HWCM - Ministry of Environment and Tourism

National Workshop on Human Wildlife Conflict Management 2005
6
Human Animal Conservancy Compensation
Scheme (HACCS) and Human Animal
Conservancy Self-Insurance Scheme (HACSIS)
Garth Owen-Smith, IRDNC
Why do conservancies need HACCS
• Improved conservation has led to increased wildlife;
• Therefore increased human-wildlife conflict;
• Need to balance individual losses vs. collective benefits.
Unless addressed, local farmers’ support for conservation at risk.
Why have other compensation schemes failed
Ownership of scheme has not been devolved to users and beneficiaries:
• costs have been prohibitive;
• difficult to verify claims;
• bureaucracy hinders process.
Why HACCS can work
Conservancies:
• have their own funds;
• are recognised social units with defined membership;
• have local knowledge to make conditions that work for them;
• have capacity to verify and process claims;
• can be held accountable by members if scheme is mismanaged.
What HACCS is NOT
• Not ‘the solution’ to all human-wildlife conflict;
• Cannot cover the full cost of losses;
• Cannot address all losses to all wildlife - only those killed by high value species.
Objectives of HACCS pilot
• Develop and test practical locally-based verifications and processes;
• Promote better stock management;
• Get more accurate data on number of incidents and their costs;
• Explore mechanisms for funding.
Pilot participants
Four conservancies funded by donor:
8 Ehirovipuka and Omatendeka in Kunene;
8 Mayuni and Kwandu in Caprivi;
8 Torra – self funded.
Selection Criteria
• Track record in good monitoring;
• High occurrence of wildlife conflict.
40