Protecting Wild Dogs

In order to save wild dogs in Botswana, it was suggested that it might be better to keep the cattle away from the wild dog refuge. This suggestion was refused with the explanation that the wildlife belongs to the government, and livestock belongs to the farmer, if it gets into farmer’s mind that wildlife is more important than the cattle, then there will be trouble, as according to Botswana culture, one cannot live without cattle.

It was later decided to live with wildlife on one side of a buffalo fence and livestock on the other side.

Environmentatl critics say that the larger threat to Okavango and its wild dog is commercial cattle ranching. This industry is highly supported by European unions. In order to get cattle disease free, they fenced the area cutting off many ancient animal migration routes. Due to this, in 1983, 50,000 wild beast were found dead near the fence, which prevented them from reaching water.

According to reports from the university of Botswana, the villagers are not getting any benefit from the European ranching program rather only a small number of people are getting economic gain out of it.

It was said that it would be better to preserve the existing wildlife instead of recreating it. In order to motivate people the government carried out a movement for educating and motivating people to save wildlife. It was said that one does not realize its value until its gone and then it takes enormous amount of time to reestablish it. The government faced great difficulties during the movement. Later a few farmers realized their mistakes and stopped killing predators. They used bars to cover their cattle. As time passed, the movement proved to be fruitful and the predator population got stable.

Go To Page: 1