PATROL FREQUENCY VERSUS PRESENCE: NEGATIVE OUTCOMES RESULTING FROM THE EXCLUSION OF EITHER
Lawrence Munro
Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife

 

Abstract

Protected Area management face a paradox in their strategic deployment of Field Rangers. Rhino reserves employ the picket strategy to achieve frequency of patrols for ground cover. This system is augmented by the Anti-Poaching Units (APU) which have limited manpower. Field Ranger presence in the field is often assumed to be a foregone conclusion resulting from patrol frequency resonating from the picket system. Given the operational constraints that Protected Area managers are faced with, frequency in terms of ground cover is achieved but it is restricted in proportion to the static picket system from which the patrols emanate. Presence is therefore marginalised with the result that some areas are facing an increased vulnerability to security concerns such as rhino poaching. Furthermore, the modern “information age” is enabling rhino poaching syndicates to capitalise on the static nature of the picket patrol system when used in isolation. The resultant negative outcome from decreased frequency homogenously throughout the Protected Areas is retarding Field Ranger presence in the field, ultimately leading to increased vulnerability to rhino poaching.

 

Presentation Topic
PATROL FREQUENCY VERSUS PRESENCE: NEGATIVE OUTCOMES RESULTING FROM THE EXCLUSION OF EITHER
Contact Mr Munro:
Email Lawrence Munro