There is a well known rift between Prince William and Prince Harry, but it is based on an important aspect of conservation

Unfortunately, this disagreement, is not restricted to within the royal family, quite to the contrary.

There are many species that it is hard to live alongside – I am not thinking of animals like elephants or rhino or buffalo, which will also be dangerous to life, but provided you behave in the right way, you can live in close proximity with and rarely have a problem. Indeed, there are populations who succeed to live in the close proximity with big cats such as lions and leopards. However, in many other places, lions and leopards can turn to man-eating, or indeed livestock eating. These reserves, seem best to be kept as so called fortress reserves, where people live outside (though bushmen still live in these areas, and having passed down information for thousands of generations, so can live with big cats). A large number of these huge reserves were set up while the land was held as parts of empires, and as such may not be the best way to do things, though in many of these places, it is the way things are set.

On the other hand, William believes that you should be community led schemes which focus on locals and allow them to benefit from the wildlife. I would argue that these are not incompatible. My experience of the Kruger, was that many locals did very well from their proximity to the Kruger national park – not to the extent that perhaps they should, but those willing to learn can become guides, while the rest can work in hospitality and the like. Even beyond this, there is the ability for artisans to sell their products on the way in and out of the park.

Personally, I believe that the path falls somewhere between the two. It is essential, that were possible, migration routes between reserves are created before these become built over.

Our website aims to allow both – we have a space on this website (called Wild places) for listing large reserves, and chances to see the wildlife they contain. Alongside this, we offer our area called “in the shadow of mankind” which is aimed at all of the other wildlife, often found alongside where people live, or where their livestock lives. To a large extent, to allow the natural world to truly thrive, we need both ends of this spectrum.

Is Cambodia expanding protected areas by over a million hectares?

The expansion of 1.06 million hectares, or 2.62 million acres of protected land is in theory fantastic news. Unfortunately Cambodia has not shown that it is the best in protecting its land set aside for wildlife anyway.

A biodiverse corridor alongside land being used

Analysis suggests that much of this gained land appears to have come from nearby Biodiverse corridors, and many of these corridors are lived in and extremely degraded. As such, while it is a great move, it is just a first step. Instead Cambodia needs to be paying to move alll villages out of these corridors.

We will have to see what happens in the future. However what must be held in mind, is that changing the designation of land does nothing if action does not fallow – for an example look at Indonesia, where many parks are rapidly being transformed into palm oil plantations.

See Animals Wild

Read more news

Join as a wild member
to list your wild place & log in

Join as an ambassador supporter to
support this site, help save wildlife
and make friends & log in

Join as an Associate member
to assist as a writer, creator, lister etc & to log in

List a wild destination

List a destination in
the shadow of man

List a hide for animals more easily seen this way

Highlight some news
missed, or submit a
one-off article

Browse destinations for fun or future travel

Temporary membership
start here if in a hurry

Casual readers and watchers