystem services in areas
targeted for agricultural intensification; Build local and national capacity for environmental monitoring among scientists,
civil society, government leaders and the private sector; Create resilient ecosystems and sustainable livelihoods for
smallholder farmers; and Create a "global public good," a freely accessible and transparent information resource
Another notable approach to educating political decision-makers and business leaders as to the value of ecosystems in both
an economic and security context is that of the Conservation Caucus. This is an informal discussion group that provides a
framework to link parliamentarians from all political parties, industrialists and NGOs so that public and private actors can
engage in meaningful dialogue about why conservation matters, share information and better leverage one anothers efforts
to address conservation challenges. The US-based International Conservation Caucus Foundation (ICCF) is facilitating the
formation of these forums around the world, including two in the EA region to date (Kenya and Tanzania)66.
Given the relatively obvious relevance and importance of the services that ecosystems provide in terms of helping to sustain
water supplies and mitigate climate change, it is easy to forget that the biological diversity making up an ecosystem has
immense economic value in its own right:
many individual species are exploited for their utilitarian or trade values: individually these can be huge, and when
added together the overall value of biodiversity nationally and globally is staggering
the biodiversity of ecosystems underpins their power as a tourism attraction
the greater the heterogeneity of an ecosystem, the more effective and resilient are its service functions (and vice
versa)
numerous wild species have known and unknown medicinal properties
loss of species results in loss of important ecological services such as pollination of crops (birds, bats, insects), seed
dispersal (birds, primates, bats, elephants) and natural control of agricultural pests. These losses can affect fruit and
vegetable productivity, as well as the regeneration of natural vegetation and forests
important aspects of global food security depend on the existence of wild relatives of staple and commercially
valuable food plants.
Throughout EA, there are many international and national NGOs engaged in education and awareness campaigns designed
to ensure greater public knowledge and appreciation of ecosystem and biodiversity values, including among children and rural
65 In Central Africa, the potential contribution of private mining and plantation schemes to conservation is considered huge (see sections 4.4
and 5.2 in Volume 4)
66 A reviewer of this report pointed out that Members of the European Parliament also should form a Conservation Caucus to emulate that
of the US

Final report
Page 42
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
communities. The incorporation of environmental studies into national school curricula is also needed. Without public
understanding and support, it will always be much harder for conservation to succeed.
3.6
ADAPTING TO CLIMATE CHANGE
The general response of EA countries to this topic is taking place within the context of their participation in the UN Framework
Convention on Climate Change which requires parties to prepare and implement projects and programmes which focus on
both adaptation and mitigation activities. Four Partner States, namely Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda and Tanzania have developed
a National Adaptation Programme of Actions (NAPAs), which are in various stages of implementation. The NAPAs identify
immediate, urgent and priority project activities that are necessary to enhance adaptation capacities to climate change adverse
impacts. Kenya, not being a Least Developed Country, has prepared instead a Climate Change Strategy which spells out
priority adaptation and mitigation activities.
Developing countries do not have binding targets under the Kyoto Protocol, but are still committed under the treaty to reduce
their emissions. Actions taken by developed and developing countries to reduce emissions include support for renewable
energy, improving energy efficiency, and reducing deforestation. Under the Protocol, emissions of developing countries are
allowed to grow in accordance with their development needs.
These strategies and action plans have identified energy-related mitigation options which can be used to foster economic
development in the region while contributing to global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The potentials in various
parts of the region range from geothermal along the Rift Valley, wind, cogeneration, hydropower, solar, carbon sequestration,
use of natural gases and methane recovery from waste management. So far three partner states, namely Tanzania, Kenya
and Uganda have registered clean development projects.
Appropriate natural resource management constitutes another very important response to climate change in the region. As
already recounted above, this includes widespread forest restoration and rehabilitation measures, and the development of
REDD+ projects where the carbon absorption value of a conserved forest is rewarded, through carbon credits, for offsetting
emissions elsewhere in the world.
In terms of wildlife conservation, it is important that PA managers now participate in predictive climate change adaptation
exercises, in order to identify and be ready to deal with anticipated likely impacts. The best approach is to incorporate
responses to the threats posed by climate change into the established process used to develop site-specific General
Management Plans. UNESCO has already taken steps in this direction for natural World Heritage Sites. In 2013 it piloted the
use of guidance materials for the preparation of Climate Change Adaptation Plans (CCAPs) at two sites in India, and two sites
in Kenya. Thus it is that Mt Kenya and the component PAs of the Great Rift Valley Lakes Site are among the first to have sitespecific CCAPs. Once refined on the basis of these pilots (and possibly one more in Latin America), UNESCO will roll out the
guidelines globally.
3.7
ALLEVIATING POVERTY
The relevance of poverty as a fundamental driver of ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss is universally recognised and
accepted today. However, it is only about 15 years ago that conservation-linked approaches to poverty alleviation were initiated,
and they have evolved since into the variety of approaches collectively termed Community Based Natural Resource
Management (CBNRM).
The basic premise underlying all CBNRM is that illegal and unsustainable natural resource use by the rural poor can be halted
by giving them ownership of, and management responsibility for the resource, so that they may directly benefit from its use
and their livelihoods improve accordingly. Consequently they will automatically acquire a vested interest in protecting it from
unsustainable exploitation.
Apart from generating benefits directly linked to the utilisation of wildlife, CBNRM also addresses other ways of improving
livelihoods while minimising environmental damage. This can include measures to reduce the costs of living with wildlife (self
help against HWC), as well as to promote alternative crops, or improve agronomy and livestock breeds. It also involves the
introduction of new holistic grazing strategies for the improved exploitation of rangelands, as well new techniques of soil and
carbon friendly conservation agriculture.
Because of their relevance to poverty alleviation, all of these approaches have received massive support from the donor
community, to the extent that a huge body of experience exists that is far too great to review more than superficially here. A
few key examples and points pertaining to measures directly linked to wildlife both plant and animal are given below.

Final report
Page 43
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
CBNRM in the forestry sector revolves around Participatory Forest Management (PFM) where defined and organised
communities either manage a forest with the State forestry authority to their mutual benefit, or the State devolves full
management responsibility for village forests to the community. In some cases the user rights granted include timber, in some
cases only non-timber forest products.
There is a large number and variety of projects of this type throughout Africa, several of them supported by the EC, and EA is
no exception. Three particular community forestry approaches are notable. This first involves PFM and REDD+ so that the
proceeds from carbon credits are distributed amongst the community on, theoretically at least, a significant scale (see Box 20).
The second works on the same principle, but with the benefits to be shared being generated by formalised Payments for
Ecosystem Services.
Box 20. Linkages between PFM and REDD
The idea of linking PFM and REDD+ makes a lot of sense at first sight, and indeed the obvious complementarities
between the two have spawned a number of new Standards against which a forest can be certified in addition to a
fundamental GHG-reduction standard such as the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS), thus adding value to the carbon
credits generated. These include the Climate, Community and Biodiversity (CCB) Standards which identify projects that
are designed to deliver robust and credible GHG reductions while also delivering net positive benefits to local
communities and biodiversity, while the REDD+ Social & Environmental Standards initiative aims to build support for
government-led REDD+ programs that make a significant contribution to human rights, poverty alleviation and
biodiversity conservation.
The third is to use a globally recognised certification of sustainability to add value to specific forest products in trade. The
community managing the resource thus gains a double benefit an enhanced revenue stream to share, without compromising
a sustained supply to the market. The best example of this is provided by the village forests in Tanzania that are participating
in an NGO-facilitated and Forest Stewardship Council-certified trade in African Blackwood. This wood, used for musical
instruments, commands huge prices and by cutting out the middlemen, the returns now reaching the community are truly
transformative.
CBNRM in the wildlife sector relates to the granting of user rights to communities in agreed, legally defined wildlife
management areas. The utilisation allowed may be consumptive (hunting), non-consumptive (tourism), or a combination of
the two. Different approaches predominate in different countries, with consumptive utilisation not even an option in those
countries in which hunting of all types is banned.
Within EA, Tanzania has taken the lead in developing a legal framework for the establishment of community managed WMAs,
to which species-specific consumptive user rights are devolved on the basis of government-imposed, sustainable offtake
quotas. In Kenya on the other hand, community (and private) land owners have taken the initiative to declare all or part of their
land as Conservancies devoted to the conservation and non-consumptive utilisation of wildlife, often in associations such as
the Northern Rangelands Trust. In either model, hunting and tourism revenues are shared amongst the entitled community
members.
CBNRM is now increasingly being applied in the fisheries sector also, on both coast and lakes, with the devolution of resource
user and management rights and responsibilities being organised around Beach Management Units. The EUR 15 million
programme for the Coastal, Marine and Island Specific Biodiversity Management in the Eastern and Southern Africa and Indian
Ocean Region (ESA-), signed in January 2013, aims at developing and strengthening over five years the national and subregional capacities for sustainable participatory management of coastal, marine and island specific biodiversity in the islands
states and coastal states of the ESA-IO region, namely: Comoros, Madagascar, Mauritius, Seychelles, Kenya and Tanzania.
Whilst CBNRM has indeed helped communities to develop a vested interest in protecting natural resources from unsustainable
exploitation, it has not been, nor is it likely ever to be, an unqualified success everywhere. In all cases where government
approval is involved, whether for PFM (as in Ethiopia) or WMAs (as in Tanzania), the procedural steps involved are complex
and time consuming and mostly beyond the capacity of communities to follow without help from a donor-funded NGO partner.
Once approved, management of the user rights so granted is often hijacked by elites, but even without that the benefits
generated are very modest once shared out amongst all entitled households.

Final report
Page 44
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Situations also arise in which extreme scarcity can generate unsustainable resource use that is NOT driven by poverty, and
therefore relatively immune to mitigation through PFM. An excerpt from the evaluation of an EC-funded PFM project in Malawi
provides an example of such a situation67 (see Box 21).
Box 21.Charcoal and deforestation
The situation in Malawi today is such that forests are being degraded and destroyed because the demand for biomass
fuel (wood and charcoal) far exceeds supply. This process however is not being driven by the poverty of forest
dependent communities. It is being driven partly by a simple lack of alternatives, meaning even if you improve a persons
livelihood or income through PFM, they still will have no choice but to go on cooking using wood or charcoal, irrespective
of whether that improvement is forest-dependent and irrespective of whether they have come to value the forest more
than previously as a result. An even more important driver is the charcoal industry which is linked to markets and
communities in mostly urban centres, far distant from the source forests. In other words the destructive process is largely
independent of the livelihoods or wealth of communities living close to and/or partially dependent upon, forests.
Despite its promise, CBNRM is not a panacea that alone will neutralise the unsustainable utilisation of natural resources that
is driven by poverty. As already alluded to, CBNRM schemes may seem viable when first devised, the harvest having been
correctly calculated for the number of wild animals (or trees) that live in the area and the income shared out fairly. In due course
however, the number of people increases and there is a demand to increase offtake, but the wildlife in an area does not
increase, its numbers remain steady and so must the harvest if it is to be sustainable. A steady harvest means that each person
now receives a declining income. Furthermore, each person is not content to receive even a steady income their whole lives,
let alone a declining one, they expect an increasing income so that the demand for an increased harvest is exacerbated.
For these and other reasons, there is an inevitable trend over time for CBNRM to become unsustainable. The ultimate solution
must depend on a combination of two things. The first is greater government efforts to overcome poverty through large-scale
development initiatives that are not directly linked to natural resources, but which must be respectful of them nonetheless. The
other is to reduce the population growth rate to the greatest extent possible, thereby minimising the scale of the poverty
alleviation challenge. Some countries, notably China, have grasped this nettle with albeit unpopular measures but at least they
are not in denial of this fundamental problem, as are most countries in Africa. Family planning within CBNRM areas is essential
if they are to be sustainable in the long term.
LESSON LEARNT
Listed below are the main lessons to be learnt with regard to the conservation and management of natural resources in Eastern
Africa. Most of the Lessons Learnt noted in the reviews of other regions are applicable in EA also (see the equivalent sections
of Volumes 2, 4 and 5).
4.1
THE VALUE OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES IS STILL NOT SUFFICIENTLY WELL UNDERSTOOD
The root causes underlying unsustainable resource utilisation and the relentless degradation of natural ecosystems are illqualified, poorly motivated and often corrupt officials, and the approval of development actions whose environmental impacts
are not being minimised to the extent possible. These problems relate back to ignorance in Ministries of Finance and Planning
as to the economic value of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Agricultural, extractive and financial services industries are
also ignorant.
4.2
NRM AGENCIES REMAIN UNDER-RESOURCED
The under-valuation of ecosystem services and biodiversity by governments is a fundamental driver of the institutional
weaknesses that generate inefficient, ineffective and corrupt management practices. These weaknesses centre on human
resources that are too few in number, poorly paid and equipped, ill trained and inadequately supervised. Whether for routine
operations or capital development, the level of funding made available to NRM agencies is invariably inadequate. Badly paid
and unsupervised field staff in particular will always be corruptible.
67 TRANSTEC Project Management (2012) Final Evaluation of Improved Forest Management for Sustainable Livelihoods Programme.
Report to the European Union Delegation in Malawi

Final report
Page 45
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
4.3
POACHING CANNOT BE CONTAINED BY IN SITU PROTECTION ALONE
Recent failures to protect elephants and especially rhinos in areas considered extremely safe prove that in situ protection
measures can never be impenetrable. The lesson to be learnt is that much more must be done at other points along the value
chain. For supply countries, the biggest constraint to combating the illegal trade in wildlife products is insufficient coordination
between different law enforcement agencies, and in particular a lack of skills in intelligence-based methods at the national
level.
4.4
CBNRM IS NOT A PANACEA AGAINST ALL THREATS
Communities will value their local wildlife if it can provide livelihood benefits that outweigh alternatives. Despite this sound
theoretical foundation, CBNRM has its limits in terms of alleviating the poverty that drives most of the regions environmental
problems. Community success in obtaining and maintaining user rights is very heavily dependent on the assistance of donorfunded NGOs due to complex and demanding Government procedures. Schemes fail when technical support is withdrawn
prematurely: it must be maintained for decades rather than years. Even then prospects for sustaining meaningful benefits in
the long term are poor in the face of high population growth rates and slow economic development.
4.5
PA DESIGNS NEED IMPROVING
Recent and developing trends are exposing weaknesses in the designs of PA systems inherited from colonial administrations.
These include failure to include representative examples of all major ecotypes, and the erosion of connectivity through the
accelerating transformation of hitherto undeveloped areas between PAs. Elephants in particular seldom if ever spend a full
year within a PA, and so is the species most affected by the ongoing appropriation of unprotected habitat, and the one causing
the most serious conflict with man as a result. In response, new PAs and corridors between PAs must be created wherever
possible in order to improve PA resilience and long term system viability. Such needs have inspired many stakeholders to
adopt a landscape approach to area-based conservation, in which complexes of PAs are conserved hand-in-hand with the
eco-sensitive and wildlife friendly development of intervening and surrounding areas. These complexes may be within or
straddling national borders, the latter being known as Trans-frontier Conservation Areas. Experience and logic indicate that
priority should be given to the integrated conservation and development of complexes that support key elephant populations.
4.6
THE EAC HAS YET TO FULLY EMBRACE A REGIONAL APPROACH TO WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
Compared to some other regions, the EAC has yet to take seriously a coordinated, trans-frontier approach to conservation. To
date, the regional NRM interests of the EAC have been heavily biased towards shared lake and freshwater fishery resources.
Momentum towards the development of properly mandated TFCAs is still tentative, and the regional function for which College
of African Wildlife Management was created has been greatly weakened, thus partly explaining deficiencies in adequately
trained manpower at the PA-manager level in particular.
However, a recent request from the EACs Deputy Secretary General, Jesca Eriyo, for member countries to work together in
order to effectively manage and protect their ecosystems as an integral part of development, and her statement that regional
and continental park authorities need to share information and carry out enforcement jointly, are encouraging and suggest
that the necessary political will is emerging68.
4.7
DONOR-FUNDED
PROGRAMMES TO SUPPORT THE WILDLIFE SECTOR CAN BE EFFECTIVE BUT MUST BE
SUSTAINED LONGER
Projects and programmes which provide technical and material support to build management capacity in an NRM organisation,
or even throughout the sector as a whole, can be very effective especially in situations where a complete overhaul and
restructuring is necessary and appropriate.
Experience has shown that PA-support projects should not focus entirely on the selected PAs: they work best when
complementary support can be given at HQ level also.
While the need to ensure that TA to CBNRM is maintained long enough has already been noted above, there is a tendency
for all forms of TA provided to the wildlife sector to be too short lived. No doubt high costs are one reason for this, but it can
68
Reported in the 22-28 November 2014 edition of The East African weekly newspaper

Final report
Page 46
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
take a very long time for the new policies, laws, procedures or skills that TA might impart to be formulated, implemented and
embedded. At the same time, EDF procedures tend to inhibit the speedy implementation of activities (especially those for
procurement). With the benefit of hindsight, there are many examples of the efforts of Advisors - whether deployed at PA or
HQ level - collapsing after they were removed too soon. Project designs must make more realistic appraisals of sustainability
prospects within alternate timeframes.
Another project design problem frequently encountered irrespective of donor and common to all regions, is that disbursements
are not tightly enough linked to the achievement of targets and results. This compromises the motivation and efficiency of
project executants, opens a door to the misapplication of funds, and ultimately reduces effectiveness and impact well below
what should be attainable. If projects and programmes are to become longer and bigger, this must go hand in hand with the
introduction of more rigorous performance monitoring and accountability measures.
INDICATIVE CONSERVATION ACTIONS
On the basis of the above reviews it is very evident that the EA region contains a spectacular variety of ecosystems and natural
resources of great economic value, all of which are under an inexorably mounting threat of degradation or loss, and therefore
urgently in need of improved protection and/or sustainable management. Therefore the grounds for the EU to greatly magnify
its support for their conservation are extremely robust and compelling. At the same time, as the reviews have attempted clearly
to indicate, there are numerous programmes, projects and actions already underway or planned by Governments, IGOs and
NGOs, covering a wide spectrum of issues and approaches.
It follows that the EU needs to identify a niche within this spectrum within which it can implement a suite of interventions
designed to deliver an optimal ratio between cost and impact, whilst simultaneously satisfying its pre-declared interests and
priorities.
The Terms of Reference for this study indicated clearly that the contemporary crisis issues of international wildlife trade, and
related to that issues of elephant and rhinoceros conservation, are areas to which the EC would like to afford priority, while at
the same time taking advantage of the interest and concern generated by these issues to make a significant, long-lasting
contribution to conserving other key elements of Africas biodiversity.
The choice of other key elements is critical because the scope is huge yet even magnified resources will be finite. A narrow,
selective focus is thus inescapable, but it is also acceptable given the fact that nothing of genuine importance will escape the
attention of one actor or another. It is recommended that selectivity in the present case be based on two fundamental premises.
Firstly selected interventions should have multiple benefits, thus optimising the ratio between cost and impact. Secondly, in
order to facilitate acceptance of higher spending, it is more important to select interventions that align well with the relatively
unsophisticated perceptions and interests of the average European taxpayer, the ultimate financier of any Pan African
conservation programme, rather than take an overly technical or scientific approach.
Based on the above-mentioned priorities (trade, elephants, rhinos) and premises (multiple benefits, popular appeal), a variety
of interventions suitable for EU support in EA can be identified. These can be differentiated according to whether they address
an Issue, a Species, an Area or an Institution. Some can be further distinguished according to whether they are relevant to the
entire region, or at a national level only.
Inevitably, any deliberately selective approach can create debate and dispute amongst different stakeholders with different
vested interests about what to include or exclude. However, it must be borne in mind that since the approach proposed is for
an EU programme, then the EUs vested interests are entitled to prevail.
5.1
ISSUES: LAW ENFORCEMENT AND TRADE CONTROL
The illegal wildlife trade is a cross-cutting issue relevant to all regions. As such the topic has a stand-alone chapter in Volume
6 of this Report in which a full set of relevant actions recommended for EU support is presented. While those particularly
important for EA are briefly outlined below, please refer to the overall Trade section for further detail.

Final report
Page 47
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
5.1.1
National
Support for national-level multi-agency Wildlife Enforcement Networks (WENs) in all countries is recommended, irrespective
of whether a WEN or an equivalent already exists. The main components of that support would be application of ICCWCs
Wildlife and Forest Crime Analytic Toolkit, and the secondment through ICCWC of Wildlife Security Advisers to boost the
intelligence aspects of WEN work in particular (see also Volume 6, section 3.9.3.3).
The urgency and relevance of such support has been highlighted by the trade in ivory and rhino horn, but the investigative
actions necessary to control that trade all long the value chain are basically the same as those required to control the trade in
any and all other wildlife commodities. Thus action in this area has multiple benefits: all species of plant or animal in trade will
benefit.
5.1.2
Regional
A WEN for the Horn of Africa (HAWEN) is under development, but its utility is questionable if functional WENs exist at national
level. The situation thus requires further debate and analysis before unequivocal EU support can be recommended (see
Volume 6, section 3.9.3.2).
There is a strong case for the development of a forensic laboratory able to provide regional services for DNA and isotopic
analyses of ivory, rhino horn and other specimens, including bushmeat. Given its pre-existing inter-regional orientation, the
KWS forensic lab in Nairobi is the obvious place in which to develop such a service (see 3.2.2 above), not least because the
same equipment can be used irrespective of the type of sample, be it rhino horn, ivory or something else.
The development of forensic services for EA at the KWS lab is recommended for EU support, as elaborated further in section
3.9.3.4 of Volume 6.
Support to law enforcement training for PA managers features under institutional strengthening of EAs regional College of
African Wildlife Management (see 5.4.1 below).
5.2
5.2.1
SPECIES: PROTECTING THREATENED FLAGSHIP SPECIES

Elephants
Elephant conservation is a cross-cutting issue relevant to all regions of Africa. As such the topic has a stand-alone chapter in
Volume 6 of this Report in which a set of relevant actions recommended for EC support is presented. Those applicable to EA
are briefly outlined here, for further detail please refer to the Elephant chapter in Volume 6.
All EA nations are elephant Range States, with the exception of Burundi and Djibouti, and the possible exception of Sudan
and Somalia. As such they all stand to benefit from the recommendations made. These include further support to the following:
the MIKES and ETIS projects; the African Elephant Specialist Group; the African Elephant Fund and other similar funds; and
the censusing of forest populations.
Given the economic and ecological importance of elephants, and the fact that they have such relatively very large demands in
terms of living space, there is a strong logic that by conserving elephants successfully, you will automatically help conserve
the multitude of other species sharing their range, as well as a considerable degree of ecosystem-level functionality.
Recognising the multiplier effect of conserving key flagship species is not new, but that in no way negates its validity or
importance. Indeed at least two leading conservation NGOs explicitly target key elephant ranges in their current programmes
for that reason (AWF and IFAW).
It is recommended that the EC adopts this approach also, but targets the very biggest populations in each region as an initial
priority. Many selection criteria could be used but the simpler ones approach the better, provided it remains meaningful. The
argument here is that the bigger the population, the easier it will be to keep the rate of mortality (heavily influenced by poaching),
below the birth rate. Put another way, the biggest populations represent the species best hope looking far into the future.
Some might argue that the biggest populations need the least attention, but this assumes an unwarranted complacency as to
their resilience because even these can crash with alarming speed as recent events in Tanzania have shown (see 1.2.1 in
Volume 6), and recent history provides several examples of formerly huge populations disappearing.

Final report
Page 48
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
The need to distinguish and include the biggest populations from each region is necessitated both by the genetic variation
across the range (there may in fact be two or even three species), and a desire to use the elephant to help conserve examples
of the very different types of ecosystem it lives in, which range from forests to semi-deserts.
Table 1 gives a summary of EAs elephant numbers, from which it is predictable that the biggest populations will be in Tanzania
and Kenya. The data given are for 2012/3 as posted on the website http://elephantdatabase.org, from which full details at the
individual population level may be obtained.
Table 1. Elephant numbers in Eastern Africa by country (2012/3)
Country
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Kenya
Rwanda
Somalia
South Sudan
Tanzania
Uganda
TOTALS
Definite
96
628
26,365
11
0
1,172
95,351
2,223
130,859
Probable
0
0
771
17
0
5,882
10,278
1,031
12,966
Possible
8
220
3,825
54
0
5,882
10,927
903
16,700
Speculative
0
912
5,299
0
70
0
900
385
7,566
The five biggest elephant populations in EA, whose ranges might be termed Very Important Elephant Areas, are those shown
in Table 2. As in any selection process, the decision on where to place a cut-off threshold is to an extent arbitrary. In this case
choosing the top five represents a subjectively satisfactory reconciliation between a necessary and realistic limit (big
populations by definition will be expensive to protect), and the populations which really do stand out head and shoulders above
the others. Working from the combined number of EAs Definite and Probable elephants (143,825), the five populations listed
are the only ones that exceed 7,200 - or 5% of the regional total - in number69. While it is suggested that other regions should
also keep their selection of VIEAs to a maximum of five, the cut off point in percentage terms will differ from one to another.
Table 2. Very Important Elephant Areas in Eastern Africa by population size (2012/3)
Name of Population/Ecosystem
Mikumi-Selous-Niassa Corridor70
Ruaha-Rungwa
Moyowosi-Kigosi
Tsavo
Laikipia-Samburu
Country
Tanzania
Tanzania
Tanzania
Kenya
Kenya
Population estimate
44,828
32,025
13,143
12,182
7,415
All of the five populations listed above use an ecosystem made up of a mosaic of protected and unprotected areas, as shown
in Fig.5 for Ruaha-Rungwa. All of them are sufficiently important to be assured of being included among those considered a
priority for area-based interventions (see 5.3.1).
69
Most of the populations cited have been much reduced since these data were collected and collated, but irrespective of their actual size
today, their relative size and importance is probably unchanged
70 A census of the Selous GR in November 2013 showed a 67% decline in the 4 years since the previous count (see section 1.2.1 of the
Elephant chapter in Volume 6), but not enough to disqualify the overall population but probably moving it to No2 in this list. NB however that
the area remains emphatically a VIEA as the population in the contiguous area of Mozambique estimated at 12,000 in 2011 is not included
in these figures
Final report
Page 49
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Figure 5. The Ruaha-Rungwa-Kitulo-Kipengere KLC
5.2.2
Rhinos and other iconic species
Rhino conservation is a cross-cutting issue relevant to both Eastern and Southern regions. As such the topic has a stand-alone
chapter in Volume 6 of this Report in which a set of relevant actions recommended for EC support are presented and from
which all the rhino Range States of EA stand to benefit.
The recommendation to develop a forensic lab for EA in Kenya was prompted by a KWS labs pre-existing efforts to acquire a
capacity to undertake DNA analysis of rhino horn (see section 3.2.2 above).
Compared to elephants, rhinos have considerably less ecological impact, and nowhere near as extensive range requirements.
Consequently it is not possible to generate an equivalent multiplier effect argument for giving their needs matching priority.
However they are considerably more endangered, and as such do have very significant existence value, in western perception
especially. They also have economic value deriving from their status as a tourism attraction and as a potential, if controversial,
source of revenue (through sport hunting and horn trade). As such rhinos must be included among a set of globally iconic
species of similar concern, all of which should benefit from the EU programme if possible: others with equivalent existence and
economic values are the Great Apes, the Big Cats and Wild Dogs.

Final report
Page 50
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Consequently the presence of these species is deemed particularly relevant to the selection of areas most deserving of support
(see 5.3 below). Action on behalf of locally iconic and other endangered species is discussed in 5.3.3 below.
5.3
AREAS: KEY LANDSCAPES FOR CONSERVATION
If one applies a consideration of multiple benefits and popular appeal to a selection of areas in EA (protected or otherwise)
most deserving of support, once concludes that the selection should start with any area that satisfies at least one of these
criteria:
Qualifies (subjectively) as representative of a last great intact ecosystem/wilderness area
Represents the most viable, fully functioning remnant of a particular ecotype
Contains an abundant and diverse assemblage of animals on a pleistocene scale
Features a unique migratory phenomenon
Supports one of the EA regions five biggest elephant populations
Has Outstanding Universal Value according to its status as a World Heritage Site
Obviously the more of these criteria an area can satisfy, the more important and deserving of support it becomes. Few individual
PAs are able to satisfy even one of these criteria, but certain complexes of PAs that are contiguous, or are in close proximity
to each other, can. PA complexes then, are a dominant feature of the landscapes most deserving of support identified in the
next section.
An analysis to demonstrate that a selection based on such simple criteria can indeed deliver multiple benefits follows in section
5.3.3. As such they represent spectacular, still viable examples of Africas wildlife and wild places that are of such outstanding
importance and value that they should be conserved at all costs and in principle for ever: they are referred to both here and in
all other Volumes as Key Landscapes for Conservation or KLCs. Section 5.3.4 concludes with description of the various
ways in which KLCs could actually be supported.
5.3.1
East African Key Landscapes for Conservation (Inland)
Table 3 and Fig.6 show the inland areas of EA qualifying as KLCs against one or more of the basic criteria posed above, and
identified as priorities under the current review. Some of those listed are TFCAs (see 3.4.2), while others lie entirely within a
single country. Further detail with regard to the nature and importance of each KLC may be found elsewhere in this report as
indicated in Table 4. In addition, Appendix 1 lists all the PAs to be found in each KLC, with supplementary information given
also in Table 5 of Volume 1.
Table 3. Proposed list of inland KLCs for Eastern Africa
Name of KLC
Countries
Extensive
wilderness
Remnant
ecotype
Pleistocene
abundance
Unique
migration
Y
VIEA
WHS
Tentative
WHS
2
3
Mara-SerengetiNgorongoro*
KE, TZ
Greater Virunga*
DRC, RW,
UG
Rift Valley Lakes

WHS-Natron*
Greater
Kilimanjaro*
Selous-Niassa*
Simien Mountains
Lake
Turkana
National
Parks
WHS
Greater Mt Kenya
Sudd-BadingiluBoma-Gambella*
Bale Mountains
KE, TZ
KE, TZ
TZ, MZ
ET
1
1
KE
KE
ET, SS
ET
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Lakes Tanganyika
and Malawi*
TZ,BI,DRC,
ZM
&
TZ,MW,MZ
1
Y
1
1

Final report
Page 51
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Name of KLC
12
Countries
Extensive
wilderness
Eastern
Arc
TZ, KE
forests*
13 Ruaha-RungwaTZ
Y
Kitulo-Kipengere
14 Moyowosi-Kigosi
TZ
Y
15 Nyungwe-Kibira*
RW, BI
Y
16 Imatongs-Kidepo*
SS, UG
Y
17 LantotoSS, DRC
Y
Garamba*
*Denotes a TFCA * Denotes a TFCA shared by two regions
Remnant
ecotype
Pleistocene
abundance
Unique
migration
VIEA
WHS
Tentative
WHS
1
Y
Y

Final report
Page 52
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Figure 6. Map of proposed KLCs

Final report
Page 53
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
Table 4. Text sections, boxes and maps providing further information on each KLC
Name of KLC
Text section
1
Mara-Serengeti-Ngorongoro*
1.3
2
Greater Virunga*
3.4.2; and Vol 4 - 5.1.1.1
3
Rift Valley Lakes WHS-Natron*
1.5; 3.4.2
4
1.1
5
Selous-Niassa*
1.3
6
Simien Mountains
1.1
7
Lake Turkana National Parks WHS 1.5
8
Greater Mt Kenya
1.1
9
Sudd-Badingilu-Boma-Gambella*
1.3; 1.5
10 Bale Mountains
1.1
11 Lakes Tanganyika and Malawi*
1.5
12 Eastern Arc forests*
1.2.1
13 Ruaha-Rungwa-Kitulo-Kipengere
1.2.1; 5.2.1
14 Moyowosi-Kigosi
5.2.1
15 Nyungwe-Kibira*
1.2.2; 3.4.2
16 Imatongs-Kidepo*
1.2.1
17 Lantoto-Garamba*
3.4.2; and Vol 4 5.1.1.4
Box
2
7
2
1; 2
11
2; 3
10
4
Map
Fig.2
Fig.4
Fig.3
Fig.5
Elephants in Amboseli NP with Kilimanjaro NP and WHS behind : a scene from the Greater Kilimanjaro TFCA and KLC.
Photo Amboseli Trust for Elephants
Considering the rigorous criteria involved in attaining WHS status, its inclusion as a qualifying criterion for KLCs is important.
Combining this with the other KLC criteria, one can be very confident that between them, the KLCs selected not only host a
very high percentage of the regions biodiversity, but also do so where it has the best chance of survival in perpetuity. As
generally large areas, they also preserve ecosystem service functions to the extent possible.
Even so, purists will reasonably object that very many important areas are excluded, including certain TFCAs, National Parks
and other PAs, Ramsar Sites, Important Bird Areas and so on. While further analysis would show that several of these are
also captured by the proposed KLCs, the fact remains that a limit must be set somehow. Bearing in mind that the other three
regions have generated lists of similar magnitude, delivering meaningful support to approximately 70 KLCs, incorporating some
300 PAs in total, is already a massive challenge. Nevertheless, there is no reason why other areas new WHSs in particular
- may not in future be recognised as KLCs and be equally eligible for priority EU support (see also 5.3.3).
Final report
Page 54
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
It is strongly recommended that the EU gives initial priority to supporting the KLCs listed both here and in other
volumes (see summary Table 5 in Volume 1). The various ways in which this could be done are outlined in 5.3.4 below.
5.3.2
East African Key Landscapes for Conservation (Coastal/Marine)
Although most coastal PAs in Eastern Africa have been established in relation to a specific biophysical feature, such as a coral
reef, there is no reason why a more holistic, KLC-type approach cannot be used also to identify coastal-marine areas or
complexes of outstanding biodiversity and value. Although relevant work has been undertaken in the EA region, few of the
areas of apparently greatest importance have obtained either formal recognition or direct support to date.
The marine World Heritage Sites closest to EA are the Aldabra Atoll (Seychelles) and iSimangaliso Wetland Park (South
Africa). Only one coastal area features in the Lists of Tentative WHS submitted by EA countries, and that is the small Jozani
Forest-Chwaka Bay area on Zanzibar (Tanzania). However, some coastal wetlands have been recognised under the Ramsar
Convention, notably the Rufiji Delta (Tanzania) and Tana Delta (Kenya).
The most recent work to identify coastal complexes of outstanding importance has been undertaken by IUCNs Eastern and
Southern Africa Regional Programme Office in the course of developing a programme entitled Resilient Coasts which covers
also the southern country of Mozambique71. Five areas have been proposed for support under this programme. These include
the three locations within the Eastern African region that had been put forward previously as sites of outstanding universal
value to be considered for listing by UNESCOs World Heritage Centre72, namely:
the Quirimbas-Mnazi Bay complex, northern Mozambique coast/southern Tanzania coast
Bazaruto-Tofo in Inhambane Province, southern Mozambique coast
the Lamu Archipelago-Tana Delta complex73, northern Kenya coast
In addition, the IUCN study recommends a further two sites that provide valuable ecosystem services, namely:
Rufiji Delta-Mafia Island complex, Tanzania (see also Box 12)
Kenya south coast complex (Msambweni, Funzi Bay-Ramisi River Estuary, Vanga)
In terms of the present Volumes scope, consideration must also be given to outstanding areas in the Red Sea and Gulf of
Aden. A major EU-funded study of the coast of Sudan conducted in 2007 developed a proposal for the Tentative Listing of a
serial WHS called the Sudanese Red Sea Marine PA Network, a complex that includes both the Sanganeb Atoll Marine NP
and the Dungonab Bay-Mukkawar Island Marine NP74. Eritrea hosts another important area, the Dahlak Archipelago, part of
which is designated a marine NP but not as yet not proposed for WHS status. EU-funded studies of the Somali environment
carried out some years ago identified several coastal areas of conservation potential, but circumstances in that country continue
to preclude any meaningful development effort75.
Table 5 summarises the EA areas with identified potential to be coastal KLCs in accordance with the concept promoted in this
Report. In the short term, the most appropriate strategy for the EC would be to offer support to IUCNs Resilient Coasts
Programme since much of the groundwork has been laid. In the longer term, support can be developed for areas in the Red
Sea and Gulf of Aden whose littoral States are inherently harder to work in.
Table 5. Potential coastal-marine KLCs for Eastern Africa
Name
Mnazi Bay-Quirimbas
Lamu Archipelago-Tana Delta
Dahlak Archipelago
Red Sea Marine PA Network
Rufiji Delta-Mafia Island
South coast complex
Jozani Forest-Chwaka Bay
Countries
Tanzania, Mozambique
Kenya
Eritrea
Sudan
Tanzania
Kenya
Tanzania
71
Samoilys M., G.W. Maina, J.E. Church, B. Mibei, M. Monjane, A. Shah, D. Mutta and M. Pabari (2013) Situation analysis to understand
the resilience of the coastal ecosystems of eastern Africa. IUCN ESARPO, Nairobi
72 Obura, D.O., J.E. Church and C. Gabri (2012). Assessing Marine World Heritage from an Ecosystem Perspective: The Western Indian
Ocean. World Heritage Centre, United Nations Education, Science and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 124 pp
73 The Tana Delta also features on Kenyas Tentative WHS list
74 Equipe Cousteau (2008) Towards developing Integrated Coastal Zone Management in Sudan. Phase I: Survey for the ICZM of the Red
Sea Coast of Sudan
75 IUCN (2006) Country Environmental Profile for Somalia. IUCN Eastern Africa Regional Programme Office, Nairobi
Final report
Page 55
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
5.3.3
Multiple benefits
Tables 6 and 7 show how the conservation of the large, diverse and intact ecosystems identified here as KLCs automatically
satisfies other important considerations, thus confirming the multiple benefits premise. Table 6 for example, shows how all
the important iconic species of global concern will benefit from the selection.
Table 6. Representation of iconic flagship species in selected inland KLCs
Name of KLC
Countries
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Big
Cats
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Wild
Dogs
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
?
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Elephants
Rhinos
Y
Y
1
2
KE, TZ
Greater Virunga*
DRC, RW, UG
3
KE, TZ
4
KE, TZ
5
Selous-Niassa*
TZ, MZ
6
Simien Mountains
ET
7
Lake Turkana National Parks WHS KE
8
Greater Mt Kenya
KE
9
Sudd-Badingilu-Boma-Gambella*
ET, SS
10 Bale Mountains
ET
11 Lakes Tanganyika and Malawi*
TZ,BI,DRC,ZM & TZ,MW,MZ
12 Eastern Arc forests*
TZ, KE
13 Ruaha-Rungwa-Kitulo-Kipengere
TZ
14 Moyowosi-Kigosi
TZ
15 Nyungwe-Kibira*
RW, BI
16 Imatongs-Kidepo*
SS, UG
17 Lantoto-Garamba*
SS, DRC
ALL COMBINED
Great
Apes
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
?
?
Y
?
Y
Y
Y
Legitimate concern might be raised that the rather simplistic emphasis given in KLC selection to the most obviously charismatic
megafauna means that locally iconic and/or other rare and endangered species are excluded. It is not been possible as part
of the present study to develop full species lists for each of the proposed KLCs, but the text sections cited in Table 4 indicate
just how many species of great local concern and importance are in fact catered for in the selection. Other examples include
Grevys zebra (Equus grevyi) the core of whose very restricted distribution falls within KLC8; Rothschilds giraffe is a rare subspecies restricted to KLC3; KLC9 incorporates the most important area for the locally iconic Nile Lechwe (Kobus megaceros);
and so on.
Nonetheless, there are inevitably some important species which range outside the initial selection of KLCs presented here.
Perhaps the most notable exclusions are some from truly arid areas and coastal forest species such as the primates detailed
in Box 5, and the Hirola antelope76 also mentioned in section 1.2.3. As indicated earlier however, the list of KLCs should be
seen as flexible not fixed, and open to the addition of new WHSs in particular. It is notable in this context that a Tana delta
and forest complex features on Kenyas Tentative WHS List, so the chances are very high that this area will automatically
qualify as a KLC in due course.
As such the Tana delta and several other high value areas could already have been selected as KLCs, and are only omitted
from the present list as a matter of initial prioritisation. It is hoped that locally perceived shortcomings in the KLC selection will
help motivate the concerned stakeholders to get their areas profile raised (by upgrading to NP or WHS status, for example)
and to raise dedicated funds for their proper management and protection. Indeed, in view of their potential as KLCs, the
EU should support the preparation of application dossiers for tentative WHSs as part of its strategic approach.
Table 7 shows how the initial selection captures at least one representative example of every major ecotype found in the
region, as well as areas providing critically important watershed protection services.
76 In fact the Hirola is effectively covered under KLC8 because the NRT-managed conservancy it ranges in, although physically separated
from the others, could still benefit from any KLC8-support programme (see Appendix 1)

Final report
Page 56
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
10
11
Lakes Tanganyika and
12
13
14
15
16
17
Malawi*
KE
ET
TZ,BI,DRC,ZM
TZ,MW,MZ
TZ, KE
TZ
TZ
RW, BI
SS, UG
SS, DRC
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
?
Y
&
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Scope of possible actions in KLCs
The level of investment required will vary greatly according to a KLCs present condition, and any pre-existing level of
investment from Government and/or other external sources. Depending on this, assistance would centre on helping to prepare
(or update), and then implement, General Management Plans. Where several PAs make up a KLC, these GMPs could either
be at the level of an individual PA, or at an integrated level for the whole KLC. In the latter case especially, the plans will look
beyond the borders of formal PAs and plan for the eco-friendly development of the (mostly) communal areas in the interstices
between them. Consequently, any of the following activities would be eligible for support in KLCs:
Coastal forest
Miombo woodland
ASAL
Y
ET, SS
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Lowland forest
Y
Y
Y
Y
Highland forest
Bushland
KE
Eastern Arc forests*

Ruaha-Rungwa-Kitulo-Kipengere
Moyowosi-Kigosi
Nyungwe-Kibira*
Imatongs-Kidepo*
Lantoto-Garamba*
ALL COMBINED
5.3.4
Y
Y
Y
Important
watershed
Afro-alpine
8
9
KE, TZ
DRC, RW, UG
KE, TZ
KE, TZ
TZ, MZ
ET
Savannah
Greater Virunga*
Selous-Niassa*
Simien Mountains
WHS
Greater Mt Kenya
Sudd-Badingilu-BomaGambella*
Bale Mountains
Wetlands
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Countries
Soda lakes
Name of KLC
Freshwater lakes
Table 7. Representation of all Eastern African ecotypes in selected inland KLCs
Supporting the establishment and functioning of a high-level Steering Committee

Provision of technical assistance (resident advisors, and/or consultants)
Co-management contracts
Outright management contracts (e.g. with Africa Parks)
General management planning
Strengthening management through capital investment in buildings, roads, vehicles and other equipment
Strengthening management by defining and meeting training needs at all levels
Establishing performance standards and monitoring procedures (e.g. SMART)
Securing strategic corridors
Ecological and biological management of habitats and species (including research and monitoring; translocations;
forest rehabilitation/restoration)
Ensuring GMPs address Climate Change Adaptation
Developing business plans for enhanced revenue
Improving law enforcement strategies and capacity through additional manpower, training and equipment
Mitigating HWC and HEC, including fencing and improved compensation schemes
Controlling invasive species
Supporting CBNRM (whether consumptive or not)

Final report
Page 57
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
5.4
5.4.1
Promoting improved/complementary livelihood strategies (both pastoral and agricultural)

Developing PES and REDD+ projects within the KLC
Conducting local education and awareness campaigns
Strengthening family planning services throughout the KLC
INSTITUTIONS: STRENGTHENING SECTORAL MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION

Regional
At the time its Regional Indicative Programme (RIP) for 2014-2020 under the 11th EDF was being finalised, the EU was
considering support to the following interventions under its EAC/NRM component:
Strengthening EAC policy and procedures for the establishment and management of TFCAs
Developing a new course at the EA regional College of African Wildlife Management for PA Wardens
Developing an EA regional forensics laboratory for wildlife crime
Whether or not they feature in the final RIP, these interventions remain worthy of EU support. Consequently the first two are
discussed in the paragraphs below, while that for the forensic laboratory is presented in Volume 6, section 3.9.3.4.
TFCA policy and procedures
It is evident from the selection of KLCs proposed for support, that successful development and application of the concept of
TFCAs is very important to the conservation of key EA ecosystems. Unfortunately the level of political commitment and support
for TFCAs is still weak in the region, but the EAC, its Secretariat and its NRM Protocol provide a sound platform on which this
could be developed (see 3.4.2).
Accordingly it was proposed under the RIP process, that EA should develop a Protocol on Wildlife Conservation and Law
Enforcement modelled closely on that adopted by SADC. This met resistance from the EAC Secretariat on grounds that the
draft EA Tourism and Wildlife Protocol was already too far advanced to be significantly altered. This is unfortunate because as
it stands the draft Protocol is deficient in terms of provisions for TFCAs (see 3.1.3). Having been in the pipeline since 2009, a
reluctance to admit now to serious flaws is understandable. The compromise suggested by the EAC Secretariat was to allow
the Protocol to go ahead as is and, in a parallel move, augment it with an Agreement, MoU or some other similar instrument
whose formal adoption unlike a Protocol proper could be fast-tracked.
Whilst not carrying the weight of a Protocol, an EA Agreement on Wildlife Conservation and Law Enforcement is far better than
nothing in terms of providing a strong platform for TFCA co-management in the region. Accordingly, EU support is anticipated
for all this would entail, including consultation, adoption and supervision of implementation. The latter would centre on widening
the remit and capacity of the units and staff responsible for wildlife affairs to provide a permanent focal point within the EAC
Secretariat to catalyse, coordinate and sustain the TFCA initiative.
Irrespective of whether or when a much stronger policy environment and support apparatus for TFCAs in the EAC might
emerge, it is recommended that the EU assists the EAC to prepare a regional TFCA Development Plan as soon as
possible, followed by support for its implementation in one or more priority TFCAs that are also KLCs. The range of
inputs that could be involved are as listed in 5.3.4 above.
Warden training at the College of African Wildlife Management, Moshi, Tanzania
A need has been identified to re-constitute at the College of African Wildlife Management the availability in the EA region of a
comprehensive training course tailored to the needs of Wardens-in-charge of PAs that is geared to contemporary lawenforcement challenges in particular (see 3.4.3)77.
A draft curriculum has already been prepared by the College, and EU support for its refinement and delivery has been
requested under the RIP. Since it is unlikely that everything needed to initiate and run the programme could be met from that
source, supplementary EU support is recommended, especially with regard to Scholarships to enable selected officers
to attend. It can be noted here that the EC has provided very similar support to CAWM in the past 78.
77Interestingly,
TRAFFIC in EA has recently entered into a partnership arrangement with CAWM to help strengthen its delivery of wildlife law
enforcement training
78 The Wildlife Management Training Project implemented in the late 1990s, but which was implemented through SADC. The newly proposed
programme would be implemented through EAC.

Final report
Page 58
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
5.4.2
National
Programmes supporting sectoral reform (including policy and legal), institutional restructuring and strengthening of
management authorities (including the design or re-design of PA systems) are very cost-effective conservation investments at
the national level because all PAs, and all wildlife (whether in PAs or not), stand to benefit.
It is recommended therefore that the EC sets aside resources to enable it to support national-level sectoral,
institutional and/or PA system reforms on an ad hoc, if-and-when requested basis and advertises its willingness and
ability to act in this way.
Countries identified in this report to be in need of such support are, in order of priority (based on the degree of perceived
mismatch between biodiversity richness and overall management capacity) are: Ethiopia, Tanzania (transformation of the
Wildlife Division into the Tanzania Wildlife Authority), Kenya (possible merger of Wildlife and Forest Services), Sudan and if
conditions ever permit Somalia.

Final report
Page 59
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
APPENDIX 1. PROTECTED AREA COMPOSITION OF KLCS PROPOSED FOR EASTERN AFRICA

1
Name of KLC
Countries
KE, TZ
Greater Virunga*
DRC, RW, UG
KE, TZ
KE, TZ
Selous-Niassa*
TZ, MZ
6
7
Simien Mountains
WHS
ET
KE
Greater Mt Kenya
KE
Sudd-Badingilu-BomaGambella*
ET, SS
10
Bale Mountains
ET
PAs
Maasai Mara NR (KE)
Serengeti WHS/NP (TZ)
Maswa GR (TZ)
Grumeti GR (TZ)
Ikorongo GCA (TZ)
Loliondo GCA (TZ)
Ngorongoro WHS/CA (TZ)
+ Conservancies
+ whole Mara Catchment (mostly KE)
Virunga WHS/NP (DRC)
Volcans NP (RW)
Mgahinga NP (UG)
Queen Elizabeth NP (UG)
Bwindi WHS/NP (UG)
Semuliki NP (UG)
Ruwenzori WHS/NP (UG)
Kibale NP (UG)
Kasyoha-Kitomi FR (UG)
Kalinzu-Maramgambo FR (UG)
Kayumbura WR (UG)
L Bogoria NR (KE)
L Nakuru NP (KE)
L Elementeita NWS (KE)
Soysambu Conservancy (KE)
L Natron Ramsar Site (TZ)
+ catchment areas
Kilimanjaro WHS/NP (TZ)
Chyulu NP (KE)
Amboseli NP (KE)
Tsavo West NP (KE)
Tsavo East NP (KE)
South Kitui NR (KE)
Mkomazi NP (TZ)
+ conservancies and WMAs
Selous WHS/GR (TZ)
Niassa NR (MZ)
Mikumi NP (TZ)
Udzungwa NP (TZ)
Kilombero GCA (TZ)
+ WMAs, conservancies and hunting blocks
Simien Mts WHS/NP
Sibiloi NP
Central Island NP
South Island NP
Turkana GR
Mt Kenya-Lewa Downs
WHS/NP/FR
Samburu NR
Buffalo Springs NR
Shaba NR
+ NRT Conservancies
Zeraf GR (SS)
Shambe NP (SS)
Badingilu NP (SS)
Boma NP (SS)
Gambella NP (ET)
+ other satellite PAs
Bale Mts NP
Mena-Angetu FR
+ other PAs

Final report
Page 60
Volume 3
EASTERN AFRICA
11
Name of KLC
Lakes
Tanganyika
Malawi*
12
Eastern Arc forests*
TZ, KE
13
Ruaha-Rungwa-KituloKipengere
TZ
14
Moyowosi-Kigosi
TZ
15
Nyungwe-Kibira*
RW, BI
16
Imatongs-Kidepo*
SS, UG
17
Lantoto-Garamba*
SS, DRC
*Denotes
and
Countries
TZ, BI, DRC, TZ,
ZM and TZ, MW,
MZ
PAs
Mahale Mountains NP (TZ)
Gombe Stream NP (TZ)
Sumbu NP (ZM)
Lake Malawi WHS/NP (MW)
Udzungwa NP (TZ)
Usambara Mts FRs (TZ)
Pare Mts FRs (TZ)
Ruaha NP
Muhezi GR
Kizigo GR
Rungwa GR
Mbomipa WMA
Umemarua WMA
Kitulo NP
Mpanga Kipengere GR
Mt Rungwe NR
Moyowosi GR
Kigosi GR
Burigi GR
Nyungwe NP (RW)
Kibira NP (BI)
Imatong Central FR (SS)
Agora FR (UG)
Kidepo GR (SS)
Kidepo NP (UG)
Garamba WHS/NP (DRC)
Lantoto NP (SS)
+ contiguous Domaines de Chasses
a TFCA * Denotes a TFCA shared by two regions

Final report
Page 61
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
CENTRAL AFRICA
Western lowland gorilla, an iconic species of the Central African rainforests. An adult male displays in a forest clearing in
Odzala-Koukoua National Park, Congo. Photo Sylvain Gatti & Florence Levrro, CNRS, Station Biologique PaimpontUniversit de Rennes

Final report
Page 1
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
SPECIAL FEATURES OF THE CENTRAL AFRICAN REGION .............................................................................................8

1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
CONSERVATION ISSUES AND CHALLENGES ..................................................................................................................15

2.1
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.2
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.2.3
DIRECT THREATS ............................................................................................................................................................. 15

Unsustainable commerce of wild animal protein ........................................................................................................................... 15
Massive, criminal-organized, international trade in wildlife and ivory ............................................................................................ 16
Habitat loss .................................................................................................................................................................................... 17
Emerging diseases ........................................................................................................................................................................ 20
KEY DRIVERS OF THREATS ............................................................................................................................................... 20

Human population growth and poverty .......................................................................................................................................... 20
Poor governance ............................................................................................................................................................................ 21
National and regional conflict ......................................................................................................................................................... 22
ONGOING CONSERVATION EFFORTS ...............................................................................................................................23

3.1
3.2
MOIST TROPICAL FORESTS ................................................................................................................................................. 9

MOIST FOREST-SAVANNA TRANSITION ZONES .................................................................................................................... 12
EAST SUDANIAN SAVANNAS AND SAHELIAN ACACIA SAVANNAS ........................................................................................... 13
SOUTHERN MIOMBO WOODLANDS ..................................................................................................................................... 14
COMIFAC, CBFP AND ECCAS A REGIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION. ........................................ 23
KEY FUNDING AGENCIES AND CONSERVATION PARTNERS ................................................................................................... 24
LESSONS LEARNED AND PROMISING APPROACHES ....................................................................................................27

4.1
THE BEST REMAINING ASSEMBLAGES OF BIODIVERSITY ARE IN PROTECTED AREAS. .............................................................. 27
4.2
LONG-TERM FUNDING IS ESSENTIAL FOR SUCCESSFUL BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION .......................................................... 27
4.3
A LANDSCAPE APPROACH, INCLUDING TRANSFRONTIER CONSERVATION AREAS, ENHANCES BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION ..... 27
4.4
PARTNERSHIPS WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR OFFER PROMISING MODELS FOR ENHANCING BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION IN
CENTRAL AFRICA.......................................................................................................................................................................... 28
4.5
POLITICAL WILL AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL IS ESSENTIAL FOR EFFECTIVE BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION..................................... 31
4.6
CREATING CONSERVATION CONSTITUENCIES IN FOREST ENVIRONMENTS HAS PROVED CHALLENGING.................................... 31
4.7
CONSERVATION PROJECTS ARE TOO OFTEN DIVERTED FROM THEIR PRINCIPAL MISSION BY BEING EXPECTED TO RESOLVE ALL
THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROBLEMS OF LOCAL COMMUNITIES. ............................................................................................................ 32
4.8
CONSUMPTIVE AND NON-CONSUMPTIVE TOURISM HAVE PROVIDED SOME OF THE BEST COMMUNITY CONSERVATION SUCCESS
STORIES IN CENTRAL AFRICA. ....................................................................................................................................................... 32
4.9
WILDLIFELAW ENFORCEMENT OUTCOMES IMPROVE SIGNIFICANTLY IF THE ENTIRE JUDICIAL PROCESS FROM ARREST TO
PROSECUTION IS CLOSELY MONITORED. ......................................................................................................................................... 33
4.10 LAW ENFORCEMENT ALONE IS NOT A LONG TERM SOLUTION TO THE BUSHMEAT CRISIS. ........................................................ 33
INDICATIVE CONSERVATION ACTIONS / PRIORITY CONSERVATION NEEDS .............................................................33

5.1
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.2
AREAS
5.3
5.4
5.4.1
5.4.2
5.4.3
5.5
IN SITU LONG-TERM SUPPORT TO PROTECTED AREAS IN KEY LANDSCAPES FOR CONSERVATION .......................................... 33
Transfrontier conservation areas (TFCA) ...................................................................................................................................... 36
Other priority KLCs ........................................................................................................................................................................ 41
ENGAGE WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRY TO ENHANCE BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION OUTSIDE PROTECTED
49
TRAINING AND INSTITUTION BUILDING ................................................................................................................................ 49
TACKLING THE BUSHMEAT ISSUE....................................................................................................................................... 49
Reduce the demand for bushmeat................................................................................................................................................. 51
Improve the sustainability of the supply by better management of the resource........................................................................... 52
Create a conducive and enabling institutional and policy environment. ........................................................................................ 52
DISMANTLING WILDLIFE CRIME NETWORKS AND CURBING THE DEMAND ................................................................................ 53
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................................................................55
APPENDIX 1. THE CONGO BASIN FOREST PARTNERSHIP (CBFP) .................................................................................................... 55
APPENDIX 2. LIST OF NONGOVERNMENTAL FUNDERS AND TECHNICAL PARTNERS ACTIVE IN CENTRAL AFRICA..................................... 56

Final report
Page 2
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
List of tables
Table 1. Summary of key features of the Central African KLCs ............................................................................................... 45
List of Figures
Figure 1. Major biomes of the Central African region ................................................................................................................. 8
Figure 2. Mining permits in the TRIDOM landscape (source WWF)......................................................................................... 19
Figure 3. Map of the Greater Virunga TFCA............................................................................................................................. 37
Figure 4. Map of Greater TRIDOM/TNS Transfrontier Conservation Area ............................................................................... 39
Figure 5. Map of the Gamba/Mayumba/Conkouati Transfrontier Conservation Area............................................................... 40
List of Boxes
Box 1. Key elements of the COMFAC Convergence Plan 2015-2025 ..................................................................................... 23
Box 2. African Parks a new model for protected area management ..................................................................................... 29
Box 3. PROGEPP a public private partnership for managing the buffer zone of Nouabal-Ndoki NP .................................. 30
Box 4. The importance of high level political support for conservation ..................................................................................... 31
Box 5. Conservation Security Partnerships - a concept for linking wildlife conservation efforts with efforts to address security
threats to local people .............................................................................................................................................................. 35
Box 6. Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool SMART.......................................................................................................... 35

Final report
Page 3
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
ACRONYMS
AALF
ABC
ADB
AECID
AFD
AFRICOM
ANPN
AWF
BAK
BCI
BIOPAMA
BMZ
CAR
CAFEC
CARPE
CAWHFI
CBFP
CBNRM
CBCSP
CIB
CITES
CI
CIFOF
COMIFAC
DFGF
EAGLE
ECCAS
ECOFAC
EFG
ENF
ERAIFT
FAO
FB
FFI
FFEM
FLEGT
FSC
FTNS
FZS
GEF
GIZ
GIC
GRASP
HGBF
ICCN
INCEF
INTERPOL
IUCN
KfW
KLC
LAGA
LEM
LRA
MAAMA
MECNT
MINEF
MIKE
Appui lApplication de la Loi sur la Faune

Amis des Bonobos du Congo
African Development Bank
Agencia Espanola de Cooperacion Internacional para el Dearrollo (Spain)
Agence Franaise de Dveloppement
United States Africa Command
Agence Nationale des Parcs Nationaux
Biodiversit au Katanga
Bonobo Conservation Initiative
Biodiversity and Protected Areas Management in African, Caribbean and Pacific countries
Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (Germany)
Central African Forest Ecosystem Conservation
Central African Regional Programme for the Environment
Central African World Heritage Forest Initiative
Congo Basin Forest Partnership
Community Based Conservation Security Partnerships
Congolaise Industrielle du Bois (now OLAM)
Convention for the International Trade in Endangered Species
Center for International Forestry Research
Commission des Forts dAfrique Centrale
Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund
Economic Community of Central African States (CEEAC in French)
Programme Rgional de Conservation et Utilisation Rationnelle des Ecosystmes Forestiers dAfrique Centrale
cole de Faune de Garoua (Garoua Wildlife College Cameroon)
cole Nationale des Eaux et Fort du Gabon
cole Rgionale Post-Universitaire d'Amnagement et de Gestion Intgrs des Forts et Territoires Tropicaux
(DRC)
Food and Agriculture Organisation
Fundacion Biodiversidad
Fauna and Flora International
Fonds Franais pour lEnvironnement Mondial
Forest Stewardship Council
Fondation Tri National Sangha (TNS Trust Fund)
Deutsche gesellschaft fr technische Zusammenarbeit (German technical cooperation)
Gilman International Conservation
Great Apes Survival Partnership
Howard G. Buffet Foundation
Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature
International Conservation and Education Fund
International Criminal Police Organization
International Union for Conservation of Nature
Kreditanstalt fr Wiederaufbau (German financial cooperation)
Last Great Ape Alliance
Law Enforcement Monitoring
Lords Resistance Army (a rebel group of Ugandan origin)
Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentcion y Medio Ambiente (Spain)
Ministre de lEnvironnement, Conservation de la Nature et Tourisme
Ministre des Eaux et Forts
Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants

Final report
Page 4
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
MIKES
MIST
MF
NCU
NGO
NTFP
NP
NICFI
OFAC
PALF
PAPECALF
PROGEPP
PREPAN
PNNN
PNKB
PPP
RDC
REDD
RAPAC
RFO
SCAEMPS
SI
SIV
SMART
SSC
SYVBAC
TL2
TNS
TRIDOM
UNESCO
UNODC
UNEP
USAID
USFWS
WHS
WWF
WCS
WCO
WWF
ZSL
ZSM
Minimising the Illegal Killing of Elephants and other Endangered Species

Murray Foundation
National Coordinating Unit
Non-Governmental Organisation
Non Timber Forest Products
National Park
Norways International Climate and Forest Initiative
Central African Forest Observatory
Projet Appui lApplication de la Loi sur la Faune
Plan dAction sous-rgional des Pays de lEspace COMIFAC pour le renforcement de lApplication des
Lgislations nationales sur la Faune sauvage
Projet de Gestion de la Priphrie du Parc National de Nouabal-Ndoki
National Parks Rehabilitation Project (World Bank)
Parc National de Nouabl-Ndoki
Parc National de Kahuzi-Biega
Public Private Partnership
Rpublique Dmocratique du Congo
Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation
Rseau des Aires Protges dAfrique Centrale
Rserve de Faune Okapi (Okapi Wildlife Reserve)
Strengthening Central African Environmental Management and Policy Support
Smithsonian Institute
Simian Immunodefficiency Virus
Self-Monitoring, Analysis and Reporting Technology
Species Survival Commission
SYstme de suivi de la filire Viande de brousse en Afrique Centrale
Tshuapa-Lomami-Lualaba
Tri National Sangha
Trinational Dja Odzala Minkb
United Nations Education, Science and Culture Organisation
United Nations Environment Programme
Agence de coopration des Etats-Unis
World Heritage Site
World Wide Fund for Nature
World Customs Organisation
World Wide Fund for Nature
Zoological Society of London
Zoological Society of Milwaukee

Final report
Page 5
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The strategy is organised into six sections: (0) the overall rationale for the proposed EU strategic approach for wildlife
conservation; (1) an introduction to the wildlife and habitats of Central Africa; (2) a review of challenges, threats and drivers of
threats; (3) a review of ongoing conservation efforts; (4) lessons learnt and promising approaches particularly with respect to
the landscape approach to protected area management, partnerships with the private sector, engagement with local
communities, and law enforcement; (5) indicative conservation actions to achieve long-term wildlife conservation in Central
Africa.
Section (0) sets out the rationale for an EU strategic approach for wildlife conservation in Africa by underlining the hitherto
underappreciated scale of the wildlife crisis in Africa and the fact that with the burgeoning human population pragmatic strategic
choices will have to be made as it will not be possible to conserve everything. Protected areas (PA) must therefore be at the
heart of any strategic approach to wildlife conservation as these are the areas where the most intact assemblages of Africas
wildlife are found.
Section (1) describes the main natural habitats and ecosystems of Central Africa and the status of wildlife in the region. It
describes the moist tropical forests that dominate Central Africa (including the volcanic islands in the Gulf of Guinea), the
biodiversity rich moist forest-savanna transition zones, the sahelian savannas and woodlands to the north of the moist forest
block and the miombo woodlands to the south. The moist forest block is by far the most extensive area of continuous forest in
Africa and contains the planets largest area of swamp forest. The Central African forests are characterised by high levels of
endemism including several iconic species such as 4 sub species of gorillas, bonobos and okapi. They also represent a gigantic
carbon sink and strongly influence local weather patterns. The generally intact nature of vast areas of habitat outside protected
areas in Central Africa, particularly in the moist forest zone, together with the generally low human densities, means that it is
not too late to do something for conservation.
Section (2) reviews long term threats to Central African wildlife. The commercial bushmeat trade is probably the single most
pervasive threat and is leading to defaunation of large tracts of otherwise undisturbed forest (empty forest syndrome). The
commerce is greatly aided by the industrial logging and mining activities which provide easy and rapid access for hunters deep
into the most remote forest blocks. Habitat loss through deforestation, principally from shifting agriculture and fuelwood and
charcoal collection, is a threat although deforestation rates are lower than anywhere else in Africa. Land grabbing for agroindustrial plantations, particularly oil palm, is a growing threat. The most important drivers of these threats are population
growth, poverty and poor governance. Insecurity of land tenure and resource user rights and armed conflict are also important
drivers. Finally insecurity and conflict have plagued the region for decades and have had a devastating effect on capacities to
manage PAs and protect wildlife.
Section (3) reviews ongoing conservation efforts. The Central African Commission for Forests (COMIFAC) and the Congo
Basin Forest Partnership (CBFP) provide the strategic framework for regional cooperation and donor collaboration in Central
Africa. The section reviews the key bi and multi-lateral donors and conservation NGOs operating in Central Africa.
Section (4) reviews lessons learned and promising approaches. The key lesson is that PAs contain the most intact
assemblages of wildlife and biodiversity and that the PAs where biodiversity is being most effectively protected are those that
are receiving long term support from donor agencies and their technical partners. Public Private Partnerships (PPP) for
management of PAs offer good opportunities for strengthening PA management in Central African countries where PA
management capacities are very weak. The landscape approach, targeting groups of PAs and the areas linking them (including
transfrontier conservation areas), significantly enhances conservation outcomes because habitats, particularly in the moist
forest block, remain relatively intact. Promising opportunities exist for partnerships with private sector logging and mining
operators whose concessions cover the majority of the forests linking PAs and who are required to integrate conservation
measures in their legally binding management plans. Building constituencies for conservation among local communities has
proved challenging because forest peoples are highly individualistic in their approach to natural resource use. Insecurity of
land tenure further complicates the situation and contributes to situations of open access to resources resulting in
overexploitation. There are few examples of successful livelihoods programmes that contribute to more sustainable natural
resource use in Central Africa. Furthermore the conservation-linked-to-development paradigm that dominates modern
biodiversity conservation thinking has resulted too often in conservation projects having to address all the socio-economic ills
of populations living around protected areas, despite rarely having either the financial resources or the expertise to do this.
Finally no lasting progress in wildlife conservation can be achieved if there is no political will at the very highest level.
Final report
Page 6
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Section (5) outlines a plan for achieving long term wildlife conservation in Central Africa. Long term support for Key Landscapes
for Conservation (KLC) containing Central Africas most important PAs is the central pillar of the plan since these are the areas
that have the greatest chance of surviving the many pressures on wildlife and natural resources in the coming years. Priority
is given to sites harbouring the most intact assemblages of Central African wildlife. World Heritage Sites (WHS) are also a
priority by virtue of their WHS status which recognizes their global importance for nature conservation, as are sites which are
on the counties Tentative Lists for WHS status or which protect specific globally important features not found elsewhere. In
total some 60 PAs are included in the KLCs identified. Three particularly important KLCs, all of which are also Transfrontier
Conservation Areas (TFCA) are (i) Greater Virunga KLC (overlapping with Eastern Africa region) along the Albertine Rift which
encompasses 11 PAs including 3 WHS, (ii) the Greater TRIDOM-TNS KLC encompassing 14 PAs including 3 WHS, and (iii)
Gamba-Mayumba-Conkouati KLC encompassing 4 PAs. Between them these three KLCs protect a substantial proportion of
Central Africas floral and faunal diversity. They also include most of the priority areas identified in the Action Plans for gorillas
and chimpanzees and encompass the majority of Africas remaining forest elephants, of which Gabon alone probably holds
50%. These large KLCs also offer good opportunities for reinforcing existing, and developing new, public private partnerships
(PPP) for PA management as well as for developing PPPs with the mining and logging sector for wildlife conservation and
sustainable livelihood activities in the intervening buffer zones.
While on-the- job training will always be an important component of support to PAs, the major constraint to effective PA
management is the weakness of the PA management authorities and the absence of career opportunities to encourage
competent conservation practitioners (at all levels) to join the authority and stay with it to make their career. Support for
institutional strengthening and/or reform of national PA authorities should therefore be a strategic priority of this plan.
Actions to dismantle wildlife crime networks are also key components of the plan and should focus on three themes (i) building
collaboration between organizations and agencies; (ii) strengthening law enforcement; (iii) properly penalizing wildlife crime.
COMIFACs regional law enforcement action plan should be supported, as should the important efforts of NGO Wildlife
Enforcement networks.
Lastly the issue of the unsustainable bushmeat trade must be addressed. Although there are no neat solutions to this intractable
problem it cannot be ignored either. Most bushmeat is consumed in urban areas where it is more of a luxury item than for
rural populations where it is more of a food security issue. The plan identifies three areas where action must be taken (i)
reducing the demand for bushmeat including developing alternative sources of protein at a cost similar to bushmeat, (ii)
improving the sustainability of the supply by better management of the resource, (iii) creating a conducive enabling institutional
and policy environment so that local resource users have a secure stake in the resource and an incentive to manage it
sustainably.

Final report
Page 7
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
SPECIAL FEATURES OF THE CENTRAL AFRICAN REGION
Figure 1. Major biomes of the Central African region

Final report
Page 8
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
The Central African region as defined for the purposes of this report comprises 8 countries - Cameroon, Central African
Republic, Chad, Republic of Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon and So Tom e Prncipe.
The moist tropical forest block of what is loosely referred to as the Congo basin, is the dominant feature of the Central African
region in terms of surface area, species richness and diversity, carbon sequestration and influence on climate. The gulf of
Guinea islands of Equatorial Guinea and So Tom e Prncipe also contain small, but biologically important, areas of moist
tropical rainforest. To the north and south of the moist forest block the ecological transitions to woodland and savannas produce
a number of biologically important ecosystems.
1.1
MOIST TROPICAL FORESTS
These forests constitute a vast block of tropical rainforests covering an estimated 1.79 million km of Central Africa 1 and
spanning 6 of the Central African states (Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Central African Republic, Republic of Congo,
and Democratic Republic of Congo) and extending also into small areas of Nigeria and Angola. The forests include a vast
expanse of different types of lowland Congolian rainforests, and much more restricted, and threatened, areas of high
biodiversity Afro-montane forests in the Mount Cameroon area in the west and the Albertine Rift in the east. This vast expanse
of forests is often loosely referred to as the Congo basin, although it in fact covers several watersheds: Congo, Sanaga, Ntem,
Ogoou, Nyanga, Niari and Kouilou, and in the east the Nile watershed. However roughly two thirds of these forests are drained
by the Congo River and 60% of them fall within the DRC.
The moist tropical forests of Central Africa form an essentially uninterrupted forest block, with roughly 80% falling between 300
and 1,000m above sea level2. Average annual rainfall is between 1,600 and 2,000 mm, although along the coasts between
Cameroon and Gabon annual rainfall is much higher (3,000 to 11,000 mm). The cycle of climate changes over the past 2
million years has had a profound influence on the forests of the Congo basin. In response to expansions and contractions of
the polar ice caps, cool dry periods have alternated with warmer, humid periods, causing the forests to shrink and expand.
During dryer periods, the forests were reduced to a series of scattered refuges situated along the Atlantic coastal mountain
ranges, the highlands of eastern DRC, and along the gallery forests and swamps associated with the Congo River. These so
called forest refuges acted as reservoirs of forest species in periods of forest contraction and as the forest fragmented and
expanded, forest and non-forest species were repeatedly intermixed in a kind of evolutionary whirlpool 3. The Okapi, the
DRCs endemic forest giraffe, is a spectacular example of a forest species clearly displaying its savanna origins.
Overall diversity, particularly floral diversity, of the Central African forests is high, though not as high as the Southern African
region. However what makes these forests particularly interesting is that much of the fauna and flora is found nowhere else in
the world and this is true not only at the species level but also at the genus and even family levels. The lowland forests contain
around 10,000 higher plants, of which 30% are endemic (including 9 endemic families), while the afro-montane forests contain
around 4,000 species, of which 70% are endemic (including 2 endemic families) 4. Several endemic and charismatic mammals
occur in the Central African forests including the okapi, bongo, aquatic genet, gorilla (four subspecies) and bonobo and many
of the small primates and forest duikers are also unique to these forests. In addition to the endemic Congo peacock the forests
contain at least 5 bird families endemic to Africa. Amphibian, reptile and fish diversity are also high although all three groups
are relatively poorly known and new species are regularly discovered. In the DRC alone over 1,000 species of freshwater fish
are known. Several of the more charismatic regional endemics are confined to the DRC including the okapi, bonobo, Grauers
gorilla, aquatic genet and Congo peacock and new mammal species are still being discovered in remote areas.
In addition to its importance in terms of species diversity and endemism the Congo basin is one of the last regions in the world
where vast areas of interconnected rainforest allow biological processes to continue undisturbed. Rainforests cover only 13%
of Africas landmass but they account for more than 90% of the carbon stored in the continents terrestrial ecosystems 5. The
Congo basin is therefore a gigantic carbon sink and as such plays a vital role in regulating the planets greenhouse gases.
Lastly it has a dominating influence on local weather patterns since over 50% of the rain that falls on the central Congo basin
1 Mayaux P, Pekel J-F, Descle B, Donnay F, Lupi A, Achard F, Clerici M, Bodart C, Brink A, Nasi R, Belward A. 2013 State and evolution
of the African rainforests between 1990 and 2010. Phil Trans R Soc B 368: 20120300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0300
The Forests of the Congo Basin. State of the Forests 2006 (Chapter 1)
J. Kingdon. 1990. Island Africa. Academic Press.
4R.A.Mittermeier, C. GoettschMittermeier, P Robles Gil, J. Pilgrim, G. Fonesca, T. Brooks & W.R. Konstant. 2002. Wilderness: Earths Last Wild Places.
5 Mayaux P, Pekel J-F, Descle, B, Donnay F, Lupi A, Achard F, Clerici M, Bodart, C, Brink A, Nasi R, Belward A. 2013. State and evolution of the African
rainforests between 1990 and 2010. Phil Trans R Soc B 368: 20120300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0300.
2

Final report
Page 9
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
comes from evaporation and evapo-transpiration from the forest itself6. It is important to underline that average rainfall over
the Congo basin is relatively low (approximately 2,000mm) compared with Amazonia and south east Asia and places it close
to the threshold of dry forests. This means that most, if not all, of the moist forest tree species would likely be lost if rainfall
were to decrease slightly through climate change or extensive forest clearance. With a shift to drier forests fire would start
having a devastating impact on the remaining forests, hydrological regimes would be profoundly affected, and the impact on
human livelihoods in the region would be catastrophic7. The vastness and apparent intactness of the moist tropical forests
of the Congo basin forests therefore belies the extreme precariousness of its existence.
Specific features of the Central African moist forests to be highlighted include:
The Congolian Atlantic coastal forests have exceptionally high levels of species richness and endemism in all taxonomic
groups, particularly birds, amphibians and reptiles. These forests contain a number of Pleistocene refuges areas which
remained forest covered during the periodic expansions and retractions of the forest block over geological times and where
forest species probably survived the dry periods to colonize the new forests in succeeding wet periods. The Monts de CristalMonte Aln range, spanning eastern Equatorial Guinea and western Gabon, and Mont Doudou in southern Gabon, rise to
altitudes in excess of 1,000m and are of particular importance for plant diversity and endemism. The Monts de Cristal has over
3,000 species of vascular plant, of which over 100 are strict endemics. Species richness of forest mammals is also exceptional.
The highly restricted range of the sun tailed monkey, a species endemic to Gabon and only discovered in 1984, covers this
eco-region. Globally important populations of gorillas, chimpanzee and forest elephant are also found within these forests.
Other important larger mammals include the mandrill, black colobus, bongo and several forest duikers.
A vast area of inland and coastal wetlands, and pockets of Central African mangroves, is also located within this eco-region.
The delta of the Ogoou River in Gabon is Africas second largest delta after the Niger 8. Covering over 5,000km of flooded
forests, swamps, lagoons, lakes and mangroves, this is one of 9 Ramsar sites in Gabon and of huge importance for wildlife,
particularly fish (both freshwater and marine), birds and other aquatic vertebrates such as manatee, hippo and Africas three
species of crocodile. The area contains pockets of Central African mangroves. Another unique feature of this area is the fact
that elephants, gorillas, chimpanzees, hippo, forest buffalo and Nile crocodile can often be observed on the beaches on the
Gabon coast. These beaches are also among the worlds most important for nesting of marine turtles, particularly leatherbacks.
The central portion of these forests, particularly the part in Gabon, has one of the lowest human population densities in Africa.
Nevertheless human activities in the form of industrial logging are widespread. Essentially all forests outside of protected areas
have been attributed as logging concessions. Commercial hunting for the bushmeat trade is also widespread and protected
species are often openly on sale in urban markets. Onshore oil exploitation in the coastal area is also a threat to biodiversity.
There are 9 IUCN category I to IV PAs in these forests (2 in Equatorial Guinea, 6 in Gabon, 1 in Congo) covering more than
27,000 km (18% of the eco-region).
Moist forests of the Gulf of Guinea islands. The Gulf of Guinea islands comprising Bioko, Prncipe, So Tom and Annobon
form an arc of volcanic islands reaching out 750 km into the Atlantic Ocean. Uninterrupted moist forest formations from sea
level to over 3,000m are found on the islands. Because of their long separation from mainland continental Africa (Prncipe
emerged from the ocean some 17 million years ago 9) species have evolved that are unique to these islands. So Tom and
Prncipe have over 20 endemic bird species and Bioko has 2 Important Bird Areas - IBA (Luba crater and Basil peak). Bioko
also has 5 endemic subspecies of primate. The volcanic origin of these mountains gives them rich soils. The rugged landscapes
of these volcanic islands are particularly spectacular. The beaches of the islands are important nesting areas for marine turtles,
the remote southern shore of Bioko island being particularly important for leatherback, green and olive Ridley turtles.
There are 5 IUCN category I to IV PAs (Bioko 2, Prncipe 1, So Tom 1 and Annobon 1) on the 4 islands covering
approximately 1,260 km.
Montane forests of west Cameroon and the Albertine Rift. The montane forests and afro-alpine formations on Mount
Cameroon and the Cameroon highlands in the west and the Albertine Rift in the east are areas of particularly high biodiversity
and levels of endemism. For example 42 plant species, and 3 genera, are strictly endemic to Mt Cameroon (where annual
rainfall attains >10,000mm locally). Exceptionally large numbers of endemic animal species occur in all taxonomic groups. For
example along the Albertine Rift 30 bird and 25 mammal endemics are known. The Virunga National Park in eastern DRC
encapsulates the unique biodiversity of the Albertine Rift with an uninterrupted gradient of biotopes from 700m asl to afroalpine meadows and glaciers on the summit of the Ruwenzori range at just over 5,000m over a horizontal distance of little
6A.
Hoare. 2007. Clouds on the Horizon: The Congo Basins Forests and Climate Change. Rainforest Foundation report. 27pp.
Forests of the Congo Basin. State of Forests, 2008.(Chapter 10)
8 Vande weghe, 2007. Loango, Mayumba et le Bas Ogoou. Gabon Parks.
9 Gulf of Guinea Biodiversity Project http://researcharchive.calacademy.org/research/guinea_islands/
7The

Final report
Page 10
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
more than 25kms. No other area in Africa has such a wide altitudinal span of natural habitats. In an area representing only
0.3% of the total surface area of the DRC the Virunga NP is home to over half of the DRCs mammal species and two thirds
of its bird species.
However, throughout Central Africa, montane forests have been reduced to relicts by intense human activity since these areas
are coveted for agriculture and livestock. The highest human densities of the Central African region are found in these regions
(>400 inhabitants/km locally along the Albertine Rift). In the Cameroon highlands there are a large number of very small forest
reserves which are not well protected. Korup NP (1,295 km) is the only category I-IV protected area in the Cameroon
highlands. Along the Albertine Rift only parts of Virunga NP and Kahuzi-Biega NP (both World Heritage Sites in Danger) protect
these important forests.
Congolian swamp forests. This is one of the largest areas of swamp forest on the planet10 covering some 200,375km. The
Congolian swamp forests are located in the heart of the Congo basin along the middle reaches of the Congo River and along
its northern tributaries (Likouala, Sangha, Likouala-aux-herbes, Oubangui) and southern tributaries (Lomami, Tschuapa, Loile).
While displaying relatively low species richness and diversity they are nevertheless of high importance in terms of endemism.
They are very important for fish diversity and are vital breeding areas for many species. They also play a central role in the
regulation of water flows across the Congo basin. Surveys in northern Congo11 in the early 90s showed that the presence of
Raphia palms in the Likouala-aux-Herbes swamps support high populations of gorillas year round, and attract forest elephant
in the dry season. The swamp forests of Lac Tumba-Lediima Reserve also support populations of bonobo12. Contrary to what
might be expected the swamp forests are not inaccessible to poachers. In some areas of the swamps in northern Congo a
dense network of dugout canoe channels in the swamps is maintained by local hunters which enable them to penetrate far into
the forest and silently approach the non-inundated patches of forest where mammals tend to concentrate. Furthermore that
fact that they are in dugout canoes means that they can transport larger loads of bushmeat than if they were on foot.
With the exception of a very small area along the Loile River in Salonga NP, none of these important forests lie within IUCN
category I to IV PAs. However the Lac TlLikouala aux Herbes Community Reserve in Congo (4,525 km) lies wholly within
this forest type, as does approximately half (3,500km) of the Lac Tumba-Lediima Reserve in DRC.
Central Congolian lowland forests cover a vast area (c. 430,000 km) to the south of the great arc of the Congo River and
are entirely restricted to the DRC. They cover almost the entire range of the bonobo13, a species of great ape that is endemic
to the DRC. A network of large rivers functions as distribution barriers to many species, thereby isolating this lowland basin
along its northern, eastern and western limits. Because of the relatively flat topography of the area, most of these rivers are
slow flowing with heavy sediment loads, and numerous alluvial islands. Many of the soils are nutrient poor oxisols developed
over ancient dune fields.
The central Congolian lowland forests, dominated by species from the leguminous Caesalpiniaceae family, are less floristically
diverse than other areas of the Congo basin but 10% of the species are thought to be endemic. Vertebrate species richness
and endemism is also lower than in other parts of the Congo basin, perhaps because the river barriers have prevented
interchange of species from other ecoregions. On the other hand these barriers have meant that several mammal species,
including several small primates, are endemic to the areas of forest to which they are confined by the river network. Selected
examples are the recently described lesula monkey (between the Tschuapa and Lomami Rivers), the Salonga guenon
(between the Lua and Lopori rivers) and Thollons red Colobus (between the Lomami and Congo rivers). In 2014 a probable
new species of monkey, the Inoka, was discovered between the Lomami and Congo Rivers 14.
Only one category I-IV PA is located in these forests (Salonga NP, 36.000km - a World Heritage Site in Danger) but several
other protected areas (Tumba-Lediima, Lomako-Lokolala, Sankuru) are also located in this eco-region, as is the future Lomami
NP.
Northwestern and Northeastern Congolian lowland forests have high levels of species richness and endemism and cover
the core area of the lowland gorilla and western chimpanzee distribution. Mammalian richness is among the highest of any
forest region in Africa and primate species richness is the highest in Africa. Cameroon has 29 species of primate and Gabon
19. The Okapi Wildlife Reserve (DRC) alone has 17 primate species. These forests contain the last strongholds of forest
elephant, particularly in the transfrontier area of Gabon, Cameroon, Congo and CAR. A particularly important feature of these
weghe, 2004.Forests of Central Africa. Man and Nature. ECOFAC Lanoo.
Blake, S., Rogers, E., Fay, J.M., Ngangoue, M., Ebeke, G. 1995. Swamp gorillas in northern Congo. Afr. J. Ecol. 33: 285-290
12IUCN & ICCN (2012).Bonobo (Pan paniscus): Conservation Strategy 20122022. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group & Institut
Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature. 65 pp.
13 The bonobo range also extends into the northern part of the southern Congolian forest savanna mosaic in the southern extremity of the future Lomami NP
(IUCN & ICCN (2012). Bonobo (Pan paniscus): Conservation Strategy 20122022. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group & Institut
14 Searching for Bonobos in Congo http://www.bonoboincongo.com/maps/
10Vande
11

Final report
Page 11
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
forests, particularly the northwestern forests, is the presence of hundreds of forest clearings or bais as they are known locally.
These bais usually have mineral licks which attract large numbers of large mammals including forest elephant, buffalo,
sitatunga, bongo, bush pig, giant forest hog, gorillas, chimpanzees. They often have water sources and the sedges and other
aquatic vegetation provide an important food source for gorillas and ungulates.
The forest clearings are also important sites for social interactions for many of the species that visit them, particularly the forest
elephant. In areas relatively undisturbed by human activities the bais are linked by a dense network of heavily used trails,
known as elephant boulevards, which may cover many hundreds of kilometers.
These forests have, until recently, been relatively inaccessible and have therefore remained largely free of human activities.
However the situation has changed very rapidly over the past 20 years. Almost all of the northwestern forests are covered by
active, or soon to be active, industrial logging concessions. The dense network of logging roads has opened up the forest for
immigrants in search of employment and forest resources, particularly bushmeat. Several very large industrial mining
concessions (iron, cobalt, nickel) are also starting up and these will also attract thousands of people into these hitherto low
populated areas. Gold deposits, some of which are of exceptionally high quality, are also found all over these forests. Most of
the gold mining is artisanal and unregulated but attracts very large numbers of people. The majority of Central Africas forest
elephants are found in the northwestern forests but they are being heavily targeted by gangs of poachers with links to criminal
networks operating from within, and outside, the Central African region.
There are 15 category I-IV protected areas in these forests covering a total of 74,100 km, approximately 11% of the
Northeastern and Northwestern Congolian forests. The northern part of Virunga NP also covers some of this forest type. Three
of Central Africas six moist forest World Heritage sites occur within these forests (Dja Reserve, Tri National Sangha - TNS,
Okapi Wildlife Reserve) although Dja and Okapi are on the World Heritage in Danger List.
Large numbers of forest elephant, forest buffalo, bongo and sitatunga share the mineral rich Dzanga bai in the CAR section of
the Tri National Sangha World Heritage Site.
Photo Tom Aveling
1.2
MOIST FOREST-SAVANNA TRANSITION ZONES

Final report
Page 12
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
These transition zones are almost as extensive as the moist tropical forests. To the north of the rainforest block the forests
give way to the Northern Congolian forest savanna mosaic, a biologically interesting transition zone where plant and animals
species characteristic of both the rainforests and savannas occur (chimpanzee, bongo, giant forest hog, hyena, lion, etc). With
their characteristically diverse habitat types, forest savanna mosaics support a high proportion of eco-tonal habitats, which
have high species richness and have probably been important centers for differentiation and speciation. Gallery forests are the
dominant forest type in this zone and this is where the typical rainforest species are mainly found. Further north the forest
savanna mosaic gives way to relatively moist wooded grasslands with typically woodland/savanna species such as giant eland,
northern white rhino (now extinct), black rhino (only a few individuals remain), giraffe, roan, hartebeest, lion. In Garamba NP
the elephants show morphological characteristics of both the forest and savanna species.
A similar transition to forest savanna mosaic occurs all along the southern flank of the Congo basin rainforest block. The Batk
plateaus, comprising grasslands and lightly wooded savannas overlaying deep Kalahari sands, extend northwards into the
south eastern part of the moist forest block (Figure 1).
Because of their relative accessibility the main threats to the forest-savanna transition zones come from subsistence
agriculture, hunting and competition for grazing and water-point access by large domestic herds of livestock. Artisanal gold
panning is widespread in these areas and causes locally high levels of habitat disturbance, especially in the biodiversity-rich
gallery forests along water courses.
Category I-IV PAs in the northern forest savanna transition zone include Mbam and Djerem NP, Benou NP and Faro NP
(Cameroon), Garamba NP (DRC) and Zemongo WR (CAR). However the vast complex of the Bili-Uere hunting domains
(category VI, 33,000km) in northern DRC also covers this transition zone. Three category I-IV PAs occur in the transition zone
to the south of the moist forest block: the southern tip of the future Lomami NP (DRC), and in the Batk plateaus the Plateaux
Batk NP (Gabon) and Lefini WR (Congo).
1.3
EAST SUDANIAN SAVANNAS AND SAHELIAN ACACIA SAVANNAS
In the Central African region these habitat types are found in CAR, Cameroon and Chad. The climate is very hot and dry and
during the dry season most of the trees lose their leaves and the grasslands dry up and burn extensively. There is low faunal
endemism because the area is so vast and continuous but is quite important in terms of plant endemism. Roughly one third of
the 2,700 plant species in the east Sudanian savannas are endemic. Animal species typical of the Sudanian savannas are
elephant, lion, cheetah, wild dog, roan antelope and giant eland. Further north, in the drier Sahelian Acacia savannas, many
mammal species have been hunted to extinction or near extinction. Species typical of this region include the scimitar-horned
oryx (extinct in the wild15), dama gazelle, dorcas gazelle, and red-fronted gazelle. Endangered predators such as wild dog,
cheetah and lion, were all also present and common, but have now been extirpated over most of the ecoregion. The elimination
of wildlife over such a large area was facilitated by modern hunting methods rifles and four-wheel drive vehicles and
exacerbated by civil disturbance, poor law enforcement and competition for grazing and water-point access with large herds
of domestic livestock.
The original wooded savanna and Acacia bushland habitats have been greatly altered over thousands of years, through longterm climatic changes and, more recently, through anthropogenic effects (herding, subsistence agriculture, fuel wood, fire).
Climatic desiccation is a further threat, exacerbating the impacts of human activities, as the ability of the ecosystem to recover
from overuse is reduced when there is little rainfall. In the past there were substantial populations of large mammalian
herbivores, which would have grazed and browsed the vegetation. The remaining blocks of intact habitat are found mainly in
the protected areas. In other areas the habitat is often degraded, but is extensive and relatively continuous in sparsely
populated areas.
In the 60s and 70s the area of northern CAR was sometimes referred to as the Serengeti of Central Africa because of the
vast numbers of large mammals that the habitat supported. However decades of poaching, and incursions by large herds of
domestic livestock (in many cases owned by influential and wealthy individuals) from Sudan and Chad16, have reduced wildlife
numbers to very low levels. Long term conflict in southern Sudan, CAR and Chad has also prevented effective conservation in
this area. Elephants have been particularly targeted in southern Sudan, northern CAR, northern Cameroon and southern Chad
by Sudanese poachers and armed militia. For example the slaughter of elephants in Chads Zakouma NP between 2006 and
2008 resulted in a catastrophic population decline from 4,500 to 450 individuals17. Similarly over a six week period in 2012 in
15
IUCN Red Data List http://www.iucnredlist.org
16The
flood plains of the Gounda River in the Manovo-Gounda-St Floris World Heritage Site offer particularly rich grazing for pastoralists
from Sudan and Chad who now occupy the zone year round. The cattle raised here are used to supply meat markets as far afield as Nigeria.
It is important to underline that over 25 years of conservation investment in this park by the EC from the late 80s had resulted in a spectacular recovery of
all wildlife in this park, and with the exception of the elephants, wildlife populations remain very healthy in Zakouma. This illustrates the fact that elephant
poaching is a special issue requiring a series of highly specialized and targeted actions.
17

Final report
Page 13
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Bouba-Ndjida NP in northern Cameroon at least half of the parks elephants were slaughtered by a highly organized band of
Sudanese poachers18.
Chad has several large category I-IV PAs totaling 120,000km although the only one that is managed adequately is Zakouma
NP. In CAR the complex of Wildlife Reserves, Hunting Domains and National Parks centered around the Manovo-GoundaSaint-Floris and Bamingui-Bangoran National Parks cover 80,000km but most are not effectively managed because of
recurring conflict in the region (Manovo-Gounda-St Floris is a World Heritage Site in Danger). In fact, until the recent conflict
overwhelmed to country, the areas where the best populations of wildlife remain in the savanna areas of CAR were in areas
managed for sport hunting. The Chinko-Mbari watershed adjacent to the Zemongo Wildlife Reserve, covering over 80,000km,
in the east of CAR still contains a surprisingly complete representation of the wildlife characteristic of this ecosystem thanks to
protection provided by professional safari hunters19.
1.4
SOUTHERN MIOMBO WOODLANDS
Spread throughout Central and Southern Africa, the southern miombo woodlands extend over a vast area. In the Central
African region they extend across the south of the DRC from the Zambian border to Angola. These woodlands are floristically
rich, dominated by slow growing leguminous tree species with a canopy height of up to 15m. Grasses cover the ground under
the trees and they burn in the dry season. Miombo is thus a fire-adapted habitat. Soils are generally poor which means that
miombo woodland plants tend to be difficult to digest for
mammals, thus favoring low densities of bulk feeding
mega-herbivores such as elephant and black rhino (now
extinct in Central Africa). Miombo woodlands are also
typically rich in termite species and mushrooms, both of
which provide important sources of food for local
populations. Although vast in extent the Central African
miombo woodlands are in fact threatened by agriculture
and fuel wood cutting, particularly as they are so slow to
regenerate. The high plateaus of the Katanga region of
southern DRC, covered by miombo woodland and
grasslands, give rise to several large rivers that feed into
the Congo River. They therefore play a vital role in the
provision of a regulated supply of clean water. The
Katanga plateaus also provide spectacular landscapes
with high tourist potential. The 380m high Kaloba falls on
the Lofoi River in Kundelungu NP are the highest in
Africa.
Only two national parks, Kundelungu and Upemba
(DRC), totaling 21,400 km, protect the Central African
miombo woodlands in Central Africa.
The 380 m high Kaloba falls on the Lofoi River in the
miombo woodlands of Kundelungu NP, DRC, are the
highest in Africa. Photo M. Bostroem.
18http://www.ifaw.org/united-states/news/elephant-population-halved-cameroon-killing-spree-graphic-images
19http://www.chinkoproject.com/

Final report
Page 14
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
In this section the direct threats to biodiversity, and the key drivers of these threats, are presented.
2.1
DIRECT THREATS
2.1.1
Unsustainable commerce of wild animal protein20
The massive scale of the commercial bushmeat trade across Central Africa is leading to impoverishment of vast areas of rain
forest, and local extinctions of many species, particularly the medium and large bodied species (the empty forest syndrome).
Estimates of the scale of the Central African bushmeat trade indicate that up to 4.5 million tons of bushmeat are extracted
annually from the Central African forests with an estimated value of up to 205 million $US annually. A very wide variety of taxa
are hunted (mammals, birds, reptiles). Mammals make up the bulk of the catches in terms of number and biomass, with
ungulates and rodents representing two thirds of the carcasses sold in urban markets. Large bodied species are hunted where
they are present (ie in recently exploited forest) but these soon disappear after which catches are dominated by smaller species
such as brush tailed porcupines, pouched rat, and blue duiker. Monkeys are hunted in large numbers in many areas but as
shotguns are required to kill them, the cost of the cartridges often outweighs the financial return for the hunter. However
cartridges and firearms are often supplied by corrupt officials and where this happens the financial returns make monkey
hunting worthwhile. For terrestrial species the overwhelming method of hunting is with steel wire snares, a commodity that is
widely and cheaply available in the form of brake cables for bicycles. This method is extremely wasteful since it is unselective
in what it catches and also many carcasses decay before hunters return to check their traps. Typically hunters will lay up to
several hundred traps on a hunting trip. Hunters do not distinguish between protected and non-protected species they will
take whatever they find in their traps. In heavily hunted areas protected species, which are often larger bodied ones, disappear
first. Larger-bodied longer-lived species with low intrinsic rates of population increase such as elephants, apes, other large
primates, carnivores and large antelopes are less resistant to intensive hunting than species with high intrinsic rates of
population increase such as rodents and small to medium sized ungulates. Primates and carnivores are extremely vulnerable.
However some species, such as the blue duiker, are particularly resistant to hunting pressure and can maintain their population
levels even under quite high hunting intensity levels.
There is increasing evidence of overfishing in many of the inland waters of Central Africa. This is particularly evident in Lake
Edouard (Virunga NP)21 where open access to the resource, and the involvement of powerful middle men in the trade, is
depriving local fishing communities of their livelihoods. Forest people in Central Africa often naturally alternate between
bushmeat and fish as a function of seasons and availability, but as bushmeat supplies diminish there will be a tendency to
increase consumption of fish, leading to overfishing. Evidence of this is already occurring in the town of Mambasa in DRC (in
the moist forest region near the Okapi Wildlife Reserve) where increasing quantities of fish from the Great Lakes region to the
east, (including Lake Edouard) are being consumed.
The loss of wildlife from forest ecosystems disrupts ecological processes and reduces biodiversity. Plant diversity and
regeneration is often dependent on the presence of specific animal species or groups of species for pollination and seed
dispersal. The disappearance of keystone species at the top of the food chain and/or important seed dispersers (elephants,
apes, large carnivores, crocodiles, raptors, etc) is likely to have a disproportionate impact on the ecosystem. Central African
hunting systems are biased towards heavy offtakes of seed-dispersing frugivorous mammals - over 70% of animals in an
average village hunting offtake have a seed dispersal role 22.
Although per capita bushmeat consumption in urban areas is lower than in rural areas, the vast majority of the bushmeat is
consumed in urban areas because that is where the majority of the people in forested Central Africa lives (levels of urbanization
vary from 34% in DRC to 86% in Gabon23). Furthermore the contribution of urban areas to the overall bushmeat consumption
is likely to continue increasing as the population of Central African countries continues to urbanize.
Bushmeat is a much needed source of protein in rural areas where there is generally very little availability of meat from domestic
livestock. When wild fish is available it can outweigh the importance of bushmeat in the diet of forest dwellers, who will readily
switch from one to the other according to availability. In urban areas there is greater availability of alternative meats sources
but where meat alternatives are more expensive than bushmeat (eg Kisangani, Bangui) the poorer households will tend to opt
20Principal
source of information concerning bushmeat for this section: R. Nasi, A. Taber and N. Van Vliet. 2011. Empty forest, empty stomachs ? Bushmeat
and livelihoods in Congo and the Amazon basin. International Forestry Review, vol 13.
21 Aveling, C. Debonnet, G, and Oudraogo, P. 2014. Rapport de Mission. Mission de suivi ractif de lEtat de Conservation du parc national des Virunga,
Rpublique dmocratique du Congo (RDC) de 07 au 14 mars 2014. UNESCO, IUCN, RAMSAR.
22 Abernethy KA, Coad L, Taylor G, Lee ME, Maisels F. 2013. Extent and ecological consequences of hunting in Central African rainforests in the twenty-first
century. Phil Trans R Soc B 368: 20130494. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0494
23 https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2212.html

Final report
Page 15
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
for bushmeat. However in the larger cities of Equatorial Guinea, Gabon and Cameroon where there is more wealth, bushmeat
is more of a luxury product rather than a protein necessity.
Although bushmeat is primarily used by rural populations for basic subsistence needs most families will also hunt to supplement
their incomes. Bushmeat is often seen as a buffer to see families through hard times (crop failure, unemployment) or to gain
income for special needs (funerals, school fees, weddings) and this safety net is particularly important for the more vulnerable
members of the community. However the commercial trade is undoubtedly the primary driver of the increasing levels of
bushmeat off take in Central Africa.
A large amount of bushmeat trade occurs across borders in Central Africa but there is also a significant international trade
outside of the region.
andcriminal-organized,
crocodile, both protected
species, ontrade
sale in
bush
meat market, Gabon. The increasingly
2.1.2Chimpanzee
Massive,
international
inLambarene
wildlife and
ivory
widespread phenomenon of open access to natural resources is leading to impoverishment of wildlife populations through
Photos S. Louembet
(left)
& C.
(right)
overhunting
the bushmeat
trade. range states poaching for ivory has dramatically
Like almost
all theforother
African elephant
intensified
over
theAveling
past decade.
Central African elephants are particularly sought after by poachers because the ivory from forest elephants is denser than that
of savanna elephants and preferred by ivory carvers in Asia. The Central African forests are also prized hunting areas because
it is difficult to detect and arrest poachers in the forest environment, and poor governance and lack of resources and political
will result in very ineffective law enforcement.
Most of the ivory poached is smuggled out of Central Africa and finally ends up in Asia where the price is so high that well
organized criminal networks are now involved in the entire chain from the African forest to the illegal and legal markets in
China. Actors in the criminal networks are numerous and varied including corrupt law enforcement, customs and administrative
officers in range states, armed militia and rebel groups and diverse African (often west African) and Asian middle men. Ivory
is smuggled out of the Central African states in various directions overland to Sudan (Khartoum), by air, land and sea to west
African capitals acting as transit points (Togo, Nigeria, Guinea Bissau, Senegal) for the Far East, or overland to the east African
ports of Mombasa and Dar es Salaam.
The increasing involvement of armed militia and rebel groups in the organized poaching of elephants is a particular concern
because of its implications for national security. Several such cases have been documented in Central Africa. The Lords
Resistance army is involved in elephant poaching in Garamba NP (DRC) 24 to fund its brutal campaign, and Sudanese militia
were responsible for the slaughter of elephants in Bouba-Ndjida NP in northern Cameroon in 2013. The involvement of rogue
elements of the national armed forces is widespread. Their involvement ranges from doing the poaching themselves, to
supplying weapons and ammunition to poachers, to providing protection for the transport of the ivory. High tech resources are
often deployed. For example the Ugandan Army is suspected of having used its helicopters to poach elephants in Garamba
NP25. Also kidnapped children who have escaped from the LRA attest to the fact that helicopters (of undetermined origin)
regularly landed at their camps to collect ivory.
Elephant populations have declined dramatically all over their range in Central Africa. A paper published in April 201326
analyzed all available survey data for Central African forest elephants between 2002 and 2012 and concluded that there had
been a 62% decline. In the savannas and woodlands to the north and south of the rainforest block intense poaching over many
years has reduced elephant populations to very low levels, and has extirpated them from large areas. Large scale slaughters
K. Agger & J. Huston. 2013. Konys Ivory : How Elephant Poaching in Congo Helps Support the Lords Resistance Army. !Enough. www.enoughproject.org
Ugandan Army Antonov helicopter was photographed in Garamba NP in April 2012 in the vicinity of a site where 15 elephants had just been killed with a
single bullet through the top of the skull, and the ivory taken. The registration number of the helicopter was recorded and the Ugandan Army has so far failed
to provide an explanation as to what the helicopter was doing so far into Congolese territory.
26Maisels F, Strindberg S, Blake S, Wittemyer G, Hart J, et al. (2013) Devastating Decline of Forest Elephants in Central Africa. PLoS ONE 8(3): e59469.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059469
24
25A

Final report
Page 16
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
of elephants have been recorded in Zakouma NP, Bouba Ndjida NP and the north of the CAR. As elephant populations have
declined around the edges of the rainforest block poachers have moved deeper and deeper into the forested areas. Despite
having 60% of Central Africas rainforests the DRC now has only 19 % of its remaining forest elephants. WCS estimated DRCs
forest elephant population at 19,000 individuals in 2011. The last remaining stronghold for forest elephants is now the transborder area between northeastern Gabon, south west Cameroon, northern Congo and south western CAR (the TRIDOM and
TNS landscapes) an area containing 12 national parks totaling some 250,000 km.
However even this area is now under intense pressure. For example a survey conducted by ANPN, WCS and WWF 27 showed
that Minkb NP in Gabon, regarded as the park with one of the highest elephant populations in Central Africa, lost between
16,000 and 20,000 elephants between 2004 and 2012, much of this ivory going out through Cameroon.
Gabon is the only remaining Central African country where elephants occur throughout the territory and is home to an estimated
40,000 to 64,000 elephants, about half the remaining forest elephants in Africa.
In the transition zone and in the savannas and woodlands to the north of the rainforest block, remaining elephant populations
are isolated to scattered pockets, mainly in and around the following protected areas: Zakouma NP (Chad), Bouba Ndjida and
Waza NPs (Cameroon), Garamba NP (DRC) and Zemongo WR (CAR). In the transition zone Garamba NP (DRC) has between
1,500 and 2,000 elephants28, Mbam et Djerem NP (Cameroon) still contains an estimated 1,000 elephants, while in the BiliGangu sector of the vast Bili-Uere complex in north-central DRC numbers have declined dramatically and are currently
estimated at 650 individuals29.
Many other wildlife species and products are traded in Central Africa. There is a large and poorly regulated international trade
in grey parrots throughout Central Africa and the trade is clearly unsustainable 30. Illegal trading of pangolin scales, mainly for
the Asian market, is widespread. There is also a local, but large scale, trade in fruit pigeons in DRC. In both cases bais are the
preferred location for catching these species as they visit them in large numbers and can be caught quite easily with nets or
natural glues smeared over lures.
2.1.3
Habitat loss
Forest degradation, deforestation and forest fragmentation are important direct threats to wildlife and biodiversity in Central
Africa. Deforestation leads to total loss of biodiversity, while habitat fragmentation negatively affects gene flows and ecological
processes both of which ultimately result in biodiversity impoverishment.
Annual net deforestation rates31 across the Congo basin are lower than in Amazonia and South East Asia but are accelerating.
Net deforestation for the period 1990-2000 was 0.09% and rose to 0.17% for the period 2000-200532. Net annual deforestation
was highest in DRC with 0.11% for 1990-2000 and 0.22%33 for 2000-2005. Congo had the next highest net deforestation rate
(0.07% for 2000-2005) while Gabons net rate for this period was zero. An assessment of forest degradation between 2000
and 2010 in the DRC published in 201334 reports a loss of 1.02% of primary forest cover due to clearing and predicts that
degradation of intact forests could increase up to two-fold over the next decade.
The key agents of habitat loss and impoverishment in Central Africa are shifting (slash and burn) agriculture, fuelwood
collection and charcoal. Fragmentation is also caused by industrial logging and mining with their associated road and rail
infrastructures, agro-industrial plantations (with oil palm plantations becoming an increasingly important threat) and hydroelectric dams. Competition for grazing and access to water points by domestic livestock herds also causes habitat
impoverishment in the moist forest-savanna transition zones and is often associated with the killing of wildlife, particularly large
carnivores.
Shifting agriculture
This type of agriculture has been part of the ecosystem for centuries but it becomes a problem when fallow periods are
shortened as the human population grows and more land is required for production. Shorter fallow periods lead to a decline in
tree regeneration, soil fertility and agricultural yield. In Central Africa shifting agriculture is most intense along main roads, near
27ANPN,
WCS & WWF (2013) Wildlife and poaching assessment in northeast Gabon. 23pp. Report.
Bolans, N.C. 2012. Aerial animal census 2012. Garamba National Park, DRC. April and May 2012. ICCN/ANP report.
29 Hart, J. 2014. Summary of elephant surveys in North Central DRC 2007-2013. Lukuru Wildlife Research Foundation. Draft report submitted to AfEDB, sept
2014.
30 http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/sowb/casestudy/568
31 Net deforestation is the difference between gross deforestation and gross reforestation. Under the current climatic conditions natural reforestation occurs in
Central Africa when habitat is left undisturbed by humans.
32 The Forests of the Congo Basin. State of the Forests 2010.Chapter 1.
33Gross annual deforestation in DRC from 2000-2005 was 0.32%.
34 Zhuravleva, I., Turubanova, S., Potapov, P., Hansen, M., Tyukavina, A., Minnemeyer, S., Laporte, N., Goetz, S., Verbelen, F., and Thies, C. (2013). Satellitebased primary forest degradation assessment in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 20002010. Environmental Research Letters, 8, 024034.
28

Final report
Page 17
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
villages and on the outskirts of urban centers. The problem is exacerbated by the rapid expansion of the road network,
particularly by industrial logging (see below).
Fuelwood and charcoal
Fuelwood and charcoal represent 90% of all wood removal from the forests of Africa35. Fuelwood is the main energy source
for over 80% of people in Central Africa, and its consumption is expected to continue to grow in the coming decades 36 (indeed
Africa is the only continent where fuelwood consumption will continue to rise). In the DRC 94% of total round wood production
is for fuelwood, compared with 24% for Gabon. Peri-urban forests play a key role in providing fuelwood and charcoal, so
deforestation and biodiversity loss are highest in these areas. In Kinshasa, a city of over 7 million inhabitants, the halo of
deforestation from charcoal extraction extends for up to 200km from the city, but a significant proportion of its charcoal comes
from even further afield - by river over distances of up to 1,000km.
Industrial logging
Most of Central Africas rainforests are being, or will be, selectively logged. Logging is generally selective for high value species
with average extraction rates at between 2 and 6 trees per hectare. In addition to the direct forest loss caused by the extraction
of trees (secondary damage from felling and extraction) forest is lost for the construction of roads, sawmills and logging camps.
Soil erosion, water pollution and reduction of the regeneration capacity also occur. Logging also removes nutrients and
escalates forest fragmentation. The extensive network of roads created by logging activities also allows people to move into
the forest to settle, and opens up vast new areas for hunters.
Industrial mining and oil extraction
Africa contains one third of global mineral resources. The subsurface strata of the Congo basin contain very important oil and
mineral resources. Several of the worlds largest iron ore deposits are found in the TRIDOM landscape (Cameroon-GabonCongo transfrontier zone) (Figure 2). Other minerals present in the landscape include of cobalt, nickel, copper, manganese,
platinum, silver, uranium, zinc, lead, gold and diamonds. Key iron-ore deposits that are being, or will soon be, exploited are
Belinga (Gabon), Mbalam, Nkout (Cameroon), Nabeba, Letioukbala, Avima, Badondo (Congo).The Belinga and Mbalam
deposits are estimated at 1 billion tons each. They are among the largest in the world, and the ore has exceptionally high iron
content. To exploit the Mbalam deposit a 500 km railway line to Kribi on the Cameroon coast is planned. The capital cost of
the Mbalam project over 25 years is currently estimated at 4.7 billion $US. To exploit Belinga an extension to the transgabonese railway is planned and the construction of a hydroelectric dam on the Ivindo river has also been considered. This
would severely impact the Ivindo NP, a potential World Heritage Site, with its spectacular series of rapids and waterfalls at
Koungou.
35
36
The Forests of the Congo Basin. State of Forests. 2010. Chapter 4.

The Forests of the Congo Basin. State of Forests, 2010. Page 39.

Final report
Page 18
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Figure 2. Mining permits in the TRIDOM landscape (source WWF)

Onshore oil has been exploited for decades along the coastal area of Gabon and Congo and onshore oil exploration permits
are beginning to appear all over the Congo basin. As with mining permits many of these oil blocks overlap partially or wholly
with protected areas. The most worrying example is Virunga NP, a World Heritage Site and the oldest park in Africa, where an
oil exploration permit has been granted inside the park in contravention of the World Heritage Convention to which the DRC is
a signatory.
As with logging, industrial mining causes habitat loss through the mining activity itself, the construction of associated
infrastructures (camps, roads, railways, hydro-electric dams). Pollution is also a major concern. Mining also attracts massive
numbers of people into the forest in search of economic opportunities. This leads to permanent settlements, agriculture and
commercial hunting. The very rich gold deposits also attract thousands of artisanal miners and associated hunters and traders.
In 2011 the Gabonese army evacuated a mining camp of over 6,000 people from Minkb NP.
Agro-industrial plantations
Oil palm originates from Central Africa. Because of the huge profits that can be made, there is currently a strong push, mainly
from south east Asian companies, to greatly expand oil palm plantations, particularly in Cameroon, Gabon, Congo, CAR and

Final report
Page 19
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
DRC. A Rainforest Foundation study37 reveals that new industrial oil palm expansion projects currently underway in the Congo
Basin cover 0.5 million ha, and that at least 1.6 million ha are planned, with companies seeking even larger areas. The terms
of the agreements between palm oil companies and Congo Basin governments have mostly been conducted and concluded
in complete secrecy.
Oil palm plantations have a devastating effect on biodiversity as they result in total forest loss. They also cause fragmentation
of forests and, if badly planned, can block gene flows and disrupt ecological processes.
2.1.4
Emerging diseases
Over the past 2 decades research has highlighted the importance of emerging diseases as a serious threat not only to human
populations but also to wildlife. Since the mid-90s there have been several outbreaks of Ebola in Gabon38 and Congo39 in
human populations and all were traced back to hunters handling ape carcasses found in the forest 40. The Ebola outbreaks in
and around Odzala NP in Congo between 2000 and 2004, resulted in the probable loss of 80% of the gorilla population.
It is now known that HIV originated in chimpanzees and sooty mangabeys and made the jump to humans, and more than 40
different non-human primate species have been tested positive for Simian Immunodeficiency Virus (SIV) 41. As the meat of
many of those species is being consumed by humans, the risk of many new SIV strains jumping over to humans is believed to
be significant. Observations made in Cameroon of people with HIV symptoms but without HIV or SIV positive test results are
causing concerns over the ongoing creation of new HIV strains, which ultimately could make it even more difficult to find a cure
against AIDS.
Other diseases that have been identified in primate bushmeat species include Marburg virus, Monkey pox, Simian foamy virus,
Arbo viruses (dengue and yellow fever), Anthrax, Salmonellosis, Herpes B, Cutaneous leishmaniasis and loaloa. Given the
scale of the bushmeat trade the presence of these pathogens constitute a very serious human health hazard.
Wild primate populations are also at risk from human diseases such as influenza and measles. This is particularly relevant in
the case of ape-based tourism where humans come into close contact with habituated groups of gorillas and chimpanzees 42.
These apes are particularly vulnerable to certain human diseases and this is therefore a major concern in the case of
endangered species such as the mountain gorilla where only a few hundred individuals remain in two discrete populations
(Bwindi forest and Virunga mountains).
As deforestation continues, wildlife will be increasingly confined to patches of forest surrounded by human settlements. This
enhances the chances of contact between virus-bearing animals and humans and thus increases the chances of new diseases
emerging.
2.2
2.2.1
KEY DRIVERS OF THREATS

Human population growth and poverty
Human population growth, allied with continuing poverty, is the overridingly important driver of biodiversity loss. Some nations
of the Congo basin rank among the lowest in the world on most human welfare indicators, and among the highest in population
growth and fertility43. Average annual population growth in Central Africa is between 2 and 3%. The population of the DRC is
predicted to increase from 67 million in 2013 to 155 million in 2050 (Volume 1, section 1.4, Table1).
Poverty, particularly in the rural areas, means that local populations remain heavily reliant on natural resources from the forest
for their subsistence. However lack of economic opportunities in rural areas leads to communities engaging in commercial
exploitation of forest resources for the burgeoning urban markets where roughly half of Central Africas population lives. For
37Seeds
of Destruction. Expansion of industrial oil palm in the Congo Basin: potential impacts on forests and people. Rainforest Foundation. February 2013.
38p.
38Huijbregts B, DeWachter P, Obiang L.S.N., Akou, M.E. (2003) Ebola and the decline of gorilla Gorilla gorilla and chimpanzee Pan troglodytes in populations
in Minkb Forest, north-eastern Gabon. Oryx 37:437443.
39 Bermejo M., Rodrguez-Teijeiro J.D., Illera G., Barroso A., Vila C., Walsh P.D. (2006). Ebola outbreak killed 5000 gorillas. Science 314:1564
40Rouquet, P., Froment, J. M., Bermejo, M., Kilbourn, A., Karesh, W., Reed, P., et al. (2005) Wild animal mortality monitoring and human Ebola outbreaks,
Gabon and Republic of Congo, 2001-2003.Emerging Infectious Diseases, 11, 283-290).
41Locatelli, S. & Peeters, M. (2012) Non-Human Primates, Retroviruses, and Zoonotic Infection Risks in the Human Population. Nature Education Knowledge
3(10):62
42Elizabeth J. Macfie and Elizabeth A. Williamson (2010). Best Practice Guidelines for Great Ape Tourism. Gland. Switzerland. IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist
Group (PSG). 78pp.
43http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/where_we_work/congo_basin_forests/problems/population_growth/

Final report
Page 20
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
most forest wildlife species, particularly the medium to large bodied species, commercial exploitation almost always leads to
overexploitation of the resource44.
In the absence of any kind of effective family planning programs population growth, particularly in agriculturally rich areas such
as the Albertine Rift highlands, has led to overpopulation in the highlands and a tendency for people to migrate to the lower
altitude forests to the west. Not only are these forests not able to support such high population densities (resulting in larger
areas of forest being cleared for agriculture) but also migration leads to conflict for land with the local indigenous communities.
Overlapping customary and modern land tenure systems make these conflicts particularly difficult to resolve and this has often
led to violence (eg eastern DRC) as indigenous and migrant populations clash over land tenure and power structures.
Commercial hunting of wildlife for the urban bushmeat markets is a classic example of open access to resources leading to
overexploitation. Immigrant hunters moving in to an area recently made accessible by new roads are often resented by
indigenous communities who see these outsiders earning revenue from their resources. However levels of poverty in these
forest communities are such that the indigenous populations will often collaborate with the immigrant hunters in order to obtain
a share of the economic profits. For example the semi nomad indigenous people (pygmies) will willingly work for commercial
hunters (for very little financial return) and as they are such proficient hunters they can rapidly deplete an area of its wildlife.
2.2.2
Poor governance
For the purposes of this section the term poor governance is used to cover not only corruption, but more broadly the problems
of lack of political will and the multitude of a ways in which poorly designed and implemented government policies, laws and
programs (covering all sectors: environment, education, justice, land tenure, health, infrastructures, mining, etc) lead to
irreversible negative impacts on biodiversity.
The extractive industries (logging, mining and oil) are a major source of investment and revenue in Central Africa but the
countries have generally not succeeded in translating revenues to sustainable economic development. In some cases large
extractive industry revenues even appear to have retarded economic and social development through a number of phenomena
known as the resource curse45 (theft of revenue from resources by the ruling elite, conflict over access to resources). Despite
being one of the richest countries on the planet in terms of natural resources the DRC is lowest ranked in the world in terms of
per capita GDP (415 $US)46. Equatorial Guinea is an example where huge oil and gas revenues have placed it 30 th in the
world nations in terms of GDP of (29,742 $US), but 144th in the UNDPs ranking of Human Development Index trends47.
The countries of Central Africa are ranked among the worlds worst in terms of corruption 48. It permeates all aspects of life,
and undermines all development efforts. In Central Africa poor governance is the overarching driver compromising the
sustainability of all conservation efforts. It impacts wildlife and biodiversity in many ways:
Lack of political will to provide the necessary support for PAs. While the political discourse from Central African
governments is firmly in favor of biodiversity conservation and PA management in reality most of the governments
invest less than the bare minimum in their PAs. Almost without exception the only PAs in Central Africa that are being
managed more of less adequately are those that are receiving support from foreign donors and conservation NGOs.
Dysfunctional legal systems mean that law breakers are rarely prosecuted. Impunity from prosecution, particularly at
the highest levels of government where corruption on a grand scale is openly tolerated, sets the standards for
everyone else and breeds contempt for legal processes and a feeling that anything goes. In the case of wildlife
crime successful prosecutions are rare and penalties are anyway not dissuasive enough. There are also wide
disparities between the wildlife laws of the different countries in terms of severity of penalties for wildlife crimes.
Poor land use planning regularly results in competing and incompatible land use attributions. Inter-ministerial
communication and collaboration is notoriously weak, resulting in development choices that often do not integrate
biodiversity conservation needs. Environmental Impact Assessments are generally of very poor quality and are often
44Nasi,
R., Brown, D., Wilkie, D., Bennett, E., Tutin, C., van Tol, G., and Christophersen, T. (2008). Conservation and use of wildlife-based resources: the
bushmeat crisis. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal, and Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor. Technical
Series no. 33, 50 pages.
45Governance of extractive industries in Africa.Survey of donor-funded assistance. Report for Norad/World Bank/African Development Bank/African
Development Fund. 2008. 46p.
46http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD/countries?display=default
47 http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/table-2-human-development-index-trends-1980-2013
48http://www.transparency.org/cpi2013/results#myAnchor1 Out of the worlds 175 nations Transparency Internationals 2013 Corruption Perception Index
places Sao Tom highest placed at 72, followed by Gabon (106), Cameroon and CAR (144), the two Congos (154) and Equatorial Guinea (163).

Final report
Page 21
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
viewed as an administrative hurdle to enable companies to continue business as usual. Examples are road
infrastructures, hydroelectric dams, agro industrial plantations, mining permits, etc., in areas of high biodiversity
value, including inside PAs. The attribution of an oil exploration permit inside the Virunga NP World Heritage Site is
one of the most high profile examples. This example also highlights another aspect to the problem which is that even
when it is known that a mining or oil permit overlaps a PA countries are often unwilling to forgo the potentially huge
revenues that would be generated and are prepared to override, or change, existing laws in order to allow exploitation
to go ahead.
Insecurity of land tenure leads to unsustainable use of resources. In some countries customary and State systems
of land tenure overlap and this can create conflicts in land use. When forest-living people feel that they do not have
a real stake in the ownership of their forest resources there is little incentive to exploit them sustainably. This often
results in a situation of open access to resources resulting in overexploitation for commercial purpose.
Dysfunctional education systems mean that a large proportion of children, particularly in rural areas, do not attend
school. The quality of higher education structures is highly variable across the region. The environment is generally
very poorly covered in school curricula and concepts of conservation and sustainable use of natural resources are
poorly understood by the young generation.
Dysfunctional national armies where discipline is poor and soldiers are often badly paid (or in the case of DRC often
not paid at all). Members of the armed forces at all levels are frequently involved in poaching and other illegal activities
such as mining. In eastern DRC members of the armed forces even collaborate with rebel groups to exploit and
commercialize the same resource (eg gold, diamonds, coltan, charcoal). The presence of a band of highly armed
and well organized Sudanese poachers, apparently operating with complete impunity in CAR and northern
Cameroon, went unchallenged by the national defense forces until international public opinion forced them to act (by
which time it was too late).
2.2.3
National and regional conflict
Central Africa has been blighted by conflict (internal and external) over the past three decades. This has had a devastating
impact on livelihoods, socio-economic development and natural resource protection. Many of these conflicts can in fact be
described as natural resource conflicts (eastern DRC, northern CAR, Chad, Congo). The DRC is a particularly striking example
where its immense riches have brought little more than conflict. At the time of the wars of liberation between 1997 and 2004
the armies of at least 7 neighboring countries were present on Congolese territory, the major motivation for most, if not all, of
them being to exploit the countrys natural resources. A legacy of armed conflict is that countries end up being flooded with
automatic weapons and these often end up in the hands of hunters or their patrons. The two Congos, CAR, and Chad have
been particularly affected by this problem, but the porosity of international borders in this region means that other countries
are also affected. The recent evolution of the elephant poaching crisis highlights how the void created by the breakdown in law
and order (either in the situation of bad governance or in periods of conflict) has allowed armed militias and terrorist groups to
move in and operate with virtual impunity.

Final report
Page 22
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
3.1
COMIFAC, CBFP AND ECCAS A REGIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION.
The Commission des Forts dAfrique Centrale (COMIFAC) emerged from a Heads of State Summit on sustainable forest
management held in Yaound in 1999, and the Congo Basin Forest Partnership (CBFP) was launched at the World Summit
on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2004. Together these two structures provide the strategic framework for
regional cooperation and donor collaboration in Central Africa. The CBFP (Appendix 1) coordinates programs and policies of
the different partner organizations in order to improve the coherence and effectiveness of their programs for the sustainable
development of the Congo Basins forest ecosystems within the framework of the COMIFAC strategic plan (Plan de
Convergence) which was revised in 2014. Technical support to COMIFAC is provided by a number of partner organizations,
including RAPAC (the Central African Protected Area Network) and OFAC (Central African Forest Observatory).
Conservation of biological diversity (including PA management) is a key component of COMIFACs nine point strategic plan
(Box 1 below). The landscape approach is an integral part of the CBFPs support to COMIFAC. This approach aims to enhance
the ecological integrity of PAs and their surroundings by addressing conservation management issues in the multiple-use
zones that link them.
Key regional law enforcement and biodiversity conservation planning initiatives and agreements that have been developed
recently include:
Regional Action Plan for Strengthening National Wildlife Law Implementation for the period 20122017 (PAPECALF)
developed by COMIFAC49. The plan aims to (i) strengthen cooperation and collaboration between supervisory bodies
and the legal authorities concerned by wildlife law enforcement at the national and regional levels, (ii) intensify
investigations and law enforcement operations at key transit points, borders, trans border zones and local markets,
(iii) establish effective deterrents to poaching and the illegal commercial wildlife trade, and ensure that cases are
properly prosecuted and the results widely publicised, and (iv) strengthen awareness about the illegal wildlife trade.
Extreme Urgency Anti-Poaching Action Plan (PEXULAB)50, a short term component of PAPECALF.
Regional Action Plan for the conservation of gorillas and chimpanzees in Central Africa 51.
Eastern DRC great apes conservation action plan 2012-202252.
Bonobo Conservation Strategy 2012-202053.
Central African Elephant Conservation Strategy (2005).
Trinational Agreement a ground breaking agreement signed in 2000 between the governments of Congo, CAR and
Cameroon for the joint protection and management of the Tri National Sangha complex of protected areas. This
agreement was a precursor to the area being listed as a World Heritage Site.
The Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS, french acronym CEEAC) has become increasingly involved in
addressing the issue of wildlife crime because of the damage it does to economies and security in the region. In collaboration
with regional technical partners, the CEEAC is playing an important role in developing and implementing strategic responses
through its anti-poaching cellule54, in particular the above mentioned PEXULAB and PAPECALF. The CEEAC is also the
regional structure through which the EU channels its support to ECOFAC/RAPAC.
Box 1. Key elements of the COMIFAC Convergence Plan 2015-2025
49 Plan dAction sous-rgional des pays de lespace COMIFAC pour le renforcement de lapplication des lgislations nationales sur la faune sauvage
(PAPECALF) 2012-2017. www.pfbc-cbfp.org/comifac.html
50 Plan dextrme urgence de lutte anti-braconnage (PEXULAB). www.pfbc-cbfp.org/comifac.htm
51Tutin,
C., et. al. 2005. Plan daction rgional pour la conservation des chimpanzs et des gorilles en Afrique Centrale. Conservation
International. Washington, DC.
52Maldonado,
O., Aveling, C., Cox, D., Nixon, S., Nishuli, R., Merlo, D., Pintea, L. & Williamson, E.A. (2012).Grauers Gorillas and Chimpanzees in Eastern
Democratic Republic of Congo (Kahuzi-Biega, Maiko, Tayna and Itombwe Landscape): Conservation Action Plan 20122022. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN/SSC
Primate Specialist Group, Ministry of Environment, Nature Conservation & Tourism, Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature & the Jane Goodall
Institute.
53IUCN & ICCN (2012). Bonobo (Pan paniscus): Conservation Strategy 20122022. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group & Institut
54 http://www.lab-ceeac.com/

Final report
Page 23
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Priority strategic themes
Harmonization of forestry and fiscal policies
Management and sustainable development of forest resources
Conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity
Combatting climate change and desertification
Socio-economic development and multi-actor participation

Cross-cutting strategic themes
Sustainable funding
Training and capacity building
Research and Development
Communication, awareness building and education
3.2
KEY FUNDING AGENCIES AND CONSERVATION PARTNERS
Biodiversity conservation in Central Africa is delivered predominantly through international donor agencies, conservation NGOs
and other technical partners working in partnership with the national forestry, wildlife and PA authorities. NGOs work with funds
provided by donor agencies but also mobilise many sources of private funding. There are very many organisations working in
Central Africa and it is not possible to provide a detailed description here of their different interventions.
Over the past two decades the EU and the USA have been, and continue to be, the most important donors in terms of funds
mobilised for the region. Individual European nations are also making significant contributions, particularly Germany and
France. Germanys focus is mainly on protected areas while Frances has been mainly on the forest sector. Spain supports
conservation initiatives in DRC, Congo, Cameroon and Equatorial Guinea. Norway has recently started contributing, through
its International Climate and Forest Initiative. International institutions such as the World Bank (through GEF), African
Development Bank, FAO, UNESCO and UNEP also support conservation efforts in the region. The paragraphs below
summarise the interventions of the largest donors in Central Africa. Table 1 (section 5.1) provides a more complete overview
of where the main donors and technical partners are active.

Final report
Page 24
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
European Union
To date the EU has committed more than 500M for biodiversity conservation in Africa over the past 28 years. Support to PAs
by the EU is either through grants to international or local NGO who are then responsible for the implementation of activities,
or through bilateral cooperation (beneficiary state/EU). Through the regional ECOFAC project, launched in 1992 (and still
operational) the EU pioneered a regional approach to conservation in Central Africa which promoted regional collaboration for
PA management through coordinated support to specific PAs in each country. The Central African Protected Areas Network
(RAPAC) emerged from ECOFAC and is one of the structures through which the EU mobilizes its funds for conservation. Other
PAs are also supported within the framework of Public Private Partnerships (Zakouma NP, Odzala NP, Nouabal-Ndoki NP
(planned), Virunga NP, Garamba NP, Akagera NP (see Section 4). Over 203m are currently proposed for conservation
activities, focusing on PAs, in Central Africa.
The EU also funds cross-cutting projects which include Central African components such as MIKES (Minimising the Illegal
Killing of Elephants and other Endangered Species), BIOPAMA (Biodiversity and Protected Areas Management in African,
Caribbean and Pacific countries) and OFAC (Central African Forest Observatory) and also disburses its funds through other
international agencies (eg UNESCOs Central African World Heritage Forest Initiative (CAWHFI) targeting existing or potential
Central African World Heritage Sites).
Through the FLEGT process the EU also contributes indirectly to biodiversity conservation by ensuring that timber imported
into Europe has been exploited in conformity with national forestry laws.
The EU supports training and capacity building through its support to the Regional Post-graduate Training School of Integrated
Management of Tropical Forests and Lands (French acronym ERAIFT) and the University of Kisangani (DRC).
USA
The US government delivers its conservation aid to Central Africa through USAID and USFWS.
USAID
USAIDs CARPE program (Central African Regional Program for the Environment) was launched in 1997 and, like ECOFAC,
promotes a regional approach to conservation. An accent is placed on the landscape approach with significant resources
mobilised in the buffer zones of protected areas in 12 landscapes across Central Africa for land use planning, community
based natural resource management activities and capacity building of local structures. CARPE partners with international
conservation NGOs experienced in the region for the implementation of its activities. Over the past 2 decades it has mobilised
between 10 and 15m$ / year.
From 2013 to 2018 CARPE III will be rolled out through two programmes, Central African Forest Ecosystem Conservation
(CAFEC) and Strengthening Central African Environmental Management and Policy Support (SCAEMPS). For CAFEC a total
of 92.3m$ is expected to be mobilised (21.6 m$ of which will come from Norways International Climate and Forest Initiative
(NICFI) over 5 years. Actions will be concentrated on 8 landscapes located in the two Congos. For SCAEMPS approximately
10 m$ will be allocated over 5 years to promote national and regional policy and regulatory advances and deliver monitoring
tools that inform policy and support forest and biodiversity conservation.
USFWS
USFWS delivers its aid worldwide through their Wildlife Without Borders program funded through 7 Funds enacted by the US
Congress55. The USFWS is funding projects in all the Central African states (currently over 30 initiatives funded). Funds are
disbursed through cooperation agreements and grants. Grants may be made to individuals, national agencies, national and
international NGOs through an annual system of calls for proposals.
Over the next five years 5.5m $/yr has been allocated for cooperation agreements with Gabons National Park agency (ANPN),
DRCs ICCN (for Virunga and Lomami NPs), and the TNS World Heritage Site. In addition grants (from 50,000 to 250,000
$US) will be available for a variety of other initiatives aimed at reducing the bushmeat trade, strengthening judicial processes
for wildlife crime, identifying and managing new PAs, and training wildlife managers 56.
It is anticipated that around 5-6 m$US will be made available annually (subject to Congress approval each year).
Germany
Germany has been a long term supporter of conservation in Central Africa, most notably its uninterrupted support to DRCs
Kahuzi-Biega NP (World Heritage Site) since 1983 and is currently one of the largest donors for conservation in Central Africa.
55African
Elephant Conservation Fund 1989 ; Amphibians in Decline Fund 2010 ; Asian Elephant Conservation Fund 1997; Critically Endangered Animals
Fund 2009; Great Apes Conservation Fund 2000; Marine Turtle Conservation Fund 2004; Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Fund 1994.
56Training is supported through grants to Garoua Wildlife College and an innovative new approach pioneered with Gabons ANPN entitled MENTOR-FOREST
(Mentoring for Environmental Training in Outreach and Resource conservation) to build the capacity of multidisciplinary teams of central African
conservationists to improve forest stewardship and wildlife conservation. http://www.fws.gov/international/signature-initiatives/mentor-forest.html

Final report
Page 25
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
German support for conservation is delivered through the BMZ and implemented by GIZ (technical cooperation) and KfW
(financial cooperation). Over 125m is currently committed or in the pipeline for KfW-implemented initiatives.
German support targets various aspects of the conservation challenges in the region. Forest policy and governance are
addressed through support for several processes including COMIFAC, FLEGT, certified forest exploitation and REDD+
preparation, and DRC institution building. Recognizing the shortcomings of national conservation institutions and the need for
long term support for PAs and sustainable sources of funding to avoid the negative impacts of stop-start funding cycles,
Germany makes significant investments in PA management (particularly in sites where experienced NGO partners are present)
and sustainable funding mechanisms. At least 15 important PAs are receiving, or are about to receive, direct support for
management57 and Germany was one of the first European countries to capitalize Trust Funds in Central Africa. It was a key
player in the development and capitalization of the TNS Trust Fund (Congo, CAR, and Cameroon) and is supporting the
development of the Okapi Trust Fund for DRCs PA network58. Germany was also one of the first countries to use debt swap
mechanisms to support conservation activities in Central Africa.
France
Frances support to conservation and sustainable forest management is delivered through AFD (Agence Franaise de
Dveloppement) and the FFEM (French Global Environment Facility).
Over the past 20 years AFD has made a particularly strong contribution to achieving sustainable management practices in
logging concessions. It has helped place 20 million ha of forest in the Congo basin under management, 5m of which are
certified under international standards. AFDs biodiversity conservation strategy aims at protecting, restoring, managing and
developing ecosystems and fairly sharing the benefits of their development, mainstreaming ecosystem conservation in
industrial development policies and strengthening partnerships between French biodiversity players and other players where
AFD operates. Achieving sustainable financing for biodiversity protection through Foundations (AFD contributes to the TNS
Foundation), payments for ecosystem services and biodiversity offsets is also a key element of their strategy. AFD also
finances conservation activities through debt conversion mechanisms. A 50m debt conversion for Gabon is being used to
fund conservation and sustainable management of Gabons forest ecosystems including implementation of ANPNs antipoaching activities. AFDs current commitments for biodiversity are around 160 m/yr with about 75% going to Sub-Saharan
Africa.
The FFEM mobilises about 200m annually, of which roughly 5m goes for biodiversity conservation in Africa. In Central Africa
FFEM supports efforts to improve best practices in logging and to integrate sustainable forest management (supported by
France for many years) into REDD strategies for Central African countries. Other areas of support include PA management,
conservation and sustainable management of wildlife in buffer zones, sustainable village hunting, and communal forests. FFEM
has also played a role in facilitating the creation of Trust Funds, including the TNS Fund.
World Bank/GEF
The World Bank supports biodiversity conservation in the DRC through its National Parks Rehabilitation Project (PREPAN)
and its Forest and Nature Conservation Project for which around 75m$ are committed. The objectives of these interventions
include support to high priority PAs (Virunga NP, Maiko NP), creation and capitalisation of the Okapi Trust Fund for the DRC
PA network and institution building of the national PA authority (ICCN) and its Ministry (MECNT). In southern Cameroon the
World Bank/GEF will support an initiative for the conservation and sustainable use of the Ngoila-Mintom forest block located
in the strategically important zone between the Dja World Heritage site and Boumba-Bek National Park.
United Nations
UNDP/GEF funding supports the TRIDOM project, a strategically important trans-border biodiversity conservation initiative in
the Minkb-Dja-Odzala interzone of Gabon, Cameroon and Congo containing 9 protected areas and logging and mining
concessions (the zone includes the Ngoila-Mintom zone mentioned above). The initiative aims to officially establish governance
structures for conservation and sustainable natural resource use in this tri-national trans-border complex. Activities focus on
land use planning, monitoring of biodiversity and natural resource use, law enforcement and biodiversity conservation systems
in logging concessions and community based natural resource management.
UNEP UNEP coordinates the Great Apes Survival Partnership (GRASP), a partnership of great ape range states targeting
the objectives of the Global Strategy for the Survival of Great Apes.
The UNESCO World Heritage Centre mobilizes funds from various sources (EU, France, Italy, Belgium) in support of 8 of the
9 existing World Heritage Sites as well as for the identification of new potential World Heritage sites through its two
programmes: support to DRCs WHS in Danger and the Central African World Heritage Initiative (CAWHFI). The CAWHFI
initiative places a particular focus on transfrontier protected area complexes and engagement with the private sector for
57DRC: Okapi WR, Kahuzi-Biega NP, Kundelungu NP, Lomami NP, Salonga NP, Ngiri NR; Cameroon: Korup NP, Mt Cameroon NP, Takamanda NP, Banyang-
Mbo NP, Lobeke NP, Waza NP, Benou NP, Bouba-Ndjida NP; and the TNS transfrontier World Heritage Site (Congo, CAR, Cameroon).
58The Okapi Trust Fund is for DRCs protected areas and is initially targeting a capital of 120m.

Final report
Page 26
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
biodiversity conservation in inter-zones connecting the protected areas. UNESCO also launched the ERAIFT regional post
graduate training school in Kinshasa in 1999 and continues to coordinate it.
The FAO/GEF has recently launched a 10m$ regional initiative for the sustainable management of the wildlife and bushmeat
sector in the DRC, Gabon, Congo and CAR. Through a series of pilot projects the initiative aims to overcome the barriers to
effective participatory wildlife management. This will involve policy reforms to give communities legal rights to the use of wildlife
on their lands, develop tools for the development of community level rules for wildlife management, and strengthen capacities
of key stakeholders (community managers, supporting institutions and oversight bodies) for participatory wildlife management.
Non-governmental Organisations and Foundations
INGOs and NGOs play a central role in Central African conservation initiatives. For many of the funding agencies they are the
preferred structures for delivering their support as they are experienced operators on the ground, often have long-term
commitments in the areas where they work, have specialist skills and generally leverage several other sources of private
funding (Foundations, private donors, etc) in addition to their own core funding.
An extensive list of these organisations is given in Appendix 2. Some of the biggest players (in terms either of geographical
scope, numbers of projects, funds mobilised, impact or long term presence) include African Conservation Fund, African Parks
Foundation, African Wildlife Foundation, Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International, Fauna and Flora International, IUCN, Jane
Goodall Institute, Lukuru Foundation, Wildlife Conservation Society, Gilman International Conservation, World Wide Fund for
Nature, Zoological Society of London, Zoological Society of Milwaukee.
Important private foundations supporting biodiversity conservation activities include Arcus Foundation, Abraham Foundation,
Aspinall Foundation, Berggorilla & Regenwald Direkthilfe, BirdLife International, Howard G. Buffet Foundation, International
Fund for Animal Welfare, International Conservation and Education Fund, Liz Claybourne and Art Ortenberg Foundation,
McArthur Foundation, Murray Foundation, Rufford Foundation.
Many universities, international research institutions or campaigning organisations are also active in Central Africa (see
Appendix 2) including the Centre for International Forestry Research, Environmental Investigation Agency, French Agricultural
Research Centre for International Development, Joint Research Centre, Kyoto University, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary
Anthropology, Rainforest Foundation, World Resources Institute, Royal Museum for Central Africa (Belgium).
4
4.1

THE BEST REMAINING ASSEMBLAGES OF BIODIVERSITY ARE IN PROTECTED AREAS.
Almost without exception in Central Africa the areas with the most intact assemblages of biodiversity are in protected areas (or
areas under active management like sport hunting zones). Furthermore the PAs where biodiversity is being most effectively
protected are those that are receiving support from donor agencies and their technical partners because most national PA
agencies are so weak and under-resourced.
4.2
LONG-TERM FUNDING IS ESSENTIAL FOR SUCCESSFUL BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Biodiversity conservation requires sustained long-term support. Stop-start funding cycles must be avoided because wildlife
populations can be lost very quickly but take a long time to recover. The EUs sustained support to Zakouma NP is a particularly
good example of what uninterrupted long term funding can do to bring an area back from the brink. In the late 80s, when the
EU first intervened, very little wildlife could be seen. By the mid 90s Zakouma NP was teeming with wildlife and was attracting
significant numbers of tourists, both local and international. Without Germanys 30 year support to Kahuzi-Biega NP (DRC) it
is doubtful that that the park would have survived the prolonged period of war and anarchy. The same applies for the long term
international support for Virunga and Garamba NPs. Long term conservation investment in PAs helps create conservation
hubs which have a better chance of surviving periods of civil war because institutions and governance are stronger.
More streamlined and coordinated financial mechanisms to support high priority PAs (where several funding
agencies/organizations) are present also lowers the administrative burden associated with managing multiple donors and/or
relatively short term contracts and improves the chances of positive conservation outcomes.
4.3
A LANDSCAPE APPROACH, INCLUDING TRANSFRONTIER CONSERVATION AREAS, ENHANCES BIODIVERSITY

CONSERVATION

Final report
Page 27
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
While species diversity is high in the moist forests of Central Africa densities of species are relatively low and so for this reason
most of the PAs, except for the very largest and best protected, are probably not large enough to ensure the long term
conservation of the full range of species and biological processes. This has led to a shift in conservation strategies in recent
years with an increasing emphasis on a landscape approach to conservation, the idea being to enhance the ecological integrity
of PAs and their surroundings by addressing conservation management issues in the multiple-use zones that link them. The
strategy is to manage the impact of human activities in such a way that gene flows and ecosystem processes are maintained
across the landscape, so that PAs are prevented from becoming isolated islands of biodiversity. Since most ecological
landscapes lie astride international boundaries a regional, transfrontier, approach goes hand in glove with the landscape
approach59.
In Central Africa there are several examples where contiguous complexes of PAs straddle international boundaries as
transfrontier PAs. In addition to ensuring protection over a larger area (important for wide ranging species like elephant), the
conservation costs are shared between the countries, and they provide refuges (reservoirs) for wildlife in the event of a
breakdown of law and order in one of the countries. A good example is the complex of PAs in the Virunga landscape shared
between DRC, Uganda and Rwanda. At the beginning of the 90s the hippo population of DRCs Virunga NP was over 25,000.
Ten years later it was down to 500 individuals through poaching. However there is little danger of local extinction of this species
because stability in Uganda ensures that the contiguous Queen Elizabeth NP serves as a reservoir for repopulation. The
principle is the same for gorillas and elephants. Inter-state collaboration for the management of transfrontier protected areas
also strengthens regional integration and security. Collaboration for the management of this transfrontier complex is achieved
through the Greater Virunga Transboundary Collaboration agreement (Vol. 3, section 3.4.2, Box 16).
4.4
PARTNERSHIPS WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR OFFER PROMISING MODELS FOR ENHANCING BIODIVERSITY
CONSERVATION IN CENTRAL AFRICA
Two types of partnership with the private sector have been tested in Central Africa: partnerships for the management of PAs
and partnerships with extractive industries in buffer zones of PAs. Both have produced promising results.
Public-private partnerships for PA management
One of the major constraints to effective PA management through classic donor-funded technical assistance projects for PAs
is that the technical partners responsible for project implementation do not have a strong enough mandate to take the required
actions and make the difficult decisions (such as replacing corrupt or incompetent staff). PPP agreements give the
implementing partner a stronger and clearer mandate with greater decisional independence (including powers to hire and fire)
and greater administrative and financial flexibility. In effect the private partner brings a more business-like approach to park
management. The involvement of the private sector partner also acts as an important lever for raising other sources of
funding60. PPP agreements are particularly pertinent in countries where national capacities for PA management are very weak,
although there was initial resistance to this kind of approach 61. PPP agreements in DRC (Virunga NP, Garamba NP), Congo
(Odzala-Koukoua NP), Chad (Zakouma NP) and Rwanda (Akagera NP) are delivering positive conservation results, often in
extremely difficult contexts, and others are planned in the region (Salonga NP, Nouabal-Ndoki NP, Okapi WR). Box 2 below
describes the African Parks PPP model for PA management. A summary of the range of legal mechanisms through which the
private sector can assist with PA management is given in Volume 1, section 4.1.6, Table 3.
UNESCO. 2010. World Heritage in the Congo Basin. 63p.

J-P. dHuart. 2013 Formulation d'un programme de partenariat public priv (PPP) dans le domaine de la conservation de la nature. Report to the EC.
61APN Annual Report 2012 http://www.african-parks.org/
59
60

Final report
Page 28
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Box 2. African Parks a new model for protected area management
African Parks (AP) is a non-profit organisation that takes on direct responsibility for the rehabilitation and long-term management
of national parks in partnership with governments and local communities. By adopting a business approach to conservation,
supported by donor funding, African Parks aims to make each park sustainable in the long-term, thereby contributing to
economic development of the region. Fundamental elements necessary for the success of their model are full accountability
for their work, for which they require a secure long-term management mandate, and sound governance structures to ensure
full transparency and avoid unwarranted interference. African Parks currently manages seven parks in six countries Chad,
Republic of Congo, DRC, Malawi, Rwanda and Zambia with a combined area of 4.1m hectares.
The main governing body, African Parks Network (APN), based in Johannesburg, South Africa, is the strategic and decisionmaking entity which is responsible for the business plan for each park, determining capital investments, operating budgets,
standard operating procedures and appointing skilled park management. Each park managed by AP is established as a
separate legal entity, registered in the host country with its own board of directors. The board is represented by partner
institutions, key stakeholders and AP representatives, and is directly accountable to government for the professional
management of the park. AP aims to have majority representation at the park board level or to appoint the board chairman.
Four critical partnerships are necessary for an AP project. Government must support the AP approach and must be prepared
to delegate management responsibilities to AP. Community considerations are built in to each project, often through a formal
relationship with community structures represented on the park management board. Donors are required to support capital
investment and annual operating costs until financial sustainability is achieved. Commercial investors are sought to develop
tourism and other commercial enterprises in order to create a sustainable income base for a park.
A secure long-term mandate is a key to success, with a clear separation of functions between the State which retains
responsibility for legislation, policy and regulatory control, and AP which is responsible for implementation. Having clear dayto-day management control of the park is crucial, as is ensuring that commercial income flows are used to contribute to the
parks financial sustainability. In the short-term, donor funding is key, whilst long-term income streams are a combination of
donor funding, commercial revenues from tourism and related enterprises, endowment income and payment for ecosystem
services.
The long-term aim of AP is to create a conservation-led economy in each region where it operates with the park at its core
(diagram below). The multiplier effects in the region in terms of socio-economic development, improved distribution of resources,
better governance, and much else are what will build conservation constituencies and hopefully dispel the political indifference
that undermines efforts to promote biodiversity conservation and effective protected area management.
Private sector partnerships in buffer zones of protected areas.

Final report
Page 29
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Logging concessions cover, or will soon cover, essentially all of the exploitable Congo basin forests. While this may seem at
first view a disaster scenario, in reality a well-managed logging concession in the periphery of an actively managed PA offers
better possibilities for conserving the forest and its wildlife than a forest with no form of management regime and no control
over how the forest is used. The importance of ensuring boots on the ground within the PA while implementing collaborative
agreements with adjacent logging concessions should be emphasized. For much of the 8 year period when Minkb NP lost
between 12,000 and 16,000 elephants (2.1.2), there were active collaborative agreements with adjacent logging concessions,
but surveillance within the park was almost non-existent.
Central African forest laws are generally sound and if implemented correctly can have considerable positive impacts for
conservation. Concessionaires control access to their concessions and are legally bound to integrate wildlife protection and
other conservation measures in their forest management plans. FSC-certified companies are generally keen to collaborate
with specialist conservation organizations (Box 3). In logging concessions in Gabon the way forward is seen as being to
undertake EIEs and then to integrate the mitigation measures into the concessionaires legally binding Environmental and
Social Management Plan.
Box 3. PROGEPP a public private partnership for managing the buffer zone of Nouabal-Ndoki NP
The PROGEPP initiative in northern Congo, a collaboration between the Congolese forestry authorities, a logging
company (CIB) and WCS in the buffer zone of Nouabl-Ndoki NP, was the first of its kind in central Africa and
variants of this type of collaboration have since been established by WWF in Gabon and Cameroon. Using a fivepronged approach PROGEPP combined law enforcement, development of alternative activities, education and
awareness-raising, and research and monitoring.
Given that the motivations of each partner for entering into this kind of partnership may be very different (logging
companies want to improve their image and access to markets and financial resources, NGOs are motivated by
gains in conservation, governments pursue socio-economic development), effective collaboration requires formal
protocols that clearly define the roles and responsibilities of each partner. Partnerships based on a shared vision
are more enduring than those of convenience, and all partners must be actively involved in the implementation of
conservation actions on the ground. Trust, respect and transparency between partners help to overcome the
inevitable challenges to the partnership. Finally the combined expertise and resources of the three partners allows
conservation to be conducted at much bigger scales than is possible when working only in protected areas.
Conservation actions in logging concessions are most successful when communities are integrated early into the
land use planning process and when the access rights of indigenous people to land and resources are recognized
and guaranteed.
Successful conservation actions that were developed by PROGEPP include:
application of strict internal company regulations concerning hunting and the transport of bushmeat;
mobilization of a law-enforcement guard force funded by the logging company but supervised by WCS
and the government;
management of hunting zones for local communities and logging company personnel;
importation of domestic meat by the logging company for sale in the logging camps.
Small scale husbandry initiatives had less long-term success.
Source: J. Poulsen. 2009. Building private-sector partnerships for conservation: Lessons learned from the collaboration between WCS, CIB
and the Republic of Congo in forestry concessions. USAID/WCS. 56p.
Partnerships with industrial mining companies are relatively new in Central Africa but given the potentially massive impacts on
biodiversity that they will have on the vast pristine TRIDOM transfrontier forest landscape, conservation practitioners are
increasingly engaging with them. With the financial resources at their disposal, the political leverage that this gives them, and
their need to safeguard their international image, there are clear opportunities to influence what happens to wildlife in their
concessions and leverage biodiversity offset arrangements.
Since almost all forest outside of PAs is (or will soon) be attributed to private operators, conservationists have to engage with
them if we are to preserve connectivity between PAs and ecological functions across large tracts of forest.

Final report
Page 30
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Finally, as noted throughout this document, conservation NGOs play a very important role in the implementation of conservation
activities in Central Africa. However it is important that their roles and mandates should be very clearly defined from the outset
so that donors do not end up funding NGOs to implement activities for which they do not have the mandate from the host
government.
4.5
POLITICAL WILL AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL IS ESSENTIAL FOR EFFECTIVE BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION.
In most of the Central African countries there is a serious disconnect between the political discourse regarding natural resource
conservation, and the resources that governments mobilise to conserve them. In most countries PAs remain one of the lowest
priorities in terms of national budgets. Most PA authorities are seriously underfunded and personnel are expected to work for
salaries (if and when they are paid) that are well below what could be considered a decent living wage. Furthermore little
consideration is given to the fact that the work is arduous and can be particularly dangerous (Virunga NP has lost over 140
park guards in the past 20 years). National budgets often make no provision for capital investment, and corruption ensures
that even the meagre budgets allocated are misappropriated. Finally there are no proper career advancement structures for
biodiversity conservation personnel, very little provision is made for training and retraining and the high, and often arbitrary,
turnover of key staff disrupts conservation initiatives. Too often biodiversity is considered to the affair of westerners and the
donor community is expected to pay for it. As a result, in several important PAs that have received overseas support since the
early 90s, conservation partners are still paying top-up salaries and/or bonuses to staff and covering almost all capital
investment costs.
Box 4. The importance of high level political support for conservation
Gabon is setting the example of how strong political support in favour of biodiversity makes a significant difference
to conservation outcomes. At the beginning of the 2000s Gabon did not have a single national park. In 2002 a
network of 13 national parks, designed by a team of experienced conservation scientists and encompassing almost
all of the important biomes in the country, was declared by the President and enacted in law in 2007. Where there
was conflict between proposed national park boundaries and logging permits tough decisions were made and
solutions found. For the creation of Lop National Park a logging permit located inside the proposed national park
boundary was cancelled and an equivalent area elsewhere was attributed to the concessionaire. A protected area
agency, Agence National des Parcs Nationaux was established, and its government budget has increased
significantly and steadily since it was created. The inevitable teething problems as the Agency develops the
absorptive capacities to use these funds effectively are being addressed and progress is being made.
ANPN receives strong political support from the highest level for implementation of the governments flagship
policies of Green Gabon and Blue Gabon which target the sustainable development of the terrestrial and marine
environments. In just one year the EU fishing agreement were completely renegotiated, bogus fishing permits
cancelled (involving the politically risky decision of closing down the fisheries industry for a month), no-fishing zones
established and enforced and a large extension to the network of marine protected areas proposed encompassing
23% of Gabons territorial waters. Illegally operating trawlers are being systematically seized and heavy fines
imposed. Gabonese vessels are now equipped with tracking devices and followed by ANPN and the Fisheries
Ministry, and fish catches are monitored and reliable statistics starting to be compiled for the first time ever.
At the regional level the President, together with his homologue from Chad, are showing strong leadership in the
fight to stem the ivory poaching crisis. For example a deal was brokered at Presidential level to halt the killing of
elephants in the famous Bayanga elephant bai in CAR by rebel forces loyal to the April 2013 putchists, and in 2012
Gabon publicly burned its entire 5 ton stock of seized ivory.
4.6
CREATING CONSERVATION CONSTITUENCIES IN FOREST ENVIRONMENTS HAS PROVED CHALLENGING
Creating a constituency for conservation in local communities around PAs is a key element of PA management but has proved
one of the most challenging aspects for conservation projects in Central Africa. Various approaches are used: outreach
programmes for agriculture, health centres, clean water sources, small hydroelectric turbines 62, community-run tourism
enterprises, environmental education, etc, with varying levels of success.
62http://gorillacd.org/2013/08/18/virungas-first-hydroelectric-plant-online/

Final report
Page 31
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
In forested regions so called community conservation initiatives have had limited success for various reasons. Local
populations living in these areas often do not have secure land tenure, and therefore, control over the use of the forest
resources. Local traditional land tenure is superimposed with State land tenure, but the State is generally incapable of
effectively controlling how forest resources are used and by whom. This frequently leads to a situation of open access to
resources resulting in overexploitation, especially when people with economic power (eg salaried workers in extractive
industries), or better organisational capacities63, migrate to an area.
Forest communities are also generally very poor, often poorly educated and are characterised by an individualistic approach
to the use of forest resources. Indeed the concept of community in forest-living peoples is misleading since the only really
strong social unit is the family, and villages are simply stronger or weaker associations of families. Mobilising forest people to
work together to adopt sustainable methods of natural resource use for the benefit of all is therefore complex, time consuming
and costly and requires expertise from many different fields (biology, social science, agriculture, communications etc.).
Furthermore community conservation models from southern Africa have little relevance in the moist forest milieu. Much effort
has been spent by conservation projects trying to develop alternative activities to unsustainable resource use but there have
been many more failures than successes. For example attempts to introduce animal husbandry or fish farming, as alternatives
to bushmeat, have rarely had lasting success because (a) there is no cultural tradition for these activities and (b) hunting will
remain the preferred source of meat protein as long as there remain populations, even very depleted ones, of wild animals in
the forest. Essentially people will wait until there are no longer any animals before considering other meat sources, by which
time it is almost too late.
4.7
CONSERVATION PROJECTS ARE TOO OFTEN DIVERTED FROM THEIR PRINCIPAL MISSION BY BEING EXPECTED TO
RESOLVE ALL THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROBLEMS OF LOCAL COMMUNITIES.
Following on from the above point, the conservation-linked-to-development paradigm that dominates modern biodiversity
conservation thinking has resulted too often in conservation projects having to address all the socio-economic problems of
populations living around PAs, despite rarely having either the financial resources or the expertise to do this. Furthermore it
still remains to be clearly demonstrated that improving livelihoods of local communities inevitably leads to less pressure on
natural resources. On the contrary, as livelihoods improve local communities will often exert even greater pressures on
biodiversity64 (but see following point). While improving livelihoods and alleviating poverty will always be priority components
of development aid it is essential that conservation projects should be designed in such a way that they are accompanied by
properly funded and resourced socio-economic development initiatives, with objectives compatible with wildlife conservation.
4.8
CONSUMPTIVE AND NON-CONSUMPTIVE TOURISM HAVE PROVIDED SOME OF THE BEST COMMUNITY
CONSERVATION SUCCESS STORIES IN CENTRAL AFRICA.
Community conservation success stories are relatively rare in forested Central Africa. Consumptive and non-consumptive
tourism (sport hunting and eco-tourism) have so far provided the best examples as they generate tangible spin-offs for local
communities (employment, revenue sharing, a stake in the management of the resource). Mountain gorilla tourism generates
millions of dollars annually and as a result is well supported both at the community and national levels. Indeed mountain gorillas
are a central element of Rwandas international marketing image. Despite being located in an area of prolonged conflict the
warring parties have always understood the economic importance of gorillas and have ensured their protection65. While not
generating such spectacular revenues, lowland gorilla tourism in CAR and Congo has also proved successful particularly when
it can be combined with wildlife viewing in forest clearings (bais) which provide unique opportunities for observing the large
mammal fauna of the Central African forests. Constraints to lowland forest eco-tourism are the difficulties of access to these
remote areas, the absence of an enabling environment for eco-tourism (serious local operators, adequate infrastructures, visas
difficulties) and the challenging conditions of the lowland forest environment for tourists.
Safari sport hunting has been successful in preserving wildlife when safari operators collaborate with local communities to
manage the resource and share the benefits. Surprisingly (given the history of conflict in the region) the best examples come
from the savanna-woodland area of CAR. The EC funded Zones Cyngtiques Villageoises (village safari hunting zones) in
northern CAR was very successful66 until the zone was overwhelmed by pastoralists and armed militia from Sudan and Chad.
63The well organised and economically savvy Banande highlanders from the Albertine Rift migrating westwards to the Ituri forest in search of land have been
the cause of a rapid acceleration of natural resource depletion (forest clearance for agriculture, artisanal timber extraction, gold mining) over the past two
decades (ref: RFO Management Plan).
64As forest people move into a monetary economy their increased purchasing power enables them to acquire cartridges and wire for snares. There are many
examples where salaried activities in the forest environment (logging concessions, infrastructure projects, even conservation projects) has led to increased
hunting pressure.
65Rebel forces occupying the gorilla habitat have even financed their activities by organising gorilla tourism.
66http://www.rapac.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=85&Itemid=100206

Final report
Page 32
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
The key factors in its success were the presence of healthy populations of flagship trophy species for hunters (notably giant
eland and bongo), the active participation of local communities in the protection and exploitation of the zone through
collaboration agreements with the safari hunting operators, sharing of revenues and other spin-offs (eg meat), and a low human
population density enabling benefits to be felt by everyone. In 2010 an aerial survey of the PAs and surrounding hunting zones
showed that all the remaining wildlife was concentrated in the hunting zones 67. A similar situation is currently being played out
in Chinko68 (eastern CAR) where a dedicated group of safari operators are successfully protecting a large area of Sudanian
savanna woodlands containing surprisingly intact assemblages (though low densities) of wildlife, despite the chaos and conflict
that has characterised CAR for the past two decades.
A promising model of community conservation is being tested by AWF in the Maringa-Lopori-Wamba landscape in the bonobo
range. Here the conservation project intervenes to improve farmers access to markets for their agricultural products, as a
livelihood alternative to unsustainable farming practices and commercial bushmeat hunting. The intervention involved providing
local communities with a boat to transport crops from the forest landscape to DRCs main markets in Kinshasa and Mbandaka,
as well as new methods of sustainable farming. The barges round-trip journey takes approximately two months. It transports
up to 400 tons of product crops travelling one way, humanitarian aid the other. The Congo Shipping Project has allowed
farmers to sell produce for profit, increasing the overall income of their community. It is anticipated that farmers will have less
incentive to engage in the commercial bushmeat trade and that farming practices will enable fallow periods to be lengthened,
thus reducing the rate of forest degradation69.
4.9
WILDLIFELAW ENFORCEMENT OUTCOMES IMPROVE SIGNIFICANTLY IF THE ENTIRE JUDICIAL PROCESS FROM
ARREST TO PROSECUTION IS CLOSELY MONITORED.
The EAGLE (Eco Activists for Governance and Law Enforcement) network of wildlife law enforcement NGOs70 are achieving
remarkable success with their approach of investigations, law enforcement operations, legal assistance for prosecution of
cases and media coverage of the results. These organizations work closely with all the national law enforcement organizations
(forest and wildlife, police, gendarmerie, customs, justice department, national representatives of INTERPOL) to detect and
prosecute wildlife crime. A network of informers provides evidence, and when arrests are made lawyers are on hand to make
sure that the correct legal procedures are strictly adhered to (arrest protocol, witness statements, trial, etc.) in order to ensure
successful prosecution. Cases are given wide publicity in the local and international media. High level political support is
important particularly when high level figures are prosecuted for wildlife crimes 71. The wide publicity contributes to improving
wildlife governance, by improving understanding of the laws and serving as a warning to potential offenders.
4.10
LAW ENFORCEMENT ALONE IS NOT A LONG TERM SOLUTION TO THE BUSHMEAT CRISIS.
There are no examples in Central Africa where a comprehensive solution for tackling the bushmeat trade has been developed
and tested. A review of experiences of livelihood alternatives for the unsustainable use of bushmeat commissioned by the CBD
Bushmeat Liaison Group highlights the paucity of successful examples from Central Africa72. While interdiction and
enforcement only policies have been widely used, they are not the complete answer in the short and medium term. However
satisfactorily regulating and managing the entire supply chain, from sustainable hunting in the forest, to sale of disease-free
meat in the urban markets, is also highly problematic given the problems of governance in Central Africa. Bushmeat is a food
security issue as much as a biodiversity issue73 in rural environments and needs to be tackled from this perspective. By contrast
in urban areas bushmeat is more of a luxury item so actions should focus on reducing the supply to urban markets by exerting
pressure on the supply routes (roads, rivers, railways, airlines) and encouraging a shift in feeding habits away from bushmeat
consumption.
INDICATIVE CONSERVATION ACTIONS / PRIORITY CONSERVATION NEEDS
5.1
67P.
IN SITU LONG-TERM SUPPORT TO PROTECTED AREAS IN KEY LANDSCAPES FOR CONSERVATION
Bouch. 2010. Inventaire arien 2010 des grands mammifres dans le nord de la Rpublique Centrafricaine. ECOFAC.
68http://www.chinkoproject.com/#page-introduction
69http://www.awf.org/projects/congo-shipping-project
70The
EAGLE network comprises: LAGA (Cameroon); CJ (Gabon); PALF (Congo Brazzaville); RALF (CAR); GALF (Guinea Conakry); TALF (Togo).
Gabon the Prefect (Senior Divisional Officer) of Mitzig, was successfully imprisoned for 12 months for wildlife crime and abuse of power.
http://www.conservation-justice.org/wordpress/?p=726&lang=en
72 Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2011) Livelihood alternatives for the unsustainable use of bushmeat. Report prepared for the CBD
Bushmeat Liaison Group. Technical Series No. 60, Montreal, SCBD, 46 pages.
73 R. Nasi, A. Taber and N. Van Vliet. 2011. Empty forest, empty stomachs ? Bushmeat and livelihoods in Congo and the Amazon basin. International Forestry
Review, vol 13.
71In

Final report
Page 33
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLC) are areas recognized to be of global wildlife importance with intact ecosystems
capable of sustaining wildlife populations in the face of increasing isolation from other similar areas. The strategic approach
must be first and foremost to concentrate efforts on helping the national PA agencies to secure the protection of priority PAs
and their immediate buffer zones in KLCs. If wildlife cannot be protected here there is little chance that it can be preserved
elsewhere given the pressures on wildlife and the speed with which wildlife populations are being impoverished across the
Central African region. A pragmatic and realistic approach is required that recognises that we cannot protect wildlife
everywhere. Where it is feasible efforts should be made to ensure connectivity between PAs but it should be understood that
this will not be possible everywhere. As a general principle the areas where conservation efforts are likely to have the most
success are those that are large and intact; in other words they have the full complement of species, in the right proportions,
and where the population structure of the longest-lived components (the trees) has not been too badly compromised by human
activities such as farming and logging. Areas where there are clear opportunities for developing effective collaboration with
communities and private sector operators in the buffer zones linking the PAs (FSC certified logging concessions, mining
companies) are also considered to be of particular importance. However some PAs containing exceptional species richness
and/or endemism, particularly in the highly threatened Afromontane habitats, are already so isolated that efforts will inevitably
be focused almost entirely on protecting the PA.
The priority KLCs are those that meet as many of the following criteria as possible:
Recognised as a World Heritage Site for its global (scientific) importance;

Protects a functioning ecosystem with viable wildlife populations in the face of increasing isolation caused
by an expanding rural population;
Established as a Transfrontier Conservation Area or in the process of formal development as a TFCA;
Protects the most important populations of free-ranging elephants in the region;
Protects a key population (as rated by the appropriate IUCN SSC Specialist Group) of one or more of the
other iconic Central African wildlife species (gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobo, okapi, forest elephant,
endemic small primates, endemic ungulates, etc.) which are categorised as endangered or vulnerable
according to IUCN Red List Criteria;
Protects a globally important dry-season concentration area for wildlife populations together with their wetseason dispersal zones;
Plays an important role in protecting important wintering grounds for Palearctic bird migrants (eg wetlands
recognised as Important Bird Areas IBA);
Protects a regionally important hotspot of endemism and diversity;
Contains wildlife landscapes of exceptional scenic interest;
Protects a watershed that human populations are highly dependent on;
Plays a vital role in sustaining a key natural resource, such as a fishery or source of freshwater, that has
critical national importance through public, commercial, recreational, artisanal or subsistence use.
In the moist forest zone certain KLCs span international boundaries. These Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCA) provide
good opportunities for economies of scale, sharing of conservation costs, regional cooperation for conservation and buffering
in time of civil unrest in one or other of the national components of the ecosystem (see also 4.3). Three such TFCAs stand out
in the Central African moist forest zone: the Greater Virunga TFCA (DRC, Uganda, Rwanda), the TRIDOM-TNS TFCA
(Cameroon, Gabon, Congo, CAR), and the Gamba/Conkouati TFCA (Gabon, Congo) (see 5.1.1. below for more detailed
information). Between them they account for roughly a third of the Central Africa regions category I-IV protected areas and
almost certainly protect the majority of Central Africas floral and faunal diversity. They also include most of the priority areas
identified in the Central African Chimpanzee and Gorilla Action Plan and the Eastern DRC Great Apes Action Plan, and cover
the majority of Africas remaining forest elephants, of which Gabon alone probably holds 50%74.
In the drier ecosystems to the north of the moist forest block, spanning the forest-savanna transition zone and the east
Sudanian savannas of CAR, northern DRC, southern South Sudan and southern Chad, there are a number of important sites
harbouring wildlife characteristic of these zones. These include Zemongo/Chinko complex in eastern CAR, the Garamba
NP/Bili-Uere complex in northern DRC and the Southern NP in South Sudan. However much of this area suffers from high
levels of insecurity and conflict and is intensively used for wildlife trafficking. In these areas it is not only very difficult to work
effectively within the existing PAs but opportunities for developing concrete conservation activities in the areas linking them
74 Maisels F, Strindberg S, Blake S, Wittemyer G, Hart J, et al. (2013) Devastating Decline of Forest Elephants in Central Africa. PLoS ONE 8(3): e59469.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059469

Final report
Page 34
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
are currently limited. However although wildlife populations have been seriously depleted over much of this area it is considered
important not to abandon it since, given the very low human density and the vastness of the area, there is potential for recovery
if security and law and order can be restored. WCS working in this area has had success developing what they refer to as
Conservation Security Partnerships through which wildlife law enforcement is linked with efforts to address security threats to
local people (Box 5).
Box 5. Conservation Security Partnerships - a concept for linking wildlife conservation efforts with efforts to address security
threats to local people
WCS working in the South Sudan/CAR/north DRC transfrontier area have developed the concept of Conservation
Security Partnerships (CSP) for operating in zones of high wildlife value where insecurity and lawlessness is an issue.
It is based on a similar approach developed by the Northern Rangelands Trust of Northern Kenya and aims to
embrace explicit conflict mitigation and security enhancement objectives together with wildlife protection and
protected area management.
At the regional level the CSP involves partnerships between wildlife law enforcement forces, police, military,
international security organizations (eg AFRICOM) and local community leaders which link wildlife law enforcement
efforts to protect and secure wildlife with efforts to address security threats to local people (cattle raiding, local
militia/rebels) as well as broader security threats to state and regional stability. For example in Southern NP in South
Sudan park rangers are linked in with AFRICOM, SPLA and UPDF, as well as local community scouts, to eliminate
LRA threats and contribute to elephant protection and anti-trafficking.
At the local level Community Based Conservation Security Partnerships (CBCSP) involve local communities directly
in monitoring of illegal activities, intelligence gathering, first alert systems, joint patrolling with wildlife forces and intertribal peace processes using common security and wildlife conservation concerns as a neutral common ground.
In addition to these very large KLCs, a number of individual sites containing a single PA and its buffer zone should be targeted
for support. Priority should be given to existing World Heritage Sites which, by virtue of their WHS status are internationally
recognised as being of global importance for nature conservation, and to sites which are on the counties Tentative Lists for
WHS status or which protect specific globally important features not found elsewhere.
In countries open to PPPs for the management of their PAs this approach should be promoted (DRC, Chad, Congo).
Elsewhere, where the institutional context is favourable (such as in Gabon) support to the PA agency through collaborative
agreements should be considered. This could include the secondment of qualified staff (expatriate or otherwise) to the national
organisations with a dual management and training role.
The support for PA management should place particular emphasis on:
Strengthening anti-poaching and general law enforcement activities.
Equipment (and, importantly, mechanisms for proper management of the equipment) and law enforcement
training, including paramilitary training, will be major components in many sites. Where feasible and
appropriate specialist anti-poaching/surveillance organizations should be involved75.
Establishing Law Enforcement Monitoring tools (SMART, CyberTracker76 or others, Box 6 below) and
Protected Area Management Effectiveness monitoring tools as standard features of park management
procedures.
Mainstreaming the LAGA approach (investigations, operations, legal assistance, media coverage) into the
PA management operations (see 4.9 above).
Box 6. Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool SMART
75
76
http://maisha-consulting.com/
http://www.cybertracker.org

Final report
Page 35
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
In order to strengthen the effectiveness of monitoring and patrolling, a global consortium of NGOs and conservation
agencies (WCS, WWF, ZSL, Frankfurt Zoological Society, CITES-MIKE and North Carolina Zoo) have developed the
Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool (SMART; www.smartconservationtools.org). SMART harnesses rangercollected data on threats and performance by applying new technologies to local needs and capacities through an
easy-to-use software tool and a suite of best practices for patrol monitoring and management. At the local level,
SMART can support anti-poaching by enabling identification of poaching hotspots, evaluation of ranger performance,
and more efficient targeting of enforcement efforts; at the national level, the information can strengthen institutional
communication channels to better allocate financial and human resources to improve anti-poaching efforts; and
globally, the information provides standardized, reliable, and accountable measures of poaching and performance to
prioritize funding streams and encourage better governance.
SMART is being implemented in more than 100 protected areas worldwide through technical support provided by
SMART partners in collaboration with host government agencies. In Africa SMART is being used in protected areas
in 14 countries, with national-level adoption of the system already secured in Gabon and underway in Uganda, Kenya,
and Democratic Republic of Congo. The SMART Partnership is also engaged with several global institutions and
conventions in joint efforts, such as CITES-MIKE and the World Heritage Centre. Through these and other multilateral and international mechanisms, SMART has the potential to become the global standard for improved law
enforcement monitoring (LEM) across protected areas.
Ensuring that there are sufficient resources for regular monitoring of key conservation targets, particularly great apes
(see the different great ape Conservation Action Plans) and forest elephants. In addition to data on the target species it should
be remembered that these surveys generate a great deal of other essential information for managers, notably human activities.
Over the past 20 years much work has been done to refine methodologies for large mammal survey methods in the moist
forest environment and standard methodologies are now being used widely across the region enabling more reliable
comparisons to be made. However these surveys require considerable resources and until now have not been conducted with
sufficient frequency. For forest elephants for example, in addition to the official Central African MIKE sites, a number of other
important sites require urgent surveys. These are Lobk, Nki, Mbam et Djerem National Parks and Ngoila-Mintom zone
(Cameroon); Conkouati and Ntokou-Pikounda National Parks (Congo), Moukalaba-Doudou, Wonga-Wongue, Loango,
Birougou, Mwagne, Ivindo, Waka and Mts de Cristal National Parks (Gabon).
Aerial monitoring and surveys is a very cost effective tool for which sufficient resources should be made available. While its
usefulness over the open savanna ecosystems are self-evident aerial monitoring over the moist forest ecosystem has also
proved highly effective particularly for monitoring use of the ecologically important forest clearings (by humans and animals),
and also for monitoring mining and logging activities (new roads and tracks, etc..). This should be an integral part of monitoring
activities.
Training of field staff (wardens, assistant wardens, monitoring officers, community outreach officers). This is in addition to
the specific anti-poaching training referred to above. This should include on-the-job training as well as formal training in
specialised regional or international institutes (see also 5.3).
Community outreach activities to build conservation constituencies for the parks that are relevant to the particular contexts
of the sites and are practical and achievable. Outreach programs developed by the park must not attempt to resolve all the
socio-economic ills of the neighbouring populations. That task should be assigned to specialist organisations with appropriate
budgets, and the objectives of the interventions must be compatible with the conservation objectives of the park, and preferably
run in parallel with the support to the PA. Awareness building and effective communication between stakeholders will be an
integral part of outreach activities. The INCEF77 approach is considered particularly effective for awareness raising and
dissemination of information in local communities. INCEF focuses on locally produced and disseminated videos as an
educational tool to foster improvement of the health and well-being of human and wildlife populations. It does this by building
capacities of local media professionals to produce quality films in local languages and building capacities among local
education teams to disseminate the videos and measure their impacts.
5.1.1
Transfrontier conservation areas (TFCA)
Brief descriptions of important KLCs spanning international boundaries as TFCAs are given below.
Greater Virunga TFCA
77
http://www.incef.org/

Final report
Page 36
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
This complex encompasses 11 protected areas in DRC (Virunga NP), Rwanda (Volcans NP) and Uganda (Queen Elizabeth
NP, Mgahinga Gorilla NP; Bwindi NP, Semiliki NP, Ruwenzori NP, Kibale NP, Kasyoha-Kitomi FR, Kalinzu-Maramagambo FR,
Kyumbura WR). Covering about 12,860 km, and with an altitudinal range of 600 to 5,100 m, this area protects the worlds
remaining 800 mountain gorillas as well as a significant proportion of the Albertine Rift endemics. It is considered one of the
most species rich regions on earth78 and is undoubtedly one of the most spectacular landscapes in Central Africa. It is also the
only area in Central Africa where very substantial tourism revenue is guaranteed (gorillas, chimpanzees, active volcanoes,
Ruwenzoris, savanna fauna). Mountain gorilla tourism generates millions of Euros annually for the national economies of the
countries involved and enhances their international standing. Indeed the safeguarding of the mountain gorilla population was
one of the few issues over which the three countries, variously in conflict with each other over the past 20 years, were able to
agree. The Greater Virunga Transboundary Collaboration, with its Executive Secretariat based in Kigali, Rwanda is a
mechanism established by the three countries for strategic, collaborative management of the Greater Virunga landscape. The
gorilla population has increased steadily since the late 70s. Tourism revenue is guaranteed to increase as long as the mountain
gorilla population remains protected. Gorilla tourism is also one of the few examples from Central Africa where local
communities benefit clearly from the presence of the park (and mostly recognise the fact that they do an important nuance).
Figure 3. Map of the Greater Virunga TFCA

78Plumptre,
A.J., Behangana, M., Davenport, T., Kahindo, C., Kityo, R., Ndomba, E., Ssegawa, R., Eilu, P., Nkuutu, G., and Owiunji, I. (2003).The Biodiversity
of the Albertine Rift. Albertine Rift Technical Reports N3.

Final report
Page 37
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Greater TRIDOM-TNS TFCA

This TFCA covers a very large area of essentially contiguous moist forest spanning the borders of three countries (Cameroon,
Gabon and Congo). It includes two Central African landscapes known as TRIDOM (Tri national Dja-Odzala-Minkebe) and
TNS (Trinational Sangha) but is also extended to include Lop NP WHS and Lac Tele Community Reserve since the habitat
linking all these PAs is almost contiguous and much of it is under concession to the logging and mining industries.
It covers 15 protected areas in Gabon (Ivindo NP, Mwagne NP, Minkebe NP, Lop-Okanda WHS), Cameroon (Dja WR WHS,
Nki NP, Boumba Bek NP, Lac Lobeke NP, Kom NP), Congo (Odzala NP, Nouabal-Ndoki NP, Ntokou-Pikounda NP, Lac Tele
CR), CAR (Dzanga-Ndoki NP, Dzanga RS). The TNS part of this KLC differs from the other PAs in this landscape in that it is
a transfrontier World Heritage Site (the first in the world) composed of 4 contiguous protected areas, managed within the
framework of a tri-national agreement79 between the governments of CAR, Cameroon and Congo and funded through its own
Trust Fund (see below). Lop-Okanda is both a natural and cultural World Heritage Site
This vast area of over 250,000km contains the majority of Central Africas forest elephants, lowland gorillas and chimpanzees
as well a wide cross-section of the Congo basin fauna. Floristically the PAs together protect a substantial proportion of the
Congo basin flora80. Almost all the forest in between the PAs is, or soon will be, under the management control of extractive
industries (logging and mining). This offers many possibilities of PPP to enhance wildlife conservation in the concessions and
thus preserve forest connectivity between the network of PAs (see section 5.2). Some of the PAs have extraordinary tourist
potential (TNS, Odzala, Ivindo) because of the presence of many forest clearings with guaranteed viewing of forest elephant
and gorillas and a wide spectrum of other forest animal species. In TNS, Odzala and Ivindo tourist infrastructures have already
started attracting international tourism although it is still a long way from being a profit making operation. The private sector
partner in Odzala has invested in particularly impressive high-end infrastructures81 which is a clear indication of the
conservation importance and tourism potential of this site.
Over the past 15 years conservation partners and logging companies have developed collaborative partnerships and tested
methodologies for wildlife management, anti-poaching and sustainable hunting in the logging concessions adjacent to this
complex of protected areas. Lessons learned from these partnerships should be used to guide evolving partnerships with the
mining sector, a more recent arrival in the landscape with an enormous capacity to influence, both negatively and positively,
what happens here. PPP management agreements exist for the management of Odzala NP and Nouabal-Ndoki NP.
In 2007 the TNS Trust Fund (FTNS) was established with support from the World Bank/WWF Alliance for Forest Conservation
and Sustainable Use, GTZ, WCS, AFD and USAID-CARPE. Currently the FTNS has a capital of approximately 25m provided
by KfW, AFD, and Regenwalt Striftung through the Krombacher Regenwald Kampagne. These funds are invested in
international markets and are expected to produce a stable revenue stream to cover targeted activities for conservation and
sustainable development.
79
A tri-national cooperation agreement between Gabon, Cameroon and Congo also exists for TRIDOM
80J.J.
Wieringa and M.S.M. Sosef. 2011. The applicability of relative floristic resemblance to evaluate the conservation value of protected areas. Plant Ecology
and Evolution Fast Track:1-7
81Odzala Wilderness camps: http://www.odzala-kokoua.com/

Final report
Page 38
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Figure 4. Map of Greater TRIDOM/TNS Transfrontier Conservation Area

Gamba/Mayumba/Conkouati TFCA
This complex includes 4 PAs in Gabon (Mayumba NP, Loango NP, Moukalaba-Doudou NP) and Congo (Conkouati NP) and
is important because it encompasses some of the best examples of coastal forests and wetlands in Central Africa. The
landscape is also globally important for 4 species of marine turtle that nest on the beaches, and 17 Cetaceans, including an
important population of humpback whales which are easily observed during the breeding season from June to September. The
extensive areas of inland lagoons harbor populations of the endangered West African Manatee, as well as terrestrial large
mammal assemblages including gorillas, chimpanzees, forest elephants, forest buffalo and hippos, all of which can sometimes
be observed on the beaches. The area therefore has major tourist potential, in addition to its global importance for wildlife
conservation.
Over the past 15 years conservation and research partners, notably WWF and the Smithsonian Institution, have developed
innovative and successful partnerships with private sector logging and oil companies82 active in the area to enhance biodiversity
conservation and these types of partnership should be continued and developed.
82Smithsonian
Institution collaborates with Shell: Oil http://nationalzoo.si.edu/SCBI/Collaborative-Research-Initiatives/Gabon-Biodiversity-Program.cfm

WWF collaborates with oil and logging companies on land use planning, wildlife management and anti-poaching, and alternative livelihoods,
http://awsassets.panda.org/downloads/wwf_gamba_fact_sheet_en_300410.pdf

Final report
Page 39
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Figure 5. Map of the Gamba/Mayumba/Conkouati Transfrontier Conservation Area

Garamba / Bili-Uele / Southern / Zemongo-Chinko TFCA
It is recognised that this TFCA is significantly different from the others described above in that the area is characterised by
extreme insecurity and lawlessness which has led to depletion of wildlife populations over the past 25 years. However it is
considered important to maintain a presence in the zone to (i) secure the PAs, one of which is a WHS in Danger and (ii)
contribute to conservation security in the intervening zones. Trafficking of wildlife to northern Sudan from this area, as well as
from further south in the Congo basin, occurs across this vast largely uncontrolled area. There is therefore a need, and good
potential, for a broad Northern DRC-Eastern CAR-Southwestern South Sudan conservation-security partnership (Box 5 above)
including wildlife services of the three countries, NGOs operational in the areas (WCS, APN, Chinko Project) and AFRICOM,
US Departments of State and Defense, and local military operators (SPLA, UPDF, UN armed missions). Gabons ANPN has
also recently become involved helping the CAR government with wildlife security issues, including in Chinko.
Biologically the area contains vast intact areas of biodiversity-rich forest-savanna mosaic as well as the drier Sudanian savanna
and woodland wilderness areas. As recently as the early 1980s this area supported the highest density of elephants in Africa
and there is potential for recovery given the low human densities and the intactness of vast areas of natural habitat. The area
contains three national parks: Garamba NP in DRC, and Lantoto NP (contiguous with Garamba) and Southern NP in South
Sudan. Other PAs are the vast Bili-Uere complex of Wildlife and Hunting Reserves in DRC and the Zemongo Wildlife Reserve
and Chinko Hunting Reserve in the CAR. Garamba NP has the most important elephant population remaining in the region
(although currently suffering intense poaching pressure from the LRA and Sudanese gangs 83). Southern NP remains a
stronghold for giant eland and also contains roan, hartebeest and wild dog 84. The Chinko-Zemongo complex has a remarkably
intact (though low density) array of wildlife species typical of the forest-savanna ecotone including giant eland, buffalo, bongo,
lion, elephant, chimpanzees and giant forest hog. Similarly recent surveys in the long abandoned Bili-Uere complex have
confirmed important pockets of wildlife particularly in the forest sections of the forest-savanna mosaic85,86.
http://www.african-parks.org/Blog_150_Update%3A+Garamba+National+Parks+Poaching+Crisis.html
Grossmann, F., Elkan, P., Tiba,C., Moi, J., Awol P. P., Lita, J., Demetry, P. and S. Kenyi. 2011. Aerial Surveys of Wildlife, Livestock, and Human Activity
in and around Existing and Proposed Protected Areas of the Republic of South Sudan 2009 - 2010. WCS Report No. 4 to USAID and Government of South
Sudan.
85 Elkan, P., et al. (in prep.) Aerial surveys of Wildlife, Livestock, and Human activity in the Bili-Uere landscape, Democratic Republic of Congo. WCS and
ICCN technical report on survey conducted in 2013.
86 Hart, J. 2014. Summary of elephant surveys in North Central DRC 2007-2013. Lukuru Wildlife Research Foundation. Draft report submitted to AfEDB, sept
2014.
83
84

Final report
Page 40
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
The Monts de Cristal - Altos Nsork TFCA

This mid altitude mountain range spanning Gabon and Equatorial Guinea represents a Pleistocene refuge with the highest
species richness and diversity of any site in western Central Africa, including perhaps the greatest plant diversity in Africa. With
a unique combination of primary rainforest and cloud forest, it has one of the highest numbers of butterfly species in Africa
(many species are found only here and Equatorial Guinea). It has a significant population of elephants and mandrills, and is a
key water source for the region.
The Korup-Takamanda-Mount Cameroon TFCA is covered in Volume 5 (Western Africa).
5.1.2
Other priority KLCs
While the TFCAs described in 5.1.1 above provide a reasonably comprehensive coverage of Central Africas biodiversity and
key flagship species populations, the following KLCs, some of which contain only a single PA, are also considered as highest
priority for support, either because they are already on the World Heritage Tentative List (and therefore have the potential to
meet the Outstanding Universal Value criteria of the World Heritage Convention) or because they protect unique or highly
endangered species or ecosystems.
Democratic Republic of Congo:
The remaining three DRC World Heritage Sites: Okapi WR, Kahuzi-Biega NP, Salonga NP. (Virunga NP is
covered in the Greater Virunga TFCA, and Garamba NP in the Garamba-Bili Uere-Southern-Chinko TFCA). Their
status as WHS confirms their global importance. Globally important DRC endemics are protected by these sites
(Okapi, Grauers gorilla, Bonobo, Congo peacock, aquatic genet, numerous small primate endemics). The Okapi
Wildlife Reserve is the most important protected area for the Eastern Chimpanzee (about 6,000 individuals) and
contains the DRCs largest forest elephant population (estimated at 1,200 in 201187).
Lomami NP (in the process of being gazetted). This area contains several DRC endemics including the iconic
bonobo and okapi. Scientists have also recently described a new endemic monkey species, the lesula monkey
(Cercopithecus lomamiensis)88 and a second new species is currently being described. This is a very remote area
of moist forest with relatively limited human and development pressures on its boundaries.
Lomako-Yokokala NR : A priority area for bonobos in the northern part of its range (IUCN Bonobo conservation
Strategy) and an area where long term research has been conducted.
Tumba-Lediima NR: A priority area for bonobos in the western part of its range (IUCN Bonobo Conservation
Strategy). In addition the swamp forests of Lac Tumba (together with those of Lac Tele CR in the Congo Republic
see below) constitute the largest area under protection of the vast and unique Congolian Swamp forests.
Itombwe-Kabobo: The Itombwe Massif and the adjacent Kabobo-Luama landscape on the Albertine Rift are both
in the process of becoming protected areas: the Itombwe Natural Reserve and the Ngamikka National Park
respectively. These contain the highest number of Albertine Rift endemics of any site on the Albertine Rift with many
species that are unique to the two sites. Recent discoveries include 3 mammal and 5 plant species, and a possible
10 new amphibian species. Kabobo-Luama landscape may have as many as 2,000 chimpanzees while the Itombwe
Massif has both chimpanzees and Grauers gorilla populations.
Maiko NP. Given the highly heterogeneous distribution of the Grauers gorilla (making it vulnerable to local
extinctions outside of PAs) this park is important for the protection of this DRC endemic. Several other Congo
endemics occur there (Congo peacock, okapi, aquatic genet). This park is currently very difficult to operate in
because of problems of access and the presence of Simba rebels who have been living in the park since the late
60s.
The two Katanga national parks Kundelungu NP and Upemba NP and the Zone Annexe connecting them. These
are the only national parks in the Central African region that protect the miombo woodland ecosystem. The endemic
Congo Zebra survives in Upemba NP and there is strong potential for recovery of wildlife populations given proper
protection. The area also has significant tourist potential (spectacular landscapes).
Vosper, A., Masselink, J. & Maisels, F. (2012) WCS RFO Program: Great ape and human impact monitoring in Okapi Faunal Reserve, Democratic Republic
of Congo. Final report to USFWS - GACF Agreement 96200-0-G100. WCS]
88 Hart JA, Detwiler KM, Gilbert CC, Burrell AS, Fuller JL, et al. (2012) Lesula: A New Species of Cercopithecus Monkey Endemic to the Democratic Republic
of Congo and Implications for Conservation of Congos Central Basin. PLoS ONE 7(9): e44271. oi:10.1371/journal.pone.0044271
87

Final report
Page 41
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Gounda-St Floris World Heritage Site and the surrounding Village Safari Hunting Zones (Zones
Cyngtiques Villagoises) ZCV although this area is currently overwhelmed by conflict, the past history of
community conservation successes based on consumptive tourism in the ZCV justifies keeping this area on the list
of priority zones where interventions could restart if and when security returns to this area. A key feature of this zone
is the large population of giant eland.
Cameroon
Bouba-Ndjida-Benou: Sudanian savanna. Bouba-Njida previously contained >500 savanna elephants, but has
potential for recovery. Both have giant eland populations.
Mbam et Djerem NP. Large, mostly intact, area of the biodiversity rich savanna-forest transition ecotone. One of the
largest remaining populations of savanna elephants in Central Africa (estimate 800).
Mount Oku and Ijim Ridge. Although not category I-IV PAs the area contains the Oku Floral Sanctuary (Sanctuaire
flore dOku) and contains the largest extent of, and highest, afromontane forest in West Africa, the only Alpine
bamboo forest and the only Podocarpus forest in West Africa. It also has exceptional floral, herpetological, and bird
endemicity.
Chad
Zakouma NP. This is Chads emblematic protected area which was brought back from the brink by >30 yrs of sustained support
for protection. Zakouma is the flagship protected area of the Sudanian savanna ecosystem. Conservation efforts in the park
(managed by APN under a PPP) receive political support at the highest level. It also has very significant tourist potential.
Equatorial Guinea
Pico Grande NP (HP) and Pico Basile NP. Spectacular forest-covered volcanic landscapes with a large altitudinal
range (0 3000m) and harbouring important Gulf of Guinea primate endemics. Also globally important beaches for
marine turtles. On the WHS Tentative List.
So Tome e Prncipe
Obo NP So Tom and Zona Ecologica Prncipe. They protect important plant and bird endemics and are vital for
watershed protection. They are also landscapes of outstanding scenic interest with good tourist potential. On the
WHS Tentative List.
The complete list of KLCs, their special features and current partners, is presented in Table 1 below.

Final report
Page 42
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA

Final report
Page 43
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA

Final report
Page 44
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Table 1. Summary of key features of the Central African KLCs
KLCA
(countries)
Greater Virunga*
(DRC, Ug, Rw)
TRIDOM/TNS*
(Cam, Gab, Co,
CAR)
Protected areas
Gamba/Mayumb
a/ Conkouati*
(Gab, Co)
Virunga NP (DRC) WHS in Danger

Volcans NP (Rw)
Mhahinga NP (Ug)
Queen Elizabeth NP (Ug)
Bwindi NP (Ug) WHS
Semiliki NP (Ug)
Ruwenzori NP (Ug) WHS
Kibale NP (Ug)
Kasyoha-Kitomi FR(Ug)
Kalinzu-Maramagambo FR (Ug)
Kyumbura WR (Ug)
Minkb NP (Gab)
Ivindo NP (Gab)
Mwagne NP (Gab)
Dja WR (Cam) WHS in Danger
Nki NP (Cam)
BoumbaBek NP (Cam)
Lac Lobeke NP (Cam) part of TNS WHS
Odzala NP (Co)
Nouabal-Ndoki NP (Co) part of TNS
WHS
Ntoukou-Pikounda NP (Co)
Lac Tele CR
Dzanga-Ndoki NP (CAR) part of TNS
WHS
Dzanga SR (CAR)
Lop NP (Gab) WHS (natural and
cultural)
Loango NP (Gab)
Moukalaba-Doudou NP (Gab)
Mayumba NP (Gab)
Conkouati NP (Co)
Size
(km)
c. 13,000
Special features of site justifying selection
c. 250,000
c. 12,600

Final report
Multi and bilateral

donors and other
funders present
Principal international
technical partners
supporting national PA
institutions**
ACF
WCS
WWF
AWF
ZSL
FZS
DFGF
Albertine Rift Montane and mid altitude forest, East Sudanese

savanna, Wetlands
WHS x 3;
Entire mountain gorilla population and important chimpanzee
populations;
Watershed protection;
EU
UNESCO
Belgium
WB/GEF
HGBF
MF
USAID
USFWS
Northwest Congolian Forest, Northeast Congolian Forest,

Sangha Aquatic ecoregion, Atlantic Equatorial Coastal Forest
WHS X 4;
Majority of Central Africas remaining forest elephants;
Majority of Central Africas lowland gorillas and chimpanzees;
Major portion of Congo basin flora; including several endemic
plants (eg in Lop)
Important area of Congolian swamp forest (Lac Tele )
Endemic sun tailed monkey (Lop)
Hundreds of mineral rich forest clearings (bais)
Ancient rock art (Lop)
High tourist potential in several of the PAs Odzala, TNS,
Lop, Ivindo)
Good potential for PPPs with logging and mining sector and
with protected area management specialists;
EU
USFWS
USAID
KfW
GIZ
GEF/PNUD
ADB
Netherlands
WWF Netherlands
WCS
AP
FTNS
Atlantic Equatorial Forest, Southern Congolian Savannah

Forest mosaic, Equatorial coastal aquatic ecoregion
Extensive inland wetlands;
Endangered manatee population;
Forest elephant and apes;
USFWS
WWF
WCS
SI
Page 45
KLCA
(countries)
Garamba/BiliUere/Southern/
Chinko*
(CAR, DRC, SS)
Gounda-St Floris
-BaminguiBangoran and
surrounding
hunting blocks
(CAR)
Salonga
(DRC)
Protected areas
Garamba NP (DRC) WHS in Danger

Bili-Uere complex of Hunting Domains
(DRC)
Southern NP (South Sudan)
Lantoto NP (South Sudan)
Zemongo-Chinko (CAR)
Gounda-St Floris NP (WHS in danger)

Bamingui-Bangoran NP
Zone Pilote de Sangba
Salonga NP. WHS in Danger
Size
(km)
C. 250,000
Globally important for marine turtles, whales and dolphins;

High tourist potential;
Protects regionally important marine fish stocks;
Potential for PPP with logging and oil sectors.
Northern Congolian forest savanna mosaic, Sudanian
savanna
WHS x 1 (Garamba -on list of WHS in Danger)
Biodiversity rich forest-savanna mosaic in transition zone
linking with vast intact areas of Sudanian savanna. Wildlife
reflects this mix of habitats: Chimpanzees, bongo, giant forest
hog, forest and savanna elephant, giant eland, roan,
hartebeest, wild dog.
c. 50,000
Sudanian savanna
WHS in Danger
Until recent conflict good CBNRM results from safari hunting
in Zone Pilote de Sangba buffer zone
33,350
Eastern Congolian swamp forests, Central Congolian lowland

forest
WHS in Danger
Bonobos, endemic small primates,
Northeastern Congolian lowland forest
Okapi, forest elephant, chimpanzee, bongo, Congo peacock,
Aquatic genet
17 spp of diurnal and nocturnal primates
Northeastern Congolian lowland forest,
Albertine Rift Afro montane forests
Northeastern Congolian lowland forest
Grauers gorilla (important site for this species given its very
heterogeneous distribution in eastern DRC)
other endemics including Okapi, Aquatic genet, Congo
peacock
Okapi
(DRC)
Okapi WR. WHS in Danger
13,750
Kahuzi-Biega
(DRC)
Maiko-Tayna
(DRC)
Kahuzi-Biega NP. WHS in Danger
6,000
Maiko NP
Tayna Community Reserves
c. 11,000

Final report
Multi and bilateral

donors and other
funders present
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
technical partners
institutions**
WCS
APN
Chinko Project
Lukuru Foundation
AWF
USFWS
EU
World Bank
GEF
Spain (AECID,
MAAMA)
Fundacion
Biodiversidad
Life Web
EU
AGRECO
EU
WWF
KfW
GIZ
UNESCO
WCS
GIC
GIZ/KfW
UNESCO
WCS
FZS
Page 46
KLCA
(countries)
Protected areas
Size
(km)
UpembaKundelungu
(DRC)
Upemba NP (DRC)
Kundelungu NP
Zone Annexe (buffer zone)
17,000
LomakoYokokala (DRC)
Lomako-Yokokala WR
3,625
Tumba-Lediima
(DRC)
Tumba-Lediima NR
7,500
Itombwe-Kabobo
(DRC)
Itombwe proposed PA
Mitsotshi-Kabobo proposed PA
Luama Hunting Domain
Lomami
(DRC)
Lomami NP (in process of gazettment)
BoubanjidaBenou
(Cam)
Buba Ndjida NP
Benoue NP
Mbam and
Djerem
(Cam)
Mbam and Djerem NP
4,500
Mt Oku Ijim
Ridge
(Cam)
Mt Oku Ijim Ridge
200
Zakouma
(Chad)
Zakouma NP
c. 10,000
4,000
23,600

Final report
KfW
EU
Central Congolian lowland forests; Eastern Congolian swamp

forests
Bonobo, elephant, sitatunga etc.
Central Congolian lowland forest; Congolian swamp forest
Bonobo
Together with Lac Tele in Congo this is the largest area of
protected Congolian swamp forest
Protection of vital freshwater fish stocks
Albertine Rift mid altitude forest; Forest savanna transition
Chimpanzees one of the few viable chimp populations in the
Albertine Rift
Endemic subspecies of Angolan Colobus and red Colobus
Albertine bird endemics
Central Congolian lowland forests
Bonobo, Okapi, Congo peacock, two newly described species
of small primate
Northern Congolian forest savanna mosaic; East Sudanian
savanna
Savannah elephants, savanna ungulates (23 antelope
species) including giant eland
Forest savanna transition
One of largest remaining savanna elephant populations in
Central Africa;
Gorillas, chimps, forest savanna ecotone species,
Afromontane forest
Largest extent of, and highest, afromontane forest in Western
Africa, the only Alpine bamboo forest and the only Podocarpus
forest in Western Africa.
Exceptional floral, herpetological, and bird endemicity
A rare example of intact Sudanian savanna ecosystem with
viable wildlife populations.
USAID
AWF
WWF
WWF
WCS
USFWS
USAID
Rainforest Trust
Critical Ecosystems
Partnership Fund
KfW
Abraham Foundation
ARCUS
France
Germany
EU
Lukuru Foundation
GIZ
USFWS
WCS
EU
APF
Multi and bilateral

donors and other
funders present
c. 10,000
Miombo woodland (only protected example in Central African

region
Last remaining population of Congo zebra
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
technical partners
institutions**
GFA
BAK
Page 47
KLCA
(countries)
Monts de CristalAltos Nsork*

(Gab, GE)
Pico Grande and

Pico Basile
(EG)
Protected areas
Obo-Zona
Ecologica
Principe
(STP)
Monts de Cristal NP
Altos-Nsork NP
Pico Grande NP
Pico Basile NP
Obo NP (Sao Tome)

Zona Ecologica (Principe)
Size
(km)
c. 2,500
850
300
TOTAL
61
Multi and bilateral

donors and other
funders present

Good tourism potential
Atlantic Forests
Pleistocene refuge, with the highest species richness and
diversity of any site in western Central Africa
Mandrills,
Vital water catchment area
On WHS tentative list
Gulf of Guinea lowland and montane forest
Spectacular forest covered volcanic landscapes with a large
altitudinal range (0 3000m);
5 endemic sub species of primate;
Globally important beaches for marine turtles.
Gulf of Guinea lowland and montane moist forest
Plant and bird endemics;
Vital for watershed protection.
Landscapes of outstanding scenic interest with high tourist
potential;
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
technical partners
institutions**
EU
c. 723,775
* Denotes that the area is also a TFCA

** Many of these technical partners also mobilise their own sources of core funding.
Country abbreviations: CAR Central African Republic; Cam Cameroon; Co Congo Republic; DRC Democratic Republic of Congo; EG Equatorial Guinea; Gab - Gabon ; Rw Rwanda;
STP Sao Tome e Principe; Ug Uganda.
NB The surface areas quoted are approximate because, unlike PAs, the boundaries of landscapes around and between the PAs are not officially defined.

Final report
Page 48
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
5.2
ENGAGE WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRY TO ENHANCE BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION OUTSIDE
PROTECTED AREAS
Since almost all forest outside of protected areas is (or will soon) be attributed to private extractive industry operators,
conservationists have to engage with them if we are to preserve connectivity between protected areas and ecological functions
across large tracts of forest. Currently the most promising opportunities for this type of collaboration are in the forests of Gabon,
northern Congo, and southern Cameroon in the Greater TRIDOM/TNS landscape. Since protected areas cover only 20% of
the forest in this zone, the areas attributed as concessions cover the overwhelming majority of the forest, and therefore probably
still contain much of the zones wildlife.
Ideally collaborative agreements should be established between the government forestry/wildlife institutions, the extractive
industry concessionaires and conservation organizations with the objective of developing and implementing best practices to
avoid wildlife loss as a result of the extractive activities. The exact nature of measures will depend on the particular
circumstances of each case but it will be necessary to work on several fronts including wildlife and socio-economic surveys to
establish baselines, establishing strong company internal regulations concerning wildlife issues, implementing wildlife
surveillance strategies, biodiversity offset mechanisms for no net loss of biodiversity, and monitoring conservation outcomes.
Working with local communities in the concessions to clarify owner and use rights of forest resources, particularly wildlife, will
be a crucial step in the process of managing sustainable hunting of bushmeat species. These measures should be an integral
part of a companys management plan which is a legally binding document (see further discussion in following section on
tackling the bushmeat issue). The inclusion of adherence to wildlife laws in the matrix of FLEGT legality criteria would further
enhance the conservation outcomes in non-FSC forest concessions.
Priority should be given to working with mining and logging companies that are located within the Greater TRIDOM/TNS and
Gamba/Mayumba/Conkouati TFCAs (5.1.1).
5.3
TRAINING AND INSTITUTION BUILDING
In Central Africa much important training of wildlife managers (wardens, monitoring officers, community conservation officers,
rangers, etc) takes place on site in the form of on-the-job training within the framework of externally funded projects. While the
value of this kind of training is undeniable, and has led to the emergence of many highly competent national conservation
practitioners, the weakness of the protected area agencies to which they belong (absence of career opportunities, poor
management of staff, governance issues) means that many of these individuals end up leaving their institutions for better paid,
and more stable and fulfilling jobs with INGOs or international agencies where they have real career opportunities. The other
common scenario is that, because of the lack of competent PA authority staff, individuals from outside of the management
authorities are brought in to a site and trained, but once trained very few of them are integrated into the national authority (nor
do many of them even wish to be integrated).
There is therefore an urgent need for fundamental institutional reform in almost all of the Central African PA authorities. PA
management needs to be professionalised and proper career prospects offered for people entering the service. This is such a
fundamental change which has to occur that many years of institution building will be required before tangible results will be
seen in terms of improved management of PAs. It will also require genuine political will for change (and improved governance)
in order to overcome the resistance to change that undoubtedly exists within certain countries of the region. However, as
noted in Vol. 3 (5.4.2), institutional reform of PA management authorities is a cost effective conservation investment because
all PAs and wildlife stand to benefit.
Three simultaneous lines of action are therefore required:
Continue with on-the-job training in sites within the framework of externally supported interventions (see 5.1 for more
detail). Training should be a standard component of all interventions in support of the sites identified in this report.
Support the main regional training centers, (EFG, ERAIFT, ENF) in Cameroon, DRC and Gabon respectively in
collaboration with their other international partners. This would involve capacity building of the institutions
themselves, as well as provision of scholarships for students. Other training centers located in the heart of the moist
forest zone, such as the Alphonse Makanga Training Centre in Lop, could be supported and links strengthened
with the above-mentioned regional training centers.
Support national-level institutional support/reform for national PA authorities in countries demonstrating genuine
political commitment to see the reforms through.
5.4
TACKLING THE BUSHMEAT ISSUE

Final report
Page 49
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Over-exploitation of wildlife threatens food security and wildlife. It is recognized as a global concern by the Convention on
Biological Diversity89 which has established a Liaison Group on Bushmeat to work with the CITES Central Africa Bushmeat
Working Group. In Central Africa demand for bushmeat is higher than the sustainable level of production. One of the most
important root causes of overhunting is the breakdown in traditional controls over access to land and hunting areas, and the
fact that legal frameworks of the Central African nations do not recognize local control over traditional lands and the rights of
local populations to manage or regulate hunting on these lands90. As a result traditional rules over hunting have broken down
and in many areas there is now a situation of open access with little or no control by local communities over hunting by
outsiders. Faced with the scale of bushmeat hunting and the evident impoverishment of large areas of forest in Central Africa
conservationists have tended to favor a law enforcement approach to prevent irreversible impoverishment of the forests.
Development-orientated actors suggest that a regulated bushmeat trade, which maintains the supplies of appropriate species
from forests, can contribute to economic growth in areas where there are few other options, but conservationists argue strongly
that sustainable offtake can only be achieved where human populations do not exceed about 1 inhabitant/kmand where the
meat is consumed at home (ie not sold outside the area)91. This is an increasingly rare situation in Central Africa and as long
as rural populations remain poor and the demand for bushmeat in urban markets remains high an unsustainable trade in
bushmeat will continue to exist. Establishing a regulated and sustainable system of harvesting bushmeat will therefore be
extremely complex and time consuming to achieve given the fundamental changes to legal frameworks that must occur across
Central Africa and the scale of capacity building of local communities for wildlife management that will be necessary. The
legitimate fear of conservationists is that by the time the regulatory frameworks are in place and capacities of local
communities for sustainable wildlife management have been built, most of the wildlife will already have disappeared
from the forests outside of protected areas. Law enforcement will therefore remain a necessary activity running in parallel
with pilot schemes to test and develop models for the regulated participatory management of bushmeat harvesting.
CBD
Decision
XI/25
on
Sustainable
use
of
biodiversity:
bushmeat
and
sustainable
https://www.cbd.int/decision/cop/default.shtml?id=13186.
90Sustainable Management of the Wildlife and Bushmeat Sector in Central Africa.FAO/GEF project document 2010. 99pp.
91 Robinson JG, and Bennett EL. 2000. Hunting for sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press
89

Final report
wildlife
management
Page 50
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Bushmeat is a food security issue in rural environments whereas in urban areas this is not necessarily the case. The protein
gap therefore needs to be tackled in rural areas by combinations of various actions at different points of the value chain and
of the enabling environment. Three strategic approaches are therefore necessary: (i) reducing the demand for bushmeat; (ii)
improving the sustainability of the supply by better management of the resource and (iii) creating a conducive and enabling
institutional and policy environment. The ultimate goal should be to achieve sustainable harvesting of bushmeat for local
consumption in rural areas, and eliminate bushmeat consumption in urban areas.
5.4.1
Reduce the demand for bushmeat
Hunters and rural consumers:

Develop alternative sources of protein at a cost similar to bushmeat. With an estimated yearly extraction rate in the
Congo basin of 4.5 million tons of bushmeat cattle ranching is never going to be an ecologically sustainable solution
since an estimated 25 million hectares of forest would have to be converted to pastures 92. Pigs and chickens have
much higher conversion rates than do cattle and both can thrive on kitchen scraps and crop residues. Near Ouesso,
one of the regions biggest bushmeat markets, opportunities exist for producing chicken feed locally (from soya and
mas) at a price below bushmeat93. Developing sustainable fisheries in the rivers and lakes should also be
investigated as fish are so important in local diets and can be a substitute for bushmeat. However, as noted in 4.10,
attempts to develop alternatives for bushmeat have so far had limited success in Central Africa. Requiring extractive
industry concessionaires to import domestically produced meat for their workers should also be a standard
requirement.
Improve economic opportunities in productive sectors. This will cover a wide range of possibilities depending on the
local context.
Raise awareness through environmental education and awareness building through local media using the INCEFtype approach.
Retailers and urban consumers:
Strictly enforce the ban on the sale and consumption of protected and endangered species. Protected species found
on sale should be publicly destroyed.
International consumers:
The international trade must be completely stopped. Heavy fines should be levied for possession or trade of
bushmeat regardless of the status of and provenance of the species.
A concerted effort is needed to raise awareness among personnel stationed at exit points (ports, airports, border
posts)
Airline and shipping companies should commit to banning the transport of all bushmeat (regardless of its status) and
should be made accountable for enforcing this. Regardless of the issue of sustainability, the international trade in
bushmeat constitutes a serious public health risk.
R. Nasi, A. Taber and N. Van Vliet. 2011. Empty forest, empty stomachs ? Bushmeat and livelihoods in Congo and the Amazon basin. International Forestry
Review, vol 13.
93 Pers. Comm. with WCS representatives
92

Final report
Page 51
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
5.4.2
Improve the sustainability of the supply by better management of the resource
This will require developing models of wildlife management with local communities, research and extension, and engagement
with the extractive industries.
Hunters and rural consumers:
Work with hunters and rural communities to establish hunting rules which allow harvesting of resilient species but
ban hunting of vulnerable species. This process will involve participatory land-use planning at the local community
level and should lead to the definition of hunting rules (period, location, hunting tools, quotas, etc.), and simple
methods to self-monitor their activities. This will be a highly complex undertaking requiring adequate financial and
technical resources. Lessons learned from past experiences in the region (e.g. PROGEPP) should be drawn on
rather than trying to reinvent the wheel.
Research and extension services:
Understanding the dynamics of hunting and its impact on the dynamics of heavily hunted resilient species and their
more vulnerable competitors is highly complex and will require a concerted effort in terms of research and monitoring
by appropriate research bodies. The SYVBAC program94, established by TRAFFIC, is one such monitoring initiative.
Analyzing the relationships and trade-offs between bushmeat and other protein sources is also a key component of
improving the sustainability of the supply. Rural communities will usually switch from bushmeat to fish as the price
or availability fluctuates with the seasons. However a decline in one resource can lead to overharvesting of the other
so understanding the feedback loop between fish and meat catches is essential. Understanding the factors
determining when and under what circumstances consumers will transition to domestic meat is also key to achieving
sustainability of bushmeat supply.
Extractive industries
The extractive industries dominate the forest landscape and have considerable potential to influence how the bushmeat crisis
will evolve. Current legislation in most of the Central African countries requires conservation to be integrated into their
sustainable forest management plans, for example the setting aside of no logging conservation series, and they have the
responsibility to ensure that their personnel respect wildlife legislation. However companies should go further in a number of
ways:
Internal regulations and codes of conduct concerning wildlife in the concessions should become part of the
companies standard operating procedures. Transportation of bushmeat should be strictly forbidden on company
vehicles and manned check-point with trained personnel should be established on the main logging roads in the
concessions.
Companies should be required to provide alternative sources of protein for their workers at cost.
Companies, in collaboration with experienced technical partners, should organize and support community hunting
schemes for communities living within their concessions.
Companies should subscribe to certification schemes which will give them preferential access to environmentally
sensitive international markets prepared to pay a premium for sustainably sourced timber from concessions where
wildlife regulations are respected. The same principle applies for the mining concessions.
5.4.3
Create a conducive and enabling institutional and policy environment.
For participatory wildlife management to become a reality national polices, laws and regulations must be able to grant to
communities the rights to the land and wildlife that they will manage, and allow community members to market locally the
bushmeat and other wildlife products (from permitted species) that are harvested. These provisions are not yet firmly integrated
in the policy and legal frameworks of the Central African countries. Several countries are however developing policies or
strategies for wildlife management (CAR, DRC, Gabon, Congo) and only one country (Congo) makes very general provisions
in its wildlife law for participatory wildlife management (but which cannot be rendered operational until the ministerial regulations
are passed). None of the legal frameworks clearly allow the marketing of bushmeat from community-managed lands and the
general perception is that the bushmeat market chain is illegal. The distinction between sale for local consumption and trade
further afield remains very blurred and is a source of recurring conflict.
Action will be required at several levels:
94
SYVBAC: SYstme de suivi de la filire Viande de brousse en Afrique Centrale.

Final report
Page 52
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
National policy making

Policies, laws and regulations will need to be revised in order to provide an adequate legal framework for enhancing
ownership and tenure rights and allowing participatory wildlife management.
At the same time it will be necessary to legitimize the bushmeat debate in order to properly address the fraught
question of the legality of the bushmeat market chain, and acknowledge the contribution of bushmeat to food security
in national strategies.
International policies
Companies or individuals not complying with CITES regulations must be firmly punished and denounced (name and
shame).
Wildlife issues must be systematically covered within internationally-supported policy processes.
A clear link must be made between the international bushmeat trade and emerging disease risks.
Local institutions
Once the policy and regulatory frameworks are in place, local institutions that have a vested interest in protecting
their wildlife resource should be supported and capacities strengthened for managing and monitoring a sustainable
local trade in bushmeat.
Finally it should be reiterated that in urban areas, where the great majority of bushmeat is consumed, bushmeat is generally
not a food security issue. A bushmeat strategy for the region should therefore concentrate on achieving sustainable off take in
rural areas but should not try to develop or manage the bushmeat chain in urban areas. Ultimately the aim should be to
see the bushmeat trade in urban areas disappear by squeezing the transport lines to the urban markets by controlling the
major accesses (roads, rivers, railways, and airlines). Dissuasive penalties for transporting bushmeat on trains, internal airlines,
public and private transport (logging trucks, buses, boats) would require strong political will but could significantly reduce the
volume of trade to the cities.
Since there are no silver bullet solutions to the bushmeat problem it is recommended that a series of pilot projects be
established in the countries in order to test different approaches in the range of contexts across the region. These pilot projects
should build on lessons learned from other ongoing initiatives of this type and should be replicated as and where feasible.
Ideally pilot projects should comprise as many of the following components as possible:
Be conducted in an area contiguous with a PA that is receiving long term support from the EU (or other agency).
This would be part of the PAs community conservation/livelihoods programme;
Be conducted in collaboration with a private sector partner (e.g. in Central Africa with an FSC certified logging
company) as part of its community development obligations;
Include, or be associated with, a component for developing alternative domestic animal protein at a competitive price
(e.g. intensive chicken production where chicken feed can be produced locally without involving habitat loss);
Include, or be associated with, a scheme to develop sustainable harvesting of freshwater fish (either wild caught or
fish farming);
A strong research and monitoring component, ideally in association with an experienced research organisation
sustainable harvesting of wildlife, particularly in the forest ecosystem, is still a very inexact science.
A strong community relations component for awareness building and local governance structures.
Associating private sector, PA management and research partners in the work with the local communities would bring important
added value in terms of scientific method, local governance building, law enforcement and awareness building.
5.5
DISMANTLING WILDLIFE CRIME NETWORKS AND CURBING THE DEMAND
This aspect is treated fully in the supplementary report on the Wildlife Trade. The recommendations of that report are entirely
relevant to the Central African context.
There has been a concerted effort over the past year to translate the 10 point Action Plan of the Marrakech declaration into
concrete actions in the Central African region. The Marrakech plan proposes a series of actions around three key themes: (i)
building collaboration between organizations and agencies; (ii) strengthening law enforcement; (iii) properly penalizing wildlife
crime. Central Africas response has been to adopt a regional action plan entitled PAPECALF (Action Plan for the COMIFAC
sub region for strengthening the enforcement of national wildlife laws) and to initiate a process leading towards the
Final report
Page 53
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
establishment of National Coordinating Units for fighting wildlife crime. These NCUs will bring together all the arms of
government concerned by wildlife crime (Justice, Interior, Defense (Police, Criminal Police, INTERPOL), Finance (Customs),
Wildlife), as well as the NGOs involved in wildlife enforcement, such as the EAGLE network and WWF. The presence of NGO
WENs (Wildlife Enforcement Networks) is essential in order to guarantee full transparency. Representatives of Diplomatic
missions should also be involved in the NCU.
Because the NCUs will bring together so many government departments it is proposed that they should work directly under
the Office of the Prime Minister. The mission of the NCUs will be to:
Establish a mechanism for collecting, storing and sharing information on wildlife crime;
Build awareness about wildlife criminality among stakeholders and disseminate information on wildlife laws;
Strengthen capacities of actors involved in combating wildlife crime;
In addition to supporting the process of establishment of effective wildlife crime NCUs, support from the EU should also include:
Continued support for international trade regulation through support for the CITES core functions and expansion
of the International Consortium on Combatting Wildlife Crime (ICCWC). The ICCWC is a collaborative effort of five
inter-governmental organizations: CITES, INTERPOL United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, World Bank and
the World Customs Organisation which works to bring coordinated support to the national wildlife law enforcement
agencies, as well as to the sub-regional and regional networks, that are fighting wildlife crime on a daily basis. The
aim is to ensure better coordinated responses to wildlife crime to increase the risk of detection and punishment for
wildlife criminals. UNDOC is currently aiding Gabon to develop a plan for improving criminal investigations for wildlife
crime and establishing forensic investigation capacities. This kind of initiative should be supported and expanded.
Support for the EAGLE network of NGO wildlife law enforcement organizations. Given the problems of
governance and capacities in the sub region the EU should support the EAGLE network. These NGOs, run by highly
motivated national and international staff, have demonstrated over the past 5 years their effectiveness and efficiency
(they work with very modest budgets). They work well with national law enforcement agencies and make an important
contribution to strengthening their capacities. They also help to ensure greater transparency, and wide media
coverage of wildlife crime operations.
The mobilization of specialist international Wildlife Security Advisors (Vol. 6, 3.9.3.3) in support of the NCUs.
Dismantling wildlife crime networks requires specialist skills that are rarely available in the region.

Final report
Page 54
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1. THE CONGO BASIN FOREST PARTNERSHIP (CBFP)
The partnership brings together the 10 member states of the COMIFAC, donor agencies, NGOs, scientific institutions and
private sector representatives. It currently has 48 members who share the commitment to enhance communication and
coordination among the members and to create synergies between their respective projects, programs and policies, in
support of the COMIFAC Convergence Plan.
Governments
Belgium, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea,
European Commission, France, Gabon, Germany, Japan, Netherlands, Republic of Rwanda, So Tom and Prncipe, South
Africa, Spain, United Kingdom, United States of America.
International Organizations:
African Development Bank, COMIFAC, FAO, Global Mechanism of the United Nations Convention to Combat
Desertification, GRASP (Great Apes Survival Partnership), International Tropical Timber Organisation, Secretariat of the
Convention on Biological Diversity, Secretariat of the Convention on Migratory Species, UNDP, UNEP, UNESCO, World
Bank.
NGOs and research groups:
African Wildlife Foundation, Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), CUSCO International, Conservation
International, Forest Trends, IUCN, Jane Goodall Institute, Last Great Ape Organisation, Rseau Africain de Forts Modles
(RAFAM), The Nature Conservancy, Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), World Resources Institute (WRI), WWF
International.
Private sector:
American Forest and Paper Organisation, Inter-African Association of Forest Industries (IFIA), International Technical
Association for Tropical Timber (ATIBT), Society of American Foresters
source: http://www.cbfp.org

Final report
Page 55
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
APPENDIX 2. LIST OF NONGOVERNMENTAL FUNDERS AND TECHNICAL PARTNERS ACTIVE IN CENTRAL AFRICA
The major NGOs implementing conservation activities in Central Africa are (in alphabetical order):
African Parks Foundation http://www.african-parks.org/ - promotes a business approach to conservation through
PPP agreements. Manages Zakouma NP (Chad), Odzala NP (Congo), Garamba NP (DRC).
African Wildlife Foundation :http://www.awf.org/where-we-work - active in DRC and Cameroon. Focuses on areas
of great ape importance, including Maringa-Lopori-Wamba landscape in DRC, a key area for bonobos, where they
support conservation, research and livelihood initiatives. Their innovative Congo shipping project enables farmers
in this remote bonobo area to access markets for their produce.
Conservation International: http://www.conservation.org. Supports community based natural resource
management initiatives in the Maiko-Tayna-Kahuzi-Biega landscape which encompasses the Grauer gorilla range.
Also active in Equatorial Guinea. Part of the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund
http://www.cepf.net/Pages/default.aspx
Frankfurt Zoological Society: https://www.fzs.org/en/projects-2/current-projects/ Currently supports park
management activities in Virunga NP and Maiko NP. Until end 2013 also active in Upemba NP.
Fauna and Flora International: http://www.fauna-flora.org/ A founding member of the International Gorilla
conservation Programme. Supports conservation of two subspecies of lowland gorilla in Cameroon, and various
conservation activities in World Heritage Sites in DRC. Helped ICCN develop its community conservation strategy.
International Gorilla Conservation Programme: http://www.igcp.org A consortium of AWF, FFI and WWF in
partnership with the protected area authorities of DRC, Rwanda and Uganda for the protection of the mountain
gorilla population and sustainable livelihood development. Active since 1991,
IUCN West and Central Africa: http://www.iucn.org Involved in developing and implementing protected area
management tools, World Heritage and Ramsar site evaluations, capacity building of civil society.
Jane Goodall Institute: http://www.janegoodall.org/ Active in eastern DRC and south west Congo (Tchimpounga
Chimpanzee rehabilitation centre). Developed a great ape action plan for eastern DRC.
Lukuru Foundation: http://www.lukuru.org Operates in DRC focusing on research and conservation of bonobos
in Lukuru and Lomami. Also conducts research in the Bili-Uere forest-savanna transition zone of north DRC.
Les Amis du Bonobo du Congo: http://www.lolayabonobo.org/ Manages a sanctuary for confiscated bonobos in
Kinshasa and releases them back to the wild. Has a highly effective public awareness and education program.
TRAFFIC: http://www.traffic.org/overview/ The wildlife trade monitoring network, known as TRAFFIC, is the leading
non-governmental organization working globally on trade in wild animals and plants in the context of both
biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. It investigates and analyses wildlife trade and trends,
informs and supports government and inter-government cooperation to adopt, implement and enforce effective
wildlife policies and laws, and provides information and advice to the private sector to ensure that sourcing of wildlife
uses sustainability standards and best practice.
Virunga Foundation: http://acfvirunga.org/ Manages Virunga NP under a PPP agreement with ICCN. Although the
conflict in this region makes law enforcement a dominating theme, tourism development (particularly mountain
gorillas and volcanos) remains highly relevant and innovative livelihood initiatives to address the domestic energy
requirements have also been developed (micro-hydroelectric plants, energy efficient stoves and fuel). Education
and health are also important sectors supported by the park. See also http://www.virunga.org
White Oak Conservation Centre (Gilman Conservation International): http://wildlifeconservationglobal.org/
Active in the Okapi Wildlife Reserve (DRC) through its Okap Conservation Project since 1987 where it has provided
substantial and uninterrupted support for okapi conservation, general reserve management and livelihoods and
education initiatives.
Wildlife Conservation Society: http://www.wcs.org/where-we-work/africa.aspx - active in all countries of the
forested Central African region at the landscape and species levels (great apes, forest elephant, marine mammals,
etc). Deeply involved in park management, capacity building, and conservation oriented research and monitoring.
Has been one of the leading organisation developing and promoting methodologies for monitoring and research in
forested environments. A major player in the Central African conservation landscape.
World Wide Fund for Nature: http://wwf.panda.org/who_we_are/wwf_offices/cameroon/

Final report
Page 56
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
Active at the landscape and species levels (great apes, elephant). WWF is involved in protected area management,
policy development, capacity building, community forests, and fighting wildlife criminality. It is a major player in the
Central African conservation landscape.
Zoological Society of London: http://www.zsl.org/about-us/ - Active in DRC, Cameroon, Gabon and Equatorial
Guinea. Undertakes research on the bushmeat issue and tests livelihood alternatives. Also works on single species
conservation initiatives (Okapi, mountain and lowland gorillas).
Zoological Society of Milwaukee: Active in Salonga NP, DRC for the past 30 years. Focuses on bonobo research,
monitoring, training and support for anti-poaching, and education and adult literacy.
Other private Organisations supporting conservation activities include:

ARCUS Foundation: www.arcusfoundation.orgAn important funder for projects targeting Central Africas 3 great
apes through numerous grants to conservation NGOs.
Abraham Foundation: http://abrahamfoundation.org/. Supports conservation NGOs implementing conservation
activities in DRC and Cameroon focusing on elephants, and great apes. The annual Abraham Awards are given to
Congolese field conservationists who have made an outstanding contribution to conservation. In recent years many
of the awards have had to be made posthumously to the families of guards who have lost their lives in the line of
duty.
Aspinall Foundation: http://www.aspinallfoundation.org/ Rehabilitation of gorillas in gallery forests of two protected
areas on the Batk plateau in Gabon and Congo, and support for management of the two parks.
Ape Alliance: http://www.4apes.com/ Supports initiatives for Grauer gorillas (Kahuzi-Biega), Bonobos (Lukuru) and
Chimpanzees (Tchimpounga Rehabilitation centre).
Berggorilla & Regenwald Direkthilfe: http://www.berggorilla.de/ A German-based NGO focusing on fundraising
and lobbying for gorilla conservation.
Biodiversit au Katanga: http://www.bakasbl.org/ A Congolese NGO dedicated to biodiversity conservation in the
Province of Katanga, southern DRC, through research and education.
BirdLife International: http://www.birdlife.org/The worlds largest nature conservation partnership with 13 million
members and 120 partner organizations worldwide. Gathers information and monitors Important Bird Areas (IBA)
and supports conservation initiatives throughout Central Africa through its network of partners and volunteers.
Bonobo Conservation Initiative: http://www.bonobo.org/ Works in several protected areas of the bonobo range
in DRC and implements education and sustainable development initiatives.
Born Free Foundation: http://www.bornfree.org.uk/ Supports chimpanzee sanctuaries in DRC and Cameroon, and
supports Kahuzi-Biega NP in DRC, and LAGAs activities in Cameroon.
Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International: http://gorillafund.org/page.aspx?pid=407. Dedicated to the conservation
and protection of gorillas and their habitats through research, support for protection, and community conservation
activities.
Howard G. Buffet Foundation: http://www.thehowardgbuffettfoundation.org/. Through its Africa Great Lakes Peace
Initiative it supports conservation, agriculture and economic development (100m$ mobilised from 1999-2014).
Currently supports livelihood initiatives in buffer zone of Virunga NP.
International Fund for Animal Welfare: http://www.ifaw.org/ A highly effective pressure group combating
international wildlife crime through political advocacy and support to conservation and law enforcement activities on
the ground, with a particular focus on elephants.
International Conservation and Education Fund: http://www.incef.org/ Focuses on locally produced and
disseminated videos as an educational tool to foster improvement of the health and well-being of human and wildlife
populations. It does this by building capacities of local media professionals to produce quality films in local languages
and building capacities among local education teams to disseminate the videos and measure their impacts.
International Primate Protection League: http://www.ippl.org/gibbon/ Supports primate initiatives in Bioko
(Equatorial guinea), Cameroon (LAGA) and Congo (chimpanzee rehabilitation)
Liz Claybourne and Art Ortenberg Foundation: http://www.lcaof.org/ Focuses on elephant conservation and
support for park and buffer zone management. Has been a major donor to WCS in Central Africa.
Margot Marsh Biodiversity Foundation: Provides small grants to a variety of primate conservation activities in
Central Africa

Final report
Page 57
Volume 4
CENTRAL AFRICA
McArthur Foundation: http://www.macfound.org/ Supports a wide variety of conservation actions (surveys, capacity
building, park management, education) through small grants to individuals and NGOs. Part of the Critical Ecosystem
Partnership Fund.
Mohammed bin Zayed Species Conservation Fund: http://www.speciesconservation.org/ Support for bonobo
conservation in Tchuapa-Lomami-Lualaba
Murray Foundation: http://www.themurryfoundation.com The foundations activities include: constructing and
maintaining schools for orphaned children, ensuring animal welfare, rehabilitation and release sanctuaries for
endangered animals, supporting AIDS/HIV projects, and land acquisition for projects
Prince Bernhard Nature Fund: http://www.pbnf.nl/ Supports small local initiatives towards the conservation and
wise use of natural resources. The Fund aims to help save critically endangered flora and fauna.
Rufford Foundation: http://www.rufford.org A UK based charity making numerous small grants for a wide range of
nature conservation and sustainable livelihood projects. Funds projects throughout Central Africa.
The Thin Green Line Foundation: http://www.thingreenline.org.au/ Focuses on supporting rangers with training,
equipment and other resources in high biodiversity value conflict zones. Provides support for the widows and children
of fallen rangers.
Universities, international research organisations active in Central Africa include:

Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR): http://www.cifor.org/ Research themes cover climate change,
smallholder and community forests, conservation and development trade-offs, globalised trade and investment, and
production forests.
Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA): http://www.eia-international.org/ An independent campaigning
organisation committed to protecting the natural world from environmental crime and abuse. Areas of expertise are
ecosystems and biodiversity, environmental crime and governance, climate change.
French Agricultural Research Centre for International Development (CIRAD): http://www.cirad.fr/en Research
themes include biodiversity and development, alleviating food insecurity, sustainable management of forest
ecosystems, monitoring the emergence of agro-industrial plantations, animal disease epidemiology.
International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO): http://www.itto.int/ An intergovernmental organization
promoting the conservation and sustainable management of tropical forests.
Joint Research Centre (JRC): http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/jrc/ The EUs JRC oversees the implementation of the
BIOPAMA and OFAC projects and supports local organisations through capacity building, provision of mapping and
other data.
Kyoto University: http://www.kyoto-u.ac.jp/en Undertakes research on great apes in DRC and Gabon
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology: http://www.eva.mpg.de/ Focuses on gorilla and bonobo
research and conservation in CAR, Gabon, DRC, Rwanda and Uganda. Developed and houses the IUCN/A.P.E.S.
great apes data base and mapper.
Rainforest Foundation UK: http://www.rainforestfoundationuk.org/index Supports indigenous forest peoples in their
efforts to protect their environment and fulfil their rights to land and sustainable livelihoods. Has produced many
excellent analyses on forest related issues (climate change, indigenous peoples, conservation, law and policy, rights
and livelihoods).
South Dakota State University (SDSU): Monitoring of forest cover change in the Congo Basin, particularly in and
around protected areas, and training. A partner in the Central African Forest Observatory (OFAC).
University of Stirling,: Involved in primate research for many years.
University of Maryland: A partner of OFAC doing forest cover mapping and analyses, and training.
Universit Catholique de Louvain, Belgium: A partner of OFAC doing forest cover changes and analyses, and
training.
World Resources Institute: http://www.wri.org/ Forest Mapping of the Congo Basin. Has produced Forest Atlases
of each of the rainforest countries of Central Africa.World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF): http://www.cgiar.org/ A
consortium of 15 research organisations working on a wide range of agroforestry and sustainable agriculture issues.
.World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF): http://www.cgiar.org/ A consortium of 15 research organisations working on
a wide range of agroforestry and sustainable agriculture issues.

Final report
Page 58
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
WEST AFRICA

Final report
Page 1
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
SPECIAL FEATURES OF WEST AFRICA ....................................................................................................................... 9

1.1
1.1.1
1.1.2
1.1.3
1.1.4
1.1.5
1.1.6
1.2
1.2.1
1.2.2
1.3
1.3.1
1.3.2
2.
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.2
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.2.3
2.2.4
2.2.5
Major Ecotypes ....................................................................................................................................................................... 13

Conservation issues and challenges (key and threatened, rare and high value species) ...................................................... 15
OVERVIEW OF REGIONAL-SPECIFIC ASPECTS OF THE WEST AFRICAN REGION................................................................ 19

Regional institutional support .................................................................................................................................................. 19
Conservation capacity building in WA..................................................................................................................................... 19
KEY DIRECT THREATS TO CONSERVATION IN WA ......................................................................................................... 21

Availability of funds for PAs .................................................................................................................................................... 22
Institutional governance of PAs .............................................................................................................................................. 22
Illegal wildlife trade income and corruption ............................................................................................................................. 23
Weak planning, management effectiveness and monitoring of PAs....................................................................................... 25
KEY INDIRECT THREATS TO CONSERVATION ................................................................................................................ 26

Population growth and poverty ............................................................................................................................................... 26
Fragmentation, reduction and isolation of PA in the landscape.............................................................................................. 26
Coup dtats, rebellions, civil unrest and religion fundamentalism, Ebola and refugee crises ............................................... 27
Negative economic trends ...................................................................................................................................................... 27
Policy and sectorial approach ................................................................................................................................................. 28
DESERTS .................................................................................................................................................................. 29
SAVANNAS ................................................................................................................................................................ 29
FORESTS .................................................................................................................................................................. 29
MANGROVES/COASTAL .............................................................................................................................................. 29
LESSONS LEARNED AND PROMISING APPROACHES ............................................................................................ 31

4.1
4.2
4.3
4.3.1
4.3.2
4.3.3
5.
OVERVIEW OF ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE WEST AFRICAN REGION ............................................................ 13
ONGOING CONSERVATION EFFORTS........................................................................................................................ 29

3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4.
Development indicators ............................................................................................................................................................ 9

Conflict .................................................................................................................................................................................... 11
Food crisis ............................................................................................................................................................................... 11
West Africa and the Millennium Development Goals .............................................................................................................. 12
Climate change ....................................................................................................................................................................... 12
Conclusions............................................................................................................................................................................. 13

2.1
3.
COUNTRIES OF WEST AFRICA ...................................................................................................................................... 9
NEGATIVE LESSONS LEARNED .................................................................................................................................... 31

POSITIVE LESSONS LEARNED ..................................................................................................................................... 31
PROMISING APPROACHES .......................................................................................................................................... 32
Constant and specific intervention on the ground ................................................................................................................... 32
Biodiversity and Management Information System ................................................................................................................ 33
Shared political and institutional decisions ............................................................................................................................. 34
INDICATIVE CONSERVATION ACTIONS / PRIORITY CONSERVATION NEEDS ...................................................... 35

5.1
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.1.4
5.1.5
5.1.6
5.1.7
5.1.8
5.1.9
5.2
5.2.1
5.2.2
5.2.3
5.2.4
5.2.5
ACTIVE PROCESS ...................................................................................................................................................... 37

Dissemination and analysis of the proposals about sites and conservation priorities in WA ................................................. 37
Support for conservation of the major ecotypes: Deserts, Savannas, Forests and Mangroves/Coastal ............................... 37
Specific strategies and actions for the major Desert ecotypes ............................................................................................... 38
Specific strategies and actions for the major Savanna ecotypes ........................................................................................... 43
Specific strategies and actions for major Forest ecotypes ..................................................................................................... 53
Specific strategies and actions for major Mangroves/Coastal ecotypes ................................................................................ 63
Dismantling Wildlife traffic network ......................................................................................................................................... 69
Special analysis ...................................................................................................................................................................... 70
Wildlife protection training ....................................................................................................................................................... 71
PROACTIVE PROCESS ............................................................................................................................................... 72

Institutional support and coordination ..................................................................................................................................... 72
Monitoring and planning .......................................................................................................................................................... 73
Communication ....................................................................................................................................................................... 74
Biological research .................................................................................................................................................................. 74
Management Governance Training ..................................................................................................................................... 74

Final report
Page 2
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
5.3
5.3.1
5.3.2
5.3.3
6.
Recommendations for tackling key indirect threats to conservation ....................................................................................... 76

Recommendations for tackling general direct threats to conservation ................................................................................... 77
Recommendations for tackling specific direct threats to conservation ................................................................................... 78
ANNEXES ....................................................................................................................................................................... 84
6.1
7.
CONCLUDING RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 76
ANNEX 1. WEST AFRICA DATA MISCELLANEOUS .......................................................................................................... 84
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................................................. 89
List of tables
Table 1. Population, Annual Growth (%) and Estimated doubling time of population of West Africa ....................................... 10
Table 2. Major Ecotypes, formally protected areas and indicative conservation status in West Africa .................................... 14
Table 3. Synthetic indications of trends of the key, rare and high value species of major ecotypes ........................................ 17
Table 4. Composite strategic approach for interventions in the four major ecotypes ............................................................... 32
Table 5. Key elements of the Niger-Chad-Algeria Desert KLC ................................................................................................ 39
Table 6. Key elements of the Senegal-Mauritania Atlantic Coastal KLC ................................................................................. 39
Table 7. Key elements of the Mauritania Western Sahara Atlantic Coastal KLC .................................................................. 40
Table 8. A - West Africa Deserts Key Landscape of Conservation and priorities.................................................................. 41
Table 9. Key elements of the WAPOK Savanna KLC .............................................................................................................. 47
Table 10. Key elements of the Como Mole (CM) Savanna KLC ......................................................................................... 47
Table 11. Key elements of the Niokolo - Badiar - Bafing Baoul - Falm Fouta (NBBBFF) Savanna KLC ..................... 48
Table 12. Key elements of the Gourma Elephant, Sahel Faunal Reserve and Inner Niger Delta Savanna KLC..................... 49
Table 13. Key elements of the Lion Key Conservation Areas .................................................................................................. 49
Table 14. Key elements of the Volta Trans-Border Ecosystem Wildlife Corridors KLC ........................................................... 49
Table 15. B - West African Savannas - Main Key Landscapes of Conservation and Key Conservation Areas and priorities . 51
Table 16. Key elements of the Cross River - Korup - Mont Cameroon - Tamakanda - Gashaka - Tchabel - Faro (CKTGTF)
Forests KLC ............................................................................................................................................................................. 55
Table 17. Key elements of the Ta Grebo - Sopo (TGS) Forest KLC .................................................................................... 56
Table 18. Key elements of the Mount Nimba (MN) Forest KLC ............................................................................................... 57
Table 19. Key elements of the Gola-Lofa-Foya (Sierra Leone-Liberia Trans-border Peace Park) and Mano-WologiziWonegizi-Ziama (GLF-MWWZ) Forests KLC ........................................................................................................................... 57
Table 20. Key elements of the Outamba/Kilimi - Kuru Pinselli Soya (OKKPS) Forest KLC ............................................... 59
Table 21. Key elements of Forest KCAs .................................................................................................................................. 59
Table 22. C - West Africa Forests - Main KLCs and KCAs and priorities ................................................................................. 60
Table 23. Mangrove areas falling within protected areas ......................................................................................................... 63
Table 24. Key elements of the Rio Cacheu - Cufada - Cantanhez - Rio Buba - Iles Tristao (CCCBT) Mangrove KLC ........... 64
Table 25. Key elements of the Mangroves/Coastal Key Conservation Areas .......................................................................... 66
Table 26. D - West Africa Mangroves/Coastal - Main KLCs and KCAs and priorities .............................................................. 67
Table 27. Summery table of Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLCs) and Key Conservation Areas (KCAs), and priorities for
WA ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 79
Table 28. Population, Annual Growth (%) and Estimated doubling time of population of WA ................................................. 84
Table 29. CITES, Countries currently subject to a recommendation to suspend trade (09/09/2013) ...................................... 84
Table 30. The biodiversity features of West Africa ................................................................................................................... 85
Table 31. International protected areas in West Africa ............................................................................................................ 86
Table 32. Biome and ecotype of the WA countries .................................................................................................................. 87
Table 33. WA, Countries data, Source: Africa Development Indicators ................................................................................... 88
List of figures
Figure 1. West Africa .................................................................................................................................................................. 9

Final report
Page 3
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Figure 2. West Africa, Development indicators (1), 1960-2012 ................................................................................................ 10

Figure 3. West Africa Development indicators (2), 1990-2012 ................................................................................................. 11
Figure 4. Illustrating Climate Change Vulnerability in West Africa ........................................................................................... 12
Figure 5. Schematic representation of conservation in WA according to the major ecotypes. ................................................ 18
Figure 6. Overview of ecological characteristics of the West African region ............................................................................ 19
Figure 7. Illegal live baby chimpanzee trade ............................................................................................................................ 23
Figure 8. Annual population growth rate in percent as average of 10 years (1993-2012)........................................................ 26
Figure 9. Promising approach to improve the protection of biodiversity in WA ........................................................................ 32
Figure 10. A - West Africa Deserts Key Landscape of Conservation and priorities .............................................................. 42
Figure 11. B - West Africa Savannas - Main Key Landscapes of Conservation and Key Conservation Areas and priorities .. 52
Figure 12. C - West Africa Forests - Main KLCs and KCAs and priorities................................................................................ 62
Figure 13. D - West Africa Mangroves/Coastal - Main Key Landscape of Conservation - Key Conservation Areas and
priorities .................................................................................................................................................................................... 68
Figure 14. Summery figure of West Africa - Main KLCs and KCAs, Wetlands and conservation priorities by Ecotypes ......... 81
List of boxes
Box 1. Importance of WAPOK .................................................................................................................................................. 23
Box 2. Biodiversity and Protected Areas Management Project (BIOPAMA) ............................................................................ 33
Box 3. Digital Observatory for Protected Areas (DOPA) .......................................................................................................... 33
Box 4. The decline of wetlands ................................................................................................................................................ 44
Box 5. Importance of Cameroon-Nigeria border and trans-border conservation measures ..................................................... 55

Final report
Page 4
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
ACRONYMS
ABS
ACP
ADB - AfDB
AFD
AfESG
ANP
AU
AWF
AZE
BIOPAMA
CBD
CBNRM
CENAGREF
CI
CITES
CoP
DNA
DOPA
EA
EAGLE
EC
ECOFAC
ECOWAS
EDF
EFG
ENEF
ERAIFT
ETIS
EU
FAO
FEM
FFEM
FLEGT
FZS
GDP
GEF
GIZ
GRASP
HEC
HWC
IBA
IBRD
ICCWC
IDA
IUCN
IUCN-PAPACO
KCA
KfW
KLC
Access and Benefits Sharing

African Development Bank
Agence Franaise de Dveloppement
African Elephant Specialist Groups statement of 2003
Africa Parks Network
African Union
Alliance for Zero Extinction
Biodiversity and Protected Areas Management Program
Centre National de Gestion des Rserves de Faune
Conference of the Parties
Digital Observatory for Protected Areas
Eastern Africa
European Commission
Programme Rgional de Conservation et Utilisation Rationnelle des Ecosystmes Forestiers dAfrique
Centrale
cole de Faune of Garoua
cole Nationale des Eaux et Forts
cole Rgionale dAmnagement intgr des Forts et Territoires tropicaux
European Union
Food and Agriculture Organisation
Fonds pour lEnvironnement Mondial
Fonds Franais pour lEnvironnement Mondial
Gross Domestic Product
Deutsche gesellschaft fr technische Zusammenarbeit (German technical cooperation)
Great Apes Survival Partnership
Important Bird Area
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development [UN]
International Development Association
International Union for Conservation of Nature
Programme Aires Protges pour l'Afrique du Centre et de l'Ouest
Key Conservation Area
Kreditanstalt fr Wiederaufbau (German financial cooperation)

Final report
Page 5
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
LAGA
LAGA
LEM
MAB/UNESCO
MIKES
MIST
MoU
NEPAD
NGO
NP
NRM
NTFP
OFAC
OFINAP
PA
PES
PES
PFM
PHVA
PPP
PVA
Ramsar
REDD+
RRIS
SMART
SSC
STEWARD
TEEB
TFCA
ToR
TRAFFIC
UICN
UN
UNDP
UNEP
UNESCO
UNODC
USAID
USFWS
WA
WAEMU
WAMPAN
WAPAN
WAPOK
WAZA
WCMC
WCS
WHS-UNESCO
WWF
Last Great Ape Organisation

Last Great Ape Alliance
Law Enforcement Monitoring
Man and the Biosphere Program
New Partnership for Africas Development
Non-Governmental Organisation
National Park
Natural Resource Management
Non Timber Forest Products
Central African Forest Observatory
Office national des aires protges of Burkina Faso
Protected Area
Payments for Ecosystem Services
Participatory Forest Management
Population and Habitat Viability Assessment
Public Private Partnership
Population Viability Analysis
The Ramsar Convention is an international treaty for the conservation and sustainable utilization of
wetlands
Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation
Regional Reference Information System
Self-Monitoring, Analysis and Reporting Technology
Species Survival Commission
Sustainable and Thriving Environments for West African Regional Development
Trans-Frontier Conservation Area
Terms of Reference
Union Internationale pour la Conservation de la Nature
United Nations
United Nations Development Program
United Nations Environment Program
United Nations Education, Science and Culture Organisation
United States Agency for International Development
West Africa
West Africa Economy and Monetary Union
West Africa Marine Protected Areas Network
West Africa Protected Areas Network
Savannas KLC between Benin, Burkina Faso, Niger and Togo
World Association of Zoos and Aquariums
World Database of Protected Areas
World Heritage Site

Final report
Page 6
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Aspects of WA biodiversity
The following aspects characterize the biodiversity of West Africa (WA):
Wide diversity of habitats and species;

Strong degradation;
Greatest richness of biodiversity in lowland and mountain forests (the Guinea forest in WA contains half
the mammal species on the African continent);
Presence of some of the largest and most beautiful antelopes in the world;
A pattern of extinction of mammals in the wild that is progressively higher moving from the coastal and
forest biomes to the deserts (including the desert PAs);
Progressive decline in the representation of biomes in PAs on moving from desert towards the forest and
coastal areas.
The current interventions for conservation in WA do not ensure the protection of wildlife or its biodiversity heritage. Those
interventions that assist in-situ conservation are highly concentrated in the savanna areas. Interventions in favour of ex-situ
conservation do not protect some of the key endemic mammals at risk of extinction (e.g. WA lion). Survival of some key species
(e.g. Oryx) requires the adoption of a mixed strategy of in-situ and ex-situ conservation due to poor genetic heritage of the
mammals supposedly extinct in nature and existing only in captivity. The effects of climate change and the important
development of industrialization in the southern countries in WA are causing significant in-migration of human populations. The
effects of these phenomena are higher pressure and consequently greater degradation of coastal and lowland forest
ecosystems which are the most threatened ecotypes in the region. The current fragility of biodiversity and the significant threats
on the overall biodiversity heritage of Western Africa require conservation interventions that are highly specific to this region
this is in addition to the more general strategic approach outlined in volume 1.
For the strategic approach to wildlife conservation in WA, there is specific need for the following:
In situ support for conservation which includes: (1) Specific strategies and actions for the four ecotypes: (a) Deserts,
(b) Savannas, (c) Forests and (d) Mangroves/Coastal areas; (2) Special analysis for species and habitats that are
highly threatened with extinction; and (3) Specific training in wildlife protection on the ground (see sections 5.1.2,
5.1.8, 5.1.9).
Strengthening of management capacity in wildlife conservation with a focus on regional coordination: (1)
Institutional support to raise capacity for wildlife conservation and strengthen coordination between countries of the
region; and (2) Governance training for management authorities so that the landscape approach proposed by this
strategic approach can be adopted (see sections 5.2.1, 5.2.5).
Organisation of the volume 5
The first chapter presents the key elements of the West African countries concerning: (i) development indicators, driving forces
causing wildlife decline and the impacts of climate change; (ii) an overview of the wildlife in West Africa following an analysis
by four major ecotypes (Deserts, Savannas, Forests and Mangroves/Coastal) including the coastal and marine PAs, the more
threatened species and the risks of species disappearing; (iii) a quick analysis of two elements connected with long-term wildlife
conservation: the need for regional institutional support and for conservation- capacity building in WA. The second chapter
indicates the key direct threats and the key indirect threats to conservation in WA. The chapter presents analysis of:
Four key direct threats to conservation: (i) availability of funds; (ii) institutional governance; (iii) illegal
wildlife income and corruption and iv) weak planning, management, effectiveness and monitoring;
Five key indirect threats to conservation: (i) population growth and poverty; (ii) fragmentation, reduction
and isolation of PAs in the landscape; (iii) coup dtats, rebellions, civil unrest and religion
fundamentalism, ebola crisis (epidemics/pandemics), and refugee crises; (iv) negative economic trends;
(v) Policy and sectorial approaches.

Final report
Page 7
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
The third chapter is a short presentation of the ongoing conservation effort organised for the four major ecotypes; Deserts,
Savannas, Forests and Mangroves/Coastal. At present the ongoing conservation efforts are characterised by: (i) low funding
for desert PAs with a strong involvement of NGOs, (ii) comparatively strong support in the savanna area; (iii) low funding for
rainforest areas, with mixed interventions of government and NGOs; (iv) a small scale success story for the recovery of
mangrove forests through a public-private partnership.
The fourth chapter looks quickly at negatives and positives lessons learnt and promising approaches. The success of the
promising approaches depends on the functional integration of three strategies: (A) consistent, uninterrupted interventions on
the ground with specific strategic approach of intervention for each major ecotype but coordinated between them, (B) a decision
support system based on the collection and organization of information on biodiversity and management effectiveness in
collaboration with BIOPAMA (EU programme) and (C) shared decision-making at institutional and political levels.
The fifth chapter is the most developed and gives details about the two parallel processes, active and proactive, to try to
establish or restore the fundamentals to a better wildlife conservation in West Africa. The active process has a focus on more
feet on the ground to take action against key direct threats and for the protection of areas of high biodiversity, while the proactive
process is an external support for better governance, monitoring and planning and against the key indirect threats on PAs.
The active process has five main activities: (1) Dissemination and analysis of the proposals about sites and priorities on
conservation in WA; (2) Specific strategies and actions for the major ecotypes: Deserts, Savannas, Forests and
Mangroves/Coastal; (3) Dismantling Wildlife traffic network; (4) Special analysis and (5) Wildlife protection training. The
objectives of the active process are: (i) to balance the interventions between the four major ecotypes; (ii) to save threatened
species from extinction; (iii) preservation of critical habitats (e.g. wetlands, Mount Nimba, mangroves); (iv) to improve
management effectiveness of national and transborder parks; (v) to promote the initiatives of landscapes on conservation for
maintaining connections between the blocks of PAs and (vi) to ensure a better representation of the realities of wildlife in WA.
The proactive process attempts, by creating an Institutional Support and coordination under WAEMU, to coordinate and
promote: (1) Monitoring and Planning; (2) Communication; (3) Biological research; (4) Management-Governance training. The
objectives of the proactive process are: (i) improving the availability and proper use of resources; (ii) ensuring a shared and
harmonized implementation between countries; (iii) developing a stronger balance of conservation initiatives in the macroecotypes of West Africa; (v) greater attention about the specificities of conservation at national, regional and interregional level
(e.g. highly threatened species, wetlands at risk of extinction, mangrove ecosystems). At present there is no organisation that
provides the required institutional, technical and scientific capacities in WA; therefore this document recommends the
combination of existing institutions and organisation with adequate support to establish a unit to implement the proposed
strategic approach.
The annexes present basic information that will support the development of a strategic approach on conservation of biodiversity
in WA: (i) key, threatened, rare and high value species; (ii) data of the main projects on conservation in WA and (iii)
miscellaneous data about WA.

Final report
Page 8
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
1. SPECIAL FEATURES OF WEST AFRICA

1.1
COUNTRIES OF WEST AFRICA
Figure 1. West Africa

Cape Verde was not considered in the report because there are no protected areas (PA) in the country, but it was associated
with this strategic approach in a few specific analyses.
1.1.1 Development indicators

The countries of West Africa have a population of 340 million and about 60% of the inhabitants live in rural areas. The average
yearly income for each person in West Africa is $800 (2011). This compares with an average yearly income for each person
in Sub-Saharan Africa of $1.500. The region's economic growth has averaged only 2.9% during the past three years, in contrast
with what was the best GDP growth for Africa in the past, while its population has been growing by 2.8 2.9% a year. It is
estimated that economic growth of about 6-7% a year would be required to meet the goal of cutting extreme poverty in half by
2020 (see table 1 and figures 2 and 3).

Final report
Page 9
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 1. Population, Annual Growth (%) and Estimated doubling time of population of West Africa
Country
Benin
Burkina Faso
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Ivory Coast
Liberia
Mali
Mauritania
Niger
Nigeria
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Togo
Total
July 1, 2013
projection
9 742 000
17 323 000
1 794 000
26 441 000
11 861 000
1 699 000
23 919 000
3 881 000
16 678 000
3 461 000
17 493 000
177 096 000
13 567 000
5 823 000
6 675 000
337 453 000
Average relative annual

growth (%)
3,24
3,28
2,75
2,56
3,09
2,60
3,09
2,10
3,29
2,58
3,85
3,24
3,06
1,84
2,88
2,90
Estimated doubling time

(Years)
22
21
26
27
23
27
23
33
21
27
18
22
23
38
24
25
Increasing population density and agricultural land with decreasing forest areas and formally maintained protected areas (source World Bank, Africa
Development Indicators, specific elaboration)
Figure 2. West Africa, Development indicators (1), 1960-2012

Final report
Page 10
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
1.1.2 Conflict
Over the past 15 years, nine of the 15 members of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS - Benin,
Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Cote d'Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Senegal, Sierra Leone
and Togo) have experienced conflict ranging from high intensity civil wars to violence during elections. One of the most common
reasons advanced for the prevalence of conflict is weak governance. The area accounts for more than 70% of military coups
in Africa. There is a high degree of illicit trade in diamonds, timber and wildlife which can be directly related to the conflict. In
the last years, the conflicts in Cote d'Ivoire and Mali have been particularly damaging for the region and also for biodiversity in
the country. Maintaining peace in the region is seen as a prerequisite for improving its development outcomes. In 1999, it was
estimated that $800 million that could have been used for development was instead diverted into conflicts.
1.1.3 Food crisis

Underdevelopment, low rainfall, climate change, coup dtat, rebellion, civil and religious fundamentalism, epidemics (EBOLA)
and unrest continue to disrupt local and cross-border staple food and livestock markets. Consequently the forced migrations,
poverty, declining food stocks and rising food prices are all key factors that are contributing toward a chronic food crisis in
Western Africa. Fifteen million people across Western Africa are directly or periodically affected by the food crisis. A higherthan-average staple food price is causing an increase in the illness rate in Western Africa as many people are becoming
severely malnourished.
Note the insufficient reduction in population growth, increasing GDP and GNI growth, but a recent decline in tourism (source World Bank, Africa Development
Indicators, specific elaboration)
Figure 3. West Africa Development indicators (2), 1990-2012

Final report
Page 11
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
1.1.4 West Africa and the Millennium Development Goals

West Africa is lagging behind in its efforts to meet the Millennium Development Goals:
Over 55% of West Africans live on less than $1 / day;

Life expectancy at birth is only 46 years;
Secondary school enrolment is at 20 %;
42% of adults are illiterate;
Malnutrition affects 29% of children under the age of five.
(Source World Bank, Africa Development Indicators)
1.1.5 Climate change
Source: Atlas compilation of tomorrow's world, La Vie/Le Monde, source UNEP, Atlas of future world, Robert Laffont 2008; Maplecroft, Climate Change
Vulnerability Index 2013
Figure 4. Illustrating Climate Change Vulnerability in West Africa

For WA, the most recent estimates of the effects of climate change show:
High risk for the desert and savanna areas of the Sahelian zone;
Increasing desertification of Sahelian Acacia savanna ecotypes and the West Sudanian savanna;
Probable degradation of agricultural systems for: (1) the south-east of Nigeria, (2) the cross-border area
between Guinea, Cote d'Ivoire, Liberia and Sierra Leone, (3) the cross-border area between Senegal,
Gambia, Guinea Bissau and Guinea Conakry;
Increased threat of floods on the Niger Delta (see figure 4).

Final report
Page 12
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
1.1.6 Conclusions
West Africa has several negative aspects that are acting as constraints on conservation actions: (1) high political instability
and security risks; (2) high population growth (featuring high concentrations in big cities but a reduction in the urban population)
with an estimated doubling time of the population over the next 25 years; (3) economy growing slowly in relation to the
objectives of the Millennium; (4) significant environmental fragility due to the pressures of deforestation, cyclical periods of
drought, climate change; (5) constant food crises which increase the tendency of migration to coastal areas, and reduce the
effectiveness of conservation in savanna and coastal areas because of the higher pressures on natural resources, pressure
on land, and economic activities; (6) the high risks arising from climate change; (7) an insufficient awareness of wildlife by civil
society.
1.2
OVERVIEW OF ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE WEST AFRICAN REGION
West Africa has high biodiversity value because of the wide range of ecosystems: deserts, savannas, forests, big rivers and
floodplains, mountains, mangroves and seas. Despite greatly reduced wildlife populations, the region still has high conservation
value1 as: (a) large antelopes which can be considered among the most beautiful in Africa, such as the Giant eland, roan
antelope, major (or western) hartebeest, addax, and also some spectacular small antelopes such as Zebra duiker and Jentink's
Duiker including a newly discovered (2009) species of duiker (Philantomba walteri); (b) extensive and important terrestrial
ecosystems, including the cross-border WAPOK complex of parks (W, Arly, Pendjari, Oti Monduri, Keran and hunting reserves
of about 38,000 Km) that host the largest elephant population in the region (with 20 to 60 elephants per 100 Km) 2; (c) many
endemic and isolated populations of wildlife - giraffe (G. c. peralta), pygmy hippopotamus, manatee, lion, cheetah and African
wild dog; (d) populations of two subspecies of chimpanzee and one highly threatened subspecies of gorilla; (e) high importance
for migrating birds from Europe; (f) inland waters supporting a high diversity of aquatic species with high levels of endemism;
(g) unique and critical habitat for the conservation of amphibians (e.g. Mount Nimba) which are the most endangered class of
animals in the word.
1.2.1 Major Ecotypes

The WA region is analysed on the basis of four major ecological zones that correspond to the biomes and ecoregions adopted
by the WWF. Due to the geopolitical area limitation, the biomes and some ecoregions of WA fall also in other regions of Africa.
The major ecological zones (or ecotypes) of WA are (see table 2 and figure 5):
1
2
A Deserts (Realms: Palearctic - Biome: Deserts and xeric shrubland). The ecotypes of the desert
area are: (1) Sahara Desert; (2) Atlantic coast; (3) South Saharan steppe and woodlands; (4) West
Saharan montane xeric woodlands.
B Savannas (Realms: Afrotropics - Biome: Tropical and subtropical grasslands, savannas, and
shrublands). The ecotypes of the savanna area are: (1) Sahelian Acacia savanna; (2) West Sudanian
savanna; (3) Guinean forest-savanna mosaic; (4) Jos Plateau forest-grassland mosaic.
C Forests (Realm: Afrotropics - Biome: Tropical and subtropical moist broadleaf Forests. The
ecotypes of the forest area are: (1) Guinean Montane Forests; (2) Western Guinean lowland forests; (3);
Eastern Guinean forests; (4) Nigerian lowland forests); (5) Cameroonian Highlands forests; (6) CrossSanaga-Bioko coastal forests; (7) Niger Delta swamp forests; (8) Cross-Niger transition forests.
D Mangroves/Coastal (Realm: Afrotropics - Biome: Mangroves). The ecotypes of the mangrove area
are: (1) Guinean Mangroves, and (2) Central African mangroves.
The report analyzes only the terrestrial biodiversity

Source: African Elephant Database (AED) / IUCN / SSC African Elephant Specialist Group (AfESG) - 1995 - 2005

Final report
Page 13
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 2. Major Ecotypes, formally protected areas and indicative conservation status in West Africa
Km
% Formally
protected
Sahara Desert
4.619.260
1,8
Vulnerable
Atlantic coast
39.883
17,0
Relatively Intact
1.101.700
6,0
Vulnerable
258.100
41,5
Relatively intact
Sahelian Acacia savanna
3.052.854
9,4
Vulnerable
West Sudanian savanna
1.638.306
5,1
Critical/Endangered
673.600
9,7
Critical/Endangered
13.208
0,0
Critical/Endangered
Guinean Montane Forests
31.078
9,2
Critical/Endangered
Western Guinean lowland

forests
206.666
15,6
Critical/Endangered
Eastern Guinean forests
189.724
21,9
Critical/Endangered
Nigerian lowland forests
67.335
17,3
Critical/Endangered
38.070
7,9
Critical/Endangered
52.314
22,6
Vulnerable
Niger Delta swamp forests
14.503
6,6
Critical/Endangered
Cross-Niger transition forests

D. Mangroves/Coastal
20.718
2,6
Critical/Endangered
Guinean Mangroves
22.790
11,3
Vulnerable
Central African mangroves
29.783
10,9
Critical/Endangered
Biome
Ecotypes
Conservation
Status
Countries of other
regions
Realms: Palearctic
A. Deserts
Deserts
and
xeric shrubland
South Saharan steppe and

woodlands
West Saharan montane xeric
woodlands
Algeria, Chad, Egypt,

Libya, Sudan
Morocco
Algeria, Chad, Sudan
Algeria
B. Savannas
Tropical
and
subtropical
grasslands,
savannas, and
shrublands
Montane
Grasslands and
Shrublands
Guinean
mosaic
forest-savanna
Jos Plateau forest-grassland

mosaic
Cameroon, Chad,
Sudan, South Sudan,
Eritrea
C. Forests
Realms: Afrotropics
Tropical
and
subtropical moist
broadleaf
Forests
Cameroonian
Highlands
forests
Cross-Sanaga-Bioko coastal
forests
Mangroves

Final report
Cameroon
Cameroon
Cameroon,
Equatorial Guinea,
Gabon
Page 14
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
1.2.2 Conservation issues and challenges (key and threatened, rare and high value species)
1.2.2.1
Elephants
West Africa has lost more than 90% of the elephant population in the 20th century. There are little reliable data on the numbers
of elephants in WA. Estimates indicate that elephant populations are small, isolated, and nearly two-thirds of them consist of
little more than 100 elephants, with the exception of one population in the WAPOK complex (Oti-Mounduri and Keran in Togo
home no elephants) which has a density of 0.58 elephant/Km (CR 28%) (Bouch et al, 2013).
1.2.2.2
Sahelo-Saharan Antelopes
These vast arid lands contain relatively few, but highly charismatic and emblematic species. As result of the successive
droughts during the 1980s and increasing human pressures, the Sahelo-Saharan antelopes are seriously threatened (Addax,
Dama Gazelle and Darcas Gazelle) or even probably extinct (Oryx). The desert antelopes survive essentially through ex-situ
conservation but their genetic heritage must be improved to ensure the survival of these species. In the future there should be
carefully planned reintroductions, adapted to the specific needs of these highly mobile species, into an effectively managed
network of protected areas.
1.2.2.3
Primates
Logging is considered as one of the most serious threats to biodiversity and to great apes particularly. In recent years, in Africa
this view is more nuanced in the case of responsible sustainable logging in particular in FSC3 certified concessions, where
specific ecological and social requirements are imposed and the ban on hunting of primates and especially great apes is strictly
enforced. This it is not the case in WA. In West Africa an estimated 80% of the regions original forest cover was gone by the
1980s, affecting not only the habitats of great apes but also the rainfall (during the last three decades, precipitation has
diminished in West Africa even faster than it has in the drier regions of the Sahel (Paturel et al. 1995, Servat et al. 1997). In
West Africa, the IUCN Red List lists as Critically Endangered the following primates: (i) Niger Delta red colobus; (ii) Preuss's
red colobus and (iii) Cross River gorilla. The Endangered primates (IUCN Red List) are (i) White-naped mangabey; (ii) Drill;
(iii) Preusss guenon; (iv) Roloway monkey; (v) Benin subspecies of red-bellied guenon; (vi) Badius species of red colobus;
and (vii) Nigeria-Cameroon chimpanzee.
3
Forest Stewardship Council

Final report
Page 15
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
1.2.2.4
Carnivores
West African lions have unique genetic sequences not found in any other lions, including those held in zoos or other form of
captivity. Recent surveys (January 2014) have suggested that the African lion population is facing extinction across the entire
West African region4. The results represent a massive survey effort taking six years and covering eleven countries where lions
were presumed to exist in the last two decades. The team discovered that West African lions now survive in only 3 national
parks and in the trans-frontier WAP complex. The PAs with lion are only in 5 countries: of West Africa: Senegal, Nigeria, Benin,
Niger and Burkina Faso. Counting lions is extremely difficult, and we may never know precisely how many lions there are in
West Africa, especially if few specialists suppose that we can find lions outside the PAs. In West Africa, the primary threats to
the lions are: (1) the loss, degradation and fragmentation of lion habitats; (2) the decline of the lions wild prey base and (3)
human-lion conflict. The lion is the principal predator of domestic cattle, so livestock loss combined with poor capacity for
managing human-lion conflict lead to the elimination of lions, particularly by poisoning (Di Silvestre, 2002). Trophy hunting is
only practiced in three lion conservation units.
A West and Central Africa regional conservation strategy for cheetah and African wild dog is being drafted. The Saharan
cheetah (Critically Endangered since 2009 in the IUCN Red List) is very rare but can still be found in small numbers in Algeria
(Ahaggar and Tassili NAjjer) and Niger (Termit and Ar), and possibly also in Mali, Chad and Mauritania. In the south, cheetahs
are known to occur in the W Trans-border Park and the Arly Pendjari PAs. Although a persecuted species, this large carnivore
is probably scarce by nature and also impacted by the effects of periodic droughts on its prey species.
African wild dogs have disappeared from much of their former range in West Africa where they were present in all regions
from deserts to mountain summits with the exclusion of the lowland rainforest and the driest deserts. The species is virtually
eradicated from West Africa, and survives only in Bafing Niokolo Koba areas.
In West Africa, leopards remain widespread, albeit now patchily distributed within the region. The most marked range loss in
West Africa has been in the Sahel belt, as well as in Nigeria. They have been locally extirpated from densely populated areas
or where habitat conversion is extreme. There are no reliable continent-wide estimates of population size, but it is supposed
that in the northern part of the WA savanna-forests there is a low density with less than 1 000 individuals, and in the southern
part of the savanna-forests there is a medium density with between 1 000 and 10 000 individuals.
1.2.2.5
Other rare and threaded species
The Guinea forest in WA contains half the mammal species on the African continent and other important regional biodiversity
values must be mentioned including the West African manatee, the rare pygmy hippopotamus, the zebra duiker and the drill,
etc. In view of climate change and increasing frequency of droughts in WA, the number of water-dependent species such as
manatees and crocodiles, will come under increasing threat.
1.2.2.6
Birds
West Africa plays a fundamental role for Palearctic (EuropeanAfrican) long-distance migratory birds which use the Palearctic
Western route from Western Europe through Spain across the Straits of Gibraltar. The ecological networks of habitats play a
decisive role for migratory birds, because they provide key sites along migration routes where birds can recover from their
strenuous journeys. Many migratory birds have little choice in the selection of suitable areas to use. They need access to
specific sites located along their migration routes. If one of these important sites is damaged or destroyed, it usually means
disaster for the birds that depend on that site. So it is vital for West Africa to preserve a functional network of habitats for birds
and especially the several wetlands in the Sahelian zone such as: Niger and Senegal rivers, the inner delta Niger (30,000 km
situated in the middle of the Sahelian landscape) and floodplains in Senegal and Niger, which are very important for millions
of migratory birds.
The lion in West Africa is critically endangered, Pantheras Lion Program Survey, Dr. Philipp Henschel, PLOS ONE, 2014

Final report
Page 16
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
1.2.2.7
Aquatic species in inland waters
The inland waters of western Africa support a high diversity of aquatic species with high levels of endemism. Many of these
species provide direct (e.g. fisheries) and indirect (e.g. water purification) benefits to people. More than 14% of species across
the region are currently threatened and future levels of threat are expected to rise significantly due to a growing population and
the corresponding demand of natural resources. The West Africa region supports a significant proportion of the worlds species
dependent upon freshwater wetland habitats. Given that the region represents approximately 5% of total global land mass
(excluding Antarctica), it is apparent that many groups, waterbirds, plants and mammals in particular, are well represented
within the region. Of the 1,435 species assessed here at the regional scale, just over 14% are regionally threatened.
1.2.2.8
Rare and high-value trees
In West Africa the movement of people south towards the humid tropical areas has resulted in depletion of natural resources:
loss of primary forests and woodlands, repeated logging of the secondary vegetation, and depletion of a number of plant
species. These include the extraction of trees for charcoal-making, general timber and high-value woods. Most affected of the
high-value woods are (a) Afromosia or African Teak Pericopsis elata (endangered or critical endangered - with levels of
exploitation that have been unsustainable in all countries and the species' habitat has declined, especially in Cte d'Ivoire 5,
Ghana and Nigeria), (b) the Meliacaea family (Khaya species), (c) Vne (Pterocarpus erinaceus), and (d) African Blackwood
(Dalbergia melanoxylon).
This strategic approach document cannot analyse all the biodiversity aspects of the West Africa region. Consequently, we
used the information from several sources already organized as macro- indicators and indicators or as aggregated data to
examine the trends in the conservation status of key species. The analysis was complex because of the difficulties of obtaining
updated and structured data. The results of the exercise should be considered only indicative of trends in conservation status
based on information currently available (see Table 3 and Figure 5). For more details tables and maps are available by request.
Table 3. Synthetic indications of trends of the key, rare and high value species of major ecotypes
The number of arrows indicates the strength of the decline (red) or recovery (green).
B Savannas
A - Desert
Scimitar Oryx
Lion
Saharan cheetah
Wild dog
Dama Gazelle
Cheetah
Addax
Leopard
Giant eland
Dorcas Gazelle
AfrotropicalPalaearctic and
piscivorous birds
Manatee
Elephant
intra-African
migration birds
Chimpanzee
Giraffe
Roan antelope
Buffalo
C Forests
Niger Delta red
colobus
Preuss's red
colobus
Cross River gorilla
D Mangroves
Niger Delta red
colobus
West African
manatee
Roloway monkey
Drill
Nigeria-Cameroon
chimpanzee
Pygmy
hippopotamus
Jentinks duiker
Forests Elephant
CITES, 7 September 2012, country currently subject to a recommendation to suspend trade of Pericopsis elata

Final report
Page 17
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Figure 5. Schematic representation of conservation in WA according to the major ecotypes.

Note for each Major Ecotype:
1. the geometric rhomboids shows indicatively (a) proportion (of ecotype surface area) of PAs between the different
ecotypes, progressively smaller going from deserts to mangroves areas (green); (b) human population size,
progressively larger from deserts to coastal areas (blue); (c) biodiversity richness, more important in forests ecotypes
(orange) and (d) mammal extinctions, stronger in the deserts and savannas than in forests and mangroves ecotype
(pink).
2. the green histogram represents the combined area of PAs in each ecotype as a percentage of the total area of PAs in
WA, red arrows denote declines in species status. High species declines in the desert areas indicate problems facing
desert mammals.

Final report
Page 18
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Figure 6. Overview of ecological characteristics of the West African region
1.3
OVERVIEW OF REGIONAL-SPECIFIC ASPECTS OF THE WEST AFRICAN REGION
1.3.1 Regional institutional support

There are two principal economic and political regional institutions: the Economic Community of West African States
(ECOWAS) with 15 countries (Benin, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Cte d'Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea Bissau,
Liberia, Mali, Niger, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Togo) and the West Africa Economy and Monetary Union (WAEMU) with 8
countries (Benin, Burkina Faso, Cte d'Ivoire, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal and Togo). The WAEMU is more
operational than the ECOWAS and acts more directly on the harmonization of policies and interventions in the areas of
agriculture, forestry and conservation. The WAEMU may occur throughout the West African region at the request of countries;
institutions use this possibility for moving forward on convergence plans (strategic plans) on management of wildlife and forest
resources. This approach could help if oriented towards the definition of a common regional conservation strategy.
1.3.2 Conservation capacity building in WA

This analysis considers the available institutional capacities and the present and future management needs of protected areas
in WA. The IUCN training needs study for West and Central Africa6 highlights current inadequacies. In particular it concludes
that training institutions in West and Central Africa: (1) do not provide skills for improving management effectiveness of PAs,
(2) do not provide an adequate knowledge base and practical tools for PA management, (3) do not adequately address the
needs of biodiversity conservation. The study identifies the most important training needs and the institutions that offer courses
on the subject, but does not address the training requirements for rangers in terms of protection and interactions with resourceusers in the buffer zones. We recommend that capacity building for PA management effectiveness is enhanced by integrating
WA and CA training institutions.
In WA there are currently two training schemes supported by IUCN and implemented in collaboration with the University of
Senghor - Egypt: (1) university degree (DU) capacity building in protected area management (training of 8 weeks in
6
Yves Hausser. 2013. Assessment of the regional needs and training availabilities for professionals of protected areas in West and Central
Africa. IUCN.

Final report
Page 19
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Ouagadougou - Burkina Faso) (2) Masters in Development, specializing in management of protected areas (2 years, in
Alexandria - Egypt). In CA the formal training options are: (1) a Masters, with an option in PA management, at the cole
Nationale des Eaux et Forts (ENEF) of Cape Esterias in Gabon, (2) a training LMD with the cole Rgionale dAmnagement
intgr des Forts et Territoires tropicaux (ERAIFT) in Kinshasa DRC, and (3) a three year professional certificate to be
developed at the cole de Faune of Garoua (EFG) in Cameroon.
Further analysis is required of existing capacity building activities, and the new skills required by PA managers and rangers
are still to be identified. The recipients of capacity building should be: (1) the departments of wildlife and protected areas, (2)
the parastatal agencies responsible for PAs management (e.g. the CENAGREF in Benin or the OFINAP in Burkina Faso), (3)
PA managers and rangers, (4) the national and international conservation and development NGOs, (5) the local administrations
and communities as part of the implementation of decentralized natural resource management policies, (6) the private sector
(companies related to the sectors of forest, ecotourism and safari hunting).
Finally, if the future PA management and governance training requirements are to be adequately covered in West and Central
Africa, the type of training offered by regional institutions must evolve in line with modern conservation approaches. The
capacities of the institutions to dispense this training must be greatly strengthened. In addition a selected number of PAs where
ranger training can be given must be identified and long term financial and technical partnerships built to ensure uninterrupted
high quality training opportunities.

Final report
Page 20
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
2.
2.1
KEY DIRECT THREATS TO CONSERVATION IN WA
In West Africa, we differentiate between direct threats which comprise the proximate human activities or processes that impact
on wildlife (in the past, present or future) such as unsustainable fishing or logging, and indirect threats which are the ultimate
drivers of biodiversity decline such as human population growth, poverty increase and government budget reductions. Thus
direct threats are synonymous with sources of stress and proximate pressures. The principal direct threats to the survival of
wildlife in the various ecosystems of WA are loss of habitat for wildlife and unsustainable hunting by humans.
West Africa still has one of the highest annual population growth rate of any region on the continent (or in the world), estimated
at about 2.6% in 2012 (AfDB 2012)7. Economic development (and particularly the growth of commercial agriculture and
extractive industries) has accelerated in forest-zone countries as several civil conflicts have subsided. West Africa currently
has the fastest rate of GDP growth on the continent, predicted at 6.8% in 2013 and 7.4% in 2014 (AfDB 2013) 8. These drivers
are reinforced by the tendency of all human beings (not just those in West Africa) to give priority to their short-term selfinterests, and to consume resources beyond their immediate survival needs.
In the forest zone of Western Africa, the area of relatively undisturbed high-canopy rain forest in West Africa has been
steadily declining over the last 100 years. Outside the few national parks that protect rain-forests and some forest reserves,
the rate of forest loss may recently have accelerated. Good data are lacking for many countries in the region, but the estimated
annual percentage forest loss in Nigeria in 2000-2010 was the highest in the world, at 3.7% (FAO, 2010). Forest is being lost
to subsistence agriculture, the expansion of industrial-scale plantations of oil palm and other crops (including land grabs that
involve foreign companies), timber and fuelwood harvesting, mining operations, road and dam construction, and the spread of
settlements. In other words, West Africa today is being affected by the same kinds of development that long ago destroyed the
original forest cover of much of Europe, the USA and large areas of East Asia. It is difficult to single out one of these threats
as more significant than another and they vary in extent from country to country but farming and plantation agriculture
are probably causing greater forest loss than any other activities.
Hunting of wild animals for meat has been a major factor in the decline of larger mammals in West Africa for a very long time,
probably related in significant part to high human population density and long-established trade networks. Hunting for
subsistence has always been important, but as human populations have continued to grow and urbanization increase, hunting
has become increasingly commercialized, and supports an important bushmeat trade.
The bushmeat trade is pushing some mammals species (and rain-forest primates especially) towards extinction, in part
because their populations have often been reduced to small, highly vulnerable isolates by loss of habitat (Oates et al 2000).
Mammals species of the West African forest zone rated as Critically Endangered (CR) or Endangered (EN) on the IUCN Red
List are: Cephalophus jentinki (Jentinks duiker, EN); Choeropsis liberiensis (Pygmy hippopotamus, EN); Gorilla gorilla (Gorilla,
CR only in Nigeria in the West African region); Mandrillus leucophaeus (Drill, EN only in Nigeria in W. Africa); Pan
troglodytes (Chimpanzee, EN); Procolobus badius (West African red colobus, EN); Procolobus preussi (Preusss red colobus,
CR only Nigeria in W. Africa). Several subspecies are also rated as CR or EN, and many species and subspecies (including
the African elephant) are listed as Vulnerable.
There are only a few areas within the West African forest zone where all wildlife is fully protected by law. From Guinea to the
Nigeria-Cameroon border there are only 11 national parks distributed across eight countries in the forest zone, together
with a handful of wildlife or game sanctuaries. Most of the national parks are small (less than 50,000 ha in area) and therefore
not of maximum value for the long-term protection of viable populations of large mammals. Liberia, which lies at the heart of
the Upper Guinea forest region, and which is clearly a biodiversity hotspot, has only a single national park, Sapo. Even within
the few national parks, management is generally weak and hunting for bushmeat often rife.
Africa s Demographic Trends,
http://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/PolicyDocuments/FINAL%20Briefing%20Note%204%20Africas%20Demographic%20Trends.pdf
8 west Africa Monitor, http://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Publications/West_Africa_Monitor_2013.pdf
7

Final report
Page 21
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
2.1.1 Availability of funds for PAs

Analysis
Funding is a critical limiting factor for all the PAs in Western Africa. International and domestic funding for PAs have struggled
to keep pace with the growth in the number and area of PAs and the economic crisis. Governments have progressively reduced
funding due to the negative economic trend in the region that began in 1960 with the most difficult times in the 1990s. Despite
the current economic recovery in WA, and the endorsement of international environmental treaties and the commitments for
the creation of more protected areas, government funding for PAs is still very low. On an area basis of just US$150/km/year
(source: ODA Official Development Assistance), only a few EU projects of PAs in Western Africa spend close to this target
(about US$120-140/km/year) while private funding for game reserves in WA is far less, although the size of this contribution
is unclear. In conclusion, the current spending on PAs is grossly inadequate, not only to support the costs of existing sites, but
also to ensure the creation and effective management of a representative regional system of PAs.
The existing low level of financial support for biodiversity in WA is mirrored by a low capacity level in the management of PAs.
It is extremely rare to find examples of good management effectiveness of wildlife in the region. The funds invested in
conservation give only weak and very short effects without long-term sustainability outcomes. This funding gap has historical
reasons arising from the way that institutions were established. Whereas institutions providing capacity-building in forest
management and the creation of strong forestry bodies in the countries were developed, the same process was not
implemented for wildlife management. The lack of capacity to manage wildlife has led to a general underestimation of the value
of wildlife in government. The final result was the development of an operating strategy for natural resources that did not
incorporate improved management of wildlife. This situation stands in marked contrast with that in EA and SA.
High population growth, political instability and unfavourable natural processes (desertification and fragility to climate change)
have contributed to the reduction of protected areas as they become utilised for agricultural and pastoral uses.
Investments in wildlife conservation in WA must be oriented in a variety of activities: building PA management capacity,
protecting endangered species, improving communication about the values of biodiversity, improving the monitoring of
biodiversity, and tackling corruption and illegal trafficking. The only hope for WA biodiversity is to restore the fundamentals of
conservation and to bring about sustainability in the uses of natural resources.
Effects
Under resourcing is the most important constraint acting on management effectiveness. The PAs of Western Africa do not
have enough staff, resources, equipment and infrastructure to ensure the control of conservation areas (including anti-poaching
measures and bio-monitoring) and the development of community-based supporting activities in the buffer zones. This results
in degradation and encroachment of the PAs which can ultimately lead to their degazettement.
2.1.2 Institutional governance of PAs

Analysis
In most WA countries the State is the owner of the land and of the natural resources. In the past, governments established
numerous and large protected areas, and classified forests and game reserves. To manage the various conservation aspects,
the governments created centralised institutions for forestry, parks or wildlife and more recently for the environment.
Effects
The indirect drivers such as population growth, poverty increase, government budget reductions, increased democratization
and decentralization, and sectorial approaches render ineffective many aspects of direct centralised management of wildlife
and protected areas by the State. Also their institutions are ill-adapted to cope with rapid structural changes in the countries.

Final report
Page 22
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Protected area agencies are seen by WA governments as a relatively low priority, and until now tend to be too centralized.
Their staff structures are often out of date, staff training is inadequate, and their enabling legislation is too restrictive.
2.1.3 Illegal wildlife trade income and corruption

Analysis
Given the decline in purchasing power of salaries over the past 30 years
and the increased incomes possible from illegal wildlife trade, corruption
has spread and it is growing at all levels with the involvement of
populations, local and central government bodies including forest rangers
and officers, police, army and justice. The increasing importance of the WA
coast as a key transit hub for drugs is another potential danger for the illegal
wildlife trade.
Poaching levels of elephant in WA have increased since 2006 but not as
rapidly as in the other regions. However in WA the rise in poaching is
particularly worrying because the small fragmented populations could
disappear completely. In the WAPOK complex however the populations is
estimated at nearly 8 000 individuals (WAEMU/UNDP, 2013) which is more
robust although 150 elephant were lost in 2013 (Box 1).
Figure 7. Illegal live baby chimpanzee trade
The issue of bushmeat hunting is highly politicized and the commercial circuits are well organized to supply the urban areas
where it is consumed. The high rate of bushmeat harvest, combined with habitat loss and alteration, has led to very severe
population declines. It has already resulted in widespread local extinctions throughout the Upper Guinea Forest Ecosystem of
West Africa. The forests and savannas with no large animals are known as the Empty Forest or Savanna Syndrome.
The large and small antelopes of Western Africa can be considered amongst the most beautiful in the continent (including giant
eland, roan antelope, major hartebeest and Zebra duiker) but they are the object of black-market traders who will smuggle live
animals into wealthy countries, including other African countries such as South Africa (Figure 7).
Effects
Poaching in the small and highly fragmented elephant populations of West Africa is high, and increasing throughout the region.
Ivory trafficking through Nigeria is the major illegal wildlife trade in WA. ETIS statistics9 indicate Nigeria and Togo are the major
exit points but ten other countries are also involved either as source countries for export, transit countries or countries with
significant domestic markets. Nigeria is the country with the largest flows of illicit ivory but more recently other countries such
as Togo have become involved in large-scale smuggling of ivory. Most of this ivory appears to originate in Central Africa, but
Nigeria was also identified as the destination of major shipments of ivory from Kenya, suggesting that ivory from as far away
as Eastern Africa may now be moving through this country. The increasing involvement of Chinese buyers in Nigeria, as well
as the involvement of organised crime syndicates in the illegal wildlife trade and deforestation for cannabis cultivation, means
that Nigeria is playing an increasingly important role in biodiversity loss in WA.
Box 1. Importance of WAPOK
UNEP, CITES, IUCN, TRAFFIC (2013). Elephants in the Dust The African Elephant Crisis. A Rapid Response Assessment. United
Nations Environment Programme, GRID-Arendal. www.grida.no

Final report
Page 23
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
THE WAPOK COMPLEX

The WAPOK complex is a large area about 38,000 km2 of intact habitat that
is of great importance to the survival of large mammals in West Africa,
including many that are endangered. These different blocks constitute the
largest remaining wilderness and the only functional ecological complex in
WA.
This large landscape of contiguous conservation areas is located at the
frontiers with Burkina Faso, Benin, Niger and Togo. The landscape
encompasses one transborder park (W), two national parks (Pendjari and
Keran), two more important faunal reserves (Arly and Oti Monduri), one
Giraffe area not classified, 10 hunting concessions and many adjacent
villages hunting zones.
The complex is situated in a transition zone between savanna and forest
lands. The site reflects the interaction between natural resources and
humans since Neolithic times and illustrates the evolution of biodiversity in
this zone. The park is known for its large mammals: lions, cheetahs,
leopards, giraffe, buffalos, roans, hartebeests, manatees, baboons,
hippopotamuses. In WA the complex provides a home for the biggest, and
in a few cases the last, populations of lions, elephants, cheetahs, manatees
and giraffe. The WAPOK area is also known for its bird populations,
especially transitory migrating species, with over 350 species identified in
the complex.
The 'W' National Park, was so named because of the local configuration of the Niger River.
The PAs in the complex are listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site (W-Niger and Pendjari -requested), all as MAB/UNESCO
(W was the first MAB transborder regional park to be classified in Africa), many of them as Wetlands of International
Importance (Ramsar) and as BirdLife International Important Bird Areas. The area is largely uninhabited by humans, having
been (until the 1970s) a Malarial and Tse-Tse zone comprising wetlands formed by the delta of the Mekrou River with the
Niger. Historically, the area has been at one time a major area of human habitation, judged by the important archaeological
sites (mostly tombs and furnaces - it is quite possible that the iron age in the savanna areas of WA started in the W transborder
park) found in the area (see tha analysys of the ECOPAS projet).
Benin, Burkina Faso and Niger have implemented an inter-state cooperation agreement based on the ecological complex of
adjacent protected areas with national parks, wildlife reserves and hunting zones forming a large regional complex (WAP
from the name of the major PAs of each country: Regional Park W, Arly Faunal Reserve and Pendjari NP). After several years
of intervention, under the supervision of the WAEMU and the support of the EU and German funds, there was an improvement
on the status of the natural ecosystems. Given the success of the conservation intervention in the WAP complex, Togo in the
years 2006-2009 proposed to join the initiative with adjacent PAs Oti-Mandouri and Keran so the complex has been enlarged
and has now become WAPOK (this name comes from the names of the most important PAs of the four neighbouring countries
(W-A-P-O- K). At present, the situation in the WAPOK complex is at risk of degrading with increasing pressures from elephant
poaching, mining, increasing poverty in rural and urban areas and desertification. Conservation interventions should be based
on a participatory approach involving the political and technical representatives at central and decentralized levels, traditional
authorities, users, people, private sector, NGOs, national and international institutions and the civil society.
One favourable factor is that bushmeat is no longer the most important source of protein in the region because the wildlife
populations have been so depleted by years of unsustainable hunting for meat. Furthermore analyses in Ghana indicate that
among cocoa farmers, the value of harvested bushmeat is relatively low and contributes little to household production.
Ungulates and primates have been replaced by rodents as the most commonly eaten wild animals.
The illegal live mammals trade is concentred on Togo. The country acts as a hub for the transit of large and small WA antelopes
destined for hunting reserves of other Africans countries and even outside of Africa (see the officially sanctioned captures of
giant eland in Niokola-Koba National Park for export). A small illegal wildlife trade in ivory trinkets, birds and live small animals
occurs along the coasts from Nigeria to Mauritania.
Final report
Page 24
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
2.1.4 Weak planning, management effectiveness and monitoring of PAs

The analyses of the illegal wildlife trade (above) have some common and specific aspects. First, we present here some possible
common solutions.
Analysis
The quality of PA management effectiveness in WA is poor, and in some cases very poor. The IUCN management
assessments conducted in the PAs of WA scored far less than PAs in other African regions. To put this in wider context, the
overall mean for the assessment of African PAs is well below the world mean.
Effects
PAs in WA are managed with insufficient knowledge of the biodiversity values, trends and threats arising from direct and
indirect causes. There is a lack of planning, monitoring, adaptive management and proactivity. Inadequate resources and weak
capacities to implement the management processes lead to the general loss of biodiversity in the region and a loss of
ecosystem services provided by the PAs. At present, the WAPOK complex, composed of PAs and hunting reserves covering
more than 38.000 Km, is the only functional and stable ecological complex, despite the high threats that it faces. Major parks
and reserves in WA are highly degraded, but even so a few can still be recovered. Specific projects are needed to preserve
important or endemic species. In a few degraded protected areas, the administration still provides an institutional presence in
the hope of a possible recovery of the area at some later date. The general tendency, however, is to reduce the conservation
areas because of lack of funds and capacities to manage them.
Solutions
As planning, management and monitoring are closely linked, integrated solutions must be found. We recommend the following
general solutions:
Improving information to build a more effective monitoring and decision-support system in order to facilitate: (i)
legitimacy, accountability and fairness in park management, and (ii) adaptive management and proactivity;
Emphasising the role of stakeholders and rights-holders, local, national and international NGOs, private sector and
other non-traditional partners with a view to improving management effectiveness over a broader landscape which
includes the PAs and the buffer zones;
Strengthening institutional capacities (and providing training opportunities) to govern management frameworks and
for multi-scale management of protected areas at local, national and regional levels;
Integrating species-based and habitat-based approaches;
Protecting the original ecosystem is generally less costly than ecosystem restoration;
Integrating in situ and ex situ conservation of genetic diversity which can serve the needs of restoration of ecosystems
and PAs.

Final report
Page 25
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
2.2
KEY INDIRECT THREATS TO CONSERVATION
Indirect threats to conservation have been defined as the ultimate factors, usually social, economic, political, institutional, or
cultural, that enable or otherwise add to the occurrence or persistence of proximate direct threats. (Source: A Standard Lexicon
for Biodiversity Conservation: Unified Classifications of Threats and Actions.)
Halting biodiversity loss (or reducing it to a minimal level) requires tackling the combined effect of human activities. The indirect
drivers of biodiversity loss are related to economic, demographic, socio-political, cultural, and technological factors. Also,
indirect drivers affect biodiversity loss differently from direct drivers. Charismatic mega-fauna, such as elephants, benefit from
intense conservation efforts and research when subject to direct or indirect threats to their conservation. By contrast when
many endangered species of antelopes, amphibians, insects and plants are affected by indirect drivers but fail to draw the
same amount of attention as the charismatic mega-fauna.
The solutions are global and are listed at the end of this chapter (see below).
2.2.1 Population growth and poverty

Analysis
In West Africa, population growth is between 2.5 and 3.5% per annum and this is resulting in increasing levels of poverty over
an ever enlarging area. The effect
is greater than any of the other
African regions and is placing
enormous pressure on the
capacity of the environment to
provide services for human wellbeing (see figure 8).
Effects
As the demand for resources
increases, all the protected areas
Source World Bank, Africa Development Indicators, specific elaboration
in WA face pressure from
Figure 8. Annual population growth rate in percent as average of 10 years (1993-2012) grazing,
cultivation,
and
harvesting of wood, meat, fish,
water, and pharmacopoeia. In Burkina Faso the populations in the buffer areas of some parks and reserves draw 33% of their
basic needs from the natural resources of the PAs.
2.2.2 Fragmentation, reduction and isolation of PA in the landscape

Analysis
As land outside protected areas is exploited more and more intensively in WA, the increasing isolation of protected areas in
the landscape poses a serious threat to the long-term viability of many wildlife populations.

Final report
Page 26
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Effects
The primary effects of isolation of protected areas are: (i) habitat loss (pastoral and forested lands converted to agriculture);
(ii) disturbance from human infrastructures (wildlife abundance increases with distance from human settlements); (iii)
overhunting (widespread along protected area boundaries) and (iv) disease (transmission from livestock, domestic animals,
and humans).
2.2.3 Coup dtats, rebellions, civil unrest and religion fundamentalism, Ebola and refugee crises
Analysis
With the exception of Senegal and Ghana which have had a relatively long period of stability, the WA countries have suffered
from political instability, conflicts with rebel movements, civil unrests, conflicts linked with religious fundamentalism and refugee
crises.
Effects
Breakdowns in law and order generally have devastating effects on PAs, as recently seen in Ivory Coast. Protected areas and
their natural resources become targets for everyone: (i) populations for land, grazing, wood, bushmeat, etc; (ii) illegal traders
who target the most precious woods and wildlife; (iii) armies who use wildlife and natural resources as sources of money and
food; and (iv) rebels and religious fundamentalist movements who use PAs as places of refuge and sources of funding.
Protected areas in WA have, and are still suffering greatly, from these effects. However in cases where there are decentralized
systems, and where NGOs and community groups are involved, the PA management and governance have proved better able
to partially save conservation areas (e.g. Sapo National Park in Liberia, where the local community was involved in the park's
management).
2.2.4 Negative economic trends

Analysis
Between 1960 and 2002, declining national economies and steady population growth in WA meant that the combined effect of
servicing international debts and providing education and health care for the burgeoning populations resulted in a reduction of
funding for protected areas. Poverty has led to increasing level of poaching and illegal activities in the PAs, and the prolonged
political crisis in the Cte dIvoire also threatening the economic recovery in WA. The peaceful solution to the crisis in Cte
dIvoire brought some relief, but higher international oil and food prices have now started to cause inflation.
Effects
The situation for PAs has remained unchanged. PA staff are poorly paid and equipped, materials and equipment are totally
inadequate, and infrastructure is poorly maintained. Illegal grazing, wood cutting, agriculture, and poaching in PAs continue,
sometimes with the complicity of the PA rangers.

Final report
Page 27
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
2.2.5 Policy and sectorial approach

Analysis
Investment in the primary sectors like agriculture (e.g. cotton), pastoralism (e.g. transhumance grazing systems), forestry (e.g.
logging concessions or firewood provision), wildlife conservation (e.g. new PAs) or in sectors such as mining operations or
energy infrastructure all affect the socio-economics of the region and raise a range of political, administrative, economic,
industrial, environmental, infrastructural and energy issues. As elsewhere in Africa, the WA countries, with the support of
donors and private funds, implement their policies, strategies and projects with a sectorial approach without the inter-sectorial
coordination and collaboration that is essential to ensure mainstreaming of natural resource conservation and management
issues.
Effects
Governments and populations continue to regard PAs as unproductive areas to be exploited on a short time base
(unsustainable exploitation) rather than as important economic and spatial elements of the landscape. Consequently pressures
on PAs are increasing and resulting in biodiversity loss and degradation of many ecosystem services.
Possible global solutions to indirect drivers
People make decisions concerning biodiversity based on a range of values related to their well-being, including the use and
non-use values of biodiversity and ecosystems. The well-being of local people must dominate many responses, including those
relating to protected areas, governance, and wildlife management. Responses to indirect drivers with a primary goal of
conservation could be the following:
Manage protected areas for a wide range of sustainable uses (as is found in IUCN category VI PAs). This is extremely
important where, as in WA, biodiversity loss is sensitive to changes in key drivers;
Design and manage PA systems in the context of an ecosystem approach, with due regard to the importance of
corridors and interconnectivity of PAs, if it is possible;
Mainstream natural resource conservation and ecosystem services in all the primary sectors such as agriculture,
pastoralism, forestry, fisheries, mining and in energy;
Adopt inter-sectorial coordination and collaboration to ensure mainstreaming of biodiversity conservation and
management issues;
Capture the benefits and reduce the costs of wildlife for local communities, especially the local opportunity costs in
line with the principle of equitable sharing;
Increase transparency and accountability of government and private-sector through involvement of concerned
stakeholders and rights-holders in decision-making on biodiversity;
Increase coordination among multilateral environmental agreements and between environmental agreements and
other international economic and social institutions;
Raise the level of public awareness, information-communication and education.

Final report
Page 28
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
3.
The historical analysis in WA over the last 15-20 years shows that the external funding for conservation was about $780 million.
In terms of percent of the allocation of these funds, Nigeria and Ghana received more than 15%, whilst the smaller countries
(Gambia, Guinea Bissau), the less secure countries (Sierra Leone) and the countries of the desert ecotype received about 13% of the funds. Funding for transborder protected areas was about 10% of the total. The regional programmes on conservation
used about 12% of the available funds.
The analysis can also be extended to each major ecotype.
3.1
DESERTS
International NGOs have long been involved in arid land conservation through reserve management, genetic research, wildlife
monitoring, wildlife veterinary work, captive breeding and reintroductions and tourism development (e.g. Zoological Society of
London, and Sahara Conservation Fund). Currently conservation in the desert ecosystem is focused on Termit & Tin Toumma
(Niger). In the Desert Atlantic Coast there are Important Bird Areas (IBAs) such as the Banc d'Arguin NP and the Diawling
NP (Mauritania), and Djoudj NP (Senegal).
3.2
SAVANNAS
Savanna PAs have received significant support, particularly from the EU. Today the effort is focused on the WAPOK complex
(W, Arly, Pendjari Oti Monduri -Keran- Benin, Burkina Faso, Niger and Togo). Other PAs receiving lower and more irregular
levels of support are Como (Cte d'Ivoire); Mole (Ghana); Niokolo Koba NP (Senegal); Gourma Elephant FR (Mali); the Sahel
Wildlife Reserve (Burkina Faso) and the Volta Trans-Border Ecosystem Wildlife Corridors (Burkina Faso and Ghana).
3.3
FORESTS
There have been numerous projects in support of rainforest PAs but only a few of these areas still retain their biological value.
Where the administration alone is responsible for management, the PAs are effectively paper parks. PAs with important
biological values are: Gola Forest Reserve and Loma Mountains (Sierra Leone), Sapo (Liberia), Tai (Ivory Coast), Cross River
(Nigeria), and Ankasa and Bia Conservation Areas (Ghana). There are interesting possibilities for a landscape approach in
which the PA is at the core of wider sustainable land uses. The particular landscape approach could be adjusted according to
a wide range of conditions and land-use practices, from strict protection to intensive development. The communities
surrounding PAs could benefit from forest and biodiversity resources and services whilst contributing to their conservation.
At the same time, well managed commercial forest blocks contribute to the protection of PAs and biodiversity. The landscape
approach is, therefore, a wider mosaic of land uses where the protected areas form part of the overall socio-economic network:
human settlements, agricultural areas, forested and non-forested areas. Interesting possibilities for a landscape approach are:
(i) Gola Forest Reserve (Sierra Leone) and the Lofa and Foya Forest Reserves (Liberia), (ii) Mount Nimba & East Nimba
Nature Preserve (Guinea , Ivory Coast and Liberia) , (iii) Outamba - Kilimi National Park (Sierra Leone) and Madina Oula, Soy
& Oure Kaba sub-prefectures (Guinea). It is important to underline that there are still important forests blocks that could
complement the overall biodiversity of this ecotype but these do not have protected area status. Granting this added protection
should be a priority.
3.4
MANGROVES/COASTAL
There are few PAs in the mangroves forests. The Niger Delta, the most important area of mangrove forest in Africa, and the
third most important in the world, does not have a protected area. In WA the most important example of mangrove conservation
is the public-private partnership for conservation, management and sustainable use of mangrove forests in Guinea Bissau
(Orango National Park, Tarafes Cacheu Natural Park and Cacheu Mangrove, Lagoas de Cufada, Cantanhez Forest, Rio
Grande de Buba, Cufada, and Cantanhez Forest). In Guinea Bissau, the intervention enabled six new conservation areas to
be created a rare success story in the conservation of this important ecosystem. In the other countries actions on mangroves
Final report
Page 29
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
are basically shared between the administration, communities and NGOs: as with Songor Lagoon and Keta Lagoon Ramsar
site (Ghana) and Niumi National Park (Gambia). Other coastal conservation actions target Important Bird Areas: the Banc
d'Arguin NP and the Diawling NP (Mauritania), the Saloum Delta NP and the Lower Casamance NP (Senegal). The remaining
blocks of mangrove forests constitute an opportunity for the establishment of new conservation areas. This action should also
be a priority.
In conclusion biodiversity conservation in WA is characterised by (i) low funding for desert PAs but with the benefit of strong
involvement by NGOs, (ii) an almost constant level of support going to the protected savanna areas; (iii) low funding for rain
forest protected areas with mixed interventions of government and NGOs; (iv) a small scale success story for the recovery of
mangrove forests through a public-private partnership.

Final report
Page 30
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
4.
4.1
NEGATIVE LESSONS LEARNED
4.2
The fragility of ecosystem conservation in WA is made worse by the continuing nature of the key indirect
threats (instability, high population growth, etc.). The phenomenon is further amplified by the absence of
a culture and tradition in PA management and the lack of education and training in wildlife and protected
areas management.
The futility over the long-term of short-term investments in conservation in countries where indirect threats
to natural resources and biodiversity are high.
The severe drought cycles linked to climate change have led to the spread of pastoralism and
transhumance essentially at the expense of savanna PAs. This phenomenon is made even more acute
by the investment of powerful and influential people (politicians, administrators, traders) in livestock. As a
result it is extremely difficult to oppose the illegal occupation of PAs by transhumant herders.
The enormous challenges posed by corruption, particularly in public institutions.
Wasting a huge potential in promoting an exclusively ethnic and cultural tourism in the deserts areas and
omitting to invest in ecotourism and safari hunting despite that potential (i.e. WAP transborder park and
the wildlife reserves).
The abandonment of the fundamentals of PA management (control of territory, anti-poaching activities,
bio-monitoring, etc.) in favour of less expensive and more popular actions; new strategies for the
maintaining of PA control alongside conflict management have not been instigated.
Encouraging NGOs to take on a major role in conservation has not always helped state structures to
address their issues of weak capacities. Furthermore the predominant position occupied by NGOs has
sometimes led to a situation where the main priority of the NGO is to maintain its position of power and
influence rather than to pursue the conservation objectives.
POSITIVE LESSONS LEARNED
Long-term and sustained conservation investments and professional management, as in the case of the
EU funded W Trans-border Park project, has been shown to have very positive conservation outcomes in
terms of reduced illegal activities, increased wildlife, ecotourism development and environmental
education.
The potential of public-private partnerships for conservation and sustainable development in the mangrove
forest ecosystem in Guinea Bissau.
The importance of the work of strongly motivated national and international NGOs with clear objectives:
e.g. the conservation of desert antelopes, assisting government in law enforcement as in relation to the
trade in great apes and ivory, and the protection of great apes (e.g. Last Great Ape Organisation
LAGA/NGO in wildlife law enforcement), giraffes and other charismatic species.
Using cultural heritage, even in times of conflict, to promote the protection of important areas such as the
conservation activities in the Gola Rainforest National Park which have involved the communities of both
Sierra Leone and Liberia who share similar cultures as well as many species of plant and animal use.
The potential of sport hunting areas (e.g. Burkina Faso) which help to maintain the only functioning
ecosystem (including its elephant population) in the major savanna ecotype of WA.
The potential for a species to become a national symbol as in the case of the giraffe in Niger. During the
great drought of 1984 about 50 giraffes moved south to Niger from Mali. Currently the population numbers
nearly 400 animals, living outside a PA and protected jointly by local populations and the national wildlife
service.

Final report
Page 31
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
4.3
PROMISING APPROACHES
Improving biodiversity conservation in WA should be based on the regional integration of three strategies: (A) consistent,
uninterrupted interventions on the ground with a specific strategic approach to each major ecotype, with strong coordination
between ecotypes; (B) a decision-support system based on the collection and organisation of information on biodiversity and
management effectiveness in collaboration with the BIOPAMA EU programme; and (C) shared decision-making at institutional
and political levels (Figure 9). The success of this overall approach will depend on the functional integration of these three
specific strategies.
Figure 9. Promising approach to improve the protection of biodiversity in WA
4.3.1 Constant and specific intervention on the ground

The strategic approach is based on the consistency of interventions in the four major ecotypes: (1) Deserts, (2) Savannas, (3)
Forests and (4) Mangroves/Coastal. The specific intervention strategies on the ground are based on a composite approach
(only in alphabetical order): (i) composite in-situ and ex-situ conservation, (ii) ecosystem approach, (iii) habitat approach, (iv)
in-situ conservation, (v) species approach. Below are presented the proposed priority intervention approaches for each major
ecotype in WA (Table 4).
Table 4. Composite strategic approach for interventions in the four major ecotypes
Priority
Deserts
Savannas

Final report
Forests
Mangroves/Coastal
Page 32
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
1
2
3
4
5
Species
In-situ conservation
Composite in-situ and exsitu conservation
Ecosystem
Ecosystem
Ecosystem
Species
Species
Habitat
Habitat
Habitat
Species
Ecosystem
Habitat
4.3.2 Biodiversity and Management Information System

In WA, data on conservation are scattered, often out of date and not focused on the issues to be solved. The sources of
information at the global level are very generic and do not allow the development of a strategic approach with a coordinated
series of conservation activities. The BIOPAMA10 project proposes the creation of regional observatories in Africa and then to
connect the collected information in a more general system (DOPA11, managed jointly with IUCN). Through this project the EU
has an opportunity to turn the simple provision of information into a system that will enable conservation data to be organized
and used in a decision-support system to identify priorities, formulate strategies and monitor the impact. The synergies between
information, decision making and conservation action are essential.
Box 2. Biodiversity and Protected Areas Management Project (BIOPAMA)
Box 3. Digital Observatory for Protected Areas (DOPA)
BIOPAMA: The Biodiversity and Protected Areas Management Programme (BIOPAMA) is an initiative of the ACP Secretariat funded
by the European Union. BIOPAMA aims to address threats to biodiversity in African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries while
reducing poverty in communities in and around protected areas. Specifically, the program will enhance existing institutions and
networks by making the best available science and knowledge available for building capacity to improve policies and better decisionmaking on biodiversity conservation, protected areas management and access and benefit sharing.
BIOPAMA consists of two components:
1. Protected areas component (jointly implemented by IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature and the EC-Joint
Research Centre), that includes:
1.1. Capacity building for regional and national institutions and agencies and protected areas managers;
1.2. Improved access to and availability of biodiversity data through the establishment of regional observatories and
information systems to improve decision making.
2. Access and Benefits Sharing (ABS), component implemented by the Multi-donor ABS Capacity Development Initiative
managed by Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH.
The actions of the protected area component will be implemented in four BIOPAMA regions: West and Central Africa, Eastern and
Southern Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific. One of the main objectives is establishing Regional Observatories that should support
the conservation interventions in the field with:
Developing a Regional Reference Information System (RRIS)
Supporting decision-makers at various levels (regional, national, and local PA level)
Strengthening capacity-building
Operating a regional review on information needs and gap analysis
Indicating priorities of PA funding (ACP/EU ++) and addressing Aichi targets and national reporting obligations to MEAs
Supporting the assessment of biodiversity values mainstreaming biodiversity
Contributing to improve PA Management Effectiveness
Proposing the assessment of ecosystem services - arguments for protection
10
11
BIOPAMA, The Biodiversity and Protected Area Management Programme

DOPA, Digital Observatory for Protected Areas

Final report
Page 33
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
4.3.3 Shared political and institutional decisions
THE DIGITAL OBSERVATORY FOR PROTECTED AREAS (DOPA)

DOPA has been developed by the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission to support the European Unions efforts
to substantially strengthen the effectiveness of international governance for biodiversity and ecosystem services
(EC/COM/2006/0216 final) and more generally for strengthening the capacity to mobilize and use biodiversity data, information
and forecasts so that they are readily accessible to policymakers, managers, experts and other users (UNEP/CBD/COP/10/27).
DOPA is conceived as a set of distributed Critical Biodiversity Informatics Infrastructures (databases, web modelling services,
broadcasting services, ...) combined with interoperable web services to provide a large variety of end-users including park
managers, decision-makers and researchers with means to assess, monitor and possibly forecast the state and pressures on
protected areas at local, regional and global scale. Aside the services hosted at the JRC, databases contributing to DOPA are
typically The Red List of Threatened Species (IUCN), the World Database of Protected Areas (IUCN and UNEP-WCMC), and the
species occurrences provided by the GBIF.
In particular, DOPA aims to
1. provide the best available material (data, indicators, models) agreed on by contributing institutions which can serve for
establishing baselines for research and reporting (e.g. Protected Planet Report, National Biodiversity Strategies and
Action Plans);
2. provide free analytical tools to support the discovery, access, exchange and execution of web services (databases
and modelling) designed to generate the best available material but also for research purposes, decision making and
capacity building activities for conservation;
3. provide an interoperable and, as much as possible, open source framework to allow institutions to develop their own
means to assess, monitor and forecast the state and pressure of protected areas and help them to further engage with
the organizations hosting critical biodiversity informatics infrastructures.
DOPA Explorer (Beta version, 2013: http://ehabitat-wps.jrc.ec.europa.eu/dopa_explorer/) has been developed to provide simple
means to explore areas around all marine and terrestrial protected areas that are greater than 150 km2, identify those with most
unique ecosystems and species, and assess the pressures they are exposed to because of human development. Ecological data
derived from near real-time earth observations are also made available although currently limited to African protected areas.
Two other main interfaces to the web services are planned for the period 2014-16: (1) DOPA Validator (2015) will allow registered
users to validate/invalidate the information summarized in DOPA Explorer and provide additional observations about individual
protected areas; (2) DOPA Analyst (2016) will be providing end-users with a broad range of modelling tools for forecasting climate
change impact on protected areas, assessing connectivity, computing niche models or to allow end-users to simulate
consequences of adding or removing a protected area on regional indicators.
Reference: Dubois, G, M. Schulz, J. Skien, A. Cottam, W. Temperley, M. Clerici, E. Drakou, J. vant Klooster, B. Verbeeck, I.
Palumbo, P. Derycke, J-F. Pekel, J. Martnez-Lpez, S. Peedell, P. Mayaux (2013). An introduction to the Digital Observatory
for Protected Areas (DOPA) and the DOPA Explorer (Beta). EUR 26207 EN, EC. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the
European Union 72 p. See more at: http://dopa.jrc.ec.europa.eu/content/publications-resources#sthash.kYTkHhtQ
In WA, the severity of conservation problems imposes a strong need for a supranational dialogue. In WA, safeguarding the
populations of elephants, the desert ecotype wildlife, the specificities of the rainforests, and the wetlands and mangroves
requires greater coordination between countries of the region and greater collaboration between countries and donors on the
subject. This collaboration can be achieved firstly by empowering a special unit at the institutional policy level (i.e. WAEMU)
and a strong coordination of activities among donors, always to take place through this special unit at institutional level. The
creation of a special unit at the institutional level should provide greater awareness in government decision-making. The
creation of a coordinated response by donors ensures greater synergy of interventions in financing long-term, specific and
emergency interventions (see chapter 5.2.1 for implementation).

Final report
Page 34
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
5.
INDICATIVE CONSERVATION ACTIONS / PRIORITY CONSERVATION NEEDS
Having reviewed the main conservation issues in West Africa, including the status of wildlife in 4 major ecotypes and the nature
of direct indirect threats to wildlife, we now move on to consider a strategic approach for the conservation of biodiversity in WA.
The most important points to remember about conservation in WA are the following:
High biodiversity values in a wide range of ecosystems, but weak funds, management, protection and
sustainable development of wildlife and other natural resources;
Strong direct threats such as loss of habitats and fragmentation, unsustainable poaching, and poor
institutional governance with weak monitoring and planning;
Strong indirect threats such as human population growth and poverty, a weak policy and sectorial
approach with unstainable land and resource use.
This strategic approach focuses on the following key needs:
A. An active conservation process with more feet on the ground to counter the direct threats and to enhance
protection of biodiversity whilst at the same time promoting its high values;
B. A proactive process with more external support for better governance, monitoring and planning, and in
support of actions taken to reduce indirect threats on conservation.
A. Active process
The active process has its own goals: (i) to balance the interventions between the four major ecotypes; (ii) to save threatened
species from extinction; (iii) to preserve critical habitats (e.g. wetlands, Mount Nimba, and mangroves); (iv) to improve
management effectiveness of national and transborder parks; (v) to promote the initiatives of landscape-based conservation
including the maintenance of connections between blocks of PAs; and (vi) to ensure a better awareness and representation of
the realities of wildlife in WA.
The active process has five main activities:
1. Dissemination and analysis of the proposals for site conservation and for other conservation priorities in
WA;
2. Specific strategies and actions for the major ecotypes: Deserts, Savannas, Forests and
Mangroves/Coastal;
3. Dismantling the wildlife trafficking network;
4. Special analyses;
5. Training in wildlife protection.
The objective of the first activity (Dissemination and analysis of...) is to confirm the conservation strategic approach for WA
and to refine the details necessary for the implementation of the proposals. The action is scheduled only for the first year.
The second activity (Specific strategies and actions...) entails (i) prioritizing interventions for the most important Key
Landscapes for Conservation (KLCs) and Key Areas for Conservation (KACs); (ii) itemizing the main objectives of every single
KLC and KCA; and (iii) preparing proposals to prevent the further decline of wetlands and to create new or larger KLCs and
KCAs.
For each major ecotype, the process provides priorities of implementation based on criteria related to species, habitats and
typologies of conservation (Table 4). The ecotype of mangroves also includes the marine and coastal PAs, but a harmonised
and more detailed analysis than could be undertaken here with incorporation of the strategic plan for marine protected areas
on the Atlantic coast of Africa as implementation of the Abidjan Convention.
The third activity is part of the active conservation approach with activities on the ground. It will include the following supporting
actions:
Final report
Page 35
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Dismantling wildlife trafficking networks in four sub-actions:

o Political and diplomatic support;
o Intelligence and security;
o Judiciary and Conviction of illegal activities on PAs;
o Security communications.
The fourth activity on special analysis is split into three sub-activities:

o Monitoring and planning of highly threatened species and habitats;
o Population and Habitat Viability Assessment (PHVA);
o Establishing new or larger KLCs and KCAs.
The fifth activity on wildlife protection training will assist in winning back control of the parks and in curbing poaching. It has
three steps:
o Identify conservation sites with the capacity to deliver basic training for new rangers;
o Prepare and implement training programmes targeting the specific needs of each PA;
o Support implementation of the appropriate anti-poaching programmes for each PA.
B. Proactive process
The proactive process attempts to support and boost the active process on a long term basis by creating a unit of institutional
support and coordination allocated under the WAEMU with the support of a special task force. The establishment of a regional
coordination unit should exclude the creation of a new regional entity, but aim for the strengthening an existing regional
institution in the specific field of conservation by the introduction of a task force. This proposal recommends strengthening the
existing regional institution of WAEMU in the specific field of conservation by a special unit reinforced by a task force of experts.
A unit under the WAEMU will have the mission of coordinating and promoting the following:
Monitoring and Planning in coordination with the Observatory installed by BIOPAMA in West and Central
Africa with the duty of organizing and directing the conservation information as a decision-support system
at local, national and regional levels;
Communication to increase the awareness of the region for conservation through a far-reaching
communication process;
Biological Research that is highly targeted and oriented towards the improvement of management
effectiveness on specific aspects of conservation in WA;
Management-Governance Training for raising the capacity of senior level officers of PAs and central
government so that they are equipped to adopt the most advanced and suitable techniques for long-term
management and conservation of biodiversity in WA.

Final report
Page 36
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
5.1
ACTIVE PROCESS
5.1.1 Dissemination and analysis of the proposals about sites and conservation priorities in WA
The implementation of inputs and proposals for intervention in the short and medium term requires the transmission of
information through regional channels (ECOWAS - WAEMU) in favour of national institutions, NGOs and representatives of
stakeholders in conservation. The information is intended to confirm the general conservation strategic approach and refine
the details necessary for the implementation of the proposals. The EU should promote the first initiative, but in the future the
regional Observatory setup by the BIOPAMA project will support the coordination of the regional and national institutions by
its regional reference information system on conservation (see boxes 2 and 3).
This intervention should be carried-out under the coordination of WAEMU.
5.1.2 Support for conservation of the major ecotypes: Deserts, Savannas, Forests and Mangroves/Coastal
The strategic approach to conservation in West Africa is fundamentally based on national parks management. The highly
degraded situation and the strong, persistent threats suggest the need for a more structured intervention on conservation
based on:
a)
major ecotypes, to extend the interventions of conservation from savannas and forests to the areas that have
received less attention in the past such as desert PAs and mangroves and coastal-marine PAs;
b)
species, so as to prevent extinction of the rare and charismatic species (desert antelopes, elephants, primates,
carnivores, giraffes, eland, pygmy hippopotamus, birds, plants and amphibians);
c)
habitats, to defend sensitive areas such as the wetlands, the water basin, the inner deltas, and the montane
habitats;
d)
Key Landscapes of conservation (KLCs), to allow for better management of habitats and species;
e)
Transborder Conservation Areas (TFCA), through better regional coordination and to act as a symbol of a possible
peace process between neighbouring countries;
f)
Key Conservation Areas (KCAs), to guarantee the basic intervention of conservation in support of specific habitats
and species.
The strategic approach organises these interventions according to the four major ecotypes to ensure a balance between the
different conservation realities of WA and to spread the current strong focus for Savanna protected areas. This strategic
approach put more attention to key, rare and endangered species, and special and unique habitats in the KLCs, TFCAs and
KCAS.
Consequently the strategic approach will carry out conservation actions on the following:
A.
KLCs of Deserts Major Ecotypes;
B.
KLCs, KCAs and endangered wetlands of Savanna Ecotypes;
C.
Existing KLCs and KCAs and new or larger KLCs and KCAs (in Liberia, Ghana and Nigeria) of the Forest Ecotypes;
D.
KLCs, KCAs and new or larger KLCs and KCAs (in Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Senegal, Guinea)
of Mangroves/Coastal Ecotypes.
Beginning with the Desert ecotype, this strategic approach presents specific proposals for conservation of every site and for
each major ecotype. For summarised global data, see Table 27 and Figure 14.
The elements of each site are presented in table format under the following headings:
Conservation objectives
Key Species
Key habitats
The summary elements of each major ecotype are presented in table format under the following headings:
Protecting biodiversity;
Countries;
Biomes / Ecotypes;
Final report
Page 37
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Main Protected Areas and priorities;

Analysis;
Objectives and Proposed actions;
5.1.3 Specific strategies and actions for the major Desert ecotypes
The habitats of the Desert ecotype are heavily influenced by drought. So in the most arid zones, degradation is found where
water (oases, etc.) is present. Otherwise the Sahara is a vast area of largely undisturbed habitat. The areas of steppe and
woodlands in the desert are also heavily influenced by drought and the effects are exacerbated by large numbers of domestic
livestock.
The desert areas of the Atlantic coast are severely degraded (overgrazing, cutting of trees for firewood and timber, and soil
erosion aggravated by drought are contributing to desertification). The chief faunal values are along the coast where key
migratory staging posts for the birds using the Atlantic Coastal Flyway are found. The large mammal species have suffered
from uncontrolled hunting but the coast also supports the world's largest population of the critically endangered Mediterranean
monk seal (Monachus monachus).
It is recommended that the highest priority be given to key landscapes of conservation and key protected areas in the following
ecotypes:
Desert with the ecotypes of Sahara Desert; South Saharan steppe and woodlands and West Saharan
montane xeric woodlands;

Atlantic coast.
For summarised global data: see table 8 and figure 10.

The proposal for the WA Desert ecotype is to establish one large Desert Key Landscape of Conservation.
Niger-Chad-Algeria Desert KLC (416,750 km2 of PAs)
The conservation field activities should focus on the area between the Niger, Chad and Algeria where there are probably the
only remaining PAs that contain populations of many of the larger ungulates of this ecotype. However, this vast area has long
been plagued by political insecurity and civil unrest, and the current situation of the desert wildlife is far from certain.

Final report
Page 38
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Many desert species track seasonally variable and patchy resources and require large natural landscapes to persist.
Consequently, and if necessary, in-situ conservation should cover the entire area between the priority PAs. Special habitats to
protect are the water sources and riparian habitats which are critical for the persistence of many desert species. For this reason,
agreements between countries should be defined to determine a common intervention strategic approach at the regional level.
The Desert KLCs encompass 3 PAs of Niger [(1) 97,000 km2 Termit & Tin Toumma (2) 78,339 km2 Ar and Tnr (3)
12,754 km2 Addax Sanctuary], 2 PAs of Chad [(4) 83,000 km2 Ouadi Rim-Ouadi (5) 1,739 km2 Fada Archei) and 2 PAs of
Algeria [(6) 98,900 km2 Tassili-n-Ajjer (7) 45,000 km2 Ahaggar].
The key threats to be addressed are the reduction of large mammal populations and the Saharan cheetah and the poorness
of the genetic heritage of the desert antelopes. The large spaces and the system resilience, despite climate change, argue for
adopting these measures:
(i) species approach, together with a

(ii) combined in-situ and ex-situ conservation approach to protect the endangered species in the priority PAs
(see below) and to preserve and improve the genetic heritage of desert antelopes with ex-situ
conservation.
To have the greatest probability of conservation success, in situ and ex-situ conservation techniques should be applied
synergistically and must:
be flexible to act in areas and countries as soon as security conditions allow it;
save the habitat in which the species can live and reproduce (PAs and ecosystem);
preserve and improve the genetic heritage (DNA12), under the responsibility of WAZA13, with a view to
the possible reintroduction of species in their natural habitat. Care must be taken to ensure that the
natural habitat is preserved until reintroduction can take place (see Table 5).
Table 5. Key elements of the Niger-Chad-Algeria Desert KLC
Elements
KLC
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
Key Landscape for Conservation in the desert ecotype between Niger, Chad and Algeria
1. Protection of desert and semi-desert habitats and desert antelopes
Scimitar Oryx ; Saharan cheetah ; Dama Gazelle ; Addax
Water sources and riparian habitats which are critical for the survival of many species
The proposal for the Atlantic coast is to establish two KLCs as follows.
Senegal-Mauritania-WL1 Atlantic Coastal KLC (2,465 km2 of PAs)
This landscape includes: (1) the contiguous 659 km2 Diawling NP in Mauritania, (2) the 209 km2 Parc National des Oiseaux du
Djoudj and (3) the nearby 461 km2 Saint-Louis Marine protected area, (4) the 486 km2 Ndiael Wildlife Reserve and (5) the 650
km2 Fort de Keur Momar Sarr in Senegal.
This complex contains the most import wetlands in WA (WL1 in Figure 10) and consists of lagoons, saline flats and a small
area of mangroves, as well as dunes, alluvial plains and an interconnecting network of rivers lakes and ponds. There are
seasonally inundated and marshy areas with small channels, especially adjacent to the river, and some of these are extremely
important for birds in some years or at certain times of year, depending on flood and rain water-levels. The PAs and the buffer
areas are incorporated in sites classified as IBAs (Table 6).
Table 6. Key elements of the Senegal-Mauritania Atlantic Coastal KLC
Approach
KLC
Priority elements
Atlantic coast key landscape of conservation between Mauritania and Senegal
1. Conservation, restoring and monitoring the sites and habitats
12 DNA, Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is a molecule that encodes the genetic instructions used in the development and functioning of all
known living organisms and many viruses
13 WAZA, World Association of Zoos and Aquariums

Final report
Page 39
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Key Species
Key habitats
2. Promote resilient ecological transborder networks

3. Protection for the wintering Western Palearctic waders
Over two million wintering Western Palearctic waders, from fifteen different species
Inland delta in a shallow depression lying within the flood-plain of the Senegal River
Mauritania Western Sahara Atlantic Coastal KLC (33,850 km2 of PAs)

This landscape encompasses (1) the 11,876 km2 Banc d'Arguin National Park and (2) the 3,100 km2 Rserve Intgrale de Cap
Blanc in Mauritania and (3) the 18,888 km2 Dakhla National Park (split into two distinct sectors: coastal and inland) in Western
Sahara. The Presqule du Cap Blanc, that supports the world's largest population of the critically endangered Mediterranean
monk seal, is protected by the Dakhla National Park (Western Sahara) and the contiguous Rserve Intgrale de Cap Blanc
(Mauritania).
The marine part of the national parks include shallow open sea and seagrass beds, intertidal flats, channels and creeks, clumps
of mangrove, as well as coastal desert habitats. Adjacent to the Mauritanian park lays one of the worlds richest fishing grounds.
The terrestrial part of the PAs includes areas of Saharan vegetation and a much larger inland desert sector for the Dakhla
National Park.
The landscape hosts one of the world's most diversified communities of nesting piscivorous birds in the world (Hoffmann,
1988). At least 108 bird species have been recorded, representing both Palaearctic and Afrotropical realms. The number of
wintering shorebirds is estimated to be over three million (Table 7).
Table 7. Key elements of the Mauritania Western Sahara Atlantic Coastal KLC
Approach
KLC
Conservation
objectives
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
Atlantic coast key landscape of conservation between Mauritania and Western Sahara
1. Conservation, restoring and monitoring the sites and habitats
2. Protection for one of the world's most diversified communities of nesting piscivorous birds in the world
3. Prevent bird and Mediterranean monk seal extinctions
4. Promote resilient ecological transborder networks
Over three million wintering shorebirds
At least 108 bird species of nesting piscivorous birds
The critically endangered Mediterranean monk seal
Shallow open sea, coastal desert habitats, clumps of mangrove

Final report
Page 40
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 8. A - West Africa Deserts Key Landscape of Conservation and priorities

Protecting biodiversity
Countries
- Under-representation of the desert and

semi-desert habitats in PAs poses a threat
to their long-term stability and conservation
- Important Saharan large mammals but
globally threatened
- Immense importance for over two million
wintering Western Palearctic waders, from
fifteen different species (Atlantic coastal
desert)
- Extraordinarily rich floras despite the very
low and variable rainfall
- Diversity of reptiles is moderately high
(around 100 species)
- Small number of endemics, but local
endemism may be quite pronounced in
some regions
- Many species track seasonally variable and
patchy resources and require large natural
landscapes to persist
- Water sources and riparian habitats are
critical for the persistence of many species
WA
- Mali
- Mauritania
- Niger
- Senegal
Biome / Ecotype / Key

species
Biome:
Deserts and xeric shrubland
Ecotype:
- Sahara desert
- South Saharan steppe and
woodlands
- Atlantic coastal desert
- West Saharan montane
xeric woodlands
Other ecotypes of the
biome:
- East Saharan montane
xeric woodlands
- Tibesti-Jebel
Uweinat
montane xeric woodlands
Key species and status:
Scimitar Oryx
Saharan
cheetah
Dama Gazelle
Addax
Dorcas Gazelle
piscivorous birds
Main KLCs and KPAs and priorities

Key Landscape of Conservation
1. Niger-Chad-Algeria (NCA) Desert
Landscape
of
Conservation
(416,750 km2 of PAs) Termit & Tin
Toumma Ar and Tnr Addax
Sanctuary in Niger; Ouadi RimOuadi Fada Archei in Chad and
Tassili-n-Ajjer Ahaggar NP in
Algeria
2. Senegal-Mauritania-WL1 (SMWL1)
Atlantic Coastal Desert Landscape
of Conservation and Wetlands
(2,465 km2 of PAs) Diawling NP in
Mauritania, Parc National des
Oiseaux du Djoudj, Saint-Louis
Marine protected area, Ndiael Wildlife
Reserve and Fort de Keur Momar
Sarr in Senegal
3. Mauritania Western Sahara
(MWS) Atlantic Coastal Desert
Landscape of Conservation (33,850
km2 of PAs) Banc d'Arguin NP and
Rserve Intgrale de Cap Blanc in
Mauritania and Dakhla National Park
in Western Sahara
Analysis
Objectives and Proposed actions
Negative aspects
- Degraded
habitat:
overgrazing, cutting of trees,
dry and intensive land use
for agriculture
- Motorized hunting
- Local poaching
- Political insecurity and civil
unrest
- Under-representation of the
desert and semi-desert
habitats of these ecotypes
- Threat to long-term stability
and conservation of PA
- Genetic heritage of desert
antelopes
- Insufficient funds
- Poverty
- Disadvantaged population
Objectives
1. Protection of desert and semi-desert habitats
and desert antelopes
2. Conservation, restoring and monitoring the sites
and habitats
3. Protection for the wintering Western Palearctic
waders and one of the world's most diversified
communities of nesting piscivorous birds in the
world
Actions
- Promote resilient ecological transborder networks
- In-situ conservation for the entire biome
(coordination / responsibility of one or more
international organizations specializing in
conservation in desert areas or a partnership
between them)
- Prevent extinctions (also for the birds) and
preserve the genetic heritage (DNA)
- Promote resilient ecological transborder networks
- Monitor and strengthen national ex-situ
conservation
- Improving the genetics of desert antelopes in-situ
and ex-situ conservation (responsibility of WAZA)
- Constant support by the IUCN/SSC Antelope
Specialist Group (ASG), Northeast African
Subgroup IUCN and Birdlife International
- ICDP on the principles of good governance
(Legitimacy & voice, Direction, Performance,
Accountability, Fairness)
- Exploitation of every possibility in land surveys
(military) for better protection (and knowledge) of
wildlife.
- Possible future reintroduction of the species back
into its natural habitat (while ensuring that the
natural habitat remains intact)
Positive aspects
Surface (about 25% of
Africa)
Extraordinary
ecosystem
and fauna
Cultural heritage
Potential tourism
Note: Red arrows denote declines in status, green arrows denote species recoveries
Final report
Page 41
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Figure 10. A - West Africa Deserts Key Landscape of Conservation and priorities
(1) Niger-Chad-Algeria Desert Landscape of Conservation (416,750 Km2 of PAs); (2) Senegal-Mauritania Atlantic Coastal Desert Landscape of Conservation (2,465 Km2 of PAs); (3)
Mauritania Western Sahara Atlantic Coastal Desert Landscape of Conservation (33,850 Km2 of PAs). The WL Number (WL1) indicates the priority of intervention for wetland
conservation. (map: Climate Change and Protected Areas in West Africa CCPAWA, United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 2010; specific
elaboration)

Final report
Page 42
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
5.1.4 Specific strategies and actions for the major Savanna ecotypes
The original savannas of WA have been greatly reduced, degraded and fragmented by farming, grazing, cutting and burning
trees and bushes for wood and charcoal. The degradation is exacerbated in areas of high human population density such as
Nigeria (up to 300 persons/km). Also the interlacing forests and savanna areas, with their critical habitat for a number of large
charismatic mammals, are highly degraded and the PAs preserve only two percent of the forest-savanna mosaic. The periodic
droughts are further threats, exacerbating human pressures on biodiversity. The remaining blocks of intact habitat are found
mainly in the protected areas, but most are under-resourced and even within the better-managed protected areas poaching is
still rife and predators are systematically poisoned by transhumant herders. Most of the populations of larger mammal species
have been decimated by over-hunting. West African populations of elephant are small, but of great conservation interest and
draw attention to the value of the protected areas. Roan antelope and West African savanna buffalo are relatively more
numerous but restricted to protected areas. Species that are at risk of extinction include giant eland, waterbuck, west African
giraffe, wild dog, lion, leopard and cheetah.
The lions of WA are a particular concern. Dr. Philipp Henschel of the NGO Pantera's explained:
When we set out in 2006 to survey all the lions of West Africa, the best reports suggested they still survived in 21 protected
areas. (In 2013) We surveyed all of them, representing the best remaining lion habitat in West Africa. Our results came as a
complete shock; all but a few of the areas we surveyed were basically paper parks, having neither management budgets nor
patrol staff, and had lost all their lions and other iconic large mammals.
Bird species are also declining. The annual passage in the area of the huge numbers of migrant birds (Afrotropical-Palaearctic
and intra-African migration) is particularly threatened by drought, overgrazing in the Sahel, and by the drainage and pollution
of WA wetlands (Box 4).
The most important PAs in the WA savannas include: the W trans-border park between Benin, Burkina Faso and Niger,
Pendjari NP in Benin, Arly NP in Burkina Faso, Comoe NP in Cte dIvoire, River Gambia in Gambia, Mole NP in Ghana,
Boucle du Baoul NP and Gourma Elephants in Mali, Kainji Lake and Yankari NP in Nigeria and Niokolo-Koba NP in Senegal.
Finally, threats to the conservation of biodiversity on WA savannas are: (i) the degraded and fragmented ecosystems; (ii) the
high poaching levels and the high extinction risk for large mammals species; (iii) the highly vulnerability of the area to climate
change exacerbating desertification and degradation of agricultural systems, with knock-on effects for PAs. The intervention
strategic approach requires:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
concentrating conservation actions on the WAP14 transborder area, the only functional ecological
complex to maintain biodiversity in WA savannas;
preserving the most important ecological blocks of PAs (even if faunal densities are low), and the
corridors between them for possible future rehabilitation;
determining the most appropriate conservation actions for threatened species (in-situ and ex-situ
conservation, special conservation, translocation, etc.) by the establishment of PHVA 15 analysis if
necessary, and the preservation of specific habitats especially wetland areas for birds.
The West Africa Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU), with the support of experts in West Africa savanna management,
has proposed interventions which are summarized and integrated with other proposals in the following key points:
Establish a convergence plan of interventions on conservation in the ecotypes;

Save the WAP ecosystem (W - Arly - Pendjari), the only functional ecological complex to have a potential
serve as a site for regeneration and reintroduction of species back into the other degraded AP in the
savanna ecotype;
14 The strategy must prioritize the intervention in the WAP complex (W, Arly and Pendjari) and less in the Togo complex of Keran-Oti-Monduri
in reason of the high level of degradation and the resources needed to restore the protected areas of Togo
15 Population and Habitat Viability Assessment

Final report
Page 43
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Preserve the most important ecological blocks of protected areas: (1) W - Arly - Pendjari - Oti Monduri
(Benin, Burkina Faso, Niger and Togo); (2) Como Mole (Cte dIvoire and Ghana); (3) Niokolo - Badiar
- Bafing Faleme Fouta Djalon (Guinea, Mali, Senegal) and (4) Gourma Elephant and Sahel Faunal
Reserve (Mali and Burkina Faso), even though faunal densities may be low;
Support transborder complexes of protected areas and special conservation measures (cross border
activities) in the major Savanna ecotypes in West Africa such as the WAPOK;
Implement new management initiatives such as the proposal to establish trans-border corridors between
major ecological blocks, as for the Volta Trans-Border Ecosystem Wildlife Corridors between Burkina Faso
and Ghana.
Summarized global data are presented in Table 15 and Figure 11.

Box 4. The decline of wetlands
THE DECLINE OF WETLANDS

(from Zwarts, L. et al (2009). Summary of Living on the Edge: Wetlands and Birds in a Changing Sahel. KNNV Publishing,
Zeist, The Netherlands)
The Palearctic-African bird migration draws birds from the geographical range between 10 W (Ireland) and 164 E (Kolyma Basin,
northeastern Siberia). Long distant migrants from this vast region pour into sub-Saharan Africa, amassing mainly in the northern
savannas of the Sahel and Sudan-Guinea zone. Although the region is close to the Sahara it has four huge Sahelian Wetlands:
the Senegal Delta, the Inner Niger Delta, the Lake Chad and the Hadejia-Nguru wetlands. These wetlands are of critical importance
to the migrating waterbirds.
Senegal Delta (WL1 in the figure 10 and 14)
The Senegal Delta has a unique ecosystem because sea water can enter the floodplains, hence the gradient from marine to fresh.
In the past in an area of 3400 km2 the water level varied by 3.5 m. At present the floodplains were turned into irrigated farmland
and the permanent water body have invasive plant species (Water Lettuce, Kariba Weed) and has reduced the level to 0.5 m. The
bird life reduced dramatically. No wetland in West Africa has changed to the extent as the Senegal Delta. Some of the ecological
disasters associated with the loss of the floodplains were offset by the creation of Djoudj NP (Senegal) and Diawling NP (Mauritania.
Both sites are now important wetlands for migratory bird species. (For conservation measures, see chapter 5.1.3).
Inner Niger Delta (WL2 in the figure 11 and 14)
The Inner Niger Delta in Mali is huge. The area covered by water at any one time could amounts to 25,000 km2 but in most years
the areas of floodplains are smaller. The Inner Niger Delta stands out also for its hydrological dynamics. The water could rise by
more than 6 m in wet years, but in extremely dry years the flood level rises only by 3 m. For waterbirds the large annual differences
in flood extent are a matter of life and death (starvation or preying). Dams in the Niger upstream of the Delta and large irrigation
works and breeding (as in the Senegal Delta) take so much water that the floodplains are now reducing up to an estimated 15-20%
of the total. The drier the Inner Niger Delta the fewer migrants survive the northern winter. For few species, the population in the
Inner Niger Delta constitute a substantial part of the entire population. The significance of this area for European and Asia migrants
can hardly be overestimated. (For conservation measures, see chapter 5.1.4).

Final report
Page 44
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Lake Chad Basin (WL3 in the figures 11 and 14)

In the past Lake Chad was very large, varying in size between 15,000 and 25,000 km2, at present the decline of the water level is
important due to irrigation along the Logone and Chari Rivers and the climate change. All in all, birdlife in Lake Chad must have
changed a lot, but hard data are lacking. So although Lake Chad was reduced in size, the floodplains increased in size, which spells
good news for foraging birds. The complete bird counts reveal the Lake Chad significance for local species, but also for migrants.
(This area has not covered by direct conservation measure, but it should be supported by the special fund for new or larger KLCs
and KCAs in savanna areas).
Hadejia-Nguru wetlands (WL4 in the figures 11 and 14)
The Hadejia-Nguru wetlands lie on the southern edge of the Sahel savanna in north-eastern Nigeria. The area is a flood-plain
complex, comprised of a mixture of seasonally flooded lands and dry uplands. There are 20 dams upstream of the Hadejia-Nguru
and the size of the floodplains varies annually, depending on the river discharge, between 300 and 3600 km2. Large parts of the
wetland are under rice cultivation during the rainy season and, during the dry season, are usually utilized for growing other crops as
water-levels drop. Uncultivated areas are grazed by livestock. The bird counts, performed between 1988 and 1998, show that
numbers are related to the size of the floodplains: 300,000 waterbirds were counted in wet years, but only 50,000 in dry years. (This
area has not covered by direct conservation measure, but it should be supported by the special fund for new or larger KLCs and
KCAs in savanna areas).

Final report
Page 45
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
It is recommended that the highest priority be given to the following key landscapes of conservation and key conservation
areas.
WAPOK Savanna KLC (38,000 km2 of PAs)
This large complex of contiguous conservation areas is located near to the international frontiers with Burkina Faso, Benin,
Niger and Togo. The landscape encompasses (1) the 10,400 km2 W transborder park between Benin, Burkina Faso and Niger;
(2) the 1,823 km2 Pendjari NP in Benin; (3) the 839 km2 Arly Faunal Reserve (named Park) in Burkina Faso; (4) the 1,450 km2
Oti Monduri Faunal Reserve and (5) the 1,196 km2 Keran NP in Togo. The WAPOK complex includes one Giraffe area not
classified in Niger, 10 hunting concessions and many adjacent village hunting zones.
The WAPOK complex is a large area about 38,000 km2 of intact habitat (with the exclusion of Togos PAs) with great importance
for the survival of large mammals including lion and other species that are at high risk of extinction in WA. These different
blocks constitute the largest remaining wilderness and the only functional ecological complex in WA. The complex has the
potential to serve as a site for regeneration and reintroduction of species back into other degraded PAs in the savanna ecotype.
The survival of the WAP complex is the highest priority in WA.
This strategic approach prioritises and stresses the intervention in the WAP complex (W, Arly and Pendjari and theirs faunal
reserves). It also emphasizes the Togo complex of Keran- Oti-Monduri but recognizes the high level of degradation of the PAs
of Togo and the greater resources needed for their restoration (Table 9).

Final report
Page 46
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 9. Key elements of the WAPOK Savanna KLC

Approach
KLC
Conservation
objectives
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
Priority savanna KLC located near to the frontiers between Burkina Faso, Benin, Niger and Togo
1. Preserving the only functional savanna ecological complex in WA
2. Saving the potential for regeneration and reintroduction of species back into the other degraded PAs in the savanna
ecotype
3. Determining the most appropriate conservation actions for threatened species
4. Preservation of specific habitats especially wetland areas for birds.
Lion, Cheetah, Elephant, Giraffe, Leopard, Manatee, Roan antelope, Buffalo, and Defassa Waterbuck
Fishes in refuge area of the Niger and Volta Basins
Savanna and dry forest areas
Extensive network of rivers, drainage lines and flood-plains (the rivers and many of the smaller rivers and ponds dry
completely by the end of the dry season)
Floodplains and gallery forest
The geological formation of La Falaise de Gobnangou and also a number of isolated inselbergs.
Como Mole (CM) Savanna KLC (16,571 km2 of PAs)

This large ecosystem is located on the frontier between the Cte dIvoire and Ghana. The two PAs are situated near the
borders between the two countries, but they are not contiguous.
The landscape encompasses (1) the 11,671 km2 Como NP (the largest PA in the savannas of WA) and (2) the 4,900 km2
Mole NP in Ghana.
The CM savanna KLC is characterised by savanna woodlands, which cover almost the totality of the parks, and the riparian
forests that fringe the rivers. Isolated forest patches of varying size occur throughout the savanna. Other habitat-types include
alluvial plains and flat seasonal marsh.
The Como NP is high degraded, but it must be preserved, even though faunal densities are low, in the expectation and hope
of a better future for conservation in Cte dIvoire after the recent civil wars and violence. The initiative will also serve to support
cross-border activities and establish trans-border corridors between major ecological blocks in order to save the large
populations of mammal and the threatened species in WA (Table 10).
Table 10. Key elements of the Como Mole (CM) Savanna KLC
Approach
KLC
Conservation
objectives
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
Savanna KLC located close to the frontiers between Cte dIvoire and Ghana
1. Preserve the savanna ecological blocks and the corridors between them for possible future rehabilitation
2. Adopt the most appropriate conservation actions for threatened species
3. Preservation of specific habitats especially wetland areas for birds.
Elephant, Leopard, Roan antelope, Buffalo
Extensive network of rivers
Savanna woodlands
Forest patches and gallery forest
Alluvial plains and flat seasonal marsh
Niokolo - Badiar - Bafing Baoul - Falm Fouta (NBBBFF) Savanna KLC (about 25,000 km2 of PAs)
This large complex of noncontiguous conservation areas is located between Guinea, Senegal, and Mali.
The landscape encompasses (1) the 8,423 km2 Niokolo NP in Senegal; (2) the contiguous 278 km2 Badiar NP in Guinea; (3)
the 1,600 km2 Bafing NP and (4) the 3,935 km2 Boucle du Baoul NP in Mali. The complex includes the Faleme area (Mali and
Guinea) and two Chimpanzee areas, one in Mali (Bafing) and the other in Guinea (Fouta Djalon,) and more than 9 hunting
zones.
The complex is largely flat with large areas of floodplain and marsh, inundated during the seasonal rains (June to October).
The area includes low hills and rugged and broken terrains, especially in the west where there are spectacular escarpments.
The area is crossed by large rivers that dried during the dry season, but the waters of the artificial lake form the eastern
Final report
Page 47
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
boundary of the Bafing NP for much of its length. The vegetation includes herbaceous savanna dominated by Andropogon
gayanus in the valleys and plains, dry forest and gallery forest and more luxuriant vegetation along watercourses.
There is a proposal for the creation of a 38,000 km2 Bafing-Falm Trans-border Protected Area (BFTPA), which will be very
important both in terms of biodiversity and regional water security. With a mean population density of just 10 people/km 2, one
of the lowest in the region south of the Sahel, the BFTPA is considered one of West Africa's last wild places. The stability of
its unique ecosystems is now threatened by roads construction, mining, and a growing demand for arable land, energy, wildlife
products, and other scarce resources (Table 11).
Table 11. Key elements of the Niokolo - Badiar - Bafing Baoul - Falm Fouta (NBBBFF) Savanna KLC
Approach
KLC
Conservation
objectives
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
Savanna KLC located to the frontiers between Guinea, Mali, and Senegal
1. Preserve the savannas ecological blocks and the corridors between them for possible future rehabilitation
3. Preservation of specific habitats especially wetland areas for birds
Lion, Wild dog (Niokolo Koba), Eland (the last population in WA), Chimpanzee (the furthermost north
population in Africa), Leopard, Roan antelope, Buffalo
Largely flat with large areas of floodplain and marsh, inundated during the seasonal rains
Low hills and spectacular escarpments in the west
Large rivers and an artificial lake form the eastern boundary of the Bafing NP
Gourma Elephant, Sahel Faunal Reserve and Inner Niger Delta (WL2) Savanna KLC (26,500 km2 of PAs)
This large complex of conservation areas is located between the frontier of Mali - Burkina Faso and the Inner Niger Delta, but
there are not contiguous PAs. The landscape encompasses (1) the 5,715 km2 Gourma Elephant in Mali, (2) the 18,150 km2
Sahel Faunal Reserve in Burkina Faso and the 2,560 km2 of five Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in the Inner Niger Delta (see
figure 16). Tombouctou is the biggest IBA, immediately north of the town.
The savanna ecosystem, that include also the seasonal lakes and wetlands of the Sahel Faunal Reserve in Burkina Faso, is
home of the furthermost northerly Elephant population in Africa. The complex houses a large numbers of birds including
hundreds of thousands of wintering birds and breeding colonies of cormorant, heron, spoonbill, ibis and other waterbirds (Table
12).
The habitats are characterized by wetlands, sand dunes, semi-desert grasslands, open eroded shields, drainage lines,
inselbergs rising out of the plains and a series of hills. On the seasonal floodplain there is a rich plant community providing
important dry season grazing. The IBAs in the Inner Niger Delta consist of permanent and semi-permanent wetlands sometimes
connected between them. Depending entirely upon the annual run-off from the rains of July to September, the lake levels vary
considerably from year to year. Some lakes are ringed by important stands of trees. Under natural conditions, the wetlands
retain flood water from the Niger throughout the dry season in years of good rainfall, but otherwise have dried out completely
by April. The sites include cultivation and scrub woodland along the course of the Niger and its tributaries, fixed dunes and
ephemeral interdunal slacks. The most important areas for waterbirds are thought to be the clusters of dry season shallow
ponds.

Final report
Page 48
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 12. Key elements of the Gourma Elephant, Sahel Faunal Reserve and Inner Niger Delta Savanna KLC
Approach
KLC
Conservation
objectives
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
KLC with savanna and wetland areas for birds located at the frontiers between Mali and Burkina Faso
1. Preserve the savanna ecological blocks and the corridors between them for possible future rehabilitation
2. Preserve other specific habitats especially wetland areas for birds
3. Adopt the most appropriate conservation actions for threatened species (Elephant, Manatee, wetland birds)
Elephant (furthest north population in Africa), Manatee, wetland birds (Afrotropical resident species and
migrants)
Extensive network of rivers, seasonal lakes and wetlands
Seasonal floodplains
Clusters of dry season shallow ponds
Lion Key Conservation Areas (8,200 km2 of PAs)

Recent surveys (8th January 2014) have suggested that the African lion population is facing extinction across the entire West
African region16.
The team discovered that West African lions now survive only in the trans-border WAP complex (fewer than 200 lions) and in
3 national parks: Niokolo Koba NP in Senegal (fewer than 10 lions), Kainii Lake NP (fewer than 20 lions) and Yankari NP
(fewer than 5 lions) in Nigeria (see chapter 6.1.4 in annexes). Counting lions is extremely difficult, and we may never know
precisely how many lions there are in West Africa, especially if few specialists suppose that we can find lions outside the PAs.
The strategic approach for the protection of savanna fauna of WA includes: (1) the 5,824 km 2 Kainii Lake NP (and the Wari Maro - Mont Kouffe - Agoua Forest in central Benin, to explore) and (2) the 2,387 km 2 Yankari NP with the main objective of
contribution to save the last lions and wild dogs (in Kainii Lake NP) of WA (Table 13).
Table 13. Key elements of the Lion Key Conservation Areas
Approach
KCAs
Conservation
objectives
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
Protected areas with the last lions of WA
1. Adopt the most appropriate conservation actions for lion and the others threatened species
2. Preservation of wetland areas for birds
Lion, wild dog (Kainii Lake NP) and populations of IBA trigger species
Dry savanna woodlands
Riparian vegetation
The only place in Nigeria with Monodominant stands of Pteleopsis habeensis
Volta Trans-Border Ecosystem Wildlife Corridors KLC (3,700 km2 of PAs)

The Volta Trans-Border Ecosystem Wildlife Corridors is a new management initiative for the boundary ecosystem between
Burkina Faso and Ghana.
The complex is centred on the Fort classe and Ranch de Gibier de Nazinga. The Volta Trans-Border Wildlife Ecosystem
could represent a continuum between the WAPOK complex and the Como-Mole complex. The corridor encompasses (1) the
913 km2 Ranch Nazinga and the 2,760 km2 of other PAs and hunting zones surrounding Nazinga for a total of about 3,700
km2. All the most important PAs and the Ranch Nazinga are classified as Important Bird Areas (see table 14).
Table 14. Key elements of the Volta Trans-Border Ecosystem Wildlife Corridors KLC
Approach
KLC
Conservation
objectives
16
Priority elements
Savanna KLC located close to the frontiers between Burkina Faso and Ghana
1. Preserving the most important corridors between ecological blocks of the savanna of WA
2. Determining the most appropriate conservation actions for threatened species and particularly for Elephant
3. Preservation of specific habitats especially wetland areas for birds
The lion in West Africa is critically endangered, Pantheras Lion Program Survey, Dr. Philipp Henschel, PLOS ONE, 2014

Final report
Page 49
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Approach
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
Elephant and populations of IBA trigger species
Typical southern Sudan/Guinea savanna with shrub savanna, tree-savanna and gallery forests
New or larger national protected areas should be created also to stop the decline of Wetlands
Evaluate about 1,000 3,000 km2 of savanna wetlands for new or larger PAs that can serve to avoid the decline of wetlands
(addition of +1-2% of new or larger national PAs than existing KLCs and KCAs as considered by the strategic approach for the
specific Savanna ecotype) (Figure 11).

Final report
Page 50
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 15. B - West African Savannas - Main Key Landscapes of Conservation and Key Conservation Areas and priorities
- Under-representation of the savanna
areas and particularly of interlacing
forests and savanna areas in PAs
- Large mammal species threatened
with extinction: giant eland, wild dog,
lion, cheetah and leopard
- West Africa lion population estimated
at only 250 adults restricted to four
isolated PAs. The WAP alone has
fewer than 200 lions.
- Highly
fragmented
elephant
population with the only large group
being in the WAP complex.
- Last population of western giraffe (340
animals).
- Huge numbers of migrant birds:
Afrotropical-Palaearctic and intraAfrican migration.
- Roan antelope and West African
savanna buffalo occur in relatively
large numbers.
- High level of plant endemism.
- Large mammals are amongst the
most beautiful in Africa, such as the
giant eland, roan antelope and major
hartebeest
- West African lions have unique
genetic sequences not found in any
other lions, including in zoos or other
captivity.
Countries
Benin
Burkina
Cte dIvoire
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea Bissau
Liberia
Mali
Mauritania
Niger
Nigeria
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Togo
Biome / Ecotypes / Key species

Biome:
- Tropical
and
subtropical
grasslands,
savanna
and
shrublands
- Montane
Grasslands
and
Shrublands
Ecotype:
- Sahelian Acacia savanna
- West Sudanian savanna
- Guinean forest-savanna mosaic
- Jos Plateau forest-grassland
mosaic (without PAs)
Lion
Wild dog
Cheetah
Leopard
Giant eland
Manatee
Elephant
Main KLCs and KPAs and priorities

1. WAPOK Savannas Landscape
of
Conservation (38,000 km2 of PAs) W

transborder park, Pendjari NP, Arly FR, Oti
Monduri FR and Keran NP
2. Como Mole (CM) Savannas Landscape
of Conservation (16,571 km2 of PAs)
Como NP and Mole NP
3. Niokolo - Badiar - Bafing Baoul - Falm
Fouta (NBBBFF) Savannas Landscape
of Conservation (25,000 km2 of PAs)
Niokolo NP, Badiar NP, Bafing NP, Boucle du
Baoul NP, complex Faleme and
Chimpanzee areas Bafing and Fouta Djalon
4. Gourma Elephant, Sahel Faunal Reserve
and Inner Niger Delta Savannas
Landscape of Conservation (26,500 km2
of PAs) Gourma Elephant FR, Sahel FR and
5 IBAs in the Inner Niger Delta
Key Conservation Areas
AfrotropicalPalaearctic and intra-

African migratory birds
5. Lion Key Conservation Areas (8,200 km2

of PAs) Kainii Lake NP and Yankari NP
Chimpanzee
Giraffe

6. Volta Trans-Border Ecosystem Wildlife
Roan antelope
Buffalo
Corridors (VC) (3,700 km2 of PAs) Ranch

Nazinga and other PAs and hunting zones
surrounding Nazinga
New or larger KLC and KCA
7. KLC and KCA to stop the decline of
Wetlands (1,000 3.000 km2 of potential
wetlands) see WL2 and WL3
Analysis
Negative aspects
- Habitats degraded and fragmented,
exacerbated by high human
population density and the new
conflicts,
civil/
religious
fundamentalism unrest and refugee
movements (Cte dIvoire/Nigeria).
- Periodic droughts
- Over-hunting
- Strong illegal grazing in PAs (fire,
hunting, poisoning predators).
- PAs under-resourced and low
effectiveness of management
- Many paper parks - not active on
the ground.
- Threat to short-term stability and
conservation of PAs.
- Poverty
&
disadvantaged
populations
- Climate change
Positive aspects
- Biodiversity potential (elephant,
western giraffes, lion, cheetah,
leopard, wild dog) and high
restoration potential
- Cultural
heritage
in
water
conservation techniques
- Potential ecotourism from private
funds through international tenders.

Objectives
1.
Preserving the only functional savanna ecological
complex in WA
2.
Save the potential for regeneration and reintroduction
of species back into the other degraded PAs.
3.
Determining the most appropriate conservation actions
for threatened species
4.
Preservation of specific habitats especially wetland
areas for birds
5.
Preserve the savanna ecological blocks and the
corridors between them for possible future
rehabilitation.
Actions
- Highest priority for major support to save the WAPOK
ecosystem
- Ecosystemlandscape interventions together with
corridors between major ecological blocks
- Continuous support by the IUCN/SSC Cat Specialist
Group to preserve predators through the implementation
of PHVA strategies (also for game hunting).
- Preserve the genetic heritage (DNA) of the West African
lions by in-situ and ex-situ conservation (responsibility of
WAZA).
- Control and manage pastoralism to reduce the human-lion
conflict (which leads to killing of lions).
- Continuous support by the IUCN/SSC Antelope Specialist
Group (ASG) for the Giant eland and Western giraffe and
implementation of the PHVA strategic approach.
- Specific protection for threatened species in PAs such as
Yankari and Kainji Lake for lions
- ICDP on the principles of good governance (Legitimacy &
voice, Direction, Performance, Accountability, Fairness) in
the buffer zones
- Strong inter-sectorial policy coordination and action
between agriculture, pastoralism and conservation.
- Strengthen the management of human-elephant conflict
caused by habitat fragmentation in order to save/
translocate small isolated groups of elephants.

Final report
Page 51
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Figure 11. B - West Africa Savannas - Main Key Landscapes of Conservation and Key Conservation Areas and priorities
(1) WAPOK Savanna KLC (38,000 Km2 of PAs); (2) Como Mole Savanna KLC(16,571 Km2 of PAs); (3) Niokolo - Badiar - Bafing Baoul - Falm Fouta Savannas Landscape of Conservation
(ca. 25,000 Km2 of PAs) ; (4) Gourma Elephant and Sahel Faunal Reserve Savanna KLC (ca. 26,500 Km2 of PAs); (5) Lion Key Conservation Areas (8,200 Km2 of PAs); (6) Volta Trans-Border
Ecosystem Wildlife Corridors (ca. 3,700 Km2 of PAs); WL Number (e.g. WL1 or WL2) indicates priority of intervention in Wetlands conservation. (map: Climate Change and Protected Areas in West
Africa CCPAWA, United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 2010; specific elaboration)

Final report
Page 52
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
5.1.5 Specific strategies and actions for major Forest ecotypes

The forest ecotype of Western Africa consist of scattered mountains, high plateau areas, gently undulating landscape but also
lowland and coastal forests. These forests contain some of the highest levels of faunal species richness of any African forest,
especially in terms of forest-restricted mammals, birds and butterflies, but many areas are essentially unstudied. The diversity
of life inhabiting these forests is astonishing (Mt. Nimba has more than 2,000 species of vascular plants recorded, more than
500 are new species and many of them are endemic; Ta Forest, the largest area of protected lowland forest in the region has
1,300 vascular plant species recorded). Discoveries of new species of plants and insects are frequent. The global demand for
valuable hardwoods continues to spur logging in this region so most of the high forest areas that remain are late secondary
stands and isolated from each other by slash-and-burn farming. Some of the mountain zones remain largely untouched (Loma
Mountains), while others have been severely degraded and fragmented (Mount Nimba, Fouta Djalon, etc.). Only in a few areas
are there sufficiently large and interconnected forests to allow migrations of animals to continue occurring. The forest blocks
of Cross-Sanaga-Bioko Coastal Forests between Nigeria and Cameroon are still connected.
The forests in WA have been degraded by high human population density resulting from natural population growth, immigration
from the northern countries and the refugees from civil war in the coastal countries (Liberia, Sierra Leone and Ivory Coast).
High anthropogenic pressures for farmland, bushmeat hunting for local consumption, large rubber and oil-palm plantations
(including land grabs that involve foreign companies), timber, fuelwood and mineral resources have all contributed to reduce
the size and biotic potential of the WA forest habitats, especially the lowland forests. Outside the few rainforest national parks
and some of the forests reserves, the rate of forest loss accelerated recently. The loss of forests has been severe in Nigeria
(3.7%, in 2000-2010, the highest in the world, FAO, 2010), Guinea and Cte dIvoire. Subsistence agriculture in the wake of
commercial logging together with hevea and palm oil plantations have reduced the area of primary forest to just fragments.
Siltation from mining for diamonds and gold is threatening freshwater fish populations, while hunters have increased poaching
to supply bushmeat to the mining settlements. Organized crime networks involved in cannabis cultivation (which means forest
clearance) and cross-border wildlife trade also contribute to the disappearance of forests. Habitat loss for farming and
plantations, coupled with an intensive bushmeat trade, are pushing some mammal species, particularly rain-forest primates,
towards extinction.
The largest stands of forest in WA are found within protected areas and forest reserves. The management of protected areas
and reserves is currently poor or non-existent, especially in Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia. The total area of protected forest
in WA is just under 3 percent for all national parks and other reserves. However there are still important forests blocks that
could complement the overall biodiversity of this ecotype, but these have not been elevated to the status of conservation areas.
A recent study on the pattern of mammal extinctions in the PAs of west and central Africa shows that there is no significant
correlation between the size of PA, the high demographic pressure and the size and the number of functional mammal
extinctions17. However, the extinction of mammals increases following a south-north gradient: it is lower for the PAs of rain
forests and higher for the PAs of the sahelio-saharan savanna and steppes. So despite the small size of the forest PAs, and
the high anthropogenic pressures, biodiversity values in WA rain forests could be maintained if habitats are preserved and
poaching curbed.
17 David BRUGIERE, Bertrand CHARDONNET, Paul SCHOLTE, 2014: Pattern and correlates of mammal extinction as a measurement of
conservation effectiveness of protected areas in west and central Africa, Preliminary results V1.2

Final report
Page 53
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
The threats to biodiversity are habitat degradation by farming and wood cutting, and high levels of poaching. Endemic plants,
insect, birds, amphibians and small and large mammals are all at risk of extinction. Furthermore the low representativity of PAs
across the whole forest area means that there is a danger of losing hitherto unknown biodiversity. For example there are no
protected areas in the Niger delta swamp forests. Deforestation and degrading agricultural systems also makes the area more
vulnerable to climate change (which will lead to further pressure on PAs).
Selecting key sites in the West African forest zone on which to concentrate resources should be an important part of any
conservation strategic approach. Choosing appropriate sites in West Africa is not difficult, because so few protected areas of
reasonable size exist in the forest zone. Among the most important sites are Gola Forest and (newly-created) Loma
Mountains in Sierra Leone, Sapo in Liberia, Ta in Cte dIvoire, and Cross River in Nigeria, along with the Ankasa and
Bia Conservation Areas in Ghana. These protected areas contain some of the most important populations of forest elephants,
pygmy hippopotamuses, and great apes in the region.
The intervention strategic approach requires:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
concentrating actions in principal KLCs and KCAs (see below). They are all equally important in terms
of species richness and diversity;
reducing threats on PAs by adopting a holistic approach to ensure inter-sectorial policy development,
analysis of environmental impacts, the valuing of ecosystem services and the respect of conservation
principles;
determining the most appropriate conservation actions for threatened species, by the establishment of
PHVA analysis if necessary, the preservation of specific habitats inside or outside the PAs and the
combination of in-situ and ex-situ conservation if necessary.
For summarised global data: see Table 22 and Figure 12.

It is recommended that the highest priority be given to trans-border KLCs and key conservation areas.
Cross River Korup Mont Cameroon - Tamakanda Gashaka Tchabel Faro (CKMCTGTF) Forests KLC (19,110
km2 of PAs)
This complex encompasses: (1) the 3,643 km2 Cross River NP in Nigeria, (2) the 1,295 km2 Korup National Park in Cameroun,
(3) the 620 km2 Tamakanda NP in Cameroon, (4) the 581 km2 Mont Cameroon, (5) 6,670 km2 Gashaka-Gumti NP, (6) the
3,000 km2 Tchabel Mbabo Wildlife Reserve and (7) the 3,300 km2 Faro NP. The landscape is located along the CameroonNigeria border (Figure 20).
The forest blocks of Cross-Korup are still connected. The Cross River NP is divided into two sections separated by about 50
km of disturbed forest. The (1.a) Oban Division (IBA - NG007) the largest sector of the park is contiguous with Korup National
Park in Cameroon (IBA - CM019). The (1.b) Okwangwo Division (IBA - NG010) the smaller part of the park is connected with
the (3) Tamakanda NP. The complex is a large area of lowland and submontane rainforest. In the less accessible areas the
forest has had little interference, but elsewhere the exploitation has resulted in secondary regrowth and the establishment of
plantations of oil-palm and rubber. The terrain is rough and elevation rises from the river valleys to over 1,000 m in mountainous
areas but the terrain is generally flat, with hills and escarpments.

Final report
Page 54
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
The Mont Cameroon NP (4) is one of Africa's largest volcanoes, rising to 4,040 metres. It has a wide range of habitats including
lowland, evergreen rainforest, mangrove, coastal vegetation, swamp forest, submontane forest, montane forest and grassland.
Mont Cameroon is home to 49 strictly endemic and 50 near endemic plant species, 20 of the 28 restricted-range bird species
of the EBA, including the 2 strictly endemic species, 3 endemic species of butterfly and large mammals including the Forest
Elephant. The (5) Gashaka-Gumti NP (IBA - NG001), the largest of Nigerias National Parks, is contiguous with (6) Tchabel
Mbabo in Cameroon (IBA - CM009), both far from the isolated Faro NP (IBA - CM009). The area is situated on the mountains
rising up to 2,400 m but there are also extensive lowland areas. The area is a heterogeneous mix of habitats comprising
montane forests and grasslands, derived savanna with relict lowland forests, riparian forest and SudanGuinea Savanna
woodlands. The Faro NP (7) is a large block of Sudanian savanna on gently undulating terrain at 250500 m (Table 16).
Box 5. Importance of Cameroon-Nigeria border and trans-border conservation measures
THE CAMEROON-NIGERIA BORDER
The Cameroon-Nigeria border region, where the Cross River Gorilla occurs, is a biodiversity hotspot of global significance that
supports a high diversity of animal and plant species that can occur in large numbers in restricted ranges. Many of them are
threatened. These forests contain some of the highest rates of animal species richness of any African forest, especially in
terms of forest-restricted mammals, birds and butterflies. Many of these animals are endemic. The ecotype is heavily impacted
by human use, including logging and plantation agriculture. Threatened primates share parts of the same habitat including the
Cross River Gorilla, the Nigeria-Cameroon chimpanzee, the Roloway monkey and the Drill (Mandrillus leucophaeus).
Given the small and highly fragmented populations of the Cross River Gorillas, it is important to protect the corridors connecting
the sub-populations and to increase the effectiveness of existing and proposed protected areas within their range. Taken
together, these findings serve to emphasize the need to expand our knowledge of the gorillas range.
Trans-border conservation measures have already been developed or proposed for a number of other protected areas that lie
on either side of the Nigeria-Cameroon border. These are: the Oban Division of Cross River NP in Nigeria and the connected
Korup NP and Tamakanda NP and the block Gashaka Gumti NP in Nigeria and Faro NP and a proposed protected area at
Tchabal Mbabo in Cameroun.
Table 16. Key elements of the Cross River - Korup - Mont Cameroon - Tamakanda - Gashaka - Tchabel - Faro (CKTGTF)
Forests KLC
Elements
KLC
Conservation
Objectives
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
Forests with some of the highest rates of animal species richness of any African forest, especially in
terms of forest-restricted mammals, birds and butterflies.
1. Preserving one of the forest biodiversity hotspots of global significance
2. Protection of forest fauna and habitats with priority given to a landscape approach with corridor protection.
3. Establish ecosystem landscape governance and save corridors between the major ecological blocks.
4. Adopt the most appropriate conservation actions for threatened species (primates).
Threatened primates: Cross River Gorilla, the Nigeria-Cameroon chimpanzee, the Roloway monkey, the Drill
Elephant, Pygmy Hippo Jentink's Duiker, Water chevrotain, Leopard
Forest dependent birds; more than 25 are threatened or restricted-range species
Lowland, submontane and montane rainforest
Savannas with relict lowland forests, riparian forest and SudanGuinea savanna woodlands
Sudanian savanna (Faro NP)
Ta Grebo - Sopo (TGS) Forest KLC (7,700 km2 of PAs)

The complex encompasses (1) the 3,300 km2 of the Ta NP (IBA - CI011) and its buffer area (960 km2) and Nzo Faunal Reserve
(930 km2) in Cte dIvoire, (2) the 971 km2 Grebo National Forest (IBA - LR009) and (3) the 1,550 km2 Sapo NP (IBA - LR008)
in Liberia.
Ta NP is the largest and best-preserved remnant of Upper Guinea rainforest in West Africa. This humid tropical forest has a
high level of endemism. The park contains some 1,300 species of higher plants. Much of the forest in the park is unlogged,
mature, old-growth with emergents rising to 60 m. The fauna is fairly typical of West African forests and the park contains 47
of the 54 species of large mammal known to occur in Guinean rainforest including five threatened species. Mammals include
Final report
Page 55
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
the mona monkey, white-nosed monkey and diana monkey, black and white colobus, red colobus and green colobus, sooty
mangabey, chimpanzee, giant pangolin, tree pangolin and long-tailed pangolin, golden cat, leopard, elephant, bushpig, giant
forest hog, pygmy hippopotamus, water chevrotain, bongo, buffalo and an exceptional variety of forest duikers. Over 230 bird
species have been recorded, 143 typical of primary forest.
The (2) Grebo National Forest is an area of evergreen lowland rainforest enclosed on three sides by a large, easterly projecting
meander of the Cavalla River, on the international frontier with Cte dIvoire, in the extreme east of the country.
The (3) Sapo NP contains the second-largest area of primary tropical rainforest in WA after Ta National Park in neighbouring
Cte d'Ivoire. The park is a biodiversity hotspot that has "the highest mammal species diversity of any region in the world and
one of the richest amounts of floral species in the country, with many endemic species. The Sapo NP is hosting around 125
mammal species and 590 types of bird, including a number of threatened species. The park is home to the pygmy
hippopotamus. Note that IUCN Species Survival Commission reports: Sapo NP is the only realistic choice of a suitable
conservation area for the Pygmy Hippopotamus. Other important species are forest elephant, seven species of monkey
(including Chimpanzee and the endangered Diana monkey), crocodiles, leopards, three species of pangolin, seven species of
duiker antelopes (including the vulnerable Jentink's duiker and zebra duiker). Sapo National Park remains relatively
inaccessible and this significant and environmentally rich area remains somewhat undeveloped for management, research and
tourism (Table 17).
Table 17. Key elements of the Ta Grebo - Sopo (TGS) Forest KLC
Elements
KLC
Conservation
Objectives
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
The largest and best-preserved remnant of Upper Guinea rainforest between Cte dIvoire and Liberia
1. Preserves the last remnant of Upper Guinea rainforest with priority for landscape conservation with
protected corridors.
2. Establish ecosystemlandscape governance system.
3. Adopt the most appropriate conservation actions for threatened species (mammals and birds).
Endemic species: pygmy hippo, chimpanzee, Jentinck's and zebra duikers,
12 endemic birds and bird species of primary forest
Tropical and subtropical moist broadleaf forests
Mount Nimba (MN) Forest KLC (415 km2 of PAs)

The complex covers the 175 km2 of the Nimba Mountains Strict Nature Reserve (1944), (1) in Guinea (85 km2) and (2) in Cte
dIvoire (65 km2) and (3) in 240 km2 of the East and West Nimba Nature Reserve in Liberia. This area was designated as a
Biosphere Reserve in 1980 and a World Heritage Site in 1981.
Rising above the surrounding savannas and covered in dense forests, Mount Nimba (and its surrounding mountains) is an
area with some of the highest biodiversity in the West African region due to its unique geographical and climatic location. The
complex is home to a large number of plant species, more than 317 vertebrate species (107 of which are mammals including
a significant population of West African chimpanzees) and more than 2,500 invertebrate species, many of which are only found
in this region. More than 2,000 species of vascular plants, including several endemic or quasi-endemic plants, have been
recorded. This site has been identified as an Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE) species/site profile due to its containing a
Critically Endangered or Endangered species with a limited range.
Mount Nimba has received legal protection from both Guinea and the Ivory Coast, but the habitat is still threatened by activities
occurring adjacent to the site boundaries and spreading into the protected area. While a large portion of the forests are still
present inside the Biospheres reserve core, much of the fauna have suffered because of human practices such as poaching,
agriculture, bush fires, and mining.
The project Steward of the USAIDs regional program for conserving the biodiversity of the Upper Guinean Forest of West
Africa is the promoter of the Nimba transborder initiative and it is still working in the area. STEWARD was conceptualized in
2005-2006 and is currently (2011-2015) in its implementation phase (see table 18).

Final report
Page 56
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 18. Key elements of the Mount Nimba (MN) Forest KLC
Elements
KLC
Conservation
Objectives
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
Conservation of unique forest and mountains landscape and important birdlife areas between Guinea,
Cte dIvoire and Liberia
Protection of the World Heritage Site
1. Preserving the unique ecological blocks of the Mount Nimba World Heritage Site
2. Establish ecosystem governance
Unique and endemic species
West African chimpanzees
Endemic or quasi-endemic plants
Forest dependent birds; three species of global conservation concern
Dense montane forests
Gola-Lofa-Foya (Sierra Leone-Liberia Trans-border Peace Park) and Mano-Wologizi-Wonegizi-Ziama (GLF-MWWZ)

Forests KLC (2,550 + 914 km2 of PAs)
This large complex hosting only partially contiguous conservation areas is located between Sierra Leone, Liberia and Guinea.
The complex encompasses a first block with (1) the 750 km2 Gola Forest Reserve in Sierra Leone, (2) the 800 km2 Lofa and
(3) 1,000 km2 Foya Forest Reserves in Liberia and a second block with (4) the c. 550 km2 Mano, (5) the 995 km2 Wologizi, (6)
the 380 km2 Wonegizi and (7) the 914 km2 Ziama (Figure 24).
The complex encompasses the Gola-Lofa-Foya Trans-border Peace Park between Sierra Leone and Liberia and the forest
and mountains complex of Mano-Wologizi-Wonegizi-Ziama between Liberia and Guinea. The Trans-border Peace Park unites
the Gola Forest Reserve in Sierra Leone and the Lofa and Foya Forest Reserves in Liberia.
The proposed Sierra Leone-Liberia Trans-border Peace Park (Figure 23) covers a large area of rainforest, evergreen in the
south, becoming progressively more semi-deciduous to the north. The rivers in the parks are characterized by spectacular
rapids and waterfalls and are usually unfordable. The human population within the parks is very low and the vegetation remains
largely unmodified. Both the areas in Sierra Leone and Liberia are IBAs.
The (5) Wologizi Mountains are an isolated area of upland located in north-west of the Liberia. The area includes Liberias
highest mountain (Mount Wuteve at 1,447 m) and other peaks. Lower parts are covered with relatively open forest. The foothills
and lower valleys are surrounded by large areas of savanna woodland.
The (6) Wonegizi Mountains (IBA LR002) is contiguous with the Massif du Ziama Biosphere Reserve (IBA GN016) in Guinea.
The vegetation consists mainly of semi-deciduous forest, similar in composition to that found on the Wologizi Mountains (IBA
LR001). The site spans a still largely intact transition from lowland rainforest to semi-montane Parinari-dominated forest at
altitude.
The (7) Massif du Ziama Biosphere Reserve forms part of the Guinea Highlands. Part of the western boundary is contiguous
with the Wonegizi Mountains in Liberia. Much of the terrain is extremely rugged. The whole area was forested originally, but
primary forest now remains only in the remote upland parts of the south-west, next to the Liberian border. There are also areas
of swamp and of wooded savanna on lateritic outcrops of the high plateaux. The core zone of the reserve covers 600 km2
(Table 19).
Table 19. Key elements of the Gola-Lofa-Foya (Sierra Leone-Liberia Trans-border Peace Park) and Mano-Wologizi-WonegiziZiama (GLF-MWWZ) Forests KLC
Elements
KLC
Conservation
Objectives
Priority elements
The forests and mountains landscapes and important birdlife areas between Sierra Leone, Liberia and
Guinea
1. Preserving the most important ecological blocks of PAs in the forests of WA
2. Protection of forest fauna and habitats
3. Establish ecosystem landscape governance and save corridors between the major ecological blocks

Final report
Page 57
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Elements
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
Forest Elephant, Pygmy Hippo Jentink's Duiker, Water chevrotain, Leopard and thirteen species of primate,
one of the highest densities of chimpanzees in WA and CA (Loma Mountains)
More than 300 forest dependent birds; more than 25 are threatened or restricted-range species
Rainforest, evergreen and semi-deciduous
Lowland forest - mixed moist evergreen and semi- evergreen
Mountain forests with spectacular rapids and waterfalls
High plateaux
River valleys
Outamba/Kilimi - Kuru Pinselli Soya (OKKPS) Forest KLC (1,110 km2 of PAs)
This complex is in the transborder area between Sierra Leone and Guinea. The complex encompasses (1) the 1,110 km2
Outamba-Kilimi NP and Forest Reserves in Sierra Leone (Kuru Hill) and in Guinea (Pinselli and Soya). The park is split into
two areas, Outamba and Kilimi, between which lies an unprotected strip of land. The Guineas protected forests are in the
Madina Oula, Soya & Oure Kaba sub-prefectures. The complex has varying landscapes of savanna and forest. With a diverse
landscape, the areas are home to large numbers of fauna and flora. Some 256 bird species have been recorded from the park
including three species of global conservation concern. For mammals, the site is an important refuge for at least nine species
of primate and also several large mammals such as the leopard, pygmy hippopotamus and forest elephant.
The project Steward of the USAIDs regional program for conserving the biodiversity of the Upper Guinean Forest of West
Africa is the promoter of the transborder initiative and it is still working in the area. STEWARD was conceptualized in 20052006 and it is currently (2011-2015) in its implementation phase (Table 20).

Final report
Page 58
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 20. Key elements of the Outamba/Kilimi - Kuru Pinselli Soya (OKKPS) Forest KLC
Elements
KLC
Conservation
Objectives
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
The forests and mountains landscapes and important birdlife areas between Sierra Leone and Guinea
1. Protection of mountains landscapes and important birdlife areas
3. Adopt the most appropriate conservation actions for threatened species (primates)
4. Preservation of specific habitats for birds
West African chimpanzee, forest elephant, pygmy hippo Jentink's duiker, water chevrotain, leopard
Forest dependent birds (three species of global conservation concern)
Landscape of savanna and forests
National level: WA Forest Key Conservation Areas requiring high priority direct support (680 km2 of PAs)
(1) Ankasa NP in Ghana

The park is a virgin evergreen rain forest having exceptional botanical species and extending to 490 km2 in area. The forest
has the most biological diversity of any other PA in Ghana, with over 300 different plant species having been recorded in a
single hectare of forest. Animal life includes the elephant, bongo, 10 types of primates including chimpanzee (although these
have not been seen for some time) and Diana monkey, leopard, more than 260 species of birds (IBA - GH001) and hundreds
of varieties of butterflies. The park incorporates the former Nini-Suhien National Park. It has benefited from recent EU
conservation funding.
(2) Bia NP in Ghana

The 190 km2 park and the 563 km2 of the connected Resource Reserve are characterized by a transitional forest between
moist evergreen and moist semi-deciduous. The core area is untouched rain forest with the distinction of having some of the
tallest trees in West Africa, but the site is isolated being surrounded by mixed farms and secondary forest. Bia NP has forest
elephants, chimpanzee, Colobus monkeys, Diana monkey, leopard, buffalo, the giant hog, and a variety of antelopes. The park
is the only known natural home of the newly discovered lizard, Agama Sylvanus, and the variety of the animal life is outstanding.
Bird species number about 200 including few endangered birds (BIA - GH003) (Figure 12 and Table 21). This park also has
benefited from recent EU conservation funding.
Table 21. Key elements of Forest KCAs
Elements
KCAs
Conservation
objectives
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
Untouched rain forests having exceptional biodiversity
1. Protection of untouched rain forests and habitats
2. Establish ecosystem landscape governance
4. Further develop eco-tourism potential
5. Further develop community conservation and livelihood initiatives
Elephants, chimpanzee, Colobus monkeys, Diana monkey, leopard,
Endemic and endangered birds
Endemic lizard, Agama Sylvanus
Evergreen rain forest
Transitional forest between moist evergreen and moist semi-deciduous
New or larger national protected areas should be created (Liberia, Ghana and Nigeria)
Evaluate about 3,000 5,000 km2 of forests for new or larger PAs (addition of +7-11% of new or larger national PAs than
existing KLCs and KCAs as considered by the strategic approach for the specific Forests ecotype) (Figure 12).

Final report
Page 59
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 22. C - West Africa Forests - Main KLCs and KCAs and priorities
- Highest rates of plant and animal
species richness of any African forest
- Large mammals, especially primates,
in the forest zone are threatened by
both hunting and habitat destruction
- Relatively poor knowledge of the
biology and threats to WA forest
wildlife (e.g. to understand the possible
distinctiveness of the rare and
threatened WA elephant as a third
species)
- Highly fragmented populations of
elephants with only small groups in the
forest ecotypes
- Outside PAs and Forest Reserves, the
loss of forest is severe
- Special habitats are extremely
degraded
- Very high numbers of endemics in
plants, mammals, birds, amphibians,
insects but also high extinction risk of
endemic species of plants, insect,
birds, amphibians and small and large
mammals.
- Deforestation for cannabis cultivation
with poaching and trans-border illegal
wildlife trade
- Important forest blocks that could be
elevated to the status of conservation
areas
- Low correlation between the size of
PA, the high demographic pressure
and the functional extinction of
mammals (see footnote 15)
- Protection of threatened trees:
Afromosia or African Teak Meliacaea
family (Khaya species), the Vne
Countries
Benin
Cte dIvoire
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea
Bissau
Liberia
Mauritania
Nigeria
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Togo

Biome:
- Tropical and subtropical moist
broadleaf Forests
Ecotype:
- Guinean Montane Forests
- Western Guinean lowland forests
- Eastern Guinean forests
- Nigerian lowland forests
- Cameroonian Highlands forests
- Cross-Sanaga-Bioko
coastal
forests
- Niger Delta swamp forests
- Cross-Niger transition forests.
Niger Delta red
colobus
Preuss's red
colobus
Cross River gorilla
Roloway monkey
Drill
Nigeria-Cameroon
chimpanzee
Pygmy
hippopotamus
Jentinks duiker
Forests Elephant
Procolobus badius
Leopard

Final report
Main KLCs - KPAs and priorities

1. Cross River Korup Tamakanda
Gashaka Tchabel Faro (CKTGTF)
Forests Landscape of Conservation
(19,100 km2 of PAs)
2. Ta Grebo - Sopo (TGS) Forest
Landscape of Conservation (7,700 km2
of PAs)
3. Mount Nimba (MN) Forest Landscape of
Conservation (415 km2 of PAs)
4. Gola-Lofa-Foya and Mano-WologiziWonegizi-Ziama (GLF-MWWZ) Forests
Landscape of Conservation (3,500 +
1,900 km2 of PAs)
5. Outamba/Kilimi - Kuru Pinselli Soya
(OKKPS) Forest Landscape of
Conservation (1,110 km2 of PAs)
Key Conservation Areas
6. National level: WA Forest Key
Conservation Areas requiring high
priority direct support (680 km2 of PAs)
7. New or larger KLCs and KCAs should
be created (Liberia, Ghana, Nigeria)
Analysis
Negative aspects
- Highly degraded and
fragmented habitats
- Over-hunting
- PAs as a refuge for illegal
activities (organized crime
for drugs cultivation, illegal
trade, etc.)
- PAs: low number, small
size
and
underrepresentation of forests
ecotypes
- Valuable
hardwoods
continues to spur logging in
the high canopy forests
- Migrations of animals
severely reduced
- Acceleration of forest loss
(civil wars)
- Effects of mining on
sustainable
natural
resource management
- PAs under-resourced and
poorly managed
- Some countries with nonexistent PA management,
others with very poor
management (paper parks)
- High density of poor and
disadvantaged populations
- Danger from loss of
unknown biodiversity
- CC and degradation of
agricultural systems and
more threats on PAs
- Relatively
superficial
knowledge about the
Proposed actions
Objectives
1.
2.
3.
Preserving the forest biodiversity

hotspots of global significance
Establish ecosystem landscape
governance and save corridors between
the major ecological blocks
Adopt the most appropriate conservation
actions for threatened species
Actions
- Provide greater control of hunting by antipoaching activities and law enforcement
- Adopting a holistic approach that ensures
mainstreaming of PAs in the development
context and respects the principles of
conservation at local, national and
international level
- Promote strong inter-sectorial policy
development and action between
agriculture, mining, infrastructures, etc. and
conservation
- Strengthen the oversight of the
environmental impact of mining, agroindustry,
hydroelectric
and
other
infrastructure projects
- Raise awareness by populations of
sustainable natural resource conservation
techniques and restore and legalize their
traditional resource use rules where
appropriate
- Focus on in-situ conservation but do not
exclude the contribution of the ex-situ
conservation, if necessary to preserve the
genetic heritage (responsibility of WAZA)
- Ensure continuous support by the
IUCN/SSC Specialist Group, and
Page 60
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
(Pterocarpus erinaceus), and African
Blackwood (Dalbergia melanoxylon);
etc.
- The first-ever forest elephant
translocation in West Africa of 6
elephants from small patches of forest
outside the town of Daloa to Azagny
National Park, although with some
mortalities.
Countries
Main KLCs - KPAs and priorities
Analysis
biology and threats tof WA
rain forest wildlife (e.g..
elephant)
Positive aspects
- Existing forests blocks to
complement the overall
biodiversity could still be
integrated into PA system
- Astonishing diversity of life
inhabiting the rain forests of
WA
- Rain forest PAs of small
size can ensure the
conservation of biodiversity
(see footnote 15)
- First trans-border parks
(peace parks and systemic
management)
- Cultural
heritage
in
sustainable management
of natural resources
- Potential discoveries of
new species
Proposed actions
implementation of the PHVA strategic
approach for threatened species
Establish a regional strategic approach that
focuses on conservation principles,
integrate conservation in development
processes (i.e. the valuation of sustainable
ecosystem services) and promotes ICDP
and good governance in the buffer zones
Support and sustain the political will to
tackle conservation problems, to fulfil the
gaps in scientific knowledge and to
establish objectives, indicators and
benchmarks for conservation
Support civil society on issues of wildlife
management and protection and support
the growth of a network of local nongovernmental organizations in West Africa
Operate at the national level and not just
locally in raising awareness for nature
conservation.

Final report
Page 61
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Figure 12. C - West Africa Forests - Main KLCs and KCAs and priorities
(1) Cross River Korup Mont Cameroon - Tamakanda Gashaka Tchabel Faro Forests Landscape of Conservation (19,100 Km2 of PAs); (2) Ta Grebo - Sopo Forest Landscape of Conservation
(7,700 Km2 of PAs); (3) Mount Nimba Forest Landscape of Conservation (415 Km2 of PAs); (4) Gola-Lofa-Foya (Sierra Leone-Liberia Trans-border Peace Park) and Mano-Wologizi-(Wonegizi-Ziama (GLFMWWZ) Forests Landscape of Conservation (2,550 + 914 Km2 of PAs); (5) Outamba/Kilimi - Kuru Pinselli Soya Forest Landscape of Conservation (1,110 Km2 of PAs); (6) National level: WA Forest Key
Conservation Areas requiring high priority direct support (map: Climate Change and Protected Areas in West Africa CCPAWA, United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre,
2010; specific elaboration)

Final report
Page 62
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
5.1.6 Specific strategies and actions for major Mangroves/Coastal ecotypes

In WA, mangroves are found discontinuously from Senegal to the Niger delta. Some 14% of identified mangrove areas in West
Africa fall within nationally and internationally designated protected areas. However, there are strong concerns about the
management coordination and effectiveness of the coastal and marine protected areas that encompass the mangroves,
predominantly due to financial and administrative constraints in the region.
West African mangroves are in moderate decline, with an estimated average decline of 25% between 1980 and 2006. The
Atlantic coast of Africa has some of the highest human population
Table 23. Mangrove areas falling within protected
densities on the continent. The majority of industry of West Africa is
areas
located in the coastal zone (Nigeria and Cte dIvoire). In west and
Mangrove area falling within
Country
protected areas [%]
central Africa some 20-30% of mangroves have been lost in the past 25
Benin
0
years (Cte dIvoire shows a particularly severe decline in mangrove
Burkina Faso
0
habitat). This, together with rapid growth, high poverty, low development
Gambia
3,5
indices, poor governance in rural regions and open access of coastal
Ghana
1,5
Guinea
0,2
resources has depleted the mangroves forests. Threats include
Guinea35,5
urbanisation, industrialisation (such as the oil refineries of the Niger
Bissau
Delta), agriculture, timber and petroleum exploitation, fishing with
Ivory Coast
26,9
dynamite and poison, canalisation, discharge of sewage and other
Liberia
26,1
Mali
0
pollutants and siltation.
Mauritania
Niger
Nigeria
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Togo
62.5
0
3,4
42,5
14,5
0
The WA mangroves are allocated into different ecotypes. The Guinean

Mangroves, influenced by a large tidal range and high inputs of
freshwater, contain the best developed mangroves in western Africa.
This ecotype provides important habitat for migratory birds and
Source: Regional Action Plan for the Conservation of
endangered species such as the West African manatee. However, the
Chimpanzees in West Africa, Rebecca Kormos and Christophe
mangrove habitat has been affected by poor rainfall over the entire
Boesch, 2003
region during the past three decades. The most extensive blocks of
Central African mangroves are found in the Niger River Delta, which supports the single most extensive mangrove system in
Africa, and the third most extensive worldwide after India and Indonesia. Despite its size, it is extremely threatened because
none of it falls within a PA. These mangroves occur in suitable low energy marine environments and they trap large amounts
of sediment. The mangroves of this region have no endemic species but support some endangered species, such as manatees
and, it seems also the pygmy hippopotamus, in the Niger Delta. Mangroves here, as elsewhere, are important as nursery and
feeding areas for marine fishes.
The mangroves depend for their conservation on coastal and marine protected areas and both are highly dependent on their
environment and in particular on the context and dynamics of development, including development taking place far from the
mangrove sites. The extension of coastal and marine protected areas to new sites and the prioritizing of mangrove areas for
conservation intervention requires accurate forecasting about human developments as the latter are moving much faster than
conservation efforts. Careful examination of different development scenarios is essential in order to guarantee the viability of
conservation investments in coastal and marine protected areas.
Recent data identified by the Master Plan for Coastal West Africa (Schma Directeur du Littoral Ouest Africain SDLAO),
produced by IUCN between 2009 and 2011, confirm the importance of the dynamics of human developments that occupy the
coastal strip at the expense of mangroves. This is often overlooked by conservation organisations.
A further problem is that some coastal and marine protected areas do benefit from long-term funding whereas others are
almost forgotten.
The need to improve the consistency and effectiveness of the ecotypes network of coastal and marine areas, led us to consider
the following conservation measures as a priority:
Implementation of conservation actions in some key areas which have not benefited from conservation
(e.g. Sherbro - Sierra Leone);

Final report
Page 63
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Conservation of the river-sea connections (a complex of small estuaries) in the Gulf of Guinea;
Strengthening inter-sectorial management of some border areas of high biological value and heritage;
Address strategies and practices of the fishing and processing industry and enterprises that have
significant impacts on mangroves;
Integrate conservation with extractive activities especially those related to oil and oil storage device by
strengthening marine spatial planning;
Search for synergies between mangrove conservation activities and the need for reducing coastal risks of
flooding, especially in areas where the coastline is particularly dynamic.
At present, the Abidjan Convention is implementing a strategic plan for marine protected areas on the Atlantic coast of Africa
from Mauritania to South Africa. The implementation phase works in detail on three connected geographical areas: (1) from
Mauritania to Sierra Leone, (2) from Liberia to Nigeria, and (3) from Cameroon to DRC.
Threats to the conservation of biodiversity of mangroves forests are as follows: clearing, overharvesting mangrove trees,
mining, river changes, poaching, pollution and exotic/invasive plants. Climate change is another major threat because
mangrove forests require stable sea levels for long-term survival. The interventions of this strategic approach require:
(i) Adopt the legislations and the international conventions relating to mangroves and develop adequate
policies and inter-sectorial approaches for implementation of actions;
(ii) Concentrate actions in the priority PAs (see below) and the community mangrove forests;
(iii) Collaborate with national and international NGOs and empower local communities to maintain and monitor
the community mangrove areas;
(iv) Develop an integrated PA and Reserve network of coastal and marine areas encompassing mangrove
and other coastal habitats;
(v) Establish a fund to maintain a sustainable economy and management of mangroves and coastal habitats;
(vi) Determine the most appropriate conservation actions and studies to ensure management effectiveness of
PAs and mangrove forests, and related threatened species.
Summarised, global data are provided in Table 26 and Figure 13.
Guinea Bissau
Rio Cacheu - Cufada - Cantanhez - Rio Buba - Iles Tristao (CCCBT) Mangrove KLC (4,780 km2 of PAs)
The complex encompasses in Guinea Bissau (1) 886 km2 the Rio Cacheu Mangroves (IBA - GW001), (2) the 723 km2 Lagoas
de Cufada (IBA - GW004), (3) the 1148 km2 Rio Grande de Buba (IBA - GW005), (4) the 1209 km2 Cantanhez Forest (IBA GW008); and in Guinea (5) the 814 km2 Iles Tristao (IBA - GN004). The complex of mangrove forests is contiguous to 10,279
km2 Bijagos Archipelago Biosphere Reserve with 3 MPA: (i) Ilhas Formosa, Nago & Tchedi (Urok); (ii) Orango and (iii) Joo
Vieira and Poilo Marine National Park.
This complex includes the ocean coasts and the lands on both banks of the rivers or lakes. Much of the area is covered in
mangrove as well as fresh and brackish water marshes. The complex encompasses primary forests and sacred forests, palm
forest, semi-dry woodland, savanna areas and agricultural land. The area includes mudflats and sandbanks, rivers, freshwater
lagoons and lakes (Table 24).
Table 24. Key elements of the Rio Cacheu - Cufada - Cantanhez - Rio Buba - Iles Tristao (CCCBT) Mangrove KLC
Elements
KLC
Conservation
objectives
Priority elements
The best developed mangroves in WA with migratory and water birds, endangered species (Manatee)
and a success story of forests governance
1. Preserving the best developed mangroves in WA
2. Establish an ecosystemlandscape governance system and save corridors between the major ecological
blocks
3. Adopt the most appropriate conservation actions for threatened species (manatee and birds)

Final report
Page 64
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Elements
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
West African manatee

Migratory birds
Mangroves as nursery and feeding areas for marine fishes,
Ocean coasts and the lands on both banks of the rivers or lakes, mudflats and sandbanks
Forests, palm forest, semi-dry woodland, savannas
Rivers, freshwater lagoons and lakes
National level: WA Mangroves KCAs requiring high priority direct support (3,062 km2 of PAs) (Note: the number in
brackets corresponds to the number on figure 13)
Sierra Leone
(2) Sherbro and Turtles Islands
The ca. 450 km of the area encompasses more than two-thirds of the country's mangroves. The site should be classified as
a Marine Protected Area (MPA), one of the largest in the region. The Sherbro Island and the Turtle Bank Is a mosaic of rivers
and marine areas unique in the region and a breeding ground for green sea turtles as well as leatherback sea turtles (Figure
13).
Senegal
(3) Saloum Delta National Park
The 1,800 km2 of this site is an IBA (SN013), but only 760 km2 are designated as a National Park and Ramsar Site. The site
consists of deltas of the seasonal rivers. There is a network of inter-linking channels and additional, seasonal freshwater
streams that flow into the delta. The site consists of sea, sandy coast and islands and islets with mangroves, savannas and
forests. The National Park and part of the buffer zone of the Biosphere Reserve are managed by the central authorities, but
the remainder is managed through liaison between a rural council and National Park and forest service authorities (Figure 13).
(4) Basse Casamance National Park
The 50 km2 of the National Park (IBA - SN014) is in the delta of the Casamance River. The habitat consists of low-lying lands
with mangroves fringing tidal channels, seasonally bare saline mudflats, some wooded savanna and terrestrial forest, including
the only remaining small area of GuineaCongo forest in the country (Figure 13).

Final report
Page 65
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Ghana
(5) Keta Lagoon Ramsar site (Ghana) GH033
The 530 km2 Keta Lagoon (IBA - GH033) is an extensive, brackish water-body situated to the east of the Volta river estuary.
The site comprises the open water of the lagoon and the surrounding flood-plains and mangrove swamps. The lagoon is
bordered by numerous settlements and the surrounding flood-plain consists of marsh, scrub, farmland and substantial
mangrove stands, which are heavily exploited for fuelwood (Figure 13).
(6) Songor Lagoon
The 232 km2 Songor Lagoon (IBA - GH036) is, with Keta Lagoon, one of the two major lagoon systems associated with the
Volta river estuary. The site comprises a brackish water lagoon with extensive mudflats and islands, saltpans, a broad sandy
beach and flood-plains of a number of small streams. It is separated from the sea by a narrow sand-dune on which small
villages are situated. The lagoon has no direct access to the sea and seawater replenishment is from seepage through the
sand-dunes. The main wetland vegetation-type is saline marsh with degraded mangroves (Figure 13 and Table 25).
Table 25. Key elements of the Mangroves/Coastal Key Conservation Areas
Elements
KCA
Conservation
Objectives
Key Species
Key habitats
Priority elements
The mangrove forest blocks that could be elevated to the status of conservation areas are already
listed as UNESCO Biosphere Reserves, Ramsar sites, Important and Endemic Bird Areas.
1. Preserving the best developed mangroves in WA
3. Adopt the most appropriate conservation actions for threatened species (manatee and birds)
West African manatee
Migratory birds
Mangroves as nursery and feeding areas for marine fishes,
Ocean coasts and the lands on both banks of the rivers or lakes, mudflats and sandbanks
Forests, palm forest, semi-dry woodland, savannas
Rivers, freshwater lagoons and lakes
New or larger KLCs and KCAs should be created (Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Senegal, and Guinea)
New or larger national protected areas should be created in Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Senegal, and Guinea.
Evaluate about 1,300 2,000 km2 of mangrove for new or larger PAs (addition of +15-25% of new or larger national PAs than
existing KLCs and KCAs as considered by the strategic approach for the specific Mangroves/Coastal ecotype) (Figure 13).

Final report
Page 66
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 26. D - West Africa Mangroves/Coastal - Main KLCs and KCAs and priorities
- Mangroves are very rich in biodiversity
with a variety of specialist fishes (they
harbour widespread pelagic fishes),
marine turtles, invertebrates, various
unique species such as the West African
manatee, and a large number of
Palearctic and Afro-tropical bird species
- Low number and under-representation of
this habitat/ecotype in Protected Areas or
no-representation in some instances (e.g.
in Nigeria)
- Many mangrove forest blocks are
designated as UNESCO Biosphere
Reserves, Ramsar sites, Important and
Endemic Bird Areas.
- Fragmentation does not greatly affect
mangrove biodiversity, as mangroves are
naturally fragmented, and are able to
disperse over long distances
- Important mangrove forest blocks that
could be elevated to the status of
conservation areas
Countries
-
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Ivory Coast
Liberia
Mauritania
Nigeria
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Biome / Ecotypes / Key

species
Biome:
Mangroves
Ecotype:
Guinean Mangroves
Niger Delta red
colobus
West
African
manatee
KLCs - KCAs and priorities

Key
Landscapes
Conservation
for
1. Rio Cacheu - Cufada Cantanhez - Rio Buba - Iles

Tristao (CCCBT) Mangroves
Landscape of Conservation
(4,780 km2 of PAs)
Key Conservation Areas (3,062
km2 of PAs)
Note: the number in brackets
corresponds to the number on the
figure 13)
Sierra Leone
2. Sherbro and Turtles Islands
Senegal
3. Saloum Delta National Park
4. Basse Casamance National
Park
Ghana
5. Keta Lagoon Ramsar site
(Ghana) GH033
6. Songor Lagoon
7. New or larger KLCs and KCAs
should be created (Nigeria,
Ivory Coast, Liberia, Sierra
Leone, Senegal, Guinea)
Analysis
Negative aspects
- Clearing for agricultural, human settlements and
infrastructure
- Overharvesting of mangrove trees for firewood,
and wood, wood chip and pulp
- Mining exploitation and oil spillage
- River changes resulting from dams and irrigation
which kill the trees
- Excessive hunting of species
- Pollution by fertilizers, pesticides, and other toxic
man-made chemicals
- Exotic/invasive plant species colonization (water
hyacinth)
- Climate change
- Civil and political unrest (Nigeria)
Objectives:
1.
Preserving the best developed mangroves in WA
2.
Establish ecosystem landscape governance and
save corridors between the major ecological blocks
3.
Adopt the most appropriate conservation actions for
threatened species (manatee and birds)
Actions:
- Signature by the WA Governments of mangrove related
legislations and international conventions (i.e.
Convention on CC, Convention on Biodiversity, CITES,
and Ramsar Convention).
- Adopt an holistic approach for policy development,
legislation and institutions that integrates PAs and
mangrove forests in the development context and
promotes conservation principles at the local, national
and international levels.
- Elaborate adequate policy, law and institutional
provisions for mangrove forests for implementation of
international conventions and National Action Plans
including mangroves in protected areas.
- Adopt an inter-sectorial approach in order to give greater
importance to mangrove forest conservation.
- Collaborate with national and international NGOs (e.g.
African Mangrove Network and its national focal offices)
and local communities on various projects and
programmes for the conservation of mangroves and
sustainable management of natural resources and
poverty reduction.
- Maintain a balance between the needs of the local
coastal communities and the ecological services of the
remaining mangrove ecosystems.
- Continue searching for strategies geared towards
sustainable management of mangrove forests.
- Increase the role of private sector participation.
- Orientate research towards providing more quantitative
data for management effectiveness.
- Collaborate for a strong inter-sectorial coordination on
policies and actions between agriculture, infrastructures
and other developments, and conservation.
- Raise awareness in local communities of opportunities
for sustainable natural resource conservation.
Positive aspects
- Important ecological and economic potential for
mangroves when utilised to (a) stabilise the
shoreline, (b) provide protection against
tsunamis, and (c) to provide critical nursery areas
for fish and shrimps.
- Positive example of Guinea Bissau where
communities were empowered to maintain and
monitor their mangrove areas; today the PA
network covers 15% of the country and provides
70,000 people with food, jobs and livelihoods
- Successful previous efforts to replant the
mangroves trees
Final report
Page 67
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Figure 13. D - West Africa Mangroves/Coastal - Main Key Landscape of Conservation - Key Conservation Areas and priorities
(1) Rio Cacheu - Cufada - Cantanhez - Rio Buba - Iles Tristao (CCCBT) Mangroves KLC (4,780 Km2 of PAs) ; National levelWA Mangrove KCAs requiring high priority direct support (3,062 Km2
of PAs): (2) Sherbro and Turtles Islands, (3), Saloum Delta NP (4) Basse Casamance NP (5) Keta Lagoon (6) Songor Lagoon (map: Climate Change and Protected Areas in West Africa
CCPAWA, United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 2010; specific elaboration)

Final report
Page 68
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
5.1.7 Dismantling Wildlife traffic network

West Africa is already considering the establishment of a strategic plan for dismantling the illegal wildlife traffic networks. At
present priority is being given to the establishment of agreements between countries 18 and the strengthening of border control
actions for the WAPOK complex. The proposal for dismantling wildlife trafficking networks in WA is structured by areas of
intervention. The analysis below concerns the international illegal wildlife trade (elephant poaching and ivory trade, and live
animal trade). Further details of the efforts throughout Africa to tackle wildlife trafficking are presented in Volume 6 of this
strategy.
Political and diplomatic
Build awareness of the serious threats that poaching and smuggling pose to economic, regional and social security
at the national and international19 levels;
Build awareness of the current limitations in the effort to combat poaching and wildlife smuggling;
Strengthen the outreach to WA countries on the illegal wildlife trade;
Adopt a regional approach to fighting the illegal wildlife trade and dismantle international criminal networks;
Strengthen national wildlife legislation, and establish the principle of international crime for illegal wildlife activities in
WA countries;
Designate / establish a high authority for this task within regional institutions (WAEMU under ECOWAS).
Intelligence and security
Develop and implement national and international intelligence gathering systems;
Increase investigations especially at key transit points or borders, and in local markets;
Establish effective lines of communication with the different concerned services (wildlife, police, defence, security)
intra and interstate;
Strengthen the capacities of anti-poaching operations in PAs (human resources, training, equipment, facilities,
resources and incentives);
Strengthen the capacities of the teams responsible for investigating and arresting poachers and wildlife traders
(human resources, training, equipment, facilities, resources and incentives);
Establish effective collaboration between NGOs and government and intergovernmental agencies to support the
establishment and operation of intelligence and security networks. It would be worthwhile to support the growth of
a network of non-governmental organizations in West Africa that support government law-enforcement
efforts under the auspices of, or closely linked, with LAGA (already initiated by WAEMU) (see also Volume 4 Central Africa). The NGOs intervention should be supported but not coordinated by the regional institutions to
preserve their specific approach.
Judiciary and Conviction of illegal activities on PAs
Establish effective cooperation and collaboration between the supervisory authorities and judicial authorities involved
in the enforcement of laws against illegal wildlife networks in WA;
Establish effective coordination and communication with law enforcement agencies (in order to ensure better
conviction rates of poachers and illegal traffickers);
Monitor and support legal proceedings against poachers and illegal wildlife traffickers in order to ensure convictions.
Security communications
Provide regular information on the evolution of intelligence, security and legal proceedings;
Define indicators and benchmarks for actions to dismantle wildlife trafficking networks;
Monitor and communicate operations by the designated authority within regional institutions (WAEMU - ECOWAS);
Provide full press coverage.
18
Signature 12 July 1984 an agreement to fight against poaching between Benin and Burkina Faso, on which joined the Niger in 1986. The
agreement was implemented from January 1986
19 WA provides less information on the populations of elephants, source MIKE

Final report
Page 69
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
The interventions should be carried-out under the coordination of a special task force headquarters in the WAEMU (proposition)
and the implementation by a competent body or the association of competent bodies.
5.1.8 Special analysis

Monitoring and planning of highly threatened species and habitats
This is a priority action that must establish: (1) the status of the most endangered species and habitats and (2) a bailout plan
at the regional and interregional level (i.e. a plan for an emergency package in support of threatened key species such as
desert antelope and gorilla, and habitats such as the Inner Niger Delta and mangroves of the Niger Delta). The actions must
be entrusted to the IUCN specialist groups or to specialized NGOs. The actions must be associated with PHVA analysis (see
below) and could lead to joint actions in-situ and ex-situ conservation between national conservation agencies, NGOs and
international institutions specialized and the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA).
Population and Habitat Viability Assessment (PHVA)
The PHVA is a key planning tool to develop targets and recommendations for the conservation of endangered species and
habitats, or for the analysis and support for the introduction or reintroduction of individuals into a new habitat. The PHVA is
based on knowledge of stakeholder groups and uses stochastic and social measures (threats and opportunities), each of them
with a degree of sustainability and uncertainty, leading to concrete proposals. The core element of the PHVA is a quantitative
assessment of the risk of species and habitat extinctions, a process known as population viability analysis, or PVA. Population
viability analysis evaluates the risk of wildlife population decline or extinction under current conditions, or under future
conditions by using computer simulation models. The model can project the demographic behaviour of a simulated population
for a specified period of time into the future, under a specific set of assumed conditions. These underlying conditions can then
be altered to determine the primary drivers of population growth or decline, as well as the best options for population
management to minimize the risk of extinction.
The PHVA has successfully contributed to preserving the last population of Giraffe peralta in West Africa. Considering the high
extinction risk of species and habitats in WA, this strategic approach proposes using this key tool in a programme of direct
action to better target interventions to safeguard endangered species and habitats.
New or larger KLCs and KCAs
In West Africa, the high level of degradation of wildlife, the inadequate representation of ecosystems and habitats, the
fragmentation and reduced connections between the PAs, all contribute to the need for a special contingency plan to better
amalgamate protected areas, forming new key landscapes for conservation to recover significant wildlife ecosystems and
endangered species and habitats.

Final report
Page 70
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
The action is critical but will not succeed unless some emergency actions are first taken. Direct interventions for saving the
PAs identified in this document are urgently required, alongside a brief initial presentation phase to national and regional
institutions in WA to confirm and win support for the strategic approach. The process of creating new PAs is very important,
but it is a long and difficult step that requires the emergency interventions on existing sites of conservation if it is to succeed.
The intervention in support of KLCs should be carried-out under the coordination of a special unit with headquarters in WAEMU
(proposition) and the implementation by a competent body or an association of competent bodies. The WAEMU speciallytasked unit should propose the KLC-formation studies in the following prioritised ecosystems:
Wetland ecosystems in the Savanna ecotype (e.g. Hadejia-Nguru wetlands and Lake Chad Basin) so as to prevent
the further decline of wetlands and to preserve the Afrotropical-Palaearctic and intra-African bird migrations;
New and/or larger KLCs and KCAs to protect wildlife ecosystems in the Forest and Mangroves/Coastal ecotypes. In
the case of marinecoastal PAs the planning should take place in collaboration with the strategic plan for marine
protected areas on the Atlantic coast (as an implementation of the Abidjan Convention).
Further information on the resources required to implement the proposed studies on formation of new KLCs and KCAs, and
on wetlands, is presented in Section 5.1 under the Specific strategies and actions given for each major ecotype.
5.1.9 Wildlife protection training

One of the principal threats to the survival of wildlife in WA is the unsustainable hunting and poaching of wild animals. This is
related in significant part to the comparatively high human population density and long-established trade networks. On the
other hand, given the decline of salaries and the increased incomes from illegal wildlife trade, corruption has also spread
amongst the rangers and other staff of the parks. Illegal activities, such as poaching, fishing and logging, have converted some
PAs into empty forests or empty savannas that can only be classified as paper-parks.
To reverse this trend, it will be necessary to return to the fundamentals of conservation: first and foremost full control of the
parks must be gained by re-establishing the park-management tradition and esprit de corps. To achieve this, it is necessary to
build capacity for the protection of wildlife.
For ranger training the following steps are required: (1) identify conservation sites with the capacity to deliver basic training for
new rangers; (2) prepare and implement training programmes targeting the specific needs of each specific PA; and (3) support
implementation of the appropriate anti-poaching programmes for each PA. Finally, attractive career opportunities for rangers
must be assured to enable staff turnover and the welfare of rangers after their period of anti-poaching activities.
These interventions should be carried-out under the coordination of a special task force with its headquarters in WAEMU
(proposition) and with their implementation by a competent body or an association of competent bodies.

Final report
Page 71
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
5.2
PROACTIVE PROCESS
5.2.1 Institutional support and coordination

A strong process of coordination of the wildlife interventions recommended in the strategic approach for Western Africa will be
essential to ensure the following synergies: (i) the availability and proper use of resources; (ii) a shared and harmonized
implementation between the countries including the necessary agreements for Transfrontier Protected Areas; (iii) the
identification and implementation of wildlife protection and law-enforcement agreements across borders and between the
Western African and Central African regions; (iv) a stronger balance of conservation initiatives in the major ecotypes of West
Africa; and (v) attention to the specificities of conservation at national, regional and interregional levels (e.g. specific plans for
highly threatened species, decline in wetlands and mangrove ecosystems).
At present, there is no single organisation in WA that can provide all the services needed for the interventions of conservation
in the region. Coordinating the actions for wildlife conservation must therefore also assure the establishment of (i) Institutional,
(ii) technical and scientific and (iii) organisational capacities. It is recommended that the institutional reform involves the
combination of existing institutions: (1) the West Africa Economy and Monetary Union (WAEMU), (2) the West Africa Protected
Areas Network (WAPAN) and (3) a Task-force unit to provide support.
WAEMU is more operational on conservation than ECOWAS. It has the capacity to coordinate the active and proactive
processes described above during implementation by Agencies, NGOs, Institutions and Universities, as demonstrated by their
expertise in other sectors (agriculture, biosecurity). Furthermore, a conservation unit of WAEMU currently supports a
programme of interventions in the WAPOK complex. This strategic approach proposes that this conservation unit is maintained
and extended to undertake the coordination of the governance and implementation of the wildlife strategic approach in WA.
To achieve theses goals, WAEMU must follow the following institutional aspects: (i) promote and coordinate conservation
activities in the countries of WA by complying with the regional strategic approach; (ii) support and harmonize policies and
laws; (iii) boost the convergence plan (strategic plans) for achieving specific and inter-sectorial interventions in favour of
conservation; and (iv) ensure institutional support in the fight against the illegal wildlife trade.
The technical part of the coordination unit must: (i) support technically WAEMU and ECOWAS to fully adopt the principles of
the wildlife strategic approach; (ii) upgrade the strategic approach over time; (iii) coordinate with the regional BIOPAMA
observatory on making informed decisions about directing funds towards key management priorities and institutions.
It is recommended that WAPAN operate on the technical aspects of conservation: (i) promoting, monitoring and developing
the regional strategies; (ii) detecting the needs for planning and managing conservation with regard to landscapes, species
and habitats; (iii) identifying and setting up conservation actions on the ground; (iv) monitoring indicators of the key aspects of
PA conservation and management effectiveness in collaboration with the BIOPAMA project.
The task force, as a support unit of WAEMU and the WAPAN, must ensure:
high levels of technical support in collaboration with IUCN Protected Areas Programme for Central and
West Africa;
organisational and financial / administrative support.
The proposed structure composed by WAEMU, WAPAN and the Task-force does not exist and requires a strong investment
of one or two years at the beginning of the implementation phase to organise the unit, followed by several years to establish
its capacity to intervene in all aspects of conservation in WA. Specifically, WAEMU must evolve from managing priorities for
transborder parks to the promotion and the support of transborder and national landscape interventions and to improving the
status of key and threatened species and habitats. WAPAN (with the West Africa Marines Protected Areas Network WAMPAN) must evolve from its role as a representative body of the directors of PAs to a regional technical support body
coordinating the institutional parties represented by WAEMU and the international technical and financial institutions. The Task
Force must provide technical support and facilitate the mobilization of funds for the conservation initiatives in WA. The task
force should be closely advised by the IUCN Programme on African Protected Areas & Conservation (IUCN-PAPACO). The
IUCN-PAPACO could offer technical support, experience with capacity building with cross-regional initiatives amongst
Final report
Page 72
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
neighbouring countries of West Africa, with the mobilization of specialist groups for analysis in decision support systems, and
as a partner in the BIOPAMA project. The expertise from the EU and other international partners could ensure a consistent
evolution of the strategic approach and help in the mobilization of resources.
The special unit on this strategic approach to conservation in WA (composed by WAEMU WAPAN Task force) could assure
the promotion and the coordination of the following tasks: (1) Dismantling the wildlife traffic networks; (2) Special analysis; (3)
Wildlife protection training; (4) Monitoring and planning; (5) Communication; (6) Biological research; and (7) Management
Governance Training.
5.2.2 Monitoring and planning

The poor performance of wildlife conservation in WA arises from (i) insufficient availability of information on biodiversity, and
(ii) a lack of coordination and inter-sectorial approach in the interventions.
Data on conservation in WA are insufficient, and they are not available, structured and oriented as a decision support system.
This large deficit in WA conservation capacity can be improved by the use of resources and tools made available by two EU
initiatives: (1) the Biodiversity and Protected Areas Management Program (BIOPAMA) (see Box 2) and (2) the Digital
Observatory for Protected Areas (DOPA) (see Box 3). The two initiatives are complementary: (i) BIOPAMA strengthens the
process of collecting, organizing and structuring information as a decision support system at the local, national and regional
levels; (ii) DOPA operates at higher level on informatics infrastructures combined with inter-operable web services connected
with the Regional Reference Information System (RRIS) of BIOPAMA. The two initiatives form a Bottom - Up (BIOPAMA) and
Top-Down (DOPA) integrated information system as a decision support system at all levels of the interventions on
conservation.
BIOPAMA forecasts the establishment of Regional Observatories and the RRIS to improve the access and the availability of
data on biodiversity in the four regions of Africa. The BIOPAMA regional observatory for West and Central Africa should: (1)
collect and organise existing information; (2) boost the collection of information through the use of a form organized for
collecting vital information on the state of conservation, management effectiveness and quality of governance (this last element
is scheduled as a future action).
The periodic update of data scheduled by the BIOPAMA observatory could enable West and Central African regions to have
baselines and trends of the key aspects of their wildlife and its conservation. The objective will be to base the management
effectiveness of wildlife conservation on an information baseline and related benchmarks.

Final report
Page 73
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
5.2.3 Communication
A major effort in the communication of wildlife and environmental issues is needed in Africa which can be usefully informed by
a successful series of awareness campaigns on the illegal wildlife trade in Asia Awareness raising is particularly needed in WA
where there is very little environmental awareness amongst all age groups. Building conservation constituencies to change
attitudes and mobilise political support for conservation will require action at many levels:
Undertake environmental education at both the local level (where the direct threats are occurring) and in the urban
areas (where many of the drivers of threats originate and political decisions are made);
Make greater use of broadcast media and use well known charismatic personalities to deliver conservation messages;
Implicate international NGOs specialized in environmental education to strengthen and stimulate national NGO
environmental education activities;
Stimulate nature clubs in schools to inspire tomorrows conservation leaders;
Create small scale urban natural parks to allow urban community members, who may not have the means to visit or to
participate regularly in nature based recreation, to interact with nature and learn about conservation.
The interventions should be carried-out under the coordination of a special task force with headquarters in WAEMU
(proposition) and the implementation by a competent body or an association of competent bodies.
5.2.4 Biological research

Knowledge on the biology and threats to West African wildlife remains relatively superficial (for instance, a survey is underway
in Togo as we are writing this chapter to ascertain whether or not any chimpanzees still survive in that country). Although
sponsoring scientific research may be outside this documents immediate ambit in this instance, the need for more research
must not be ignored. Apart from further surveys on the distribution of and threats to the most endangered species,
better genetic data is vital for some conservation priority-setting and decision-making.
To take one example, it remains a matter of debate how many species of elephant should be recognized in Africa. The IUCN
Red List (2013) states:
Preliminary genetic evidence suggests that there may be at least two species of African elephants, namely the Savanna
Elephant (Loxodonta africana) and the Forest Elephant (Loxodonta cyclotis). A third species, the West African
Elephant, has also been postulated. The African Elephant Specialist Group believes that more extensive research is
required to support the proposed re-classification. Premature allocation into more than one species may leave hybrids
in an uncertain conservation status (IUCN SSC African Elephant Specialist Group 2003).
The African Elephant Specialist Groups statement of 2003 (AfESG 2003) does not appear to have been updated. It
recommends that:
Further analysis of the existing West African samples should be carried out.
Additional genetic samples from a wider range of sites should be collected and analysed.
There should be a consensus on the significance of the genetic and morphological data between the scientists working
on this issue.
This scientific issue needs urgent resolution, both for conservation priority-setting and for the design of legislation affecting
protection and trade. It is especially important to understand the distinctiveness of West African elephants, which are now so
rare. The Conference of the Parties (CoP) to CITES agreed in their meeting in Bangkok in March 2013 that the DNA testing of
large ivory seizures should be mandatory. For such testing to be of full value the evolutionary genetics of all African
elephants (at the DNA level) needs to be well understood as a matter of urgency.
The interventions should be carried-out under the coordination of a special task force with headquarters in WAEMU
(proposition) and the implementation by a competent body or an association of competent bodies.
5.2.5 Management Governance Training

Final report
Page 74
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
In the WA region, biodiversity conservation activities are mainly in IUCN category II sites (National Parks). Other categories of
protected area and governance systems are largely overlooked for biodiversity conservation. In WA the focus has traditionally
been on highly centralized management with a strong accent on law enforcement which requires substantial resources. Less
than a hundred PAs have permanent staff and resources, and these are generally insufficient. Given the current difficulties and
constraints in terms of resources, policymakers are looking towards a more decentralized and diversified approach to PA
management, including greater community involvement. The new approach requires new skills, particularly for planning and
implementation of cross-sectorial and participatory management for conservation and for managing sustainable use of natural
resources (hunting, fishing, forestry, Non Timber Forest Products). The new approach enables livelihood issues and poverty
reduction to be addressed both in categories IV to VI PAs (where sustainable resource-use is already allowed) and in category
II PAs (national parks, where development activities are conducted in the buffer zone). This change in the conservation
strategic approach represents a major challenge for biodiversity conservation in WA. The new scenarios require a variety of
new management competencies for ensuring the conservation of biodiversity and at the same time to boost the development
process of local populations.
Capacity building in the community model of conservation must be organised for the mid-level (senior site officers) and highlevel officers (senior government officers and other wildlife professionals working in conservation, education and environmental
sectors). The most important capacity-building institutions are: (1) the cole Rgionale dAmnagement intgr des Forts et
Territoires tropicaux (ERAIFT) in Kinshasa DRC and (2) the cole de Faune of Garoua (EFG) in Cameroon. Neither
institution is able to provide direct and specific support for implementation of the wildlife strategic approach in WA. This strategic
approach recommends an intervention to strengthen these institutions for the creation of specific conservation courses for midlevel and high-level officers from WA.
Finally attractive career opportunities in conservation must be created if PAs are to attract and retain quality staff. If capacity
building of staff is not accompanied by attractive career conditions the brightest mangers will continue to seek employment
elsewhere.
The interventions recommended here should be carried-out under the coordination of a special unit with headquarters in
WAEMU (proposition) and the implementation by a competent body or an association of competent bodies.

Final report
Page 75
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
5.3
CONCLUDING RECOMMENDATIONS
Halting or reducing biodiversity loss requires tackling both indirect and direct drivers of biodiversity loss. The direct drivers can
be divided into general and specific. General direct drivers apply across the region of WA and in some cases to all of Africa.
Specific direct drivers are formulated for each of the four major ecotypes: (1) Deserts; (2) Savannas; (3) Forests and (4)
Mangroves (and coastal areas).
5.3.1 Recommendations for tackling key indirect threats to conservation

There are several factors in West Africa that mitigate against effective conservation actions: (1) high political and security
instability; (2) rapid population growth; (3) slow growing economy; (4) permanent food insecurity; (5) significant environmental
fragility; (6) high risks from climate change; and (7) insufficient awareness of civil society on wildlife matters. These issues
generate an increasing demand for natural resources in the ecosystems, consequently and all the protected areas in WA face
pressure from grazing, cultivation, wood harvesting, hunting, fishing, use of water, and extraction of natural medicines. This
results in fragmentation, reduction and isolation of PAs in the landscape with habitat loss, intrusion of human infrastructures
and overhunting.
The government generally does not invest in PAs: the latter are considered as unproductive areas that are reserved (hence
the term reserves) for later exploitation. Generally PAs are not viewed as economic and spatial elements of the landscape.
Finally PA management is inadequately supported. As a result PAs are exploited for illegal grazing, cutting, agriculture, fishing,
and poaching, sometimes with the complicity of PA rangers. In the case of breakdowns in law and order, the PAs easily become
targets for refugees and rebel groups or are used as sources of funding and illegal trading by rebel groups and religious
fundamentalist movements.
Possible global solutions to indirect drivers must be linked to issues of livelihoods, including the sustainable use of natural
resources and the exploitation of non-use values of biodiversity and ecosystems. Focusing exclusively on responses and
values at one level (e.g. provisioning economic services) often hinders responses that could promote wider values (e.g.
livelihood-supporting services and cultural values).
In conclusion, the following actions are recommended for tackling indirect drivers of biodiversity loss:
Managing protected areas and their surroundings for a wide range of sustainable uses. This is extremely important
where, as in West Africa, biodiversity loss is sensitive to changes in key drivers.
Mainstreaming biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services into all the primary sectors such as agriculture,
pastoralism, forestry, fisheries, mining and energy, through an inter-sectorial approach.
Build the capacity of African governmental and nongovernmental institutions to adopt the new specific and intersectorial approaches to conservation (e.g. ERAIFT Regional postgraduate school for integrated management of
natural resources in Sub-Saharan Africa for students and governmental officials from 23 African countries).
Strengthen the institutions with oversight over the environmental and biodiversity impacts of mining, agro-industry,
hydroelectric and other infrastructure projects.
Support government institutions on questions of internal security (police, forestry, wildlife and/or National Parks
departments, and justice) with respect to wildlife law enforcement as part of national programmes and projects financed
by donors.
Capture benefits and reduce costs for local communities, especially the local opportunity costs based on the principle
of equitable sharing.
Increase transparency and accountability of the government and private-sector through the involvement of concerned
stakeholders and rights-holders in decision-making on biodiversity issues.
Public awareness, communication and education.
Promote and facilitate awareness-building in civil society for wildlife management and protection; support the growth
of a network of local non-governmental wildlife organizations in West Africa.

Final report
Page 76
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
5.3.2 Recommendations for tackling general direct threats to conservation

The wide range of ecosystems in West Africa is what gives it such biological richness and diversity. From the African continental
perspective, WA has an enviable natural heritage: (i) largest system of deserts; (ii) most extensive mangrove system; (iii)
highest levels of plant and animal species richness of any forest in Africa; (iv) some of the largest and most beautiful antelopes;
(v) high levels of endemism; (vi) immense importance for over two million migrant birds (Afrotropical - Palearctic and intraAfrican migrations). Yet these natural resources and biodiversity are being degraded rapidly due to the complex political and
socio-economic situation. In particular, WA governments generally do not give enough importance to PA management for two
raisons: (i) inadequate prioritisation of funds; (ii) poor Institutional governance. The results are: (i) a weak planning,
management effectiveness and monitoring of PAs and (ii) illegal wildlife trade and corruption.
Recommendations to tackle general direct drivers of biodiversity decline are as follows:
Availability of funds for PAs
Increase the opportunity for more private sector investment and sponsorship in management, eco-tourism activities
and in valuing ecosystems services (Payments for Ecosystem Services PES).
Plan for long-term financial sustainability for each PA by extending the time frame of interventions and strengthening
the inter-sectorial approach for community support (to reduce threats and, indirectly, surveillance costs).
Institutional governance of PAs
Seek more efficient structures that avoid duplication in natural resource management. This will require creating intersectorial guidelines on natural resource management and biodiversity conservation at national and regional levels
(convergence in legislation, strategies and planning).
Create parastatal bodies, and link the wildlife skills of national and international NGOs, natural resource rights-holders
and the private sector.
Integrate aspects of wildlife and habitat management in national forestry policies for logging concessions.
Illegal wildlife trade and corruption
Seek greater support for law enforcement with better equipped and trained anti-poaching units, and greater integrity of
wildlife officers, police, army and justice.
Specific measures for West Africa Elephant:
Highlight the importance of the WAP complex to ensure the survival of WAs most important elephant population.
Evaluate viable populations, and provide special protection for them (such as for the elephants at national level and
for Zakouma NP in Chad).
Create and strengthen intelligence gathering services, with monetary incentives for useful information leading to
successful anti-poaching results.
Bushmeat
Develop partnerships involving the private sector, communities, and government agencies for forest and wildlife
management in logging concessions. This must include economic alternatives, alternative sources of protein, and
wildlife monitoring.
Illegal live wild animal trade (See common solutions above)
Weak planning, management effectiveness and monitoring of PAs
Improve data collection to build a more effective monitoring and decision support system (objectives indicators
benchmarkers) that facilitates adaptive management and proactivity;
Emphasize the role of stakeholders and natural resource rights-holders, national and international NGOs, private sector
operators and other non-traditional partners with a view to enhancing management effectiveness at the
ecosystem/landscape scale (PAs and buffer zones);

Final report
Page 77
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Strengthen institutional capacities, particularly through greater training opportunities, for protected area management
at the local, national and regional levels.
5.3.3 Recommendations for tackling specific direct threats to conservation

The major recommendation to overcome both general and specific threat to conservation in Western Africa in the medium term
is to invest in a comparatively small number of Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLCs) that have the capacity to conserve
viable populations of the large and charismatic wildlife species within intact and self-sustaining ecosystems. This will greatly
assist in reversing the decline of threatened species and the loss of biodiversity in the region. Our proposals for conserving 14
KLCs are summarised in Table 27 and Figure 14.
On a short-term basis, we further recommend that conservation efforts are focussed on Key Conservation Areas to stem the
wildlife emergency which threatens to bring about the extinction of WA lions and other key wildlife species (Table 27).

Final report
Page 78
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 27. Summery table of Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLCs) and Key Conservation Areas (KCAs), and priorities for WA
N.
KLC
N.
KCA
Deserts Major Ecotypes
1
2
N.
PAs
KLCs and KPAs and priorities

Totals Deserts
2. SMWL1 - Diawling NP Djoudj NP-WL1; Saint-Louis MPA; Ndiael Wildlife Reserve and Keur Momar Sarr Forest Reserve
2,465
33,850
18
119,971
38,000
Savannas Major Ecotypes
Totals Savannas
1. WAPOK: W transborder park; Pendjari NP; Arly Faunal Reserve; Oti Monduri Faunal Reserve and Keran NP
453,065
1. NCA - Termit & Tin Toumma NNR; Ar and Tnr NP; Addax Sanctuary NNR; Ouadi Rim-Ouad NP; Fada Archei NP; Tassili-n-Ajjer NP and Ahaggar NP
3. MWS - Banc d'Arguin NP; Rserve Intgrale de Cap Blanc NNR and Dakhla NP
13
Surface
km2
416,750
2. CM: Como NP Mole NP
16,571
3. NBBBFF: Niokolo Koba NP - Badiar NP- Bafing NP Boucle du Baoul NP Falm area NC Fouta Djalon area NC
25,000
4. GS: Gourma Elephant NP, Sahel Faunal Reserve and Inner Niger IBA
26,500
5. LION KCAs: Kainii Lake NP and Yankari NP
8,200
6. VC: Volta Trans-Border Ecosystem Wildlife
3,700
Avoid the decline of wetlands
(1-3,000)
17
37,395
1. CKTGTF: Cross River NP; Korup NP; Mont Cameroon; Tamakanda NP; Gashaka-Gumti NP; Tchabel Mbabo Wildlife Reserve and Faro NP
19,100
2. TGS: Ta NP; Nzo Faunal Reserve; Grebo National Forest; Sapo NP
7,700
3. MN: Nimba Mountains Strict Nature Reserve and East and West Nimba Nature Reserve in Liberia
415
4. GLF-MWWZ: Gola- Lofa - Foya Forest Reserves Trans-border Park; Mano NF, Wologizi NF; Wonegizi NF and Ziama MAB
4,400
7
1
8
Forests Major Ecotypes

9
10
11
12

Final report
Totals Forests
Page 79
N.
KLC
N.
KCA
13
2
5. OKKPS: Outamba-Kilimi NP and Forest Reserves Kuru Hill (in Sierra Leone) and Pinselli and Soya (in Guinea)
1,100
6. Forest KCAs: Ankasa NP; Bia NP
680
New or larger KLC and KCA (Liberia, Ghana, Nigeria)
(3-5,000)
9,592
1. CCCBT: Rio Cacheu Mangroves NC; Lagoas de Cufada NC; Rio Grande de Buba NC; Cantanhez Forest NC and Iles Tristao NC
4,780
2. Mangroves KCAs: Sherbro et Turtles Islands NC; Saloum Delta NP; Basse Casamance NP; Keta Lagoon Ramsar site; Songor Lagoon NC
3,062
New or larger KLC and KCA (Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Senegal, Guinea)
(1,5-2,000)
Mangroves/Coastal Major Ecotypes

14
3
N.
PAs
KLCs and KPAs and priorities
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Surface
km2
Totals Mangroves
Totals West Africa

Final report
51
620,000
Page 80
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Figure 14. Summery figure of West Africa - Main KLCs and KCAs, Wetlands and conservation priorities by Ecotypes
A) Deserts, yellow color); (B) Savannas, orange color; (C) Forests green color and (D) Mangroves/Coastal, blue color; WL Number - priority of intervention in Wetlands (map sources: Climate
Change and Protected Areas in West Africa CCPAWA, UNEP - World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 2010; specific elaboration)

Final report
Page 81
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
The KLC and KCA protected area approach must be integrated with recommendations for specific direct drivers formulated for
each of the four major ecotypes: (1) Deserts; (2) Savannas; (3) Forests and (4) Mangroves (and coastal areas).
5.3.3.1
Apply a species approach for Scimitar Oryx, Saharan cheetah, Dama Gazelle, Addax
Adopt synergistically in situ and ex-situ conservation techniques in order to have the greatest probability
of effective conservation.
Be flexible enough to intervene in areas and countries as soon as security conditions allow.
Save the habitat in which the species can live and reproduce (with PAs and KLCs).
Preserve and improve the genetic heritage (DNA), under the responsibility of WAZA, with a view to future
reintroduction of the species in their natural habitats. It is essential that these habitats remain occupied
by the conservation services until such time as the reintroductions can take place.
Exploit every possibility in land surveys (including information from the military) for better protection (and
knowledge) of wildlife.
5.3.3.2
Savannas
Establish a convergence plan of conservation interventions in this ecotype.

Save the WAP(OK) ecosystem, the only functional ecological complex to have a potential for
regeneration and reintroduction of species in the savanna ecotype.
Preserve the most important ecological blocks of protected areas: (i) Comoe Mole (Cte dIvoire and
Ghana); (ii) Niokolo - Badiar - Bafing Faleme Fouta Djalon (Guinea, Mali, Senegal) and (iii) Gourma
Elephant and Sahel Faunal Reserve (Mali and Burkina Faso) even if wildlife densities are low.
Establish transborder corridors between major ecological blocks such the Volta Trans-Border Ecosystem
Wildlife Corridors between Burkina Faso and Ghana.
Support cross-border activities such as in WAPO complex (or WAPOK with the inclusion of Park Keran)
or new management initiatives such as the Volta Trans-Border Ecosystem Wildlife Corridors between
Burkina Faso and Ghana.
5.3.3.3
Deserts
Forests
Concentrate actions in the principal PAs, with equal priority for all the sites given their biological diversity
and richness.
Create new or enlarged national protected areas (Liberia, Ghana and Nigeria) in the important forest
blocks to complement the overall biodiversity protection of this ecotype. Fill in information gaps (and
scientific knowledge) and establish priorities, objectives, indicators and benchmarks for conservation
actions.
Reduce threats to PAs by adopting a systems approach to ensure inter-sectorial policy and development
activities, analysis of environmental impacts, the valuing of ecosystem services and the respect of
conservation principles.
Determine the most appropriate conservation actions for threatened species (by the establishment of
PHVA analysis if necessary), the preservation of specific habitats inside or outside PAs, and the
combination of in-situ and ex-situ conservation.
Create the political will to tackle conservation problems.

Final report
Page 82
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
5.3.3.4
Mangroves
Apply legislations and international conventions related to mangroves, and adopt adequate policies and
inter-sectorial approaches for implementation of actions.
Concentrate actions in priority PAs and community mangrove forests.
Create new or enlarged national protected areas (Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Senegal, and Guinea)
and develop an integrated PA and Reserve network of coastal and marine areas encompassing
mangrove and other coastal habitats. Collaborate with national and international NGOs and empowered
local communities to maintain and monitor the community mangrove areas.
Develop an integrated PAs and Reserves network of coastal and marine areas encompassing mangrove
and other coastal habitats.
Establish a fund to maintain sustainable economies that are based on the ecologically sustainable
management of mangroves and coastal habitats.
Determine the most appropriate research and conservation actions for improving management
effectiveness of PAs and mangrove forests and related threatened species.

Final report
Page 83
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
6.
ANNEXES
6.1
ANNEX 1. WEST AFRICA DATA MISCELLANEOUS
Table 28. Population, Annual Growth (%) and Estimated doubling time of population of WA
Country
July 1, 2013 projection
Benin
Burkina Faso
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Ivory Coast
Liberia
Mali
Mauritania
Niger
Nigeria
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Togo
Total
9 742 000
17 323 000
1 794 000
26 441 000
11 861 000
1 699 000
23 919 000
3 881 000
16 678 000
3 461 000
17 493 000
177 096 000
13 567 000
5 823 000
6 675 000
337 453 000
Average relative
annual growth (%)
3,24
3,28
2,75
2,56
3,09
2,60
3,09
2,10
3,29
2,58
3,85
3,24
3,06
1,84
2,88
2,90
Estimated doubling
time (Years)
22
21
26
27
23
27
23
33
21
27
18
22
23
38
24
25
Table 29. CITES, Countries currently subject to a recommendation to suspend trade (09/09/2013)
Country
Benin
Cameroon
Cte d'Ivoire
Guinea
Notification
No. 2013/013 (02/05/2013)
No. 2013/013 (02/05/2013)
No. 2013/013 (02/05/2013)
No. 2013/013 (02/05/2013)
No. 2013/017 (16/05/2013)
Basis
Significant trade
Significant trade
Significant trade
Significant trade
Compliance and
enforcement
Mali
No. 2013/013 (02/05/2013)
Significant trade
Mauritania
Niger
No. 2004/055 (30/07/2004)

No. 2013/013 (02/05/2013)
No. 2013/013 (02/05/2013)
No. 2013/013 (02/05/2013)
National legislation
Significant trade
Significant trade
Significant trade
Togo
Common name
Emperor Scorpion
hippopotamus
Black crowned-crane
Scope
Pandinus imperator
Hippopotamus amphibius
Pericopsis elata
Balearica pavonina
Valid from
2 May 2013
7 September 2012
7 September 2012
2 May 2013
All commercial trade
16 May 2013
Cape Parrots
Poicephalus robustus
Mali Spiny-tailed Lizard Uromastyx dispar
All commercial trade
African chameleon
Chamaeleo africanus
Cape Parrots
Poicephalus robustus
Emperor Scorpion
Pandinus imperator

Final report
9 July 2001
22 August 2008
30 July 2004
30 July 2004
9 July 2001
2 May 2013
Page 84
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 30. The biodiversity features of West Africa

Biodiversity
Mammals
Country
Benin
Burkina Faso
Cape Verde
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Cte d'Ivoire
Liberia
Mali
Mauritania
Niger
Nigeria
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Togo
AII countries
Area km2
11 2620
2 740 00
4 030
11 303
238 540
245 860
36 120
322 460
111 370
1 240 190
1 025 520
1 267 000
923 770
196 720
71 740
56 790
6 138 030
Endemic
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
4
0
0
0
7
Total
188
147
5
117
222
190
108
230
193
137
61
131
274
192
147
196
Birds
Endemic
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
9
Plants
Total
503
447
87
666
447
676
628
454
536
561
459
433
848
546
581
551
Endemic
0
86
Not known
43
88
12
62
103
11
Not known
Not known
205
26
74
Not known
710
Total
2 500
1 100
774
974
3 725
3 000
1 000
3 660
2 200
1 741
1 100
1 460
4 715
2 086
2 090
3 085
Threat % of
land
transformed
Response %
of land
protected
9
48
42
17
14
7
25
30
15
3
2
34
47
38
7
16%
6
12
0
5
0
6
1
4
0
8
4
11
2
8
4%
Note: Sources: Biodiversity information taken from Groombridge and Jenkins (2002). Calculation of the proportion of transformed land was based on the
reclassification by Hoekstra and others (2005) of the GLC3 Global Landcover Classification (Mayaux and others 2004). Hoekstra and others (2005) defined
four classes of transformed land: 1) Artificial surfaces and associated areas, 2) Cultivated and managed areas, 3) Mosaic: cropland/treecover, and 4) Mosaic:
cropland/ other natural vegetation. In this chapter, all four classes have been integrated into the calculation of the proportion of transformed land. The area
covered by classes 3 and 4 was divided by two, assuming that this reflects their mosaic character with a certain proportion of land remaining untransformed.
Note that this method does not account for the degree of fragmentation within the mosaic landcover classes. Data on protected areas (IUCN class I-V) were
obtained from WRI 2005

Final report
Page 85
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 31. International protected areas in West Africa

Biosphere reserve
World heritage sites
RAMSAR sites
Important Bird Areas
Country
Area
Area
Area
Number
Number
Km
Km
Km
Benin
1
6 230
0
0
2
1 390
Burkina Faso
1
1 860
0
0
3
2 990
Cape Verde
Cte dIvoire
2
14 800
3
15 040
1
190
Gambia
0
0
0
0
1
200
Ghana
1
80
0
0
6
1 780
Guinea
2
1 330
1
13
6
2 250
Guinea-Bissau
1
1 100
0
0
1
390
Liberia
0
0
0
0
0
0
Mali
1
23 490
1
4 000
3
1 620
Mauritania
0
1
12 000
2
12 310
Niger
2
251 280
2
79 687
4
7 150
Nigeria
1
<1
0
0
1
580
Senegal
3
10 940
2
9 290
4
1 030
Sierra Leone
0
0
0
1
2 950
Togo
0
0
0
0
2
1 940
Total
15
311 110
10
120 030
37
36 740
Note: Source: Data from Wetlands International undated, UNESCO 2006a, UNESCO 2006b
Number

Final report
Number
6
10
15
14
13
40
18
8
9
17
24
15
27
17
10
4
Area
Km
14 901
16 279
4 685
23 221
585
16 076
7 078
7 578
6 302
28 692
17 906
83 431
32 468
25 799
6 149
5 085
296 235
Endemic
Bird
Areas
Number
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
4
1
1
0
12
Page 86
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 32. Biome and ecotype of the WA countries

Biome
Ecotypes
Benin
Burkina
Faso
Cte
d'Ivoire
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
GuineaBissau
Liberia
Mali
Mauritania
Niger
Nigeria
Senegal
Sierra
Leone
Togo
A. Deserts
Realms: Palearctic
Sahara Desert
Deserts and xeric
shrubland
Tropical
subtropical
grasslands,
savannas,
shrublands
and
Atlantic coast
South Saharan steppe and
woodlands
West Saharan montane xeric
woodlands
B. Savannas
Sahelian Acacia savanna
West Sudanian savanna
and
Montane Grasslands
and Shrublands
Guinean
mosaic
forest-savanna
Jos Plateau forest-grassland

mosaic
C. Forests
Guinean Montane Forests
Western Guinean lowland
forests
Eastern Guinean forests
Tropical
and
subtropical
moist
broadleaf Forests
Nigerian lowland forests

Cameroonian
Highlands
forests
Cross-Sanaga-Bioko coastal
forests
Realms: Afrotropics
Niger Delta swamp forests

Cross-Niger transition forests
D. Mangroves
Mangroves
Guinean Mangroves

Final report
Page 87
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Table 33. WA, Countries data, Source: Africa Development Indicators

WB Indicators
Population growth (annual %)
Population in the largest city (% of urban population)
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 TREND
3.1
3.3
3.5
3.5
3.4
3.2
3.0
2.8
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.1
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.1
3.1
3.0
3.0
2.9
2.8
2.8
30.6 30.4 30.0 29.2 28.4 27.8 27.3 26.9 26.5 26.1 25.7 25.1 24.5 24.0 23.4 23.0 22.6 22.2 21.9 21.7 21.6 21.4
GDP growth (annual %)
9.0
4.2
3.0
5.8
2.0
6.0
4.3
5.7
4.0
5.3
4.9
6.2
4.4
3.9
3.1
2.9
3.8
4.6
5.0
2.7
2.6
3.5
GDP per capita growth (annual %)
5.6
0.8
-0.6
2.2
-1.4
2.7
1.3
2.8
1.1
2.4
1.8
3.0
1.2
0.6
-0.1
-0.3
0.6
1.5
2.0
-0.3
-0.3
0.7
GNI growth (annual %)
2.9
4.2
5.2
2.6
4.7
4.6
5.4
5.4
3.7
4.8
5.7
5.4
4.5
4.2
2.9
2.5
3.2
2.9
2.5
2.7
3.1
2.9
2.8
3.0 36.0
5.1
5.1
5.1
4.3
3.9
4.0
4.0
4.7
4.6
4.8
4.5
Corruption Perceptions Index (score)

International tourism, expenditures (% of total imports)
3rd pillar: Macroeconomic stability
4.9
Terrestrial protected areas (% of total surface area)
23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8
Forest area (% of land area)
51.1 50.5 49.8 49.2 48.6 48.0 47.4 46.7 46.1 45.5 44.9 44.4 44.0 43.6 43.1 42.7 42.2 41.8 41.3 40.9 40.4 40.0
Agricultural land (% of land area)
20.1 20.2 20.4 20.6 21.3 22.3 24.0 25.6 27.0 27.6 28.3 29.0 29.8 30.7 31.6 31.2 29.6 29.6 30.6 29.3 30.1 30.4
Population density (people per km of land area)
42.3 43.8 45.3 46.9 48.5 50.1 51.6 53.1 54.6 56.1 57.8 59.6 61.5 63.5 65.6 67.7 69.8 71.9 74.1 76.3 78.5 80.7

Final report
Page 88
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
7.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Documents
A.J. Hartley, A. Nelson, P. Mayaux and J-M. Grgoire, 2007: The Assessment of African Protected Areas, A
characterisation of biodiversity value, ecosystems and threats to inform the effective allocation of conservation
funding
AfDB, 2012, Africa s demographic trends
AfDB, 2013, West Africa monitor,
African Elephant Database, the African Elephant Status Report from 1995 to 2012
African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement
Afrique de l'Ouest Communaut europenne Document de stratgie rgionale et Program indicatif rgional
pour la priode 2008 2013
Arnold van Kreveld and Ingrid Roerhorst (Ulucus Consultants), 2009: Great Ape & logging, WWF
Atelier rgional dlaboration dun plan daction durgence de lutte anti braconnage dans le complexe WAPO
Dave Armstrong,2012: Great Apes threatened again, this time by habitat loss
David BRUGIERE, Bertrand CHARDONNET, Paul SCHOLTE, 2014: Pattern and correlates of mammal
extinction as a measurement of conservation effectiveness of protected areas in west and central Africa,
Preliminary results V1.2
Dr. I. Herbinger; Wild Chimpanzee Foundation, 2006: Report on Education and Awareness Activities to
improve the protection of wild chimpanzees in West Africa
Dr. Philipp Henschel, PLOS ONE, 2014: The lion in West Africa is critically endangered, Pantheras Lion
Program Survey
Emily Corcoran, Corinna Ravilious, Mike Skuja, UNEP-Regional Seas Program/UNEP-WCMC, 2007:
Mangroves of Western and Central Africa
GRASP, 2009: The UNEP Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), the UNEP/UNESCO Great Apes Survival
Partnership (GRASP) and the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA) have joined hands to
declare 2009 the Year of the Gorilla (YoG).
Heather E. Eves, colleagues: Bushmeat a wildlife crisis in west and central Africa and around the world,
Bushmeat Cris Task Force
IUCN SSC Cat Specialist Group, February 2006: Conservation strategy for the lion in West and Central africa,
J. F. Oates , 1999: Myth and reality in the rain forest, how conservation strategies are failing in West Africa
J. F. Oates and col. 2007, IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group and Conservation International: Regional
Action Plan for the Conservation of the Cross River Gorilla (Gorilla gorilla diehli)
Luc MATHOT, 2013: TRAFIC DIVOIRE : Problmes et solutions, Leons des expriences de EAGLE, Eco
Activists for Governance and Law Enforcement
Office des Nations Unies Contre la Drogue et le Crime, 2012: Compilation doutils pour lanalyse de la
criminalit lie aux espces sauvages et aux forts, office des Nations Unies contre la drogue et le crime
Philippe Bouche, Iain Douglas-Hamilton, George Wittemyer, Aime J. Nianogo, Jean-Louis Doucet, Philippe
Lejeune, Cedric Vermeulen, 2011: Will Elephants Soon Disappear from West African Savannas?
PNUD, Projet WAPO, 2012: Inventaire arien de lcosystme W-Arly-Pendjari Mai Juin 2012
PNUD, Projet WAPO, 2013: Inventaire pdestre de la grande faune de lcosystme W Arly Pendjari
Program CITES-MIKE, 2013: Afrique de lOuest runion du comit sous-regional de pilotage, Ouagadougou,
Burkina Faso, 29-30 mai 2013
R.C. Beudels, P. Devillers, R-M. Lafontaine, J. Devillers-Terschuren, M-O. Beudels (Editors). CMS SSA
Concerted Action. 2d edition. CMS Technical Series Publication N11, 2005. UNEP/CMS: Sahelo-Saharan
Antelopes. Status and Perspectives. Report on the conservation status of the six Sahelo-Saharan Antelopes
Volume 5
WEST AFRICA
Rebecca Kormos, Christophe Boesch, Mohamed I. Bakarr and Thomas M. Butynski, 2003: Regional Action
Plan for the Conservation of Chimpanzees in West Africa
Russell A. Mittermeier, Christoph Schwitzer, Anthony B. Rylands, Lucy A. Taylor, Federica Chiozza, Elizabeth
A. Williamson and Janette Wallis, 2012: PRIMATES IN PERIL, The Worlds 25 Most Endangered Primates,
20122014
Tom Milliken,: ETIS and the West African Sub-region, 2013 CITES MIKE West African Sub-regional Steering
Committee Meeting Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso 29 30 May 2013
Tweh Clement et al., 2012: Conservation status of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) and other large
mammals across Liberia: results from a nationwide survey, Oryx - The International Journal of Conservation
UICN, 2003: Plan daction pour la gestion des lphants des corridors transfrontaliers dAfrique de lOuest
UICN, 2005 : Plan daction pour la gestion des lphants des corridors transfrontaliers dAfrique de lOuest
UICN, 2005: Stratgie pour la conservation des lphants de lAfrique de lOuest
Workshop Report, Shumba Valley Lodge, South Africa, August 2001: Global Cheetah, Conservation Action
Plan
Yves Hausser Consultant UICN, Janvier 2013: Evaluation rgionale des besoins et des formations disponibles
pour les professionnels des aires protges dAfrique de louest et du centre synthse des tudes existantes
et recommandations
Zwarts, L. et al (2009). Living on the Edge: Wetlands and Birds in a Changing Sahel. KNNV Publishing, Zeist,
The Netherlands
Websites
http://bioval.jrc.ec.europa.eu/APAAT/fr/
http://ehabitat-wps.jrc.ec.europa.eu/dopa_explorer/#
http://worldwildlife.org/pages/wildfinder
http://www.afdb.org/
http://www.cheetah.org/ cheetah conservation fund
http://www.cheetahandwilddog.org
http://www.earthtimes.org/conservation/great-apes-threatened-time-habitatloss/2203/#sthash.1V0pgJxZ.dpuf
http://www.earthtimes.org/conservation/great-apes-threatened-time-habitatloss/2203/#q6cfuCwkQQL1gvyV.99
http://www.saharaconservation.org sahara conservation fund
http://www.unep.org/grasp/Resources/fact.asp
http://www.unep-aewa.org
http://www.un-grasp.org
http://www.yog2009.org

Final report
Page 90
Volume 6
STRATEGIC APPROACH TO WILDLIFE CONSERVATION IN AFRICA
ADDITIONNAL SECTIONS:
ELEPHANTS
RHINOS
TRADE
MADAGASCAR
MIGRATORY BIRDS
OTHER TAXA
Northern White Rhinos in the Garamba National Park and World Heritage Site, Democratic Republic of Congo. The last
sighting in the Park was in 2007, with the last sighting anywhere reported from the Domaine de Chasse in 2012. The subspecies is now almost certainly extinct in the wild, with only 5 surviving in captivity Kes and Fraser Smith

Final report
Page 1
Volume 6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1. INTER-REGIONAL SECTION ON ELEPHANTS ........................................................................................ 6
1.1
1.2
1.2.1
1.2.2
1.2.3
1.3
1.4
1.4.1
1.4.2
1.4.3
1.4.4
1.4.5
1.4.6
1.5
1.5.1
1.5.2
STATUS: DISTRIBUTION AND NUMBERS ......................................................................................................................... 8

THREATS AND TRENDS .............................................................................................................................................. 10
Illegal killing ............................................................................................................................................................................ 10
Illegal trade ............................................................................................................................................................................. 11
Factors associated with poaching and the ivory trade ........................................................................................................... 12
CONSERVATION PLANNING AND COORDINATION .......................................................................................................... 13

ACTION BEING TAKEN ................................................................................................................................................ 15
Awareness raising .................................................................................................................................................................. 15
Funds dedicated to Elephant Conservation ........................................................................................................................... 16
Monitoring ............................................................................................................................................................................... 17
Law enforcement .................................................................................................................................................................... 18
Forensic investigation to determine the provenance of seized ivory...................................................................................... 20
Human-elephant conflict ......................................................................................................................................................... 21
ACTIONS RECOMMENDED FOR EU SUPPORT ............................................................................................................... 22
Urgent and short term measures ............................................................................................................................................ 22

Medium and long term measures ........................................................................................................................................... 25
SECTION 2. INTER-REGIONAL SECTION ON RHINOS .............................................................................................. 29

2.1
2.2
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.2.3
2.3
2.4
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.4.3
2.4.4
2.4.5
2.4.6
2.4.7
2.5
2.5.1
2.5.2
DISTRIBUTION AND STATUS........................................................................................................................................ 30

THREATS AND TRENDS .............................................................................................................................................. 31
Illegal killing ............................................................................................................................................................................ 31
Illegal trade ............................................................................................................................................................................. 32
Other threats........................................................................................................................................................................... 33
CONSERVATION PLANNING AND COORDINATION .......................................................................................................... 33

ACTION BEING TAKEN ................................................................................................................................................ 35
Awareness raising .................................................................................................................................................................. 35
Funds dedicated to Rhino Conservation ................................................................................................................................ 35
Monitoring and the biological management of metapopulations ............................................................................................ 36
Law enforcement .................................................................................................................................................................... 36
Forensic investigation to determine the provenance of seized rhino horn ............................................................................. 38
Consumptive utilisation........................................................................................................................................................... 39
Rhino Impact Bonds ............................................................................................................................................................... 41

Urgent and short term measures ............................................................................................................................................ 42
Medium and long term measures ........................................................................................................................................... 42
SECTION 3. WILDLIFE TRADE ..................................................................................................................................... 44

3.1
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.3
3.2.4
3.2.5
3.2.6
3.2.7
3.3
3.3.1
3.3.2
3.3.3
3.3.4
3.4
3.5
3.5.1
3.5.2
3.5.3
FUNDAMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................................................................................. 47

INTERNATIONAL TRADE REGULATORS AND MONITORS .................................................................................................. 47
ICCWC ................................................................................................................................................................................... 47
CITES ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 48
INTERPOL.............................................................................................................................................................................. 49
UNODC .................................................................................................................................................................................. 50
World Bank ............................................................................................................................................................................. 51
WCO ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 52
TRAFFIC ................................................................................................................................................................................ 52
INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE TO RECENT TRENDS ......................................................................................................... 53

Major reports .......................................................................................................................................................................... 53
Policy commitments................................................................................................................................................................ 53
Conferences and Meetings .................................................................................................................................................... 55
Programmatic and funding commitments ............................................................................................................................... 56
STRATEGIC OPTIONS FOR COMBATING ILLICIT TRADE ................................................................................................... 57

STRATEGY 1: STRENGTHENING POLICIES AND LAWS.................................................................................................... 58
Enact poaching and wildlife trafficking as serious crimes .................................................................................................... 58
Adopt a zero tolerance policy on corruption ........................................................................................................................... 58
Ensure the judiciary imposes effective deterrent penalties .................................................................................................... 58

Final report
Page 2
Volume 6
3.5.4
3.6
Expand the agenda of National Security Committees ............................................................................................................ 59
STRATEGY 2: STOPPING THE KILLING ......................................................................................................................... 59
3.6.1
3.6.2
3.6.3
3.6.4
3.6.5
3.7
Strengthen protection forces .................................................................................................................................................. 59

Best practice ........................................................................................................................................................................... 60
Monitor law enforcement performance and effectiveness ...................................................................................................... 61
Form Public Private Security Partnerships ............................................................................................................................. 62
Promote community development .......................................................................................................................................... 62
STRATEGY 3: STOPPING THE TRAFFICKING ................................................................................................................. 62
3.7.1
3.7.2
3.7.3
3.7.4
3.7.5
3.8
Promote international coordination in wildlife law enforcement ............................................................................................. 63

Facilitate interagency networking within Africa....................................................................................................................... 63
Form national interagency coordination bodies ..................................................................................................................... 65
Develop information management and monitoring systems .................................................................................................. 66
Apply specialised tools ........................................................................................................................................................... 67
STRATEGY 4: STOPPING THE DEMAND ........................................................................................................................ 69
3.8.1
3.8.2
3.9
Educate and influence consumers ......................................................................................................................................... 69

Other measures ...................................................................................................................................................................... 69
3.9.1
3.9.2
3.9.3
3.9.4
Action to strengthen policies and laws ................................................................................................................................... 70

Action to Stop the Killing ........................................................................................................................................................ 70
Action to Stop the Trafficking ................................................................................................................................................. 71
Action to Stop the Demand .................................................................................................................................................... 74
SECTION 4. MADAGASCAR ......................................................................................................................................... 76

4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
SPECIAL FEATURES OF MADAGASCAR ........................................................................................................................ 76

CONSERVATION ISSUES AND CHALLENGES ................................................................................................................. 79
ONGOING CONSERVATION EFFORTS ........................................................................................................................... 81
LESSONS LEARNED AND PROMISING APPROACHES ...................................................................................................... 86
INDICATIVE CONSERVATION ACTIONS NEEDED ............................................................................................................ 86
SECTION 5. PRIORITIES FOR BIRD CONSERVATION .............................................................................................. 91

5.1
THREATS AND ISSUES FOR AFRICAN BIRDS ................................................................................................................ 91

Europes vanishing migrant birds ........................................................................................................................................... 91
Declining Vultures................................................................................................................................................................... 92
Birds in wildlife traffic .............................................................................................................................................................. 93
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.2
CURRENT CONSERVATION EFFORTS .......................................................................................................................... 93
5.2.1
5.2.2
5.3
Identification of EBAs and IBAs .............................................................................................................................................. 93

EU concern for African Birds .................................................................................................................................................. 94
INDICATIVE ACTIONS RECOMMENDED FOR EU INTERVENTION...................................................................................... 95
5.3.1
5.3.2
Synergy between development and environment agendas ................................................................................................... 95

Key Sites and habitats ............................................................................................................................................................ 95
ANNEXE. NOTES ON DISTRIBUTION AND STATUS OF OTHER TAXA ................................................................... 99
5.4 99
5.5 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................................. 99
5.6
5.7
5.8
5.9
5.10
5.11
5.12
5.13
5.14
DISTRIBUTION OF PLANTS ....................................................................................................................................... 100

DISTRIBUTION OF MAMMALS .................................................................................................................................... 101
DISTRIBUTION OF BIRDS .......................................................................................................................................... 101
LION - KING OF THE BEASTS ..................................................................................................................................... 102
OTHER LARGE CARNIVORES .................................................................................................................................... 103
AFRICAN GREAT APES ............................................................................................................................................ 103
DISTRIBUTION OF FISH AND AMPHIBIA ...................................................................................................................... 104
DISTRIBUTION OF INSECTS ...................................................................................................................................... 105
PRIORITIZING SITES FOR CONSERVATION .................................................................................................................. 106
5.14.1
5.14.2
5.15
Biodiversity hotspots Approach ....................................................................................................................................... 107

Sites of biological irreplaceability..................................................................................................................................... 108
HOW CAN EU ASSIST CONSERVATION OF LESS PROFILED TAXA? ................................................................................ 109

Final report
Page 3
Volume 6
List of figures
Figure 1. African elephant range................................................................................................................................................ 9
Figure 2. Brookesia chameleons ............................................................................................................................................. 77
Figure 3. Map of protected areas managed as part of the Madagascar National Parks Network (IUCN categories I-IV) and
remaining forest habitat ........................................................................................................................................................... 83
Figure 4. The Protected Areas system of Madagascar ............................................................................................................ 84
Figure 5. The Indri (Indri indri) ................................................................................................................................................. 90
Figure 6. Main threats causing loss of birds ............................................................................................................................ 91
Figure 7. Declines of long distance versus short distance migrant birds ................................................................................. 92
Figure 8. Distribution of EBAs .................................................................................................................................................. 93
Figure 9. 1,238 IBAs identified in Africa ................................................................................................................................... 94
Figure 10. Location of more than 400 IBAs with Local Conservation Groups (shown in blue) ................................................ 97
Figure 11. Location of the 75 IBAs in danger in Africa (Source: BirdLife International) ........................................................... 97
Figure 12. Vegetation zones .................................................................................................................................................... 99
Figure 13. Wetlands of Africa ................................................................................................................................................... 99
Figure 14. Fifteen Centres of plant diversity in Africa (from Davis et al.) ............................................................................... 100
Figure 15. Species richness of all mammals ......................................................................................................................... 101
Figure 16. Species richness of primates ................................................................................................................................ 101
Figure 17. Bird richness (Source: BirdLife International) ....................................................................................................... 101
Figure 18. Shrinking range of lion (Source: Kingdon 1997) ................................................................................................... 102
Figure 19. Remaining lion populations in West Africa (Source Panthera) ............................................................................. 102
Figure 20. Remaining range of African cheetah .................................................................................................................... 103
Figure 21. Remaining range of Hunting dog .......................................................................................................................... 103
Figure 22. Distribution of African Great Apes ........................................................................................................................ 104
Figure 23. Amphibian Richness ............................................................................................................................................. 104
Figure 24. Fish richness in West Africa ................................................................................................................................. 105
Figure 26. Graphium richness................................................................................................................................................ 105
Figure 25. Butterfly richness .................................................................................................................................................. 105
Figure 27. Priority areas for swallowtails ............................................................................................................................... 106
Figure 28. Global 200 Ecoregions of sub-Saharan Africa...................................................................................................... 106
Figure 29. Distribution of African Hotspots ............................................................................................................................ 107
Figure 30. Sites of biological irreplaceability in Africa ............................................................................................................ 108
Figure 31. Overlap of the most irreplaceable sites with the WH sites. ................................................................................... 109

Final report
Page 4
Volume 6
List of tables
Table 1. African Elephant numbers: continental and regional totals (2012/3) ........................................................................... 8
Table 2. List of African Elephant Action Plans ......................................................................................................................... 14
Table 3. African Rhino numbers: continental and regional totals (31 December 2012) ........................................................... 31
Table 4. Reported numbers of white and black rhinos poached in Africa (from 2010 to 30 June 2014) ................................. 32
Table 5. List of Rhino Action Plans by region and country ...................................................................................................... 34
Table 6. White Rhino legal hunting data (South Africa) ........................................................................................................... 39
Table 7. Levels of species richness, endemism and threatened terrestrial and freshwater species in Madagascar ............... 78
Table 8. Protected Areas within the Madagascar National Parks Network (IUCN categories I, II and IV: Strict Nature
Reserve/SNR, National Park/NP, Special Reserve/SR). In some cases two protected areas are managed together in one
management unit. .................................................................................................................................................................... 81
Table 9. Protected Area coverage in Madagascar ................................................................................................................... 85
Table 10. Major current and planned biodiversity conservation programs in Madagascar ...................................................... 85
List of boxes
Box 1. African Elephant Summit (December 2013) ................................................................................................................. 14
Box 2. Ivory DNA Analysis ....................................................................................................................................................... 21
Box 3. Forensic investigation of ivory seizures ........................................................................................................................ 23
Box 4. How South Africa fights pseudo-hunting....................................................................................................................... 33
Box 5. The value of the illegal wildlife trade ............................................................................................................................. 46
Box 6. The MIKES Law Enforcement Capacity Assessment Benchmarks .............................................................................. 61

Final report
Page 5
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
SECTION 1. INTER-REGIONAL SECTION ON ELEPHANTS

ACRONYMS
AEAP
AECF
AED
AEF
AEFSC
AES
AESR
AfESG
ANPN
AsRSG
AWF
CAR
CARPE
CGI
CITES
CMS
CODIS
CoP
DG DEVCO
DRC
DNA
FBI
EC
ECF
EDF
ETIS
EU
EUR
GEF
HEC
HWC
ICCWC
IFAW
IGO
IUCN
KLC
KWS
LRA
MIKE
MIKES
NGO
NIP
PA
PAEAS
PIKE
RhODIS
RIP
SAR
SC
SPANEST
SSC
STE
ToR
TRAFFIC
UK
African Elephant Action Plan

African Elephant Conservation Fund
African Elephant Database
African Elephant Fund
African Elephant Fund Steering Committee
African Elephant Summit
African Elephant Status Report
African Elephant Specialist Group (of SSC)
Agence Nationale des Parcs Nationaux (Gabon)
Asian Rhino Specialist Group
Central African Regional Programme for the Environment
Clinton Global Initiative
Combined DNA Index System
EC Directorate General for Development and Cooperation
Federal Bureau of Investigation
European Commission
Elephant Crisis Fund
European Union
Euro
Global Environment Facility
Lords Resistance Army
National Indicative Programme
Protected Area
Pan African Elephant Aerial Survey
Proportion of Illegally Killed Elephants
Regional Indicative Programme
Special Administrative Region
Steering Committee
Strengthening the PA Network in Southern Tanzania
Save The Elephants
Terms of Reference
United Kingdom

Final report
Page 6
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
UNDP
UNEP
UNODC
US(A)
USAID
USFWS
VGL
WAPOK
WCN
WCS
WEN
WWF

United Nations Environmental Programme
US Fish and Wildlife Service
W-Arly-Pendjari-Oti Mandori-Kran
Wildlife Conservation Network

Final report
Page 7
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
Of all Africas iconic flagship species, few if any have greater relevance to the conservation of the continents overall wildlife
and wilderness than the elephant. Its importance, whether viewed from an economic perspective (both positive and negative)
or an ecological one (as a habitat engineer), is so well documented as to be beyond dispute. Not surprisingly therefore with
almost 100 elephants being lost daily - the current onslaught on the species for its ivory is a cause for great international
concern, and a key catalyst for the present study of African conservation needs and strategies on behalf of the European
Commission (EC).
1.1
STATUS: DISTRIBUTION AND NUMBERS
The African Elephant (Loxondonta africana) is still widespread, being found in 35-38 Range States1 in all four regions as shown
in Table 1 and the Map that follows. The numbers data given are for 2012/3 as posted on the website
http://elephantdatabase.org, from which full details at country and individual population levels may be obtained. Forest
populations are very likely to be under-estimated due to obvious counting difficulties. Conversely, many savannah populations
have suffered heavy poaching losses since (see 1.2.1 below), but an up-to-date continental dataset is not yet available.
Table 1. African Elephant numbers: continental and regional totals (2012/3)
Definite
Probable
Possible
Speculative
Range Area
(km)
% of Continental
Range
% of Range
Assessed
Central Africa2
16,486
65,104
26,310
45,738
1,005,234
30
55
Africa3
130,859
12,966
16,700
7,566
873,318
26
57
267,966
22,442
22,691
49,317
1,312,302
39
47
7,107
942
931
3,019
175,552
65
433,999
89,873
54,629
105,640
3,366,405
100
53
Region
Eastern
Southern Africa4
West Africa5
Totals
The distribution of elephants varies considerably across the four regions, with small fragmented populations in West Africa,
and large tracts of range remaining in Southern Africa. Holding just over 52% of the continents DEFINITE plus PROBABLE
elephants, Southern Africa has by far the largest known number of elephants in any region. Eastern Africa holds just over 28%,
Central Africa 17% and West Africa 1.6%.
In Southern Africa, Botswana holds by far the largest population in that region and on the continent. Mozambique, Namibia,
South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe hold large elephant populations. Data are scanty in Angola and smaller populations
persist in Swaziland and Malawi. While numbers seem to be increasing in Namibia and South Africa, there appear to be
declines in some of the populations in Zimbabwe and Zambia. The vast majority of Eastern Africas known elephants are in
just two countries, Tanzania and Kenya6.
The continued presence of elephants in Senegal, Somalia, and Sudan (north) remains uncertain
Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon
3 Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Somalia, South Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda
4 Angola, Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Zambia, Zimbabwe
5 Benin, Burkina Faso, Cote dIvoire, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togo
6 For more detail, see section 5.2.1 of Volume 3 for Eastern Africa
2

Final report
Page 8
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
Figure 1. African elephant range

Final report
Page 9
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
Currently two morphologically different sub-species of African Elephant are recognised, namely the Bush or Savannah
Elephant (L.a. africana) typical of Eastern and Southern Africa, and the Forest Elephant (L.a. cyclotis) found in parts of Central
and West Africa. However, recent genetic studies suggest there may be two (possibly three) distinct species. Pending further
work and analysis, IUCN and its African Elephant Specialist Group (AfESG) continue to recognise two sub-species. The
derivation of separate conservation strategies for the distinct forms is complicated by the hybridisation evident in some interface
areas, notably in Central Africa.
Overall, the species is currently listed as Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List, but with an increasing number of
populations being reduced to critically low numbers as a result of the range of threats described below. All
populations of African elephant have been listed on CITES Appendix I since 1989, except for four national
populations that were transferred back to Appendix II (Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe in 1997, and South Africa
in 2000).
1.2
THREATS AND TRENDS
Land use pressure, range and habitat loss, human elephant conflict, and illegal killing for both meat and ivory all pose threats
to the long-term survival of elephant populations across Africa. Recent research also points to climate change and the
increasing frequency of droughts as a major threat to elephant populations in the Sudano-Sahelian ecoregion.
At this point in time however, by far the most acute threat facing African elephants arises from large scale poaching and the
illegal ivory trade as confirmed by data derived from two key CITES monitoring programmes namely, Monitoring the Illegal
Killing of Elephants (MIKE) and Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS). The fact that the MIKE and ETIS data are
consistent with each other gives confidence that each set of results and their interpretation is robust.
The information provided throughout this section is sourced primarily from the Status Report jointly prepared for the 65 th
Meeting of the CITES Standing Committee 7-11 July 2014 by the AfESG, MIKE and ETIS on behalf of the CITES Secretariat7.
1.2.1
Illegal killing
The MIKE programme is managed by the CITES Secretariat under the supervision of the CITES Standing Committee and
implemented in collaboration with IUCN. Since implementation began in 2001, MIKE has benefitted from the generous financial
support of the European Union. MIKE aims to inform and improve decision-making on elephants by measuring trends in levels
of illegal killing of elephants, identifying factors associated with those trends, and by building capacity for elephant management
in range States. To date MIKE operates in a large sample of sites spread across elephant range in 30 countries in Africa and
13 countries in Asia. There are some 60 designated MIKE sites in Africa, which include many of the continents prime National
Parkssuch as Chobe, Etosha, Kruger, Ruaha, South Luangwa and Tsavoas well as some of its most famous Game
Reserves, such as Selous and Niassa. Taken together, the elephant population at MIKE sites is estimated to represent 30 to
40% of the continental elephant population.
MIKE data are collected by law enforcement patrols and other means in designated MIKE sites. When an elephant carcass is
found, site personnel try to establish the cause of death and other details. This information is recorded in standardized carcass
forms, details of which are then submitted to the MIKE programme. A database of more than 13,000 carcass records has been
assembled so far, providing a substantial information base for statistical analysis.
MIKE evaluates relative poaching levels based on the Proportion of Illegally Killed Elephants (PIKE), which is calculated as
the number of illegally killed elephants found divided by the total number of elephant carcasses encountered by patrols or other
means, aggregated by year for each site. Coupled with estimates of population size and natural mortality rates, PIKE can be
used to estimate numbers of elephants killed and absolute poaching rates.
The data show a steady increase in levels of illegal killing of elephants starting in 2006, with 2011 displaying the
highest levels of poaching since MIKE records began in 2002. In 2012 and the first six months of 2013, the trend
seems to flatten out at levels close to those recorded in 2011. PIKE levels seem to have begun a gradual decline
thereafter, reaching in 2013 similar levels to those recorded in 2010.
7 CITES, AfESG, TRAFFIC (2013) Status of African elephant populations and levels of illegal killing and the illegal trade in ivory: a report to
the CITES Standing Committee http://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/com/sc/65/E-SC65-42-01_2.pdf

Final report
Page 10
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
Despite the decline since 2011, poaching levels overall remain alarmingly high, with nearly two thirds of dead elephants found
in 2013 deemed to have been illegally killed. Overall, the elephant population at MIKE sites is likely to have continued to decline
in 2013, as poaching rates exceed likely intrinsic population growth rates. In some areas, a decline in PIKE may be the result
of a substantial decline in the elephant population, making it more difficult for poachers to find suitable targets in such areas.
However, without recent and reliable elephant population estimates from such areas, it is difficult to verify the impact of
poaching on such populations
Differences in poaching levels between the different African regions are evident, with Central Africa consistently showing the
highest overall poaching levels (see also Volume 4, section 2.1.2), in contrast with Southern Africa (see also Volume 2, section
3.2.1), which has shown the lowest overall levels. In Eastern Africa, which has contributed the largest number of carcass
records, the trend is very similar to the continental one. Counts of Tanzanias biggest elephant populations carried out in
October/November 2013 show alarming declines since the previous counts in 2009. In this period the Mikumi-Selous
population (numbering around 109,000 in 1976), fell from an estimated 38,975 to 13,083 (66%), while the Ruaha-Rungwa
population fell from an estimated 31,625 to 20,090 (36.5%)8. West Africa has the smallest elephant population and has
submitted the smallest number of records (see also Volume 5, section 6.1.1). As a result, there is a high level of uncertainty
around PIKE estimates in that region, which makes it difficult to determine the trend. Nevertheless, overall higher PIKE levels
are apparent in all four African regions in the second half of the period covered by MIKE monitoring (2008-2013). While PIKE
levels in 2013 were lower than in 2011 in all four regions, they remain above the 0.5 level in all but Southern Africa9.
Modelled PIKE levels for 2012 translate to an estimated 15,000 elephants illegally killed across all African MIKE sites in that
year alone, or about 7.4% of the total elephant population in those sites. As elephant populations seldom grow at more than
5% per annum the model suggests that at this level of offtake, the overall population in MIKE sites is likely to have declined by
around 2% in 2012. Furthermore, the model estimates that the threshold of sustainability was crossed in 2010, with poaching
rates on top of natural mortality remaining above the population growth rate ever since. It is therefore likely that populations at
MIKE sites have been in net decline since 2010. This does not mean declines at every site, merely a decline on average with
some taking larger losses perhaps and some smaller. However, most observers believe this average decline, extrapolated
from a 30-40% sample, almost certainly reflects a continent-wide trend for the species as a whole.
One authoritative study published recently has concluded that over 100,000 African elephants were killed in the three years
2010, 2011 and 2012, at an average of 33,630 per year10.
According to the AfESG it is not yet possible to derive a robust estimate for the scale of elephant poaching in 2013.
However, an indication can be derived from the above estimate of elephants killed at MIKE sites in 2012 (around
15,000) in combination with the estimated change in PIKE between 2012 and 2013 (a decline of 5.86% across
African MIKE sites). This preliminary and rough calculation results in an estimate of more than 14,000 elephants
killed at MIKE sites alone in 2013. The AfESG has stated that there are good reasons to believe that the number
of elephants illegally killed throughout Africa in 2013 ran, as in previous years, into the tens of thousands, perhaps
in the order of 20 to 22 thousand. Also in line with previous evidence however, is the likelihood that MIKE-derived
data return underestimates of mortality at an overall continental level11.
1.2.2
Illegal trade
According to ETIS, the frequency of large-scale ivory seizures, in which 500 kg or more of ivory is seized through a single law
enforcement intervention, has increased greatly since 2000. Prior to 2009, an average of five and never more than seven such
events occurred each year but thereafter an average of 15 and as many as 21 large-scale ivory seizures have taken place
each year. In the period from 2009 through 2013, at least 77 large-scale ivory seizures occurred. Although data for 2013 may
still be incomplete, 19 large seizures have been reported to ETIS for the year, yielding a greater quantity of ivory than any
other previous year going back to 198912.
Carcass ratios were roughly 33% and 15% respectively, compared with the 7 to 8% associated with natural mortality
PIKE levels above 0.5 indicate that illegal annual off-take is likely to be higher than the number of elephants born annually into a naturally
increasing population. In other words, a PIKE level of 0.5 or higher means that the elephant population in question is very likely to be in net
decline.
10 Wittemyer G., Northrup J., Blanc J., Douglas-Hamilton I., Omondi P. and Burnham K. (2014) Illegal killing for ivory drives global decline in
African elephants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 111 (36): 1311713121
11 See also http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2013/12/16/elephant-declines-a-view-from-the-field/
12 ETIS seizure data provided by TRAFFIC up to date as of 10 March 2014
9

Final report
Page 11
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
Whether this constitutes an increase in actual illegal trade volumes or reflects improved law enforcement in particular countries
remains to be determined. It is known however, that the upward surge in terms of the weight of ivory seized from 2009 through
2011 does represent increased illegal activity that is being driven by consignments in the large-scale weight class. Further,
such seizures are indicative of the presence of organised crime in the illicit ivory trade, which often involves Asian-run, Africabased sourcing of ivory. According to TRAFFIC, the raw data on large-scale ivory seizures represent the salient evidence of
ivory trade crime orchestrated by transnational criminal operatives. Because large-scale seizures of ivory typically generate
media coverage and become known soon after they occur, tracking them serves as a crude early indicator of the illicit ivory
trade as a whole. For this reason, the 2013 data are regarded with considerable alarm as they suggest that the illegal trade in
ivory is continuing to increase.
ETIS large-scale seizure data have allowed an analysis of the routes followed by illegal ivory when in transit between supply
countries in Africa and consumer countries (mostly) in Asia, and show how these keep changing in order to elude detection.
However, determining the provenance of seized ivory remains a major constraint to dismantling the illicit networks involved in
the trade (see also 1.4.5 below).
1.2.3
Factors associated with poaching and the ivory trade
The MIKE programme has statistically evaluated relationships between PIKE levels and a wide range of ecological,
biophysical and socio-economic factors at the site, national and global levels. Three such factors consistently
emerge as very strong predictors of poaching levels and trends: poverty at the site level, governance at the national
level and demand for illegal ivory at the global level.
Previous MIKE analyses have used human infant mortality rates in and around MIKE sites as a proxy for poverty.
Infant mortality emerged in successive MIKE analyses as the single strongest site-level correlate of PIKE, with sites
suffering from higher levels of poverty experiencing higher levels of elephant poaching. A new poverty-related
variable, namely the proportion of people living in extreme poverty (defined as people living with less than US$ 1.25
per day) in and around MIKE sites was tested in the most recent analysis. This variable was found to be as strong
a predictor of PIKE at the site level as the infant mortality rate, with higher poaching levels found in and around
sites where poverty is more prevalent. While these relationships highlight a close linkage between the well being
of people and that of the elephant populations with which they coexist, they do not imply that wildlife conservation
areas - or indeed poaching therein - cause poverty. Rather, these relationships simply suggest that poaching is
more likely to be adopted as an economic activity in areas where human livelihoods are insecure.
At the national level, the strongest correlate of PIKE is governance, as measured by Transparency Internationals
Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) or the World Banks Worldwide Governance Indicators. High poaching levels
are more prevalent in countries where governance is weaker, and vice versa. This is likely to be a causal
relationship, with poor governance facilitating the illegal killing of elephants and movement of illegal ivory, be it
through ineffective law enforcement or active aiding and abetting by unscrupulous officials.
Ultimately however, the illegal killing of elephants for ivory is driven and sustained by demand from consumers who are willing
to pay for illegal ivory. ETIS analyses indicate that, in recent years, China has become the worlds largest consumer of illegal
ivory. This is corroborated by the fact that that temporal PIKE trends are strongly related to patterns in consumer spending in
that country. This relationship does not hold for other traditional destination markets for ivory (Europe, USA or Japan) or for
countries known to be important transit points in the ivory trade chain (Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand or Viet Nam).
However, as household consumption expenditure is a measure of general consumer demand for goods and
services, and not a specific measure of demand for ivory, a more specific proxy measure was sought with a view
to replacing it in MIKE analyses. To that end, it was recently hypothesized that demand for mammoth ivorythe
international trade in which is legal and reliable data on which is therefore more easily obtainablewould serve as
a better predictor and a better proxy for elephant ivory demand, not least because China and Hong Kong SAR
account for virtually all global imports.
Final report
Page 12
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
When tested against models developed in previous analyses, the time series of mammoth ivory import values per
kg for China (including Hong Kong SAR) was indeed found to be a better predictor of PIKE than the Chinese
household consumption expenditure variable used in the past. In other words, mammoth ivory import prices do
appear to be a better proxy for demand for ivory than household consumption expenditure. It is important to note
that no claim has been made that mammoth ivory imports cause elephant poaching. It is rather more plausible that
high demand for ivory results in both high raw mammoth ivory prices and high levels of poaching in Africa.
Temporal PIKE trends are also correlated with another demand-related variable, namely trends in large-scale ivory seizures
as reported by ETIS. The three main factors identified by MIKE analyses - poverty, governance and demand - explain nearly
two thirds of the variation observed in PIKE levels across African sites. Poverty and governance explain spatial patterns in
poaching levels, while demand accounts for the temporal trend.
As things stand, the four Range States with elephant populations currently on Appendix II of CITES may not apply to sell ivory
until after 2017 at the earliest, and so any such proposal could not be considered until CoP 18 (in 2019) at the earliest. States
with elephants on Appendix I may not apply to sell ivory. The earliest any Appendix 1 state may apply to downlist its elephant
populations to Appendix II would be at the next CoP17 in South Africa (in 2016). No seized illegal ivory may ever be sold.
However, it must be noted here that there is a considerable divergence of opinion amongst professional conservationists as to
whether or not totally banning the trade in ivory is in the elephants best interests. This often heated debate has been raging
since the CITES ban of 1989, and continues to this day. The related literature is extensive. Amongst the latest pro-trade inputs
are arguments based on claims that the massive increase in ivory poaching in Africa is not being driven by rising demand for
carved ivory in China, but by speculative stockpiling of ivory in China, and that the current policies stamping down on the illegal
ivory trade are actually fuelling the main driving force behind poaching, creating a counter-productive positive feedback loop13.
On the anti-trade side, recent inputs based on advanced economic analyses of market and trader behaviour indicate that a
properly controlled and supervised legal trade as a mechanism for balancing supply and demand can never be attained in a
corrupt world14,15,16 (see also 2.4.6).
The simple conclusion to be drawn from this intractable debate is that probably there never will be any single or perfect solution
to the ivory trading dilemma, which just underlines the importance of improving in situ protection, while at the same time working
to stop or at least minimise demand from the ultimate consumer. When it comes to trade issues, the EU should maintain a
policy of following and supporting decisions of CITES full Conference of the Parties. This recommendation is made in the
belief that the CoP will not make decisions that are not based on an adequate consensus of scientifically informed opinion. In
the meantime, suitable measures to support the ongoing fight against the illicit trade in ivory are considered in 1.4.4.2 below.
1.3
CONSERVATION PLANNING AND COORDINATION
In 2010, the continental African Elephant Action Plan (AEAP) was adopted by a consensus of all the African elephant range
States. The AEAP defines a set of eight key objectives aimed at securing, and restoring where possible, sustainable elephant
populations throughout their present and potential range in Africa. At the next level, regional action plans are in place in Central,
Southern, and West Africa. National action plans and strategies also have been adopted by 15 countries in the last ten years.
A list of existing strategies is given in Table 2.
13
See the opinion piece by D. Stiles entitled Can Elephants Survive a Continued Ivory Trade Ban? Published 15 September 2014 on the
National Geographic website and available here http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2014/09/15/opinion-can-elephants-survive-acontinued-ivory-trade-ban/ and B. Moyle (November 2014) The raw and the carved: Shipping costs and ivory smuggling, in Ecological
Economics 107: 259-265 and available here http://authors.elsevier.com/a/1Piyg3Hb~026CT
14 See the June 2014 paper by Nadal and Aguayo entitled Leonardos Sailors: a review of the economic analysis of wildlife trade available
here http://thestudyofvalue.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/WP5-Nadal-and-Aguayo-Leonardos-Sailors-2014.pdf
15 E. Bennetts essay in the journal Conservation Biology entitled Legal Ivory Trade in a Corrupt World and its Impact on African Elephant
Populations first published online in August 2014 at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cobi.12377/abstract
16 http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2014/10/22/legalizing-ivory-trade-taking-to-new-heights-a-dangerous-policy-proposal/
Final report
Page 13
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
Table 2. List of African Elephant Action Plans
Central Africa
East Africa
- Strategy for the
- Kenya (2012)
- Tanzania (2012)
Conservation of
Elephants
in
Central
Africa
(2005)
- Cameroon (2010)
African Elephant Action Plan (2010)

Southern Africa
- Southern Africa
Regional Elephant
Conservation and
Management Strategy
(2005)
Botswana (2003)
Mozambique (2010)
Namibia (2007)
Zambia (2003)
West Africa
- Strategy for the Conservation of West African
Elephants (2005)
- Convention on Migratory Species
- West African Elephant Memorandum
-
of
Understanding (2005)
Benin (2005)
Burkina Faso (2003)
Cote d'Ivoire (2004)
Ghana (2000)
Guinea (2008)
Guinea-Bissau (2000)
Niger (2010)
Togo (2005)
Other more recent plans not listed include, at a continental level, the 14 Urgent Measures formulated and adopted by the
recent high-level African Elephant Summit whose purpose is described in Box 1, while the Measures themselves are
reproduced in Annex 1.
Box 1. African Elephant Summit (December 2013)
The African Elephant Summit (AES) took place in Gaborone from 2-4 December 2013. It was co-hosted by the Republic
of Botswana and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) to address a conviction that, given the
magnitude of the problem, and the fact that illegal trade is increasingly entrenched in organized crime networks, the
African elephant crisis required political commitments at the highest level of government to secure viable elephant
populations across the continent and to halt the illegal ivory trade at all points along its value chain. Thus the AES
brought together senior representatives of African elephant range States, ivory transit States, and the States that are
the major consumers of ivory to secure their commitment to take urgent measures designed to remove barriers to
effective elephant protection and significantly reduce the amounts of illegal ivory in trade. The Summit duly debated,
endorsed and adopted a set of 14 well-defined Urgent Measures required over a 12 month period from both supply and
consumer states.
Building on both the AEAP and the AES, Gabon is promoting the Elephant Protection Initiative, an agreement to be signed
between itself, Botswana, Chad, Ethiopia and Tanzania regarding the federation of national parks and wildlife agencies in
order to exchange lessons learned and technical experience aimed at promoting south-south cooperation and finding African
solutions to the elephant crisis.
At a national level, the 8 countries most implicated in the illicit ivory trade were required by CITES at its March 2013 CoP16 in
Bangkok to prepare special National Ivory Action Plans and take urgent measures to implement them in order to demonstrate
their commitment to the Convention17. These 8 Plans have been prepared and submitted, and their implementation will be
subject to periodic review at meetings of the CITES Ivory Enforcement Task Force. The CITES Secretariat is now also seeking
similar plans from countries of secondary concern (Cameroon, the Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt,
Ethiopia, Gabon, Mozambique and Nigeria) as well as from others identified as being of importance to watch (Angola,
Cambodia, Japan, the Lao Peoples Democratic Republic, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates) 18.
A number of bodies exist which provide oversight and coordination to the other more regular Plans listed in Table 2. Chief
amongst these is IUCN SSCs African Elephant Specialist Group (AfESG) 19 which maintains the African Elephant Database
(AED) and periodically publishes African Elephant Status Reports (AESR) and various guidelines for many aspects of elephant
management. Most elephant range states are Party to CITES, and with all populations listed on either Appendix I or II, the
Convention provides the single most powerful instrument available to influence action to protect and manage elephant
17
China (including the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong), Kenya, Malaysia, Philippines, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda and Viet
Nam
18 http://www.cites.org/eng/dec/valid16/16_78-83.php
19 The AfESG is one of the many Specialist Groups that make up IUCNs Species Survival Commission, or SSC
Final report
Page 14
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
populations on the one hand, and investigate and control the ivory trade on the other. CITES decisions on these matters are
guided primarily on information collated and interpreted by AfESG in close collaboration with the MIKE and ETIS programmes20:
these three bodies being mandated to report to the CITES Standing Committee on all elephant-related decisions and
resolutions of the Parties (see 1.2 above).
The AEAP is overseen by a Steering Committee (see also 1.4.2), while the national agency responsible for wildlife management
is generally responsible for the implementation of national level plans.
1.4
ACTION BEING TAKEN
The recent escalation in elephant poaching and the widespread publicity it has received has stimulated a huge response from
IGOs, governments and NGOs (see extensive list in section 3.3.4 of the Trade chapter also in this Volume).
One interesting revelation of this was the finding at the recent African Elephant Summit that action is already being taken by
numerous organisations of different types with respect to ALL the 14 Urgent Measures adopted by the delegates.
In addition to the shock-value of the publicity given to the carnage, another very important factor underlying the overall
response is the links that have been made to national security in sensitive parts of the continent and the growth of organised
crime activity in Africa. Thanks to escalating demand, a kilo of ivory can sell for $3,000 to collectors in China or America. With
such high value, ivory is widely believed to have become a commodity that rebel militias such as the Lord's Resistance Army
(LRA), which originated in Uganda, or al-Shabaab in Somalia use to finance their operations, at least opportunistically. Having
received enough credible information as to links between poaching and LRA activities in the DRC, the UN Security Council
adopted In January 2014 a Resolution (No 2136) which makes specific reference to illegal wildlife trafficking, especially of
elephant ivory, and authorises sanctions such as arms embargos, travel bans and asset freezes on groups and individuals
that are complicit in illegal wildlife trade21.
Together with negative impacts on the tourism sector, the apparent links to organised crime as well as national and regional
insecurity have helped motivate both national governments and international organisations to take action. As summarised
below, the character of the overall response varies: some of it is general, while some is focused on a specific issue or site.
1.4.1
Awareness raising
Awareness of the elephant poaching and ivory trade crisis has been raised through a variety of means including publications,
meetings, campaigns and other initiatives. A few notable examples are:
20
21
Elephants in The Dust: The African Elephant Crisis, a joint report from UNEP, CITES, IUCN, and
TRAFFIC, published in English and French, and launched in March 2013 at the CITES CoP16 in Bangkok
Vira, V., and T. Ewing (2014) Ivory's Curse: The Militarization and Professionalization of Poaching in Africa. Born
Free USA and C4ADS
Vira, V., and T. Ewing and J. Miller (2014) Out of Africa: Mapping the global trade in illicit elephant ivory. Born Free
USA and C4ADS
The African Elephant Summit described above can be thought of as a high-level awareness exercise
directed at the Governments of both ivory supply and consumer States. Of course its main focus was on
solutions, not only awareness (see Box 1)
The worlds leading conservation NGOs have all responded to the poaching crisis with their own
awareness and fund-raising campaigns to support specific elephant and ivory-oriented programmes and
projects addressing both ends of the supply chain, as well as the routes in between. WCSs 96 Elephants
campaign is just one example. Some approaches are innovative: WildAid has pioneered the use of
celebrities to modify public opinion in China, while Space for Giants has run a combined publicity and
The ETIS programme is managed by TRAFFIC on behalf of the CITES Parties

A similar conclusion was reached and Resolution adopted (No 2134) for the CAR also.

Final report
Page 15
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
fund-raising campaign through The Independent, a leading UK daily newspaper. Hands Off Our Elephants
is a notable example from Kenya of a national level campaign in a source country led by an indigenous
NGO, in this case an organisation called WildLife Direct. The campaign has published strong-impact
advertisements, and has benefited from the direct involvement and support of the countrys First Lady: it
has also signed a mutually supportive MoU with UNEP. NGO awareness campaigns in consumer
countries are mentioned under the section below headed Stop the Demand
1.4.2
Destroying ivory stockpiles. An increasing number of countries have burnt or crushed their stockpiles
recently (e.g. Belgium, Chad, China, France, Gabon, Hong Kong SAR, Philippines and the USA in the
period 2012-2014).
Funds dedicated to Elephant Conservation
The African Elephant Fund. An African Elephant Fund (AEF) jointly administered by a Steering Committee
(AEFSC) and UNEP has been put in place to help fund the implementation of the AEAP, for which UNEP
charges a modest cost-recovery overhead. Governance is vested in the Range States who elect the
AEFSC, which in turn follows well designed grant making procedures based on sound eligibility criteria. To
date there have been only two funding rounds resulting in a number of small grants. One reason for this is
that meetings of the AEFSC cannot be financed by the Fund, so it meets seldom and opportunistically.
Donors have included the USA and South Africa as well as the following EU Member States: France,
Germany, Netherlands and the UK, with Germany and the Netherlands both announcing further
contributions at the recent African Elephant Summit22. To date all donations have been relatively small in
relation to the AEAPs overall budget of $97 million. So far grants totalling just over $367,000 have been
disbursed to 12 projects in Eastern (49%), Southern (17%) and West Africa (34%). Few if any applications
have been received from Central Africa and none approved. According to a report received from UNEP as
administrator of the Fund, there is approximately US$ 567,000 available for projects. Consequently a third
call for proposals is anticipated before the end of 2014.
The Elephant Crisis Fund. Save the Elephants (STE) and the Wildlife Conservation Network (WCN) have
created and jointly administer the Elephant Crisis Fund (ECF) which aims to address the current ivory crisis
and complement other efforts by the growing coalition of concerned organizations. The ECF intends to
provide at least $10 million to partners around the globe that are undertaking actionable projects focused
on anti-poaching, anti-trafficking, and demand reduction over the next 5 years. The Elephant Crisis Fund
was launched in 2013 and has already been able to make a difference for elephants. As of September
2014, the ECF had disbursed over $2.8 million, supporting 15 anti-poaching projects, 8 anti-trafficking
projects and 9 demand-reduction projects across Africa and East Asia.
CGI Partnership to Save Africas Elephants. In 2013, the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) brokered a formal
Partnership with the Wildlife Conservation Society, African Wildlife Foundation, World Wildlife Fund,
International Fund for Animal Welfare, Conservation International and a number of other organisations23
committed to preventing further elephant poaching by directly targeting the chief drivers of poaching. This
commitment takes a triple pronged approach by dedicating funding to: stop the killing, stop the
trafficking, and stop the demand. A total of $80m24 will be used to hire and train park rangers at 52 MIKE
sites encompassing a large proportion of the entire elephant population in Africa; to fund sniffer-dog teams
22
Netherlands EUR 130,000; Germany EUR 50,000

Network, Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Frankfurt Zoological Society, Freeland Foundation, International Conservation
Caucus Foundation, National Geographic, Save the Elephants, TRAFFIC, WildAid, WildLife Direct, Howard Buffett Foundation
24 This is not new money: it was already raised and committed before CGI was formed
23 African Parks

Final report
Page 16
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
along the top smuggling routes; and to train law-enforcement officials and judges responsible for
prosecuting international trafficking gangs. The CGI is looking to raise an additional $70m for the antipoaching plan over the next three years. Following the strong success of the first years single commitment,
the CGI announced at its Annual Meeting on 23 September 2014 a scaling up of the Partnership into the
Elephant Action Network, which now includes 21 different commitments made by 16 individual
organizations, which reach 58 different countries and touch upon each of the same three key pillars: Stop
the Killing, Stop the Trafficking, Stop the Demand. The Network now has formal links with the Gabon-led
Elephant Protection Initiative (see 1.3 above).
African Elephant Conservation Fund. As part of its Wildlife Without Borders programme, the US Fish and
Wildlife Service administers the AECF. In 2012, USFWS awarded 20 new grants for African elephant
conservation, totalling $1,397,916 which raised an additional $1,606,004 in leveraged funds. Field projects
in 13 countries were supported. Over $30m were allocated in the years 2007 through 2012.
Species Protection Grant Fund. This is a relatively new trust fund being raised and administered by the
African Wildlife Foundation to protect a range of flagship species including the African elephant for which
an associated action plan has been developed using an in-house methodology that identified 10 key
populations qualifying for priority support25
MIKES Emergency Response Mechanism. The upcoming MIKES programme (see below), includes a small
(c. $0.5m) but important provision for flexible emergency action.
Following adoption of the Paris Declaration in December 2013 (see 3.3.2) the French Government donated
EUR 10 million to Gabon to support the fight against poaching. This reflects Frances commitment to fight
wildlife crime and was publicised as an invitation to other countries and international institutions to follow
suit to save Africas last elephants.
1.4.3
Monitoring
1.4.3.1
MIKE, MIKES and ETIS
The CITES Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) Programme referred to many times in this report is currently being
funded by the EC through an interim, EUR 2.0m project (MIKE 3.0) which runs until December 2014.
Thereafter, the MIKE Programme will be financed by a new project called the Minimising the Illegal Killing of Elephants and
other Endangered Species (MIKES) Project. MIKES will be implemented by CITES in collaboration with participating range
States and other partners over a 4.5 year period commencing in late 2014, with a budget of EUR 12.3m being supported in full
by the European Development Fund (EDF).
The MIKES Project will build on the successes that have been achieved by the MIKE Programme over the past decade, but
with an expanded focus to include: a) other CITES-listed flagship species threatened by international trade such as rhinos and
great apes; b) initiatives aimed at minimising the impact of poaching and the illegal trade on the target species, in particular
through efforts to strengthen the capacity and capabilities of law enforcement agencies to combat poaching at both site and
national levels26; and c) piloting of the MIKE Programmes successful adaptive management and monitoring approaches in
selected Caribbean and Pacific sites.
Four populations/sites in southern Africa as follows Botswana in Kazungula landscape, Zimbabwe in Kazungula landscape, Zambezi
landscape, and Luangwa landscape. Three populations/sites in eastern Africa as follows Tsavo ecosystem, Ruaha and Selous. Two
sites/populations in central Africa including Dja-Odzala-Minkebe (in Cameroon, Congo, Gabon respectively), and Sangha Trinational
(Cameroon, CAR and Congo). One population/site in western Africa Park W landscape
26 Including through the Law Enforcement Capacity Assessments discussed in section 3.6.2
25

Final report
Page 17
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
In Africa, support will continue to be provided for monitoring illegal killing of elephants in the existing 56 MIKE sites, with
additional support for strengthening law enforcement capacity focussed on a sub-set of eight yet-to-be-selected sites, while
additional sites may be enlisted to the programme through complementary activities by partners 27. Importantly, under MIKES,
collaboration and integration with ETIS will be greatly strengthened, with MIKES providing significant support for ETIS activities.
1.4.3.2
Population surveys
In order to maintain and update the African Elephant Database, the AfESG collates all available survey data and works to
standardise and improve the precision of the aerial and ground count methodologies used. Survey costs are invariably high,
and seldom financed by Governments without external assistance. Thus securing funding for surveys is a perennial challenge,
and so the recent announcement of a $7m grant from the Paul G. Allen Foundation to the Botswana-based NGO Elephants
Without Borders to implement a series of aerial surveys across the elephants range in partnership with Governments and a
number of other competent NGOs is a very important contribution to the overall monitoring effort. Known as the Pan African
Elephant Aerial Survey (PAEAS), this exercise will cover savannah populations throughout much of eastern and southern
Africa, as well as some savannah areas in central and west Africa 28.
Surveying in forest represents a much greater challenge because of difficult access, limited visibility, more complicated data
collection and analysis methodologies, and a relative lack of competent expertise in them. All this makes it difficult to raise the
money needed, but some surveys have been ongoing for years, partly funded by the EU, partly by USAID (CARPE) and partly
by USFWS, although funding overall has been insufficient to carry out regular surveys at more than about a 7 year cycle, or
worse, at many sites.
Consequently additional funds are urgently required to support an ongoing and more frequent forest survey cycle, especially
as the upcoming MIKES programme has no provision for the necessary ground surveys (nor aerial either, for that matter). At
the time of writing in November 2014, there were indications that the Paul G. Allen Foundation might fund ground as well as
aerial surveys which would be extremely welcome and valuable, as without information on live numbers, interpretation of the
monitoring data for forest populations will be index-based only.
1.4.4
Law enforcement
As demonstrated by the Elephant Crisis Fund and the CGI Partnership outlined above, most programmes and projects aim to
support realisation of one or more of the three key strategic Objectives recognised by all organisations working to conserve
elephants, and which address the full ivory value chain, namely Stopping the Killing, Stopping the Trafficking and Stopping the
Demand.
While some elements of each of these overarching strategic objectives as concern elephants are discussed here, a much fuller
discussion of their application to the illicit trade and trafficking of wildlife products in general (not just ivory), and from which
elephants will benefit, is given in sections 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8 of this Volume.
Government action in these areas generally conforms with the priorities identified in their respective Elephant and/or Ivory
Action Plans (where these exist).
1.4.4.1
Stopping the Killing
The focus here is on protecting elephants in the field, whether inside or outside protected areas (PAs). Government responses
have included strengthening existing anti-poaching forces (often PA-based), as well as forming, training, equipping and
deploying specialised Units or Strike Forces that are highly mobile and so able to move into a hot-spot to reinforce local
operations at very short notice (e.g. Kenya, Uganda). Where it is felt anti-poaching operations are needed on a very large
scale, some Governments have assigned units of their standing Defence Forces to assist (e.g. Botswana, Tanzania). Such
operations can backfire badly if poorly managed. Tanzanias recent Operation Tokomeza Ujangili had to be suspended when
enforcement personnel allegedly violated citizens rights by abusing their powers of search, interrogation, confiscation and
arrest, leading to the dismissal of four Ministers29. In terms of seizures and justifiable arrests however, the resumed exercise
is being deemed a success.
Several countries are instituting proactive and reactive intelligence procedures as part of a multi-agency approach to the
problem. Other Government actions being taken to help stop the killing involve promulgation of truly deterrent punishments
27
As mentioned elsewhere WCS intends, through the CGI Partnership, to support MIKES objectives and monitoring protocols in 50
complementary sites many of which are MIKE sites already
28 More information at https://greatelephantcensus.com
29 Natural Resources and Tourism; Livestock and Fisheries; Home Affairs; Defence and National Service

Final report
Page 18
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
for persons caught poaching elephants (and other wildlife). In most cases this requires re-enactment of relevant policies and
laws, such as those passed by Kenya in December 2013 under which poachers now face life imprisonment, and a fine of 20
million Kenya shillings30, although concerns remain as to possible loopholes (see Volume 3 for Eastern Africa, section 3.2.1).
In parallel with this, training of prosecutors and the judiciary is also being addressed.
The NGO approach to stopping the killing typically involves helping strengthen Government operations at specific sites, usually
PAs with important elephant populations (see Volumes 2 to 5 for many regional examples). This may cover training and
equipment, including specialised equipment such as drones and tracker dogs. WCS and the South Sudan Government have
a national level elephant protection and monitoring program in place tracking all the remaining major elephant groups in south
Sudan. Save the Elephants provides elephant tracking services via Google Earth to provincial anti-poaching control centres in
Kenya to help guide deployment of ranger forces and provide rapid response to poaching incidents. UNDP has made funds
available for the creation and installation of a similar elephant collaring and monitoring system for the Greater Ruaha ecosystem
in Tanzania31.
Occasionally individual elephants, invariably big tuskers, get special protection. The whereabouts of a bull named Satao, bearer
of the biggest known tusks in Kenya, were monitored daily from the air by the Tsavo Trust as part of their Big Tusker Project.
Despite this he was killed by poachers in late May 2014 and some speculate whether it was leaked information as to his
location that led to his downfall. Close protection may backfire if any of those involved are or become corrupt.
1.4.4.2
Stopping the Trafficking
This strategy is based on realisation of the need to integrate and coordinate the work of different agencies involved all along
the ivory value chain between the killing site at one end, to the buyer of raw ivory or an ivory carving at the other.
Although catalysed primarily by the ivory and rhino horn trades, emerging anti-trafficking measures such as Wildlife
Enforcement Networks (WENs) are relevant and applicable to any illegal natural product, and as such are discussed in an
entire separate chapter of this Report dedicated to the trade in African wildlife generally (see section 3.7 below).
Anti-trafficking measures being taken specific to ivory include the following:
establishment by CITES of an Ivory and Rhino Enforcement Task Force

registration and securing of ivory stockpiles, including comprehensive marking and inventory of stored
ivory. Tools exist for stockpile management including an ivory inventory database users manual
developed originally for the CITES Management Authority of Gabon, and a new system devised by the
NGO Stop Ivory for establishing an inventory using an App on electronic tablets that meets all CITES
information storage requirements, including photographs of all tusks
destruction of ivory stockpiles: in addition to the important publicity and awareness-raising value of such
measures, their destruction is recommended because they are costly to secure and maintain; divert scarce
resources away from front line elephant conservation; and their content may enter the illegal supply chain
(through theft) and drive speculation32.
forensic investigation to determine the provenance of seizures the subject of detailed discussion in
section 1.4.5 below
deployment of sniffer dogs specifically trained to detect ivory in port and airport situations.
It should be noted also that analysis of the ETIS data is able to identify those countries most heavily implicated in illegal ivory
trade flows and the roles they play in the trade as source, transit or end-use countries. These results are essential for identifying
and monitoring those countries which are failing to address serious ivory trade issues. Where progress is not occurring, in spite
of repeated interventions, such countries are liable to sanctions under CITES.
1.4.4.3
Stopping the Demand
Clearly the prime targets of demand-reduction efforts must be the current and potential consumers throughout East and South
East Asia, principally China and Thailand, but there are still ivory markets in the west also (e.g. the USA). A strategic response
30
Roughly EUR 180,000

Under its Strengthening the Protected Area Network in Southern Tanzania Project (SPANEST)
32 The need for destruction may be repetitive: in countries with large populations the annual accumulation of ivory from natural mortality
alone is very high, meaning stockpiles are continually being replenished one way or another
31

Final report
Page 19
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
can only be effective if it is built on a good understanding of the drivers for consumption in each of dominant consumer
countries. Obviously these will vary from country to country, so relevant research is a first requirement on the basis of which
country or locality-specific actions to neutralise drivers can then be designed.
TRAFFIC is leading on consumer research approaches, while several major international NGOs are already conducting
targeted and effective awareness campaigns much influenced by the finding that the majority of consumers simply do not know
anything about the cruel and devastating impacts of the illegal trade in ivory 33. In order to highlight this they are cleverly and
effectively exploiting local culture and enlisting local celebrities to the cause. Artists working for IFAW for example have
embellished the Chinese character for elephant to show bloody ivory and used this in advertisements. STE, in collaboration
with WildAid and UNEP, brought the Chinese basketball star Yao Ming and leading Chinese actress Li Bingbing to Africa and
then distributed articles and film of their reactions to gruesome poaching scenes hopefully to good effect. Following such
efforts, more and more truly indigenous conservation movements are taking up the challenge.
A recent study has shown that a more important issue perhaps is dealing with the demand stimulated by a growing Chinese
interest in arts investment34. Efforts from NGOs and authorities of the sort described above have greatly improved public
awareness of the problems. These endeavours should be continued, but they should be more targeted by grounding them in
a realistic contextual and factual understanding of consumers and their motivations. To facilitate this, it is necessary to go
beyond the conservation sector and involve current non-participants who may have an important role to play in this issue, for
example, the arts investment community, cultural preservation groups, and religious groups.
Calls to curb demand by closing all domestic ivory markets through involuntary, legal mechanisms are gaining strength. Some
US markets have been closed down recently (see 3.3.2 and 3.3.4), and all other countries with active domestic markets are
under increasing pressure to follow suit.
1.4.5
Forensic investigation to determine the provenance of seized ivory
An aspect of the effort to understand and dismantle trade networks that is specific to elephant conservation is the need to be
able to trace seized ivory back to its natural origin. Adding this information to records of the ports through which it was transshipped should greatly improve the chances of national and international enforcement networks being able to reconstruct and
then disrupt the transit routes and trade syndicates involved in moving the ivory from source to final destination. This need has
been recognised in two Decisions made at the March 2013 CITES CoP16, firstly to examine forensic investigation techniques
for sourcing and ageing ivory as well as identify relevant facilities, and secondly to require all Parties to submit samples from
large scale seizures (500kg or more) for forensic analysis (see also Box 3). These decisions underpin Urgent Measure 14
adopted by the Elephant Summit which is to Support the development of a network of accredited forensic laboratories able to
determine the origin of seized ivory according to internationally standardized protocols for DNA and isotopic analysis that can
provide evidence admissible in a court of law.
Through ICCWC, the CITES Secretariat is working closely on ivory forensics with the United Nations Office on Drugs and
Crime (UNODC) which assists States in gaining access to quality forensic scientific services in their efforts to combat illicit
drugs and crime. As a result, UNODC has recently produced a manual on Guidelines on methods and procedures for ivory
sampling and laboratory analysis. Law enforcement officers responsible for the investigation of cases involving large-scale
ivory seizures are often confronted with the challenge of identifying the most appropriate way to collect and submit specimens
to appropriate facilities for forensic analysis. The UNODC Manual provides a practical guide that shows best practices and
logistical procedures. It is intended for worldwide application, to facilitate the use of wildlife forensics to the fullest extent
possible to combat wildlife crime, and in particular illegal ivory trade. It includes detailed protocols on methods of ivory sampling
and analysis, which can be applied by law enforcement officers and by laboratories with appropriate facilities.
While forensic labs exist for wildlife generally such as that run by the USFWS in Ashland (and are even being developed in a
number of African supply and Asian consumer countries), there are very few specialising in products from specific taxa such
as rhinos (horn) and elephants (ivory). UNODC is drawing on its partnership with the World Bank under ICCWC to bolster
capacities of laboratories in affected countries (see 3.2.5).
At present, expertise in ivory-specific forensic analysis is being developed around two complementary methodologies, the one
based on DNA, the other on isotopes. The lab directed by Prof Sam Wasser at the Centre for Conservation Biology in the
University of Washington is leading with the former approach, having assembled an important reference collection of ivory
samples from around the continent: it is said his team can now ascertain the geographic origin of a tusk to within a 160-mile
33 e.g. the awareness and attitudinal survey carried out in China as part of an ivory demand study by WildAid and STE in 2012
(http://www.wildaid.org/sites/default/files/resources/WEBReportIvoryDemandinChina2014.pdf)
34 Yufang Gao, Susan G. Clark (2014) Elephant ivory trade in China: Trends and drivers. Biological Conservation 180:23-30

Final report
Page 20
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
radius35. DNA analysis focused on origin has already produced interesting results that prove its potential utility (see Box 2, for
example).
Box 2. Ivory DNA Analysis
The testing of 6.5 tons of illegal elephant ivory seized in Singapore in 2002, 3.9 tons confiscated in Hong Kong in
2006, and another 11 tons confiscated in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Japan (also in 2006) determined that the massive
consignments came from closely related elephants in specific localities: eastern Zambia for the Singapore seizure, a
small section of eastern Gabon and neighbouring Congo for the single Hong Kong seizure, and southern
Tanzania/northern Mozambique for all samples in the 11-ton seizure. Forensic analysis also has the power to link
suspects to specific crimes. In addition to providing information on where a tusk came from, DNA analysis can be used
to identify individual elephants killed in a particular incident. When a mass killing occurs, tissue samples from
carcasses can be analyzed, so that when and if the tusks enter the illegal market, they can be matched to that same
incident. DNA analysis could also be used to show domestic ivory markets are operating legally. Recently, Chinese
officials have disputed allegations of large-scale importation of illegal ivory and insisted that there is no linkage
between their legal imports and the massive elephant poaching presently taking place. One way they could prove their
point would be to provide random samples of ivory from Chinas legal markets for DNA analysis. If that analysis showed
that it is all from Botswana, Zimbabwe, South Africa, and Namibia, where one-off sales were allowed, such allegations
could be rejected. But if the DNA analyses pointed to origins elsewhere, such as the Democratic Republic of Congo,
Chad, Tanzania, or Kenya, there would be clear grounds for rejecting the Chinese claims.
A potential problem with the Washington lab however is an alleged reluctance to share its reference materials with other labs
meaning its methods cannot be replicated elsewhere, thus maintaining an effective monopoly on DNA-based forensic
investigations of ivory36. Another is neither it nor any of the other labs which are currently sourcing ivory to geographical
locations have ever had their results independently verified anywhere else. A final problem is the labs alleged lack of neutrality
in the ivory trade debate, which inhibits some range States from using its services. Given that UNODC actively supports the
work of this lab while promoting ivory forensics globally, it is to be hoped these concerns will be resolved in the near future.
The separate isotopic approach, which provides both age and source information (based on chemicals linked to diet), is being
led by scientists working for the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation. A pre-declared intent of this programme is
to give other labs unrestricted access to its reference data collection, but this is still being built.
It is reported that the sourcing of ivory or tissues for reference libraries has been a major problem, with many range States
just not participating: hopefully they will in time become more cooperative as the participating labs become more open and
neutral. To encourage this, it is clearly important to ensure that forensic labs are independent and de-linked from any advocacy
activities.
A separate development that acknowledges the potentially crucial role of forensic investigations in combating elephant
poaching and ivory trafficking throughout Africa is the decision taken by the CITES Secretariat at the recent internal launch
meeting (8-9 January 2014) for the MIKES Project, to incorporate a new project component relating to forensic investigations,
under Result 4: International actions. A provisional budget of US$300,000 has been allocated, as part of the broader Result 4
budget line for MIKES Emergency Responses. Although the specific forensic activities to be supported are yet to be fleshed
out (this will be done during the preparation period of the project prior to the main project launch in January 2015), the CITES
Secretariat envisages that the main focus of support will be for building capacity for carrying out forensic investigations at the
site level37, as well as for piloting the application of forensic techniques at different levels throughout the forensics chain (i.e.
site-national-international levels).
1.4.6
Human-elephant conflict
Human-elephant conflict (HEC) continues to pose a serious challenge throughout the elephant range, and the
cursory mention afforded to it here is in no way commensurate with its huge importance as a symptom of what is
arguably the biggest long term threat to elephant survival, which is the rapid conversion of land in Africa leading to
35
But this level of precision has never been independently validated

Other institutions reported to have experience in ivory-DNA analysis are Duke University and the University of Copenhagen. Utah
University has experience in isotopic analysis.
37 Assumed to mean best-practices for the collection of samples in the field, and their preservation and packaging for onward transfer to a
specialist laboratory for analysis
36

Final report
Page 21
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
habitat degradation and permanent range loss. Both land conversion and Human Wildlife Conflict in general are
considered more fully in the broader context of the various regional volumes of this Report.
Much of the problem lies in the fact that most mitigatory actions are very expensive, particularly in the case of HEC.
Fencing is a prime example, with NGOs such as Rhino Ark devoting their entire programme to this approach.
Although a number of innovative methods are emerging to add to the toolbox to help mitigate HEC (such as the
strategic deployment of beehives along farm boundaries by Save The Elephants), long-term land use planning and
cooperative management of elephant populations with local communities are required to provide sustainable
solutions. Studies of elephant movement patterns are ongoing in many sites and these are expected to provide
useful information for land-use planning that would minimise future conflict (e.g. identification of corridors).
1.5
ACTIONS RECOMMENDED FOR EU SUPPORT
Range States need urgent and sustained financial and technical support for: anti-poaching work in the field; to strengthen and
enforce national laws protecting elephants and preventing trafficking; to deliver national, regional and international intelligencesharing and law-enforcement efforts; to safeguard habitats; and to support communities which live alongside elephants,
particularly with regard to the development of sustainable livelihoods and the reduction of human-elephant conflict.
Although the actions needed to conserve the African elephant therefore are many and are replicated throughout its range, the
scale and diversity of the response to date is such that any additional contributions from the EU need to be carefully focused.
On the basis of the review presented here, it is recommended that this focus should embrace the following urgent, short and
medium term interventions.
1.5.1
Urgent and short term measures
1.5.1.1
Support to priority and emergency measures through the Funding of Funds
The formal adoption of the African Elephant Action Plan (AEAP) by all Range States is a remarkable and important
achievement that deserves, in line with AES Urgent Measure 8, wider recognition by way of input to the associated African
Elephant Fund (AEF)38. As noted earlier, donations to date have been limited, perhaps due to the fact that the Steering
Committee (SC) is made up of Government representatives raising concerns firstly as to the proportion of funds that will be
spent on what is needed, and secondly as to its ability to develop large-scale projects. Given the involvement of UNEP and
the commendable grant-giving procedures in place, the former concern is invalid. In the opinion of several persons closely
involved in the evolution of the AEAP and AEF however, the second concern remains valid at least in the sense that the political
dimensions of so many Range Sates competing for limited funds probably means it will always remain a small grants fund.
The advice therefore is to boost donations, but in sensible increments until such time as the Fund has proved (or otherwise)
its ability to absorb more. If the EC wishes to pursue its interest in supporting the AEF, it is recommended that it makes an
initial donation of no more than EUR 1.0m and encourages the SC to try and leverage additional funds against it.
Given the crisis nature of the current situation, the EC is understood to be keen to contribute to unforeseen emergencies but
none of its existing mechanisms allow this, and the emergency funds to be provided under MIKES are not yet available. Of the
various funds devoted elephants, it appears that only the Elephant Crisis Fund (ECF) is geared specifically to genuine
emergency action without site-specific pre-conditions. Access to such flexible and quickly mobilised resources is potentially of
very great assistance to Governments and other NGOs alike. Accordingly it is further recommended that the EC should
consider making a donation to the ECF, perhaps matching any made to the AEF.
As noted, the ECFs basic strengths lie in its ability to respond quickly to support multiple institutions working on different
aspects of the ivory crisis. Led by two well-respected non-profit organizations, the ECF combines the elephant conservation
experience and network of Save The Elephants (STE) with the financial and administrative efficiency of the Wildlife
Conservation Network (WCN). This combination provides a unique model to jumpstart and scale up immediate strategic
interventions by rapidly deploying financial resources to carefully vetted field partners. STE leads the project review and vetting
process: WCN leads the financial and administrative requirements of grant administration. A strong emphasis is placed on
38 This overall position with respect to the AEAP is exactly consistent with that recommended by the recent Expert Conference on the EU
Approach against Wildlife Trafficking.

Final report
Page 22
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
efficiency, with a short application turn-around, streamlined reporting requirements, and communications conducted virtually
to ensure maximum inputs are given to conservation efforts.
The ECF is committed to guaranteeing that 100% of funds will be used to support actionable, on-the ground programs that
save elephants. Two other characteristics set the ECF apart:
1.5.1.2
Donors can double the impact of their contributions with a dollar for dollar match (currently up to a total of
$1 million)
Donors who contribute more than $5,000 may designate their gift to support specific actions, such as antipoaching efforts, anti-trafficking efforts, decreasing demand, or to be used as an additional match.
Forensic analysis of ivory in Africa
The importance of being able to ascertain the provenance of seized ivory is elaborated above, but the ability to do so remains
limited. In line with Urgent Measure 14, a network of suitably equipped laboratories is needed in both Africa and Asia to ensure
the requisite analyses can be carried out as cost and time-effectively as possible. This is of increasing importance now that
CITES parties are required to submit samples from large-scale seizures for analysis (see also Box 3).
Box 3. Forensic investigation of ivory seizures
In the coming months, compliance with the CITES decision for Parties to submit samples from large-scale ivory seizures
should be closely watched. While some countries might assert that financial constraints prevent them from sending in
DNA samples, the truth of that claim is suspect because the analysis itself will be funded by outside sources. If a country
opts not to submit samples, one might speculate whether it is doing everything it can to stop elephant poaching and
ivory trafficking. And it might cause one to wonder if the government was allowing seized ivory to find its way into the
illegal trade. It is in this context a matter of considerable concern to note that none of the countries that have destroyed
ivory stockpiles since this decision was made have either inventoried or done any forensic work on their ivory before
doing so (including the US, which had strongly supported the decision). These wasted opportunities represent a serious
loss of invaluable information. In contrast, a willingness to supply samples from seized ivory will help demonstrate a
countrys commitment to stopping the illegal ivory trade.
CITES and UNODC are in the process of identifying facilities in which such capacity could be developed. An obvious candidate
in Africa is the Veterinary Genetics Laboratory (VGL) at the University of Pretoria, a facility that has pioneered the DNA-based
analysis of rhino horn (see 2.4.5). Another potential candidate in Africa is the forensic lab being developed by the Kenya Wildlife
Service, originally to address bushmeat seizure issues (see 3.2.2 in Volume 3). From 1st to 5th September 2014, UNODC
conducted a joint field visit to Botswana with experts from TRACE Wildlife Forensics Network and the Netherlands Forensic
Institute to carry out a coordinated assessment of wildlife DNA forensics and identify possible models for developing wildlife
DNA forensic capacity. The Agence Nationale des Parcs Nationaux (ANPN) in Gabon also is working with UNODC to develop
a lab there.
The development of forensic labs capable of analysing the identity and provenance of a variety of wildlife products, not just
ivory and rhino horn, is an important part of the overall approach to curbing the trafficking of wildlife in general. Accordingly
recommendations on EU support for forensic labs are presented under the Trade section of this Volume (see 3.9.3.4).
1.5.1.3
Support for forest census work
As noted earlier (1.4.3.2), the funds available for counting elephants in forest are very limited. The need for objective
and repeatable enumerations of forest populations is really critical, because without the live elephant numbers the
strength of MIKE information is greatly reduced. In order to secure full value for money invested in MIKES therefore,
it is recommended that the EC secures additional funds to this end in line with AES Urgent Measure 5. Subject to
confirmation by the executants, it is estimated that censusing all MIKE forest sites probably requires funding in the
order of at least EUR 2.5 million over two to three years.
However there are many other sites apart from MIKE sites that need to be surveyed especially in Central Africa
(see Volume 4). Overall the important forest elephant sites (including MIKE) will cost about 4 to 5 million dollars to
survey over the next 5-7 years (F. Maisels, pers. comm.). At the time of writing in November 2014 there were
Final report
Page 23
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
indications that the Paul G. Allen Foundation might contribute to ground as well as aerial surveys, but the extent
and duration of that support remain unknown. Competent donor coordination is therefore needed.
1.5.1.4
Support for the African Elephant Database and African Elephant Status Report
Recent and current pressures on the African elephant are attracting a huge amount of attention from all quarters. All these
interested parties rely on the AfESG for accurate information on the status of the species. Therefore, it is vital that the AfESG
is enabled to continue providing reliable and up-to-date information to allow well-informed decision making and actions. Many
of the new commitments and initiatives at local, national and international levels rely explicitly on verifiable evidence of elephant
numbers and trends for financial assessments to be disbursed. Accordingly, the AfESG is urgently seeking finance to ensure
that the African Elephant Database (AED) can meet these expectations, now and into the future39. Also under discussion is
the potential addition of other important databases of African species to the AED platform (e.g. lions and buffalos), which could
bring considerable synergies, not least of which could potentially be real cost savings to all those sharing it.
The AfESG and its Data Review Working Group have numerous ideas for improvements and enhancements to the AED, but
lack the resources needed to underpin its Secretariats ability to implement them, making the AED one of the AfESGs highest
fundraising priorities. Currently there is only one full-time staff member on the AED, and dedicated funds are sought to hire a
database manager to oversee the AED, including undertaking those infrastructural improvements that have been identified as
essential.
The AfESG also needs funds to update and publish a full African Elephant Status Report (AESR) in both 2015 and
2018, as well as conduct a new Red List Assessment for the species in 2018.
1.5.1.5
Ivory in the European Union
In line with the USA and other nations, the EU and its Member States should develop a new Regulation to close
domestic ivory markets, beginning with the implementation of Article 11 of the European Parliament resolution on
wildlife crime, adopted in January 2014, which called on EU Member States to introduce moratoria on all
commercial imports, exports and domestic sales and purchases of tusks and raw and worked ivory products until
wild elephant populations are no longer threatened by poaching.
Furthermore, and following the example of Belgium, it is recommend that any such Regulation includes the
destruction of ivory stockpiles, in accordance with Article 12 of the European Parliament resolution which calls on
Member States to join other CITES Parties in sending out a clear signal against wildlife trafficking and demand for
illegal wildlife products by destroying their stockpiles of illegal ivory. This would incontrovertibly demonstrate that
EU Member States do not tolerate either trafficking in ivory, or the poaching driven by that trade. It would also place
the EU in a strong position to encourage other governments to follow suit, which is important in countries where
stockpile leakage is problematic.
Although contested by some commentators40, the destruction of stockpiles, and the closure of domestic ivory
markets, are fully consistent with the decisions of the CITES CoP.
39 As of November 2014 US$ 288,000 were still being sought to complete the co-funding required for a full 4-year programme. A detailed
proposal and budget is available from the AfESG.
40 t Sas-Rolfes M., Moyle B. and Stiles D. (2014). The complex policy issue of elephant ivory stockpile management. Pachyderm 55: 62-77

Final report
Page 24
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
1.5.2
1.5.2.1
Medium and long term measures

Monitoring and coordination
Without continual monitoring, the objective basis on which to decide what actions are needed where and how
urgently will be lost. The longer one studies any animal the better one understands it and as the 30 year Amboseli
Elephant Project continues to show, this is especially true of a very long lived animal like the elephant.
It is important therefore for the EC to recognise the need to sustain its support for MIKES and ETIS
indefinitely. In other words it should already start preparing for a follow-on to the next phase which will
end in mid-2018
At the same time all stakeholders in elephant conservation need to recognise the invaluable services and inputs
provided by the AfESG in terms of general coordination; technical guidance and advice given to CITES, managers
across the African elephant Range States, donors, interested parties and the general public. To the urgent support
needed to maintain the AED and periodically publish the AESR already highlighted in 1.5.1.4 may be added that
required to edit and publish the journal Pachyderm41. All this is typically done on a shoestring, and efforts to sustain
the flow of core funds needed to support adequate staffing all across the range, hold and attend meetings, and
publish documents etc, currently consume a disproportionate amount of the core staffs time.
Although the MIKES budget includes nominal money for specific activities of the AfESG, such piecemeal funding
is both insufficient and unsustainable. The EUs previous core support grant to the AfESG was highly successful
and its evaluation showed a high level of delivery against objectives. The present study would like to recommend
therefore not only that the EC should provide fully comprehensive core funding to the AfESG over at least 5 years,
but also to all other Specialist Groups with a remit in Africa. Although not all make contributions equivalent to those
of the AfESG, they do all face funding challenges to some extent. A suitably well-endowed programme should be
negotiated with IUCNs Species Survival Commission.
It should be noted that by helping understand the status of many taxa and their conservation and
management needs, this single intervention has the potential to provide multiple benefits. As such it would
be an extremely cost-effective use of conservation funds.
For similar reasons of coordination, it is recommended that the EC extends its support for the CITES Joint Ivory
and Rhinoceros Enforcement Task Force, whether directly or through the ICCWC. Recommendations regarding
other, complementary support to these two bodies are presented in the Wildlife Trade chapter of this Report (see
3.9.3.1).
1.5.2.2
Direct support to key elephant populations and ranges
In other parts of this Report, arguments are presented to justify a need to focus EC resources on a selection of
areas that are of such outstanding importance and value that basically a commitment should be made to protect
them for posterity, and at all costs. It is further argued that if that perception of value is primarily one of the developed
world, then it is the developed world that must be ready and willing to bear those costs, alone if absolutely
necessary.
41 Pachyderm is managed in its entirety by the AfESG and publishes papers and notes concerning all aspects of the African elephant, the
African rhino and the Asian rhino with a focus on the conservation and management of these species in the wild. At the same time, the
journal is a platform for disseminating information concerning activities of the AfESG, the AfRSG and the AsRSG.

Final report
Page 25
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
The elephant features as one of a few major criteria used in the identification of these Key Landscapes for
Conservation (KLCs)42. There is no doubt this is justified, not simply because of its own charisma and the knockon benefits to other ecosystem features to be derived from securing a wide-ranging apex species, but also
because conserving elephants comes with costs that host nations often find socially, politically and economically
difficult to meet or even to accept. In the Eastern African part of this Report It is suggested that all areas containing
more than 5% of a regions elephants should be classified as Very Important Elephant Areas and automatically be
considered for inclusion in its list of KLCs (see Volume 3, section 4.2.1).
An indefinite commitment to KLCs that hold elephants is the most effective way in which the EC can make a
contribution to the species survival in perpetuity.
As part of this overall commitment, including support for behavioural research on elephants is particularly
compelling because of the very large areas over which they have to range. Their movements, very often far outside
the boundaries of PAs, bring them into greater contact not only with elephant poaching gangs but also with rural
farmers. Human elephant conflict is an issue that alienates local populations and leads to further killing of elephants.
Much effort is required to try and address the problem of elephant movements outside PAs, including the
development of secure elephant corridors. Care needs to be taken that potential corridors are not just drawn on
maps without taking the elephants natural movement and habits into account. It follows that money on research to
identify actual travel routes would be well spent before millions are invested in corridor developments that may
otherwise fail.
42
A fuller description of the criteria used to select the final list of the continents KLCs is given in Volume 1, section 5.1

Final report
Page 26
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
Annex 1
AFRICAN ELEPHANT SUMMIT URGENT MEASURES43
The Delegates assembled at the Summit dedicated themselves to providing political support at the highest level to
ensure the implementation of the following Urgent Measures to halt and reverse the trend in illegal killing of
elephants and the illegal trade in ivory, for implementation or initiation by the end of 2014, although it is understood
that the measures will remain relevant beyond 2014.
Urgent Measure 1. Applying a zero tolerance approach, secure and report on maximum, and therefore
deterrent, sentences for wildlife crime using a combination of existing laws and strengthened regulatory
frameworks for investigation, arrest, seizure and prosecution of suspected wildlife criminals; such laws may include,
inter alia, wildlife, corruption, money laundering, organized crime, fire arms, employment and terrorism laws.
Urgent Measure 2
Form and support National Interagency Mechanisms to allow immediate action against anyone implicated in or
abetting illegal killing of elephants and the illegal trade in ivory.
Urgent Measure 3. Enhance capacity of law enforcement and wildlife protection agencies at the national
level to respond to well-armed, highly-organized poaching syndicates.
Urgent Measure 4. Introduce elephant poaching and the illegal ivory trade as a standing agenda item of National
Security Committees (or their equivalent) in countries where proceeds from these criminal activities are known or
are likely to be used to fuel internal conflict, armed rebellion or external aggression. Include, where possible, the
head of the national wildlife agency on the National Security Committee (or its equivalent) in these countries.
Urgent Measure 5. Over the next year, in order to support evidence-based decision-making, pool efforts to
improve the coverage of monitoring of: a) African elephant populations, transmitting data as a matter of urgency
to the IUCN/SSC African Elephant Specialist Group, the agreed data repository for elephant population data; b)
levels of illegal killing, transmitting data as a matter of urgency to CITES MIKE, the agreed monitoring programme;
and c) levels of illegal trade, transmitting data as a matter of urgency to ETIS, the agreed monitoring programme.
Urgent Measure 6. Strengthen cooperation among law enforcement agencies in range, transit, and consumer
states, including through participation in activities of the CITES Ivory Enforcement Task Force, and, through the
use of controlled deliveries, whenever possible, and other appropriate law enforcement techniques; with support
from the International Consortium on Combatting Wildlife Crime (ICCWC).
Urgent Measure 7. States that are signatories to regional wildlife law enforcement networks such as the Lusaka
Agreement Task Force (LATF); Rhino and Elephant Security Group of Southern Africa Development Community
(SADC); Horn of Africa Wildlife Enforcement Network; the Central African Wildlife Enforcement Network; ASEAN
Wildlife Enforcement Network; and the recently proposed Wildlife Enforcement Network for Southern Africa;
recommit their individual support to the objectives of the regional agencies and to meeting their material, financial
and human resource commitments.
43
https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/african_elephant_summit_final_urgent_measures_3_dec_2013.pdf

Final report
Page 27
Volume 6
ELEPHANTS
Urgent Measure 8. Mobilise financial and technical resources from various national and international sources
utilizing those mechanisms that best support the implementation of the African Elephant Action Plan and these
agreed urgent measures at national, regional and continental level.
Urgent Measure 9. Design and carry out national studies and public awareness programs, aimed at all sectors,
which include information on the ramifications of illegal killing of elephants and the illegal ivory trade on the
economy, national security, public safety and the ecosystem services elephants provide.
Urgent Measure 10. Implement efficient measures to register and secure ivory stockpiles, including
comprehensive marking and inventory of stored ivory, as agreed under CITES Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev.
CoP16).
Urgent Measure 11. Develop and implement strategies to eliminate the illegal trade in ivory and use
evidence-based campaigns for supply and demand reduction that use targeted strategies including, where
appropriate, government-led approaches, to influence consumer behaviour.
Urgent Measure 12. In African elephant range States, engage communities living with elephants as active
partners in their conservation by supporting community efforts to advance their rights and capacity to manage
and benefit from wildlife and wilderness.
Urgent Measure 13. Strengthen existing or implement new legislation to classify wildlife trafficking
involving organized criminal groups as a serious crime to effectively unlock international law enforcement
cooperation provided under the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime, including
mutual legal assistance, asset seizure and forfeiture, extradition, and other tools to hold criminals accountable for
wildlife crime.
Urgent Measure 14. Support the development of a network of accredited forensic laboratories able to
determine the origin of seized ivory according to internationally standardized protocols for DNA and isotopic
analysis that can provide evidence admissible in a court of law.
Implementation
Each country will assess its progress with implementation of these Urgent Measures and will report on a voluntary
basis to appropriate regional and international fora such as, but not limited to:
further one-off meetings on wildlife crime;
Meetings of the CITES Standing Committees meetings;
The next sessions of the IUCN World Conservation Congress;
Annual African Union Summits;
Regional economic cooperation fora
African Elephant Fund Steering Committee
Meetings of the Conferences of the Parties to CITES and CMS
Meetings of the United Nations General Assembly;
Meetings of the United Nations Environment Assembly.

Final report
Page 28
Volume 6
RHINOS
SECTION 2. INTER-REGIONAL SECTION ON RHINOS

ACRONYMS
AfRSG
ARCAP
ASEAN
AsRSG
AWF
BR
CAP
CEESP
CITES
CODIS
CoP
DEA
DNA
FBI
EC
EUR
GEF
ICCWC
IGO
INTERPOL
IUCN
KLC
KWS
NGO
NWR
PA
RhODIS
RMG
RTCF
SA
SADC
SANParks
SSC
STE
SWR
TCM
TRAFFIC
UfW
UNEP
USA
USFWS
VGL
WEN
WR
WWF
ZSL
African Rhino Specialist Group (of SSC)

African Rhino Conservation and Action Plan
Association of South East Asian Nations
Asian Rhino Specialist Group (of SSC)
Black Rhino
Conservation Area for Posterity
Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy (of IUCN)
Combined DNA Index System
Department of Environmental Affairs (South Africa)
Federal Bureau of Investigation
European Commission
Euro
Northern White Rhino
Protected Area
Rhino Management Group
Rhino and Tiger Conservation Fund
South Africa
South African National Parks
Save The Elephants
Southern White Rhino
Traditional Chinese Medicine
United for Wildlife
United States of America
White Rhino

Final report
Page 29
Volume 6
RHINOS
The recent history of rhinoceros species in Africa sends mixed messages. The Southern White Rhino provides one of
conservations great success stories, having been brought from the brink of extinction to be the most numerous rhino in the
world44. However, the stories of its Northern relative and the various races of Black Rhinoceros are of a dramatic conservation
struggle in the face of an unremitting demand for rhino horn despite immense conservation efforts. In recent years this demand
has escalated and with it the value of horn, to the point that no rhinos remain in West or Central Africa, and even the Southern
White is under unprecedented pressure. Consequently many formerly secure rhino populations are now in grave danger. This
is a cause for great international concern, and along with the parallel elephant/ivory situation was a key catalyst for the present
study of African conservation needs and strategies on behalf of the European Commission (EC).
2.1
DISTRIBUTION AND STATUS
White Rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum)

Two subspecies are recognized: the Southern White Rhino (SWR) C. s. simum in southern Africa, and Northern White Rhino
(NWR) C. s. cottoni, with currently only one confirmed population in Ol Pejeta (a private Kenyan conservancy) that was created
in December 2009 following the translocation from the Czech Republic of the last four potentially breeding NWR in captivity.
The Northern White Rhino used to range over parts of north-western Uganda, southern Chad, south-western Sudan, the
eastern part of Central African Republic, and north-eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. The previous only confirmed
population in Garamba National Park in north-eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo is now considered extinct despite
systematic ground surveys over probable range and additional foot patrols and aerial reconnaissance. Although there was an
unverified sighting in the Domaine de Chasse in 2012, and a trickle of unconfirmed reports of rhino in Southern Sudan, no
incontrovertible sightings of live rhinos have been made since 2007 (see the photo chosen as a frontispiece to this volume).
The Southern White Rhino is now the most numerous of the rhino taxa, with South Africa remaining the stronghold for this
subspecies despite increased poaching. Sizeable populations occur in the greater Kruger National Park (which incorporates
additional private and state reserves) and Hluhluwe-iMfolozi Park, but also occur in numerous state protected areas and
private reserves (some of which are also well protected) throughout the country. There are smaller reintroduced populations
within the historical range of the species in Namibia, Botswana, Zimbabwe and Swaziland, while a very small number may
survive in Mozambique. Populations of Southern White Rhino have also been introduced outside of the known former range
of the subspecies to Kenya, Uganda and to Zambia.
Black Rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis)
Throughout most of the 20th century, the Black Rhino was the most numerous of the world's rhino species which at one stage
could have numbered around 850,000. Relentless hunting of the species and clearances of land for settlement and agriculture
reduced numbers and by 1960 only an estimated 100,000 remained. Between 1960 and 1995, large-scale poaching caused
a dramatic 98% collapse in numbers.
Three recognized subspecies of Black Rhinoceros now remain, occupying different areas of Africa. A fourth recognised
subspecies D. b. longipes once ranged through the savannah zones of central-west Africa but it is now considered to have
gone extinct in its last known habitats in Northern Cameroon.
The other three more numerous subspecies are found in eastern and southern African countries. The putative D. b. bicornis
range includes Namibia, southern Angola, western Botswana, and south-western and south-eastern South Africa, although
today they occur only in Namibia (the stronghold) and South Africa with a sighting of one animal in Angola and unconfirmed
reports of possibly another three animals. Following translocations from Namibia and subsequent population growth, numbers
of this subspecies are increasing in South Africa with its distribution covering more arid areas in the south west of the country,
and expanding into the Eastern Cape.
D. b. michaeli was distributed from southern Sudan, Ethiopia, and Somalia, through Kenya into northern-central Tanzania and
Rwanda. Its current stronghold is Kenya. Smaller numbers occur in northern Tanzania. The single animal that survived in
Rwanda has died. One important free-ranging population occurs outside its range in a private game reserve in South Africa.
Contractually, these D. b. michaeli animals may only be translocated back to historical range and not elsewhere in South
Africa. The repatriation of some of these animals back to former subspecies range in Tanzania commenced in 1997, with
animals going to Mkomazi Game Reserve and Ngorongoro Crater Conservation Area and the most recent being five animals
moved to the Serengeti National Park, Tanzania in 2010.
44
In 1910, it is thought only about 100 animals remained

Final report
Page 30
Volume 6
RHINOS
D. b. minor is believed to have occurred from southern Tanzania through Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Mozambique to the northern,
north-western and north-eastern parts of South Africa. It also probably occurred in southern Democratic Republic of the Congo,
northern Angola, eastern Botswana, Malawi, and Swaziland. Today, its stronghold is South Africa and to a lesser extent
Zimbabwe, with smaller numbers remaining in southern Tanzania. The South-central Black Rhino is probably now extinct in
Angola and Mozambique. The subspecies has also been reintroduced to Botswana, Malawi, Swaziland and Zambia.
The latest available data on the status of all rhino species and sub-species extant in Africa today are given in Table 345. As
shown, the majority of Africas (black and white) rhinos (98.0%) are conserved by just four range States: South Africa, Namibia,
Kenya and Zimbabwe. Botswana, Tanzania and Swaziland each conserve over 100 rhinos with smaller numbers in Zambia,
Malawi, Uganda, Mozambique and Angola.
The White Rhino as a species is currently listed as Near Threatened on the IUCN Red List, but its status is under
review because if current poaching trends continue unabated it could soon qualify for re-classification as either
Vulnerable or Endangered. The Black Rhino is listed as Critically Endangered.
By 1977, all African rhino species were listed on CITES Appendix I, and all international commercial trade in rhinos and their
products was prohibited. However, following a continued increase in numbers, the South African population of Southern White
Rhino was downlisted in 1994 to Appendix II, but only for trade in live animals to approved and acceptable destinations and
for the (continued) export of hunting trophies. In 2004, Swazilands Southern White Rhino were also downlisted to CITES
Appendix II, but only for live export and for limited export of hunting trophies according to specified annual quotas.
Table 3. African Rhino numbers: continental and regional totals (31 December 2012)
Species
Subspecies
White Rhino Ceratotherium simum (WR)

C.s.cottoni
C.s.simum
Total WR
Northern
Southern
Angola
Botswana
Malawi
Mozambique
Namibia
South Africa
Swaziland
Zambia
Zimbabwe
SA region
Kenya
Tanzania
Uganda
EA region
ALL
2.2
2.2.1
185
185
1?
524
18,933
84
10
284
20,021
390
1?
524
18,933
84
10
284
20,021
394
4
4
14
404
20,425
14
408
20,429
Black Rhino Diceros bicornis (BR)

D.b.bicornis
D.b.michaeli
D.b.minor
SouthWestern
Eastern
SouthCentral
1
27
1
9
26
0
1,750
2,068
18
27
424
4,323
631
127
27
2,323
758
5,081
9
26
0?
1,750
208
1,959
0
1,959
68
68
631
100
731
799
Total
BR
1,792
18
27
424
2,296
THREATS AND TRENDS

Illegal killing
The AfRSG has provided updated rhino poaching numbers up to the end of June 2014 (Table 4). While poaching
encouragingly continues to decline in Zimbabwe, poaching at a continental level continued to escalate in 2013 with just over
1,100 being recorded poached. South Africa conserves 82% of Africas rhinos and it also has experienced the most poaching
in absolute terms since 2009 (for more information on rhinos in Southern Africa, see Volume 2 section 3.2.2). Poaching also
spiked in Kenya in 2013, and while at similar levels in relative terms, rhino poaching in Kenya is now a little higher than in
South Africa. While poaching levels in both these countries are currently still at sustainable levels (i.e. not currently leading to
population decline); both are approaching the tipping point where poaching ceases to be sustainable and deaths will start to
exceed births. Encouragingly, Table 4 shows that at a continental level poaching in the first half of 2014 has levelled off and
remains at average 2013 levels (3.00 rhinos poached/day).
45
Emslie RH and MH Knight (2014) Update on African Rhino status and poaching trends from the AfRSG. Report submitted to the 65th
Meeting of the CITES Standing Committee, 7-11 July 2014.

Final report
Page 31
Volume 6
RHINOS
Table 4. Reported numbers of white and black rhinos poached in Africa (from 2010 to 30 June 201446)
Country
Botswana
Kenya
Malawi
Mozambique
Namibia
South Africa
Swaziland
Tanzania
Uganda
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Total
Poached/day
2010
2011
22
25
16
2
333
10
448
2
52
426
1.17
2012
2013
2
29
2
16
1
668
2
59
1
17
6
1,004
35
520
1.42
29
749
2.05
18
1,107
3.03
2014
(to June)
23
2
1 (min)
10
496
1
2
4
539
3.00
Total
4
158
5
60
19
2,949
3
5
138
3,341
Data from IUCN SSC AfRSG, TRAFFIC and CITES Rhino Working Group
AfRSG modelling against a realistic range of assumed net reproductive population growth rates predicts that if continental
poaching continues to escalate exponentially in 2014 onwards as it has done since 2008-13 (+38.76% increase per year),
then the tipping point - when rhino numbers start to decline because deaths exceed births at a continental level - could be
reached sometime between 2014-2016. Furthermore, if poaching continued to increase exponentially at this rate, rhino
numbers are predicted to drop to less than 10,000 (by over 60%) by the end of 2019, and reach 0 the following year. However
the latter extinction in the wild is unrealistic as this simplistic modelling ignores the likelihood that the last few rhinos are likely
to be harder to find and poach, and most probably would be under very high protection. In reality therefore, it probably would
take longer to reach extinction than predicted by this simple exponential model.
Nonetheless this and other more conservative arithmetic models do highlight the urgent need to stop poaching from increasing,
or at the very least to significantly slow its rate of increase, to buy more time for other initiatives such as demand reduction to
work and prevent the gains of two decades being destroyed.
2.2.2
Illegal trade
The main threat to all rhinos is poaching for the international rhino horn trade. Historically the demand for rhino horn has been
based on two main uses: traditional use in oriental medicine, and ornamental use (for example, rhino horn is a highly prized
material for making ornately carved handles for ceremonial daggers or Jambiyas worn in some Middle East countries). Despite
the fact that rhino horn was officially removed many years ago from the formal pharmacopoeias of most countries including
China in favour of substitutes from other species (such as buffalo), and despite the fact that demand for jambiyas is now
negligible, there has in recent years been an upsurge in black market prices for rhino horn accompanied by an increase in
poaching in all range states.
These trends have coincided with the emergence of non-trraditional uses of rhino horn such as a supposed cancer treatment
(for which there is no supporting clinical evidence of its effectiveness), and as a detoxification ingredient to be shared with
friends as a symbol of wealth and high status. The latter is its main use in Viet Nam, to the extent that country is now rhino
horns largest consuming market47.
While these coincidences are relevant, the explanation for the recent upsurge is much more complex, involving the sequence
and interplay of many factors on both supply and demand sides of the market 48. As a result the average retail price of rhino
horn is believed to have risen from around $4,700 per kilogram in 1993 to as much as $65,000 per kilogram in 2012: if so
rhino horn is now worth more, per unit weight, than gold, diamonds or cocaine. Such high value has encouraged a far more
concerted and sophisticated organized crime element to enter the rhino horn market, and this is reflected in the tenacity and
methods used by the current illegal suppliers. Robberies of horns from museum specimens across Europe have taken place.
Even some dehorned rhinos have been poached because of the value of the remaining horn stubs.
46
Note that these figures represent the minimum number reported poached, and the true figure is likely to be higher as some carcasses will
not have been detected (especially in very large areas or in the case of very young animals). Young calves that disappeared or died after
their mothers were poached and injured animals that subsequently died are considered as poaching deaths. A few of the immobilised
animals that had horns hacked off have survived but these too have been counted as poached.
47 Milliken, T. and Shaw, J. (2012). The South Africa Viet Nam Rhino Horn Trade Nexus: A deadly combination of institutional lapses,
corrupt wildlife industry professionals and Asian crime syndicates. TRAFFIC, Johannesburg, South Africa. To download this report, go to:
http://www.traffic.org/species-reports/traffic_species_mammals66.pdf
48 t Sas-Rolfes M (2012) The Rhino Poaching Crisis: A Market Analysis. http://www.rhino-economics.com

Final report
Page 32
Volume 6
RHINOS
2.2.3
Other threats
Civil unrest, the free flow of weapons and better communication systems all have had a significant negative impact on African
rhino conservation efforts. Poaching and civil wars in both Democratic Republic of the Congo and neighbouring Sudan have
had a devastating impact on Northern White Rhino, with no confirmed reports from either country in several years. Black Rhino
populations in Angola, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mozambique, Namibia,
Rwanda, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda have to varying degrees all suffered from the consequences of war and civil unrest
since the 1960s. The negative effects of conflict have been exacerbated when combined with lack of political will and lack of
conservation expenditure by some governments. Some detrimental effects include trading of rhino horn and ivory for weapons,
increased poaching due to increased poverty in times of civil unrest, and diminished levels of protection for rhino populations
as funds are diverted away from wildlife departments.
In South Africa, live-sale of White Rhinos on auction, limited sport hunting of surplus males, and ecotourism have provided
incentives for private sector conservation and generated much needed funds which can help pay the high cost of successfully
monitoring, protecting and managing rhino. Historically this has resulted in a significant expansion of range and numbers on
private land, to the extent that there are now more White Rhino on private land in South Africa than there are rhino in the
whole of the rest of Africa. However increased poaching, increased security costs and perceived reduced incentives for their
conservation have resulted in declining White Rhino live-sale prices, and an increasing number of owners is now seeking to
get rid of their rhino. This worrying trend, which in 2014 shows no sign of abating, threatens to reverse the expansion of range,
and has the potential also to significantly reduce conservation budgets (due to declining live sales) and negatively affect
metapopulation growth rates in future.
The successful clamp down on pseudo-hunting by South Africa, the Czech Republic and Viet Nam that was initiated in early
2012 will have significantly constricted that particular source of illicit rhino horn supply (see Box 4), but the criminals so affected
could be expected to compensate by turning to alternative sources such as illegal dehorning, poaching, thefts or robberies.
However increases in poaching in Kenya and Zimbabwe in the last quarter of 2012 suggest that other factors completely
unrelated to South Africas policy decisions and legislative and law enforcement changes are needed to explain those
increases, such as increasing demand and value in end-use markets, leading to expanding corruption (government
involvement in the trade) and increasingly lucrative livelihood opportunities for poachers in source countries (greater numbers
of poor people deliberately choosing to become rhino poachers for money).
Box 4. How South Africa fights pseudo-hunting
Pseudo-hunting refers to the procedure whereby European individuals with no hunting experience or background are recruited by
Vietnamese middlemen representing organized crime groups to hunt rhinoceroses legally with the purpose of later obtaining their
horns for purposes other than hunting trophies. To counteract this South Africa (currently the primary source for illegal rhino horn
in light of the number of animals that continue to be poached there), has introduced additional measures in terms of the regulation
of the hunting of rhinoceros. These include all applicants being required to provide proof: that they belong to hunting associations
in their country of residence; that they have hunted African species before; and that they provide a curriculum vitae in this regard.
In addition, South Africa considers whether the country of usual residence has legislation that will enable them to monitor the use
of the trophy once exported from South Africa. In this regard, South Africa liaises with the importing countries as soon as applications
are received. Since the introduction of these measures there has been a significant reduction in the number of applications to hunt
rhinoceros and the applications received are from countries that historically hunted in South Africa. Permits are currently not issued
to Vietnamese citizens and this restriction will remain in place until Viet Nam can confirm whether the rhino horn trophies exported
to Viet Nam are still in the possession of the hunters. However, this approach could be abused if, as the Czech Republic reports,
third country nationals claim to be the exporter whilst they are just middle men. To avoid this loophole, all countries should be
encouraged to cooperate with the precautionary screening being undertaken by South Africa of all countries claimed as
destinations, to ensure that rhino horns are only exported where the aforementioned requirements have been met.
Other threats that can cause populations to decline include habitat changes, competing species and alien plant invasions.
2.3 CONSERVATION PLANNING AND COORDINATION
In 1999, IUCN helped produce an African Rhino Conservation and Action Plan (ARCAP). This still provides the continental
framework with guidelines for the successful conservation of African rhinos, highlighting specific actions that have formed and
should continue to form part of successful rhino conservation strategies and policies. Range state management authorities
and stakeholders have the responsibility and mandate to conserve rhinos in their respective countries, and the Continental
plan seeks to provide them with guidance to assist in the development and implementation of sound rhino conservation policies
Final report
Page 33
Volume 6
RHINOS
and plans. Over the years IUCN SSCs African Rhino Specialist Group (AfRSG)49 has, on request, routinely assisted Range
States develop and revise their own national plans and strategies, and these are usually reviewed and updated every 5-10
years.
A list of known rhino strategies is given in Table 5. Southern Africa is the only region to have prepared its own plan, but this
has not been updated since the end of funding for the SADC Regional Programme for Rhino Conservation. Otherwise, national
action plans and strategies have been prepared by all countries with confirmed and viable populations. Even Mozambique,
which has few if any rhinos of its own, is under pressure from CITES to submit an Action Plan to the Secretariat by 31 October
2014. This is because of the impact that the weak law enforcement capacity of that country is having on South African rhinos,
and which facilitates the trafficking of South African horn to Asia through Mozambique. A number of bodies exist which provide
oversight and coordination to these Plans. Chief amongst these is the AfRSG which maintains a database on the distribution
and numbers of all sub-species and rates populations as Key and Important in terms of how critical they are for the species
survival.
Table 5. List of Rhino Action Plans by region and country
IUCN African Rhino Conservation and Action Plan (1999)
SADC Regional Rhino Conservation Strategy 2005-10 and Guidelines for Implementing SADC Rhino Conservation Strategies
(2006)
Central
West
East Africa
Southern Africa
Africa
Africa
No rhinos Kenya: Conservation South Africa: Biodiversity Management Plan for the Black Rhinoceros (Diceros No rhinos
left
left
and Management
bicornis) in South Africa 2011-2020 (2011)
Plan for the Black South Africa: Strategy for the Conservation and sustainable use of wild
Rhino D.b.michaeli
populations of Southern White Rhino Ceratotherium simum simum in South
2012-2016 (2012)
Africa (2000) which will be replaced by Biodiversity Management Plan for the
White Rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum) in South Africa 2013-2018 (has
Tanzania;
Rhino
been drafted and scheduled to be finalised 2014)
Management Plan
2010-2015 (2010)
South Africa: National Strategy for the safety and security of rhinoceros
populations in South Africa (2010)
Uganda
No
approved plan but a Namibia: Black Rhinoceros Conservation Strategy (1997). This has been
rhino conservation
updated (first submission July 2010 and second submission Jan 2012 but still
and management
is awaiting final approval).
plan is being drafted Namibia: Species Management Plan White Rhinoceros Ceratotherium simum
and it is hoped this
(2012)
will be finalised in Zimbabwe rhino policy and management framework 2011-16 (2011)
2014
Botswana: Conservation and Management Strategy for the White Rhinoceros
Ceratotherium simum and the Black Rhinoceros Diceros bicornis in Botswana
(2005) (which will be replaced by a version revised in 2010, with further edits
in 2013, and which is awaiting formal ratification)
Swaziland: Rhino Management Strategy (2009)
Zambia: Rhino conservation plan 2005-2010(2005). This is due to be revised
in 2014
Malawi: Rhino Management Strategic Plan (2007)
All rhino range states are Party to CITES (as are most consumer states), and with all populations listed on either Appendix
I or II, the Convention provides the single most powerful instrument available to influence action to protect and manage rhino
populations on the one hand, and investigate and control the trade in live animals and horn on the other. CITES decisions on
these matters are guided primarily on information collated and interpreted by the AfRSG, AsRSG and TRAFFIC, these bodies
being mandated to report to Conferences of the Parties, the CITES Standing Committee and the Committees Rhino Working
Group.
Thus the AfRSG is the continental coordinating body for rhino conservation in Africa. In addition there are a number of regional
African rhino conservation coordination initiatives including the South African Development Community (SADC) Rhino
Management Group, the recently formed East African Rhino Management Group, and the Southern African Rhino and
Elephant Security Group/Interpol Environmental Crime Working Group.
At a national level, the agency responsible for wildlife management is generally responsible for the implementation of country
plans. National level associations also exist to coordinate private rhino holders, such as the Private Rhino Owners Association
of South Africa, and the Association of Private Land Rhino Sanctuaries of Kenya.
49
The AfRSG is one of the many Specialist Groups that make up IUCNs Species Survival Commission, or SSC

Final report
Page 34
Volume 6
RHINOS
2.4
ACTION BEING TAKEN
The recent escalation in rhino poaching has stimulated a significant response from IGOs, governments and NGOs comparable
to that afforded the parallel elephant and ivory crisis. Indeed rhino horn is the more valuable commodity, 1 kg being worth
more than 20 kg of ivory, and thus more easily transported and hidden than ivory.
The problems confronting the rhino however may be more intractable than those facing the elephant due to its longer history
as an endangered species, and the fact that horn - unlike ivory - has alleged medicinal values.
Most rhino conservation plans and projects aim to support one or more of the strategic approaches discussed below.
Government action in these areas generally conforms with the priorities identified in their respective Rhino Action Plans. Kenya
and South Africa in particular have increased considerably the resources available to protect their rhino populations and to
identify horn smuggled through or out of their countries.
2.4.1
Awareness raising
Awareness of the rhino poaching and horn trade crisis has been raised through a variety of means including publications,
meetings, campaigns and other initiatives. A few notable examples are:
In May 2011 the CITES Secretariat distributed an updated briefing document on the Poaching of and illegal
trade in rhinoceros
In 2012, in collaboration with the United Nations Television (UNTV), CITES produced a video documentary
titled Rhinos under threat about the current surge in the illegal killing of rhinoceroses and the international trade
in rhinoceros horn50.
Many international and local conservation NGOs have responded to the poaching crisis with their own
awareness and fund-raising campaigns to support specific rhino and horn-oriented programmes and projects
addressing both ends of the supply chain, as well as the routes in between. AWF for example has partnered
with WildAid and STE to undertake a public awareness campaign in China, and is initiating one in Africa and
Viet Nam. WWF continues as probably the longest term supporter of rhino conservation in Africa.
2.4.2
The investigative research and ensuing publications of Dr Esmond Bradley-Martin over more than two decades
right up to date. His efforts more than any other helped curb the appetite for rhino horn jambiya-handles.
Funds dedicated to Rhino Conservation
Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Fund. As part of its Wildlife Without Borders programme, the US Fish
and Wildlife Service administers the RTCF. This covers both Asian and African rhinos, the latter including
recent grants to projects in Kenya and South Africa.
Species Protection Grant Fund. This is a trust fund raised and administered by the African Wildlife
Foundation to protect a range of flagship species including African rhinos for which an associated action
plan has been developed using an in-house methodology that identified 10 key populations qualifying for
priority support51. The AWF plan is based on information from a Rhino Emergency Summit, comprising
representatives of rhino range States, the private sector, government officials and non-governmental
organizations, which it hosted at its Nairobi headquarters in April 2012. The aim of this Summit was to
synthesise current thinking on what really needs to be done to save the rhino from the scourge of poaching
and illegal horn demand, resulting in an independent global framework for action52.
50
See http://www.cites.org/eng/news/pr/2012/20120618_rhinos_under_threat_rio.php
AWF would not disclose the identity of these ten populations
52 Ferreira, S. M. and Okita-Ouma, B. (2012). A proposed framework for short-, medium- and long-term responses by range and consumer
States to curb poaching for African rhino horn. Pachyderm 51: 52 59.
51

Final report
Page 35
Volume 6
RHINOS
2.4.3
Monitoring and the biological management of metapopulations
All the key Range States have well established monitoring programmes which, through ear-notching and radio-tracking for
example, are providing information to guide biological management decision-making aimed at managing rhino populations for
rapid population growth. This has resulted in surplus animals being translocated to set up new populations both within and
outside the species former range.
2.4.4
Law enforcement
As for elephants and all endangered species, there are three principal strategies to counter the illicit trade that is threatening
their survival and which address the full rhino horn value chain, namely Stopping the Killing, Stopping the Trafficking and
Stopping the Demand. While some elements of each of these overarching strategic objectives as concern rhinos are discussed
here, a much fuller discussion of their application to the illicit trade and trafficking of wildlife products in general (not just rhino
horn), and from which rhinos will benefit, is given in sections 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8 of this Volume.
2.4.4.1
Stopping the Killing
Effective field protection of rhino populations has been critical. Many remaining rhino are now concentrated in fenced
sanctuaries, conservancies, rhino conservation areas and intensive protection zones where law enforcement effort can be
concentrated at effective levels using very well trained and equipped anti-poaching forces. SANParks is now translocating
rhinos from the important Kruger National Park population not only on strategic grounds (to move some animals to safer
locations further from Mozambique) but also to enhance metapopulation growth rates. There are also plans to set up an
Intensive Protection Zone in the south of the Park where most of the rhinos live.
Although this sort of approach has been favoured for over a decade, its efficacy is now being challenged as never before.
Most range states have responded by boosting security even more but, apart from the difficulty of financing yet higher costs,
many are already at the limit of what can be done and are finding that no amount of expenditure can give 100% protection
from highly motivated and equally well-equipped poachers.
Other Government actions being taken to help stop the killing involve promulgation of truly deterrent punishments for persons
caught poaching rhinos (and other wildlife). Here some countries lag far behind, such as Mozambique where until recently
rhino poaching was still being treated more as a misdemeanour than a criminal act. Therefore it is to be welcomed that
Mozambique in April 2014 finally approved new legislation criminalising rhino crimes with significantly increased penalties
available. However the extent to which this new legislation will be applied and the conviction rates and penalties handed down
remains to be seen. Concern continues to be expressed about arrested suspects in Mozambique being released without trial
and what has happened to some firearms and rhino horns taken from poachers and handed in to authorities. Consequently
the Environmental Investigation Agency and International Rhino Foundation have submitted a joint petition to US Authorities
calling for Pelly Amendment Sanctions against Mozambique for their failure to properly address the rhino poaching and horn
trafficking in which its citizens are involved53. As from December 2013, Kenya too has changed its legislation to include very
stiff penalties for rhino poaching, but concerns remain as to possible loopholes (see Volume 3 for Eastern Africa, section
3.2.1).
The NGO and IGO approach to stopping the killing typically involves helping strengthen Government operations at specific
sites, usually PAs with important rhino populations. The escalating threat of poaching is also stimulating an increasing effort
to integrate local communities into rhino conservation programmes.
Strategically, both Black and White Rhinos are now managed by a range of different stakeholders (private sector, community
and state) in a number of countries, with the involvement of the private sector in particular providing a critical boost to their
overall and long-term security. Over 5,500 White Rhino are now managed by the private sector throughout Africa with the
majority in South Africa. However as discussed above incentives are declining while protection costs and risks have increased
resulting in increased numbers of South African owners looking to get rid of their white rhino. In contrast to Southern White
Rhino, most Black Rhino on privately owned land are managed on a custodianship basis for the state, where they benefit from
generally very well resourced and managed security measures.
Under the Pelly Amendment to the US Fishermens Protective Act, the President is authorised to impose trade sanctions against any
countries seen to be undermining an international conservation agreement such as CITES. The threat of Pelly Amendment sanctions against
South Korea and Taiwan prompted action to tackle the illegal rhino horn trade in those countries.
53

Final report
Page 36
Volume 6
RHINOS
2.4.4.2
Stopping the Trafficking
To help reduce illegal trade and complement CITES international trade bans, domestic anti-trade measures and legislation
were implemented in the 1990s by a number of the major consumer states and law enforcement effort has been stepped up
in many consumer countries.
Following the threat of Pelly Amendment sanctions against Taiwan and potentially against South Korea and China, all three
countries rapidly prohibited rhino horn use in traditional medicine in 1993 and took steps to enforce the ban and make it work.
This led to a 15 year respite in serious rhino horn trading. Following protracted and unprecedented economic growth, the
emergence of Viet Nam as a major end-use market in the mid-2000s is the predominant factor giving rise to the current
resurgence in rhino horn trade. The dimensions of the current rhino crisis all date from around 2005.
Consequently, the illegal trade in rhinoceros horn continues to be one of the most structured criminal activities currently faced
by CITES. There are clear indications that organized crime groups are involved in rhinoceros poaching and illegal rhinoceros
horn trade. These groups operate in range States as well as Europe, where thefts of rhinoceros horns from museums, auction
houses, antique shops and taxidermists have occurred. Seizures and arrests have also been made in Australia, Hong Kong,
the Philippines and the USA54. Illegal rhinoceros horn trade has therefore become a major problem with an impact on several
continents. Increased international cooperation and a well-coordinated law enforcement response are required to address this
threat effectively.
Current responses are based on the need to integrate and coordinate the work of different agencies involved all along the
transit chain between the killing site at one end, to the buyer of rhino horn at the other. Although catalysed primarily by the
rhino horn and ivory trades, emerging anti-trafficking measures such as Wildlife Enforcement Networks (WENs) are relevant
and applicable to any illegal natural product, and as such are discussed in a separate chapter of this Report which deals with
the trade in African wildlife generally (see section 3.7 below).
Anti-trafficking measures specific to rhino horn include the following:
establishment by CITES in May 2011 of a Joint Ivory and Rhinoceros Enforcement Task Force to undertake
exchanges of intelligence regarding smuggling of ivory and rhinoceros specimens, and develop strategies for
combating illegal trade. Besides the Secretariat, members include the ASEAN Wildlife Enforcement Network
Programme Coordination Unit, INTERPOL, the Lusaka Agreement Task Force, the United Nations Office on Drugs
and Crime, the World Customs Organization and those Parties in Africa and Asia that are currently most affected
by the smuggling of ivory and rhinoceros specimens.
On 28 and 29 October 2013 representatives from 21 source, transit and destination countries came together under
the banner of the CITES Rhinoceros Enforcement Task Force in Nairobi, Kenya, to develop concrete strategies and
actions to combat rhinoceros poaching and the illegal trade in rhinoceros horn. The Task Force meeting provided
practical assistance to countries to implement enforcement-related CITES Decisions along with providing the
opportunity for direct and focused interaction to support international cooperation and stronger enforcement actions
on the ground
means of monitoring and tracking of legal horns have been developed and are beginning to be implemented, most
notably micro-chipping and forensic profiling
forensic investigation to determine the provenance of illegal seizures the subject of detailed discussion
in section 2.4.5 below
deployment of sniffer dogs specifically trained to detect rhino horn in port and airport situations (e.g. in
Kenya with support from the USFWS Rhino and Tiger Fund)
2.4.4.3
Stopping the Demand
In 2011 a unit of eight agents from the USFWS and prosecutors from the US Justice Department launched Operation Crash, which has
since undertaken a number of undercover investigations, resulting in the arrest of 18 people for trafficking, including owners of antique
shops, a rodeo cowboy, a nail salon proprietor and a convicted drug dealer. In almost all cases, the smugglers were buying rhino horn
through taxidermy websites, auction houses and through personal contacts in the US, and shipping it to China and Viet Nam. The US
government estimates the 18 smugglers trafficked more than $10 million in rhino horn.
54

Final report
Page 37
Volume 6
RHINOS
This approach aims to reduce market demand for rhino horn by conducting targeted and effective awareness campaigns. The
principal targets of these efforts are the current and potential buyers throughout East and South East Asia, but principally
China and Viet Nam. Unfortunately persuading these consumers to desist is likely to prove more difficult than for ivory. This
is because the value of rhino horn is influenced by the medicinal properties attributed to it both traditionally and by more recent
claims.
Be that as it may, efforts made to curb demand in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan during the 1970s, 80s and early 90s were
a notable success, and give reason to believe the same can be achieved again55. The predominantly international conservation
NGOs engaged in current demand reduction efforts believe that the battle to conserve rhinos can only be won if Asian
consumers can be educated or otherwise convinced that the use of rhino horn is inappropriate because 1) it is unethical to
poach rhinos and 2) it cannot be scientifically proven to work as medicine. WildAid is one such an organisation that has had
some success in using Asian celebrities to champion hard-hitting campaigns against the use of popular products such as
shark-fin soup, while TRAFFIC is engaging with respected business leaders who are influential forces in society to promote a
message that makes rhino horn usage socially unacceptable.
Unfortunately the contention that rhino horn has no medicinal value is not a universally accepted fact: indeed the TRAFFIC
study commissioned by CITES on this very matter was unable to dismiss the possibility entirely 56, and in fact the one known
proper double-blind clinical trial undertaken in Taiwan did find horn to have statistically significant fever-reducing properties,
although was not as effective as a cheaper western medicine. Certainly the belief in horns medicinal properties, including as
an aphrodisiac, remains strong amongst Chinese consumers as revealed by an awareness and attitudinal survey carried out
by WildAid and AWF in 201257.
Even if Western science were to establish that rhino horn has no healing properties, this would not easily negate the deeply
held beliefs and customs of the rich ancestral Eastern cultures involved. A strong belief just in itself is enough to create efficacy
through the mysterious but real placebo effect. Combine this with customs that make those responsible for the sick honourbound to try every last option for a cure, irrespective of cost, or face disgrace, and the difficulty of removing rhino horn from
TCMs pharmacopeia becomes clearer58. Indeed these influences probably contribute to the persistent demand for rhino horn,
despite China having banned its use since 1993. At the same time one must bear in mind the fact that as base populations
and their disposable incomes continue to grow, so too will the number of consumers to be re-educated, which also will work
against demand reduction efforts achieving a significant impact.
These challenges notwithstanding, CITES commissioned TRAFFIC to produce a demand reduction strategy that was annexed
to the Report presented by the Rhino Working Group at CoP16 in March 2013 59. It is notable that the Strategy includes no
specific mention of trying either to debunk rhino horns medicinal efficacy, or to publicise the cruel nature of the killing. Rather
it sensibly calls for more research before these and other approaches could be mounted with sufficient confidence to be sure
of the desired impact. To this end TRAFFIC is for example, profiling rhino horn buyers and users in Viet Nam in a very detailed
manner in order to identify and segment the target audiences for the campaign.
2.4.5
Forensic investigation to determine the provenance of seized rhino horn
An ability to trace confiscated horn back to its natural point of origin through forensic analysis has long been recognised as a
potentially powerful tool for understanding and dismantling the trade networks involved. The same methods can be used also
to register legal stocks, and aid their identification in the event of theft.
In June 2012 the Governing Council of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) approved a project to strengthen wildlife forensic
capabilities in South Africa to combat wildlife crimes. The US$ 2.6 million project was developed in cooperation with the
Department of Environmental Affairs of South Africa and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and with the
support of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), and assisted by a
number of invited specialists and experts including IUCN SSC's AfRSG. The objective of the project is to strengthen the
intelligence gathering and data analysis capacity of South Africa's overall wildlife sector through forensic-based technologies
focused on the rhinoceros. The GEF funding was to be used by the Government of South Africa for a dedicated forensic
55
Although there is little hard evidence that it is: see article by S.I. Roberton of WCS (3 November 2014)
http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2014/11/03/has-demand-for-rhino-horn-truly-dropped-in-vietnam/
56 Nowell K (2012) Assessment of Rhino Horn as a Traditional Medicine. CITES SC62 Doc. 47.2 Annex (Rev. 2)
57 http://www.wildaid.org/sites/default/files/resources/WEBReportRhinoHornDemand2014.pdf
58 In a situation like this where consumers are unable or unwilling to accept and purchase substitutes, the price of the product in demand
should be inelastic. Economic analyses have shown the price of rhino horn is indeed inelastic, and are able to explain why consumers
will not be deterred by ever higher prices (see Footnote 48 for Ref).This of course is a cause for great concern
59 TRAFFIC (2013) A strategy for reducing the demand for rhino horn products of illegal origin. CITES CoP16 Doc. 54.1 (Rev. 1) Annex
Final report
Page 38
Volume 6
RHINOS
laboratory facility to provide timely DNA analysis of forensic evidence for the prosecution of wildlife crimes, and enhance the
existing coordination and information sharing among all actors involved in the law enforcement and anti-poaching efforts in
the country and the region. The Department of Environmental Affairs of South Africa was designated the Executing Agency
for the project with UNEP as the Implementing Agency. Both greatly contributed to the elaboration of the project.
The Veterinary Genetics Laboratory (VGL) at the University of Pretoria has emerged as the country and indeed the continents
leading forensics lab with regard to rhinos specifically. The AfRSG report that was presented to CoP16 via the CITES
Secretariat in March 2013 discusses forensics but makes no mention of the GEF project60. It notes specifically however that
the comprehensive reference database for rhino DNA developed and run from VGL (known as RhODIS 61), continues to
expand, and DNA analyses are increasingly being used in criminal investigations and prosecutions. It notes also that a total
of 12,000+ samples from 5,600 rhino have been collected and submitted to the VGL. Since April 2012, South Africa legally
requires horn stockpiles and trophies to be DNA-sampled, as well as all animals that are immobilised in management
operations. Special collection kits have been developed to ensure that the chain of evidence is maintained.
As discussed in the relevant other sections of Volume 6 on elephants, ivory and wildlife trade generally, forensic capabilities
are relevant to the trade in many species, not just rhinos (see 3.7.5.4). Appropriately therefore, the CITES Secretariat is taking
the lead in coordinating initiatives to develop and use relevant technologies.
2.4.6
Consumptive utilisation
As with elephants and ivory there is, and has been for many years, a strong divergence of both perspective and opinion
between southern and east African range states as to the role of consumptive utilisation as a means of supporting rhino
conservation through the significant additional resources that could be so generated to increase intelligence and anti-poaching
efforts and reduce cost:benefits for poachers. The southern states with generally larger, better protected populations are pro
(see Volume 2, section 3.2.2.2), while the opposite applies in the east
2.4.6.1
Sport hunting
White Rhino (WR) sport hunting recommenced in 1968 when there were only an estimated 1,800 Southern White Rhino
(SWR) left in the wild in one country, South Africa (SA). Today WR may be hunted legally in Namibia as well as SA 62, and
while it is predominantly males that are hunted the odd old female may occasionally be taken.
In SA the WR hunt is not controlled through an official quota, but by a licensing system. At current hunting levels a quota is
not deemed necessary as there are no concerns as to the sustainability of the offtake: the numbers currently hunted are only
just over 0.5% of the population.
All applications for a licence to hunt rhino must now go from the Provincial authorities through to the responsible Minister also
(effectively through Department for Environmental Affairs, DEA), as an extra check and balance. There is a system in place
to try to ensure all hunts will further demographic and/or genetic conservation goals, with the SADC Rhino Management Group
providing DEA with an independent check on the evaluation and scoring of applications.
Recent legal hunting data for WR in South Africa are shown in Table 6. An approved permit is valid for 12 months. Thus an
application can be made and approved in one year, with the animal hunted in the next. There are fewer hunts than applications
because some applications from nationals of countries such as Viet Nam and Czech Republic are not being approved at the
moment as a result of the major legislative changes introduced in 2012 to control pseudo-hunting (see Box 4).
Table 6. White Rhino legal hunting data (South Africa)
Year
2011
2012
2013
Applications
226
91
109
Licensed
hunts
173
73
91
60
Emslie RH, Milliken T and Talukdar B (2013) African and Asian Rhinos: Status, conservation and trade. CITES CoP16 Doc. 54.2 (Rev.1)
Annex 2
61 The principle of the RhODIS (Rhino DNA Identification System) database is based on the CODIS system of human DNA profiles of the
FBI, hence the name. The main aim of this database is the forensic application of matching recovered horns to poached rhino carcasses.
62 Although Swaziland was granted a nominal hunt quota by CITES, they have not hunted any WR as yet. The reason for obtaining a quota
was to keep management options open should they end up with an aggressive male that was killing other rhinos. Rather than export the
problem animal elsewhere, its removal through a legal hunt would generate much needed revenue to support conservation efforts, or buy a
replacement rhino to boost population vigour.

Final report
Page 39
Volume 6
RHINOS
Source AfRSG/DEA
The data in Table 6 show the huge impact these changes had on both applications and the number of hunts. In 2010, 70% of
applications to hunt were from Vietnamese, and 2011 was the year of peak applications and hunts. Applications to hunt have
declined considerably since the implementation of the measures introduced in 2012.
While SAs WR are on CITES Appendix II, Namibias are on Appendix I. Nonetheless, some WR can be and are hunted in
Namibia. However, details of the process or how many hunts have been approved and taken place in recent years could not
be obtained before going to press, but the offtake is far below that of SA.
By the end of 2013, SA and Namibia conserved between them an estimated 19,460 or 95.3% of the SWR in the wild. Despite
the recent well publicised problems with pseudo-hunting in SA, on balance hunting has played a net positive role in the
expansion of WR numbers and range. Any bans on the importation of WR hunting trophies would likely have negative
consequences for WR conservation in these two countries.
In 2004 the CITES CoP13 approved very limited annual hunting quotas of up to five Black Rhinos (BR) in both SA and
Namibia. The quota represents less than 0.3% of the population, and in the case of BR only males are hunted.
Decisions on rhinos to be hunted in Namibia are made by the Ministry of Environment and Tourism and money raised (less
expenses) goes into a ring-fenced account for rhino projects in Namibias Game Products Trust Fund. In SA, a hunt has to
meet specific criteria showing it will further demographic and/or genetic conservation goals in order to qualify for consideration.
One cannot simply apply to hunt just to raise money. As an independent check the SADC Rhino Management Group review
applications to ensure they meet criteria and to give feedback to the DEA which makes the final application approval decisions
each year.
Since 2004 neither country has hunted all the BR they could, and BR range and numbers have increased further in both
countries to an estimated 3,820 or 75.1% of the African total. Counter-intuitively, hunting of very small numbers of specific
individual "surplus" black rhino bulls can enhance the demographic and genetic conservation of the species.
Apart from being sustainable, to date hunts of both species have also generated additional revenue to support and incentivise
conservation efforts in line with recommendations in CITES Resolution 9.14 (Rev). The positive role or rhino hunting was
recognised at IUCNs last World Conservation Congress.
2.4.6.2
Horn farming and trading
The South African government has for some time been seriously exploring the contentious issue of getting the current trade
ban lifted particularly but not exclusively - so that private rhino owners could harvest and sell horn from live animals (state
and community owned horn also would be traded)63. Indeed, following a long public consultation the South African cabinet
recently approved that a proposal to trade be developed and submitted for consideration at the next CITES Conference of
Parties in 2016 (CoP17). Whether this goes ahead remains to be seen because a recent questionnaire survey of 104 rhino
experts and owners recommended that South Africa should not lift the current national moratorium on the trade in rhino horn
while an international ban existed. The survey indicated that doing so might lead to greater laundering of horn onto the illegal
market, tarnishing South Africas conservation and compliance image.
After South Africa, Namibia conserves the next largest number of white and black rhinos (8.9%) conserving slightly more rhino
than in the rest of Africa (excluding South Africa) combined. Its latest approved national white rhino strategy also calls for the
development of a legal trade in rhino horn. Thus the two most successful and most important African rhino range states that
together conserve in excess of 91% of the continent's rhinos have indicated a desire to trade horn in future.
It is interesting to note here that enterprises in China are advocating a similar horn-farming approach, and have already
imported White Rhinos for captive breeding apparently with that ultimate end in mind 64,65. In this case however, Chinas own
1993 ban on the use of rhino horn would have to be lifted.
63 In other words advocates hope a legal trade would once again incentivise private sector and community to conserve rhino and help
reverse a worrying trend where increasing numbers of private sector owners are seeking to get rid of their rhino or have already done so
64 Yanyan D and Qian J (2008) Proposal for protection of the rhinoceros and sustainable use of rhinoceros horn. State Soft Sciences Project,
Development Strategy for Traditional Chinese Medicine Research, Chinese Institute of Science and Technolgy, Beijing
65 Cota-Larson R (2013) Rhinos from South Africa to China: a troubling timeline. Annamiticus, South Africa pp 1-15

Final report
Page 40
Volume 6
RHINOS
In terms of scientific feasibility the approach appears sound, and many have argued that a very skilfully regulated legal trade,
in which horn is harvested renewably from live animals, would offer financial incentives for rhino ownership and potentially
deliver benefits to local communities and the state also 66,67.
Put simply however, those with a pure conservation agenda could only support a legal horn trade if there was incontrovertible
evidence that it would significantly reduce the illegal killing of wild rhinos and/or the demand for their horns throughout Africa.
It is very unlikely that either sustainable hunts or horn-farming can do this because - while they may not threaten the species
directly - they can and do open the door to illegal trade. The evidence that legalised trade would generate a directly positive
impact on wild populations is largely theoretical, and assumes a degree of tight control that in reality would always be very
difficult if not impossible to achieve.
The problems encountered in the management of pseudo-hunting are a reminder of such difficulties (see Box 4). Putting in
place the controls necessary in both the supply country and the hunters home country to prevent this scam generates
associated management costs that offset the revenue obtained. In any case, however diligent the enforcement machinery
such controls can never pre-empt every scam.
All in all there is a strong risk that legal trading would in practice have the opposite effect on wild populations to that intended.
The institutional and market arrangements needed to manage a legal trade would irrespective of their sophistication - not
only be extremely costly but also, in view of the intractable and price-inelastic nature of the demand48 be quite unable to close
the black-market for illegal horn any more effectively than has the current total ban.
These and other doubts have received a powerful boost from a very important study published as recently as June 2014 which
dismisses the key economic assumptions and arguments advanced by leading pro-trade anlaysts as invalid68. The counterarguments are too complex to detail here, but the inescapable conclusion is that there is no branch of economic theory, let
alone practice, that can result in a positive, stable outcome from a proposed market beset with real-world complexities
including: the vicissitudes of production from non-equilibrium wild herbivore populations; surrounding human communities who
live in extreme poverty; management authorities infused with a culture of corruption stemming from the highest levels of their
governance; and, most intractably, a growing and capricious demand from the Far East being served by a middle-man trading
system rife with criminality. A mechanism able to balance supply and demand in such a milieu appears increasingly illusory.
Because of all these compelling reasons to question the viability of a regulated trade in rhino horn, it remains extremely unlikely
that CoP17 will approve any related applications. The risk and cost of failure is too high.
2.4.7
Rhino Impact Bonds
The AfRSG has been working closely with the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) and other United for Wildlife (UfW) partners
to investigate, develop and try a new innovative form of funding of field conservation action. The Royal Foundation of Princes
William and Harry and the Duchess of Cambridge is interested in exploring the possible value of Impact Bonds as a rhino
conservation-funding tool. The idea is that each project bond will have a set of measurable target deliverables (such as
increasing rhino numbers by x or keeping poaching below y). The concept is that philanthropists provide initial funding for
such impact bonds and, if the project is successful in delivering against the measurable objectives set out, the philanthropists
will be reimbursed by other participating bodies such as the Global Environment Facility (GEF) or governments. Unlike
traditional grant projects, governments or donors only have to pay out on successes, and philanthropists are also given
incentive to back good projects likely to deliver so they can get their seed funding back and be able to re-invest it to achieve
more.
Following a February 2014 meeting coinciding with the London Illegal Wildlife Trade Conference, the concept and a draft
document jointly prepared by ZSL, Social Finance and AfRSG were presented to potential funders. The idea was welcomed
by the GEF and an initial Project Identification Form for US$ 2 million to develop and test out the concept was submitted to
and approved by GEF. The various cooperating partners are assisting by developing a full GEF proposal and liaising with the
Royal Foundation to seek support to boost the initial funding for the demonstration phase of the project up to a total of US$ 5
million.
Child B (2012) The sustainable use approach could save South Africas rhinos. S Afr J Sci. 108(7/8), Art. #1338, 4 pp
Biggs D, Courchamp F, Martin R and Possingham H 2013. Legal trade of Africas rhino horns. Science 339:1038-1039
68 Nadal, A and F. Aguayo (2014) Leonardos Sailors: a review of the economic analysis of wildlife trade. LCSV Working paper Series No6.
The Leverhulme Centre for the Study of Value, School of Environment, Education and Development, University of Manchester. The senior
author, Alejandro Nadal, is a Professor at the Centre for Economic Studies, El Colegio de Mxico and Chair of the Theme on the
Environment, Macroeconomics, Trade and Investment (TEMTI) of CEESP-IUCN
66
67

Final report
Page 41
Volume 6
RHINOS
If this funding model proves to work in practice, the hope is that it could be rolled out on a bigger scale. In the initial stage it
has been decided to focus on a few projects relating to a small number of Key black, white and greater one-horned rhino
projects in Africa and Asia. At the time of writing those involved are working to review and decide on possible sites to fund.
2.5
The basic strategy for rhinos going forward must be to have at least one or two viable populations of each sub-species survive
the current onslaught. If that can be done a recovery from the brink, as proved once before, always remains possible.
The preceding review of issues and actions suggests that any EC support to this objective would be best directed towards the
following short and medium term interventions.
2.5.1
Urgent and short term measures
2.5.1.1
Forensic analysis of rhino horn in Eastern Africa
The importance of being able to ascertain the provenance of seized rhino horn was noted in 2.4.5 above. As also noted there,
capacity for this within Africa is well established at the VGL lab in Pretoria, and is under development at the KWS lab in Nairobi
(see 3.2.2 in Volume 3).
Because labs capable of analysing rhino horn have the potential also to determine the provenance of ivory, as well as the
identity of any animal tissue sample, their development is an important part of the overall approach to curbing the trafficking
of wildlife in general. Accordingly recommendations on EU support for forensic labs are presented under the Trade section of
this Volume (see 3.9.3.4).
As regards rhinos specifically however, it can be noted here that further development of these laboratories would be in line
also with the following resolutions:
a motion passed at the recent IUCN World Conservation Congress calling upon African range States to expand
further the use of DNA profiling of horns (using the RhODIS) as an innovative means of combating the illegal killing
of rhinos and the trafficking of horn
the recommendation put forward in the AfRSGs report to CoP16 that the use of standardised DNA profiling (using
RhODIS protocols for African rhino horn and a similar initiative for Asian horn) needs be expanded to other States
around the world with ex-situ rhinos and horn stocks (particularly zoos and museum specimens) to facilitate
monitoring and investigations with regard to illegal trade in horn69.
2.5.1.2
Reducing the demand for rhino horn
Rhinos are in real danger of extinction if current trends continue unabated. Given that the trade in horn is the primary cause
of this situation, it follows that much effort must be put into disrupting that trade. Of the approaches available to do that,
reducing or even eliminating the basic consumer demand that drives the trade remains the most promising and must therefore
be a priority for funding support.
Not only will changing perspectives on effective action emerge from the ongoing work of TRAFFIC and the NGOs already
working on the ground in Asia (see 2.4.1), but any attempt to change the attitudes of centuries and the behaviour of very many
millions of people will require a massive effort to be sustained over many years, which will not be possible without strong
support from major donors like the EU.
2.5.2
Medium and long term measures
2.5.2.1
Monitoring and coordination
Without continual monitoring, the objective basis on which to decide what actions are needed where and how urgently will be
lost. It is in this context that all stakeholders in rhino conservation need to recognise the invaluable services and inputs provided
by the AfRSG in terms of general coordination, technical guidance and advice given to CITES and managers, maintenance
69
TRAFFIC (2013) A strategy for reducing the demand for rhino horn products of illegal origin. CITES CoP16 Doc. 54.1 (Rev. 1) Annex

Final report
Page 42
Volume 6
RHINOS
of the population viability and importance ratings, and publication of the journal Pachyderm70. At the last three CITES CoPs,
the AfRSG together with the AsRSG and TRAFFIC have submitted joint reports on behalf of range states which then form part
of the CITES Secretariat's report to the Parties on Rhinos: many of these reports' recommendations have become Decisions
approved by the Parties.
All this is typically done on a shoestring, and efforts to sustain the flow of money needed to hold and attend meetings, publish
documents etc consume a disproportionate amount of the core staffs time.
The present study would like to recommend not only that the EC should provide fully comprehensive core funding to the
AfRSG over at least 5 years, but also to all other Specialist Groups with a remit in Africa. This is because they all make
contributions equivalent to those of the AfRSG, and they all face similar funding challenges. A suitably well-endowed
programme could be negotiated with IUCN.
It should be noted that by helping understand the conservation needs of very many taxa, this single intervention has
the potential to provide multiple benefits. As such it would be an extremely cost-effective use of conservation funds.
For similar reasons of coordination, it is recommended that the EC extends its support for the CITES Joint Ivory and
Rhinoceros Enforcement Task Force, whether directly or through the ICCWC (see also 3.9.3.1).
2.5.2.2
Direct support to key rhino populations
In other parts of this report, arguments are presented to justify a need to focus EU resources on a selection of areas that are
of such outstanding importance and value that basically a commitment should be made to protect them for posterity, and at
all costs. It is further argued that if that perception of value is primarily one of the developed world, then it is the developed
world that must be ready and willing to bear those costs, alone if absolutely necessary.
There is no doubt that rhinos, along with certain other iconic species, should feature as a major criterion in the identification
of these Key Landscapes for Conservation (KLC), not simply because of their own charisma, but also because they provide
a very good example of species whose last best hope may well lie in high western perceptions of their value. Rhinos do indeed
feature as one of the criteria used to identify KLCs (see Volume 1, section 5.1).
It is clear from the review above and other analyses of options, that intensive in situ protection and biological management is
the most effective conservation strategy but that this comes at an extreme cost if it is be effective against the highly motivated
and very well equipped poaching syndicates operating today. Consequently many if not most range States will find it very
difficult to provide and sustain this level protection to all, or even some, of their populations without external assistance.
An indefinite commitment to KLCs that hold key rhino populations is probably the most effective way in which the EU can
make a contribution to the species survival in perpetuity.
At the same time however, the species extreme endangerment argues for action to protect all priority rhino populations, even
if they are not in KLCs. As noted earlier, the IUCNs AfRSG maintains a list of Key and Important rated populations, as well
as data on the current status of each. However for security reasons (at the request of some range States) it does not generally
release or publish these lists or data. Thus if in due course the EU commits funds to supporting rhino conservation, it should
contact the AfRSG Secretariat directly which will then consider sharing this information on a confidential basis to help the EU
select appropriate sites for projects that are of continental significance for rhino conservation.
As a possible feature of its support to rhino conservation, the EU should consider emulating the GEF as one of the institutional
guarantors of Rhino Impact Bonds who would reimburse the initial philanthropist financiers in the event the envisaged impact
target is realised (see 2.4.7).
70
Pachyderm publishes papers and notes concerning all aspects of the African elephant, the African rhino and the Asian rhino with a focus
on the conservation and management of these species in the wild. At the same time, the journal is an important platform for disseminating
information concerning activities of the AfRSG and the AsRSG.

Final report
Page 43
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
SECTION 3. WILDLIFE TRADE

ACRONYMS
ACP
AIRCOP
ANPN
ARREST
ASEAN
AU
AWF
BMZ
CA
CC
CCP
CCPCJ
CITES
CMS
COMIFAC
CoP
CSI
DEFRA
DETECT
DG DEVCO
DNA
DRC
EA
EAGLE
EC
ECOSOC
EO
ETIS
EU
EUR
FLEGT
FZS
GEF
GP
HAWEN
ICCWC
ID
IFAW
IGAD
IGO
INTERPOL
IUCN
JPCU
KWS
LAGA
LATF
LE
MIKE(S)
MoU
NCU
NEST
NGO
PA
PAW
PROTECT
RoC

Airport Communication Programme
Agence Nationale des Parcs Nationaux (Gabon)
Africas Regional Response to Endangered Species Trafficking
Association of South East Asian Nations
African Union
Bundesministerium fr wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung
Central Africa
Consultative Communication
Container Control Programme
Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice (of the UN)
Commission of Central African Forests
Crime Scene Investigation
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Detection of Environmental Crime Training
EC Directorate General for Development and Cooperation
Eastern Africa
European Commission
Economic and Social Council (of the UN)
Executive Order
European Union
Euro
Forest Law Enforcement Governance and Trade
Global Programme for Combating Wildlife and Forest Crime
Horn of Africa Wildlife Enforcement Network
Identity
Inter-governmental Authority on Development
Joint Port Control Unit
The Last Great Ape Organisation
Lusaka Agreement Task Force
Law Enforcement
Monitoring Illegal Killing of Elephants (and other Endangered Species)
National Coordinating Unit
National Environmental Security Task Force
Protected Area
Partnership for Action against Wildlife Crime
PA operational and tactical enforcement conservation training
Republic of Congo

Final report
Page 44
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
SMART
TA
TOCU
TRAFFIC
TRAPS
UfW
UK
UN
UNDP
UNEA
UNEP
UNESCO
UNGA
UNTOC
UNODC
UNWTO
US(A)
USAID
USFWS
VGL
WA
WACI
WCO
WCS
WEMS
WEN
WENSA
WIST
WLFC
WWF
ZSL
Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool

Technical Assistant/Assistance
Transnational Organised Crime Unit
Trafficking, Response, Assessment and Priority Setting
United for Wildlife
United Kingdom
United Nations
United Nations Environment Assembly
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
United Nations General Assembly
United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime
United Nations World Tourism Organisation
West Africa
West African Coast Initiative
World Customs Organization
Wildlife Enforcement Monitoring System
Wildlife Enforcement Network for Southern Africa
Wildlife Incident Support Team
Wildlife and Forest Crime

Final report
Page 45
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
The global trade in wildlife is valued at many billions of dollars per year (Box 5). It includes both live animals (for the pet trade,
research labs, zoos and aquaria) and their dead parts (for food, medicine, clothing, jewellery and ornaments). Although
popularly associated with animals, the term wildlife encompasses flora also, and the trade in plants and trees (for medicine,
fuel, timber, furniture and so on) is equally vast. While much of this commerce is legal, a great deal is not and the scale of the
illicit wildlife trade and the corresponding pressure on the wild resource base are escalating alarmingly, with the national and
international enforcement agencies tasked with combating this struggling to keep up.
Box 5. The value of the illegal wildlife trade
There are many different estimates of the financial value of illicit wildlife trafficking worldwide, but reliable estimates are hard to find,
mainly because the trade is illegal. Unreported and unregulated fisheries trade alone has been estimated at between US$4.2 billion
and US$9.5 billion per year, the value of the illegal timber trade as much as US$7 billion per year, and the illicit wildlife trafficking
(excluding fisheries and timber) as between US$7.8 billion and US$10 billion per year. Combining these numbers, illicit wildlife
trafficking (including timber and fisheries) comprises the fourth largest global illegal trade after narcotics, humans and counterfeit
products. 71
The trade in wildlife has become increasingly attractive to transnational organised crime networks and now resembles in
character and scale other types of global criminal activity, such as trafficking in drugs, human beings, firearms and counterfeit
goods. Well-armed, well-equipped, and well-organized networks of poachers, criminals, and corrupt officials exploit porous
borders weak institutions to profit from trading in illegally taken wildlife. With rebel militias and possibly terrorist groups also
using it for funding purposes, wildlife trafficking poses a serious threat not only to biodiversity, but also to peace, security and
livelihoods in affected territories.
Africa is arguably affected more than any other continent, because the conditions that encourage and facilitate the illegal trade
in wildlife are generally more prevalent there than elsewhere. Not surprisingly, it is endangered species that are most seriously
impacted. Whilst the ivory and rhino horn trades provide the most potent symbol of this problem, very many other species are
affected. The list is far too long for exhaustive review here, but just a few species of notable concern can illustrate the diversity
of taxa involved, such as the Chimpanzee72, Pangolins73, Abalone74 and African Blackwood75.
Of course the illegal trade in wildlife occurs both within and between national borders. Although it is international rather than
domestic trade that most often poses both the greatest threat and greatest enforcement challenge, there are in either case
many common features regarding both the drivers involved and the response needed. These are reviewed below in general
terms: specific analyses of the trades in ivory and rhino horn are given in the overall Sections of this Volume 6 on Elephants
(1) and Rhinos (2) that precede this one on Trade.
WWF/Dalberg (2012), Lutte contre contre le trafic illgal despces sauvages : consultation avec les gouvernements. WWF International,
Gland, Suisse
72 Pan troglodytes (just one of the Great Apes affected)
73 Scaly Anteaters with 4 African species: Smutsia temminckii (Cape or Temmincks ground Pangolin), Smutsia gigantea (Giant ground
Pangolin), Phataginus tricuspis (Tree or African White-bellied Pangolin), Uromanis tetradactyla (Long-tailed or Black-bellied Pangolin)
74 Large edible sea snails of the genus Haliotis, notably H. midae from South Africa. See Steinberg J (2005) The illicit abalone trade in South
Africa. ISS paper 105. Institute for Security Studies, South Africa
75 Dalbergia melanoxylon an extremely valuable wood used for musical instruments and carvings
71

Final report
Page 46
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
3.1
FUNDAMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS
In wildlife trade, whether legal or illegal, there is always a value chain from the capture or harvesting of wildlife to its
transportation and marketing to consumers. Intermediate collation and/or processing destinations are usually found along the
chain. Organized criminal groups essentially form distribution networks across national boundaries linking source countries
and consumer countries, often via important transit destinations. They commonly use indirect routes to avoid detection.
There are many different actors who facilitate the supply side of illicit wildlife trafficking. Illegal wildlife products are generated
in a range of different ways from local individual poachers who, facilitated by local middlemen, act out of opportunism or
need; to criminal and rebel groups that seek to finance their illegal activities; and professional international hunters who use
their experience for higher profit, often working for international clients. Illegal wildlife products can also come from legally
hunted trophies, privately held stocks not declared or registered with the authorities, or the theft of products from private and
public owners and institutions.
The well organized and equipped criminal groups involved are attracted by the availability of huge profits at a comparatively
low risk, thanks usually to the absence of credible enforcement, prosecution, penalties and other deterrents, and the presence
of corrupt officials all along the value chain.
Weak governance meaning a weak rule of law and an associated lack of institutional checks on power - is thus a major
driver of wildlife crime as it fosters corruption. Poverty also plays a key role in motivating actors, particularly those at the very
bottom of the supply chain. Poaching thus tends to thrive in places where corruption is rife, government enforcement is weak
and there are few alternative economic opportunities.
3.2
3.2.1
INTERNATIONAL TRADE REGULATORS AND MONITORS

ICCWC
The International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC) is based upon the idea that five international
organizations with mandates and expertise related to the wildlife law enforcement chain could, by aligning their efforts, provide
a catalyst for significantly enhanced global cooperation and capacity to combat wildlife and forest crimes.
ICCWC was formed in 2011 and is a collaboration between the CITES Secretariat, INTERPOL, the United Nations Office on
Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the World Bank and the World Customs Organization (WCO). A profile of each of these members
of ICCWC is given in sections below.
The consortium is supported by a Letter of Understanding between the five organizations which, by working collaboratively,
form a unique pool of technical and programming expertise that can support national law enforcement agencies and regional
enforcement networks, facilitate national multiagency cooperation, assist countries to review their current responses to wildlife
crime, and jointly develop capacitybuilding materials and tools to enhance the skills of national enforcement agencies in
combating wildlife crime. Key aims include long-term capacity building (including the use of modern investigative techniques,
such as DNA analysis), and improving international information and intelligence exchange for the better coordination of
enforcement efforts.
The ICCWC Strategic Mission 20142016 outlines five broad areas in which ICCWC will focus its activities to ensure that the
perpetrators of serious wildlife and forest crime (WLFC) face a formidable and coordinated law enforcement response:
Strengthening cooperation and coordination in combating WLFC
Facilitating analysis of national responses to WLFC
Building capacity to prevent and respond to WLFC
Raising awareness and support for measures to combat WLFC
Improving use of knowledge and innovation to inform contemporary approaches to WLFC
The ICCWC Strategic Mission 20142016 is coordinated by the ICCWC Senior Experts Group (SEG) comprising technical
specialists from all five organizations. The SEG is Chaired by the CITES Secretariat and meets quarterly to discuss ICCWC
activities and matters related to ICCWC, and holds monthly teleconferences between facetoface meetings. The Strategic
Mission requires external funding, and the EC is among ICCWCs main donors, having provided EUR 1.7m over three years.
An important ICCWC product is the Wildlife and Forest Crime Analytic Toolkit, built on the technical expertise
of all ICCWC partners as well as through extensive consultations with experts from across the globe from a variety
Final report
Page 47
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
of related fields. The Toolkit is designed to facilitate national assessments of the main issues relating to wildlife
and forest offences, and to identify the preventive and criminal justice responses needed at the national level.
ICCWC will support countries interested in conducting such a review during the entire process including in
mobilizing funds, hiring experts, analysing the results, and designing and delivering technical assistance. However,
the implementation of the Toolkit is fully government-led (see also 3.7.3.1 below).
ICCWC is also able to mobilise Wildlife Incident Support Teams (WISTs), composed of enforcement staff or
relevant experts, to be dispatched at the request of countries that are affected by significant poaching of CITES
specimens, or that have made large-scale seizures of such specimens, to assist, guide and facilitate appropriate
follow-up actions in the immediate aftermath of an incident. In July 2013, Sri Lanka requested assistance from
ICCWC, which subsequently deployed its first WIST, led by INTERPOL, to collect DNA samples from a large-scale
ivory seizure for forensic analysis.
3.2.2
CITES
Despite its dramatic expansion and change in character over recent years, trading wildlife products is of course millennia old.
In the mid 20th century however, a growing realisation that unregulated trade was threatening certain species led to a landmark
international agreement between governments aimed at ensuring that international trade in specimens of wild animals and
plants does not threaten their survival. Best known as CITES, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora was drafted as a result of a resolution adopted in 1963 at a meeting of members of IUCN
(the International Union for the Conservation of Nature). The text of the Convention was finally agreed at a meeting of
representatives of 80 countries in Washington, D.C., on 3 March 1973, and on 1 July 1975 CITES entered in force.
Levels of exploitation of some animal and plant species are high and the trade in them, together with other factors, such as
habitat loss, is capable of heavily depleting their populations and even bringing some species close to extinction. Many wildlife
species in trade are not endangered, but the existence of an agreement to ensure the sustainability of the trade is important
in order to safeguard these resources for the future.
CITES currently regulates international trade in about 35,000 species of wild plants and animals, and their parts
and derivatives, with close to one million legal trade transactions per year being recorded on its publicly accessible
data base. The vast majority of CITES-listed species, about 96%, are not necessarily threatened with extinction
but they could become so if international trade were not strictly regulated. Trade in these species is allowed
provided it is legal, sustainable and traceable and is worth about $300 billion per year. However, some 3% of
CITES-listed species are threatened with extinction and they are found on Appendix I of the Convention.
Commercial trade in these species is generally prohibited, such as for most elephants and rhinos, as well as tigers
and great apes and certain timbers and marine life.
Although CITES mainly prohibits or regulates international trade, it has continued to expand its role in preventing
illegal trade at the national level also through the adoption of various Decisions and Resolutions. This is critical
to ensure illegal trade at national levels does not lead to international trade dynamics that undermine the
conservation of species and the effectiveness of the Convention itself. The approach to each species group differs,
but all include national measures to control not only international, but also internal trade in the species parts,
derivatives and products76.
CITES is financed primarily by its Parties whose contributions are paid into the CITES Trust Fund. In addition to
the subscriptions of its Member States (all of them Parties), the European Commission has for long supported the
Convention. Recently the EC has provided funding for an important number of activities, including a project for
strengthening the CITES implementation capacity of developing countries for a total amount of EUR 2.5 million.
Two examples: for rhinos, it is recommended that internal trade be restricted (Res Conf. 9.14 Rev. CoP15); for elephants, unregulated
domestic sale of ivory [is to] to be prohibited under the Action Plan for the Control of Trade in Elephant Ivory (Dec 13.26 Rev. CoP15 Annex
2)
76

Final report
Page 48
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
Among other inputs, the EC also funds UNEP and the World Conservation Monitoring Centre to maintain CITES
Species Database.
In response to the ever escalating challenges of trade-related wildlife crime, CITES played a lead role in the
formation of ICCWC which it now chairs.
Full details about the CITES Convention, its governance structure, modus operandi and Parties can be found on
its website www.cites.org
3.2.3
INTERPOL
INTERPOL (the International Crime Police Organisation), which is a member of ICCWC, has an Environmental Security
Sub-Directorate which runs an Environmental Crime Programme of global and regional operations to dismantle criminal
networks behind environmental crime using intelligence-driven policing. The Programme is shaped by the Environmental
Compliance and Enforcement Committee, which brings together executive leaders and decision makers from all 190
INTERPOL member countries to provide strategic advice on relevant issues and to harness global support. The 1st
Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Committee Meeting and Events were held from 4 to 8 November 2013 in Nairobi,
Kenya.
To support the Committee in its function, three Working Groups lead projects in three specific crime areas, Wildlife, Pollution
and Fisheries. The INTERPOL Wildlife Crime Working Group brings together specialized criminal investigators from around
the world to initiate and lead a number of projects to combat the poaching, trafficking, or possession of legally protected flora
and fauna at an international level.
At a global level, INTERPOL has since 2012 been promoting the formation of National Environment Security Task Forces
(NESTs) and has produced a procedures Manual on how to do so 77. NESTs are designed to encourage multi-agency
cooperation; the formation of intelligence analysis and investigation units dedicated to tackling wildlife crime; deployment of
INTERPOL Investigative Support Teams to provide assistance in evidence collection and analysis for elephant poaching and
ivory seizures; and increased use of INTERPOLs Notices system to enhance transnational law enforcement cooperation in
combating ivory trafficking. The earliest NEST initiatives in Africa have involved Mozambique (2012), Senegal and Togo (both
2014).
In most countries of the world there is an INTERPOL National Central Bureau. The staff resident in these bureaux offer an
immediate source of advice and direct assistance to the work of NESTs or any other wildlife enforcement network, as well as
being able to call in support teams and other forms of back-up.
At a continental level, INTERPOL has led a number of operations to combat WLFC. As long ago as 2008, INTERPOL launched
Project Wisdom to improve wildlife law enforcement in Africa, specifically targeting illegal trade in elephant ivory and rhinoceros
horn. To date INTERPOL has coordinated at least seven operations targeting ivory and rhinoceros horn traffickers Baba,
Costa, Mogatle, Ahmed, Worthy, Wendi and Wildcat which collectively resulted in arrests, convictions and confiscations of
ivory, rhino horn, other illegal wildlife products and firearms on a large scale.
The most recent operations of this type in Africa are:
Operation Worthy (2012) a centrally coordinated wildlife law enforcement operation by 14 member
countries in Africa, targeting the illegal trade in elephant ivory and rhinoceros horn. Seizures included
nearly two tons of contraband elephant ivory, more than 20 kg of rhinoceros horn, various other wildlife
products, and more than 30 illegal firearms
Operation Wendi (2013) combating the trafficking in elephant ivory in West and Central African countries.
Nearly 4,000 ivory products and 50 elephant tusks were seized, along with 148 animal parts and
derivatives and 88 firearms. Additionally, 222 live animals were released back into the wild
77
INTERPOL (2014) National Environmental Security Task Force: Bringing compliance and enforcement agencies together to maintain
environmental security. Environmental Security Sub-Directorate, INTERPOL

Final report
Page 49
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
Operation Wildcat (2014) Combating ivory trafficking and illegal logging across Southern and Eastern
Africa, and supported by the Wildcat Foundation and the Norwegian Agency for Development
Cooperation. Operation Wildcat resulted in the seizure of 240 kg of elephant ivory, 856 timber logs, 637
firearms, illicit drugs and 44 vehicles, and the arrest of 660 people
These operations have been carried out in collaboration with NGOs such as the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW),
with whom INTERPOL signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) In May 2013, to partner in evidence-based wildlife
crime investigations and enforcement operations, the first ever MoU signed by INTERPOLs Environmental Crime Programme
with an NGO (see also 3.7.1.2).
On 7 October 2014, INTERPOL announced the formation of a dedicated environmental crime team in Africa to further support
its member countries in the fight against illegal ivory trafficking and other environmental issues. Located within the INTERPOL
Regional Bureau for East Africa in Nairobi, the environmental crime team will act as an extension of INTERPOLs
Environmental Security Sub-Directorate located at its General Secretariat headquarters in Lyon, France. As part of the
Regional Bureau, the team will collaborate with national law enforcement agencies and INTERPOL National Central Bureaux
(NCBs) in the region to increase information exchange, support intelligence analysis and assist national and regional
investigations, with a particular focus on wildlife crime.
With the illicit trade in ivory and rhinoceros horn a major concern in East Africa, the team will work with countries and partner
organizations to further the activities of INTERPOLs Project Wisdom (see above). This includes capacity building initiatives
and creating a regional network for environmental protection. Very soon after its establishment the Team issued an
international Red Notice for the arrest of Feisal Mohamed Ali, a Kenyan Asian wanted in connection with an ivory seizure in
excess of two tonnes in Mombasa earlier in the year.
INTERPOL has been closely involved in two recently-published studies of wildlife trade and crime, one global and one focused
on East Africa (see 3.3.1). These important reports highlight the need for increased intelligence analysis in order to provide
sound evidence for multiple-count indictments where the trafficking is linked to fraud, tax evasion and money laundering.
3.2.4
UNODC
In addition to contributing to the efforts of ICCWC, UNODC plays an increasingly important role through delivery of specific
technical assistance activities designed to strengthen the capacity of Member States to prevent, investigate, prosecute and
adjudicate Wildlife and Forest Crime (WLFC). The UNODC Sustainable Livelihoods Unit is the focal point for this work which
embraces capacity strengthening activities in South East Asia, South Asia, East and Southern Africa and Latin America, and
includes promotion of ICCWCs Wildlife and Forest Crime Analytic Toolkit in these continents.
In May 2014 UNODC launched in its 'Global Programme for Combating Wildlife and Forest Crime78', a 4-year, $1018 million programme to deliver assistance on a regional and national basis to support law enforcement responses,
put in place appropriate legislation to address this crime, strengthen investigative, prosecutorial and judiciary
capacities, as well as combat the related issues of money laundering and corruption. This Global Programme (GP)
has seven sub-programmes:
1: Countering transnational organized crime and illicit drug trafficking
2: Prevention, treatment and reintegration and alternative development
3: Countering corruption
5: Justice
6: Research and trend analysis
7: Policy Support
The GP will complement or extend a number of crime-specific initiatives that UNODC is undertaking in Africa addressing
piracy, illicit trafficking, money laundering and wildlife crime as part of its ongoing Regional Programmes in Eastern, Western
and Southern Africa, and to that end will closely coordinate with its various Regional Offices to avoid any duplication on the
ground, including the Transnational Organized Crime Units (TOCU) created through the West African Coast Initiative (WACI).
78
For more detail about this programme visit http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/wildlife-and-forest-crime/global-programme.html

Final report
Page 50
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
UNODC has recently organised and supported a number of WLFC-related activities in Africa including:
In September 2013, UNODC released a report entitled Transnational Organized Crime in Eastern Africa:
A Threat Assessment. The report highlights the most pressing transnational organized crime threats
facing the EA region, including ivory trafficking.
A National Environmental Security Seminar in Togo, held in Lom, on 20 May 2014. The multilateral
cooperation tools presented during the Seminar included the Wildlife and Forest Crime Analytic Toolkit,
the UNODC/WCO Container Control Programme (CCP), the UNODC/Interpol Airport Communication
Programme (AIRCOP) and the West Africa Coast Initiative (WACI).
A workshop on Recovering the Proceeds from Wildlife and Timber Crimes Asian & African experiences,
hosted by the government of Botswana, in Gaborone from 3 5 June 2014
In response to the request of the Government of the United Republic of Tanzania, UNODC undertook a
UN Transnational Organised Crime (UNTOC) Gap Assessment in Tanzania and Zanzibar. As part of the
assessment, UNODC reviewed wildlife and forest crime related legislation and law enforcement
structures. The findings of the analysis were presented and discussed at the UNTOC Gap Assessment
Workshop which took place from 16-18 June 2014 in Zanzibar.
UNODC participated in a practical training on investigative techniques specific to wildlife and forest crime,
held in Yaound, Cameroon, from 24-26 June 2014 and organized by COMIFAC in collaboration with
TRAFFIC and WWF. Participants included representatives of Ministries, law enforcement officers and
magistrates from six COMIFAC countries79. The training covered the use of informants, undercover
agents, controlled deliveries, electronic surveillance, and strengthening cooperation between law
enforcement practitioners. UNODC presented the ICCWC Wildlife and Forest Crime Analytical Toolkit,
which is being implemented in Gabon and Angola.
From 1-5 September 2014, UNODC conducted a joint field visit to Botswana with experts from TRACE
Wildlife Forensics Network and the Netherlands Forensic Institute to carry out a coordinated assessment
of wildlife DNA forensics.
A workshop on 'Recovering the Proceeds from Wildlife and Forest Crimes, jointly with the Government
of Tanzania and in partnership with the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs,
the Norwegian Agency for Development and Cooperation, and the British High Commission. The
workshop was held From 8-12 September 2014, in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
As of October 2014, UNODC has a number of WLFC activities planned in several country and regional offices. For example,
in East Africa, UNODC is designing a programme on strengthening the criminal justice approach to address the illegal trade
in rhino and ivory horn. Activities will include training for law enforcement officials on crime investigation and forensics related
to poaching, crime scene management, CITES listed wildlife and fauna, and controlled deliveries.
Further, through the UNODC-WCO Container Control Programme, Container Control Units in Mombasa, Kenya and Dar es
Salaam, Tanzania, with a special focus on wildlife and timber trafficking will be established. A similar linkage will also be
explored in building such assessments and considerations into the work of an Anti-Corruption Adviser based in South Africa,
covering both Southern and Eastern Africa. This will help to strengthen inter-agency cooperation between national and local
law enforcement agencies in the country and could also help improve the uniformity in which such cases are investigated in
the region.
Also notable is the November 2014 publication of Guidelines on methods and procedures for ivory sampling and laboratory
analysis that UNODC has developed on behalf of ICCWC (see also 3.7.5.4).
3.2.5
World Bank
As a member of the consortium, the World Bank has contributed $1.8 million to ICCWCs operations. The December 2013
Expert Group Meeting on ivory forensics led by UNODCs Laboratory and Scientific Section is one component of a
79
Cameroon, Chad, Gabon, Central African Republic, Republic of Congo and Democratic Republic of Congo

Final report
Page 51
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
comprehensive ICCWC project Forensic analysis in support of law enforcement operations, funded by the World Banks
Development Grant Facility.
The first component of the project covers the forensic analysis of ivory recovered during large ivory seizures to determine the
origin of ivory with the aim to identify main poaching hot-spots in Africa. This work is carried out by Dr Samuel Wassers
laboratory at the University of Washington and supports CITES CoP 16 Decision asking countries to provide samples of large
ivory seizures to forensic laboratories. The component serves as a pilot for the second component of the project which is the
development of international Guidelines for forensic methods and procedures mentioned in 3.2.4 above. A third component
will be to assess existing forensic facilities and capacity-building of existing laboratories, by engaging with relevant experts for
the validation of forensic methods of ivory sampling.
The Bank is also implementing a medium-sized GEF project (18-month, US$3.8 million) entitled Fighting against wildlife
poaching and illegal trade in Africa. Also it is preparing (presumably but not necessarily under the latter project), a major study
of ivory trade economics with inputs from AfESG, CITES, MIKE and TRAFFIC. The EU together with the UK Government and
the NGO Stop Ivory also participated in early talks regarding this initiative that were held to avoid duplication of effort 80.
3.2.6
WCO
The World Customs Organisation (WCO) joined ICCWC in 2011 and ever since has strived to enhance cooperation with
other IGOs, as well as NGOs, that share its commitment to protecting wildlife from criminal syndicates and other illegal
activities.
The Green Customs Initiative is another long-standing and ongoing cooperation programme that the WCO continues to
support along with the CITES Secretariat. This initiative ensures that Customs and other border control officers are well-trained
and have all the necessary tools at their disposal to fight wildlife and other environmental crimes.
Strengthening relations with the NGO sector is also on the WCOs agenda. In October 2013, the WCO formalized its
cooperative relationship with TRAFFIC, the global wildlife trade monitoring network, by signing an MoU in which the two Parties
agree to pool their capacity building efforts and enhance information exchange.
Located at borders, Customs administrations play a vital role in ensuring that all goods being declared for entry or exit are
legitimate, while using a variety of enforcement techniques and their proven expertise to detect and intercept illegal wildlife,
as well as other illicit goods. The WCO is very active in organizing global enforcement operations and in supporting regional
operations targeting wildlife criminals with the support of its many partners, such as the CITES Secretariat which acknowledges
that Customs is one of its key enforcement arms.
One example of WCO success in this field is Project GAPIN, a capacity building project in Africa that focused on building the
enforcement capabilities of frontline Customs officers to detect, intercept and seize illegal wildlife consignments, and on
advocating a culture of integrity.
Another example is Operation COBRA II, supported by the WCO, which resulted in the seizure of 36 rhino horns, three metric
tons of elephant ivory, 10,000 turtles, and 1,000 skins of protected species, and more than 100 metric tons of rosewood logs,
dealing a huge blow to criminals involved in the highly lucrative trade in illegal wildlife.
WCO is currently developing a multi-year programme that is seeking to build the capacity of Customs officials in responding
to wildlife crime that will incorporate a controlled delivery component (see 3.7.5.2).
3.2.7
TRAFFIC
TRAFFIC is an international NGO specialising in wildlife trade monitoring that works to ensure that the trade in wild plants and
animals is not a threat to the conservation of nature. Originally established as a specialist group of the IUCN Species Survival
Commission in 1976, soon after CITES came into force, TRAFFIC has developed since into a global, research-driven and
action-oriented network, committed to delivering innovative and practical conservation solutions based on the latest trade
information. Today TRAFFIC employs around 100 staff based in nearly 30 countries, and operates through a network of eight
regional programmes, co-ordinated by the TRAFFIC International headquarters in Cambridge, UK.
80
The EU was variously represented by Gael De-Rotalier; Helene Perier; and Helga Elisabeth Zeitler

Final report
Page 52
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
TRAFFIC is governed by a Steering Committee composed of members of TRAFFIC's partner organizations, WWF and IUCN.
A central aim of TRAFFIC's activities is to contribute to the wildlife trade-related priorities of these partners. TRAFFIC also
works in close co-operation with CITES to which it is regularly asked to report.
TRAFFIC has recently been successful in securing a three-year, $1.5 million grant from the US Agency for
International Development (USAID) to implement the Wildlife Trafficking, Response, Assessment, Priority Setting
(Wildlife-TRAPS) initiative to tackle the illegal trade of terrestrial and marine wildlife between Africa and Asia.
Wildlife TRAPS is likely to focus on achieving a high impact with a tightly focused group of species products (i.e.
including ivory and rhino horn) traded between Central and East and Southern Africa, and East and South East
Asia.
Full details about TRAFFIC can be found on its website www.traffic.org
3.3
INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE TO RECENT TRENDS
The range of recent responses to the illicit wildlife trade issue is huge, involving Governments, IGOs and NGOs. The selection
of trade control initiatives and measures provided in the sections below indicates just how strong and wide the international
communitys immense concern and interest now is in the escalating scale and changing character of the illicit wildlife trade,
particularly its new relevance to security and livelihoods in source countries.
For a fully comprehensive summary of all recent and anticipated high-level events and initiatives at global, regional and
national levels (including those not directly relevant to Africa), see the list published by CITES in June 2014 and available
here:
http://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/news/pr/CITES_Jun_2014_illegal_wildlife_trade.pdf
3.3.1
3.3.2
81
Major reports
Haken J (2011) Transnational crime in the developing world. Global Financial Integrity
WWF/Dalberg (2012) Fighting illicit wildlife trafficking: a consultation with Governments. WWF
International, Gland, Switzerland
IFAW (2013) Criminal Nature: the global security implications of the illegal wildlife trade. International
Fund for Animal Welfare
UNEP, CITES, IUCN, TRAFFIC (2013) Elephants in The Dust: The African Elephant Crisis, A Rapid
Response Assessment. UNEP, GRID-Arendal, www.grida.no
UNODC (2013) Transnational organised crime in Eastern Africa: a threat assessment. UN Office for
Drugs and Crime81
WCO (2013) Illicit Trade Report: 2012-July 2013. World Customs Organisation
INTERPOL (2014) Elephant Poaching and Ivory Trafficking in East Africa: Assessment for an Effective
Law Enforcement Response
UNEP and INTERPOL: Nellemann, C., Henriksen, R., Raxter, P., Ash, N., Mrema, E. [Eds] (2014) The
Environmental Crime Crisis: Threats to Sustainable Development from Illegal Exploitation and Trade in Wildlife and
Forest Resources. A Rapid Response Assessment. UNEP, GRID-Arendal, www.grida.no
Vira, V., and T. Ewing (2014) Ivory's Curse: The Militarization and Professionalization of Poaching in Africa. Born
Free USA and C4ADS
Vira, V., and T. Ewing and J. Miller (2014) Out of Africa: Mapping the global trade in illicit elephant ivory. Born Free
USA and C4ADS
Policy commitments
This follows an equivalent report for Central Africa in 2011

Final report
Page 53
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
In the lead-up to CITES CoP16 held in March 2013 and subsequently, many relevant political commitments have been made,
often at the highest political level, to increase efforts to combat wildlife crime more effectively, and often with a focus on the
illegal ivory trade.
The list that follows is not all-inclusive, but some notable high-level policy commitments relevant to Africa include:
On 23 March 2013, an emergency meeting held in Yaound, Cameroon of Ministers of the Economic Community of
Central African States in charge of defense and security, foreign relations and the protection of wildlife, adopted a
Declaration on the Fight against Poaching in Central Africa and an anti-poaching plan of the highest urgency for the
worst affected parts of Cameroon, Central African Republic and Chad (PEXULAB) 82
In April 2013, the UN Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice (CCPCJ) adopted at its 22nd
Session a resolution on Crime prevention and criminal justice responses to illicit trafficking in protected
species of wild fauna and flora. This resolution was subsequently adopted by the United Nations Economic
and Social Council (ECOSOC) as Resolution 2013/40 of 25 July 2013. It encourages States to treat illicit
trafficking in wild fauna and flora as a serious crime when organized criminal groups are involved, and to
fully utilize the UN Conventions against Transnational Organized Crime and Corruption to implement
appropriate measures to prevent and combat illicit trafficking in wild fauna and flora. The UN General
Assembly, in its Resolution 68/193 of 18 December 2013 on the Strengthening the United Nations crime
prevention and criminal justice programme, reaffirmed ECOSOCs Resolution 2013/40. At its 23rd Session
in May 2014, the CCPCJ adopted a further resolution on Strengthening a targeted crime prevention and
criminal justice response to combat illicit trafficking in timber and forest products
In a May 2013 report to the United Nations Security Council, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon
highlighted the potential link between poaching and other transnational organized criminal activities,
including terrorism
In June 2013, the Royce Amendment to the US National Defence Authorisation Act was passed to provide authority
for the US military to advise and assist host nation game and wildlife, law enforcement, and other appropriate
agencies to suppress the illicit wildlife trade in Africa, this being a source of financing for transnational rebel and
extremist groups
In July 2013 President Obama issued an Executive Order on Combating Wildlife Trafficking to enhance
coordination of US Government efforts to combat wildlife trafficking and assist foreign governments in
building the capacity needed to combat wildlife trafficking and related organized crime
The European Commission signed a Cooperation Arrangement between the Directorate-General for the
Environment of the EC and the State Forestry Administration of China on CITES-related measures in July
2013. Cooperation in wildlife trafficking featured prominently in the high-level China-EU Political Dialogue
on Africa held in Beijing on 28 October 2014
In August 2013 the Legislative Assembly of the East African Community passed a Resolution urging
partner states to take concerted action to end the massacre of elephants and trafficking of ivory
In December 2013, Delegates from the 30 countries and 27 IGOs and NGOs participating in the African
Elephant Summit in Gaborone dedicated themselves to providing political support at the highest level to
ensure the implementation of 14 Urgent Measures to halt and reverse the trend in illegal killing of elephants
and the illegal trade in ivory (see 1.3 and Annex 1)
82
In June 2012, the economic, social and environmental impact of illicit wildlife trafficking was recognised in
para. 203 of The Future We Want emanating from the UN Conference on Sustainable Development
(Rio+20) as an issue where firm and strengthened action needed to be taken
In November 2012, then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that illegal wildlife trade must be
addressed at every level of the international community, and declared illegal wildlife trade a national
security issue
Plan dExtrme Urgence de Lutte Anti-Braconnage

Final report
Page 54
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
3.3.3
Also in December 2013, a roundtable on "The fight against poaching and trafficking in endangered
species was held on the side of the France-Africa Summit on Peace and Security in Africa held in Paris
from 6 to 7 December. As a result, the ensuing "Paris Declaration" adopted by the 53 Government and
IGO delegations attending (including the EU) incorporated a commitment to "act promptly and decisively"
against poaching and smuggling of wildlife
On 11 February 2014 the Obama Administration released a National Strategy for Combating Wildlife
Trafficking which was developed by an interagency Presidential Task Force, representing agencies from
across the federal government, and with significant input from an Advisory Council on Wildlife
Trafficking. The Task Force was formed following the Presidents July 2013 Executive Order on
Combating Wildlife Trafficking. Following release of this Strategy, the Secretary of the Interior announced
that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would implement a U.S. ban imposing new restrictions on the import,
export, and commercial sale of elephant ivory within the United States, with some limited exceptions
In February 2014, the EU together with 41 countries made a joint political commitment to bring the illegal
wildlife trade to an end in the form of a formal Declaration issued at the end of the London Conference on
the Illegal Wildlife Trade, 12-13 February 2014
The Bonn Convention on Migratory Species passed a Resolution on Fighting of Wildlife Crime within and
beyond Borders at its 11th Conference of the Parties held in Quito, Ecuador, 4-9 November 2014
(UNEP/CMS/COP11/CRP19)
Conferences and Meetings
The Asian Development Bank organised in March 2013 an international symposium in Bangkok on
Combating Wildlife Crime: Securing Enforcement, Ensuring Justice and Upholding the Rule of Law
The African Development Bank together with WWF, issued in May 2013 The Marrakech Declaration, a
ten point action plan to combat illicit wildlife trafficking
UNEP hosted in November 2013 an Environmental Law Compliance and Enforcement Summit. In the
same week, meetings of INTERPOLs specialist working groups on wildlife were held. UNEP is also
working to help strengthen the judicial components of enforcement.
The European Commission recently set up an internal Inter-service Group on Wildlife Trafficking which
held its first meeting in October 2013 in order to start work on a major EU position-paper or Consultative
Communication on the subject83. This was followed on 10 April 2014 by an Expert Conference on the
EU Approach against Wildlife Trafficking. The conference, attended by over 170 representatives from 27
EU Member States, enforcement and judicial networks, international organizations, civil society and nonEU source, transit and destination countries, discussed measures and actions to be taken by the EU
domestically and internationally to strengthen its approach against wildlife trafficking. A number of
recommendations were forthcoming84
The United for Wildlife (UfW) partnership between international conservation organisations and the Royal
Foundation of Princes William and Harry and the Duchess of Cambridge convened a conference of 250
delegates from 30 countries at the Zoological Society of London on 11-12 February 2014 to seek solutions
to the international wildlife trade crisis
The UK Government, building on a preliminary conference hosted by HRH Prince Charles in May 2013,
hosted the high-level London Conference on Illegal Wildlife Trade, 12-13 February 2014, resulting in a
formal Declaration for action by participants (see 3.3.2 above): the Government of Botswana has offered
to host a follow-on conference in 2015 to review progress in its implementation.
83
European Commission (2013) Consultative Communication on the EU Approach against Wildlife Trafficking. Communication from the
Commission to the Council and the European Parliament
84 A summary of the outcome can be found at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/cites/traf_conf_en.htm

Final report
Page 55
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
3.3.4
The Expert Group Meeting on Guidelines for forensic methods and procedures of ivory sampling and analysis was
organized by UNODC, under the umbrella of the International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC) in
Vienna, 4 6 December 2013. Subsequently the Guidelines were published in November 2014.
The Tokyo Conference on combating wildlife crime took place on 3 to 5 March 2014, hosted by UN University in
Tokyo, Japan, as an event for the first World Wildlife Day. The conference included a workshop on the Wildlife
Enforcement Monitoring System (WEMS) database
On 27 June 2014 the United Nations Environment Assembly of UNEP, adopted a Resolution on the illegal trade in
wildlife, in which the UNEA calls on the General Assembly to consider the issue of illegal wildlife trade. Since then
the UN Group of Friends on Poaching and Illicit Wildlife Trafficking has complied a Draft UNGA Resolution on illicit
wildlife trafficking which was discussed by invited experts at a Group meeting in New York on 7 November 2014.
Programmatic and funding commitments
A separate list of funds and programmes focused on conservation of the elephant, and which also address the massive
challenges posed by trade in its ivory, is given in section 1.4.2.
The African Wildlife Foundation published in January 2014 a request for proposals to develop and
implement an omni-channel, pan-African anti-poaching and wildlife trafficking awareness campaign. It
has established also a Species Protection Grant Fund, focusing mainly on iconic species groups, but also
offering non-specific support to law enforcement and demand reduction measures. AWFs African Voices
campaign is addressing demand in Africa by educating and involving Africans
The European Union has actively contributed to the fight against illegal wildlife trade, both domestically
and globally, for many years through a wide range of measures. Beyond steps to combat wildlife trafficking
within its own territories, the EU has also been leading efforts internationally and bilaterally to enforce
rules against illegal wildlife trade and to support biodiversity protection in general. These efforts are being
undermined by the current poaching crisis. Regarding the regulation of international wildlife trade, the EU
has focused on CITES; the EU Forest Law Enforcement Governance and Trade (FLEGT) Action Plan85;
EU policies against illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing; and TWIX (Trade in Wildlife
Information eXchange), a centralised database in seizures and offences within the EU. The effectiveness
of these instruments naturally depends very much on the level of enforcement and cooperation by
countries of origin.
The Global Environment Facility. In its next iteration, GEF6 (2014-2018), there is a new and important
component for wildlife trade related activities. At the same time conservation NGOs, such as WWF, are
admitted as implementing partners which should enhance the GEFs conservation impact significantly.
During its last meeting in May 2014, the GEF council approved a project entitled Engaging Policy Makers
and the Judiciary to Address Poaching and Illegal Wildlife Trade in Africa with the purpose of creating
the enabling environment to effectively address poaching and illegal wildlife trade through new and
enhanced laws, regulations, and policies
The German Government is one of the biggest supporters of wildlife conservation in Africa. The Federal
Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) commissioned in 2013 a 2-year, EUR 3.2m,
Inter-sectoral Technical Cooperation Project for Combating Poaching and Wildlife Trade in Africa and
Asia to support international efforts and partner countries along the entire illegal wildlife trade chain.
Germany supports also law enforcement work at the Protected Area level
85
This Plan introduced an innovative supply-demand approach aiming to ensure that timber and timber products placed on the EU market
are of legal origin

Final report
Page 56
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
3.4
The UK Governments Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs leads a Partnership for Action
against Wildlife Crime (PAW). Not only may this offer a useful model to other countries, but publications
under this initiative may also be useful to others86
The US Government recently has demonstrated its commitment to combating wildlife trafficking, related
corruption, and money laundering in numerous ways. Along with the National Strategy for Combating
Wildlife Trafficking mentioned above it was announced that the US would provide an additional $10 million
in regional and bilateral training and technical assistance in Africa to combat wildlife trafficking. This
included approximately $3 million in bilateral assistance to South Africa, $3 million in bilateral assistance
to Kenya, and $4 million in regional assistance throughout sub-Saharan Africa. The Transnational
Organized Crime Rewards Program, which was signed into law on January 2013, enables the Secretary
of State to offer rewards up for information leading to the arrest, conviction, or identification of significant
members of transnational criminal organizations who operate primarily outside the United States. The law
also allows for rewards for information that dismantles such organizations or leads to the disruption of
their financial mechanisms
The US Agency for International Development is expected to launch a new wildlife technology challenge,
which will promote the use of innovative technologies like mobile phone applications and wildlife DNA
analysis techniques to assist in combating wildlife trafficking. USAID also supports the TRAFFIC/TRAPS
project mentioned above.
The US Fish and Wildlife Service supports the International Law Enforcement Academy in Gaborone,
Botswana, which has trained 350 law enforcement officers in wildlife crime investigations since 2002. In
2013 the USFWS pledged an additional $2 million annually in support of its Wildlife Without Borders
capacity building program, which includes wildlife law enforcement training.
WCS: as an adjunct to its involvement in the Clinton Global Iinitiative (see 1.4.2), WCS launched at the same time
a campaign called 96 Elephants, named for the estimated number of elephants being gunned down each day by
poachers. The campaign addresses the fact that the US is the worlds second largest importer of ivory, and focuses
on securing effective moratoriums on domestic ivory sales. The campaign has achieved this already in New York
and New Jersey, and the USFWS is developing a Federal ivory marketing ban (see 3.3.2). Other countries are being
called on to do likewise
WWFs Wildlife Crime Scorecard is a good example of a reporting initiative to make demand and source
countries accountable for their work and efforts. This report measures progress towards compliance with
and enforcement of CITES commitments for the three species groups (elephants, rhinos and tigers) and
aims to acknowledge those countries where illegal trade is actively being countered in contrast with those
where the current efforts are entirely inadequate87
STRATEGIC OPTIONS FOR COMBATING ILLICIT TRADE
National wildlife law enforcement agencies, especially those in sub-saharan Africa, face many challenges when it comes to
combating the illicit wildlife trade. These include: inadequate legislation; lack of equipment; limited training opportunities;
difficulty accessing modern enforcement tools like intelligence-gathering and analysis and forensic science support; poor
governance; and a limited appreciation among prosecutors and the judiciary of the seriousness of wildlife crime. Special
investigative techniques and powerful tools, such as follow the money and controlled deliveries, are not mobilised to go after
criminal organizations engaging in wildlife crime. Wildlife law enforcement officers often lack parity with their counterparts in
customs and police services, and are ill-prepared to respond to the organized nature of those who seek to steal natural
resources.
86
For example, DEFRA (2012) Wildlife Crime: a guide to the use of forensic and specialist techniques in the investigation of wildlife crime.
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK
87 Nowell K (2012) Wildlife Crime Scorecard: Assessing Compliance with and Enforcement of CITES Commitments for Tigers, Rhinos and
Elephants. WWF International, Gland, Switzerland.

Final report
Page 57
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
Very many of the reports, events and initiatives detailed above have generated strategies and action plans for dealing with
these and other problems related to the illegal wildlife trade as a matter of great international concern and urgency. All of the
reports listed in 3.3.1 above include action plans or specific recommendations on how to tackle the issue, as do the current
multi-annual and species-specific strategies of numerous IGOs and NGOs, to which can be added the action agendas
incorporated in Declarations such as Marrakech, Gaborone and London for example.
Not surprisingly there is considerable overlap between them, with many of the same points arising repeatedly, if in slightly
different language or with different emphasis. There is also a general recognition that the overall goal has to be addressed
through at least four distinct strategic approaches none of which is sufficient in itself, meaning that the grand strategy must be
to pursue all of them simultaneously at international, regional and national levels. They are:
Strengthening policies and laws

Stopping the killing
Stopping the trafficking
Stopping the demand
In the four sections that follow (3.5-3.8) an attempt has been made to collate, for each of these approaches, the main points
around which a significant degree of consensus is evident
Because of their relevance to this particular study, due attention has been paid to the recommendations arising from the EUs
recent Expert Conference on the EU Approach against Wildlife Trafficking.
3.5
STRATEGY 1: STRENGTHENING POLICIES AND LAWS
To curb the illegal wildlife trade it is important to ensure that the criminals involved, in particular those kingpins
who control the trade, are prosecuted and penalised so as to provide an effective deterrent. To this end, the
following policy and legal reforms should be adopted where necessary.
3.5.1
Enact poaching and wildlife trafficking as serious crimes
Legislation should be adopted (or amended) to criminalise poaching and wildlife trafficking by ensuring that
domestic offences involving wildlife trafficking fall within the definition of serious crime in Article 2 of the UN
Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC), to which all States should become Party. This would
establish a minimum sentence of 4 years for offences relating to poaching and illicit trafficking: UNTOC is anyway
a valuable tool that can serve as the basis of international cooperation, including extradition mutual legal assistance
and asset recovery
3.5.2
Adopt a zero tolerance policy on corruption
The serious problem of corruption must be addressed as an important factor facilitating poaching, wildlife
trafficking, and related offences by adopting (or amending) policies and legislation that criminalise corruption and
bribery, and by instituting measures to detect and punish offenders especially in the WLFC sector. All governments
should become parties to, and implement, the UN Convention against Corruption, which can be a valuable tool to
prevent corruption and foster international cooperation in corruption cases.
3.5.3
Ensure the judiciary imposes effective deterrent penalties
The ability to achieve successful prosecutions and deterrent sanctions must be strengthened by raising awareness
in the judicial sector about the seriousness, impact and potential profits of WLFC, and by working with prosecutors
and judges to ensure that penalties handed down are commensurate with legal provisions for serious crime and
so act as effective deterrents. Dedicated training and increased capacity building are essential tools to achieve this
goal, which can be delivered as part of support to national WENs.
Final report
Page 58
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
Kenya, for example, has not only revised its wildlife law inclusive of new heavy penalties, but also the Director of
Public Prosecutions has strengthened prosecutions through a new specialised Wildlife Crime Unit comprising 35
prosecutors, and the Chief Justice through the Judiciary Training Institute has initiated national dialogue meetings
on wildlife crime, and training courses for the judiciary and prosecutors on the new legislation.
3.5.4
Expand the agenda of National Security Committees
Poaching and the illegal trade in wildlife, especially ivory and rhino horn, should be introduced as a standing agenda
item of National Security Committees (or their equivalent) in countries where proceeds from these criminal
activities are known or are likely to be used to fuel internal conflict, armed rebellion or external aggression. The
head of the national wildlife agency should be a member of the National Security Committee (or its equivalent) in
these countries. This recommendation is consistent with AES Urgent Measure 4 (see Annex 1 in Section 1).
3.6
STRATEGY 2: STOPPING THE KILLING
This component of overall strategy is targeted mostly at building and/or supplementing the capacity of those responsible for
providing in situ protection to wildlife at the primary source level in the field, namely national wildlife and PA authorities as well
as managers of community and private PAs. The various ways in which this can and is being done in the different regions is
discussed in Volumes 2-5, while the principal measures available to support this strategy are summarised below.
Improvements in anti-poaching are essential to complement transit disruption and demand reduction efforts further up the
supply chain, but they cannot succeed if they are focused on tactics at the expense of community outreach and intelligenceled policing.
3.6.1
Strengthen protection forces
The poaching pressures of the last few years have found all wildlife protection agencies throughout Africa wanting in terms of
adequate manpower to confront and contain the threat. As described in the regional volumes, most national authorities are
adding significant numbers to the strength of ranger forces in both the short and longer term. They are also creating and
deploying elite strike forces that are highly mobile and capable of rapid response operations, as well as specialised PA-based
intelligence-cum-community relations units. At the same time, the efficacy of all these personnel is being enhanced by
improving their equipment, training and welfare.
The need to engage in intelligence-led operations and create, even at the PA level, intelligence analysis and investigation
Units dedicated to tackling wildlife crime is now widely acknowledged. Simply building up ranger forces to react to poaching
may increase the rate of local arrests, but it will not eliminate poaching. Organized poaching networks can easily expend
hunters at the bottom of the chain, while middlemen can quickly bid up the supply of poachers by increasing profit distributions.
Law enforcement strategies should focus on mapping out local poaching networks to identify the most vulnerable points,
enlisting the services of local informants to the extent possible.
Few protection agencies find it possible to meet all of the various needs involved, and so rely heavily on donors to maximise
the efficiency and effectiveness of their manpower.
3.6.1.1
Equipment
Equipment needs include the following categories: personal (uniforms, boots, capes, body armour); camping (tents, torches
etc.); navigation (GPS, maps); surveillance (binoculars, night-vision scopes, drones); communications (radios, phones); crime
scene (cameras, sampling containers, handcuffs); weapons and ammunition; tracker dogs.
While primary protection duties rely heavily on foot patrols, the insertion and extraction of rapid response teams in particular
requires transport ranging from helicopters and aircraft to 4WD vehicles and motorcycles. The helicopters and aircraft are also
needed both for routine surveillance and for the guidance of certain ground operations. Adequate funds to meet maintenance
and running costs obviously are essential.

Final report
Page 59
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
Other specialised equipment needed to protect particularly sensitive boundaries includes various types of wall and fence
(including electric), as well as fence-break and other intruder-detection systems, such as intrusion detection cables for key hot
spots along borders.
Whilst not normally thought of as equipment, increased manpower in the field requires an equivalent increase in the staff
housing available.
3.6.1.2
Training
Many countries run training courses for rangers and wardens at national facilities. Where these are not available, training can
be and often is provided through IGO and NGO funded projects. Skill and competence levels vary, but efforts are being made
to standardise basic law-enforcement strategy to which the few existing regional wildlife colleges can contribute.
All training facilities, whether national or regional, need to update their law-enforcement course content in particular to take in
the CSI, forensic, adaptive monitoring and intelligence-led techniques that are now needed to help defeat the contemporary
poaching challenge. A specific proposal for EU support to course development at the College of African Wildlife Management
is presented in Volume 3, section 5.4.1.
3.6.1.3
Staff welfare
Rangers in the front-line of anti-poaching duty are at risk of injury or death: increasing numbers have lost their lives during the
current crisis. Compensation schemes for bereaved families are required, plus memorial plaques and monuments to give
public recognition to their sacrifice. Similarly, rangers resident in the field must have decent housing, and all law enforcement
personnel must be paid a realistic and incentive working wage, as well as hardship and danger allowances as appropriate.
Lack of attention to basic welfare issues such as these is a significant de-motivator, and is what pre-disposes staff to corruption
and makes them vulnerable to approaches from poachers and middle-men to aid and abet them.
3.6.2
Best practices
Starting in mid-2014, the Frankfurt Zoological Society (FZS) carried out with German polifonds support, a 6-month review
aimed at developing standardised guidance for anti-poaching law-enforcement interventions in Africa, with an emphasis on
identifying best practices and helping strengthen efforts to combat wildlife crime and the trafficking of wildlife products at both
local site and national levels. The study built on existing literature and past studies, including: the International Consortium on
Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC) Toolkit, existing CITES National Ivory Action Plans prepared by several African countries,
and a number of recent reports on wildlife legislation and prosecution procedures and success factors in a number African
countries88.
An analytical framework was developed as the basis for the assessment of law enforcement approaches based on an online
survey completed by over 100 professionals directly involved in implementing law enforcement activities in Africa. The
framework identifies three pillars at the site level and three pillars at the national level that form critical components of
effective wildlife law enforcement. These pillars are, at the site level: 1) law enforcement patrols; 2) law enforcement
management; and 3) intelligence and investigations; and at the national level: 1) national intelligence and investigations; 2)
legislation and prosecutions; and 3) inter-agency collaboration. In addition to the information from existing literature and the
online survey, the assessment included site and country visits with the aim of elucidating best practices under each of these
six pillars.
Sites were visited across Southern, Eastern, and Central Africa, and consultations were also held with law enforcement officers
at the national level in a number of countries, including Kenya, Mozambique, South Africa, Botswana, Namibia, Zimbabwe,
Zambia, Gabon and Togo. Survey inputs were obtained from people working in a large number of other countries as well e.g.
Congo, DRC, Tanzania and Ethiopia.
The resulting assessment sets out key components for each of the six pillars that have worked well and have the potential to
inform best practice across the continent. As such, the assessment provides detailed guidance for law enforcement personnel
working at all stages of the chain in wildlife law enforcement, and clarifies areas that law enforcement practitioners see as a
priority for additional support and funding.
88
Similar recent review studies have been undertaken also by WWF, the International Ranger Federation and the South African Wildlife
College

Final report
Page 60
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
The studys law enforcement framework and preliminary findings have already informed the development of a set of
benchmarks for assessing protected area law enforcement capacity and for identifying support needs under the new EUfunded CITES Minimising the Illegal Killing of Elephants and other Endangered Species (MIKES) Project (see Box 6), as well
as being used as the basis for the development of National Ivory Action Plans by the further nine countries of secondary
concern in relation to the illegal trade in ivory in Africa89 (see also 1.3), as well as several countries in Asia.
Box 6. The MIKES Law Enforcement Capacity Assessment Benchmarks
The MIKES Law Enforcement (LE) Capacity Assessment has been developed as part of the new CITES Minimising the
Illegal Killing of Elephants and other Endangered Species (MIKES) Project (see also 1.4.3.1). An important component
of the new MIKES project is the establishment of a set of law enforcement capacity benchmarks designed to help
participating range States and sites to better understand the status of their wildlife law enforcement efforts, pinpoint key
areas where investments and projects could potentially be targeted, and monitor progress in strengthening wildlife law
enforcement capacity. The MIKES National-level LE Capacity Assessment is designed to be undertaken as a selfassessment by staff working in the national wildlife management agency. Similarly, the MIKES Site-level LE Capacity
Assessment is designed to be undertaken as a self-assessment by staff working at the participating MIKE site and/or
at headquarters. Each Assessment is organized around three law enforcement pillars, with a set of benchmarks
designed to measure law enforcement capacity under each pillar.
Having already demonstrated their utility, these relatively easy to apply benchmarks may also contribute directly to the
development of the ICCWC Toolkit Light mentioned in section 3.7.3.1. This and other possible activities to operationalise the
forthcoming FZS Best Practices Guide were due for discussion at a workshop scheduled for late 2014/early 2015, to which
German Government and EU officials would be invited in order to consider supporting a possible follow-up programme.
3.6.3
Monitor law enforcement performance and effectiveness
The monitoring of law enforcement and anti-poaching efforts in many protected areas remains costly, unsystematic
and unstandardised; transparency is lacking and there is little guidance available to managers on how to improve
current management practices.
In order to address this, a global consortium of NGOs and conservation agencies (WCS, WWF, ZSL, FZS, CITESMIKE and North Carolina Zoo) have developed the Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool (SMART;
www.smartconservationtools.org). SMART is an easy-to-use software tool for tracking where park rangers
go, what they see, what they do, and which makes this information transparently available to the guards
themselves, their site-based managers, the national headquarters, donors and so on.
At the local level, SMART can support anti-poaching by enabling identification of poaching hotspots, evaluation of
ranger performance, and inform adaptive management for more efficient targeting of enforcement efforts; at the
national level, the information can strengthen institutional communication channels to better allocate financial and
human resources to improve anti-poaching efforts; and globally, the information provides standardised, reliable,
and accountable measures of poaching and performance to prioritize funding streams and encourage better
governance.
SMART is being implemented in more than 100 protected areas worldwide through technical support provided by SMART
partners in collaboration with host government agencies. In Africa SMART is being used in protected areas in 14 countries90,
with national-level adoption of the system already secured in Gabon and underway in Uganda, Kenya, and Democratic
Republic of Congo. The SMART Partnership is also engaged with several global institutions and conventions in joint efforts,
such as CITES-MIKE and the World Heritage Centre.
89
Cameroon, the Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gabon, Mozambique and Nigeria, plus Angola
Cameroon, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Gabon, Kenya, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Nigeria, Sierra Leone,
Tanzania, Uganda, Zimbabwe
90

Final report
Page 61
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
Through these and other multi-lateral and international mechanisms, SMART has the potential to become the global standard
for improved law enforcement monitoring across protected areas. Although the current system is not without its critics,
improvements are expected and assistance with the adoption of SMART should certainly qualify as an eligible activity for
funding within EU support packages for Key Landscapes for Conservation.
3.6.4
Form Public Private Security Partnerships
In countries where the capacity of the responsible public institutions is far below that required to provide meaningful wildlife
management and protection, and there is little if any prospect of Government being able to rectify the situation even in the mid
to long term, then the contracting out of these functions to private entities, usually on a PA-specific basis, can provide an
effective solution. To date, Central Africa has the longest standing experience with this Conservation Security Partnership
approach, as detailed in Volume 4, section 4.4.
The African Parks Network is an NGO that provides such services exclusively, and currently has management contracts In 7
Parks in 6 countries91. Other NGOs have also taken this approach, notably WCS which is providing robust partnerships in law
enforcement in the Nouabal-Ndoki NP (Republic of Congo), as well as several Parks in South Sudan, and expects also to
conclude similar arrangements in the near future for the Reserve de Faune Okapi in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
3.6.5
Promote community development
Just as welfare issues can explain the corruption of law-enforcement personnel, poverty goes a long way in explaining the
willingness of local people living with wildlife and near PAs to break the law and kill animals whether for their own consumption
or at the behest of middle-men in the illegal wildlife trade. It follows that efforts to improve and diversify the livelihoods of
communities living with wildlife, particularly those neighbouring PAs, must feature in any strategy to stop the killing. Such
efforts should go hand-in-hand with awareness and education programmes.
There is a need to increase capacity of local communities to pursue sustainable livelihood opportunities and
eradicate poverty. This includes promoting innovative collaborative partnerships for the conservation and
sustainable management of wildlife (including actions to reduce illegal use of fauna and flora) such as community
conservancies, publicprivate partnerships, sustainable tourism, revenuesharing agreements and other income
sources such as sustainable agriculture.
A successful example of the latter is the Community Markets for Conservation (COMACO) project in Zambias Luangwa Valley,
which through a farmers cooperative has helped former poachers and subsistence farmers turn their efforts to new trades
that are both more profitable and more environmentally friendly.
3.7
STRATEGY 3: STOPPING THE TRAFFICKING
Of the four main strategies for combating the illicit trade in wildlife, that for stopping the trafficking is both the most complex
and the least developed. As such the Government agencies primarily involved are in considerable need of financial and
technical support from IGOs and NGOs.
Given the nature of the value chain from source to consumer, attempts to apprehend all those involved and disrupt the trade
depend on effective action by many different enforcement agencies. This could be thought of as a parallel enforcement chain
which, like any chain, will only be as strong as its weakest link. It follows that the procedures and competencies of all the law
enforcement services involved should be aligned to ensure there is no weak link, including: wildlife, forests, fisheries, police,
customs, immigration, security, intelligence and judiciary. Until recently these various agencies tended to operate
independently, one often undermining the work of another.
Consequently, much attention is rightly now being paid to encourage the creation of functional inter-agency coordination
bodies to ensure they collaborate and function in a mutually supportive manner. Although names vary depending on level,
these are generally referred to as Wildlife Enforcement Networks (WENs), and a lot of thought has recently gone into the
methods and other mechanisms available to make such networks, and/or the individual agencies being coordinated, more
effective. Many of these tools and techniques have been adapted from agencies combating other forms of illicit trade, such as
drugs, arms and people.
91
Akagera (Rwanda); Bangweulu and Liuwa Plains (Zambia); Garamba (DRC); Majete (Malawi); Odzala (Congo); Zakouma (Chad)

Final report
Page 62
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
A brief overview of the principal measures available to support an anti-trafficking strategy is given below.
3.7.1
Promote international coordination in wildlife law enforcement
One of the most important developments in recent years to advance international coordination in enforcing wildlife trade laws
is the formation in 2011 of ICCWC (see 3.2.1). Much of what is described below can be traced back to the influence of this
consortium (and at regional and national levels also).
3.7.1.1
Intercontinental initiatives
The USA is a strong champion of the WEN approach and is working with ICCWC and other interested partners to support the
creation of a global network of regional and national Wildlife Enforcement Networks to improve communication and strengthen
response actions across enforcement agencies globally. In March 2013 the ICCWC convened in Bangkok, with US funding,
the First Global Meeting of the Wildlife Enforcement Networks, which brought together 131 participants from around the world,
enabled wildlife law enforcement officers and WEN representatives to share their experiences at combating wildlife crime, and
to discuss ways of further enhancing cooperation to respond to the serious threat posed by transnational organized groups
involved in wildlife crime. All existing networks including those that have been recently established and those under
consideration - participated in the event, as well as a number of interested countries, intergovernmental organizations and civil
society organizations.
During the meeting participants reaffirmed the need to work together and suggested increased interaction amongst WENs to
form a network of the wildlife enforcement networks, which could promote communication and cooperation links amongst
them at regional, continental and global levels.
As a precursor to this event, a month long pilot exercise in such inter-continental cooperation was carried out in January 2013
with US support. Known as Operation Cobra this involved police, customs and wildlife officers in 22 Asian and African
countries, and resulted in a large number of arrests and seizures. Exactly a year later Operation Cobra II had similar success,
involving 28 countries and resulting in more than 400 arrests and 350 major seizures across Africa and Asia including 36 rhino
horns and over three metric tons of elephant ivory. Police, Customs, and wildlife officials from China, Africa, Southeast and
South Asia, as well as the United States, joined together with CITES, WCO, INTERPOL, ASEAN-WEN and LATF to stage the
operation out of coordination centres in Nairobi and Bangkok, with links to field operatives across Africa and Asia.
The International Coordination Team for Cobra II exchanged real time intelligence on a daily basis, targeting poachers and
traffickers of endangered species.
3.7.1.2
NGO involvement
The International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) and INTERPOL signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) In May
2013, to partner in evidence-based wildlife crime investigations and enforcement operations, the first ever MoU signed by
INTERPOLs Environmental Crime Programme with an NGO. To date the two organisations have coordinated three multiagency operations in all regions of Africa each lasting several months, namely Operation Wendi in 2012, Operation Worthy in
2013 and Operation Wildcat in 2014. IFAW and another NGO, the Freeland Foundation, were closely involved also with the
two Africa/Asia Cobra operations mentioned above.
3.7.2
3.7.2.1
Facilitate interagency networking within Africa

Inter-regional initiatives: The Lusaka Agreement and Task Force
The Lusaka Agreement on Co-operative Enforcement Operations Directed at Illegal Trade in Wild Fauna and Flora (The
Lusaka Agreement) traces its origins to a meeting of wildlife law enforcement officers from eight Eastern and Southern African
countries in Lusaka, Zambia in December 1992. This led to formal inter-governmental negotiations under the auspices of
UNEP, with the final Agreement eventually coming into force in December 1996.
Currently, there are seven Parties to the Agreement: The Republics of Congo (Brazzaville), Kenya, Liberia, Tanzania, Uganda,
Zambia and the Kingdom of Lesotho. The Republics of South Africa, Ethiopia and the Kingdom of Swaziland are signatories.
The Agreement provides for a Governing Council, National Bureaux and a permanent Task Force to implement its objectives
of reducing and ultimately eliminating illegal trade in wild fauna and flora in Africa.
The Lusaka Agreement Task Force (LATF) was established in June 1999 with headquarters in Nairobi, Kenya. It comprises
seconded law enforcement officers from Party States and locally recruited support staff, and its mission is to work with the
National Bureaux in order to:
Final report
Page 63
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
facilitate cooperative activities in undertaking law enforcement operations

investigate violations of national wildlife laws
disseminate and exchange of information on illegal trade activities, and
build capacity for awareness promotion
Essentially these correspond to WEN functions, so the idea of a WEN for Africa is not new. However the LATF prototype has
not been an unqualified success when the return on 15 years heavy investment is assessed in terms of impact. It has been
the subject of considerable criticism, and the almost random assemblage of countries involved does not fit well with any of the
regional political groupings that have emerged since, and for which the formation of new WENs is now under active
consideration (see below).
Consequently the continued relevance of the LATF is uncertain, which is causing tension and distracting from the priority
actions that need to be undertaken in Africa. It would be in the interests of all parties therefore, if a review of LATF was
commissioned, possibly by the EU in order to inform further funding and advocacy avenues if any.
3.7.2.2
Regional initiatives: emerging WENs
USAID has invested $17 million since 2005 towards establishing regional WENs, of which that for the Association of South
East Asian Nations is a notable example (ASEAN-WEN). Following such models, the US initiated the development of a Central
African WEN in November 2011, with a workshop in Douala under the auspices of the Commission of Central African Forests
(COMIFAC). The meeting brought together representatives from COMIFAC member countries 92 and produced a Regional
Action Plan for Strengthening National Wildlife Law Implementation for the period 20122017 which would form the basis for
a wildlife enforcement network in Central Africa, similar to those operational or under development in Central America, Europe,
South and South-East Asia.
This was followed up by another US funded workshop in Libreville in April 2012. The Regional Workshop on Wildlife Trafficking
and Dismantling Transnational Illicit Networks brought together the same Central African countries as in Douala.
Approximately 150 law enforcement and conservation government officials as well as representatives from NGOs and IGOs
held three days of productive and practical dialogue in support of building a regional wildlife enforcement network (WEN) to
combat wildlife trafficking. A draft resolution was proposed at the workshop with recommendations that were formulated by
the Central Africans to support establishing and implementing a Central African WEN.
The US is now initiating support for the creation of yet more networks in Asia, South America and Africa. In October 2013 it
facilitated a Southern Africa Regional Wildlife Trafficking Workshop in Gaborone. Officials of wildlife enforcement authorities
from Angola, Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe resolved,
but in principle only, to recommend the establishment of a network of national wildlife law enforcement agencies to be known
as the Wildlife Enforcement Network for Southern Africa (WENSA).
Another new African WEN is being promoted under a comprehensive programme entitled ARREST, standing for Africas
Regional Response to Endangered Species Trafficking, based on a concept jointly developed by AWF, the Freeland
Foundation and IFAW. These organisations have prepared with US help a proposal that seeks funding for the recent initiative
of eight African governments to create a new Horn of Africa Wildlife Enforcement Network (HAWEN). HAWEN member
countries currently consist of Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, and Uganda.
These are the member states of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) which has already committed to
providing office space for the HAWEN Secretariat in its Djibouti headquarters. While possible in principle, it is not clear whether
and how in practice the three countries already involved in the LATF (see above) will be able to sustain membership in two
WENs simultaneously93.
The ARREST model is designed to be a holistic continent-wide program that increases capacity and communication channels
between the Horn of Africa with other parts of Africa and the rest of the world. The ARREST partnership is already engaging
other regions of Africa and expects these to benefit from the initial action in the Horn of Africa, which is intended to serve as
a pilot that will inspire development of similar WENs as has been mooted already for Southern Africa.
92
93
Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea and Gabon
Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda

Final report
Page 64
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
As presented in the ARREST proposal, these WENs will serve as facilities to build the enforcement capacities of member
states - at the national level - for protection of key populations, wildlife crime investigation and evidence collection, the use of
legal tools and prosecutorial procedures, and identification of species targeted for illegal trade. As such their principal focus
will be on the delivery of a variety of training courses including:
Protected area operational and tactical enforcement conservation training (PROTECT)

Detection of environmental crime training (DETECT)
Legal training for prosecutors and the judiciary
Species ID training
Care for confiscated wildlife training
An important element of regional networking is to develop agreements to facilitate cross-border cooperation so pursue, arrest
and extradite poachers and illegal traders. Ideally such measures should be mandated in formal regional Protocols.
3.7.3
3.7.3.1
Form national interagency coordination bodies

NESTs, NCUs and WENs
Recent trends in the wildlife trade, particularly those involving ivory and rhino horn, have not only attracted widespread
international attention, but have also galvanised responses at the national level. Most often these have been focused on trying
to prevent commodities entering the value chain in the first place, through anti-poaching efforts to stop the killing. More and
more countries however, have realised they need to tackle the rest of the chain within their territories and even beyond.
To that end they have been setting up multi-agency Task Forces, Committees, Groups and Units which equate to WENs at
the national level, such as the NESTs (National Environment Security Task Forces) promoted by INTERPOL (see 3.2.3), and
the NCUs (National Coordinating Units) of Central Africa mentioned in Volume 4, section 5.5. Two specific examples from a
supply and consumer country respectively are South Africas National Wildlife Crime Reaction Unit, and Chinas National
Interagency CITES Enforcement Collaborative Group. Membership varies, but should encompass all natural resource
management agencies94, as well as police, customs, intelligence, prosecutors, the judiciary and so on.
A highly relevant product in this context is ICCWCs Wildlife and Forest Crime Analytic Toolkit, which is
designed to assist government officials in forestry and wildlife administration, customs and all other relevant
enforcement agencies in conducting a comprehensive review and analysis of possible means and measures to
protect wildlife and forest and monitor products thereof, and thus identify technical assistance needs. ICCWC will
support countries wishing to use the Toolkit (see 3.2.1 above). Due to its very comprehensive nature, application
of the existing Toolkit is a heavy undertaking in that it is both time consuming and expensive. Accordingly, the
development of an ICCWC Toolkit Light that can be implemented more easily, quickly and cheaply is being
actively considered. There is a potentially very useful convergence between this initiative and the national and sitelevel self-assessments developed under the MIKES Project (see 3.6.2 and Box 6).
One of the very likely and desirable outcomes of any national review or assessment would be a recommendation to form a
NEST or other national WEN-equivalent, or strengthen it where one exists already. INTERPOL has published Guidelines to
assist in this process (see 3.2.3), and also advocates the creation within NESTs of intelligence analysis and investigation Units
dedicated to tackling wildlife crime.
Many countries need help not only in organising a NEST or other national WEN-equivalent, but also in strengthening the
capacity of the networks individual members and units. In some countries where the trade, especially in high profile product
like ivory and rhino horn, is a dominant issue, a problem of too many uncoordinated offers of help can arise.
Tanzania provides a notable example of this. The US government pledged over a year ago that it would assign a USFWS
official to its Embassy in Dar es Salaam to support the Governments efforts to develop an overarching wildlife security
strategy. In the continued absence of this official, the Government turned for help to the Germans, who already had a senior
advisor embedded in the Wildlife Division. At least two other overlapping initiatives have gone ahead at the same time. The
local office of UNDP commissioned a dedicated consultancy to design a national wildlife security strategy, while the FZS
94
Including all the Management , Scientific and Enforcement Authorities officially registered as such under CITES

Final report
Page 65
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
prepared Security Plans for two premier protected areas95 which led to the development of a bottom-up logic for inter-agency
coordination and the sharing of intelligence information, without which field-level protection efforts would remain compromised.
Despite all the foregoing the US may still post a security adviser to Dar, but this could in fact help consolidate these and other
inputs into an effective single official strategy.
3.7.3.2
NGO involvement: the EAGLE approach
As for protection operations at the field level, there are countries where the capacity and/or integrity of the responsible public
institutions is far below that required to provide meaningful enforcement of anti-trafficking laws. In such situations, some
Governments will either accept or tolerate the involvement of an NGO in detecting wildlife crime, identifying those involved,
and bringing them to court. From the success of the first such project in Cameroon, a formula has emerged now based on the
EAGLE (Eco Activists for Governance and Law Enforcement) network, created and led by an NGO called LAGA (The Last
Great Ape Organisation). As for Conservation Security Partnerships with NGOs at the PA-level, Central Africa has the longest
standing experience with the EAGLE Approach (see Volume 4 section 5.5).
Currently, WCS is a partner with the Aspinall Foundation in running an EAGLE project in the Republic of Congo, called PALF
(Projet dappui lApplication de la Loi sur la Faune sauvage96), which runs investigations, assists in operations, does legal
follow-up and has a communication department to publicise convictions and other successes. WCS is currently launching
EAGLE replicates in the DRC and Nigeria also.
Unsurprisingly perhaps, WCS argues that the EAGLE approach should be applied throughout Africa. Among the bigger
economies of Southern and Eastern Africa however, many Governments will be unlikely to tolerate an NGO role in sensitive
national-security related matters. In such countries one must strive to build capacity directly within Government, by supporting
the development and effective functioning NESTs or WENs for example: this is anyway the only approach with any real
prospect of long term sustainability. Exceptions within EA where an interim EAGLE approach might be justified are South
Sudan and Somalia, countries in which governance is as weak as some of those in CA and WA.
3.7.4
Develop information management and monitoring systems
Most anti-trafficking strategists stress the need for information from poachers, documentation obtained during seizures,
interviews with associated traffickers and other evidence all to be systematically gathered and analysed for a collective
response.
However the lack of reliable, comprehensive and consistent data on wildlife trafficking is a major problem at all levels, whether
local, national, regional, continental or global. It is important that relevant data and statistics are collected, collated, analysed
and disseminated amongst all relevant agencies to assist priority setting in the fight against organised crime at any level.
Part of the problem is that enforcement services are inhibited by the resource demands of multiple reporting
requirements and the different formats used by different organisations (INTERPOL, CITES, WCO, TRAFFIC etc).
There are a number of candidate platforms on which a unified reporting format could be developed to enable a
coordinated multinational response from law enforcement worldwide. These include:
95
96
INTERPOLs global databases and network

WCOs secure Customs Enforcement Network Communication (CENcomm) applications, notably ENVIRONET, a
communication tool that facilitates information exchange and cooperation in the area of environment and wildlife
enforcement. The tool enables Customs administrations, other competent national agencies, international
organizations and their regional networks to share real-time information as well as reference material, which are
essential for successful enforcement
IBM i2 Intelligent Law Enforcement software that provides flexible intelligence analysis, law enforcement and
investigation capabilities that help combat crime, terrorism and fraudulent activity. Notably for WENs it can deliver
organizational efficiencies to policing and partner agencies by improving oversight, collaboration and the speed with
which information is shared, and by removing barriers to information access and sharing
the Wildlife Enforcement Monitoring System (WEMS) which has been under development by the UN University for
many years but whose use still appears to be limited
The Serengeti National Park and the Selous Game Reserve

Project for the Application of Law for Fauna

Final report
Page 66
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
the relatively recent SMART system and software (see 3.6.3).
Logically, ICCWC would provide a useful forum in which to discuss how to rationalise and/or reconcile these different tools,
indeed its member organisation UNODC may achieve this under its Global Programme to Combat WLFC, which includes
amongst its aims the Introduction of data collection and analysis systems to provide a detailed information/knowledge base
on WLFC, together with better dissemination and use of that information.
Functions that should feature in any law enforcement data system, include the ability to compare actual performance against
pre-set targets, whether these be number of man-days on patrol (an index of effort), or the number of arrests or seizures in a
given period (an index of success). The ability to analyse one variable against any other is also required, such as number of
arrests as a function of effort (an index of efficiency). Use of the ETIS Law Enforcement Effort Ratio (LEER), which represents
how effective law enforcement is in intercepting illegal trade in ivory in target countries, is also relevant here.
ICCWC has embarked upon a process to develop a set of global wildlife crime enforcement indicators, to which the EU can
provide inputs through a wider package of support to UNODC which is leading on this important effort (see 3.9.3.1).
3.7.5
3.7.5.1
Apply specialised tools

Container control programmes
In the international maritime trade supply chain approximately 500 million container movements are registered each year. With
up to 90% of world cargo movement occurring in shipping containers, the size and complexity of this transportation mode is
staggering. According to research results no more than 2% of these containers are physically checked after arrival at a
destination to verify the contents. The sheer volume of shipping container traffic, along with the sophisticated and often
ingenious concealment methods and diverse routings adopted by smugglers of ivory and other wildlife products, makes
successful interdiction difficult.
In response to this challenge, Container Control Programmes similar to that proposed by UNODC and WCO for East Africa
are needed. The main element of the programme is the creation of dedicated inter-agency container profiling units, known as
Joint Port Control Units (JPCUs), comprising customs and other relevant law enforcement officers.
Not only should JPCUs be included in national WENs, but JPCUs should include officers dedicated to detecting and identifying
wildlife contraband as opposed to drugs or arms etc. CCPs can train these officers in the identification and inspection of high
risk containers, based upon risk analysis and other modern profiling techniques. Additionally, they can deliver the specialised
scanners and other technical equipment needed to identify and inspect high-risk freight containers with minimum disruption
to legitimate trade and business.
One well publicised type of technical equipment being deployed to detect ivory and rhino horn in particular as it transits ports
and airports, is the trained detector or sniffer dog. NGOs such as WCS in Gabon, RoC and soon Tanzania are providing
such dogs for ivory detection, and training their handlers.
Apart from container ports, trained sniffer dogs are needed at all major trafficking hubs (airports and ports) and other choke
points such as border crossings.
3.7.5.2
Controlled deliveries97
Investigations often do not extend beyond the point of detection or seizure. For this reason the increased use of
controlled deliveries could have a significant impact on the activities of organized crime groups, as it targets the
entire crime chain and facilitates law enforcement action beyond the point of detection or seizure. At the time of
writing, both INTERPOL and the WCO, in close consultation with each other, are developing two complementary
projects to enhance the use of controlled deliveries to combat wildlife crime.
97
The technique of allowing illicit or suspect consignments to pass out of, through or into the territory of one or more countries, with the
knowledge and under the supervision of their competent authorities, with a view to identifying persons involved in the commission of offences
Final report
Page 67
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
INTERPOL is developing a 28-month long project, co-funded by ICCWC, which will include training on the
application of controlled deliveries and other tracking methods, followed by potential domestic, regional and
international operations using these methods.
WCO is developing a multi-year programme to build the capacity of Customs officials in responding to wildlife
crime, for which the CITES Secretariat has secured funding from the UK. Following discussions amongst ICCWC
partners, it was agreed that this programme should incorporate a controlled delivery component. Countries in Africa
and Asia that have the legal framework to conduct controlled deliveries with wildlife specimens will be identified,
training workshops will be provided and an international law enforcement operation using controlled delivery
techniques will be carried out, as part of the broader WCO programme.
3.7.5.3
Follow the money
To address the serious problem of moneylaundering as a facilitator of wildlife trafficking and related offences,
countries may need to adopt or amend policies and legislation aimed at the prevention and detection of this crime.
The CITES Secretariat is currently in discussion with the World Bank regarding the development of an e-learning
module on wildlife crime and anti-money-laundering. The UK and the European Commission have agreed to fund
this initiative.
On 25 March 2014, the International Sustainability Unit of the Prince of Wales Charitable Foundation hosted a
meeting in London on Following the money from wildlife crime. The meeting brought together approximately 30
participants representing a broad range of expertise from the financial sector, law enforcement and wildlife
conservation, to discuss how banks and others might use existing tools to follow the money from the illegal wildlife
trade. Participants welcomed the opportunity to meet with such a diverse group, and welcomed the convening of
an Experts Group that could continue to develop promising wildlife trade applications.
3.7.5.4
Forensics
Forensic analyses of samples from seized specimens can significantly contribute to ongoing investigations, the
design of appropriate law enforcement responses, and ensuring that the entire crime chain is addressed. For
forensic data to be credible and admissible, relevant legislation must be complied with at all times, and appropriate
methods and procedures must be used during crime-scene investigation, sample collection, shipping, analysis,
interpretation of results and database maintenance.
Law enforcement officers responsible for the investigation of cases involving large-scale ivory seizures are often confronted
with the challenge of identifying the most appropriate way to collect and submit specimens to appropriate facilities for forensic
analysis. As a major contribution to address this and related problems the International Consortium on Combating Wildlife
Crime (ICCWC) on 13 November 2014 released its Guidelines on methods and procedures for ivory sampling and laboratory
analysis in support of the deployment of forensic technology to combat elephant poaching 98. Led by UNODC, as a member
of ICCWC, the Guidelines are intended for worldwide use and are aimed at first responders, investigators, law enforcement
officials, forensic scientists, prosecutors and the judiciary. Their purpose is to facilitate the use of forensic science to the fullest
extent possible in order to combat wildlife crime, and in particular, to combat the trade in illegal ivory through the provision of
guidance to support transnational criminal investigations and law enforcement operations. It includes detailed protocols on
methods of sampling and analysis, which can be applied by law enforcement officers and by laboratories with appropriate
facilities.
Forensic analysis techniques are relevant also to seizures of rhino horn and many other wildlife products, and developing the
capacity to apply them is discussed more fully in 3.9.3.4.
3.7.5.5
98
Publicity
http://www.unodc.org/documents/Wildlife/Guidelines_Ivory.pdf

Final report
Page 68
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
NESTs and WENs should ensure that Illicit wildlife trafficking is publicised as a serious crime under national law, notably
showcasing successful prosecutions that resulted in significant penalties.
3.8
3.8.1
STRATEGY 4: STOPPING THE DEMAND

Educate and influence consumers
Effectively targeted action plans are needed to eradicate demand for illegal wildlife products, including but not
limited to, raising awareness and changing behaviour. Governments should work in partnership with relevant
stakeholders, including sectoral NGOs and experts, businesses and civil society. Actions should be scientific and
clearly evidence-based, building on research and surveys into consumer knowledge, attitudes and behaviour, and
form part of coherent demand-reduction strategies designed on the scale and in a timeframe needed to have
meaningful impact, and delivering measurable behaviour change amongst consumers.
The demand-reduction strategies of TRAFFIC and some other NGOs are described in this volumes Sections on elephants
and rhinos. WCS for instance is working on demand reduction in key markets, and recognises both the need for multiple
approaches to address demand, and the importance of awareness-raising campaigns using both traditional and social media.
As noted in the discussion of ivory demand however (1.4.4.3), demand reduction efforts need to be better grounded in more
realistic and comprehensive contextual and factual understandings of consumers and their motivations. This means it may be
necessary to go beyond the conservation sector and involve current non-participants who may have important roles, for
example the arts investment community, cultural preservation groups, and religious groups.
3.8.2
3.8.2.1
Other measures
Develop alternatives
The identification, development and promotion of sustainable or artificial alternatives acceptable to consumers of endangered
wildlife products such as ivory could have a huge impact. More research into such substitutes is needed.
3.8.2.2
Destruction of stockpiles
In addition to their important publicity and awareness-raising value, the destruction of stockpiles is recommended
because they are costly to secure and maintain; divert scarce resources away from front line conservation; and
their content may enter the illegal supply chain (through theft) and drive speculation. Consequently, Governments
including those of EU Member States - that have stockpiles of illegal products, particularly of high value items
such as rhino horn or elephant ivory, should be encouraged to destroy them. Independent audits, or other means
of ensuring transparent management, should be carried out prior to destruction as should sampling for DNA
analysis.
3.8.2.3
Impose legal moratoria and bans
International trade bans are mediated via CITES. However, there is nothing to stop either regional groupings or individual
countries from promoting and enforcing legal moratoria and bans on any product within their jurisdictions.
Thus it is for example, that calls to curb demand by closing all domestic ivory markets through involuntary, legal mechanisms
are gaining strength. Some US markets have been closed down recently (see 3.3.4), and all other countries with active
domestic markets are under increasing pressure to follow suit including those in the EU (see 1.5.1.5).
It must be noted however, that the USFWSs efforts to enforce a Federal ban on the domestic ivory trade have met significant
resistance from owners of antique ivory artefacts, and of musical instruments for example. Despite the legal challenges
involved, the Service is confident of developing regulatory compromises that will not undermine the fundamental aim of
protecting elephants, in which case the lessons learnt by the US Administration in enforcing a national ban will benefit other
countries wishing to do the same.

Final report
Page 69
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
3.8.2.4
Use high-profile diplomacy and advocacy
The potential value and impact of this approach is inherent to the suggestion made at the High Level Event on
Illicit Wildlife Trafficking hosted by Germany and Gabon in New York on the side of the UN General Assembly in
September 2013, to establish a Special Representative to the Secretary General to further the fight against illicit
wildlife trafficking, and for the UNGA to request this in a formal Resolution.
The UN Group of Friends on Poaching and Illicit Wildlife Trafficking based in New-York offers a good vehicle to explore this
suggestion further. For example, its added-value compared to existing tools deserves closer analysis, particularly with regard
to the mandate, profile, timeline and budget of the proposed special UN Representative/Envoy on Wildlife Trafficking. Also,
the link with security as well as with other initiatives on natural resources and conflicts could be developed further.
3.9
It is obvious that efforts to curb the trade in any wildlife commodity, be it ivory, apes or peacocks, will require essentially the
same preventative and investigative procedures and involve the same range of enforcement agencies. It follows that any
action taken to strengthen the capacity of the wildlife enforcement machinery stands to benefit very many species, and would
therefore represent money very well spent. The question is, what would be the most effective contributions for the EC to make
in this regard?
As has been emphasised already, none of the strategic fronts on which the war against illegal wildlife trade can be fought is
sufficient in itself, meaning action must be taken on them all simultaneously at global, regional and national levels.
According to the strategic reviews given above therefore, the following actions are recommended for EU support. With so
much that needs doing, and with so many other actors also trying to help, these recommendations represent a conscious
attempt to avoid an all-inclusive, over-ambitious programme, and instead to identify a realistic selection of interventions that
have the potential to generate a very good return on investment in terms of ultimate impact.
It should be noted here that the recommendations arising from the EUs own Expert Conference on the EU Approach against
Wildlife Trafficking of 10 April 2014 have been duly considered.
3.9.1
Action to strengthen policies and laws
The EU and its Member States should act on all of the many relevant recommendations arising from its own Expert Conference
on the EU Approach against Wildlife Trafficking of 10 April 2014, whether domestic or international in nature.
However, not all of the suggestions submitted by those consulted in the course of this exercise were adopted 99. Ones that
should be included are the need for EU countries to close domestic ivory markets and to destroy any stockpiles of ivory (see
1.5.1.5).
Several of the actions recommended under the other strategic headings will indirectly support the strengthening of wildlife
trade-relevant policies and laws, either internationally or nationally.
3.9.2
Action to Stop the Killing
In other volumes of this Report, a compelling case is made for the EU to concentrate a greater proportion of its support for
wildlife conservation in Africa on a number of carefully selected Key Landscapes for Conservation or KLCs (for an overview
see Volume 1, section 5.1).
The most effective contribution the EU could make to stop the killing at field level, would be to provide the necessary inputs
(training, equipment etc.) as part of its support packages to KLCs. Given the severity of the impacts that the ivory and rhino
horn trades in particular are having in terms of poaching it follows that of all KLCs, those harbouring key elephant and rhino
populations should receive priority funding.
Approaches to alleviate rural poverty, which is a fundamental driver of poaching at the field level, can also be addressed within
the context of support to KLCs (see sections 2.2.3 and 3.7 in Volume 3 for East Africa, for example).
99
All contributions are available at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/consultations/wildlife_trafficking_en.htm

Final report
Page 70
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
3.9.3
Action to Stop the Trafficking
Action is needed at both international and national levels. Options for the former are relatively straight forward, but at the
national level direct support to anti-trafficking efforts can take either or both of two basic routes. One accommodates major
NGO participation, the other goes directly in support of the Government machinery involved. While the former can be of great
value in particular situations, the latter is the one best suited to a major donor like the EU, itself representing Governments.
As noted elsewhere, working alongside or even within Government anyway offers the best prospects for sustainable impacts
in the long term (see section 3.7.3.2).
Accordingly, the national-level actions recommended here reflect a prioritisation of support for Government agencies.
3.9.3.1
Continue and expand support for international trade regulation
The EU should continue as an important financier of CITES-mandated actions and CITES core functions 100, and more
especially should not only continue, but expand also, its support for all ICCWC operations, especially those of UNODC which
is taking the lead in so many relevant fields ranging from forensics to controlled deliveries to indicators. This overall position
with respect to CITES and ICCWC is exactly consistent with that recommended by the recent Expert Conference on the EU
Approach against Wildlife Trafficking.
UNODCs Global Programme for Combating Wildlife and Forest Crime is considered particularly worthy of support, as it
elaborates on all these initiatives, and its anti-trafficking components are particularly well thought-out and constructed. At the
time of writing (September 2014), this Programme has secured only US$3 million of the target US$18 million required.
Since this is a ready-to-go programme, much needed in a crisis situation, which ticks all the boxes with regard to appropriate
action, and since it is organised regionally, the EU is very strongly recommended to fund its entire African component.
Failing such an all-embracing approach, the EU should support the following more focussed interventions which are anyway
consistent with UNODCs Global Programme.
3.9.3.2
Support the establishment of National WENs
The WEN approach to establishing functional, well-coordinated multi-agency enforcement mechanisms offers a great deal of
promise in the anti-trafficking context, but there is a dilemma as to how best to go about this.
One approach evidently favoured by the US - is to develop a regional WEN first, and use this to catalyse the formation
(through initial country assessments), and then develop the capacity, of the complementary national-level WENs required
within each of its member countries.
The other approach favoured by ICCWC is to work at the national level first and then, only once each country has the
appropriate machinery in place, consider the possible need for a WEN at the next level up. ICCWCs Wildlife and Forest
Crime Analytic Toolkit was developed specifically with this in mind and holds great potential.
There are several problems with developing a regional body first, especially if it creates a physical institution with its own
expensive overheads. The ASEAN-WEN that is often quoted as a successful model to follow has struggled to sustain its
operations once US funding support came to an end. Whilst the LATF has not been an unqualified success, the reason it has
kept going for 15 years is due to the annual subscriptions of its member states. Without a continuous funding commitment
from its member states, it is unlikely any regional WEN can be sustainable. Such a commitment might be forthcoming if
members were convinced of its value, but the value-added by an institutional WEN at the regional level is widely questioned.
It is not the value or need for supra-national networking per se that is being disputed, but rather the idea that without an actual
institution with offices and staff it would never happen. On the contrary, if there are strong WENs at the national level, each
with a focal person for international relations, there is nothing to stop these persons interacting with each other, or with
international agencies, directly: it is not as though this would be impossible without the assistance of an intermediary, regional
WEN101. They are not even an essential pre-requisite to coordinated inter-regional or inter-continental exercises, as Operations
Wendi, Worthy and Wildcat have proved. It is because of such considerations of sustainability and value-added that the recent
100
See also the recommendations under 1.5.2.1 and 2.5.2.1 also in this Volume
The UNDP consultancy to develop a national wildlife security strategy for Tanzania came to similar conclusions: P. Harrison (2014) Draft
Anti-Wildlife Poaching and Trafficking Support Strategy. Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Dar es Salaam
101

Final report
Page 71
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
effort to push forward a WEN for southern Africa (WENSA) received only lukewarm support from the states involved, and led
them only to recommend its formation in principle, rather than agree to it outright.
It follows therefore that the EU should not finance the development of regional WENs as institutions in their own right. The EC
can support them in principle, as does CITES and other bodies, not least because they might offer a potentially useful source
of relevant training support.
The substantive recommendation however, is for the EU to give priority to supporting the establishment of nationallevel WENs, initially by funding the application of ICCWCs Wildlife and Forest Crime Analytic Toolkit in any and all
countries that would benefit from this, and then by extending support to facilitate implementation of the resultant
National Action Plans.
The latter requirement will be essential in most countries: any assumption on ICCWCs part that Governments can be relied
on to drive and finance the necessary follow-up action is a weakness in the Toolkits current application.
One common criticism of the existing Toolkit is that goes into far too much detail. It is further recommended therefore that the
EU adds value its current and further investments in the MIKE Project and ICCWC generally, by funding a process to merge
MIKEs national-level capacity assessment methodology based on benchmarks, with the development of a Light version of
the ICCWC Toolkit. By being easier, quicker and cheaper, the latter should be much more widely applicable and so have
greater impact (see 3.6.2 and Box 6).
3.9.3.3
Develop a cadre of international Wildlife Security Advisers
The structure of the organized groups involved in wildlife trade-related crimes has five different levels, from poacher
to the end consumer:
Level 1: Field (protected area, communal and private land): Poachers (individuals or groups)
Level 2: Local: Receivers/Couriers
Level 3: National: Couriers/Buyers/Facilitators
Level 4: National: Exporters
Level 5: International: Forwarders/Importers/Traders/Consumers
Investigation complexity differs significantly between Levels 1 and 5. Current enforcement activities in source/supply States
address criminal syndicate members from Levels 1 to 2 relatively effectively (although with varying degrees of success of
course). However these individuals are often easily replaced, and the threat will continue to exist for as long as enforcement
activities do not address the driving force behind them at Levels 3 to 5. Organized crime syndicate members on Level 5 are
located in transit/consumer countries and beyond the reach of enforcement authorities in supply countries. It is for this reason
that increased international cooperation and coordination are vital.
Thus the main challenge for national enforcement agencies is at Levels 3 and 4. This is because identifying and catching the
king-pins or big fish involved needs inter-agency intelligence-led approaches that are both proactive and reactive, and which
can penetrate the layers of secrecy and corruption that protect these people and facilitate their activities. Unfortunately these
skills are not well developed, in a wildlife context at least, so it is in this area that national WENs can be expected to add most
value provided they are staffed by people skilled in intelligence analysis methods including social network analysis.
However, development of these skills is not straightforward. Probably the best way to develop them is for selected WEN
officers to work alongside a person already experienced in the relevant methods, i.e. through on-the-job, or experiential,
learning. This could be delivered by embedding - for 2 to 3 years - suitably qualified Technical Assistants (TAs), or Wildlife
Security Advisers, within national-level WENs or WEN-equivalents. It is interesting to note that the FZS came to a similar
conclusion in the course of developing PA-focused security plans, and is arranging for the short-term attachment of British exintelligence officers to Tanzanias National and Transnational Serious Crimes Investigation Unit to help it address wildlife crime
more effectively.
It is recommended therefore that the EU develops an appropriate TA resource that could be supplied on request, and the
obvious and ideal partner to lead this initiative is ICCWC102. This resource could consist of former police, military, customs
and intelligence etc officers from EU member states, especially those who have worked on other similar forms of organised
Not only is the EC already one of ICCWCs main financiers, but ICCWC also already offers similar TA-type support, e.g. the deployment
of Wildlife Incident Support Teams (WISTs), see 3.2.1
102

Final report
Page 72
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
crime (drugs, human-trafficking, arms etc.). Under the proposed scheme, the EU would fund the salaries and expenses of the
TA so deployed, and provide them also with limited hardware, software103 and operational support.
There can be little doubt that the presence of such TA would also help drive many routine aspects of WEN functionality, and
optimise links to international agencies such as INTERPOL, EUROPOL, the proposed AFROPOL and WCO. Any resultant
improvement in dealing with Levels 3 and 4 in the criminal hierarchy would bring disproportionately massive returns on the
investment in terms of saving wildlife. It follows that the deployment of national Wildlife Security Advisers represents a very
promising approach for the EC to adopt within its overall strategy.
The first steps would be to win ICCWCs agreement, and then commission a detailed feasibility study in which the AU, ACP
and beneficiary states would be consulted as to the diplomatic, technical and practical modalities required to make the scheme
work104. Initial discussions of the concept held in 2014 with senior Government officials in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda during
preparation of the next EU Regional Indicative Programme generated entirely positive reactions.
3.9.3.4
Forensic laboratories for Africa
The very urgent need for facilities capable of determining the provenance of ivory and rhino horn has been described in the
relevant sections of this Volume (1.5.1.2 and 2.5.1.1). The need is arguably most pressing in Southern and Eastern Africa,
these being the regions in which the majority of the continents elephants and rhinos especially are found today. Even so, a
significant amount of seized ivory originates in Central Africa meaning a facility is needed in that region also. At present there
are two facilities with the potential to provide regional forensic services for ivory and rhino horn, namely the VGL lab in Pretoria
for Southern Africa, and the KWS lab in Nairobi for Eastern. For Central Africa, a lab planned in Gabon has regional potential.
Subject to the inputs of other donors, it is recommended that the EU should provide complementary assistance towards the
development and sustainable operations of these labs as a matter of priority and for the following reasons.
Firstly, a substantial amount of investment has already gone into developing a real collaboration between the VGL and KWS
labs, so it makes sense to support and expand the work that has already been done in that regard. Secondly, all such labs
have the potential to determine the identity and provenance of very many types of wildlife product, not just ivory and rhino
horn, thus contributing to the overall effort to address illicit wildlife trading in general.
The VGL Laboratory, Pretoria, South Africa
The Pretoria rhino-horn facility should be developed further to provide additional ivory analysis services for southern
Africa. As a proven performer of the highest international calibre that already possesses most if not all of the
expensive equipment required, it should have relatively little difficulty expanding into this niche subject only to it
being fully and sustainably funded: the EU could help assure this.
The KWS Laboratory, Nairobi, Kenya
As noted in Volume 3 (3.2.2), this facility already has in place the security infrastructure and policies needed to
maintain the admissibility in court of biological evidence for prosecutions and, with help from the VGL lab, capacity
is already being developed there to provide a regional service with respect rhino horn analysis. It was confirmed in
the course of the present study that KWS envisages a state of the art lab in forensics that will be of strong regional
significance, and has developed a policy of making the lab available to East African neighbours on a not-for-profit/atcost basis. Further, East African scientists and technicians will be welcomed at the new lab for training and practical
work. Given this pre-existing regional orientation, the KWS lab is the obvious place in which to develop a regional
analytical service for ivory also, not least because the same equipment can be used whether the sample is rhino
horn or ivory.
As of May 2014, the lab was half built and lacked essential equipment. Cost estimates for fully equipping it varied:
according to WWF $380,000 was required (J. Okori, pers. comm.), while associates from the Smithsonian estimated
up to $774,000 inclusive of a $240,000 DNA sequencer (D. Schindel pers. comm.). These estimates did not cover
the need for computer networking and data storage hardware and software that comply with stringent security
protocols. Given the dynamics of this field, there would be a need also for continuous training estimated at $45,000
p.a. Yearly running costs, exclusive of training needs, were estimated at $150,000 p.a. for a full staff complement.
This translates to an investment of between roughly EUR 500,000 (for equipment only), or EUR 1.0m for a 3-year
support programme,
103
See section 3.7.4

Relevant to this would be lessons to be learnt from an intelligence project currently under development in South Africa that aims to better
disrupt syndicates higher up the criminal pyramids. A pre-requisite is the buy-in of all relevant branches of Government (Intelligence, Police,
Environmental Affairs etc) in effect the formation of a national WEN. At the time of writing external partners and all other project details
are being kept confidential.
104

Final report
Page 73
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
As recently as September 2014 however, KWS announced that a portion of a $3.0 million grant from the US
Government in support of anti-poaching activities in Kenya would be devoted to development of its forensic lab. It is
not known however, whether that will be sufficient to cover all the estimated costs detailed above.
In the event of a continuing shortfall, the EU is encouraged to offer any supplementary funding needed. However,
unless one was prepared prior to the US inputs, a serious design study should be undertaken before any funding
commitment is made. This would need to give careful consideration to trained manpower and sustainability issues
in particular.
The EC is already considering limited support to the KWS lab within its 2014-2020 Regional Indicative Programme
(RIP) for Eastern and Southern Africa, but the earliest these funds could come on line is 2015. Given that CITES is
the lead agency in coordinating ivory forensics, an alternative source of relatively quick funding might be the EUs
Strategic Cooperation Agreement with UNEP under which funding is available for support to multi-lateral
conventions including CITES. DG DEVCO is recommended to contact UNEPs Liaison Office in Brussels to explore
this option.
The ANPN laboratory, Gabon
UNODC is very active in Gabon, where it is implementing the ICCWC Wildlife and Forest Crime Analytical Toolkit.
It is working also with the Agence Nationale des Parcs Nationaux (ANPN) to develop a functional lab that can do
DNA, fingerprints and so on, linked to an intelligence database. In this connection, UNODC is going to post two fulltime staff to ANPN in the latter half of 2014. The ANPN anticipates the need for donor support in order to make this
facility a reality. Provided it can be developed as a regional facility working to all the relevant international standards,
rather than serving Gabon alone, EU support is strongly recommended.
It should be noted that the measures recommended here will benefit not only rhinos and elephants, but certain other species
threatened by illegal trade also, meaning support to these three regional labs has the potential to help solve several very high
priority issues at once, and as such would be an extremely cost-effective use of conservation funds.
3.9.4
3.9.4.1
Action to Stop the Demand

Support selected demand reduction efforts
Support TRAFFIC and other selected NGOs targeted research and awareness-raising activities to reduce
demand for rhino horn and ivory especially.
TRAFFICs work is seen as particularly worthy of support in that is directly linked to the work of the AfESG, AfRSG
and CITES. As a member of ICCWC, support for the demand reduction components of UNODCs Global
Programme for Combating Wildlife and Forest Crime would also support related CITES efforts because they too
will address the demand side of WLFC through awareness-raising at global and national levels.
The UNODC programme will build on its existing expertise in running effective global awareness campaigns, such
as the Blue Heart Campaign against Human Trafficking and its successful video campaign against Transnational
Organized Crime. Dedicated media outreach both on traditional and new forms such as social media will be
deployed. To maximise impact, UNODC will learn lessons from other agencies, for instance the anti-trafficking
campaign launched by UNWTO, UNODC and UNESCO in March 2014 titled Your Actions Count Be a
Responsible Traveller.
Its demand-reduction aspects thus add further weight to the principal recommendation already made in 3.9.3.1 above to
provide overall support to UNODCs Global Programme.
3.9.4.2
Deploy Wildlife Conservation Envoys
It is generally agreed that the scale and nature of the illegal wildlife trade calls for an effort to sensitise both supply and
consumer Governments at the highest possible level, in order to secure the greatest possible chance of influencing them to

Final report
Page 74
Volume 6
WILDLIFE TRADE
make a determined and effective response. Given the limited success of events like the African Elephant Summit in actually
interacting with Heads of State, there is merit in the idea of the EC dispatching official envoys to carry this message to them.
Many other international organisations use instantly recognisable film, music and sports stars to promote their mission. The
UN for example regularly enlists such persons to act as Ambassadors for specific issues, and a serious proposal to appoint a
UN Special Representative on Wildlife Trafficking is under consideration (see 3.8.2.4).
There is no reason why the EU could not follow suit, and there are many celebrities of European nationality who would be
suitable. In terms of access to Heads of State (and influential First Ladies) however, envoys would need appropriate diplomatic
credentials. This would not be an issue if the envoy was royalty for example, and it is notable here that several members of
the British royal family are already very concerned and closely involved with wildlife conservation generally, and trade issues
particularly.
A ban on the domestic ivory trade in China, which many believe to be the only way the global illicit trade can be closed down,
would almost certainly only be possible as a result of concerted advocacy at the level of the State Council, an apex body that
could only be influenced by intense diplomatic pressure applied by envoys enjoying maximum respect and honour.
Irrespective of their identity, an official EU Wildlife Conservation Envoy could not only lobby Heads of State for action against
the illicit wildlife trade, but could at the same time publicise and promote the major new funding initiative(s) that it is hoped the
EC eventually will adopt as a result of the present study.

Final report
Page 75
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
SECTION 4. MADAGASCAR
4.1
SPECIAL FEATURES OF MADAGASCAR
The island of Madagascar with a land area of 592,000 km2 is estimated to have separated from the rest of Africa approximately
165 million years ago as Gondwanaland broke up. Its long isolation, interspersed with occasional biological colonisation has
resulted in its high level of biological endemism. The relief is complex and variable and its highest peak is 2,876m. The island
lies predominantly within the tropics and has a tropical climate. Weather is mostly determined by easterly trade winds from
the Indian Ocean that rise over the eastern escarpment where the majority of the rain falls. The western regions therefore lie
in a permanent rain shadow with conditions becoming hotter and drier further to the west. During the austral summer, a
monsoon regime affects the north of the island. The northeast is the wettest part of the island and the south-west is the driest.
These conditions determine the prevailing natural vegetation types, which are broadly categorized as rainforest in the East,
deciduous forests in the West and dry spiny forest vegetation in the South and Southwest.
Madagascars unique biodiversity
One hectare of forest lost in Madagascar has a greater negative impact on global biodiversity than a hectare of forest lost
anywhere else on earth because of its exceptional levels of species endemism (see Table 7). Endemism at the genera and
family level is even more unusual with 22 endemic families and 478 endemic genera among the plants and vertebrates.
Madagascar is home to five endemic plant families and an estimated 14,000 plant species, of which nearly 90% are
endemic105. Primate biodiversity and endemism are also very high, placing it among the world's highest priorities for primate
conservation: 101 species and subspecies are all endemic106 (Figure 4). There are five endemic families of birds with 209
breeding species, of which 51% are endemic to Madagascar 107. In addition, there are 370 species of reptiles108 and
Madagascars amphibians are almost entirely unique to the country, with 244 species of which 99% are endemic 109 (Figure
2).
Unfortunately Madagascars species are also extremely threatened and there has been a steady trend in the number of
species listed in IUCNs redlists. The combination of elevated endemism and high threat means that Madagascar has
consistently been considered in the top 10 global hotspots in the various hotspot analyses that have been completed.
105
Ramananjanahary, R.H., Andriambololonera, S.R., Madagascar Research and Conservation Program. 2010. Madagascar's endemic
plant families species. Missouri Botanical Garden, Madagascar Research and Conservation Program
106 Mittermeier R.A, Gil P.R., Hoffman M., Pilgrim J., Brooks T., Mittermeier C.G. Lamoreux J., Da Fonseca G.A.B. 2004. Hotspots revisited.
CEMEX. 392 pp.
107 Goodman, S.M. & Hawkins A.F.A. 2008. Les oiseaux. In: Goodman, S.M. (ed.) Paysages
Naturels et Biodiversit de Madagascar, pp. 383- 434. Musum National dHistoire
Naturelle, Paris.
108 Glaw, F., and M. Vences. 2007. A Field Guide to the Amphibians and Reptiles of Madagascar. Third edition. Cologne: Vences & Glaw
Verlag.
109 Vieites, D.R., Wollenberg, K.C., Andreone, F., Khler, J., Glaw,F., Vences, M. (2009): Vast underestimation of Madagascars biodiversity
evidenced by an integrative amphibian inventory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106: 8267-8272.

Final report
Page 76
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
Figure 2. Brookesia chameleons

Madagascar is the main centre of diversity for chameleons and half of all species are endemic to the island. The Brookesia
chameleons, such as this Brookesia superciliaris, are among the Worlds smallest reptiles and are camouflaged for a life spent
in the leaf litter of the forest floor.

Final report
Page 77
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
Table 7. Levels of species richness, endemism and threatened terrestrial and freshwater species in Madagascar
Taxa
Fish (freshwater)
Amphibians
Reptiles
Birds (breeding species)
Bats
Carnivores
Insectivore
Rodents
Primates
Non-marine plants
No. of species
143
244
370
209
30
11
29
25
101
14,000
Sources :
% Endemism
65
99
92
51
60
72
93
88
100
83
Species figures are from Goodman & Benstead, 2005

except for sources listed in the main text
% Threatened
60
34
96
17
23
72
24
20
39
9
IUCN 2011.2 www.iucnredlist.org
Downloaded on 23 April 2012.
Almost all of the non-aquatic biodiversity is restricted to the countrys forests. Many species of both plants and animals are
restricted to relatively small areas of the country, meaning that fine-scale analyses identify many different habitat types and
species assemblages. For example, 213 Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) are recognized, each of which is considered a priority
for biodiversity conservation110. However there are broadly three very distinct forest ecoregions that are commonly used to
classify the countrys forests: rainforests, dry deciduous forests and the distinct and unique spiny forest. There are also various
transitional forests at the boundaries of these categories. Many of the biggest conservation projects over the last decade
have focused on the eastern rainforests where there is highest species diversity. Many conservationists therefore believe that
more emphasis is needed in the western dry forests and particularly the southern Spiny forest, which is suffering the highest
deforestation rates.
Current conservation efforts emphasise the role of forests in providing ecosystem services in addition to protecting
biodiversity. The value of forests and the costs of deforestation in Madagascar have been estimated in various
studies111,112. The value of direct hydrological services and tourism revenues alone justified the direct and
opportunity costs incurred by protected areas, and these studies have provided a large impetus for developing the
National Environmental Action Program (NEAP).
Wetlands are also important habitat for Madagascars native biodiversity. Five hydrographic regions contain 42
major river systems. In addition to hundreds of small lakes there are 18 that exceed 1000 hectares in area. The
five major lakes are Aloatra, Kinkony, Ihotry, Itasy and Tsimanampetsotsa. All except Lake Itasy are included in
the protected area network. All the lakes are important inland fisheries.
110
Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund 2014. Ecosystem Profile: Madagascar and the Indian Ocean Islands. Conservation International,
Washington D.C. 281 pp.
111 World Bank, USAID, Cooperation Suisse, UNESCO, UNDP, WWF. 1988. Madagascar Environmental Action Plan. Carret J. and Loyer
D. 2003. Comment financer durablement le rseau daires protges terrestres Madagascar? Apport de lanalyse conomique. World
Bank, Washington DC and Agence Franaise de Dveloppment, Paris.
112 World Bank, 2012. World Development Indicators 2012. Washington DC. (http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-developmentindicators/wdi-2012)

Final report
Page 78
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
Parts of southern Madagascar suffer from severe droughts in most years while areas in the East, North and occasionally the
West regularly experience severe floods during the rainy season. Groundwater supplies are relatively fresh except for deeper
aquifers and aquifers along the coast which are affected by saline intrusion. Poor infrastructure means that less than 48% of
Malagasy have access to safe, clean water supplies113. The country is not on track to meet the millennium development goals
for improved water or for sanitation but forest protection is a vital contribution in this regard.
Although Madagascar is famed for its terrestrial biodiversity, its marine and coastal habitats are also extremely important. The
Southwest Indian Ocean is the worlds second richest region for corals, with only the so called coral-triangle of Southeast
Asia having more species114. Other important habitats such as mangroves, seagrass beds, seamounts and the deep ocean
are also important for biodiversity and threatened marine species. The rich marine resources of the region are vital to the
human population and sustain human livelihoods and well-being throughout the coastal zones of the countries of the region:
Comoros, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, and Seychelles. The region is recognised as one of five global priority fisheriesconservation hotspots where there are increasing exploitation rates, high biodiversity, and poor management capacity but
where fisheries are still relatively intact115. In addition to resident marine biodiversity, Madagascars seas are important for
migratory species. Significant populations of cetaceans, marine turtles, sharks, coelacanth, and rays still occur in these
waters, as well as a few remnant populations of dugong. Tuna populations are declining, but this region is still one of the least
degraded tuna fisheries in the world.
4.2
Deforestation
The main threat facing Madagascars endemic wildlife is deforestation. Annual deforestation between 1990 and
2000 was 0.8%, between 2000 and 2005 it was 0.5%, and it fell further to an average of 0.4% between 2005 and
2010116. Deforestation rates for the dry, more flammable, forests of southern Madagascar have remained higher
than for other forest types. Management regime was also important and deforestation in the well-established
national parks and reserves has been close to zero since 2005, demonstrating the success of conservation
programs in the few areas where they have been implemented. The analysis identified approximately 9.2 million
hectares of remaining natural forest in 2010, with an annual loss of approximately 37,000 hectares.
The main threat to forests is slash and burn for agriculture, known as tavy in Madagascar. In the East, tavy is principally for
hill rice whereas in the West and South it is practiced to cultivate a mixture of crops, usually cassava and a mixture of
vegetables. The population of the country is largely rural and dependent on subsistence farming as their principal livelihood.
As with many tropical countries, increasing population density and competition for land has forced farmers to shorten the
fallow periods of tavy and this leads to decreasing crop yields and soil degradation. Ultimately the yields become so poor that
farmers seek out new forest to clear and cultivate 117.
In the West and particularly the South, charcoal production to supply urban areas is also a major driver of deforestation 106.
Over 90% of urban households depend on charcoal or wood for cooking. Whereas charcoal in Eastern and Central
Madagascar mostly comes from managed Eucalyptus plantations, in the West and South it comes mostly from natural forests.
Deforestation analysis shows that forest loss in the West and South is most acute close to urban areas and this is mostly due
to the demand for charcoal.
There have been few legal large-scale forestry operations in natural forests in the last few decades in Madagascar,
however uncontrolled, illegal forest exploitation is common. Typically it is highly selective and therefore degrades
forest rather than causes total deforestation, but secondary impacts from hunting by the loggers can devastate
local wildlife populations. In some cases illegal forestry can become large scale. For example, immediately
following a military coup in 2009, logging of rosewood in the Marojejy and Masoala national parks led to
113
World Bank, 2012. World Development Indicators 2012. Washington DC. (http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-developmentindicators/wdi-2012)
114 Obura D. 2012. The Diversity and biogeography of Western indian Ocean Reef-building Corals. Plos One 7:9, e45013
115 Worm B. & Branch T.A. 2012. The future of fish. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2012.07.005.
116 Office Nationale de lEnvironnement, Direction Gnrale des Forts, Foiben-Taosarintanini Madagasikara, Madagascar National Parks
and Conservation International 2013. Evolution de la couverture de forts naturelles Madagascar 2005-2010. ONE, Antananarivo. 42 pp
117 Styger, E., Rakotondramasy, H. M., Pfeffer, M. J., Fernandes, E. C. M. & Bates, D. M. 2007: Influence of slash-and-burn farming practices
on fallow succession and land degradation in the rainforest region of Madagascar. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 119: 257269.

Final report
Page 79
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
international condemnation of the new regime. It was conservatively estimated that between 23,325 and 46,650
rosewood trees, worth well over US$100 million, were removed from the two parks for export to China, causing
extensive damage to the forest and wildlife populations.
Over the last decade mining investment has grown in Madagascar and two large scale mines have been
established: a Rio Tinto-owned illmenite mine in the southeast and the Ambatovy Nickel and cobalt mine run by
Sherritt International. Both mines involved the destruction of natural forests and in both cases the companies have
committed to ambitious habitat restoration programs once the mining operations are finished as well as entering
into voluntary biodiversity offset programs in an attempt to have positive net impacts on biodiversity conservation.
By contrast, small scale mining operations have a poor record of adhering to their environmental obligations and
uncontrolled illegal artisanal mining for gold and precious stones can be extremely destructive to natural forests
and national parks. Mining rushes where several thousand miners move into areas following rumours (or real)
discoveries of gold or gemstones occur regularly and have impacted Ankarana and Isalo national parks as well as
several of the new protected areas created since 2003118. As with illegal forestry, these mining rushes result in
the destruction or degradation of large areas and miners hunt local wildlife.
Hunting
Hunting of wildlife for bushmeat consumption is a threat for Malagasy biodiversity that has received more attention
by the conservation community in recent years and has either been underestimated in the past or has recently
increased. Lemurs and tortoises, tenrecs, bats and some frog species are the main species groups that are
targeted. Most of the hunting is for subsistence and only a small portion of bushmeat is sold in towns and cities.
Pet trade
Illegal collection of animals for the international black-market pet trade is a threat for some specific animal species
and groups. The ploughshare tortoise is one of the most threatened species from this trade and less than 200
adult individuals are thought to remain in the wild. Many of Madagascars reptile and frog species are highly prized
in the illegal wildlife trade and this has decimated populations of several frogs from the colourful and endemic
Mantella genus. Despite high profile arrests and regular seizures of animals being transported out of Madagascar,
the high value of species such as ploughshare tortoise, for which adults can be sold for $20,000 each, make them
an attractive target to well organised international wildlife trafficking gangs.
Climate change
Climate change is an underlying issue that exacerbates the other threats. Future climate change scenarios for this
region suggest that Madagascars climate will become hotter, with the north of the country becoming wetter while
the south becomes drier. Cyclones are predicted to become more intense but are not expected to become more
frequent. The country already experiences 2-3 major cyclones a year that cause extensive damage to rural
communities, often forcing them to turn to using forest and wildlife resources to cope with the aftermath of these
devastating events.
Marine and coastal
Madagascars marine resources are an important part of the national and local economies, but poor management threatens
the sustainability of many fisheries. Legislation designed to protect marine resources is often ignored, leading to an open118Tilghman,
Laura, et al. 2005. Artisanal sapphire mining in Madagascar: Environmental and social impacts. Burlington, University of
Vermont. http://www.uvm.edu/envnr/gemecology/assets/Tilghman_et_al_Madagascar_2005.pdf

Final report
Page 80
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
access situation that progressively degrades important habitats. Overfishing and destructive fishing techniques are the two
biggest threats to the countrys marine resources and these are exacerbated by climate change. Several large-scale coral
bleaching events have been recorded in the western Indian Ocean over the last decade and many of Madagascars reefs
have suffered as a result.
4.3
The only management regime for natural habitats that translates into actual conservation management on the ground is the
protected area system. Although the first protected areas in the modern sense were established in 1929, before the 1990s
they were essentially paper parks. At that time the Madagascar National Parks administration (originally known as ANGAP
Association Nationale pour la Gestion des Aires Protges) was created and now manages a network of 47 protected areas
(Table 8, Figures 3 & 4). Much more still needs to be done to improve this network from ensuring sustainable finance to
improving the daily tasks of rangers but in general protected area management has greatly improved over the last two decades
and the results of deforestation analyses show that natural habitat destruction within the Madagascar National Parks network
is greatly diminished.
Table 8. Protected Areas within the Madagascar National Parks Network (IUCN categories I, II and IV: Strict Nature
Reserve/SNR, National Park/NP, Special Reserve/SR). In some cases two protected areas are managed together in one
management unit.
Protected Area Management Units
Area (Hectares)
Rainforest Ecoregion
Ambohitantely SR
5,600
Montagne d'Ambre NP et Fort d'Ambre SNR

Manongarivo SR Tsaratanana SNR
25,470
106,282
Lokobe NP
862
Mangerivola SR
11,900
Zahamena (NP and SNR)
63,898
Andohahela NP
76,020
Ranomafana NP
41,601
Midongy du Sud NP
192,198
Ambatovaky SR
78,050
Mantadia NP and Analamazaotra SR
16,290
Marojejy NP and Anjanaharibe SR
103,570
Andringitra NP and Ivohibe SR
34,613
Masoala NP and Nosy Mangabe SR
230,520
Marotandrano SR
42,200
Manombo SR
5,320
Kalambatritra SR
28,255
Betampona SNR
2,228
Marolambo NP
70,000
Mananara Nord NP
24,000
Dry Forest Ecoregion
Ankarana SR
18,225
Analamerana SR
34,700
Baie de Baly NP and Namoroka NP
79,160
Sahamalaza NP
26,035
Bemaraha (NP and SNR)
152,000
Zombitse Vohibasia NP
36,803
Isalo NP
81,540

Final report
Page 81
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
Fort de Mikea NP
185,000
Ankarafantsika NP
130,026
Kirindy Mitea NP and Andranomena SR
168,620
Spiny Forest Ecoregion

Cap Sainte Marie
4,850
Tsimanmpetsotsa
143,200
Beza Mahafaly
4,600
Marine and coastal
Nosy Ve
167,000
Nosihara
183,111

Final report
Page 82
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
Figure 3. Map of protected areas managed as part of the Madagascar National Parks Network (IUCN categories I-IV) and
remaining forest habitat

Final report
Page 83
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
Figure 4. The Protected Areas system of Madagascar

Including all existing protected areas, sites currently being created/designated as (IUCN categories I-VI) and priority areas for
future protection

Final report
Page 84
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
In 2003, the government announced plans to expand the PA network by adding new types of protected area (allowing a wider
range of management objectives) to the national system and by adopting governance arrangements that allowed a wider
group of stakeholders to play a direct role in decision making and management of these areas (Table 9). Although they
currently benefit from provisional protection, these new protected areas still have a long way to go to become effectively
managed. Nevertheless, the results from the most advanced new reserves show that the model is clearly one that deserves
further support and this should be an important future emphasis of the government and donors as they think of conservation
of natural capital beyond traditional strict protected areas.
Table 9. Protected Area coverage in Madagascar
Type of Protected Area
National Parks and Reserves managed by
MNP*
New terrestrial protected areas
New marine protected area
Total
Current Area fully gazetted (Ha)

2,323,370
Planned Area (Ha)
0
0
2,323,370
2,823,370
3,450,046a
468,0832b
6,741,499
*MNP Madagascar National Parks manages protected areas corresponding to IUCN categories I,II and IV. The New protected areas are
collaboratively managed by the state and other partners, with communities usually playing an important role; these protected areas correspond to IUCN
categories III, V and VI.
a,b these areas are currently under provisional protected status
Other than protected areas, most of the remaining natural forest is officially the domain of the State. These forests are
regulated through the forestry legislation that is largely based on the French colonial system. Communities can apply to
manage forests through Management Transfer Agreements but in practice almost all of these contracts have now been
integrated into the New Protected Areas that are being created. A few small private forests also exist and the Forestry
Department can give out forestry permits. In practice however, the forests outside of the protected area system are subject
to free access and are unmanaged. Wetland and marine areas that are not in protected areas are still subject to extensive
fishing legislation. However, like the forestry legislation, although this is often based on sound principles, the government
agencies responsible are poorly equipped and dont have the resources to enforce it.
Madagascar is emerging from a period of political crisis that started with a coup in 2009 and led most donors to
suspend their support to environment programs. As a result, government institutions were weakened, many donordependent conservation initiatives were stopped and threats on the countrys wildlife and other natural resources
increased. The crisis has been characterised by a period of particularly poor environmental governance with
uncontrolled illegal logging of precious wood in national parks, increased wildlife trafficking and bushmeat hunting
and increased deforestation. In recognition of the dire situation several donors have restarted conservation
programs (often short term emergency ones) and these broadly support three main themes:
Support to the protected area system, including both the national parks network and the new co-managed
reserves
Support to preparing for a national Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+)
program
Support to the development of sustainable community forestry approaches
Longer term donor plans are not yet clear. Table 10 shows the current main sources of funding for programs that
include elements of biodiversity conservation. The majority of funding is expected to cease at the end of 2014 and
no plans to extend or replace existing programs have been announced.
Table 10. Major current and planned biodiversity conservation programs in Madagascar
Donor
Project
Approximate Funding
Period
GEF
Support to 5 new protected areas (Managed Natural

Resources and Protected Areas)
$ 6 million
2013-2017
GEF
Contribution to the PA Trust Fund
$10 million
2012-2014

Final report
Page 85
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
World
Bank/IDA
Sustainable management of natural resources, including

Protected areas Management: National parks and New
Protected Areas
$42 million
2012-2014
CEPF
Support to civil society conservation efforts in the Western

Indian Ocean Islands Hotspot
Unspecified, probably $3-5

million for Madagascar
2014-2018
EU
Support to the creation of Marolambo National Park and

rural development activities around 4 protected areas
3 million Euros
2009-2014
USAID
Preserving Madagascars Natural Resources - focus on

illegal wood trade
$ 1.5 million
2013-2014
4.4
It is widely recognised in Madagascar and elsewhere that biodiversity conservation efforts will not work if they do
not have the support of local people. The evolution of Madagascars environment program since the early 1990s
reflects this, with a strong early emphasis on national parks and strict protected areas, whereas current site-based
approaches put an enormous emphasis on integrating local communities as co-managers of sites and ensuring
that they derive benefits from conservation. In combination with this change, civil society groups have taken on a
much greater role in modern conservation efforts, which were previously seen as the responsibility of government
institutions. Madagascar now has hundreds of local environmental NGOs and several national ones, many of
which are playing a role in the management of new protected areas.
Stable funding for conservation is crucial and Madagascars near total reliance on external funds for conservation
has left it vulnerable to crisis periods each time a donor program comes to an end or funding is suspended for
political reasons. Recent events since 2009 should serve as a lesson that removing funding at a time of political
turbulence plays into the hands of powerful interests that want to exploit natural resources. It is clearly essential
to establish long term, sustainable financing mechanisms so that basic protected area management and wildlife
conservation activities can be sustained.
An enormous opportunity was created when Madagascar revised its protected areas legislation in 2005 to create
new categories of protected areas and allow for an increased role in their management by civil society groups.
Plans for the creation of new protected areas have been largely supported by Malagasy society because the new
areas allow for a broad range of uses and provide opportunities for local communities to get official access rights
to resources. While these approaches are still in their infancy in Madagascar, they provide an important opportunity
to protect wildlife populations in areas that are complementary to the existing network of national parks and strict
nature reserves. Unfortunately few donors have recognised the opportunities that the new system provides and
this promising approach is in need of financial support.
Some progress has already been made towards establishing sustainable financing for protected areas through the
successful establishment of a Trust Fund and this should be further strengthened. The funds existence provides
an important opportunity for donors that want to support conservation activities directly at particular sites. By
making contributions to the fund that are specifically earmarked for the site, a donor can ensure the availability of
future funding that would ensure that the donors current site-based investments are safeguarded.
4.5
INDICATIVE CONSERVATION ACTIONS NEEDED
Institutional support
Since the inception of the national environment program in the early 1990s, support to Malagasy government
institutions has been a key part of donor support. Two of these institutions have become key to successful

Final report
Page 86
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
conservation efforts: Madagascar National Parks with responsibility for managing the countrys national parks and
stricter nature reserves (protected areas equivalent to IUCN categories I, II and IV) and the National Environment
Office with responsibility for oversight and monitoring of the Environmental Impact Assessment process and
environmental monitoring in the country. Both organisations have a professional cadre of staff and are relatively
effective at enforcing relevant environmental legislation for which they have a mandate, but both are underfunded.
Further capacity strengthening of these two institutions and support for long term financing strategies are
crucial needs.
Overall responsibility for the enforcement of most legislation related to forests and terrestrial biodiversity lies with
the Department of Biodiversity and Protected Areas within the Ministry of Environment and Forests. This new
department, was created in 2008 in recognition of the need to coordinate the management of the countrys new
protected areas that are equivalent to IUCN category V and VI protected areas. The Department of Biodiversity
and Protected Areas has not received any significant support from past or current donor programs and it is
understaffed, underequipped, existing staff lack training. Building the capacity of this department is a priority
for the success of the countrys plans to maintain a comprehensive protected area network.
Dismantling Wildlife Traffic Network
Wildlife trafficking and illegal wood exports from Madagascar leave the country from only a handful of exit points:
notably the airports of Antananarivo and Toamasina and the port at Toamasina. Targeted efforts to strengthen
surveillance and build capacity of the customs and border police and other enforcement agencies at these
bottlenecks would make international wildlife trafficking extremely difficult. Wildlife trafficking has not been a focus
of other donors in the past and no current donor programs are designed to address it.
Support for site protection
Site protection is undoubtedly the most important priority to conserve Madagascars endemic wildlife. All
Madagascars protected areas are dependent on donor support and huge gaps in funding for basic protected area
management remain. Support is needed for the network run by Madagascar national parks as well as for
the new protected areas created since 2003. Within the Madagascar National Parks network, further analysis
and discussions with other donors to the environment program are needed to understand their likely priorities.
Several donors have had a traditional focus on particular areas (e.g. KfW, USAID and the World Bank) and this
may continue.
A clear priority will be to ensure that the protected areas designated as World Heritage areas are effectively
managed and that long term funding support is established for them. The current World Heritage portfolio
includes Bemaraha National Park in Western Madagascar and a group of national parks included as a World
Heritage cluster representative of Madagascars Atsinanana Eastern Rainforests: Marojejy, Masoala,
Zahamena, Mantadia, Ranomafana, Andringitra and Andohahela. Ensuring that these sites are supported
should be a priority. In addition, the World Heritage listing for the Atsinanana Eastern Rainforests recognizes the
importance of the forest corridors that link the national parks. Several of these corridor areas have now been
designated as new protected areas that are co-managed by the government, NGOs and local communities. The
Makira, Ankeniheny-Zahamena and Ambositra-Vondrozo forest corridor reserves are the most advanced of
these areas. Finally, two national parks that were included in the original World Heritage nomination but not
included in the final designation because they are relatively new and their management was not yet strong enough
should also be considered for support: Marolambo and Midongy du sud National Parks.

Final report
Page 87
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
The government of Madagascar has also indicated that its next proposal for Natural World Heritage designation
will be a cluster of protected areas representing the western dry deciduous forests. In recent years most
of the major terrestrial conservation investment in Madagascar has focused on the eastern rainforests. To achieve
World Heritage status the best sites to include within the cluster would need to be determined, additional investment
will be needed to ensure that the chosen protected areas are managed to the standard expected of World Heritage
Sites, and the official nomination proposal would need to be prepared. A sustainable finance package would also
be needed to ensure that the sites included in a Western Dry Forest World Heritage cluster had sufficient
resources to be effectively managed over the long term.
Improved Forest Governance
Madagascars forestry service remains ineffective against illegal cutting of precious timber (notably rosewood and
ebony). Reform and strengthening of the forestry service remains an essential need if forest management
issues outside of protected areas are to be addressed. Precious timber is being harvested almost exclusively
for export, mainly to Asia. All precious wood export exits through a handful of ports and strengthening of forestry
and customs to make oversight effective at these ports would control the problem (also important for stopping
wildlife trafficking). For that to work, corruption would also need to be addressed, most notably by strengthening
independent monitoring and transparency of forestry governance. The EU and EU-member countries have a
history of supporting an independent Forestry Observatory and this institution should be strengthened. One of the
impacts of the uncontrolled exploitation and export of rosewood following the 2009 coup was the outcry about this
issue among the Malagasy public, the increasing national media attention it has received and the establishment of
civil society organisations specifically dedicated to natural resource governance issues. This change provides new
opportunities to encourage civil society participation and debate about the governance of precious forest resources.
The persistent threat of deforestation of natural forests for charcoal production in western and southern
Madagascar needs to be addressed if natural forests in these areas are to be maintained outside of protected
areas. The establishment of large eucalyptus plantations surrounding Antananarivo and several of the other cities
in eastern Madagascar provides most of the charcoal needed by these urban populations. The development of
similar plantations to act as a source of charcoal for cities in the West and the South of the country is
necessary to provide an alternative of the current destruction of natural forest.
Marine and Coastal
Over the last decade there has been a greater recognition of the need to protect Madagascars marine resources
and coastal fisheries. The most promising approach has been the creation of small, community managed
fisheries reserves where careful zoning and seasonal restrictions are put in place to help habitats and fish
stocks recover. The success of such pilot reserves and subsequent increase in fish stocks has created great
demand from fishing-dependent communities to develop similar initiatives in new areas. While several NGOs and
the governments fisheries department support some of these initiatives, few major donors are currently supporting
this community-based approach to marine and coastal resource protection.
Training
Formalised protected areas training has been largely ignored during the environment program and although staff
have received training this has been haphazard as opportunities arose. Recently the Department of Protected
Areas and Biodiversity have developed Competence Standards identifying the skills needed and the level of
proficiency expected for different types of protected areas staff. This provides a framework for developing more
formalized training for protected areas staff and communities involved in the co-management of new protected
areas. Existing learning institutions within Madagascar as well as specialized francophone training

Final report
Page 88
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
stations on the African mainland should be supported to provide improved training to protected areas
professionals.
Communications
Awareness about the importance of Madagascars biodiversity is already high in the country but more can be done
to maintain and improve biodiversity outreach programs. Providing training on key issues to journalists as
well as providing incentives in the form of environmental journalism prizes has been successful in the
past. Further support for such programs would help to improve the frequency and quality of reporting on
environmental issues.
Other needs
The biggest challenge for conservation in Madagascar is a chronic shortage of sustainable funding to cover basic
activities. National parks, reserves and species conservation programs rely almost entirely on international donor
funding and are therefore regularly in crisis as donor funding cycles come to an end. Recent improvements have
been made to boost tourism revenues from national parks and to establish a Trust Fund for protected area
financing. The exact annual costs of Madagascars protected area system are difficult to calculate precisely
because there is still uncertainty about whether all of the proposed new protected areas will be included in it and
there is also debate about what is necessary to achieve a basic level of effective management. The Madagascar
National Parks network currently costs 5-7 million dollars per year (the variation depends on capital investment
levels) and costs for the new protected areas have been estimated at an additional 10-15 million dollars per year
(MacKinnon et al. 2009). Carbon finance is already important for many of the larger new protected areas that have
been set up as REDD+ projects and there is important synergy between Madagascars REDD+ strategy and the
new protected areas, which are seen as a way of achieving reduced deforestation rates.
Further additions to the Trust Fund for protected areas that is managed by the Foundation for Protected Areas
and Biodiversity are a priority. Currently the fund has just over 52 million dollars of firm commitments from which
it expects to disperse approximately 2.5 million dollars per year, mostly to fund management of national parks. A
contribution to the Trust Fund could be made with the specific intent of providing future support to the
World Heritage protected areas that receive direct support from the program.

Final report
Page 89
Volume 6
MADAGASCAR
Figure 5. The Indri (Indri indri)

Is the largest of the extant lemurs of which over 100 species are recognised, making Madagascar home to about one fifth of
the Worlds primate species.

Final report
Page 90
Volume 6
PRIORITIES FOR BIRD CONSERVATION
SECTION 5. PRIORITIES FOR BIRD CONSERVATION

5.1
THREATS AND ISSUES FOR AFRICAN BIRDS
Figure 6. Main threats causing loss of birds

African birds are widely distributed (see section 5.1.3) but are faced with a wide variety of threats, the most significant being
habitat fragmentation, degradation and destruction as well as direct impacts including hunting and trapping (Figure 6). Of the
2,355 bird species in Africa, 245 are classified as globally threatened. Of these, 183 (75%) are threatened by habitat clearance
for agriculture. Other key threats include logging (affecting 49% of threatened species), invasive species (47%) and climate
change and severe weather (38%). What is especially clear is that many of Africas rarest species are impacted by multiple,
compounding threats. Farmland species show sharper declines than non-farmland species119.
Europeans should note that almost all their migrant birds rely on healthy wintering grounds in Africa and during their migrations
the Palaearctic-African migrant birds depend also on feeding grounds in the Sahel which are being degraded by agricultural
intensification. Almost all species concerned show declines.
5.1.1
Europes vanishing migrant birds
Over 25% of Europes bird species, at least 2 billion European birds, spend more than 50% of their year in Africa south of
the Sahara. These include a wide variety of birds, swallows, waders, other waterbirds, berry and insect eating songbirds and
several raptors. A high proportion of these species are experiencing precipitous population declines. This includes many
species in need of special conservation measures and listed in Annex 1 of the EU Wild Birds Directive (79/409/EEC) as well
as some of Europes most widespread and popular migratory species such as the Cuckoo, Turtle Dove and Nightingale.
119
http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/sukb2013_tcm9-358727.pdf

Final report
Page 91
Volume 6
Population declines in some species are by as much 80% in 30 years, and Europes countryside is much the poorer for this
loss. This is a painful loss for millions of EU citizens.
Figure 7. Declines of long distance versus short distance migrant birds
Of 119 Afro-Palaearctic long-distance migrant species (those breeding in Europe and wintering in Sub-Saharan Africa), 48
(40%) show marked declines in population. No similar pattern of decline is observed in resident and short-distance migrant
species (Figure 7). Declines are associated with habitat loss and degradation, particularly in the arid and humid zones of subSaharan Africa e.g. Sahel. This includes degradation of grasslands and savannah forests, damming of rivers and draining of
wetlands (estimated to be lost at c.1% per year)120, and clearance of tropical forests. These threats are therefore a concern
that connects countries and peoples in a very real way on both continents.
The EU financial mechanism LIFE+ helping a great deal in Europe with protection, site and habitat conservation for species
covered by the EU Wild Birds Directive, but the EU is currently doing very little for the same species once they have left
European territory (for up to 8 months in a year).
Such assistance could be extended by support to BirdLife International project coordinating protection of Afro-Palearctic
migrants through its network of African partner organisations.
Key activities to be undertaken under this programme include:
Improved monitoring and tracking of migrant birds
Identification of mortality factors and causes
Identification and protection of key wintering and stop-over sites.
Ensuring that reforestation efforts in the Sahel under the Great Green Wall for the Sahara and the Sahel Initiative
and forest zones are designed to be bird-friendly/bio-friendly
Strengthen protection of key wetland sites used by migrant waterbirds under Ramsar Convention and Convention
on Migratory Species initiatives
5.1.2
Declining Vultures
Vultures are singularly threatened. Over the past 20 years, six of the seven vultures that occur in Africa in significant numbers
have become globally threatened, and the threats that have led to these declines must be tackled. These threats include:
poisoning, especially in Southern and Eastern Africa, which is typically linked to large mammal poaching or humananimal
conflict121; persecution for body parts used in traditional medicine, particularly in West Africa; large-scale habitat modification
and declines in ungulate populations may play a role in some areas; and the use of veterinary diclofenac, which has caused
120
Davidson, N.C. 2014. How much wetland has the world lost? Long-term and recent trends in global wetland area. Marine and Freshwater
Research, 2014, 65, 934941.
121 Botha, A.J., Ogada, D.L., Virani, M.Z., 2012. Vulture Summit 2012.

Final report
Page 92
Volume 6
catastrophic vulture declines in Asia (and to which there are viable, cost-effective alternatives). Actions to counteract these
threats, perhaps as pilots to be followed swiftly by wider adoption, are needed over large areas of Africa.
5.1.3
Birds in wildlife traffic
Illegal trade in birds, principally African Grey Parrot, Shoebill; raptors, including vultures, cranes (e.g. Grey Crowned-crane),
should also be more clearly recognized in the EU strategic approach (see section 3 of this volume), reflecting UN Environment
Assembly decision 1/3122. In addition, many other species particularly small colourful ones are also threatened by illegal
trade at varying scales, e.g. small seed-eating birds, lovebirds and turacos.
In addition, the strategy should flag the need to identify whether legal, but unregulated hunting of birds as bushmeat (see
Volume 1 section 4.7), is having a significant impact on their populations. Where such hunting was previously for subsistence
and is now for trade, and there are significant impacts on the population, more sustainable livelihood options should be
explored (such as eco-tourism as a form of Payment for Ecosystem Services (see Volume 1 sections 4.3 and 5.4.4).
5.2
CURRENT CONSERVATION EFFORTS
5.2.1
Identification of EBAs and IBAs
By mapping the range overlaps of restricted range endemic birds, BirdLife International identified 26 Endemic Bird Areas
(EBAs) in sub-Saharan Africa (Figure 8). These sites in total provide home for the majority of all bird species in Africa and
correlate well with biodiversity priority areas for other taxa. There are, however, important threatened species that are missed
by this prioritization process so the EBA approach was followed up by identification of several hundred Important Bird Areas
(IBAs) (Figure 9) comprising specific habitat sites that contain one or more of all bird species designated as of global
concern123.
Figure 8. Distribution of EBAs

Most IBAs fall within existing national parks and game reserves and will be conserved by the KLC approach advocated in this
study, but the analysis reveals where there are gaps in protected area coverage for birds and guides an ongoing programme
122
Decision 1/3 the UN Environment Assembly on illegal trade in wildlife prioritizes i) targeted action to eradicate supply and demand for
illegal wildlife products, ii) policies of zero tolerance, including with corruption, iii) addressing the supply, transit and demand side and iv)
mobilizing resources and capacity to address illegal wildlife trade. It puts a premium on countries to effectively implement their own
obligations under CITES, among other international agreements and frameworks.
123 www.birdlife.org/datazone/userfiles/file/sowb/pubs/State_of_Africas_Birds_report_2013_(FINAL).pdf

Final report
Page 93
Volume 6
of BirdLife International and its network of African partner organizations to seek additional protection to give more complete
coverage. The bird distribution data thus assembled have also fed into the process of identifying biodiversity hotspots and
also in the analyses of Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE).
Figure 9. 1,238 IBAs identified in Africa

BirdLife Internationals Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs) are sites of particular significance for the conservation of
the worlds birds and, because of the way much biodiversity is distributed, collectively these sites also hold many priority
species of other animals and plants. Over the past 21 years 1,238 IBAs have been identified, documented and mapped in
Africa by the BirdLife Africa Partnership, using a set of standardised, globally applicable and scientifically defensible criteria
(Figure 9). IBAs represent by far the most comprehensive science-based effort to identify the Africas key sites for biodiversity
conservation and span all the continents biomes and cultures.
The IBA programme provides the growing BirdLife Partnership in Africa in 24 countries with a focus for conservation action,
planning and advocacy. In Africa, BirdLife works for the conservation of IBAs through collaborations with government and
financial institutions, civil society organisations, the private sector, research institutions, local groups and individuals. The
programme provides a particular focus for the design and implementation of protected area networks, for safeguarding priority
sites alongside investment by financial institutions and the private sector, and for monitoring the effectiveness of regional
efforts to conserve biodiversity.
5.2.2
EU concern for African Birds
EU Member States have long recognised that migratory birds do not recognise political boundaries and that there is a need
for coordinated Community action. This led to the adoption of the EU Birds Directive which gives particular attention to
conservation measures for migratory birds, the implementation of which is now financed through LIFE + Whilst LIFE + has
resourced the recovery of some of Europes most threatened species, financing is almost entirely focussed on actions in the
EU. Once Europes migratory birds leave European territory there is only very limited action that the EU is currently taking for
their conservation in Africa.
A majority of EU Member States, as well as the EU, are parties to a number of international conservation agreements which
are of great importance for migratory birds in Africa. These include the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, and the Convention
on Migratory Species (CMS) and its sister agreements for African-Eurasian Waterbirds (AEWA) and Raptors (Raptor MOU).
A CMS-led Land Bird Action Plan is currently under development. Whilst Member States and the EU provide strong political
support for these agreements, only very limited resources are committed for their effective implementation in Africa.

Final report
Page 94
Volume 6
Europe is blessed by many leading international non-governmental organisations who are working for the conservation of
migratory birds in Africa. This include the BirdLife International Partnership, which brings together over 20 leading national
organisations in the EU and Africa, Wetlands International, and IUCN, as well as leading research institutions and many
universities. These organisations have made good progress in the identification of key site and key habitats, including for
example through BirdLifes IBA programme, and the identification of the critical site network for waterbirds under AEWA.
European institutions are in an excellent position to capitalise on the additional resources that are needed to reverse the
declines in Europes migratory birds. The EU and EU Member States are also a major donor to Sub-Saharan Africa and,
alongside development gains, there are likely to be opportunities to also secure benefits for migratory birds, such as in efforts
to combat desertification. There is also the need to ensure EU financial assistance to Africa is not to the significant detriment
of Europes migratory birds.
5.3
INDICATIVE ACTIONS RECOMMENDED FOR EU INTERVENTION
5.3.1
Synergy between development and environment agendas
Given the importance of Africa for European birds, it is recommended that the EU explores synergies between its development
and environment agendas as they relate to Africa, and develops a consolidated plan of action for the Conservation of Migratory
Birds in Africa. It is recommended that EU actions, inter alia, include the following aspects:
1. Increases support for the Ramsar and Migratory Species Conventions, and especially for the implementation of CMS
programmes for waterbirds (AEWA), raptors (birds of prey) (Raptor MOU) and landbirds, so that they are enabled to take more
concerted action for migratory bird conservation in Africa;
2. Gives particular impetus to the development and implementation of the CMS Land Bird Action Plan action plan, since this
is of particular relevance to those migratory species that are experiencing the steepest population declines;
3. Puts in place an equivalent financing mechanism to LIFE+ to resource urgent conservation actions for migratory species in
Africa, and establishes framework agreements of cooperation and support to Europes leading NGOs and research institutions
working for migratory bird conservation;
4. Undertakes an audit of EU development assistance to Africa to identify where positive synergies might exist to advance
development and conserve Europes migratory birds, particular in relation to efforts to combat desertification and
woodland/forest degradation in the Sahel and Guinea Savanna zones;
5. Ensures safeguards are in place, and environmental audits are undertaken, for major EU development assistance in
agriculture, forestry and fisheries, to guard against EU funding having a major negative impact on Europes migratory birds
Specifically, types of actions that might be supported in relation to key sites and for key habitats for migratory birds, include:
5.3.2
Key Sites and habitats
Types of actions that might be supported in relation to key sites and for key habitats for migratory birds, include:
Drylands
Sustainable small-scale agriculture and woodland management, zonation of grazing, and alternative
income generation including habitat restoration, improving both human livelihoods and the quality of
habitat for migratory landbird species;
Reducing dependence on wood fuel, through policies and by supporting initiatives that promote, and make
available, alternative renewable sources of energy for heating, lighting and cooking;
Encouraging the use of indigenous trees or other plants that are of high value to migratory landbird
species in appropriate afforestation or re-afforestation initiatives.

Final report
Page 95
Volume 6
Facilitating the sharing of relevant pastoralist and small-scale agricultural experiences and good practices,
which employ land-use systems that are ecologically sustainable and support populations of migratory
landbird species;
Promoting agricultural policies that support participatory, sustainable natural resource management
practices, e.g. small-scale agriculture and traditional farming methods (including pastoralism), including
the promotion of appropriate measures within agro-environment schemes and the removal of perverse
incentives and subsidies, where these exist;
Support for existing large, dryland protected areas, especially in the Sahel and Guinea Savannah zones.
Wetlands
Mitigating effects of existing hydro-dams by allowing well-managed, artificial discharge/flooding

downstream, which can be an effective way of restoring floodplain habitats (including flood forests, where
necessary aided by replanting/regeneration, which also act as a spawning ground for fish) and local
livelihoods such as rice and arable cultures.
Ensuring that planned new hydropower reservoirs and other schemes modifying natural hydrology are
subject to rigorous Environmental Impact Assessments to ensure that their design mitigates any harm to,
and maximises the potential for environmental benefits for, migratory species and their habitats.
Promoting participatory approaches in the planning, management and conservation of sites, so as to

enable the engagement of, and benefit-sharing with, local communities where these are present.
Supporting existing large wetland protected areas, especially in the Sahel and Guinea Savannah zones.
Worldwide, better protection of wetlands for water birds has proved immensely successful.
Research (see Volume 1 section 5.6.4)
Establishing population models, diagnose the causes of population changes and undertake targeted
ecological studies of selected indicator species.
Supporting researchers and research institutions to focus on the most important and urgent issues for
migratory bird conservation including through disseminating priority research needs, analysing existing
data sets, establishing research consortia to address key conservation issues and identifying and
supporting the development and geographical expansion of sub-regional research institutes.
Ensure that the connectivity needs of IBAs are assessed, prioritised and addressed for Europes migratory
birds and support flyway-scale interventions.
Support for BirdLifes monitoring of IBAs as an early-warning system and to aid government to meet
national and international obligations, plus documentation and dissemination of IBA information (including
revision and update of regional IBA directory).
Support to growing network of Local Bird Conservation Groups

Support for a BirdLife Africa-wide programme for Local Conservation Groups (LCG), including livelihood
improvement, through the sustainable use of natural resources and biodiversity.

Final report
Page 96
Volume 6
Interest in birds can facilitate the emergence of domestic conservation initiatives across Africa. For instance BirdLifes Local
Conservation Group (LCG) approach under the Local Empowerment Programme is seeking to conserve IBAs by empowering
people and improving local livelihoods. Over 400 LCGs have been established in diverse communities in and around IBAs
across Africa, fostering local participation in conservation, with benefits for birds, other biodiversity and the people who depend
on the sites (Figure 10). Increased EU support would go a long way towards tackling one of the main drivers identified for
declining wildlife, namely lack of awareness (see Volume 1 section 2.4.4).
Figure 10. Location of more than 400 IBAs with Local Conservation Groups (shown in blue)
Figure 11. Location of the 75 IBAs in danger in Africa (Source: BirdLife International)
Whilst IBA Programme has contributed significantly to the conservation of sites across the region, there remain considerable
gaps in its local-to-regional scale effectiveness. Only 749 (60%) out of 1,230 IBAs in Africa have some form of legal protection.
The rest are unprotected. BirdLife has been working with the Secretariat of Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) to
encourage national governments to consider IBAs as they seek to fulfil their obligations under the CBDs Strategic Plan for
Biodiversity 20112020, particularly Aichi Target 11 that calls for the expansion of the global protected area network to at least
17% of terrestrial and inland water, and 10% of coastal and marine.
Final report
Page 97
Volume 6
The importance of the regular monitoring of IBAs has been highlighted by recent field observations. Analysis of monitoring
data has revealed that many IBAs are in a poor state, with some seriously affected by damaging developments. As part of a
global initiative called IBAs in Danger, the threat information from IBAs provided in early 2013 by the BirdLife Africa
Partnership identified an initial list of 75 IBAs at extreme risk of losing their biodiversity value if the threats they face are not
quickly addressed (Figure 11).

Final report
Page 98
Volume 6
STATUS OF OTHER TAXA
ANNEXE. NOTES ON DISTRIBUTION AND STATUS OF OTHER TAXA

5.4
5.5 INTRODUCTION
The distribution of African species is far from even. There are important concentrations, or overlaps of species distributions, in
key areas. Habitat suitability is governed by vegetation type (Figure 12), itself largely governed by climate and landform.
Evergreen forests occur in the Congo basin, southern fringes of West Africa, east coast of Madagascar and on some of the
higher isolated mountain ranges of the continent. Deserts cover much of northern Africa and the cold Benguela current creates
coastal deserts in SW Africa. Savanna
grasslands with scattered small trees
cover large areas of semi-arid West,
Eastern and Southern Africa, whilst
woodlands form a transition ring between
the evergreen forests and savannas. The
fynbos heathland, part of the uniquely rich
Cape flora, occurs in the Western Cape of
South Africa with its Mediterranean
climate and Alpine vegetation occurs on
some of the Afromontane regions on high
mountains.
Figure 12. Vegetation zones
Rivers, lakes, estuaries and coasts form
important wetlands. Wetlands offer
additional unique faunal treasures
millions of pink flamingos, homes for
millions of other waterfowl, dry season
watering areas vital for savanna fauna,
almost two thousand species of endemic
fish and vital oases in desert regions.
These wetlands serve as water sources
on which the lives of millions of humans and their herds also depend (see Figure 13).
Figure 13. Wetlands of Africa

Final report
Page 99
Volume 6
5.6
DISTRIBUTION OF PLANTS
Plant species richness is at its highest in mineral-poor environments on old or leached soils such as the semi-arid fynbos and
in some tropical rain forests. Richness declines with aridity and is lowest in desert regions and high mountains. Highest
densities are found in Madagascar, the Albertine rift and Pleistocene refugia of Guinean forests, the Nigerian-Cameroon
borders and Western Congolese lowlands. A further complication is recognised when we examine the species composition of
these different vegetation formations. Patterns of floral richness and species distribution prompted White 124 to define a number
of phytochoria or floristic regions defined by regions of local endemism or centres of plant radiation. White also mapped floral
transition zones between these principle phytochoria. Davis et al.125 narrow down these centres of plant diversity in their global
treatment (Figure 14).
Figure 14. Fifteen Centres of plant diversity in Africa (from Davis et al.)
124
White, F (1983) The vegetation of Africa: A descriptive memoir, UNESCO, Paris.

Davis, S.D. et al. (1994, 1995, 1997) Centres of Plant Diversity: A Guide and Strategy for their Conservation. Volumes 13. WWF, Gland,
Switzerland and IUCN, Cambridge, UK.
125

Final report
Page 100
Volume 6
5.7
DISTRIBUTION OF MAMMALS
The EU funded African Mammals Databank (AMD) project has mapped and analysed the distribution of all mammals species.
Overlay of all species maps give a good picture of spatial richness (Figure 15), revealing the high richness of species living in
the savanna regions. If we limit the analysis to primates, however, we see a different pattern favouring the moister and forested
regions of the continent (Figure 16).
Figure 15. Species richness of all mammals
5.8
Figure 16. Species richness of primates
DISTRIBUTION OF BIRDS
Birds constitute important wildlife in their own right as
controllers of insect pests, distributers of seeds, pollinators
of flowers, scavengers and raptors. But they are also one of
the best indicators of overall biodiversity, occurring in all
habitats. Because they are mostly diurnal, can be readily
identified at a distance and there are thousands of avid
birdwatchers recording data, they are also the best spatial
dataset available of any taxon with different specialists in all
vegetation types of the continent. Bird species richness is
high in all forest, woodland and savanna regions and less
rich in deserts. There are sites of highest density in the
forests of the Albertine Rift and forested mountains of East
Africa (Figure 17).
Figure 17. Bird richness (Source: BirdLife International)

Final report
Page 101
Volume 6
5.9
LION - KING OF THE BEASTS
Africa without lions is almost unimaginable but over the last two decades, Africa has lost between 30 and 50% of its lions and
today the number may be as low as 32,000 animals. In West Africa the situation is especially desperate. Latest surveys by
Panthera over 17 countries for 6 years indicates that the total West African population may be as low as 400 and from a known
occurrence in 21 protected areas in 2005, lions are confirmed in only 4 sites today (Figure 19). Lions now roam in just 1.1% of
their historic range in West Africa and are extinct in all of their former range in northern Africa (Figure 18).
As Panthera expert Mr Henschel puts it "Our results came as a
complete shock; all but a few of the areas we surveyed were
basically paper parks, having neither management budgets nor
patrol staff, and had lost all their lions and other iconic large
mammals.
Figure 18. Shrinking range of lion (Source: Kingdon 1997)
Figure 19. Remaining lion

populations in West Africa
(Source Panthera)

Final report
Page 102
Volume 6

The lions hunting grounds have been converted to agricultural land, and farmers use poisons, rifles and snares to remove
predators from their land. Prey species have been depleted, populations have become fragmented. In some countries it is still
legal to shoot lions for sport, which though distasteful to many people, can form part of an effective conservation management
policy.
Saving this emblematic species, which serves as a prime viewing target for tourists to many Africa countries, requires protection
of extensive landscapes where natural prey are plentiful combined with collaborating with local farmers and herdsmen to
reduce wildlife conflicts and let them benefit from a fair share of tourism revenues.
5.10 OTHER LARGE CARNIVORES

Other large carnivores are also facing difficulties due to loss of habitat, loss of game and deliberate poisoning. Two formerly
widespread species of special concern are cheetah and hunting dogs. These species share similar habitat needs and are have
a common survival strategy action plan.126 Figures 20 and 21 demonstrate their respective reduced ranges.
Figure 20. Remaining range of African cheetah
Figure 21. Remaining range of Hunting dog
5.11
126
IUCN/SSC. 2007. Regional conservation strategy for the cheetah and African wild dog in Southern Africa

Final report
Page 103
Volume 6
AFRICAN GREAT APES

One group of particular concern are the great apes Mans nearest living relatives. These sensitive and intelligent creatures
are becoming increasingly endangered by bush-meat trade, deforestation, pet trade and human diseases. All are endangered
and survival is realistic in only a few key localities of west and central Africa (Figure 22).
Source: Great Ape & logging, Arnold van Kreveld and Ingrid Roerhorst (Ulucus Consultants), WWF, 2008
Figure 22. Distribution of African Great Apes
5.12 DISTRIBUTION OF FISH AND AMPHIBIA

Aquatic species, such as amphibians (Figure 23)
and fish, are limited to the wetlands regions of
Africa. Many former lakes are drying up. Other
wetlands are becoming polluted or modified by
introduced species. The strange shape of the
complex Niger river system of W Africa and large
number of separate small rivers feeding into the
mangroves and coastal waters of the Guinea Gulf
results in a high density of fish species in that
region (Figure 24). The Great Rift Lakes of
Tanganyika and Malawi bear witness to an
amazing radiation of cichlid fish with respectively
250 and one thousand endemic species. Africas
freshwater fish richness is second only to S
America and almost totally endemic. These
species are vital for the functioning of freshwater
ecosystems and of huge economic importance.
Many millions of people rely on freshwater fish for
food and income and many species of perch and
tilapia have become globally important
commercial species. 28% of Africas freshwater
fish species are listed as endangered. Main
causes are shrinkage of lakes, pollution of
waterways, invasive plants such as Water
Hyacinth, overfishing and introduction of alien fish
Figure 23. Amphibian Richness
species.

Final report
Page 104
Volume 6
Figure 24. Fish richness in West Africa
5.13 DISTRIBUTION OF INSECTS
Figure 25. Butterfly richness
Figure 26. Graphium richness
Butterflies are one of the best indicators of insect diversity in Africa. In general their distribution pattern follows plant richness
but not exactly since they do not have a one to one relationship with plant hosts as most butterfly species larvae can feed on
a variety of different plants. Overall richness of butterflies was defined by Carcasson127(Figure 25). More up to date and
complete data are available for some genera such as kite swallowtails (Graphium spp)128 (Figure 26). Figure 27 analyses this
distribution and leads to identification of key regions for their conservation. These priority areas show similar patterns to key
areas also identified for vertebrates under the Alliance for Zero Extinction programme (AZE) and identified for plant
conservation.
127
Carcasson, R.H. (1964) A preliminary survey of the zoogeography of African butterflies. E. Afr. Wild. J. 2: 122-157.
Smith C. R. & Vane-Wright R.I. 2001. A review of the Afrotropical species of the genus Graphium (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera:
Papilionidae). Bulletin of The Natural History Museum (Entomology Series) 70(2): 503-719.
128

Final report
Page 105
Volume 6
Figure 27. Priority areas for swallowtails
5.14 PRIORITIZING SITES FOR CONSERVATION

A first approach might be to try to protect representative sites in each of the main ecosystems. At the first level we can classify
the vegetation into principle biomes or habitat types lowland humid forests, savannah grasslands, deserts, wetlands etc. The
vegetation map of Africa closely follows patterns of landform and climate. Different faunal species are associated with a range
of such habitat types.
Figure 28. Global 200 Ecoregions of sub-Saharan

Africa

Final report
Page 106
Volume 6
By overlaying information of distinct landform units and species distributions and centres of endemism,
biogeographers have tried to classify Africa into a large number of different eco-regions. 129 Ideally we should try to
conserve representative ecosystems in each of these 103 different ecoregions. However, it is clear that some
ecoregions are far more distinctive or bio-rich than others, so a more pragmatic approach is taken by the Global
200 programme of WWF. This initiative has selected the most important ecoregions or combinations of ecoregions
to identify a core set of regions that in total could conserve a high proportion of all species globally. There are 14
such global 200 terrestrial ecoregions recognised for sub-Saharan Africa (Figure 28). Additional regions are
identified as wetland priorities and marine priority areas.
5.14.1
Biodiversity hotspots Approach
Biodiversity Hotspots are regions of high biodiversity value combined with high levels of threat (Figure 29). They constitute
biogeographically similar aggregations of ecoregions holding at least 0.5% of the worlds plants as endemics, and with at least
70% of primary habitat already lost130. The approach is useful in identifying regions where conservation actions are most
urgently needed to prevent major losses of key species.
Figure 29. Distribution of African Hotspots

List of African Hotspots:
Cape Floristic Region. Evergreen fire-dependent shrublands characterize the landscape of the Cape Floristic Region.
Coastal Forests of Eastern Africa. Though tiny and fragmented, the forest remnants that make up the Coastal Forests
of Eastern Africa contain remarkable levels of biodiversity.
Eastern Afromontane. The mountains of the Eastern Afromontane hotspot are scattered along the eastern edge of
Africa, from Saudi Arabia in the north to Zimbabwe in the south.
Guinean Forests of Western Africa. The lowland forests of West Africa are home to more than a quarter of Africas
mammals, including more than 20 species of primates.
Horn of Africa. The arid Horn of Africa has been a renowned source of biological resources for thousands of years.
Olson, D.M. and E. Dinerstein (1998) The Global 200: A representation approach to conserving the earths most biologically valuable
ecoregions. Conservation Biology 12: 502515.
130 Myers, N. et al. (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853858.
Mittermeier, R.A. et al. (2004) Hotspots Revisited: Earths Biologically Richest and Most Endangered Ecoregions. CEMEX, Mexico City,
Mexico.
129

Final report
Page 107
Volume 6
Madagascar & the Indian Ocean Islands. Madagascar and its neighboring island groups have an astounding total of
eight plant families, four bird families, and five primate families that live nowhere else on Earth.
Maputoland-Pondoland-Albany. The region stretches along the east coast of southern Africa below the Great
Escarpment, is an important center of plant endemism.
Succulent Karoo. The Succulent Karoo of South Africa and Namibia boasts the richest succulent flora on earth, as
well as remarkable endemism in plants.
5.14.2 Sites of biological irreplaceability
Figure 30. Sites of biological irreplaceability in Africa

As part of the Alliance for Zero Extinction programme (AZE), the irreplaceability of each of the worlds 173,461 designated
PAs, and of 2059 proposed sites was estimated, in terms of ensuring representation of 21,419 vertebrate species (including
all amphibians, non-marine mammals, and birds, of which 4329 are globally threatened). Sites identified as vital for minimizing
species extinctions in Africa are shown in Figure 30. Overlay of the most irreplaceable sites with existing World Heritage sites
are shown in Figure 31131. The results show that only a few of the sites overlap but they recommend that the World Heritage
programme uses the map of irreplaceability as a guide for the selection of additional sites of outstanding global biodiversity
value.
These various approaches all throw up priority areas. Some overlap and come up under all approaches. Others are missed by
one approach but highlighted by another. The Central African rainforests are not identified as a hotspot and yet these are
critical for three great apes, contain almost all of Africas forest elephants and many other endemic species. Omitting this as a
priority would be very negative. Also all these approaches are based on presence of species rather than delivery of valued
ecological services. Efforts to identify priorities for conservation based on economic importance and ecosystem services put
more emphasis on wetlands, coastal areas and humid forests.
131
Soizic Le Saout, Michael Hoffmann, Yichuan Shi, Adrian Hughes, Cyril Bernard, Thomas M. Brooks, Bastian Bertzky, Stuart H. M.
Butchart, Simon N. Stuart, Tim Badman, Ana S. L. Rodrigues. (2013) Protected Areas and Effective Biodiversity Conservation. Science 342:
803

Final report
Page 108
Volume 6
Figure 31. Overlap of the most irreplaceable sites with the WH sites.
We conclude that African wildlife cannot be saved in a small or narrow range of sites and will require major investments across
many sites and landscapes over most of the continent.
5.15 HOW CAN EU ASSIST CONSERVATION OF LESS PROFILED TAXA?

The EU does not have the administrative or supervisory capacity to implement hundreds of individual projects across Africa.
However, the EU does have strong ability to fund actions under implementation of other agencies and NGOs.
The Species Survival Commission of IUCN comprises a number of specialised working groups focused on assessing status
and conservation needs of their particular taxonomic group (such as the Antelope Specialist Group and the Cat Specialist
Group) or conservation issues (such as the Climate Change Specialist Group and the Sustainable Use and Livelihoods
Specialist Group). Several well designed and highly relevant strategies in urgent need of implementation include:
IUCN & ICCN. 2012. Bonobo (Pan paniscus): Conservation Strategy 20122022.
IUCN / SSC Canid Specialist Group. 2011. Strategic Plan for Ethiopian Wolf Conservation
IUCN SSC Cat Specialist Group. 2006. Conservation Strategy for the Lion in Eastern and Southern Africa
IUCN SSC Cat Specialist Group. 2006. Conservation Strategy for the Lion in West and Central Africa
IUCN. 2005. Central African Elephant Conservation Strategy
IUCN 2005. Strategy for the Conservation of West African Elephants (2005)
IUCN 2005. Southern Africa Regional Elephant Conservation and Management Strategy (2005)
IUCN/SSC. 2007. Regional Conservation Strategy for the Cheetah and African Wild Dog in Eastern Africa
IUCN/SSC. 2007. Regional conservation strategy for the cheetah and African wild dog in Southern Africa
Maldonado et al. 2012. Grauers Gorillas and Chimpanzees in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (Kahuzi-Biega,
Maiko, Tayna and Itombwe Landscape): Conservation Action Plan 20122022.
Mallon et al. 2011. Conservation Strategy for the Pygmy Hippopotamus.
Morgan et al. 2011. Regional Action Plan for the Conservation of the Nigeria-Cameroon Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes
ellioti)
Plumptre et al. 2010. Eastern Chimpanzee: Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan 2012-2020
Schwitzer et al 2013. Lemurs of Madagascar: A Strategy for their Conservation 20132016.
Strategic plan for the Okapi, produced by the Giraffe and Okapi Specialist Group, to be published in 2014.
A full list of earlier action plans is available:

Final report
Page 109

African Wildlife Conservation

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

African Wildlife Conservation

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Larger than elephants

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

INTRODUCTION AND SPECIAL FEATURES OF SUB SAHARAN AFRICA ................................................................. 8

Southern Africa ....................................................................................................................................................................... 14

THE ASIA DIMENSION ................................................................................................................................................. 17

LOSS OF SPECIES ...................................................................................................................................................... 17

DRIVERS OF THE THREATS ......................................................................................................................................... 22

ONGOING CONSERVATION EFFORTS........................................................................................................................ 24

Prioritization approaches .......................................................................................................................................................... 9

THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC SETTING ................................................................................................................................. 11

CONSERVATION ISSUES AND CHALLENGES ........................................................................................................... 17

BACKGROUND TO THE CURRENT STUDY ........................................................................................................................ 8

INTERNATIONAL, REGIONAL AND NATIONAL PLANNING FRAMEWORKS ............................................................................ 24

INTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION PARTNERS ................................................................................................................ 27

LESSONS LEARNED AND PROMISING APPROACHES ............................................................................................ 28

PROTECTED AREAS ................................................................................................................................................... 28

ENGAGING WITH LOCAL COMMUNITIES AND CBNRM ................................................................................................... 32

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

INDICATIVE PRIORITY CONSERVATION ACTIONS ................................................................................................... 35

BUSHMEAT CRISIS ..................................................................................................................................................... 34

TACKLING THE ISSUE OF UNSUSTAINABLE WILD ANIMAL PROTEIN USE ............................................................................ 47

AWARENESS RAISING AND COMMUNICATION ................................................................................................................ 50

APPENDIX 1. LIST OF PROPOSED KEY LANDSCAPES FOR CONSERVATION ..................................................... 54

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

African Economic Community

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Millenium Development Goal

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

INTRODUCTION AND SPECIAL FEATURES OF SUB SAHARAN AFRICA

AFRICA ICONIC WILDLIFE CONTINENT

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

PATTERNS OF WILDLIFE DISTRIBUTION

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

The socio-economic setting

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Population Size (Millions)

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

SPECIAL FEATURES OF THE REGIONS

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

THE ASIA DIMENSION

CONSERVATION ISSUES AND CHALLENGES

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Figure 3. Relative trends in mammal population indices in Africa14

LOSS OF ECOLOGICAL SERVICES

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Habitat loss and fragmentation

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Overhunting and overfishing

Illegal wildlife trafficking

Alien Invasive Species

DRIVERS OF THE THREATS

Inputs for the design of an EU strategic approach to wildlife conservation in Africa

Inadequate land tenure and local resource rights

National and regional conflict

Political indifference and lack of awareness