1.
Wildlife crime in Uganda:
who, how many and why?

2.
Evidence
review
Evidence
review
Investigation
of drivers
Investigation
of drivers
Intervention
evaluation
Intervention
evaluation
Recommendations
for UWA
Recommendations
for UWA

3.
“any harm to (or intent to harm or subsequent trade of) non-domesticated wild
animals, plants and fungi, in contravention of national and international laws and
conventions”
“any harm to (or intent to harm or subsequent trade of) non-domesticated wild
animals, plants and fungi, in contravention of national and international laws and
conventions”

4.
Murchison Falls Protected Area (incl. Bugungu and Karuma WRs)
• 5,056 km2
• approx. 23,000 households living within 3km of PA boundary in 2002
Queen Elizabeth Protected Area (incl. Kigezi and Kyambura WRs)
• 2,475 km2
• approx. 44,000 households living within 3km of PA boundary in 2002
Murchison Falls Protected Area (incl. Bugungu and Karuma WRs)
• 5,056 km2
• approx. 23,000 households living within 3km of PA boundary in 2002
Queen Elizabeth Protected Area (incl. Kigezi and Kyambura WRs)
• 2,475 km2
• approx. 44,000 households living within 3km of PA boundary in 2002

5.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
2004200520062007200820092010201120122013
Snares(total)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
2004200520062007200820092010201120122013
Arrests(total)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Arrests(total)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
2004200520062007200820092010201120122013
Snares(total)
MFMF
QEQE

6.
We conducted a large scale household survey
• 1955 respondents
• 125 villages selected from within 3km of PA boundaries
• villages sampled proportionally to length of boundary within each
district
Key informant interviews were conducted with UWA staff, current or
former offenders, bushmeat sellers and village leaders
We conducted a large scale household survey
• 1955 respondents
• 125 villages selected from within 3km of PA boundaries
• villages sampled proportionally to length of boundary within each
district
Key informant interviews were conducted with UWA staff, current or
former offenders, bushmeat sellers and village leaders

7.
We considered five activities within PA boundaries:
• fishing
• grazing livestock
• collecting firewood
• hunting for consumption
• hunting for selling
We considered five activities within PA boundaries:
• fishing
• grazing livestock
• collecting firewood
• hunting for consumption
• hunting for selling

8.
We used a combination of direct and indirect approaches
• unmatched count technique
• key informant interviews
We used a combination of direct and indirect approaches
• unmatched count technique
• key informant interviews

9.
firewood
subsistence
hunting
fish
commercial
hunting
grazing

10.
We used two types of poverty
measure:
• basic necessity survey
• Uganda multidimensional
poverty index (UMPI)
Both scores include access to
key services in addition to
indicators of asset wealth
More reliable estimate of
poverty status when
household income comes from
illegal activities
We used two types of poverty
measure:
• basic necessity survey
• Uganda multidimensional
poverty index (UMPI)
Both scores include access to
key services in addition to
indicators of asset wealth
More reliable estimate of
poverty status when
household income comes from
illegal activities

11.
53% : 47% 53% : 47%

12.
The probability of a household hunting (for subsistence or commercial
purposes) increases:
• if they are better off
• they report suffering from livestock predation
• they do not feel they have benefited from revenue sharing
No effect for households reporting losses from crop raiding
The probability of a household hunting (for subsistence or commercial
purposes) increases:
• if they are better off
• they report suffering from livestock predation
• they do not feel they have benefited from revenue sharing
No effect for households reporting losses from crop raiding

13.
subsistence hunterssubsistence hunters
occasional huntersoccasional hunters
professional huntersprofessional hunters
senior hunterssenior hunters middlemenmiddlemen
bushmeat tradersbushmeat traders
restaurants and consumersrestaurants and consumers

14.
On average hunters reported earning:
• 100,000 sh per successful trip (50%
success rate)
• 450,000 sh per month during peak
hunting season
The average reported daily wage was
20-30,000 sh
On average hunters reported earning:
• 100,000 sh per successful trip (50%
success rate)
• 450,000 sh per month during peak
hunting season
The average reported daily wage was
20-30,000 sh
“if you worked for that money, you
couldn’t get it easily”
“if you worked for that money, you
couldn’t get it easily”
“I cannot stop hunting without another
way of earning money”
“I cannot stop hunting without another
way of earning money”

15.
Little deterrence effect found from law
enforcement
• Average encounter rate with rangers
found to be 5%
• Arrest rate only 0.14%
• Average sentence 3 months and
400,000 sh fine
Little deterrence effect found from law
enforcement
• Average encounter rate with rangers
found to be 5%
• Arrest rate only 0.14%
• Average sentence 3 months and
400,000 sh fine
“I am not afraid – I am too fast for the
rangers to catch me”
“I am not afraid – I am too fast for the
rangers to catch me”
“you go with fear but you have to be
alert”
“you go with fear but you have to be
alert”
“even though there is fear, problems will
force you to do what you are not
supposed to do”
“even though there is fear, problems will
force you to do what you are not
supposed to do”

16.
Subsistence:
• 35% of households hunt for meat for
home consumption BUT this is often
a byproduct of hunting for money
• Poorer households less likely to hunt
but more likely to be affected by law
enforcement
Subsistence:
• 35% of households hunt for meat for
home consumption BUT this is often
a byproduct of hunting for money
• Poorer households less likely to hunt
but more likely to be affected by law
enforcement

17.
Commercial:
• 42% of households hunt to sell
• Better off households are more
likely to hunt
• Some households have significant
income from hunting (> million sh)
• Senior and professional hunters
hunt to order
• Species of international concern
(e.g. elephant and pangolin) caught
as ‘bycatch’
Commercial:
• 42% of households hunt to sell
• Better off households are more
likely to hunt
• Some households have significant
income from hunting (> million sh)
• Senior and professional hunters
hunt to order
• Species of international concern
(e.g. elephant and pangolin) caught
as ‘bycatch’

18.
Perceived injustice:
• Households who suffer from
livestock predation more likely to
hunt
• Households that feel they haven’t
benefited from revenue sharing
more likely to hunt
• Revenge for crop raiding cited as a
common reason people hunt
Perceived injustice:
• Households who suffer from
livestock predation more likely to
hunt
• Households that feel they haven’t
benefited from revenue sharing
more likely to hunt
• Revenge for crop raiding cited as a
common reason people hunt

19.
Traditional cultural practices
• Many wildlife products used in
traditional rituals and medicine
• Sharp increase in hunting around
religious festivals
• Limited evidence that cultural
heritage drives hunting
Traditional cultural practices
• Many wildlife products used in
traditional rituals and medicine
• Sharp increase in hunting around
religious festivals
• Limited evidence that cultural
heritage drives hunting

20.
Enforcement:
• Limited effectiveness in deterring hunting
• Significant success in control of firearms
• More likely to impact poorer households
• Collusion an issue for professional and
senior hunters
Enforcement:
• Limited effectiveness in deterring hunting
• Significant success in control of firearms
• More likely to impact poorer households
• Collusion an issue for professional and
senior hunters
Community conservation:
• Perceptions of parks largely unfavourable
• Key informants feel let down by failure to
deliver on promises
• Anger at perceived lack of response to crop
raiding and livestock predation
Community conservation:
• Perceptions of parks largely unfavourable
• Key informants feel let down by failure to
deliver on promises
• Anger at perceived lack of response to crop
raiding and livestock predation
But there are solutions!But there are solutions!

21.
Thank you for listeningThank you for listening

22.
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
Elephant
Buffalo
Uganda kob
Waterbuck
Warthog

23.
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
Elephant
Buffalo
Uganda kob
Waterbuck
Warthog