Eco Hvar

Pesticide chaos: action urgently needed!

Towards the end of 2023, the European Parliament and the European Commission showed that they are not willing or able to protect European citizens from the ill-effects of chemical pesticides. So what needs to be done?

Pesticide chaos: action urgently needed!

It's now up to governments, national and local responsible authorities and above all individual citizens to take action. These are our suggestions to the Croatian and EU authorities.

IT IS VITAL THAT ALL THE RELEVANT MINISTRIES AND NATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SHOULD ACT ACCORDING TO THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE, WHICH IS FUNDAMENTAL TO EUROPEAN UNION LAW and THE HUMAN RIGHT TO A CLEAN, HEALTHY AND SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT ADOPTED BY THE UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 21st 2021

WHAT WE ASK OF HVAR’S LOCAL AUTHORITIES

CHEMICAL PESTICIDES ARE CAUSING UNTOLD DAMAGE ON HVAR, HARMING HUMAN HEALTH, WILDLIFE AND THE ENVIRONMENT. THIS IS ALSO HAVING A BAD IMPACT ON TOURISM. A BIG PART OF THE PROBLEM IS THE PEST CONTROL PROGRAMME, WHICH LOCAL AUTHORITIES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR, FOLLOWING THE DIRECTIVES FROM THE NATIONAL AND REGIONAL HEALTH INSTITUTES. THE ROUTINE COSTS ARE COVERED FROM LOCAL REVENUES. OVER MANY YEARS, THE ACTIONS HAVE PROVED UNSATISFACTORY IN PRACTICE.

Therefore we recommend:

1. environmentally friendly methods of agriculture and pest suppression should be encouraged, chemical pesticide use should be discouraged;

2. ecological measures for pest suppression should be used instead of relying solely on chemical pesticides;

3. there should be more public education about the adverse effects of pesticides and the better, environmentally-friendly methods for protecting people and the environment from unwanted pests such as mosquitoes and unwanted plants / weeds;

4. the Health Institute’s two documents (the Programme and Implementation Plan for Pest Suppression) should cover the whole of Hvar island with the cost shared between each of the four local authorities, instead of each paying separately for the same information;

5. monitoring of the target pests should be the compulsory basis of all pest suppression measures, and the results of the monitoring before and after such measures should be recorded and made available to the public;

6. blanket fogging actions should be avoided because of the risks to bees and people, especially people with certain health problems;

7. if blanket fogging is planned, the exact route and timing should be publicized;

8. biocides which have been banned by the EU as ‘plant protection products’ because they are proven to be dangerous for the environment, especially for aquatic organisms and bees, should not be used for insect suppression outdoors, especially not in blanket fogging actions;

9. all pest suppression actions, especially fogging, should be carried out strictly according to the relevant legal regulations and by-laws;

10. the public should be informed in advance in Croatian and other languages of planned insect suppression measures (larvicide and adulticide), using not only public announcements but also the same channels (post and email) used by local authorities to send out bills;

11. if biocides are to be used, they should be named, together with their possible adverse effects;

12. beekeeping organizations at national and local level should be informed in advance of all insect suppression actions everywhere in Croatia;

13. raticides should only be distributed on request, and a record should be kept of the recipients;

14. raticides should be used within secure applicators with access just big enough for mice or rats, to protect people, especially children, and other non-target animals, especially pets;

15. the raticide applicators should be collected after use by the company which distributes them;

16. all chemical pesticide packaging should be disposed of responsibly at designated collection points.

WHAT WE ASK OF THE CROATIAN NATIONAL AND REGIONAL HEALTH INSTITUTES

THE NATIONAL AND REGIONAL HEALTH INSTITUTES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF MEASURES RELATING TO THE LAW CONCERNING PROTECTING THE POPULATION AGAINST TRANSMISSIBLE DISEASES (NN 143/21 čl.5, law in Croatian). MEASURES LAID DOWN BY THE HEALTH INSTITUTES ARE PROVING UNSATISFACTORY IN PRACTICE. THEREFORE WE RECOMMEND:

1. risk assessments should be the basis for instigating preventive measures such as pest suppression, in particular the actual risk of specific diseases, as well as the risk of collateral damage if chemical pesticides are to be used;

2. all pest suppression actions, especially fogging, should be carried out strictly according to the relevant legal regulations and by-laws:

3. monitoring of target pests should be the compulsory basis of all pest suppression measures, and the results of the monitoring before and after such measures should be recorded and made available to the public;

4. ecological measures for pest suppression should be used instead of relying solely on chemical pesticides;

5. biocides which have been banned by the EU as ‘plant protection products’ because they are proven to be dangerous for the environment, especially for aquatic organisms and bees, should not be used for insect suppression, especially not in fogging actions;

6. the public should be informed in advance of planned insect suppression measures, using public announcements and also the same channels used by local authorities to send out bills;

7. the biocides to be used should be named, together with their possible adverse effects;

8. beekeeping organizations at national and local level should be informed in advance of all insect suppression actions everywhere in Croatia;

9. blanket fogging actions should be avoided because of the risks to bees and people, especially people with certain health problems;

10. if blanket fogging is planned, the exact route and timing should be publicized;

11. if people complain about mosquitoes, they should be given educational leaflets about how to protect themselves and their environment, also about the collateral damage caused by chemical pesticides;

12. raticides should only be distributed on request, and a record should be kept of the recipients;

13. raticides should be used within secure containers, which should be collected after use;

14. all pest suppression actions should be closely controlled by the Health Institutes;

15. the Health Institute reports following the actions should not just rubber-stamp information from the implementing companies, but should be based on observation on the ground.

WHAT WE ASK OF THE CROATIAN MINISTRY OF HEALTH

IN RELATION TO THE LAW CONCERNING PROTECTING THE POPULATION AGAINST TRANSMISSIBLE DISEASES (NN 143/21 law in Croatian) WE RECOMMEND:

1. consistent coordination between the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Agriculture, in particular in order to avoid using biocides for insect suppression which have been banned by the EU as ‘plant protection products’ because they are proven to be dangerous for the environment, especially for aquatic organisms and bees;

2. the list of approved biocides on the Ministry website should be a detailed database which is updated regularly, like the Phytosanitary Information System list of approved pesticides on the Ministry of Agriculture website;

3. that all insect suppression actions, especially fogging, should be carried out strictly according to the relevant legal regulations and by-laws;

4. that the results of monitoring should be the sole basis of any and all actions for suppressing mosquitoes;

5. that publicizing all the possible adverse effects of biocidal products should be made compulsory;

6. that testing for the presence of pesticides should be an integral part of all systematic preventive health check-ups.

WHAT WE ASK OF THE CROATIAN MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE

We recommend:

1. the Ministry should press for risks to bees to be added to the primary hazard warnings for pesticide labelling in the listings issued by the United Nations and the European Union;

2. all information and recommendations regarding chemical 'plant protection products' should always list in full the possible adverse effects and collateral damage they can cause:

3. possible adverse effects of so-called 'plant protection products' should be the first part of the information given on the Phytosanitary Information System (FIS) listing of approved substances and products;

4. organic agricultural methods should be given priority in the Ministry's regular expert technical advice bulletins for farmers;

5. agriculture based on alternative methods other than chemical pesticide and fertilizer use should be a major focus in the education of agronomists;

6. organic agricultural methods should be prioritized and promoted with a raft of incentives, as the best way to preserve Croatia's natural environment and improve public health;

7. chemical pesticides should not be the primary recommendation issued by the Ministry for dealing with pests or other hazards in agriculture;

8. controlled disposal of chemical pesticide packaging and obsolete pesticides should be made more publicly accessible in all parts of Croatia and should be subject to stricter monitoring;

9. the Ministry of Agriculture in collaboration with the Ministry of Health should initiate and support more research into the possible ill-effects of combinations of chemical pesticides on the environment and human health;

10. chemical substances used at each stage of agricultural production, from seed to finished produce, should be logged and listed when the produce is placed on the market, in accordance with the European Commission's stated safety aims;

11. the Ministry should help to ensure that any advertisements for pesticide products in any media should conform to the rules laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008, Title VII, Article 48:

12. the Ministry of Agriculture in collaboration with the Ministry of Health should press the European Commission to end the distinction between 'plant protection products' and biocides, in order to put an end to the unacceptable use of biocides for general outdoor insect suppression which have been banned by the EU as ‘plant protection products’ because they are too dangerous for the environment, especially for aquatic organisms and bees.

We recommend that the following factors should be taken into account, honoured and enacted:

1. Pesticide authorizations should be based on independent research published in peer-reviewed journals, not just on industry-funded unpublished studies as at present;

2. substances already in use which have been proven to be harmful to humans, animals, wildlife and/or the environment should be banned without delay, i.e. withdrawn from the market with immediate effect without any grace period for using up stocks, and any stocks held by end-users should be collected for appropriate safe disposal;

3. risks to bees should be included among the primary hazard warnings in pesticide labelling;

4. all the possible adverse effects of individual pesticides should be clearly stated and prioritized over suggested uses for the substances, a) on the pesticide product packaging, b) in any related product advertising, c) on treated end-products to include every part of the production process (eg from seed treatments to treated packaging);

5. the distinction between biocides and ‘plant protection products’ should be abolished: at the least substances banned or limited in one category should also be banned or limited in the other;

6. the policy of allowing ‘candidates for substitution’ to continue to be used despite having been shown to be harmful should be abolished and replaced by an immediate ban;

7. re-evaluation of authorized pesticide substances should begin long enough before the expiry date to be completed in time: the practice of granting automatic extensions if the Member State rapporteur fails to conclude the process by the due date should be abolished: substances should be banned until the re-evaluation processes are concluded;

8. the will of EU citizens regarding pesticide use as expressed in European Citizen Initiatives such as ‘Ban glyphosate and protect people and the environment from toxic pesticides’ (2017) and ‘Save Bees and Farmers’ (2023) should be taken into account, fully respected and enacted;

9. regular testing of people and the environment for chemical pesticide contamination in Member States, together with publication of the results, should be a mandatory component underpinning the award and retraction of authorizations.

WHAT WE ASK OF THE EUROPEAN DECISION-MAKERS

We recommend that the following factors should be taken into account, honoured and enacted:

1. Pesticide authorizations should be based on independent research published in peer-reviewed journals, not just on industry-funded unpublished studies as at present;

2. substances already in use which have been proven to be harmful to humans, animals, wildlife and/or the environment should be banned without delay, i.e. withdrawn from the market with immediate effect without any grace period for using up stocks, and any stocks held by end-users should be collected for appropriate safe disposal;

3. risks to bees should be included among the primary hazard warnings in pesticide labelling;

4. all the possible adverse effects of individual pesticides should be clearly stated and prioritized over suggested uses for the substances, a) on the pesticide product packaging, b) in any related product advertising, c) on treated end-products to include every part of the production process (eg from seed treatments to treated packaging);

5. the distinction between biocides and ‘plant protection products’ should be abolished: at the least substances banned or limited in one category should also be banned or limited in the other;

6. the policy of allowing ‘candidates for substitution’ to continue to be used despite having been shown to be harmful should be abolished and replaced by an immediate ban;

7. re-evaluation of authorized pesticide substances should begin long enough before the expiry date to be completed in time: the practice of granting automatic extensions if the Member State rapporteur fails to conclude the process by the due date should be abolished: substances should be banned until the re-evaluation processes are concluded;

8. the will of EU citizens regarding pesticide use as expressed in European Citizen Initiatives such as ‘Ban glyphosate and protect people and the environment from toxic pesticides’ (2017) and ‘Save Bees and Farmers’ (2023) should be taken into account, fully respected and enacted;

9. regular testing of people and the environment for chemical pesticide contamination in Member States, together with publication of the results, should be a mandatory component underpinning the award and retraction of authorizations.

November 2023.

back to top
You are here: Home poisons be aware Pesticide chaos: action urgently needed!

Eco Environment News feeds

  • Coal use to reach new peak – and remain at near-record levels for years

    Spike in fossil fuel use a result of global gas crisis triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine

    The world’s coal use is expected to reach a fresh high of 8.7bn tonnes this year, and remain at near-record levels for years as a result of a global gas crisis triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

    There has been record production and trade of coal and power generation from coal since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine inflated global gas market prices, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

    Continue reading...

  • Pollution exposure linked to mental health hospital admissions, says study

    Researchers from St Andrews found rise in nitrogen dioxide exposure associated with higher admissions

    Exposure to air pollution is linked to an increased risk of hospital admission for mental illness, according to the most comprehensive study of its kind.

    The research, involving more than 200,000 people in Scotland, found an increase in exposure to nitrogen dioxide in particular was associated with a higher number of people being admitted to hospital for behaviour disorders and mental illnesses.

    Continue reading...

  • Pakistan and Bahamas join push for global pact to phase out fossil fuels

    Climate-vulnerable pair add weight to proposed treaty seeking transition from coal, oil and gas in equitable way

    Pakistan and the Bahamas have joined a growing bloc of climate-vulnerable countries seeking to broker a global pact to phase out fossil fuels in an equitable way, the Guardian can reveal.

    The Bahamas is the 15th nation to fully endorse the proposed fossil-fuel non-proliferation treaty, which would provide a binding global roadmap to explicitly halt expansion of coal, oil and gas in a fair way – with wealthy nations responsible for the highest emissions transitioning first and fastest.

    Continue reading...

  • ‘Ridiculous’ ban on exotic animal skins at London fashion week criticised by experts

    Trade can help protect species – and real skins are often more sustainable than synthetic alternatives, say conservationists

    Conservation experts have criticised a decision by London fashion week to ban exotic animal skins from its 2025 shows as “ridiculous”, warning that it is ill-informed and could harm the protection of many snakes, crocodiles and reptile species.

    Last month, the British Fashion Council’s deputy director for policy and engagement, David Leigh-Pemberton, told parliament that next year’s fashion shows would prohibit the use of skins from alligators, snakes and other animals. In a statement, the council said the ban was part of a wider range of standards to promote sustainable practices in the fashion industry.

    Continue reading...

  • ‘Dark day for New Zealand’: outcry as bill to fast-track controversial mining projects is approved

    Critics and opposition parties vow to oppose major projects they fear could damage the environment

    A new law that could see controversial mining and infrastructure projects fast-tracked for approval across New Zealand has sparked protests in parliament and vows from critics and opposition parties to stop proposals that they fear will wreak havoc on the environment.

    The coalition government’s Fast-Track Approvals legislation passed into law on Tuesday, despite thousands of public submissions opposing it.

    Continue reading...

  • Country diary: A handful of summer on a frosty day | Nic Wilson

    Southill, Bedfordshire: On a ringing session of seed-eating farmland birds, I see up close the subtle beauty of the yellowhammer

    We’ve just released a second blitz of tits, when we notice that the mist net along the field edge has caught a sunbeam. The cold orange light that spilt over the horizon at dawn and pooled above the fields is long gone; the teasel, knapweed and bristly oxtongue seedheads are no longer haloed with hoarfrost. Instead, they’re drawing ground-feeding birds down to forage among the wild grasses and flowers.

    The fallow fields around us are part of an ambitious project to restore ecosystems across more than 1,500 acres of the Southill Estate. The plan includes creating new ponds, allowing land to revert to native scrub, and planting woodland for coppicing. Today’s visit is one of a series of winter ringing sessions to monitor the birds flocking to the fields. I’ve tagged along with my dad (a licensed ringer) and Suzy (a trainee). Their primary aim is to record seed-eating farmland species, many of which – such as greenfinch and corn bunting – are on the UK red list. And we’re in luck. Linnets lurk in the scrub and tinklings of goldfinches pass overhead.

    Continue reading...

  • ‘If 1.5m Germans have them there must be something in it’: how balcony solar is taking off

    Balcony solar panels can save 30% on a typical household’s electricity bill and, with vertical surface area in cities larger than roof space, the appeal is clear

    They are easy to install, and knock chunks off electricity bills. It may not be Romeo and Juliet, but Spain’s balcony scene is heating up as the country embraces what has hitherto been a mainly German love affair with DIY plug-in solar panels.

    Panels have already been installed on about 1.5m German balconies, where they are so popular the term Balkonkraftwerk (balcony power plant) has been coined.

    Continue reading...

  • Can everyone eat for the planet? I shopped at Dollar Store for a week to find out

    In 2019, scientists published a climate-friendly food plan. I’ve long wondered: could it work for most Americans?

    As a fossil fuels and climate reporter, most of my journalism focuses on the need to radically overhaul the energy system. But the food sector also needs a makeover, as it creates between a quarter and a third of all greenhouse gas emissions.

    When scientists came up with a new climate-friendly food plan in 2019 and published their findings in the medical journal the Lancet, I read with interest. The guidelines called for more vegetables, legumes and whole grains, which seemed doable to me. The authors even allowed for meat and dairy consumption, albeit in small quantities. Both are major drivers of the climate crisis: the United Nations estimates that meat and dairy produce more than 11% of all global greenhouse gas emissions, and some experts put the figure at up to 19.6%.

    Continue reading...

  • Bamboo bonanza: how a village in India used its forest to go from poverty to prosperity

    Restoring age-old land rights has enabled 300 villagers to build a profitable business and halt the exodus to the city

    It’s late morning and the sound of axes clacking against wood echoes through Pachgaon’s bamboo forest in the central Indian state of Maharashtra. A huge depot, larger than a cricket stadium,is full of bamboo branches, stacked neatly by size in different sections. Nearby is a small, windowless office painted in the colours of the forest – a record-keeper of Pachgaon’s turnaround from abject poverty to relative wealth in just over a decade.

    Pachgaon’s rags-to-riches story follows the implementation of two longstanding Indian laws that restored to the local adivasi (tribal) community its traditional ownership rights over the forest, which they lost to rulers and colonisers several generations ago.

    Continue reading...

  • Can Colombia’s ‘crazy’ cattle ranchers make beef an eco-friendly choice?

    By rejecting traditional grazing and maintaining trees and wildlife habitats alongside pasture, farmers are turning their land carbon positive. But will it be enough?

    On a humid dawn in Colombia’s livestock capital, Michael Robbin rides across one of his farm’s pastures, where tall green stalks brush his horse’s belly. When he bought the land outside Montería in 2020 he divided it into 125 smaller fields. His neighbours called him crazy at first.

    “That’s not how it’s done in this area,” he acknowledges. “Everybody was looking at me like I was from outer space.”

    Continue reading...

Eco Health News feeds

Eco Nature News feeds

  • 2024 in review: Amid hottest year on record, nature takes center stage

    As 2024 comes to a close, global temperatures are at an all-time high — topping the previous hottest-year on record: 2023. Yet amid this backdrop, research consistently shows nature is a powerful climate ally.

  • Meet the scientist helping women find their voice

    “Invest in one woman, and that ripples out to her family, her community and beyond. It changes people’s lives.”

  • Upon reflection: Study gauges grasslands’ climate-fighting powers

    In southern Africa, grasses can beat the heat better than trees, according to Conservation International research.

  • Doctors without biodiversity? New plan prescribes actions linking human health, nature

    An unheralded breakthrough at the recent UN biodiversity conference highlights the often-overlooked connection between our health and the planet’s, a Conservation International expert says.

  • In climate fight, ‘nature vs tech’ a false debate

    A recent study on climate solutions downplays nature’s potential, two Conservation International experts say.

  • New study reveals seaweed’s hidden climate benefits

    A new study found that seaweed forests may play a bigger role in fighting climate change than previously thought — absorbing as much climate-warming carbon as the Amazon rainforest. But not all seaweed forests are created equal.

  • A gift guide for the conscious consumer

    For the conscientious consumer, finding the perfect present can be a challenge. Not to worry, Conservation International's 2024 gift guide has you covered.

  • Climate change charts a dangerous course for the world's largest fish

    A Conservation International scientist shares what can be done to prevent an ‘outright alarming’ future for whale sharks.

  • How cool are forests? A hot new study has answers

    A new Conservation International study measures the cooling effects of forests against extreme heat — with eye-opening results.

  • In Kenya, global crisis sparked ‘a new way to do conservation’

    EDITOR’S NOTE:Few places on Earth are as evocative — or as imperiled — as the vast grasslands of sub-Saharan Africa. In a new Conservation News series, “Saving the Savanna,” we look at how communities are working to protect these places — and the wildlife within.

    MARA NORTH CONSERVANCY, Kenya — Under a fading sun, Kenya’s Maasai Mara came alive.

    A land cruiser passed through a wide-open savanna, where a pride of lions stirred from a day-long slumber. Steps away, elephants treaded single-file through tall grass, while giraffes peered from a thicket of acacia trees. But just over a ridge was a sight most safari-goers might not expect — dozens of herders guiding cattle into an enclosure for the night. The herders were swathed in vibrant red blankets carrying long wooden staffs, their beaded jewelry jingling softly.

    Maasai Mara is the northern reach of a massive, connected ecosystem beginning in neighboring Tanzania’s world-famous Serengeti. Unlike most parks, typically managed by local or national governments, these lands are protected under a wildlife conservancy — a unique type of protected area managed directly by the Indigenous People who own the land.

    Conservancies allow the people that live near national parks or reserves to combine their properties into large, protected areas for wildlife. These landowners can then earn income by leasing that land for safaris, lodges and other tourism activities. Communities in Maasai Mara have created 24 conservancies, protecting a total of 180,000 hectares (450,000 acres) — effectively doubling the total area of habitat for wildlife in the region, beyond the boundaries of nearby Maasai Mara National Reserve.

    “It's significant income for families that have few other economic opportunities — around US$ 350 a month on average for a family. In Kenya, that's the equivalent of a graduate salary coming out of university,” said Elijah Toirai, Conservation International’s community engagement lead in Africa.

    © Jon McCormack

    Lions tussle in the tall grass of Mara North Conservancy.

    But elsewhere in Africa, the conservancy model has remained far out of reach.

    “Conservancies have the potential to lift pastoral communities out of poverty in many African landscapes. But starting a conservancy requires significant funding — money they simply don't have,” said Bjorn Stauch, senior vice president of Conservation International’s nature finance division.

    Upfront costs can include mapping out land boundaries, removing fences that prevent the movement of wildlife, eradicating invasive species that crowd out native grasses, creating firebreaks to prevent runaway wildfires, as well building infrastructure like roads and drainage ditches that are essential for successful safaris. Once established, conservancies need to develop management plans that guide their specified land use for the future.

    Conservation International wanted to find a way for local communities to start conservancies and strengthen existing ones. Over the next three years, the organization aims to invest millions of dollars in new and emerging conservancies across Southern and East Africa. The funds will be provided as loans, which the conservancies will repay through tourism leases. This financing will jumpstart new conservancies and reinforce those already in place. The approach builds on an initial model that has proven highly effective and popular with local communities.

    “We’re always looking for creative new ways to pay for conservation efforts that last,” Stauch said. “This is really a durable financing mechanism that puts money directly in the pockets of those who live closest to nature — giving them a leg up. And it’s been proven to work in the direst circumstances imaginable.”

    © Will McCarry

    Elijah Toirai explains current conservancy boundaries and potential areas for expansion.

    Creativity from crisis

    In 2020, the entire conservancy model almost collapsed overnight.

    “No one thought that the world could stop in 24 hours,” said Kelvin Alie, senior vice president and acting Africa lead for Conservation International. “But then came the pandemic, and suddenly Kenya is shutting its doors on March 23, 2020. And in the Mara, this steady and very well-rounded model based on safari tourism came to a screeching halt.”

    Tourism operators, who generate the income to pay landowners' leases, found themselves without revenue. Communities faced a difficult choice: replace the lost income by fencing off their lands for grazing, converting it to agriculture, or selling to developers — each of which would have had drastic consequences for the Maasai Mara’s people and wildlife.

    © Will Turner

    A black-backed jackal hunts for prey.

    “But then the nature finance team at Conservation International — these crazy guys — came up with a wild idea,” Alie said. “In just six months they put this entirely new funding model together: loaning money at an affordable rate to the conservancies so that they can continue to pay staff and wildlife rangers.”

    Conservation International and the Maasai Mara Wildlife Conservancies Association launched the African Conservancies Fund — a rescue package to offset lost revenues for approximately 3,000 people in the area who rely on tourism income. Between December 2020 and December 2022, the fund provided more than US$ 2 million in affordable loans to four conservancies managing 70,000 hectares (170,000 acres).

    The loans enabled families in the Maasai Mara to continue receiving income from their lands to pay for health care, home repairs, school fees and more. And because tourism revenues — not government funding — support wildlife protection in conservancies, this replacement funding ensured wildlife patrols continued normally, with rangers working full time.

    Born out of this emergency, we discovered a new way to do conservation.

    Elijah Toirai

    “The catastrophe of COVID-19 was total for us,” said Benard Leperes, a landowner with Mara North Conservancy and a conservation expert at Maasai Mara Wildlife Conservancies Association. “Without Conservation International and the fund, this landscape would have not been secured; the conservancies would have disintegrated as people were forced to sell their land to convert it to agriculture.”

    But it was communities themselves that proved the model might be replicable after the pandemic ended.

    “The conservancies had until 2023 before the first payment was due,” Toirai said. “But as soon as tourism resumed in mid-2021, the communities started paying back the loans. Today, the loans are being repaid way ahead of schedule.”

    “Born out of this emergency, we discovered a new way to do conservation.”

    A new era for conservation

    The high plateaus overlooking the Maasai Mara are home to the very last giant pangolins in Kenya.

    These mammals, armored with distinctive interlocking scales, are highly endangered because of illegal wildlife trade. In Kenya, threats from poaching, deforestation and electric fences meant to deter elephants from crops have caused the species to nearly disappear. Today, scientists believe there could be as few as 30 giant pangolins left in Kenya.

    Conservancies could be crucial to bringing them back. Conservation International has identified opportunities to provide transformative funding for conservancies in this area — a sprawling grassland northwest of Maasai Mara that is the very last pangolin stronghold in the country. The fund will help communities better protect an existing 10,000-hectare (25,000-acre) conservancy and bring an additional 5,000 hectares under protection. It provides a safety net, ensuring a steady income for the communities as the work of expanding the conservancy begins. With a stable income, communities can start work to restore the savanna and remove electric fences that have killed pangolins. And as wildlife move back into the ecosystem, the grasslands will begin to recover.

    In addition to expanding conservancies around Maasai Mara, Conservation International has identified other critical ecosystems where community conservancies can help lift people out poverty, while providing new habitats for wildlife. Conservation International has ambitious plans to restore a critical and highly degraded savanna between Amboseli and Tsavo National Parks in southern Kenya, as well as a swath of savanna outside Kruger National Park in South Africa.

    © Emily Nyrop

    A lone acacia tree in a sea of grass.

    Elephants, fire, Maasai and cattle

    Many of the new and emerging community conservancies have been carefully chosen as key wildlife corridors that would be threatened by overgrazing livestock.

    When the first Maasai Mara conservancies were established in 2009, cattle grazing was prohibited within their boundaries. When poorly managed, cattle can wear grasses down to their roots, triggering topsoil erosion and the loss of nutrients, microbes and biodiversity vital for soil health. It was also believed that tourists would be put off by the sight of livestock mingling with wildlife.

    © Emily Nyrop

    Cattle are closely monitored in the Maasai Mara to prevent overgrazing.

    However, over the years, landowners objected, lamenting the loss of cultural ties to cattle and herding. “That was when we changed tactics,” said Raphael Kereto, the grazing manager for Mara North Conservancy.

    Beginning in 2018, Mara North and other conservancies in the region started adopting livestock grazing practices to restore the savanna. Landowners agreed to periodically move livestock between different pastures, allowing grazed lands to recover and regrow,  mimicking the traditional methods pastoralists have used on these lands for hundreds, if not thousands, of years.

    “Initially, there was a worry that maybe herbivores and other wildlife will run away from cattle,” said Kereto. “But we have seen the exact opposite — the wildlife all follow where cattle are grazing. This is because we have a lot of grass, and all the animals follow where there is a lot of grass. We even saw a cheetah with a cub that spent all her time rotating with wildlife.”

    “It's amazing — when we move cattle, the cheetah comes with it.”

    The loans issued by the fund — now called the African Conservancies Facility — will enhance rotational grazing systems, which are practiced differently in each conservancy, by incorporating best practices and lessons from the organization’s Herding for Health program in southern Africa.

    © Will Turner

    An elephant herd stares down a pack of hyenas.

    For landowners like Dickson Kaelo, who was among the pioneers to propose the conservancy model in Kenya, the return of cattle to the ecosystem has restored a natural order.

    “I always wanted to understand how it was that there was so much more wildlife in the conservancies than in Maasai Mara National Reserve,” said Kaelo, who heads the Kenya Wildlife Conservancy Association, based in Nairobi.

    “I went to the communities and asked them this question. They told me savannas were created by elephants, fire and Maasai and cattle, and excluding any one of those is not good for the health of the system. So, I believe in the conservancies — I know that every single month, people go to the bank and they have some money, they haven't lost their culture because they still are cattle keepers, and the land is much healthier, with more grass, more wildlife, and the trees have not been cut.

    “For me, it’s something really beautiful.”

    Further reading:

    Will McCarry is the content director at Conservation International. Want to read more stories like this? Sign up for email updates. Also, please consider supporting our critical work.

Copyright © 2024 Eco Hvar. All Rights Reserved. Developed by Orion Informatika.