Political Ecology of Wildlife Conservation/ Mt. Meru Area

The author of the text, R.P. Neumann, begins his introduction with a couple of startling statistics, stating that Tanzania's elephant population decreased by more than 50 percent in the 80's and 98 percent of its black rhinoceros population is gone as well (Neumann 85). These numbers are staggering and should certainly catch the reader's attention. It's degradation like in the Arusha National Park that Neumann focuses on in his research.
More...
Neumann claims that what is missing from the debate on what is causing wildlife populations to decline and the solutions to such problems is "the volatile politics of nature protection in rural Africa." He goes on to say that the "establishment of national parks is... a political process" and in colonial Africa, it involved denying resources to whole settlements, "threatening the very existence of communities" (85).

Following the introduction, the author describes the approach that was taken in doing his research, calling it "political ecology" and explains what it encompasses: "the political, economic, and social structures and processes which underlie human practices leading to degradation." Before getting into his research, Neumann describes the difficulties associated with taking a political ecology approach to degradation problems and cites specific examples before concluding that at its "most elemental level, a political ecology perspective entails: (1) a focus on the land users and the social relations in which they entwined; (2) tracing the linkages of these local relations to wider geographical and social setting; and (3) historical analysis to understand the contemporary situation" (86-87).

The author begins the section titled "Political Ecology of Threats to National Parks" by defining degradation as 'a reduction in the land to satisfy a particular use,' and threats as "environmental conditions that 'are in serious conflict with the objectives of park administration and management.' He then goes on to give examples of declining animal populations in Arusha National Park, such as buffalo, giraffe, and eland, and relates that conservationists and government officials chalk such degradation up to "overpopulation and the ignorance and irrationality of local residents," an interpretation that Neumann suggests is "seriously flawed" (88).

The next portion of text deals with historical information of Tanzania's national park system. It begins with the establishment of the Society for the Preservation of the Flora and Fauna of the Empire (SPFFE), a conservation group based in London, which, through an investigation, suggested that forming national parks was critical. Modeling national parks in other parts of the world, the SPFFE "made [it] clear that humans were not welcome in [the] parks, but allowed that under the prevailing political climate, preservation 'cannot be pushed to a point at which it seriously conflicts with the material happiness and well-being of the native population' (89).

The insistence by the SPFFE of the importance of national parks lead to a Tanganyika government proposal to designate 3000-4000 square miles of the Serengeti to become the first national park. As it turned out, however, this was not done without resistance. On one side of the debate were the conseravationists and natural resource professionals, and on the other were officers in charge of the colonies who worried that the conservationists were imposing on the rights of the people. The conflict grew, resulting in destruction of land and the killing of animals. The park was then divided into two areas, one where humans were not allowed and the other where the Masai were allowed to live and graze animals. In 1959, however, a new ordinance was drawn up, basically stating that human rights would have to come second and no humans would be allowed in the park. This pattern was repeated throughout Tanzania (90).

Neumann next focuses on the history of the Arusha National Park. European settlement left little area for the Meru to live and graze their cattle. When the British began ruling Tanganyika, many of the reserves established by the Germans were kept in tact and by 1920 all of Mt. Meru was designated a game reserve and strict state control outlawed settlement, cultivation, and hunting on the land, but some rights were preserved such as the allowance of residents to take produce from the forests for their own use. This and other rights were soon put to question, however, and the indigenous people found themselves submitting to the terms of the Europeans, and then taking their case to the United Nations, where they lost. As years passed, state control grew and tightened and the park eventually expanded from the original 4000 sq mi to 28590 acres in 1969. This expansion and strict rule has caused a severe collapse in grazing and the Meru have little customary rights (93).

Following the historical information of the Arusha National Park, Neumann discusses the current politics and wildlife conservation in the Mt. Meru area. Here the mainstays are coffee production and cattle-keeping. Neumann writes that "[p]articipation in cash crop production has provided the basis for a rising standard of living" but Meru's northern villages are in a much poorer state and Nasula residents are fighting for rights to more land, which is causing concern in the conservationists and state officials. Many of the people have been fined of breaking the state laws by using the land illegally and there is much conflict between the two parties (95).

Neumann states that there is little interest in the people of the of Tanzania to help the conservation efforts. He relates that many of the residents know of poaching in the area but have not told officials who because they feel the park provides no benefit to the village. The people believe that policies place animal rights above those of humans. For example, as the numbers of certain species began to decline, laws were passed that protected them from being harmed if they strayed into local farms. After government-built fences became useless (I found it funny that bull elephants learned to short circuit the wires) residents became helpless (95).