**4. Ranking of the threats to wildlife dispersal corridors in KAZA TFCA**

A qualitative ranking of the threats to WDCs on a scale of 0–5 is shown in **Table 1**, where a score of 0 = no threat, 1 = negligible threat, 2 = low threat, 3 = moderate threat, 4 = high threat and 5 severe threat. Based on ranking of the aggregate threat scores, the most threatened WDCs, requiring multiple strategies and concerted effort to mitigate the threats, are the Simalaha (Chobe National Park, Kafue ecosystem) and Chobe-Zambezi floodplain/Namibia-Sioma Ngwezi-Luengue-Luiana NPs (**Figure 2**).


**Table 1.** Summary of key threats to the WDCs in the KAZA TFCA.

The anthropogenic threats discussed above fragment wildlife habitats and constrain free transboundary movement of wildlife. The most affected species in this regard is the African elephant, whose 65% of the total population of approximately 199,031 is concentrated in the Botswana component of the KAZA TFCA, primarily due to better law enforcement by the government of Botswana, which uses the military to protect the country's wildlife resources, and the human population is generally low, enabling the elephants to roam quite freely without significant conflicts with the human socioeconomic interests.

stochasticity (e.g. weather, species interactions/intra- and interspecific competition), phenology of the forage species, social systems and climate variability. These natural systems should

Integration of Ecological and Socioeconomic Factors in Securing Wildlife Dispersal Corridors...

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.70443

191

In view of the high incidents of poaching, especially of high-value wild animals, such as elephant for their ivory, and offtake of hardwood timber, joint law enforcement operations in the

(i) Waiving restrictions of the free movement of law enforcement personnel, weapons and vehicles used in pursuit of poachers and contraband of wildlife trophies and timber

(ii) Harmonising the penalties for all wildlife offences, including mandatory minimum penalties for poaching and illegal trafficking of wildlife, wildlife trophies and timber.

(iii) Ensuring the KAZA TFCA partner countries' wildlife legislation adequately covers all key issues of wildlife crime and trafficking including the classification of key offences

(iv) Training of magistrates to ensure that they are well versed in the relevant legislation and understand the effect of wildlife crime on the economies of the KAZA TFCA part-

(v) Cooperating in transboundary pursuit of poachers and waiving restrictions in pursuing poachers beyond the international boundaries to ensure effective apprehension of

(vi) Waiving restrictions for repatriation of exhibits from country of seizure to the country

(viii) Harmonising law enforcement in-service training, e.g. intelligence gathering and sharing.

(ix) Establishing joint database on poachers in order to identify and appropriately punish

(xi) Standardising the incentives for the law enforcement personnel, such as field rations

(xii) Standardising monitoring of law enforcement effectiveness through application of the

(xiii) Standardising Law Enforcement Strategies, specifically focused on, among others: capacity building for protection of key wildlife populations; wildlife crime investigation, evidence collection, the use of legal tools, prosecuting procedures and identi-

(vii) Establishing functional transboundary radio communication networks.

(x) Standardising the calibre of weapons used for law enforcement.

Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool (SMART).

Penalties prescribed should be appropriate and sufficient to deter reoffending.

be re-established by abating threats to the wildlife species and their habitats, through:

*5.1.1. Strengthening transboundary law enforcement to effectively reduce poaching and illegal* 

KAZA TFCA should be a priority, focused on, among other, tactics:

syndicates in the KAZA TFCA region.

as serious crime.

ner countries.

of prosecution.

repeated offenders.

and bonuses.

transboundary poachers.

*offtake of timber*

The presence of large elephant population in the Botswana component of KAZA TFCA is however ecologically of great concern, more especially as most of them are concentrated in the Chobe National Park, resulting in local densities of about four animals per km<sup>2</sup> especially in the riverfront of this park. Since elephants employ strategies such as bark stripping, breaking major branches and uprooting trees and shrubs when browsing [10, 11], there is concern that at high densities elephants will negatively affect plant community structure, function and species richness [12, 13].

High numbers of elephants in the savannah ecosystems, such as those common in Botswana, have been implicated in the mortality of trees due to intensive forage and fire [14], reduction of seedling recruitment and promotion of grass production where trees are removed, as well as altering vegetation structure and nutrient cycling [15-17]. The disappearance of *Acacia* woodlands in the Chobe National Park, Botswana, is suspected to be due to the elephants' pressure in conjunction with other species, such as impala (*Aepyceros melampus*), which may prevent woodland regeneration and growth of seedlings due to foraging.

In view of the high concentration of elephants in Botswana, one of the ecological benefits of the KAZA TFCA is the re-establishment of the seasonal migration routes of the elephant to relinquish pressure in Botswana, alongside the other wide-ranging wildlife species (e.g. zebra, wildebeest, buffalo, etc.). The strategies discussed in the ensuing sections of this chapter are aimed at mitigating the anthropogenic threats to restore the ecological processes in the KAZA TFCA and enhance the socioeconomic well-being of the local communities who bear the opportunity cost of interacting with wildlife in this TFCA.
