Wildlife Health Hotspots

Wildlife Health Hotspots- a WCS perspective:

The Wildlife Conservation Society’s portfolio of animal and human health-related projects spans the globe, and has clearly identified common problems that nevertheless merit context-specific solutions. Demand for a “one health” perspective continues to grow, as socioeconomic progress demands sustained improvements in health for humans, their domestic animals, and the environment.

Where is the nexus of conservation, development, and health most obvious? While scenarios vary across the globe, themes emerge that guide our ‘diagnostic’ as well as ‘therapeutic’ approaches. The following landscape-based portraits illustrate the value of a truly multidisciplinary approach that includes the health sciences.
 

Mongolia’s Eastern Steppe

Roughly the size of the state of Oregon, the approximately 250,000 km2  Eastern Steppe landscape of Mongolia is perhaps the planet’s last and largest example of an essentially intact temperate grassland ecosystem.  It is home to Asia’s largest remaining population of wild ungulate, with the Mongolian gazelle migrating almost unhindered in numbers approaching one million or more.  The Eastern Steppe landscape provides breathtakingly vast wilderness scenes with equally amazing wildlife populations and numbers. Lack of surface water has kept human and livestock populations relatively low, with the result that one can travel for kilometer after kilometer through lush rangelands that have not been degraded, rangelands without fences, buildings, or herds of livestock except at long intervals. 

The steppe is of international importance, a Global 200 ecoregion, and stands in stark contrast to the degraded habitats in neighboring Russia and China. At the same time, only 1 % of Mongolia is considered arable land, while about 34 % of Mongolia’s people are directly dependent on livestock production, with another 26% indirectly so. These figures are probably substantially higher within the Eastern Steppe area. Clearly, conservation plans must integrate the social and economic needs of the approximately 300,000 people who inhabit the Eastern Steppe and depend on its resources for their survival. Closure of factories has left subsistence herders without a market for the wool, hides and other products they glean from their livestock. Overgrazing, particularly around county (soum) centers, human-caused fires, and limited access to water for livestock further imperil traditional livelihoods. The success of a conservation strategy for the steppe will be determined in part by its ability to foster a multi-use landscape in which traditional nomadic pastoralists can preserve their lifestyle. The reality is that impoverished inhabitants of this remote area are in search of ways to improve their standards of living, with exploitation of natural resources such as oil and coal providing one obvious route. Road building, financed largely by nearby Chinese interests, threatens to fragment the Eastern Steppe (and thus essential gazelle migrations), without consideration of irreversible environmental impacts.

The Mongolian gazelle is the flagship species of the steppe: they define the ecosystem by their numbers and extensive migrations.  With an estimated one million or more gazelles persisting, the sight of migrating herds remains the greatest Asian wildlife spectacle left in what is essentially Asia’s Serengeti.  The gazelles and the ecology of the steppe are wholly linked, interdependent: a conservation plan for one must involve the other.  Because gazelles travel so extensively, reserves by themselves are not enough for this species: the whole landscape has to be managed in an environmentally sound way.  Other large mammals on the steppe include wolves and Corsac foxes, and there are many birds- some of them rare, such as the great bustard, swan goose, and several crane species. Mongolia and the world are fortunate that the steppe still persists relatively undamaged.

Economic development scenarios include the leasing or privatization of rangelands to increase livestock and fodder production.  This would be predicted to lead to the drilling of wells every few square kilometers, fencing-in of properties to keep one’s livestock in and others’ out, a sedentary lifestyle, many new roads, and so forth. From what we already know about the ecology of the steppe, the guaranteed result would be the cessation of gazelle migrations and a crash in the population, as well as serious overgrazing of the rangelands as livestock could not be shifted elsewhere on the open range.  This has already been observed nearby in China. The effects of fencing prairies and the subsequent impacts of livestock on habitat and on wildlife have been well illustrated in the American west.

Foot and mouth disease and other pathogens are endemic in livestock on the steppe. Danger exists that such diseases could be transmitted to gazelles with catastrophic results to the population, and recent evidence points to at least exposure of some gazelles to the foot and mouth disease virus.  Already gazelle have been blamed for spreading foot and mouth, and some officials have even called for the elimination of the large herds, but this would be extremely counter-productive.  There is no question that sound science needs to be brought to bear to elucidate potential disease relationships between livestock and gazelles.  Without science-based livestock and wildlife health policies and programs, outbreaks are certain to happen and plans must be in place to reduce their impacts on all sectors and to pinpoint underlying factors contributing to health problems. Interestingly, preliminary gazelle research has identified pathological changes in microscopically examined tissues that are compatible with exposure to radiation. This could be due to grassland contamination from open pit uranium mining: more thorough analysis needs to be conducted to identify areas that may be unsafe for livestock grazing or gazelle harvesting- in the interest of animal as well as human health. In short, with disease an ever-present danger to gazelles and livestock (several epidemics having occurred in the past decade), it is essential that a health monitoring program be initiated.  Timely measures can prevent widespread animal death, and only good epidemiological monitoring of sentinel species like gazelles can help determine the factors contributing to disease outbreaks or other ecological disturbances- including those with potential ramifications for people.

As in southern Africa, for example, well-managed sustainable use of the steppe’s resources could tip the scales in favor of conservation. Gazelles could be an important economic resource for the government and local people if properly managed.  An economically and biologically viable gazelle harvesting program is currently of interest to the Mongolian authorities, and the success of such an initiative will depend on: a) reducing the size of the ongoing illegal off-take by increasing anti-poaching efforts; b) training local teams in the proper way to harvest gazelle and hygienically process the carcasses so that they can find a ready market; c) developing a strategy for disease eradication / control that meets international food safety and animal health code (Office International des Epizooties) standards to allow for expanded market options; d) establishing a marketing program for high-value (“luxury”) gazelle meat in Europe, Japan and elsewhere; e) establishing a tannery for gazelle hides and handicraft centers to make leather products for sale to tourists (at present the hides are discarded); and f) working with the government to design and implement the proper policies and procedures for all aspects of a sustainable (consumptive and non-consumptive) gazelle use program.  Transboundary natural resource management among Mongolia, China, and Russia remains a challenge. Given the similarity in terms of the threat of diseases like foot and mouth here to the situation in transboundary landscapes of southern Africa (see ahead), an interesting opportunity exists to cross-pollinate conservation and development interventions in Mongolia with expertise from southern Africa, given the latter region’s significant experience with trans-frontier wildlife and animal health management.

It is not too late for Mongolia to learn from mistakes made elsewhere so that development here does not spoil the natural wealth these grasslands represent. Given that so many people here support themselves by keeping livestock, and that diseases such as tuberculosis, brucellosis, foot and mouth disease, and Johnes remain serious problems for animals and humans (directly and/or indirectly), this biologically unique landscape is indeed a Wildlife Health Hotspot.

Bolivia

Bolivia is a land of incredible contrasts and extraordinary biological diversity.  From stark, snow-covered Andean peaks to tropical Amazonian forest, moist cloud forest to tropical dry forests and savannas, Bolivia harbors an amazing array of environments for its equally amazing wildlife.  The Northwestern Bolivian Andes Landscape is considered a Global 200 Ecoregion, and is believed to contain a stunning 10% of the world's bird species.  The Gran Chaco, stretching across southeastern Bolivia and neighboring countries, is the largest tropical dry forest in the world, and encompasses pampa, forest, and wetland habitats that are home to numerous endemic species. Despite the range of habitats in this country, however, the threats to its wildlife are surprisingly similar.  Expanding human population and invasion of wildlife habitat by humans and their domestic animals (and their pathogens), wildfires from agriculture, uncontrolled tourism development, unsustainable land use, selective logging, overhunting, overgrazing by livestock, and livestock/wildlife conflicts all contribute to habitat degradation and wildlife depletion.

The Northwestern Bolivian Andes includes Madidi National Park and Integrated Management Area, a 40,000 km2 region acknowledged as the most biologically diverse park in the world – over 1,000 of the world’s 9,000 species of birds are estimated to occur in the area, with 880 already confirmed, and preliminary surveys have shown high diversity in mammals (more than 200 species expected and 170 confirmed), reptiles, amphibians, fish, butterflies, orchids, palms, and other flowering plants. This landscape also holds a very high number of endemic (30% of all flowering plants) and threatened species.  The area contains charismatic animals such as the spectacled bear, Andean condor, white-lipped peccary, jaguar, vicuña and surubí catfish – all landscape species that are vital to the maintenance of the ecological integrity of the region while also representing economic opportunities and/or threats to the people of the landscape.

The Gran Chaco, although it receives less attention, represents an even more endangered habitat.  Kaa-Iya del Gran Chaco National Park and Integrated Management Area, a 34, 000 km2 region, is a newly (1995) established protected region.  Although large, it represents less than 25% of the Bolivian Chaco. Three groups of indigenous people live in the Chaco: the Izoceño-Guaranís, Chiquitanos, and Ayoreos.   Because many of these people survive through subsistence hunting and agriculture, the future of this landscape depends on sustainable use and resource extraction.

Large mammals such as jaguars, pumas, giant anteaters, brocket deer, tapirs, giant armadillos, and peccaries call this landscape home, as do a tremendous number and variety of small armadillos.  The critically endangered Chacoan guanaco, of which there may be as few as 50 individuals, occurs here, as does the giant Chacoan peccary, perhaps the Chaco's most famous endemic mammal.  Many migratory birds, an endemic toad, red and black tegu lizards, caiman, and red-footed tortoises are also found in this dry, somewhat forbidding environment.
       
Infrastructure development and pollution associated with petroleum exploration and exploitation are present and imminent threats to the lowland portion of the landscape, directly affecting the Tuichi, Hondo and Quiquibey valleys in the Madidi and Pilon Lajas protected areas and the northern third of Kaa-Iya National Park.  Though plans for the Bala Dam now seem less likely to be implemented, there remain several proposed road construction projects that would facilitate spontaneous and directed colonization of the lowlands as well as allow for the spread and introduction of livestock and wildlife diseases into previously unexposed populations.  Foot and mouth disease (FMD) is present in domestic livestock in Bolivia and the movement of cattle poses a serious threat of infecting native wildlife populations and making needed eradication programs more complicated and expensive.  Significant gold mining in the highlands, along with urban source pollution, also pose a significant threat to aquatic systems due to habitat destruction and contamination with toxic minerals and heavy metals.  Population resettlement is a major concern for the Madidi area.  Recent political and social developments in the country have increased the pressure on the Bolivian government to support colonization of lowland areas such as the northern Ixiamas area. This largely unregulated increase in smallholder land-clearing will have major adverse effects on pristine lowland forests. Colonization outside of the Chaco may still have an impact there if the watershed is affected.

Forest clearing for agriculture, and savanna degradation as a result of overstocking of domestic livestock, are both serious problems in the Madidi and Chaco landscapes.  Well noted in developed countries, overstocking leads not only to degraded habitats, but significantly increases the risk of infectious disease outbreaks and spread.  An increase in mechanized agriculture in the Chaco is driving the conversion of forest at a very rapid rate.  Irrigation for crops and livestock may also divert water from the main source of the principal river of the area, thus negatively impacting the wetland habitats and the subsistence agricultural practices of the Izoceños.

The threat of transmission of disease from domestic animals to wildlife is often underestimated, but may represent a serious problem for mammalian biodiversity in this landscape.  Both livestock and pets can be a source of disease for susceptible wildlife species, and with so many threatened ungulates and carnivores in Bolivia, an epidemic could be catastrophic.   The presence of foot and mouth disease (FMD) in Bolivian cattle is just one of the more obvious threats to people’s livelihoods.   In addition, many of the disease agents that affect domestic carnivores, livestock, and wildlife are zoonotic (transmissible between animals and people).

Rabies, trypanosomiasis, leishmaniasis, and toxoplasmosis are examples of common diseases that cause fatalities in humans and animals in Bolivia.  Maintaining healthy human communities and healthy ecosystems requires an integrated approach.  A narrow view to health, one that pays attention only to human disease issues or only to wildlife disease issues is doomed to failure.  On the other hand, community-based conservation will only work if the people in the community are motivated to protect their environment—and given the knowledge and simple tools to protect their own health and that of their domestic animals and the wildlife on which they depend for food security and ecosystem maintenance. 

The connections among wildlife health, livestock health, and human well-being are intimate and complex.  In a region like the Chaco, where the indigenous people survive largely through subsistence hunting, the health of their prey populations is, at the simplest level, critical for food security.  Obviously if game species are diseased and humans are eating them, disease transmission is possible.  The situation in Central Africa with Ebola virus is a tragic example of this.  Initial surveys in Bolivia have found more than half of the brocket deer tested and roughly one-fourth of peccaries had previously been infected with the bacteria causing leptospirosis, a disease which can lead to fetal death, infertility, kidney problems, fever and sometimes death in all mammals, including humans.  It is not only an individual diseased animal that is the problem, however -- if the game animal population declines, the people may have a difficult time meeting their protein requirements.  Disease presence and effects on wildlife must be determined in order to accurately calculate sustainable harvesting rates.  Additionally, because domestic dogs participate extensively in human hunting activities, their health matters too. Sick hunting dogs can both introduce disease into wildlife populations, and bring disease from wildlife to their human handlers and other villagers.

Zoonotic diseases abound in Bolivia, as wildlife and domestic carnivore surveys have shown.  Chagas' disease, caused by Trypanosoma cruzi, is a serious problem in Bolivia, especially in the southeast.  Fifty percent of dogs tested for antibodies to this organism are positive, indicating that domestic dogs may serve as a reservoir for the infection, which is one of the most serious human health problems in Latin America, with damage to the heart often leading to death in infected people. Toxoplasmosis is another zoonotic parasite, and 83% of cats and 37% of dogs in the Chaco have antibodies to the causative agent, and 92% of cats and 62% of dogs in Madidi have antibodies.  Toxoplasmosis is a problem especially among children, so this high prevalence is a concern.  Scabies, a highly contagious disease caused by the sarcoptic mange mite, is another condition that affects children.  In one small town on the border of Madidi National Park, every dog tested was found to be infected.

Preliminary research in the Chaco and Madidi has shown that 95% of domestic dogs have been exposed to canine distemper virus and canine parvovirus.  Other serious pathogens are present in the dog population as well, such as canine herpesvirus, and the causative agents of toxoplasmosis and sarcoptic mange.  Nearly one hundred percent of domestic cats have been exposed to feline calicivirus.  More disturbing is the fact that antibodies to canine distemper, canine parvovirus, feline calicivirus, and toxoplasmosis have been found in ocelots, Geoffroy's cats, pampas foxes, and crab-eating foxes in the Chaco.  In addition, several dead pampas foxes, and one living fox have been found with evidence of sarcoptic mange.  Foxes and small felids are routinely found in villages, where dogs are extremely common, and in the Izoceño communities, where dogs are almost always used during subsistence hunting activities.  This means that ample opportunities exist for contact between dogs and wildlife.  While dogs in the Madidi area are often vaccinated against rabies, the Izoceños have no access to veterinary care in their communities, and neither group of dogs is vaccinated against common canine pathogens.

Attempts to mitigate the threats outlined above are severely hampered by the persistence of a number of indirect factors that drive or facilitate the unsustainable use of natural resources. Abating these indirect threats is no less important than tackling the direct threats, because by doing so the underlying causes of unsustainable use or ineffective resource management will be removed.  Indirect threats include: a lack of baseline biological and extractive-use information relevant to natural resource management across the landscape; weak national capacity for biodiversity research; a dearth of trained professionals conducting sustainable natural resource programs at the national, regional and local levels; inadequate communication among local, regional and national stakeholders; and limited capacity of local government and the protected area administration to design and implement resource management activities.  Combined, these threats result in a lack of coherent regional and local land-use planning, and failure to address important biogeophysical, social and economic linkages across Bolivia.  A related and important threat is a paucity of income-generating options that do not rely on the direct exploitation or extraction of wild resources, a situation that perpetuates unsustainable resource-use practices.

Argentina

Patagonia was once the domain of the Tehuelches, a nomadic hunter-gatherer people whose livelihood depended largely on the huge herds of guanacos and choiques (lesser rheas) that occupied the arid steppes and scrubland of this vast landscape.  Since the “Conquista del Desierto” (Conquest of the Desert campaign) in the late 1800’s, this culture and the faunal assemblage on which it relied have to a large extent been replaced in the last one hundred years by European customs and European species.  The dominant fauna of most Patagonian landscapes in the 21st century are now sheep, cows, goats, or European red deer, rather than guanacos, choiques (rheas), and huemuls (Andean deer).  European hares are ubiquitous, and the native ecological equivalents- Patagonian maras and mountain vizcachas- are in severe decline.  Native carnivores, including some of the rarest in the world such as the Andean cat, prey almost exclusively on introduced European species, while native herbivores are present at such low densities that they no longer play a significant role in their native ecosystems, and are thus considered ecologically extinct throughout large areas.

Conversion of the Patagonian Steppe to subsidized agricultural use, namely overgrazing by domestic sheep, has resulted in destruction of the native grasslands and more recently, the bankruptcy and abandonment of many farms in the region. Economic incentives for unsustainable agricultural development focused on maximizing short-term production and profits, steering efforts away from more natural, lower impact production systems utilizing the mammals and birds evolutionarily adapted to the native habitats.  The future of Patagonia needs a fresh look, one in which the unique Patagonian wild species and their ecosystems are valued, restored, and preserved, and land and natural resources are shared among the descendents of the Tehuelches, other indigenous groups, and European settlers.  What is needed is a mosaic of land use in Patagonia that includes a series of protected areas with functioning assemblages of native wildlife, as in the days when the Tehuelches were the sole human inhabitants.  The matrix in which these protected areas are embedded would include lands under varying intensities of human use, ranging from towns and cities where native wildlife is absent, to ranches or indigenous areas managed for the co-existence of native wildlife and livestock production or other economic activities.  These different land uses would be distributed in such a way as to allow for a high degree of connectivity or permeability of the matrix for wildlife, ensuring that the protected areas do not become island refuges for isolated wildlife populations. Historical accounts indicate that the Tehuelches may have migrated seasonally to follow their prey, and a system of protected areas could provide the opportunity for the animals to migrate once again between the Andes and the coast.  
 
The major threat to native wildlife and their habitats in Patagonia is overgrazing by livestock and other introduced herbivores. Grazing has resulted in severe desertification of approximately 30% of the steppe.  Even sheep husbandry has declined in recent decades because large expanses of degraded land can no longer support the number of sheep they once did.  Livestock and other domestic animals serve as sources of diseases that can have severe adverse effects on wildlife.  The degree of this threat has not been thoroughly evaluated here, although preliminary studies have shown that domestic sheep and cattle carry a number of infectious diseases such as brucellosis, paratuberculosis, and a suite of respiratory and other viruses that have the potential to negatively impact wild ungulate populations, as they have in North America. In addition, some of these infectious agents can infect humans.  While current research is lacking, it is also likely that ranchers’ domestic dogs and cats harbor diseases to which native wild carnivores have no immunity. Human activities have disturbed habitats in the highlands and have reduced native predators, contributing to aberrant fluctuations in rodent populations and associated outbreaks of hantavirus infection- killing people and damaging efforts to develop ecotourism-based alternative revenue streams.

Guanaco, the Wild Camels of the New World Guanaco are new-world camelids that currently range throughout much of southern Argentina and Chile.  The dry grasslands and scrub, where the largest populations are found in southern Argentina, have been heavily utilized for sheep ranching for over a century.  Sheep and guanaco are still commonly found on the same ranches and “protected areas.”  Local lore in Patagonia holds that guanaco serve as the source of diseases for sheep and they are thus heavily hunted by ranchers.  Field studies by WCS showed for the first time that some populations of free-ranging guanaco are, in fact, relatively disease-free, but are themselves susceptible to common diseases of domestic livestock (cattle, sheep, and horses).  Infections such as brucellosis, paratuberculosis, and leptospirosis are common in sheep here, and pose a serious threat to the health of wild guanaco, and perhaps to native deer.  Parasites of sheep may also be impacting guanaco sharing the same grazing areas. Alleviating poaching is not enough to save the guanaco: disease transmission from livestock must be reduced by managing interspecies contact and improving the health of domestic animals.

Another major threat to native herbivores, indigenous birds, and wild carnivores is intensive hunting.  They are hunted commercially, for their skins or wool, to control predation on / competition with livestock, and for subsistence consumption.  This widespread hunting is either not managed at all, or is inadequately managed by most provincial wildlife agencies.  Once again, human impacts on natural prey and the numbers of predators disrupt the fragile ecological balance in this harsh, dry environment and can lead to disease outbreaks and the emergence of diseases in species that have never been impacted by them before.  In addition, oil exploration and drilling have destroyed and continue to destroy large areas of native habitat, serving as a source of pollution while also opening roads that provide increased access for hunters

Conservation in Patagonia largely depends on the will and initiative of large private landowners. Most public lands are occupied by small sheep or goat farmers, and are severely degraded.  Only about 1% of the steppe and scrub ecosystems are currently under strict protection.  If the current economic crisis in Argentina can be said to have a benefit, it may be that landowners and the government are more motivated than ever to find alternative management systems to reduce costs and increase revenues and thus the value of their land.  In Patagonia, wild and domestic animals and human livelihoods can clearly benefit from programs promoting better land-use zoning as well as improved livestock health to reduce the threats posed by disease.

The Congo Basin   

Across all continents, the number of plant and animal species increases toward the equator, with tropical rainforests being the most biodiverse landscapes on the planet.  A rainforest may contain over 300 tree species in a single hectare, 10 times that of the richest temperate forests.  Covering close to 2,000,000 km2, the equatorial forest of Central Africa is well recognized as one of the wildest and most diverse terrestrial ecosystems on earth.  High biodiversity is complemented by an abundance of charismatic megafauna including forest elephants, gorillas, chimpanzees, leopard, buffalo and bongo antelopes, which contribute to the outstanding conservation value of these forests.

Central Africa contains the second largest area of contiguous moist tropical forest in the world. More than 60 million people live in the region, and these people depend on their rich forests and other biotic resources for their livelihoods and economic development. These forests form the catchment basin of the Congo River, a watershed of local, regional and global significance. They provide valuable ecological services by controlling and buffering climate at a regional scale, and by absorbing and storing excess carbon dioxide released from the burning of fossil fuels, thereby helping to slow the rate of global warming.  The livelihoods of people in the Central African forests are dependent on the continued future of this resource, not as a supplement to other sources of subsistence, but as the primary resource for the raising and gathering of food and other products, for clean water, and as a basis of their cultures.  

Across the globe, a central component of successful conservation is effective management of networks of protected areas.  In recognition of this fact, the recently formulated Congo Basin Forest Partnership (CBFP)- a partnership comprised of 29 different entities including national governments, a range of nongovernmental organizations, as well as business interests - has identified key protected areas and their buffer zones in 11 priority landscapes. The primary goals of the CBFP are “protection, integrated development and land-use management to promote economic development, improved governance and natural resource conservation, through support for a network of national parks and protected

These forests support 50% of the plant and animal species in Africa, and the greatest diversity of primates on earth. Since disease knows no legal boundaries, health programs must span traditional geopolitical borders.

areas, well-managed forestry concessions, and assistance to communities which depend upon the conservation of forest and wildlife resources” http://carpe.umd.edu/.

Protection of these landscapes requires a combination of strong commitment and investment by host nations and the international community, collaboration among numerous stakeholders, intelligent land-use planning, and effective law enforcement. Linking biological and socioeconomic information is critical to developing appropriate management plans for these areas and also for monitoring the effectiveness of management strategies.   Attention to the needs and impacts of local people is essential to working towards conservation and development success, and the Congo Basin serves as an obvious example of the importance of linkages between human and animal health.  

Emergency Workshop in Brazzaville is first to develop a multidisciplinary approach to solving the continuing Ebola Virus crisis in Central Africa A workshop was organized in March of 2003 to bring together regional government authorities, NGO’s (both conservation and human medicine) and virology experts to address the current Ebola virus outbreak in northwest Congo.  The workshop was sanctioned by the Congolese Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Forests, with additional participants from the Ministry of Agriculture.   Experts and representatives from the Congo, DRC, and Gabon participated to provide insights from the previous outbreaks in those countries.   Representatives from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, the World Health Organization, Doctors without Borders, the Wildlife Conservation Society, and the World Wildlife Fund also participated. The workshop was organized by ECOFAC (a regional conservation initiative of the European Community and the Wildlife Conservation Society under the auspices of the Congolese government). There are still significant knowledge gaps in understanding Ebola.  The reservoir species for Ebola has not yet been identified, though this may change very soon based on samples collected over the last two months.  The current evidence suggests that the Ebola virus is present over a wide range in equatorial Africa, and within sub-regions it has the property of spilling over from its reservoir (much like St. Louis encephalitis virus in North America, and rabies) into other species that are severely affected by the disease.  Also, there is preliminary data correlating Ebola outbreaks with heavy rains following 2 years of drier than normal dry seasons.  1) The two lead Congolese ministers (Health and Forestry) opened and closed the workshop at public events which included local and international press.  At these “ceremonies,” their commitment to work collaboratively and invite external participation with the mutually reinforcing goals of protecting people and wildlife was clearly stated.  This provides an essential framework of authority within which conservation efforts can legitimately help address health issues and formalizes the linkages among the disciplines that can contribute to the urgently needed actions.   2) Immediate needs agreed upon by all representatives at the workshop included: (a) Community outreach programs among local villages to establish the linkages between conservation and health efforts.  The virtual abandonment of rural communities over the last 10-20 years has resulted in isolation, mistrust, and few or no education or health care programs.  The resulting lack of trust and hostilities at the local level has resulted in both the rejection of human health care efforts as well as disruption of all ongoing conservation activities whenever an Ebola outbreak occurs.   Contact with villages must be established immediately and an assessment of their health and education needs must be performed as soon as possible to begin intervention programs to protect the health of people and of wildlife. (b) Educational components used by conservation teams in Congo have already shown that disease risk education in villages can reduce primate hunting and consumption.   This needs to be expanded into areas threatened by Ebola. (c) Research needs to be supported in the area of current outbreak to understand the disease process, to help identify great ape populations at greatest risk, and to assess intervention strategies. Needs include 1) finding the reservoir and possible vectors; 2) delineating transmission rates and modes among gorillas; 3) mapping of other factors (fruiting trees, weather, etc.) to help identify correlations.  Surviving gorillas in the center of the current outbreak will be examined to determine their exposure status and the extent of mortalities and survivorship of exposed great apes. 3) This meeting represented the first multidisciplinary experts forum to address Ebola and the relationships between human and wildlife health.  In itself, this was a groundbreaking step, shifting from the old paradigm of competition for resources toward building the collaborative teams essential for tackling these complex issues of common concern.

As the human population rises exponentially, especially in rural areas, the risks posed by emerging diseases to wildlife, people and domestic animals are significant.  In the Congo Basin, human population growth and poverty are forcing people to penetrate deeper into once pristine wilderness in search of animal protein and other natural resources.  As a result, rare diseases such as Ebola are emerging with greater frequency.  In addition, other easily preventable infections such as polio, measles and typhoid are still commonly seen.  These diseases can spread among humans and primates.  Common diseases of animals (such as salmonellosis, brucellosis, leptospirosis, and rabies) can infect humans but have drawn little attention.  Equally little attention has been paid to the risk of domestic animals introducing diseases such as rinderpest, foot and mouth disease, or distemper into wildlife populations as programs to provide alternative protein sources are developed to reduce dependence on bushmeat.

As people and their domestic animals encroach on wildlife habitat, disease transmission has deleterious consequences for both human livelihoods and fragile wildlife populations.  Besides the obvious toll from death itself, there are economic consequences—the loss of a wage earner, the loss of marketable livestock, or the loss of ecotourism dollars.  Economic losses to those living in poverty affect their general health and nutrition, resulting in greater susceptibility to disease and thus an increase in disease transmission- establishing a vicious cycle of illness, suffering, and poverty.

Even beyond the impacts of disease, wildlife populations can collapse from over-harvesting, degradation of wilderness habitats, and pollution. This can easily translate into problems of malnutrition, illness, and lost income.  Usually those most at risk are the people who, by definition, live on the fringe of society, at the edge of wilderness areas, out of reach of even the most basic healthcare and sanitation systems. 

By taking a holistic approach to health care and poverty alleviation, by bringing communities in as partners in wildlife management, by managing interspecies contact and by improving the health of people, domestic animals and wildlife, societies can improve their prospects for better health and economic opportunities. 

Gorillas and Human Health In Central Africa, humans and gorillas share not only their land but also more than 140 diseases. The impact of these pathogens can be devastating if not monitored, managed, and most importantly- prevented.  Both humans and gorillas suffer terribly from rare diseases such as Ebola hemorrhagic fever, as well as easily preventable but deadly infections such as polio and measles.  People living in rural areas of central Africa are plagued by the lack of the most basic health care.  These rural peoples live on the fringes, the exact same areas that still hold the world’s richest biodiversity.  While conservation efforts in these areas offer the hope of well-managed natural resources as well as revenue streams through ecotourism, the lives of local people will not significantly improve if steps are not taken to improve their health.  Living in remote areas, far from capital cities, these people have been left off of the “map” of developing country health care programs.   Simultaneously, humans pose the greatest disease threats to great apes.  Human tuberculosis causes a rapidly fatal disease in primates.  Measles and influenza infect apes with deadly effects.  In contrast to the safety of using injectable polio vaccine, the shedding of virus following oral polio vaccines can cause deadly infections in wild apes that come in contact with water or soil contaminated by recently vaccinated people.  Ironically, one of the biggest threats to ecotourism’s significant revenue potential for local people and protected areas is disease spread by local people, their domestic animals, and even tourists.  These diseases can devastate the wildlife resources upon which tourism is based, and other animals   upon which local people depend for food.

Tanzania’s Rungwa-Ruaha Landscape

At over 45,000 km2, the Rungwa-Ruaha Landscape is one of Tanzania’s largest wild areas.  It sits within a global hotspot of mammal species richness, including the continent’s third largest population of the critically endangered African wild dog, and is biogeographically important within Tanzania.  The area contains two Important Bird Areas, two potential Ramsar sites, and is recognized in the “Global 200” and as a “Last Wild Place.” Not surprisingly, Rungwa-Ruaha and its spectacular wildlife communities are also under threat.  Grazing, land transformation, unregulated and illegal hunting, and uncontrolled fires threaten the integrity of this wild landscape. Covering an area larger than Denmark, this sprawling ecosystem reaches from the Rift Valley and the alluvial plain of the Great Ruaha River, up the Rift Valley escarpment to higher elevation miombo woodlands and relict forests of the Isinkuviola Plateau, which form the headwaters of the critically important Rungwa River.  Nearly 90% (over 40,000km2) of the Rungwa-Ruaha landscape lies within six protected areas: Ruaha National Park, Rungwa, Kisigo, Muhezi and Usangu Game Reserves, and the Lunda-Mkwabi Game Controlled Area. In short, the Rungwa-Ruaha landscape is a critical link between Tanzania’s Maasai Steppe and the western wildlife corridor.

Livestock represent a critical component of rural livelihoods in this landscape, and disease is a critical yet not fully examined threat to the ecosystem’s integrity. Competition between wildlife and livestock for grazing resources is an issue that must be addressed if a balance between agricultural and conservation interests is to be attained. The dramatic effects of livestock on Usangu Game Reserve’s vegetation resources, for example, have been evaluated.  However, disease interactions remain an incompletely understood management concern for both pastoralists and wildlife managers.  The intensity of disease threats and of resource competition will only increase as wildlife numbers recover under improved management regimes and/or as livestock densities rise.  The key stakeholders in this landscape include pastoralists, government officials, tour operators and employees, and subsistence as well as sport hunters.

The conservation significance of this landscape is extraordinary. First, the ecosystem harbors a nearly intact fauna, including as many as 12,000 elephants, and Africa’s 3rd largest population of wild dogs, a critically endangered large carnivore that has disappeared from more than 95% of its original range.  The forests of the Isinkuviola Plateau are largely unsurveyed, and like the Eastern Arc Forests to the east and the Albertine Rift forests to the west, probably contain high levels of biodiversity and endemism.  Equally important are the ecosystem’s sheer size and level of intactness.  At the core of the ecosystem is Ruaha National Park (RNP).  Even though it is somewhat smaller than Serengeti, which endures heavy illegal hunting in its western corridor, Ruaha NP represents one of the Tanzanian landscapes least impacted by hunting, largely because managed areas surround RNP, and it faces far lower human population pressure. Ruaha NP is of course influenced by hunting.  Rungwa, Kisigo, Muhezi and Usangu Game Reserves are all hunted, as is the Lunda-Mkwambi Game Controlled Area.  Hunting in these areas varies from low-volume sport hunting for trophy animals, to higher-volume subsistence hunting, to uncontrolled illegal exploitation.

The area is also potentially important as a precedent-setter for the rest of Tanzania- including in the realm of animal health policy.  The Lunda-Mkwambi Game Controlled Area will likely become one of Tanzania’s first Wildlife Management Areas (WMA), where management authority and benefits from wildlife will be devolved to local communities. This will set a powerful precedent for Tanzania by establishing a new mechanism for conservation outside protected areas. 

Conflicts between wildlife and livestock over grazing lands are most acute in the Usangu Game Reserve and adjacent areas, but livestock are also kept in Lunda-Mkwambi and adjacent to Rungwa, Kisigo and Muhezi Game Reserves. Currently, over 300,000 cattle - an order of magnitude more than the number of buffalo in RNP - and 81,000 sheep and goats graze the Usangu wetlands, which are less than half the size of Ruaha N.P.  This translates to a density of 73 individuals / km2, more than 20 times the density of RNP buffalo, and more than double the estimated carrying capacity of a cattle-only rangeland in this ecosystem.  Over 90% of the wet season grazing area used by livestock lies within the Usangu Game Reserve, where such use is illegal.  Heavy livestock grazing has led to serious degradation in some areas and, by decreasing the water-holding capacity of the wetlands, has contributed to the hydrological problems accompanying irrigation and land transformation.  However, because the ecosystem historically supported high densities of wild herbivores, the effects of grazing are not ecologically unprecedented, and recovery is realistic over time if the lands can be managed collaboratively. 

Hydrological disruptions serve neither the people nor the wildlife of Rungwa-Ruaha well. For the last nine years, the Ruaha has dried up completely and for longer periods during every dry season.  Not surprisingly, this has had profound effects on water-dependent wildlife as well as livestock herding and small-scale fisheries.   Some wide-ranging wildlife species have shifted their habitat use to elsewhere, but other species’ numbers have declined precipitously (most notably hippopotamus, crocodiles, and waterbuck).  These population declines and changes in dry season distributions have had, and if unchecked will continue to have, significant negative effects on tourism (in Ruaha N.P.), subsistence hunting (in Lunda-Mkwambi GCA), and on sport hunting (in Usangu GR).

Livestock depredation, whether real or perceived, also precipitates direct persecution of some large carnivores (lions and wild dogs), adding another dimension of threat to the grazing system.  Diseases among domestic animals may also affect both wild herbivores and carnivores, but the significance of disease interactions at the wild-domestic animal interface is in urgent need of evaluation in this landscape.  For comparative purposes, it’s worth noting that in 1999 more wild buffalo died in Kenya as a result of a livestock-introduced disease (rinderpest) than had been killed by illegal poaching during the entire previous twenty years. Tanzania National Parks (TANAPA) has been investigating a wide range of disease issues across the country, including recent work on canine distemper, tuberculosis, rabies, trypanosomiasis, foot and mouth disease, rinderpest, mange, and anthrax- just to name a few examples.

Solutions to conflicts over fodder resources must avoid simply exporting the problem elsewhere in Tanzania. Coexistence of livestock and wildlife must be explored wherever possible for several reasons.  First, complete exclusion of cattle from Usangu GR, for example, may simply concentrate livestock on alluvial fans and lead to more serious local degradation.  Second, reductions in livestock numbers could also have serious economic consequences for Mbarali District, which generates approximately half of its tax revenue from livestock.  Third, a mass exodus of livestock could also contribute to the spread, for example, of contagious bovine pleuropneumonia (CBPP), a disease of significant economic importance to livestock, and one which has forced intermittent quarantines and bans on livestock movements for over ten years.  Developing acceptable solutions to challenges at the livestock / wildlife interface will of course require close collaboration with local people and with relevant local as well as national authorities. With sound veterinary science, adequate technical and financial resources, and approaches like community-based animal health care (for example), diseases like contagious bovine pleuropneumonia, tuberculosis, brucellosis, and a range of other maladies of significance to domestic animal health and (directly or indirectly) to human health can start to be addressed on the ground and in the policy arena- in ways that secure a future for healthy wildlife as well.

Southern Africa

The Southern African Development Community (SADC) has a population of about 200 million people and a combined Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of about US$190 billion. Nevertheless, an estimated 40 percent of the total regional population still lives in poverty (http://www.sadc.int/) . According to the International Fund for Agricultural Development (http://www.ifad.org), southern Africans maintain approximately 40 million livestock units (1 cow = 0.8 LSU, sheep or goat = 0.1 LSU, camel = 1.1 LSU). Domestic animals share the landscape with, for example, the more than 70 species of antelopes in sub-Saharan Africa, representing a much greater diversity than any other group of medium to large mammals. Up to 75 % of these antelope species are in decline (East, 1998).

The SADC region received some 13.4 million tourists in the year 2000, accounting for more than 46% of the total arrivals in Africa. With regard to growth in tourist arrivals, Southern Africa recorded an 8.3% growth rate compared to world's 7.4%. Tourism receipts in SADC countries increased from US$ 3.6 billion in 1995 to US$ 5 billion in 1999 (http://www.sadc.int/). Southern Africa’s remaining wildlife areas continue to anchor growth in tourist revenues.
   
There is probably no region on earth where animal health policies have had as tangible an effect upon the biotic landscape as in southern Africa. And in terms of human livelihoods, the subregion’s dependence on agriculture becomes all too obvious in times of drought. In many parts of the world, land-use choices are often driven by government (domestic and/or foreign) incentives or subsidies that can favor unsustainable agricultural practices over more ecologically sound natural resource management schemes.

With a better understanding of disease epidemiology and the true costs associated with disease control as well as the true costs of environmental degradation related to livestock management practices not well-suited to a particular ecosystem, land-use decisions might more often favor a return to natural production systems. For example, in semi-arid parts of southern Africa that characterize much of the Kalahari semi-desert as well as southeastern Zimbabwe’s lowveldt, foot and mouth disease (FMD) control programs to support beef production for an export market may not actually be as profitable or as environmentally sustainable as a return to multi-use natural systems emphasizing endemic wildlife species (consumptively and non-consumptively). 

South Africa Bans Imports from Botswana over Foot-and-Mouth SABC News  January 15, 2003 South Africa has imposed a ban on the importation of all cloven-hooved animals and their products from Botswana, following a suspected outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in that country, the agriculture department said today.  Products banned included live cloven-hooved animals, including elephants, dairy products, meat products, hides and skins, hunting trophies, horns, hooves, bones, wool, hair, grass and pet food, it said in a statement in Pretoria.  South Africa recently regained its international foot-and-mouth disease free zone status. "It is therefore very imperative that precautionary measures are taken in order to ensure that the suspected outbreak does not endanger the health of livestock in South Africa," the statement said. Botswana: Foot and mouth disease outbreak stalls exports to EU and South Africa A ProMED-mail post  January 17, 2003 The European Union (EU) followed South Africa's lead on Thursday and banned imports of deboned meat from Botswana following an outbreak of foot and mouth disease (FMD) in the country. "The standing committee on food chain and animal health agreed to temporarily suspend the importation into the EU of de-boned fresh meat of these species [bovine, ovine, and caprine species and farmed and wild game animals] from the whole territory of Botswana," an EU statement said. [As for] speculation that Botswana's outbreak may have originated in Zimbabwe, …this had not been confirmed. However… there was some cattle smuggling across the border by Zimbabweans taking advantage of the favorable exchange  rate of the Botswana Pula, the strongest currency in the region, on the parallel market…. [Zimbabwe's unstable conditions seem to be contributing to the deteriorating animal-health situation in the entire region. There is an obvious common interest of all countries in the region that FMD outbreak(s), in any of southern Africa's countries, be speedily put under control. Hence the need to urgently support the Veterinary Services of Zimbabwe in their great efforts to control FMD, including supplying suitable (polyvalent?) vaccines. - Mod.AS]

Of course one cannot generalize across the entire mosaic of southern African landscapes- livestock will remain critically important both culturally and economically in much of the region. "Getting it right" when it comes to animal health programs and policies becomes even more critical in transboundary land-use planning, as domestic as well as wild animals have opportunities to cross international borders. The future of the new Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park and surrounds may in large part be decided by the animal health policies agreed upon by the countries involved. The choices surrounding which areas will be zoned for wildlife and which for foot-and-mouth disease-free beef production will dictate where fences are placed- which will in turn dictate whether a functional transboundary landscape exists in reality- or just on paper.

Whether we are talking about foot and mouth disease (FMD) or contagious bovine pleuropneumonia (CBPP) (a disease that directly affects only domestic stock- but common mitigation measures like fencing have significant impacts on wildlife), malignant catarrhal fever (MCF) or diseases like tuberculosis and brucellosis which are transmissible between animals/animal products and people, animal health issues (and their implications for human health, livelihoods, and the economies of nations) must be addressed by any truly regional agricultural or natural resources management strategies if they are to succeed. How can agricultural and conservation interests work together for the common good? The next section of this guide reviews the Pilanesburg Resolution, a series of recommendations for development agencies on just this very question.

Back to Table of Contents