WILDLIFE - USE IT OR LOSE IT!
Professor John E Cooper, DTVM, FRCPath, FIBiol, FRCVS
 
and
 
Margaret E Cooper, LLB, FLS
Wildlife Health Services
PO Box 153, Wellingborough,
 
Northants NN8 2ZA, UK
 
 
 
A meeting of the Tropical Agriculture Association (TAA), held at the
University of Durham on Monday 18th March, had as its theme "Exploitation
in the Conservation of Wildlife".  The day was devoted to lectures and
discussions on the use of wild animals - defined as any non-domesticated
species, ranging from butterflies to baboons - and how this might be linked
to conservation.
 
The meeting was organised and chaired by Tim Fison, a veterinary surgeon
with much experience of working in the tropics, especially local
communities, and a life-long interest in wildlife.
 
The first speaker was John Cooper of Wildlife Health Services, UK and
Makerere University, Uganda, who introduced the topic.  He argued that
wildlife had to "pay its way" or many species would disappear.   In the
words of Keith Eltringham, in a paper in the journal Oryx (1994):
 
"If wildlife is to survive, some means must be found to reconcile the needs
of the animals with the legitimate aspirations of the human population. One
solution is to give the wildlife a value so that local people will want to
conserve it".  Exploitation of wildlife can be "consumptive" - for example,
its use as food, or hunting - or "non-consumptive", such as game viewing,
birdwatching and photography.   The subject is contentious, with strong
views (on both sides) about consumptive utilisation: paradoxically, in many
areas of Africa properly controlled hunting has less adverse effect on
ecosystems, and brings in more money than do the large numbers of Western
tourists who, while expressing their concern about conservation of the
environment, are often very demanding in terms of accommodation, transport
and safety. Professor Cooper went on to discuss the use of birds as a food
source.  He stressed that birds have for long been an important source of
food in very many countries. At present domestic poultry account for 20% of
the world's meat production.  Only a few of the 9000 extant species of bird
have been successfully domesticated but many others are harvested from the
wild.  There is potential for greater use of birds as a source of food,
eggs and other products.  Existing domesticated species, especially
galliforms, need to be better utilised and in some cases improved (Fig. I).
 Certain "new" avian species could be brought into domestication, ranging
from various ducks and geese to South American chacalacas (Ortalis sp.).
The efficiency and sustainability of harvesting methods for free-living
birds might be improved and the exploitation of new species should be
considered.  Such measures could be compatible with improved conservation
of wild birds and their habitats, but careful planning and surveillance are
essential prerequisites.
 
 
John Fletcher, a veterinary surgeon who is an authority on cervids and
deer-farming, then discussed "The domestication of deer in tropical
regions".  He emphasised the historical importance of these animals and
their derivatives and described the current world situation insofar as the
supply of meat (venison) and other products, including medicinal compounds
is concerned.  Discussion at the end of the morning session focused on a
number of issues, including the cultural importance of bushmeat in many
parts of the world and the impracticability of imposing a blanket ban on
its use.  The life of many indigenous people revolved around the use of
wildlife as a source of food, and some way had to be found, especially in
view of the requirements of the Convention on Biodiversity, to respect and
promote traditional values, to cater for this.  However, no longer was
bushmeat consumption merely a local, sustainable, activity (Fig. 2).  It
was now big business and bushmeat is increasingly not only being
transported in large quantities to towns and cities "in-country" but also
being sent, usually illegally, to Europe and elsewhere.  The annual trade
in sub-Saharan Africa alone is worth about A3200 million.  In the face of
such a situation there are no easy solutions - but time is short.  Measures
that are yielding encouraging results regionally include the farming of
certain animals, such as the grasscutter rat (Thryonomys swinderianus), one
of a number of species that featured on the video shown later in the day.
More drastic action is needed, however, because in many parts of the world
local people are losing their traditional food supplies to commercial
hunting at a totally unsustainable rate.  Whole species are facing
extinction and communities are being robbed of their food security.  The
"Bushmeat Crisis" is the subject of intense publicity and lobbying by the
UK Bushmeat Campaign which is supported by such disparate groups as the
Federation of Zoos of Great Britain and Ireland and the International Fund
for Animal Welfare.
 
 
The questions of sustainable utilisation revolves very much around quotas
and effective regulation of methods.  Some of the difficulties and dilemmas
were discussed and the need for closer contact between different
disciplines - especially (in the context of the use of wildlife as a food
source) of agriculturalists, veterinarians and conservationists, was
emphasised.  A representative from DFID (Department for International
Development) put out a plea for information on the relations between
wildlife and local communities - especially ways of alleviating poverty.
Concern was expressed that so often decisions are now in the hands of
"policy makers", sometimes very divorced from practical issues, rather than
those who work with local communities.
 
 
The afternoon session started with a presentation by Margaret Cooper, a
lawyer, who discussed "Legal and Ethical Considerations" in the use of
wildlife.  The production of animals as new sources of food and other
products may be affected by a variety of laws relating to the keeping,
trading, health, welfare and movement of animals.  Other legislation, such
as that applicable to wildlife conservation and to human safety, are also
relevant.  A good knowledge and understanding of international, regional
and national laws is therefore important.  CITES (The Convention on the
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) can help
to conserve species but its controls over "recognizable derivatives", such
as diagnostic and research specimens, can hamper important studies on
health and welfare.
 
 
Religious, cultural and ethical considerations may also influence attitudes
towards a new food product.  Thus, poultry are generally acceptable to most
religions and ethnic groups whereas pigs and snails (Fig. 3) are amongst
species that may not be eaten by Muslims.  In some societies only the men
tend the larger animals, such as cattle, whereas "mini livestock" (usually
defined as animals of potential benefit weighing less than 20 kg) such as
rabbits, ducks and fish are commonly the responsibility of women and
children. It is important that all these factors are taken into account
during the planning and progress of an enterprise because they may have a
substantial impact on its acceptability and long-term viability.
 
The next speaker, Jon Hutton, a consultant who now works closely with FFI
(Fauna and Flora International), whose title was "Wildlife and Rural
Development in Southern Africa".  He outlined the history of conservation,
mainly in Africa, drawing attention to the colonial legacy of national
parks that exclude people and species protection that concentrates on
certain animals.  Instead, the emphasis should be on involving communities
in the management and use of natural resources, including animals and
plants.  The speaker returned to the earlier concept of needing to give
wildlife a value.  He argued that wildlife has more to offer than domestic
stock because it (wildlife) can provide extra income in terms of hunting
and phototourism, in addition to that obtained from meat and hides.  He
described the CAMPFIRE project in Zimbabwe where there is full
participation of local communities.  Dr Hutton argued lucidly and with
humour that trophy shooting can provide valuable income for local
communities.   In his view the tendency of Western societies to view
wildlife exploitation an a "primitive" pastime - and therefore to be
inclined to condemn it - was hampering the development and acceptance of
policies that would conserve, possibly even save, some species of wild
animal and at the same time help to feed, house and educate needy people.
 
 
Eating wildlife was not a novel concept: many communities in Asia, Africa
and South America have for centuries used animals sustainably for this
purpose (Fig. 5).
 
This paper evoked lively discussion which largely revolved around the
disparity between the needs and aspirations of people in poorer countries
and the perceptions of those in the West, such a Britain, who equate
"wildlife" with attractive mammals and birds and constantly confuse
"welfare" and "conservation".  
 
 
A video presentation, with translation (from French to English) by Margaret
Cooper brought the day to a close.  The video, produced by the European
Commission in collaboration with B.E.D.I.M (Bulletin pour L'Echange et la
Distribution de L'Information sur le Mini-Elevage) that is based in
Belgium, depicts the use for food or income of various "mini livestock",
ranging from giant rats and grasscutters to termites and grasshoppers
(Figs. 4a & 4b).
 
 
The video depicted the harvesting or captive management of a wide range of
species and emphasised the need for involvement and training of local
people.  It also served as another pertinent reminder that the use of
wildlife was not restricted to the larger, more conspicuous, vertebrate
animals. Invertebrates were a very important, often overlooked, component.
 
 
The theme of this meeting was a topical one, bearing in mind current
concerns about conservation, the destruction or fragmentation of ecosystems
and the desperate need to provide poor communities with much needed
resources.  The use of wildlife for food is criticised by some but these
are usually "Westerners" who have a reasonable standard of living and can
afford the luxury of viewing wild animals as a showpiece rather than as
species with which we share our world and with which we must co-exist in a
realistic way.
 
As the Director of UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) stated ten
years ago:
 
"There are complaints - loud complaints - from a number of developing
countries, that the rich are more interested in making the Third World in
to a natural history museum than they are in filling the bellies of the
people".