Editorial Comment: Drones are useful, but not a magic bullet

Zimbabwe’s war against wildlife poachers went a gear up on Monday with the arrival into the country of drones that were donated by a South African company.

The unmanned aerial vehicles were donated by Drone Solutions (Pvt) Ltd and are valued at $150 000. The technology would be deployed to enhance surveillance over animal parks like never before and relay critical information on the security situations for appropriate responses to be taken.

This is the direction that the national anti-poaching strategy should have taken a few years back as poachers are getting more sophisticated, in many cases better than anti-poaching teams.

Receiving the donation in Harare, the Minister of Environment, Water and Climate Oppah Muchinguri-Kashiri said the equipment would help boost the integrated approach in the Government’s fight against poachers.

“I am excited that Zimbabwe is taking the right step in piloting the use of drones to protect her natural resources,” she said.

“The dream to integrate drone systems in our law enforcement strategies has been made possible through the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between my ministry and UDS Private Limited. Success in their upkeep depends on contributions from other players and that these new technologies do not work in isolation hence we appealed for the involvement from other stakeholders in supporting teams or starting similar projects.”

Elsewhere around the globe, a slightly different version of the technology is used to wage wars. But African countries are increasingly investing in drones for more constructive purposes – to combat poaching, with Tanzania, South Africa, and now Zimbabwe using them. In South Africa they are fighting elephant and rhino poachers, with much success.

Drones used for non-combat purposes are much smaller, typically measuring one to two metres across, have a flight time of 30 minutes to over an hour, a range of 30 km to over 50 km (as long as they are within line-of-sight of their operator), and can acquire high-resolution photographs, high-definition video footage. They can produce detailed maps of surveyed areas. They can be equipped with ordinary cameras/videos, night-vision equipment or thermal-imaging cameras so they can be used round the clock.

There are many advantages that government can derive from drones when they are used for wildlife conservation initiatives. They generally have superior surveillance capability to man’s and have a wider reach. They are comparatively cheaper to run as well than if the Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority were to deploy foot or motorised patrol in forests all the time.

However, they have a number of shortcomings as well, which means that they can only work best if they are part of a holistic anti-poaching strategy.

The machines have a limited battery life and their range must be within line-of-sight of the operator. Since they are machines, there is a possibility they can malfunction and possibly crash. When this happens the gadgets could get damaged beyond repair, which poses financial implications to authorities and frustrate anti-poaching activities. Their payload, including their thermal-imaging fittings can make them a little unwieldly. Environmental and physical conditions can hamper their effectiveness as well – strong winds and mountainous terrain can limit their functionality.

Although the equipment is unmanned, they again must be operated by skilled personnel. Their critics argue that a drone is only as good as its operator. This means that if the operator is not well trained to use them effectively, the usefulness of the drone would be compromised as an anti-poaching tool. At the same time, this means that the human element could still be a stumbling block in effective use of the technology in the fight against wildlife poaching.

In a few cases, some reports say, it is possible for more sophisticated, richer poachers to actually bribe the operators to provide sensitive information to them (poachers), enabling them to directly and more easily go after the animals.

In addition, a drone can capture and relay critical information, but it would only be useful if rangers act on the information for the right purpose.

Therefore, given these positive and negative factors, we have to point out that the drone can be useful, yes, but it is not the magic bullet. They can only do well for the country when they are part of the arsenal that can be unleashed from time to time to track down, arrest and punish poachers. The Government needs to continue with more conventional anti-poaching initiatives such as foot and motorised patrols, training of anti-poaching teams, working with local communities.

You Might Also Like

Comments