Africa's National Parks Are Not Saving Wildlife

For decades the formula for protecting wildlife has been constant. Conservationists have held strong to the idea that in order to protect nature, one must enclose it and protect it from detrimental outside influences. This model has been seen throughout the United States in various national parks and more importantly, in the United States this model has flourished. After President Roosevelt's visit to Africa in the late 19th century, it was concluded that the wild, natural setting of Africa also needed to be preserved. In order to do so, it was believed that the tried and true model of wildlife protection from the United States should be implemented in the jungles and planes of Africa as well. These parks were created, numbering in the hundreds and it was believed with this effort to exclude human intervention, these lands, and the animals inhabiting them, would thrive. The only problem with this assumption is that it has been proven to be untrue. Despite great efforts to protect wildlife in Africa, species have been lost in alarming numbers. By looking at the history of the African continent, it may be possible to explain the reasons why the United States model of wildlife conservation has been highly unsuccessful in African countries.

Upon Theodore Roosevelt's visit to the continent of Africa, it was unknown that the country had just experienced bouts of crippling disease. During the 19th century, a great deal of Africa was affected by the rinderpest pandemic. This disease, originating from central Asia, affected various forms of cattle and livestock and spread at alarming rates through the country, despite all efforts to hinder it. Though humans were not affected by the disease, an important part of their economies were. The loss of cattle in Africa also led to the increased spread of the tsetse disease that is responsible for epidemics of, what is known as, sleeping sickness that still affects African populations to this day. The spread of the tsetse fly led to further decreases in livestock and large decreases in human populations as well. Another subtle issue that this pandemic caused was it led to an incorrect perception of the African continent. In the eyes of Roosevelt and other western visitors of Africa, it appeared that the wildlife of Africa was once void of livestock, even though in the centuries prior to the rinderpest disease, livestock and subsequently human populations of livestock herders freely existed across the continent. This subtle issue caused by the rinderpest pandemic has greatly impacted the current situation in Africa's national parks.

The misconception that human and livestock populations did not exist in the wildlife of Africa is the key to African national park failure today. The model of isolation championed in the United States does not fit the lifestyle that Africa flourished in prior to the spread of rinderpest disease. Historically, Africa has existed with the intermingling of humans, livestock and wildlife. Unlike in the United States, where human presence would be a destructive force, Africa has been built on cooperation and harmony. This fact is not only true for the vast planes of Africa, but the rainforests as well. It is for this reason that many environmentalists theorize the United States model of wildlife protection is the worst possible fit for Africa. Instead of imposing an unfit model on Africa's national parks, they suggest that a system should be tailored to the specific needs of African wildlife. There have been some cited examples of successful contemporary systems where there is a combination of rural communities and wildlife. Through the implication of a system based on integration instead of exclusion, it may be possible for a truly effective wildlife preservation to exist in Africa.