Self-Government and wildlife conservation

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

The first 25 concessions: 2003 – 2012 (Appendix 1)

In 2001, President Chiluba banned safari hunting. In 2002, the Minister cancelled the results of the new concessions won by tender and awarded them to those he favoured, ‘administratively’. This led to court injunctions by the illegally denied operators, with the actions of the Minister overthrown in August 2003, one of these being the removal of the prime hunting concession, Nyampala, obtained by Rashid Randera, and given back to Leopard Ridge Safaris from whom it had illegally been removed. This event was to have repercussions a few years later with the former Nyampala concessionaire embarking on a campaign to win it back. In 2003 only 30% of the safari quota was utilised, this in part due to the fact that six Prime areas of the twelve were not hunted due to the litigation – although ZAWA, reporting to the Public Accounts Committee in November 2006, stated that no hunting had taken place until 2004 – given as the reason for the reduced income based on their projections that 60% of the quota would be shot.
The twentyfive concessions awarded by tender in January of 2003 resulted in some chiefs banning the issue of District Game Licences in their areas.55 The twenty-five blocks (twelve Prime, seven Secondary and six Understocked areas), were taken up by nineteen operators for ten years. Given that 50% of the topearning Prime areas were under court injunction for the season, and that little or no income was expected from Understocked areas for five years, hunting income in 2003 had to rely on six Prime and six Secondary areas i.e. 50% of the blocks awarded. Moreover, given the late date of the awards, insufficient time was available to market hunts, placing enormous pressure on the operators, or on those to whom they had sub-leased.

QUOTAS, SPECIES STATUS AND MBEZA SAFARIS

ZAWA in its early years accepted that quotas may be defined as the number of animals which may be utilised in a year without biologically destroying or reducing the wildlife population. In scientific terms, sustainable offtake quotas should be based on scientific censuses having high confidence limits 121 in which a total population figure is arrived at, the mortality rates quantified, and a sustained yield offtake set, i.e. a quota. However, other than in the Bangweulu and parts of the Kafue and Barotse wetland systems, it is scientifically and economically not feasible to set scientific quotas in Zambia for animals other than elephant; rather a ‘good farmer’ harvesting approach is required, based on a set of agreed age and trophy standards, to be monitored at the end of each hunting season and then adjusted for the next season; thus ZAWA quotas should correctly be termed allocations.

Leopard Ridge Safaris: Nyampala: 2006

Leopard Ridge Safaris had their concession; Nyampala – the finest hunting block in Zambia – removed. The brother of the major shareholder had his Professional Hunter’s licence withdrawn, prompted by charges that they had been attracting animals with loud speakers and had overshot their quotas. In the Nyalugwe chiefdom Open Area, where they also had a game ranch at the time, they had been charged with feeding the community game meat mixed with hyena and lion meat. These latter charges, without foundation, were also made by Chief Nyalugwe to ZAWA and the Office of the President against the author and Dr Guy Scott, Secretary-General at the time of the main opposition political party, The Patriotic Front, neither having ever entered the area.

NAMAC v ZAWA

Prompted by a question in Zambia’s National Assembly – and clearly not just politically motivated – the Minister of MTENR requested that the National Movement Against Corruption (NAMAC) hold a judicial review of ZAWA to inquire into the matter of the penalties applied to a number of companies who had allegedly overshot their hunting safari quotas. This was supposedly a ruse to remove from office certain corrupt ZAWA officers, and to remove concessions from safari operators whom they deemed to have overshot quotas so that these could be made available to others, possibly ‘targeted citizens’ as catered for under the new Citizens Economic Empowerment Act No 9 of 2006 (CEE Act).

TABLE OF CONTENTS :

• Declaration
• Abstract
• Table of Contents
• Project location – Map
• Acknowledgements
• Dedication
• Introduction
• VOLUME I: WILDLIFE CONSERVATION IN ZAMBIA
• CHAPTER 1: Zambia before self-government in
  • Acronyms
  • 1 Wild Country
  • 2 Pre-colonial History
  • 3 Bantu Colonialism
  • 3.1 Early Bantu invaders, the Portuguese and the Arabs
  • 3.2 Nineteenth century invaders
  • 3.3 Bantu culture and custom
    • 3.3.1 Survival strategies
    • 3.3.2 Witchcraft
    • 3.3.3 Customary law
  • 3.4 The slave and ivory trade
  • 4 European Colonialism
  • 4.1 Explorers, missionaries, hunters, traders and miners
  • 4.1.1 The pioneer concessionaires in the east of the territory
  • 4.2 Charter companies
• CHAPTER 2: Self-Government and wildlife conservation
  • Acronyms
  • 1 Zambia and the Game Department (1964-1974)
  • 1.1 Politics and wildlife conservation
  • 1.2 Transitional and Natural Resource Development Fund
  • 1.3 The Luangwa Valley Conservation and Development Project and Game cropping
  • 2 National Parks and Wildlife Service (1975-1999)
  • 2.1 Introduction
  • 2.2 ADMADE: Administrative Management Design for Game Management Areas
  • 2.3 LIRDP: Luangwa Integrated Resource Development Project
  • 2.4 Restructuring the administration of wildlife and National Parks (1992-2001)
  • 3 Zambia Wildlife Authority (1999- 2009)
  • 3.1 Game Management Areas and The Lands Act of
  • 3.2 Community Resource Boards
  • 3.3 SLAMU: South Luangwa Management Unit
    • 3.3.1 Quotas
    • 3.3.2 Elephant poaching
    • 3.3.3 Illegal acts
    • 3.3.4 Human rights abuses
  • 3.4 NRCF: The Natural Resources Consultative Forum
  • 3.5 CITES: Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
• CHAPTER 3: Safari Hunting and wildlife-based tourism
  • Acronyms
  • Part I: Safari hunting
  • 1 Hunting Concessions
  • 1.1 The first 25 concessions: 2003 –
  • 1.1.1 Hunting Concession Agreements (HCAs)
  • 1.2 The next 13 concessions: 2005 –
  • 1.3 Proposed protected area hunting concessions
  • 2 Quotas, Species Status and Mbeza Safaris
  • 2.5.1 Quota utilisation
  • 2.5.2 Licencing
  • 2.6 Summary of Zambia’s safari quotas: 2003 –
  • 3 Concession ‘Nationalisations’
• CHAPTER 4: The Framework for Conservation and Rural Development
  • Acronyms
  • 1 Economics, Population and Investment
  • 1.1 Economics
  • 1.2 Population
  • 1.3 Investing and doing business in Zambia
  • 1.4 Investment protection
  • 1.5 Foreign aid
  • 2 The International and Regional Framework for Conservation
• CHAPTER 5: Integrated Conservation and Development Partnerships in Zambia
  • Acronyms
  • 1 Regional integrated community-based conservation and development
  • 1.1 Rhodesia/Zimbabwe
  • 1.2 Namibia (Appendix 1)
  • 1.3 Malawi
  • 1.4 Botswana
  • 1.5 Tanzania
  • 2 Zambia
  • 2.1 Customary Areas Investor Partnerships
    • 2.1.1 Nyawa Community Trust
    • 2.1.2 Luembe Conservancy Trust
    • 2.1.3 Royal Empowerment Foundation
    • 2.1.4 Itumbi-Kaingu Community Trust
    • 2.1.5 West Lunga Trust
    • 2.1.6 Mwanachingwala Conservation Trust
    • 2.1.7 Nyakolwe Trust
    • 2.1.8 Shinganda-Lumba Conservancy
    • 2.1.9 Royal Luembe Trust
    • 2.1.10 Nyakaulu Mwape Community Trust
    • 2.1.11 Sioma Falls PPP
    • 2.1.12 Nyalugwe Conservation Trust
  • 3 International Donor Funding
• VOLUME II: THE LANDSAFE COMMONS DEVELOPMENT MODEL
• CHAPTER 6: The Landsafe Model
  • Acronyms
• CHAPTER 7: The Three-rifts Landsafe Project Area
• CHAPTER 8: Implementing Landsafe in Luembe and Nyalugwe Chiefdoms

GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT
Wildlife conservation in Zambia and the Landsafe Customary Commons