ABSTRACT
The support zone community program is designed to reduce or
totally eliminate pressure on Park resources and focus attention on local
people, their welfare and developmental needs. Studies have shown that people
derive economic benefits in terms of income generation from the reserves in
their localities, but reported inadequacy of infrastructural facilities which
is necessary to the people. This study appraises the support zone community
program in Yankari Game Reserve by examining the activities of the program and
ascertaining its success and failures. Data was collected using focus group
discussion (FGD), interview, field survey, relevant literatures and
questionnaires. Descriptive statistics was used in the analysis with result
presented on tables and interpreted to draw inferences. The study revealed that
only few park employees had specialized training to enhance their job schedule
of park protection. Most of the employees are able bodied indigenes on lower
cadre like securities, cleaners, park rangers etc. To help communities build
capacity in other economic activities towards reducing dependence on the YGR
some basic infrastructures have been provided like access roads, water,
education and health care centres etc. But these facilities are quit inadequate
and some of them are malfunctioning. Farming innovations which have similar
objectives have been introduced but adoption was partial due to financial
constraint. The study also showed that the people are aware of the rules of
conservation including ban on hunting, burning, deforestation, grazing in the
reserve etc. This awareness had helped reduced illegal activities greatly.
Certain benefits enjoyed at the onset of the program are not been sustained
like the use of manual labour in the construction of tracks now replaced by
modern machinery. Problems facing the program subsequently identified include
partial compliance to conservation rules, intruders of large bands of visiting
poachers, inadequate funding to finance the program etc. The study concludes by
suggesting that the program has not been very effective. Recommendations made
included that adequate funding be made available to implement the program.
CHAPTER
ONE
1.0 DESIGN
OF THE STUDY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Game reserves are
designated areas for the protection of wildlife (Flora and Fauna).When managed
appropriately they are recognized as offering many sustainable benefits to
society. They play a central role in the social and economic wellbeing and
quality of life of their host communities by improving their living standard.
Today Kenya,
Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, South Africa, etc are very important
tourist destinations because of the success of their National Parks in that
they have made the benefits of park conservation available to host communities.
The National Park
Service Decree of 26th May 1999 (N0. 46) gives the Federal
Government the powers to declare suitable forest and wildlife habitats as
protected Areas. As of August, 2001 the National Park Service (NPS) manages
eight such protected areas including Kainji Lake National Park, Chad Basin
National Park, Cross River National Park, Gashaka-Gumti, Old Oyo National Park,
Okomu National Park, Kamuku National Park and Yankari Game Reserve.
The decree provided
strategic direction towards the improved conservation and management of
National Parks. The Regulatory function of the NPS emphasize restoring the
abundance and biodiversity of plant and animal species through protection
measures such as ban on any farming or hunting activity and heavy restraint or
access to protected Areas resources and produce by various users (Shashidharan,
2001).
Yankari Game
Reserve was established in 1956 and open to the public in 1962. By a request of
the Bauchi state Government, the Federal Government also approved its
upgrading in 1991to the status of a National park. It has again reverted to the
earlier status of a Game Reserve. (Marguba, 2002).
The open country
and villages that surround YGR are populated by farmers and herdsmen. Though
there has been no human settlement in the reserve for over a century. However,
there is evidence of earlier human habitation in the park including old iron
smelting sites and caves. (Marguba, 2002)
Declaration of
National Protected Area status has also resulted in relocation of communities
that lived inside and in the periphery of the Protected Areas. Besides the
hardship of relocation, these communities lost some of their traditional rights
and access to the resources and produce emanating from the Park and its
surrounding areas. Inevitably, this situation led to some conflicts between the
communities and the Protected Area authorities. Infringement of rules like
encroachment of Protected Area territories, illegal felling of trees or harvest
of forest produce and poaching for wild animals were some of the common causes
for the conflicts. The decree provides for a “buffer zone” around the Protected
Area boundary which can have “multiple uses”, as decided jointly by the NPS and
the communities living around the Park. (Shashidharan, 2001)
The Nigeria
National Park Service (established 1979) now adopted the Support Zone Community
Programme (SZCP) in 1981as integral part of its solidarity with and
contribution to the development of rural communities around the national parks.
The programme is aimed at reducing or totally eliminating pressure on park
resources and focus attention on local people, their welfare and developmental
needs. It is to be supported by efforts that would make the benefit of national
park protection and conservation available to local communities such as revenue
generation, infrastructural development and service, and adoption of improved
farming methods. (Tijani, 2007)
As a policy, the
authorities of Yankari Game Reserve (YGR ) has subscribed to the strategy of
support zone community programme ( SZCP) .This involves inclusion of members of
the host community in its job creation plan towards positive community attitude
and habits in protecting and conserving the reserve’s resources. This is
assumed to encourage sustainability in the reserve through the reduction or
total elimination of poaching, deforestation and bush burning activities in the
park. (Odunlami, 1994) and (Ismail, 2003). Economic empowerment will make the
host communities develop or adopt conservatory practices since it is a source
of their livelihood apart from farming and cattle rearing.
The SZCP has not
been very effective over the years. These are seen in the inability of the
programme to organize adequate agricultural extension services such as use of
hybrid, herbicide and pesticide etc. Consequently, the communities are not
making the best use of the environmental resources like trees and land at their
villages and farms to get optimum yields.Also, inadequate physical
infrastructure facilities and services characterise the host community areas. These
are evident in the limited number of schools, health facilities, water, access
roads and electricity supply.
Inadequate
provision of these facilities and services to improve the people’s condition of
living and livelihood does not augur well for sustainability of the reserve
resources like animals, trees and bushes. It therefore makes the communities
jeopardize the effort of staff and management through bush burning, hunting and
deforestation for survival and immediate gain. It is therefore evident that
there are successes and failures of the programme which need to be highlighted
with emphasis on the effectiveness over a period of time. It is to establish
whether there has been decline or improvement from the earlier stages till
date.
Tijani,(2007),Adebayo,(2005)
and Okafor ,(2000) in their studies reported the benefit that accrue to local
communities as a result of the establishment of National parks and game
reserves in various parts of Nigeria. According to their findings people derive
economic benefit in terms of income generation from the parks in their
localities. It is not clear how these results could be wholly valid since the
studies also reported inadequacy of infrastructure facilities which are
necessary to produce the kind of results that are required.Also these studies
did not investigate if and how the host communities had benefited in improving
their livelihood activities in farming such as maximizing the use of available
land to avoid search for fresh land (bush fallow) during population growth, use
of improved hybrid seedling, use of herbicides/pesticides, agricultural credit
facilities etc, in order to obtain optimum output from their farming
activities. Also, not much is said on the problem facing the host communities
as a result of the game reserve.
The
study attempts to answer the following research questions:
1.
What are the successes and failures
of the programme?
2.
Has the program been effective in
Yankari game reserve over the years?
1.3 AIMS
AND OBJECTIVES
The aim of the
study is to appraise the activities of the support zone community programme in
the YGR as basis for making strategic recommendations for improvement.
The aim was
achieved through the following objectives
1.
To review the concept of sustainable
management practices of game Reserves.
3.
To ascertain the successes and
failures of the programme in the YGR
4.
To make recommendations for improvement
based on the successes and failures of the programme.
1.4 SCOPE
AND LIMITATIONS
The study is
limited to the appraisal of the support zone community programme in Yankari
Game reserve. In areas of poverty alleviation, improvement in the livelihood of
indigenous people (host communities) and conservation of the
biodiversity in the reserve
area. However, it covers the following villages Yelwa, Duguri, Pali, Bogwas,
Jagudi, Yalo, Dogon Ruwa, Maiari, Tudun Wada, Jada and Mainamaji.
1.5 SIGNIFICANCE
OF THE STUDY
This study would be
of great significance as it would assist in proffering useful suggestions on
how to move the tourism industry to a greater height. Secondly, it would help
the stakeholders in making future budgetary allocation on the development and
wellbeing of the host communities.
Moreover, with the help of this
work policy decision on the development of the tourism industry can be made.
Finally, it would help in proper planning and management that can be viable
source of economic benefit for government, private entrepreneurs and local
communities.
1.6 DEFINITION
OF TERMS
Local Community: Concept
of local community concerns a particular constituted set of social
relationships based on something which the individual have in common usually a
common sense of identity.
Wildlife: All
non-domesticated animals, which live outdoors including mammals, birds,
and fish, which may be hunted as controlled by law.
Conservation: It
has different meaning for different people. For some it implies the exclusion
of humans from protected natural reserves and for others, the protection of
threatened species or habitats in ecosystems that are already occupied or
exploited by human populations (Mortimore, 1998).
Biodiversity: The
variety of different species and genetic variability among individuals
within each species.
Community Based Tourism: This
refers more specifically to tourism activities or enterprises that
involve local communities occur on their lands and are based on their cultural
and natural assets and attractions (Nelson, 2004).
Community Based Ecotourism: Is
community-based tourism which focuses on travel to areas with natural
attractions (rather than, say, urban locales) and which contributes to
environmental conservation and local livelihoods (Nelson, 2004).
Ecotourism: There
is no general definition currently in use. However any conception of it
must involve travel to relatively undisturbed or uncontaminated natural area
with the objective of studying, admiring, and enjoying the natural environment
of that area. An important point is that the person who practices ecotourism
has the opportunity of immersing himself or herself in nature in a way that
most people cannot enjoy in their routine, urban existence. It has also been
suggested by Stephen and John (2002) that it is a responsible travel that
conserves natural environment and sustain the well-being of local people.
Sustainable
Development: Development that meets the needs
of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs (World commission on Environment and Development, WCED,
1987 and Shittu, 1999). Environmental protection and management is central to
sustainable development.
Habitat: An
environment that provides everything: food, water, cover, space and arrangement
wildlife needs to live.
Preservation: Non-use
of resources.
================================================================
Item Type: Project Material | Size: 93 pages | Chapters: 1-5
Format: MS Word | Delivery: Within 30Mins.
================================================================
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.