http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/28/science/a-forgotten-step-in-saving-african-wildlife-protecting-the-rangers.html?_r=0
By RACHEL NUWERNOV. 28, 2016
ISIOLO, KENYA — Anna Phiri was 15 when her mother, a park ranger in Zambia, was murdered by poachers.
On Sept. 2, 2010, Esnart Paundi was standing guard with a colleague over two men they had caught with illegal bushmeat. What happened next is uncertain, but Ms. Phiri has heard that a third poacher, unknown to her mother, was hiding in the bush. He jumped out and slashed her colleague’s head with a machete.
Ms. Paundi, who was unarmed, ran. But the poachers gave chase, and when they caught her, they killed her.
Ms. Paundi, 38, was the breadwinner for her five siblings, and she left behind five children, now orphans. Though she died serving her country and protecting its wildlife, she had no life insurance, and officials offered no assistance to her family. “They didn’t even say anything to us,” Ms. Phiri said.
The world depends on individuals like Ms. Paundi to protect increasingly imperiled wildlife. But many rangers do not receive the support they need. A recent World Wildlife Fund study of 570 rangers in 12 African countries found that 59 percent did not have basic supplies like boots, tents and GPS devices, and that 42 percent had not received adequate training.
Despite the critical role rangers play in the poaching crisis, conservation organizations tend to overlook the need for everyday resources, said Peter Newland, the director of training at 51 Degrees, a private security company in Kenya.
“Donors outside of Africa want to see sexy, high-tech solutions like drones and ground sensors, not to hear about the need for warm clothing, boots and better food for rangers,” he said. “Large nongovernmental groups spend huge amounts, yet there are rangers calling me for socks.”
The wildlife fund study also found that 82 percent of rangers had faced life-threatening situations, including attacks by poachers and animals. Ms. Paundi was one of more than 1,000 rangers killed on the job over the past 10 years, according to the Thin Green Line Foundation, which supports park rangers and their families. Many receive little or nothing from the government.
Another World Wildlife Fund study, in 10 African countries, found that just 60 percent of rangers had health insurance, 50 percent had life insurance and 40 percent had long-term disability insurance.
“Imagine how demotivating it would be to see a mate killed and then to witness his family removed from their house and his kids taken out of school because they receive no wage as a thank you for his sacrifice after he’s gone,” said Sean Willmore, who founded the Thin Green Line Foundation. “Morale plays a massive role in reducing poaching.”
Governmental corruption makes a ranger’s job even more difficult in many parts of Africa. Poachers have been supported by officials in a number of countries. But rangers would be in trouble even if there were no corruption, Mr. Willmore said.
In the last two years, the foundation has spent $1.2 million on equipment and training for rangers and has supported more than 150 families of those killed in the line of duty, including Ms. Paundi’s. The organization is putting her children through school.
Similarly, For Rangers, a charity co-founded by Mr. Newland that raises money through extreme racing events, has donated $200,000 worth of gear, vehicles, medical supplies and family aid to rangers at 10 parks throughout Africa since April 2014.
Save the Elephant
Listing the two types of elephants as separate endangered species will save them from being poached into extinction.

“There’s a huge amount of recognition for the illegal wildlife trade crisis, but not a huge amount for the people really doing the day-to-day work to stop it,” said Sam Taylor, a co-founder of For Rangers and the head of conservation projects at 51 Degrees.
But small nonprofit groups can support only a fraction of the estimated 20,000 to 25,000 rangers working in Africa.
“Performance is definitely affected by the lack of insurance, combined with the high risk factor and the lack of training and equipment,” said Rohit Singh, the lead author of the World Wildlife Fund studies. “How can we expect rangers to deliver if they do not have these basic things?”
When rangers are well taken care of and receive appropriate training, poaching rates tend to drop, Mr. Singh and Mr. Willmore said.
Lewa Wildlife Conservancy, a wildlife sanctuary in Kenya, for example, was losing unprecedented numbers of rhinoceroses when it overhauled its operations in 2014. To turn things around, the conservancy invested in specialized training, brought in a helicopter, installed a new communications system and strengthened relationships with local communities.
Since then, Lewa has not lost a single rhino.
“There was a time when rhinos were poached here so often that we were becoming scared, but we’ve tried our best and we’ve stopped it,” said Francis Kobia Chokera, 44, a ranger at Lewa. “We had security before, but not like it is now. It’s very, very tight.”
Mr. Chokera’s job is still demanding: He patrols on foot for 12 hours a day, and like 47 percent of the rangers interviewed by the wildlife fund, he sees his family fewer than five days per month. But he has insurance, earns around $3,600 a year — more than two times the average income in Kenya — and receives overtime, free housing and a pension.
“By good luck, I was given the chance to work here,” he said. “I’ve always loved animals.”
Timothy Tear, executive director for the Wildlife Conservation Society’s Africa program, said that success stories like Lewa’s are “where hope is found.” He noted that the conservancy’s considerable investment in security and ranger training — $1 million a year — has been integral to its success.
“If you do the simple math of dollars spent to acres protected, you will find Lewa at the top of the investment-per-acre gradient,” Dr. Tear said.
Other protected areas that have received large investments in ranger training and support — like the Sabi Sand Game Reserve in South Africa — have seen similar gains against poachers. In 2013, the reserve lost 51 rhinos, but only two have been killed this year.
“Our rangers were herders, but now they’re effectively soldiers,” said David Powrie, Sabi Sand’s warden. “They’re at the center of all our operations.”
For now, such cases are the exception, but Mr. Willmore said better and broader training could be a first step toward improving working conditions for rangers across Africa. The Thin Green Line Foundation plans to teach 30 to 50 exceptional rangers the skills needed to be trainers themselves, and then host six events a year at which they would instruct their colleagues.
“At the moment, most training rangers get, if any, is expensive and done by expats, and there’s no follow-up,” Mr. Willmore said. “By training the trainers, we will potentially reach over 15,000 rangers in the next five years and help change the game on the ground.”
Though training would not solve problems like a lack of insurance and equipment, it could save the lives of both animals and rangers. Recently, a ranger who had been taught self-defense was attacked by a poacher with a machete and was able to use a stick to knock down the suspect and arrest him, said Craig Millar, the head of security for Kenya’s Big Life Foundation, a community conservation group.
Ms. Paundi, the ranger in Zambia, had no such training. “Protecting wildlife is good, but my mom didn’t have enough protection herself,” said Ms. Phiri, her daughter. “I believe if my mother had the proper training, equipment and security, she would still be alive today.”
Lack of resources for anti-poaching has been a constant in Africa’s fight to save its wildlife. The problem is that the government does not allocate the resources, and the benefits for many people from poaching outweigh concerns for the safety of the animals. Poaching brings huge sums from rhinoceros horns and elephant tusks. Bushmeat is desired by the growing population that is running out of farmland. Greed and human overpopulation are driving the demand for animal deaths.
Winter’s “Earth Island Journal” has a great article on the Black Mambas, an anti-poaching unit of unarmed women. The group, founded by Craig Spencer, works to deter poaching and report criminal activity to the authorities. According to Spencer, shooting poachers—which seems like a good idea to me!—has resulted in turning more of the local people against the animals and the sanctuaries, which encourages even more poaching and death. So other options are tried, but more resources and dedicated personnel need to be found to support all the options, from the Black Mambas to the regular rangers and anti-poaching units
Personally, I’m skeptical of some of the work done by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS). They have supported “sustainable forest management” and have been cooperating/collaborating with exploiters, such as logging companies, e.g., the Congolaise Industrielle des Bois (CIB) and the Societe de Bois de Bayanga. The former has been cutting trees in areas three times the size of the Nouabale-Ndoki National Park. The latter has been cutting trees in the Dzanga-Sangha Special Reserve. The logging companies not only destroy huge numbers of trees but also build roads into otherwise inaccessible areas, opening up those areas to more people, including hunters. Some of the logging companies also encourage their employees to hunt their own food, and as they hire more workers and as those workers bring their families into the peripheries, more animals die.
Unfortunately, the current fight for wildlife around the world has tended to lose focus on the deep ecology philosophy promoted by Arne Naess, which maintained that every life had value, not just the species, and that biodiversity was both desirable and necessary. That outlook has been declared anti-people, even racist, western elitist, and neo-colonial, by some, and now the trend is back to a more anthropocentric outlook.
According to Daniel Doak (“What is the Future of Conservation” in Protecting the Wild, pp 27-28) “A recent and much-publicized campaign, originating in the conservation community, marginalizes nature’s intrinsic value in favor of a primarily human-centered conservation ethic. . . . Instead of pursuing the protection of biodiversity for biodiversity’s sake, a new conservation should seek to enhance those natural systems that benefit the widest number of people.”
So, back we go to Gifford Pinchot. Somehow the human species wins and animals lose.
Anyone interested in the evils of the bushmeat trade and the part played by industry and conservation groups should read “Eating Apes,” by Dale Peterson (with graphic and horrific photos by Karl Ammon). It was published in 2003, but it doesn’t sound as if much has improved.
I still feel that anti poaching units need to be armed to the teeth and have no qualms about shooting poachers.
Renee–I was just thinking the same thing: thee anti-poaching units should be armed. It is a war out there now. I just received reports from the Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund that no Gorillas were caught in snares in 2016. They are not armed as of yet, I believe. But, with the instability and violence on the planet now increasing every day, it seems a must, doesn’t it?
Sorry for the typo on first sentence. not thee, but…. “the anti-poaching…”