Human-Wildlife Conflict
Today, we interrupt the Midlands series to look at a topical issue which is currently making headlines.
Many people, me included, immediately think of elephants trampling villagers, man-eating lions, and other dramatic tragedies when they hear the term human-wildlife conflict. Those headline-grabbing incidents certainly occur, but they tell only part of the story.
In reality, human-wildlife conflict is far broader and far more complex. It includes elephants destroying crops, predators killing livestock, baboons raiding homes, hippos attacking fishermen, and even vehicles colliding with wildlife on our roads. At the same time, it also reflects the growing pressures people place on wildlife through expanding settlements, agriculture, fencing, and shrinking natural habitats. As people and wildlife increasingly compete for the same space and resources, conflict becomes almost inevitable.
Human-wildlife conflict is therefore not simply about dangerous animals attacking people. It is about the difficult balance between protecting human lives and livelihoods while ensuring the long-term survival of the very species that make Africa unique.
The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) defines it as follows: Human-wildlife conflict is when encounters between humans and wildlife lead to negative results, such as loss of property, livelihoods, and even life. Still not enough to send us in the direction I am exploring today. Sometimes the animals are the ones dying, and not necessarily from any deliberate malicious actions by the humans…
A tragic reminder came recently from Kenya’s Amboseli ecosystem, where at least 15 elephants died after apparently ingesting cyanide. Preliminary investigations by the Kenya Wildlife Service indicate the poison was most likely introduced through pesticide-contaminated tomatoes grown on farmland bordering the park. While investigations continue into the precise source and circumstances, the incident has highlighted the unintended and often catastrophic consequences of the growing overlap between agriculture and wildlife habitat.
Human-wildlife conflict is therefore not simply about dangerous animals attacking people. It is about an increasingly fragile coexistence, where expanding human activity, shrinking natural habitats, and the pressures of feeding growing populations create situations in which both people and wildlife pay a terrible price.
I sit quietly, contemplating the fact that I’m not sure whether people should be eating those same tomatoes. I asked AI whether it’s legal to use cyanide in poisons. The answer was “No, it is highly illegal for the general public to use cyanide in poisons or to possess it for that purpose. Because cyanide is exceptionally lethal, its sale, possession, and application are strictly regulated worldwide. The chemical is typically classified under emergency hazardous substance laws, meaning it can only be handled by licensed entities for specific industrial processes” and more to the point, “Yes, using cyanide on food crops is completely illegal.”
Which brings me to a simple conclusion: solutions that are bad for nature are, almost without exception, bad for us too.
Much as we may hesitate to accept it, we are not separate from the natural world – we are part of it. Yet we so often behave as though humanity stands apart, somehow insulated from the consequences of our actions. It is just that: an illusion. Every ecosystem is connected. Every species plays a role. When we poison a river, destroy a forest, or eliminate a population of wildlife, the effects do not end there. They ripple outward through the web of life until, inevitably, they reach us. In the end, everything we do to nature, we do to ourselves.
AI tells us that “The farmers using chemicals containing cyanide on tomato farms near Amboseli National Park are currently the subject of an active, multi-agency investigation after 15 elephants died of poisoning. Authorities are trying to determine whether the contamination was an accidental byproduct of strong agricultural pesticides or a deliberate act of human-wildlife conflict.” I feel that the issues raised are significantly larger than this. Why, if it is illegal and not allowed, were they using cyanide in the first place? And how did that chemical make its way to a remote town in Africa that just happens to grow tomatoes? What have been the effects on those administering the chemicals? There are still more questions than answers…
This all makes me think of another, similar incident. A short documentary about shark finning (the cruel and wasteful practice of cutting off a shark’s fins) in Mozambique titled “Shiver”. The primary focus of Shiver (2010) was not simply to expose shark finning, but to examine the human and environmental dimensions of Mozambique’s growing shark-fin trade – the difficult reality faced by impoverished coastal fishing communities, many of whom turned to catching sharks because they had few alternative sources of income. The film deliberately portrayed these fishermen not as villains, but as people responding to economic necessity.
An often-overlooked public health issue? The local communities were consuming shark meat contaminated with high levels of methylmercury, potentially harming their own health while supplying the international fin trade.
The potential consequences of long-term consumption include neurological damage, reduced brain development in children, cardiovascular effects, kidney damage and general health impacts such as fatigue, muscle weakness, difficulty concentrating, and sensory disturbances can occur with sustained exposure.
The documentary did not claim that local communities were already suffering from clinically confirmed methylmercury poisoning. Rather, it warned that consuming shark meat containing elevated levels of methylmercury posed a significant long-term health risk, particularly for communities that relied on shark meat as a source of protein. So, a double whammy – first we poison the oceans, then we poison the people as a secondary side effect…
In many parts of the world, local people are the visible face of environmental crime, while the real drivers remain largely unseen. Behind them often lies a network of traders, middlemen, financiers, and organised syndicates that create the demand, provide the equipment, arrange the transport, and reap the greatest financial rewards.
When we damage nature, we ultimately damage ourselves. The fate of wildlife and the fate of people are inseparable. Yet we so often isolate incidents – whether through a lack of understanding or by deliberately shaping a narrative to suit our own purposes.
Nature does not work in isolation. Every action has consequences that ripple through ecosystems, communities, and ultimately our own lives. The sooner we recognise that we are not separate from the natural world, but an integral part of it, the sooner we will begin to find solutions that benefit both people and the planet.
Jacqui Ikin & The Cross Country Team
INFO BLOCK:
Cyanide in tomato pesticide killed 15 elephants, Kenyan officials suspect:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp9e0v5xmdyo
“Shiver” – note that this film contains disturbing images:
https://vimeo.com/28539793
