Zim land reform destroyed safari business

THE Financial Gazette’s Supplements Editor Tabitha Mutenga (TM) caught A. up with Darryl Collett (DC), the for­mer owner of Mjingwe Ranch — part of the Bubiana Conservancy in Masvingo province, for a chit chat over the future prospects of Zimbabwe’s wildlife conservation after the 84 000 hectare Bubiana Conservancy lost 91 percent of its land to new settlers. Find below excerpts of the interview.

TM: Most private conservancies were invaded or taken over by resettled game farmers. How has this affected conserva­tion and revenue?

DC: An expanding human population demands more land. The land is denuded of natural habitat in order to grow crops. Wild­life populations become “problem animals” and are simply eliminated. In the case of Mjingwe Ranch in the Bubiana Conservancy and many others of the game ranches, where well-meaning successful business people have taken over what others have built, have basically failed. Mjingwe has not seen any clients for the last five years and is now go­ing into the sixth.

 

The following are comments from two different sources. They all share the same sentiment. Very few conservancies were taken over by qualified resettled game farmers. They were taken over by “want to be game farmers” who had no clue in game farming. All they saw were “hunter’s dollars” flowing in and they wanted those dollars. Game farming, as would be all kinds of farming, is a pas­sion, a way of life and that cannot be replaced by someone who was never born and raised in that farming field. As a result, most, if not all, game farms taken over by resettled farm­ers have seen the wildlife reduced to nothing and replaced with domestic livestock. Trees and vegetation have been cleared for planting. Crops and all revenue generated from wildlife has dried up.

 

Very few of the new game farmers have conservation backgrounds so they unfortu­nately think that wildlife is a free commod­ity never ending. They do not realise that it needs protection and artificial water to enable it to survive and thrive.

 

TM: Are foreign trophy hunters still in­terested in Zimbabwe?

DC: Yes! Hunters are still interested in Zimbabwe, but marketing hunts becomes more and more difficult as the world wide anti-hunting drive gains momentum and as world economies go through a difficult phase. The hunters are still interested in Zim­babwe, but there are fewer and fewer areas for them to hunt. They want to hunt where it is safe, where it is free of domestic livestock and people and where they have a fair to rea­sonable chance of success.

 

Zimbabwe had a very good reputation as one of the leading wildlife destinations, so some hunters who have hunted here be­fore still come, but Zim prices and changed wildlife policies are eroding our hunting in­dustry, although ecotourism seems to be less affected.

 

TM: What can be done with the cur­rent challenges in the sector?

DC: Give back wildlife conservancies to those that had the vision to build them in the first place. Give them back their title and en­courage them to rebuild and restock. Then let them get on and farm their wildlife like how the cattle farmers farm their cattle and chick­en farmers farm their chickens or vegetable or fruit farmers farm their crops.

 

Put those who have a passion for wildlife back onto the farms and allow them to run and manage them as they used to do. The wildlife will come back and the hunters will return bringing much needed foreign cur­rency back into Zimbabwe.

 

A return to private ownership of game and a return to a less cumbersome quota system is very important. Those that concentrate on domestic livestock are going to lose all of their wildlife anyway so trying to regulate their off take is not going to achieve much. Encourage plot owners who are genuinely in­terested in wildlife and tourism to form larger wildlife conservancies and remove all live­stock, if possible, this would attract support from international donors to help fence the area and improve infrastructure and protec­tion levels.

 

TM: Gonarezhou is still underutilised, how best can it be turned into a viable en­tity? Does it have potential to attract more visitors?

DC: Gonarezhou is strategic and extreme­ly important and must be protected and uti­lised as much as possible. It must be made accessible to tourists touring the Kruger National Park and into Mozambique along the Limpopo River. For immigration and customs purposes these can be built at the exit gates to this huge wildlife-conservation area. Free movement across the Limpopo River and border into Mozambique must be facilitated by the building of bridges, roads which must be maintained and photographic safari operators must be invited to build camps within the boundaries of the conservation area. The creation of an international airport at Beitbridge would be a huge plus. Charter aircraft could fly clients into the huge conservation area. Car hire would also grow as a result of the airport.

 

The following are comments of others: Open its borders to Kruger National Park. Allow visitors to move freely between the two National Parks. Roads and accommodations need upgrading within Gonarezhou to make it attractive to tourists.

 

Gonarezhou has huge potential and is on the right track, it was decimated in the early 90s by drought so it has been a long road to recovery, but things are improving the whole time.

 

TM: Some safari owners whose land was taken over by new settlers have left for Mozambique and other countries. What is happening or being offered in Mozambique that is not being offered in Zimbabwe?

DC: Mozambique and Zambia in particular welcomed farmers and assisted them in getting established while Zimbabwe was following the opposite agenda. This made moving all the more attractive.

 

The governments of these countries acted as governments should and that is playing the part of the facilitators so that the visions of the populace can be achieved. One safari operator that I know of was given a large area of land to develop, which they did and stocked mainly with plains game species. Buffalo were then needed to complete the vision. The Mozam­bique government facilitated and the buffalo were captured and moved. These operators are very happy in Mozambique.

 

I personally spent 14 months in Mozambique working for a European company that had the vision of creating the biggest Macadamia farm in the world. Imagine that! If Mozambique of­fered that sort of opportunity then why not Zim­babwe? No one is going to invest vast sums of money without definite security.

 

Mozambique and other countries opened their doors to operators and farmers alike, un­like Zimbabwe which closed its doors to all farmers which directly affected the safari op­erators. They were offered large areas with good potential and a lot of support from the Mozambican, Zambian and Namibian wildlife and tourism departments, long leases and in Na­mibia ownership.

 

TM: If given an option to return to Zim­babwe, will these Safari owners return?

DC: Would they return? They were treated so badly by the Zimbabwean government that I doubt they will consider returning. None the less, let’s be positive.

 

First we need at least a President that has these operators and farmers interest at heart. The President will do everything possible to right the wrongs of yesteryear, farmers who lost their land and their future must be compensated. Security of land tenure must be assured in such a way that it comes outside of politics and very much in law. Outside of politics; by this I mean that all we land owners have heard in the past from the law enforcers when our farms were in­vaded was: “There is nothing we can do. It is political.”

 

If the rule of law and property rights are re­instated I would say safari owners would consider returning. National parks must back off with all their restrictive policies. When land owners were able to purchase and manage their wildlife, populations flourished, as would be the case with any commercial livestock farmer. They were free to buy and sell as they pleased. Then national parks got involved and imposed all their restrictive off take quotas for wildlife, which negatively impacted game farming as a whole.

 

Some might come back as home will always be home, but they have invested a huge amount of time and money in improving and restocking areas, especially in Mozambique, so I am doubt­ful that they will relocate again.

 

TM: In Zimbabwe there are a lot of issues surrounding poaching by big guns. What has been your past experience?

DC: This is what some other ranchers have said to me via email.

 

Having had rhino on our farm and working where they currently have rhino I agree 100 per­cent that the “big guns” are involved. How else would the poachers be getting the weapons and ammunition to poach those animals. And how else would the ivory and rhino horns be leaving the country.

 

High profile poachers have been arrested on our property and evidence of national parks and high profile ministers involvement has been re­trieved from their cell phones.

 

Definitely there is involvement in commer­cial poaching syndicates by certain people. If appears as though this is starting to be addressed — time will tell. The intelligence organisations are becoming proactive, so fingers are crossed.