WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA STRATEGY IN SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION OF WILDLIFE RESOURCES, POVERTY REDUCTION AND IN THE MITIGATION OF HUMAN/WILDLIFE CONFLICTS: THE CASE OF MBOMIPA IN IRINGA, TANZANIA.

Abstract

This study was carried out in MBOMIPA WMA to establish the effectiveness of the operative Wildlife Management Area (WMA) strategy to wildlife conservation, rural poverty alleviation and promoting local level stewardship of natural resources. People living around PAs are ―locked out‖ when policy makers declare protected areas for conservation and therefore causing resentment and denied livelihood to local communities. MBOMIPA WMA is a mega-biodiversity area as it is flanked by important protected areas of the southern highlands. The study assessed the status of current land uses, determined the main sources of conflicts, their impacts and methods of resolution. It also examined the range of benefits to local communities since its establishment. Purposive stratified random sampling technique was used to select 10 villages and random selection to select households for interviews. Field studies were conducted using household structured and unstructured interviews, focus group discussions and field observations and the primary data were analyzed. using SPSS, content analysis and Chi-square test. The results show that, WMA as strategy has contributed to wildlife conservation as the number of poachers has been reduced from 355 in 2000 to 105 in 2009 and the number of key wildlife species such as elephants have increased from 888 in 1995 to 2855 in 2002. Cultivated land have increased from 26,751 ha to 35,1453, forests from 7,090 ha to 35,219, bare soils from 590 ha to 52,852 ha in 1995 and 2010 respectively. On the other hand, the woodlands have decreased from 361,075 ha in 1995 to 91,217 ha in 2010. This indicates a high rate of woodland clearing for shifting cultivation which resulted into increased cultivated area with settlement and bare soils. The increased forests are from the protected areas i.e. the WMA, Game Reserves, Game Controlled Areas and National Park. Respondents acknowledged that there exists some socio-economic (59.7%) and ecological (76.3%) benefits derived from the Protected Areas and WMA initiatives. It was found that (60.6%) of the residents in the study area are still poor living below a dollar per day. (76.3%) of the respondents said that WMA has not sufficiently contributed to resolving the human – wildlife conflicts and that they continue to incur costs on crop damage and loss of human life (63.7%). WMA has also enhanced democratic decision making framework to the local village leaders and communities in general. However, there is still lack of transparency, accountability and skills among village leaders to manage the WMA. The information generated will be used to improve the WMA strategy so that it can provide more positive results. Furthermore, efforts are needed to raise awareness to local communities on WMA and benefits accrued from the wildlife resources. It is also necessary to enhance diversification of income generating wildlife based activities to increase the benefits from wildlife that can be shared equitably among the locals. Non wildlife activities such as beekeeping and fish ponds can help to boost the local people‘s income and therefore reduce poverty.