Category: Kalahari Tracker Project

Foreword 

In the past decade, there has been a substantial shift in both the United Nations and the environmental conservation sector toward giving greater recognition and respect to the knowledge systems of indigenous peoples. For two decades, the UNESCO Local and Indigenous Knowledge Systems programme has contributed to the promotion of indigenous peoples’ participation in the UN system and supporting their advocacy for greater understanding of their knowledge, systems of transmission, their values, practices, beliefs, languages and ways of understanding the world. 

Major global platforms are currently upgrading their understanding of indigenous knowledge and the participation of knowledge holders in knowledge production, scientific assessment, and eventually in shaping decision-making and policies at different scales. The Intergovernmental Science Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystems Services (IPBES) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are systematically including indigenous and local knowledge in assessments. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change has created the Local Communities and Indigenous Knowledge Platform and the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, building on Articles 8j and 10c, plus a decade of cooperation with UNESCO, is negotiating the place of indigenous people and indigenous knowledge in the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. 

A challenging area of the interface of formal science and indigenous knowledge systems revolves around evidence, data and validation of knowledge. Scientific method is based on the principle of independent verification and validation of the findings of others in their system. Indigenous knowledge is produced in situ for different purposes than science, through different means and by different institutions. Indigenous knowledge is part of a social and cultural system that goes beyond the modalities of science and is an inherent part of daily life. Given the colonial history of marginalisation of indigenous peoples and a legacy of European knowledge systems being considered superior to others, there is a reluctance by many indigenous peoples to offer up their observations and analyses to another set of practitioners in the context of highly unequal power relations. 

Liebenberg has been one of the advocates for recognising the similarities between indigenous knowledge of biodiversity and complementary aspects of Western science. Indigenous peoples deal with observable facts, have highly developed understanding, analytical capacity and discernment about animal behaviour, tracks and traces, and this body of knowledge is passed from generation to generation through didactic methods, that involve precision, accuracy and verification within the parameters of their own systems. 

As scientists begin to recognise the importance of multiple evidence-based approaches to research, scenarios, modelling and assessments, there is an opportunity that the historical discrimination experienced by indigenous peoples may start to wane. This could, if fully implemented, address the exclusion of indigenous peoples from formal employment and 

remunerated roles in wildlife conservation, as well as transform their role in decision-making and natural resource governance. Today, very few indigenous peoples in Africa are able to be formally employed in protected areas and wildlife conservation, as they do not have requisite qualifications from schooling, despite often having highly developed knowledge of biodiversity, ecosystem functions, weather and climate change. 

In this article, Liebenberg, drawing on his decades of working with highly skilled San trackers, discusses and describes his experience of working with indigenous peoples to create a standardised and credible system of assessing knowledge of wildlife tracking and trailing, and evolving this into a system of certification that has international validity. 

For UNESCO, this is an opportunity to create dialogue about diverse knowledge systems, explore how different indigenous peoples are dealing with their interface with science, and promoting options which can both address historical discrimination and provide new opportunities for sustaining indigenous knowledge with greater scope for application inside and outside the wage economy. 

 

Nigel Crawhall, Chief of Section, LINKS 

08 November 2021

Since Namibia gained independence in 1990 Community Based Natural Resource
Management (CBNRM) has gained importance as a tool for increased rural development. In
1996 the Namibian Communal Areas Conservancy legislation was passed by Cabinet. This
legislation has effectively given conditional rights over wildlife and tourism to communal
area dwellers who meet legal requirements. These rights, however, also bring responsibilities
and conservancies need to demonstrate to government that they are capable of managing their wildlife sustainably.

To manage these resources conservancies need to have an understanding of their wildlife
resource and need to monitor it in a manner that is acceptable to themselves and the
government agency responsible for wildlife conservation.

Application

West Caprivi

In 1990 the Community Game Guard (CGG) system was implemented in the Caprivi region
of Namibia and the initial emphasis was to stop poaching. These CGG’s were chosen by their
respective communities and paid with donor funding. Besides the prevention of poaching,
other duties included assisting farmers with problem animal control, community feedback
meetings and wildlife monitoring.

The San CGG’s in the West Caprivi were particularly enthusiastic in collecting wildlife data
but it soon became apparent that a measure of effort was required as much of the data were
collected during random patrols which were conducted over a few days. At this stage a
consultant Dr Peter Goodman was contracted by the programme to assess and improve the
method of wildlife monitoring and include an index of effort.

The West Caprivi supports diverse wildlife with buffalo and elephant the most numerous. In
the dry season they tend to concentrate close to the Kwando and Kavango rivers. Anecdotal
evidence from the CGG’s suggested that they moved to the central woodland region during
the wet season. There was also strong evidence that there was movement of wildlife to
Angola in the north and even more to Botswana in the south.

Aerial censuses are conducted in the dry season and search effort is greatest in the
concentration areas along the two rivers. The central area is generally subjected to less search effort. It was thus decided to implement some of Dr Goodman’s recommendations and develop a monitoring system that would address some of the shortcomings mentioned above.
A census would be conducted that could measure the size and trend of the wildlife resource in
the wet season. An aerial census would not be appropriate due to the density of woody plants
in the wet season, while the densities of a number of smaller but important species are
relatively low and aerial detection rates would be very low. It was thus decided to conduct a
foot line transect census with CGG’s and community volunteers playing a leading role.

A series of transects based on lines of longitude three minutes apart were calculated and
individual routes chosen on grounds of accessibility (See Map A). For the first two years
observations were recorded on paper forms and a GPS was used to navigate along the
transect. Data were then entered into a database. In 1999 the CyberTracker was used for the
first time, this increased the efficiency of the count by being able to download directly into
the CyberTracker database and then exporting the data to the dedicated wildlife database.
Much effort was spent by technical staff in developing the CyberTracker sequences and
database, but being a once off development activity and then testing it in the field, made the
effort and expense worthwhile. Map B is the record of where the CGG’s walked and where
each observation was recorded. The logistics of this count cannot be under estimated in terms of time and expense. A total of 560 km were walked during the five days of the census. Not only did teams have to contend with the long distance walked (between 15 and 22 kilometres) but also the thick bush and long grass as the count is always conducted in April at the end of the rainy season.

East Caprivi

During 1999 game count transects were set up in East Caprivi registered and emerging
conservancies to monitor wildlife. Due to low numbers of wildlife most data collected is
spoor data.

In each conservancy discussions were held with the CGG’s on how best to apply the
CyberTracker. It was decided that a similar system to the West Caprivi annual transect count
be set up i.e. a simple system which maximises local participation. As the conservancies are
much smaller than the West Caprivi it would be easier to do the counts more often. Thus
counts could be done to coincide with the different seasons and therefore record the changes
in distribution according to wet and dry seasons.

Transects were planned according to the size of the area and randomly placed two or three
minutes apart (See Map C). Waypoints were created so the GPS GOTO function could be
used to ensure the CGG’s walked the same transect during each count. Training was also
undertaken by technical advisors and San CGG’s from the West Caprivi. Many of the San
CGG’s had developed a “knack”for the CyberTracker and were initially used during the first
counts in the East Caprivi to do on job training.

Over the past three years of successive counts individual East Caprivi CGG’s have become
more adept at using the Palmpilot and CyberTracker program and they are often used as trainers for new CGG’s or for demonstrating to project visitors how the CyberTracker works.
An indirect spin-off of the CyberTracker is the sense of pride it has created among the CGG’s
(many of whom have low levels of literacy) on how they have mastered a hand held
computer. The East Caprivi Conservancy CyberTracker counts have also become an
important activity where all the CGG’s from the various Conservancies and areas outside
Conservancies come together, meet up and get involved in monitoring other areas. During
these counts the CGG’s are moving from area to area, camping together and generally
discussing their work and building up camaraderie. Map C shows the present use of the
CyberTracker in East Caprivi.

Although wildlife population numbers cannot be estimated in the East Caprivi conservancies
due to the low numbers of wildlife sightings, the CyberTracker data can nevertheless be used
for developing trends while important distribution data are also acquired

Further use can be made of this data in the Conservancy management plan where land-use
planning and zonation are important. Trend data is also important for adaptive management.
During a workshop on the formation of a management plan CyberTracker data was overlaid
onto the conservancy map and the committee members used this and other data to zone their
wildlife and farming areas.

Map A

Map B

Map C

Challenges

The CyberTracker counts have highlighted the fact for many conservancy committees that
large numbers of wildlife do not occur in their conservancies. Thus the importance of the
national Parks in the Caprivi has increased as a reservoir of wildlife which can re-populate
conservancies.

Maintenance of hardware and software in the Caprivi is probably one of the biggest
problems. The laptop computer used for the downloading has had problems which resulted in
it being sent out of the area for repairs. Due to this no counts have yet been conducted this
year. Furthermore technical input is often required from Windhoek when problems are
encountered in the field. Technical problems are a great inhibiting factor which seriously
challenges the sustainability of CyberTracker counts.

Replacement costs of hardware is high and unlikely to be sustainable in the long term when
conservancies shall need to cover their own costs.

While there are the challenges of technical and financial sustainability, there is also a major
challenge facing technical advisors who need to ensure that data are managed and analysed
optimally and that conservancy management bodies are able to use these data to make better
informed decisions. This challenge is being confronted a d creative ways to deal with it are
presently being sought.

Simon Mayes
2002

The Indigenous Peoples of Africa Co-ordinating Committee (IPACC) worked with regional San organisations, the Nyae Nyae Conservancy, Cybertracker Conservation, WWF Namibia and traditional San trackers to organise a week-long advocacy training workshop on the assessment and certification of traditional knowledge of tracking.

The workshop was part of the IPACC plan to promote awareness of clauses 8J and 10C in the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and to help regional indigenous peoples’ organisations focus on how traditional knowledge can be formally recognised and used as a resource in both livelihoods and inter-generational transmission of knowledge.

Traditional knowledge of biodiversity, which is gained from tracking, hunting and gathering wild food, is reducing across Southern Africa, yet this knowledge is very important in the labour market. Formal schooling is contributing to the loss of skills and knowledge about nature. With the policy makers waking up to the impact of climate change and the need to monitor biodiversity and environmental changes and patterns, traditional knowledge of biodiversity has become substantially more important at national and international levels. All SADC countries have protected areas which require expert knowledge to fight poaching, monitor biodiversity and assist both researchers and tourists. Tracking is the core skill which feeds all of these efforts.

IPACC Secretariat designed the workshop in consultation with regional San leaders and in cooperation with the major San organisations of the region, Trust for Okavango Culture and Development Initiative (TOCADI), Letloa, Kuru Family of Organisations, Komku Trust, the Working Group of Indigenous Minorities of Southern Africa (WIMSA), SA San Council, !Xun and Khwe Councils, Integrated Rural Development and Nature Conservation (IRDNC – Namibia) and the SouthAfrican San Institute (SASI).

We received excellent logistical and other support from the team at WWF Namibia and Ms Stacey Main working for a local mining concession, Mount Burgess Mining. Mr Louis Liebenberg of Cybertracker Conservation helped co-facilitate the workshop and ran orientation sessions on tracking assessment and accreditation. The workshop was primarily funded by the Finnish Foreign Ministry. We extend our thanks to the Finnish Embassy in Cape Town.

San participated in the workshop from the following communities:

• !Kung from Omaheke, Namibia
• !Xun from Platfontein, SouthAfrica
• ‡Khomani fromAndriesvale, SouthAfrica
• Hai||om youth from the Outjo area, Namibia
• Ju|’hoansi from Tsumkwe East and Tsumkwe West areas
• Khwe from Platfontein, SouthAfrica
• Khwe from Rundu / Caprivi, Namibia
• Khwe and ||Anikhwe from Shakawe and Shaikarawe, Botswana
• Naro from D’Kar, Botswana

The workshop took place from 25 – 29 September 2006 in the Klein Dobe camp, north of Tsumkwe, Namibia. Tsumkwe is the main town of the Nyae Nyae Conservancy, the first community based Conservancy in Namibia and home to the Ju|’hoansi people, the largest San community in SouthernAfrica. N||oq’àn!’àè is the original name of the Conservancy, meaning ‘a stoney open piece of ground’. The workshop took place on the traditional n!ore territory of Mr. Bo Kga-Xha. His family hosted us during the 5 day workshop for which we are deeply grateful.

An important component of the Tsumkwe workshop was a dialogue between representatives of different levels of government and the San knowledge-holders. We were particularly fortunate to host the Deputy Minister of the Environment for Namibia at our remote location at Klein Dobe
in the Nyae Nyae Reserve. The speech by the Honourable Leon Jooste is reproduced with his permission here.

The workshop was opened by the Tsumkwe East Councillor, Mr Kxao Moses ‡Oma, previous manager of Nyae Nyae Conservancy and previous Chairperson of the WIMSA Board.
We had active participation by the staff of the Ministry of the Environment and Tourism and staff of Nyae Nyae Conservancy. There were 32 principal participants: 25 men and 7 women. The local Ju|’hoansi community participated in the workshop with many of the women and youth receiving translation on the edges of the workshop and in the report-backs in the Ju|’hoan language.

The workshop was facilitated by Nigel Crawhall (IPACC), Annetta Bok (‡Khomani San representative on the IPACC Executive Committee) and Louis Liebenberg (Cybertracker). The workshop was conducted in English and Afrikaans, with interpretation to and from Naro, Khwedam and Ju|’hoansi.

This report follows the programme with notes from contributions and speeches given by the various delegates. The workshop alternated between discussions / workshop format and practical activities. Themes included:

• Namibia’s strategy of using Conservancies to protect biological diversity and fight poverty in rural areas; How tracking knowledge can be assessed, how certification operates regionally, and how communities can develop their own curricula and certification capacity;
• Threats to inter-generational transmission of knowledge of biological diversity and the causality of this;
• Job creation related to tracking qualifications;
• How to lobby NGOs to better understand San culture and knowledge and use this as a resource;
• Women and traditional knowledge – a hidden resource in San communities;
• Cybertracker – using technology to strengthen the role and function of traditional trackers in scientific research and conservation.

Practical components of the workshop included going out into bush sites (we were camping at a remote bush camp) and learning how tracks are graded for difficulty of identification. Participants enjoyed this aspect and were sometimes surprised by their abilities. There was some confusion at the start about whether this was an official assessment. Despite previous emails and letters, some delegates thought they would receive a full grading and get certified at the IPACC workshop. Louis Liebenberg, a world expert in tracking and the most senior assessor in southernAfrica, explained that it takes up to 10 days to do a high level tracking assessment and the maximum team of people is eight. It sometimes takes a full day to track animals like lions and identify their precise details (number, sex, age, health) without putting the tracking team at risk.

In this section, we have provided a review of the main discussions which took place during the four day workshop.

Louis Liebenberg introduced the workshop to the Cybertracker. He explained that he studied tracking with old masters in Lone Tree, Botswana. N!ate and other !Xõó people taught him how to hunt and track. The !Xõó people are bow hunters. This is the highest form of tracking. Tracking with dogs is much easier as they follow the scent. If you have no dogs, you only
have your own eyes, ears and nose to guide you.

Louis developed a small computer which you can carry with you. It allows you to capture information about what you see in the bush. This information becomes data when you apply it to study nature or animals. It allows you to use the satellites above the planet to record where you are and where you are moving. Technology provides a bridge between what good trackers know and what conservation managers need to know.

Abstract

Knowledges are not distinct entities. They cannot be held in isolation as if bounded,
discrete, or systematic. They are far too dynamic and complex to be thought of in this
way. ‘Scientific’ and ‘Indigenous’ knowledge, however, are often discussed polemically
and held in dialogical tension against one another. They are part of a set of dualisms that
work under certain universal assumptions critical to Western epistemology. These
dualisms include modernity/tradition; nature/culture; and subject/object. This study
examines the multiple perspectives, including both scientists and local trackers, involved
in the Western Kgalagadi Conservation Corridor Project (WKCC) in an attempt to
resolve some of these dualisms. It focuses on the dimensions of tracking animals and data
collection with a GPS technology known as ‘Cybertracker’. Involving both scientists and
people from the Kalahari with knowledge of tracking animals, the dynamics of
knowledge production and the movement of knowledge are explored.

Their work together demonstrates ways that movement and embodiment are central to the production of knowledge. Knowledge production and the relationship between diverse knowledges and approaches in the WKCC project are investigated without reducing them to the same epistemological foundation or holding them in dualistic opposition. Knowledges become part of networks and engage with one another through their movement, embodiment, and interaction with various non-human subject-objects. The use of the Cybertracker databasing technology shows that an engagement of multiple perspectives, the significance of movement, performance, historical connections, and subject-object relations in a variety of contexts are key to understanding the production of knowledge. The movement, agency, and relatedness demonstrated in various ‘knowledge objects’, including data, shows that the complexities involve a continual exchange of influence in which knowledges are always changing. The presence of diverse knowledges, expressed in both their relatedness and their tensions, are evident in their very movement in these networks as actors and the interwoven trails they leave behind. In the process, the boundaries between the dualisms become blurred, if not irrelevant.

Background to the Development of CyberTracker and the role of the Kalahari trackers.

CyberTracker has its origins in an apparent paradox in human evolution: the brain evolved both in size and in neurological complexity over millions of years. A fully modern brain had evolved at a time when all humans were hunter-gatherers. Yet the same brain that has been adapted for the needs of hunter-gatherer subsistence, today deals with the subtleties of modern mathematics and physics. To resolve this paradox, it can be argued that the art of tracking may have been the origin of science, requiring the same creative hypothetico-deductive reasoning that is required for mathematics and physics.

Scientific reasoning may well be an innate ability of the human mind. If the art of tracking was the origin of science, then modern-day trackers should be able to do science. However, some of the best traditional trackers in Africa cannot read or write. To overcome this problem, the CyberTracker was developed with an icon-based user interface that enabled expert non-literate trackers to record complex geo-referenced observations on animal behaviour.

In 1991 !Nate asked me to help them. They could no longer live as hunter-gathers and needed jobs. Wildlife in the Kalahari has been decimated by fences that cut off migration routes. It was no longer viable to live as hunter-gatherers. And the art of tracking was dying out. After discussions around the fire, it was decided that I should try to find a way to create jobs for trackers. Only by developing tracking into a modern profession, will tracking itself survive into the future.

Revitalising Tracking Skills In order to revitalize tracking skills, I initiated the Tracker Evaluation system in South Africa. But what was most significant is that of all the trackers who were evaluated over the years, Karel Benadie and James Minye, working with the CyberTracker, showed the most rapid improvement in tracking skills. Karel explained that the CyberTracker helped him improve his tracking skills in two ways: In the past, he may have walked past a small hole, but with the CyberTracker he would stop to investigate the tracks going into the hole in order to record the observation. So the CyberTracker made him look at tracks and signs that he may otherwise have ignored. But the second reason is perhaps more inspiring – the CyberTracker motivated him to record all his observations, because he knew that one day his children will be able to see his work. In addition to the Tracker certificates, which motivated trackers to improve their skills, the CyberTracker also proved to be an effective tool to revitalize the art of tracking.

Back in the Kalahari, I worked with David Attenborough on the BBC film showing Karoha doing the Persistence Hunt in 2001. As part of the agreement, the BBC donated a CyberTracker unit, a Desktop Computer and a solar charger to the community of Kagcae. This gave Karoha the opportunity to demonstrate that he can master the CyberTracker technology – not just collect data, but download the data, view the data on maps, and recharge the batteries. While the project successfully demonstrated his ability to use the technology, funding was still needed to pay trackers to collect data on an ongoing basis.

Persistence hunting may be the most ancient form of hunting, possibly going back two million years, long before the invention of the bow-and-arrow or the domestication of dogs. After two million years, Karoha may well be the last hunter who has been doing the persistence hunt. Yet of all the hunters at Kagcae, Karoha is the most proficient in using the CyberTracker. In Karoha, one individual not only represents one of the most ancient human traditions, but also the future of tracking with computers. Karoha’s story represents the most profound cultural leap – a story that gives hope for the future.

From its origins in the Kalahari, CyberTracker has now found its way into conservation projects worldwide. Most users simply use CyberTracker to record data. But the art of tracking also represents the most sophisticated and refined form of human observation. A fleeting glimpse of a small bird disappearing into a thick bush is closer to a sign of a bird than a clear sighting. A distant sighting of a whale in rough seas can be just as difficult to identify as an indistinct track. A dried out twig, with no flowers or green leaves, can make identification of a plant as difficult as identifying the faintest sign in the sand.

Whether looking at birds, butterflies, plants, whales, tracks or signs, human observations can be infinitely complex. The trackers of the Kalahari can inspire the development of increasingly refined observation skills. The ancient art of tracking can be revitalized and developed into a new science to monitor the impact of climate change on biodiversity – a new science that can help us solve one of the most complex challenges of the future.

The Western Kgalagadi Conservation Corridor Project

The Western Kgalagadi Conservation Corridor Project was initiated in 2008, sponsored by Conservation International and managed by Moses Selebatso.

The Kalahari is sparsely populated with wildlife, making it essential to gather data based on tracks and signs, and not only sightings of animals. The very nature of the monitoring programme requires that the individuals who gather the data should be competent trackers. Ideally, for scientific monitoring a tracker should obtain at least 95% – only three of the 13 candidates selected for the Workshop obtained more than 95%. At least half the candidates should have 95% to ensure accurate data gathering, since they work in teams of two.

Candidates came from ten villages representing five language groups and their ages ranged from 23 to 52.

Their tracking experience can be rated by four broad categories. Two have done persistence hunting (PH), which is perhaps the most ancient and demanding method of hunting. Three have done bow-and-arrow (B&A) hunting. These individuals, who are all older than 45
years, represent the old traditional generation of hunters. The older traditional hunters usually have the most refined tracking skills and traditional knowledge.

Candidates younger than 45 have hunted only with dogs and horses and some have used snares. This group represents the younger generation of hunters who grew up after dogs and horses have been introduced to communities in the central Kalahari. Some of the candidates have been working as trackers for commercial safari hunters and some as escort guides for tourists.

Tracker Evaluation Results

The focus of the WKCC workshop was mainly to train individuals in using the CyberTracker equipment and software applications. I conducted an informal tracker evaluation while testing their ability to use the CyberTracker equipment.

The results may not reflect an objective evaluation, since all the candidates were not tested on the same tracks (they were tested in small groups of up to four at a time). In addition, when I tested the four best trackers, Xhiko and !Nate challenged each other and searched out the most difficult tracks they could find in an attempt to catch each other out. The results for the four best trackers may therefore not reflect that of an objective evaluation, since the tracks selected were on average more difficult that a normal evaluation would have required. Under a normal evaluation the four best trackers would probably have scored a higher percentage. The results should therefore be regarded as provisional, although it can be used to select the best candidates for conducting scientific surveys.

In particular, !Nate should have earned his Senior Tracker certificate (100%), but made one mistake that disqualified him – he mistook a perfectly clear Wild Dog track for a Brown Hyena track. He simply did not look at the track properly and gave his answer after glancing at the track from a distance. He correctly identified Wild Dog tracks in the week before this test and subsequently, so it is not that he did not know the track. He also identified extremely difficult tracks that were much more difficult, so it is not because of lack of skill. The mistake was due to carelessness and lack of discipline. The other three trackers identified it correctly and laughed at him for making such a mistake. !Nate himself immediately recognized his mistake and laughed at himself.

What this particular mistake illustrates is that even the best trackers need to be more disciplined when gathering scientific data. In a hunting context it does not matter if they make a few careless mistakes, since tracking is self-correcting and they would soon realize if they made a mistake. But when gathering scientific data with the CyberTracker mistakes like this should not be made. It is recommended that trackers work in pairs, since this would reduce the chances of unnecessary mistakes being recorded – a second tracker will usually correct a careless mistake. While !Nate should be awarded a Senior Tracker certificate (or possibly a Master Tracker certificate), I decided to hold back on awarding him a Senior certificate until I am satisfied that he understands the importance of not making careless mistakes.

Master Tracker Evaluation

In 2010 I conducted a follow-up evaluation of !Nate, Karoha and Njoxlau, as well as /Uase Xhukwe (who was not selected for the WKCC project). The most significant result was that all four trackers excelled in the Track & Sign evaluation, not making any of the type of mistakes they made in 2008. !Nate in particular made a point of searching out the most difficult tracks and signs that he could find in order to show me what he can do. It is clear that the disappointing results in 2008 was due to the trackers becoming rusty because they no longer hunted as often as in the past. After using the CyberTracker for scientific wildlife surveys over a two-year period, their tracking skills improved dramatically and were at the exceptional level that I observed ten to twenty years ago when they were hunting on a regular basis.

This project therefore demonstrated the value of CyberTracker in revitalizing traditional tracking skills. !Nate, Karoha, Njoxlau and /Uase were awarded the Traditional Master Tracker certificate in 2010.

Tracks used to test trackers

Tracks of antelope tested were:

Wildebeest, Hartebeest, Kudu, Springbok, Duiker, Steenbok.

Tracks of mammals with padded feet were:

Lion, Leopard, Cheetah, Brown Hyaena, Wild Dog, Domestic Dog, Caracal, Jackal, Aardwolf, Honey Badger, Porcupine, Antbear, Bat-eared Fox, Cape Fox, African Wild Cat, Small Spotted Cat, Genet, Springhare, Yellow Mongoose, Striped Polecat, Slender Mongoose, Suricate, Ground Squirrel, Hare.

Tracks of birds were:

Ostrich, Secretary Bird, Kori Bustard, Korhaan, Hornbill, Crow, Dikkop.

Snake track: Puff Adder

In general, the animals that were correctly identified
most often include Ostrich, Steenbok, Duiker, Springbok, Jackal, Antbear and Lion.

Animals that were identified incorrectly most often were the small mammals and birds.

Of particular concern from a scientific monitoring point of view are mistakes made with species that are important, such as Wildebeest, Cheetah and Honey Badger.

These included confusing Hartebeest with Wildebeest, made by trackers who scored 82% or less. For spoor data on Wildebeest only data from trackers who got more than 82% should be considered as reliable.

Those who scored 88% or less sometimes confused Honey Badger for Cheetah, or Cheetah for Hyaena or Leopard. For spoor data on Cheetah and Honey Badger, only data from trackers who got more than 90% should be considered reliable.

Selection of Additional Trackers

As a general rule, trackers who hunted with bow-andarrow would most likely be among the best trackers. Of the 13 candidates, the three who in the past hunted with bow-and-arrow were among the top four trackers. In general, hunters who have only hunted with dogs and horses would not have developed tracking to the same level as bow-and-arrow hunters. A special effort should
be made to include the older trackers who hunted or who still hunt with bow-and-arrow, since they would also have retained more of the traditional knowledge of the older generation. In particular, hunters like /Uase of Morgen near Kagcae should also be included in the project. !Nate and Karoha will know where to find /Uase and others who still hunt with bow-and-arrow.

Historically, dogs and horses have been introduced most recently in the area of the central Kalahari including the villages of Kagcae, Bere, West Hanahai, East Hanahai through to old Xade. Tracking skills tend to deteriorate when hunters abandon the bow-and-arrow and the persistence hunting methods to hunt with dogs and horses. The best trackers will therefore most likely be found in these villages and they will most likely be older than 45 years. Xhiko Johannes (34 years old) and Kebogile Babotse (23 years old and from Zutshwa) do, however,
show that exceptional individuals may be found outside the proposed geographical and age range.

A new Methodology to Select the best Trackers in a
Community

A fundamental problem in selecting the best trackers for scientific monitoring is that there are not many qualified Tracker Evaluators who can identify the best trackers and conduct an objective evaluation of tracking skills. To overcome this problem, it is proposed that a threephase methodology can be followed to identify the best trackers and work towards an objective evaluation of tracking skills.

Phase I: An objective statistical method that allows an observer with no tracking skills to identify the best trackers in a community.

Phase II: Using the best trackers identified in a community, a Relative Tracking Expertise Assessment can be used to rank the trackers from the best through to the least skilled.
Phase III: Once trackers have been ranked from the best through to the least skilled, the top trackers can be evaluated by a qualified External Tracker Evaluator to provide an objective assessment of the level of tracking skills.

Since the first two phases can be conducted by an observer with no tracking skills, it will be relatively inexpensive. This will save time and cost since the qualified evaluating individuals with low levels of tracking skills – he or she can focus on evaluating the best trackers in a
community.

It should be noted that Phases I and II can only identify individuals who are the best relative to other individuals in a particular community – it does not provide an objective assessment of the level of tracking skills. For example, in a community where traditional tracking has not
been practiced for an extended period, the “best” individual may not be a very good tracker at all.

The trackers selected for the WKCC project are now familiar with the testing procedure, but they are not qualified to assess the percentage scored. The percentage scored is based on a three-point system for easy, difficult and very difficult signs. Only qualified Evaluators can issue Tracker Certificates, since it requires an understanding of the three-point system to conduct an
objective evaluation (see www.cybertracker.org).

Even if a Relative Tracking Expertise Assessment does not provide an objective evaluation of tracking skills, it will provide valuable data for future Tracker Assessments, since it will make it possible to select the best trackers for a formal evaluation. This will save time and resources, since it will not be necessary for an Accredited Evaluator to assess all trackers in all the villages.

Phase I: Procedures for identifying the Best Known Trackers in a community

An external observer (with no tracking expertise) can use the following procedure to identify the two best trackers in a community. These two trackers would be the Best Known Trackers for that particular community. The procedure is based on the assumption that the track identification of the best trackers will have the closest correlation to the true identity of the animals and that the results of the two best trackers will therefore have the closest correlation with each other. However, this method cannot determine which one is the best, since the external observer would not be able to tell which one of the two best made the most mistakes. For the most reliable results, the group of trackers tested should be as large as possible, at least more than ten individuals.

 

1. Each tracker should take turns to point out and circle the most difficult tracks they can find. To avoid bias each tracker should be given the opportunity to point out the same number of tracks to be tested.
2. Testing them one-by-one, the external observer writes down the answer each tracker gives. After being tested on a particular track, trackers should wait in a separate area away from those who have not yet been tested, so that they cannot communicate with each other while being tested.
3. A minimum of 35 tracks should be tested, but ideally about 50 tracks should be tested. After testing the trackers, the observer should analyze the answers to determine which of the trackers show the closest correlation with each other. For example, if two of the trackers gave mostly the same answers, while others gave answers that differed more often from each other, then the two whose answers correlates best with each other probably also correlates best with the true answers. These two trackers would be the Best Known Trackers for that community.

Phase II: Procedures for a Relative Tracking Expertise Assessment

The Relative Tracking Expertise Assessment should be conducted by the Best Known Trackers in an area. For the WKCC project I recommend !Nate (Shorty) Brahman, Horekhwe (Karoha) Langane and Xhiko Johannes. Since these trackers have already been identified, it is not necessary for the WKCC project to conduct the Phase I evaluation – the project can conduct the Phase II evaluations to rank trackers from best to least skilled.

By conducting a Relative Tracking Expertise Assessment, they can order the trackers from the best candidate (fewest mistakes) to the candidate who made the most mistakes. The top trackers in the villages that fall within the recommended geographic range (Bere – Kagcae – West Hanahai – East Hanahai – Xade), would hopefully have a high level of tracking expertise.

1. The identified Best Known Trackers should point out and circle the most difficult tracks they can find.
2. Testing the trackers one-by-one, the external observer writes down the answer each tracker gives. The Best Known Trackers will confirm whether or not the answers are correct. After being tested on a particular track, trackers should wait in a separate area away from those who have not yet been tested, so that they cannot communicate with each other while being tested.
3. A minimum of 35 tracks should be tested, but ideally about 50 tracks should be tested.

After testing the trackers, the observer should analyze the answers to determine which of the trackers made the fewest mistakes, and order the trackers from the fewest mistakes to the largest number of mistakes. This result would provide a Relative Tracking Expertise Assessment.

Customization of CyberTracker Software

Customisation of the software was done before field training was conducted. However, when participants made mistakes or when something was not clear, additional refinements was made to the User Interface design to make it easier to use.

Training involved both classroom training as well as field training. The most important aspect was training and evaluating their ability to master the CyberTracker User Interface to ensure that no input errors are made. Most of the participants were able to get 100% for the CyberTracker User Interface evaluation within 10 days of training.

While he had no problems with recording icons that are self-evident, such as species, !Nate initially struggled with some of the species. After improving the icons to make them easier to distinguish, he had no problem recording the correct species. For some of the black and white icons I produced more detail. For the large predators, which were not very clear in the black-and-white icons, I created colour icons.

Only !Nate struggled with the “Total Number”, “Many” (Unknown Number), “Unknown Sex” categories. These are arbitrary definitions and were therefore initially difficult to symbolize with icons.

Results of User Interface Evaluation, indicating the number of input errors made by each candidate on 7 days tested.

Both the “Unknown Number” as well as “Unknown Sex” used a question mark as an icon. This was changed to include a Male/Female with a question mark in the icon, after which he found it easier to distinguish. His persistence was finally rewarded when on the last day of the workshop he finally got 100%. Each candidate was tested until he or she made no input errors and obtained 100% (see table below). However, it is recommended that all participants should do refresher training before each survey to make sure that they remember how to use the CyberTracker.

Database Structure

The CyberTracker database includes:

• Names of observers for data validation
• GPS Timer settings to measure Effort
• Survey Methods
• Main data categories

Main data categories include:

• Hoofed mammals
•  Large mammals with padded feet
• Small mammals with padded feet
• Birds
• Reptiles
• Plants
• Water points
• Signs of humans
• Field notes

Hoofed mammals include: springbok, duiker, warthog, springbok, kudu, red hartebeest, wildebeest, gemsbok, eland and giraffe.

Large mammals with padded feet include: lion, leopard, cheetah, brown hyaena, spotted hyaena, wild dog, aardwolf and black-backed jackal. Small mammals with padded feet include: striped polecat, yellow mongoose, slender mongoose, suricate, ground squirrel, springhare, scrub hare, Cape hare, small -spotter genet, large-spotted genet, small spotted cat, African wildcat, domestic cat, caracal, bat-eared fox, cape fox, hedgehog, porcupine, honey badger, ant bear, pangolin and baboon.

Birds include: ostrich, kori bustard, secretary bird, vulture, eagle.

Reptiles include: snake, monitor lizard and tortoise (species can be filled in with a field note).
Plants include: water bearing plants, medicinal plants and edible plants (species can be filled in with a field note) Observation Type include:

• Sighting
• Spoor (footprint)
• Droppings
• Hear
• Other signs

For signs, the age of the sign is given as very fresh, fresh or old. For counts, there is the option to give an exact total or an estimate if there are too many to count (such as a large heard of springbok that may be hundreds or even more than a thousand). For exact total, the count include the number of unknown adults (sex unknown), number of male adults, number of female adults, number of juveniles (young) and number of new born (baby).

Habitat recorded with every sighting include: pan, grassland, open woodland, woodland, scrub. Habitat condition include dry, mild or green. Pan water levels recorded include dry, almost dry, half, full. For water points a distinction is made between a pan and a small water pool.

Human impact recorded include: Humans, horses, donkeys, dogs, cattle. The number of cattle is also recorded.

A tracking sequence is also included for tracking a specific individual animal.

Basic Technical Support

Several volunteers were also taught to start the generator, download the data onto a laptop and to recharge the batteries of the CyberTracker handheld computers. The volunteers included Karoha, Kebogile, Piet, Odirile and Ipoletseng.

Field Surveys

Field surveys were conducted to test whether candidates could reliably gather data and can use the CyberTracker equipment under field conditions. Field surveys included vehicle surveys and foot counts.

After the initial training was completed, 11 days of Foot Counts conducted over 17 days produced 5 202 observations. 776 km were covered on foot over 276 hours. Vehicle counts were done on 13 days, producing 381 observations over 370 km in 60 hours of counting.

Examples of the results are mapped on the following pages.

Foot Counts (above) were conducted from roads in teams of two. Vehicle Counts (below) were conducted from the vehicle as Foot Count teams were dropped off at various points.

CyberTracker calculates the Effort for Foot Counts (above) or other survey methods. For each species CyberTracker also calculates an Index of Abundance (below), which makes allowance for varying Effort.

Point data of antelope species can be displayed showing several species together, such as springbok, kudu, wildebeest and gemsbok (above) or one species if the density of points is too high to show more than one species, such as the steenbok (below).

Point data showing large predators, including cheetah, wild dog, leopard, lion, brown hyaena and spotted hyaena (above) and smaller mammals such as honey badger, antbear, Cape fox, bat-eared fox and porcupine (below).

Distribution of predators in relation to cattle in red (above) and in relation to prey species in blue (below).

Perceptions of Participants
Interviews with the trackers have shown that employment is considered vital for their future. The oldest
trackers, !Nate, Karoha and Njoxlau, maintain that they
will always be hunters. But they also need employment.
Younger trackers, like Xhiko, who have only hunted
with dogs, maintain that hunting is difficult and that it is
better to have employment.

!Nate: “If people hunt with donkeys, the lions kill their donkeys. It is better to work for safari hunters, because they pay well. But when I cannot work for safari hunting, I hunt on my own. If I have a job, I will work, but if I have no job I will hunt. Working with CyberTracker
will be better than hunting. CyberTracker and hunting are the same, because hunting teaches CyberTracker and CyberTracker teaches tracking… you need to know all the tracks. But even if I work with CyberTracker, I cannot stop hunting, because hunting is my job, I grew up
with it and I will not forget it. Some of your children must go to school and some must carry on with hunting. If you have three children, then two must go to school, but one must hunt to help the other two with meat. If a child wants to go to school you must send him to school, but if a child does not want to go to school, he must learn to hunt”.

Karoha: “A job is better than hunting. Hunting now is difficult, but when I can I will hunt. When I can get a job I will take it. But when I have no job I will hunt. Even if I have a job all the time I will still go hunting – I will never stop hunting. CyberTracker and hunting is the same – one day I will work with CyberTracker, another day I will hunt. It is important that children go to school,
otherwise they cannot get jobs”.

Njoxlau: “I hunt with dogs, horses and donkeys. There are no lions in the Bere area. A job is better than hunting. You need money to send your children to school. This is important, because if you cannot read, you cannot get a job. It is better for children to read than to hunt – to learn something is important. Working with CyberTracker is better than hunting.”

Xhiko: “Nowadays we don’t want to go around the bush. Sometimes lions attack us – it is difficult to kill them, and they kill our donkeys and horses. It is better to have a job than to hunt. You must have money to send your children to school. It is better for children to go to school than to hunt. It would be better for me to get a job using the CyberTracker, than to hunt. It is very important for children to go to school. But after school you must teach them about tracks”.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the WKCC project make an effort to identify at least three or four additional expert trackers from the older traditional generation of hunters. You can train someone to use the CyberTracker in ten days, but it may take five to ten years to reach the expert
tracker levels (Senior or Master Tracker). The expert tracker (even if he or she cannot read or write) should be paid more than younger apprentice trackers (who may be better at using the computer). This will give the younger trackers an incentive to improve their tracking skills. A special effort should be made to transfer tracking skills from the older expert trackers to the younger apprentice trackers.

Unfortunately the best trackers seem to be most vulnerable to alcohol abuse. When conducting a survey of several weeks, the base camp should be away from a village so that trackers cannot get access to alcohol. Logistically it may require more effort to set up camp, but the social management may be easier.

Surveys should be conducted as often as possible so that participants do not get rusty, both in terms of using the CyberTracker technology as well as giving the younger participants regular practice to improve their tracking skills.

Conclusion

The WKCC project was very successful and achieved significant results. Since my first visit to the central Kalahari in 1985, when I started working with !Nate, this is perhaps the most important field trip I have done. For the first time I feel hopeful that their exceptional tracking skills will be recognized and developed for the future. The WKCC project may be the most important turning point in the history of traditional Kalahari trackers.

8 February 2011

References

Biesele, M., and S. Barclay. 2001. Ju/’hoan women’s
tracking knowledge and its contribution to their husbands’ hunting success. African Study Monographs, suppl.26:67–84. Liebenberg, Louis. (1990). The Art of Tracking: The
Origin of Science. Cape Town: David Philip Publishers. Liebenberg, Louis. (2006). “Persistence Hunting by Modern Hunter-Gatherers”, Current Anthropology.
47:5.
Liebenberg, Louis. (In press). “The Relevance of Persistence Hunting to Human Evolution”, Journal of Human Evolution. Liebenberg, Louis, Lindsay Steventon, Karel Benadie
and James Minye. (1999). “Rhino Tracking in the Karoo
National Park,” Pachyderm, Number 27.
Liebenberg, Louis, Edwin Blake, Lindsay Steventon, Karel Benadie and James Minye. (1998). “Integrating Traditional Knowledge with Computer Science for the Conservation of Biodiversity”. Paper presented at the 8th International Conference on Hunting and Gathering
Societies, Osaka, Japan, October 1998.

In 1996 we developed an Icon User Interface design for handheld computers that enabled non-literate trackers to enter complex data.

When employed in large numbers over extended periods of time, trackers can gather large quantities of complex, rich biodiversity data that cannot be gathered in any other way. One significant result in the Congo was that data collected by trackers made it possible to alert health authorities to outbreaks of Ebola in wild animal populations, weeks before they posed a risk to humans. Trackers can also play a critical role in preventing the decimation of large mammal fauna due to poaching. Collectively, the seven case studies reviewed in this paper demonstrate the richness and complexity of scientific data contributed by community-based citizen science. Furthermore, trackers can also make novel contributions to science, demonstrated by scientific papers co-authored by trackers. This may have far-reaching implications for the development of an inclusive citizen science. Community-based tracking can significantly contribute to large-scale, long-term monitoring of biodiversity on a worldwide basis. However, community-based citizen science in developing countries will require international support to be sustainable.

The Old Way Kalahari San Project

Initiated 2018 and ongoing. However, visits to Kalahari was suspended in 2020 due to COVID-19 and will only resume once it is safe for Kalahari community to receive large groups of visitors.

https://www.theoldway.info/san-tracker-project

https://www.theoldway.info/copy-of-kalahari

Introduction of the Ju/’hoan San Tracker School at Klein Dobe

The world is experiencing a period of rapid environmental change caused by climate change, habitat destruction and pollution. Monitoring biodiversity is critical for effective conservation management. There are too few professional ecologists to deal with the scale of environmental challenges. Furthermore, global biodiversity conservation is seriously challenged by gaps in the geographical coverage of existing data. Locally based monitoring is particularly important in developing countries, where it can empower local indigenous communities to manage their natural resources.

The exceptional skills of indigenous Kalahari San Master Trackers may soon be lost. These trackers represent a unique part of humanity’s cultural heritage and are an invaluable resource for nature conservation worldwide.

The Nyae Nyae Conservancy is the last area in the Kalahari where indigenous San hunter-gatherers can still legally hunt with the traditional bow-and-arrow. In 2018 only 15 hunters were still actively hunting. In lieu of these threats a group of community members of the Nyae Nyae Communal Conservancy established the Ju/’hoansi Trackers Association and Close Corporation in 2019.

The Mission of the Ju/’hoansi Trackers Association and School includes:

1. To preserve and promote Kalahari San culture and skills, including ethical and sustainable traditional hunting and gathering practices.
2. To develop innovative ways, roles and services that will help the Ju/’hoansi and other indigenous communities meet the challenge of modern times while
   respecting the best of their traditional values.
3. Identify and mentor indigenous Kalahari San Master Trackers who can mentor a
   new generation of young trackers.
4. Develop a core team of specialists who can provide technical, scientific and
   financial support to the Tracker School.
5. Develop employment opportunities for trackers in the tourism, research, private
   sector and government APU and CBNRM sectors (to name a few) to ensure longterm sustainability.
6. Develop partnerships to expand the reach of the Tracker School.

The Ju/’hoan San Tracker School promotes a new “modern indigenous culture” that combines
indigenous knowledge and skills with modern science and technology. Activities at the Tracker School include Tracker Training and Certification as well as Research and Wildlife Monitoring.
The style of the Ju/’hoan Tracker School is designed to represent “modern indigenous culture” – the combination of indigenous and modern technology and skills. In this way it is different from the “Living Museum” concept.

The camps are designed to require minimal capital investment. Apart from the canvass tents and some basic equipment, the camp has been built and maintained by the community. The “modern
indigenous style”, which combines canvass dome tents with traditional grass huts is very attractive to the tracker visitor groups from America and Europe, who all responded very positively to the experience. As part of the modern indigenous style, tracker uniforms are a mix of khaki, light green, olive green, light grey, dark grey. This is so that they do not all look the same, but retain their individual personalities. Trackers should look different from field rangers which differentiates the Ju/’hoan Tracker School from the luxury lodge industry as well as the “Living Museum” type cultural experience.

Key certified Master Trackers play a critical role in the future of indigenous tracking skills of the Ju/’hoan San of the Nyae Nyae Conservancy and even the Kalahari San in other parts of Namibia and Botswana. The Master Trackers conduct the training and evaluation of Ju/’hoan San community members, as well as other indigenous communities in Namibia, Botswana and other parts of the world. The Ju/’hoan San Tracker School plays a crucial role in revitalising tracking skills for indigenous communities worldwide.

We have identified 45 trackers who are the most experienced trackers and hunters in the Nyae Nyae Conservancy. 10 Master Tracker certificates have been issued. We have a Master Tracke Training Team, consisting of /Ui G/aqo, /Ui /Kunta and Dam Debe, who can issue Tracker Certificates, based on the CyberTracker Tracker Certification system. The Master Tracker Training Team is currently mentoring 10 potential Master Trackers. The Training Team has also issued Tracker certificates Levels I to III to visiting trackers from Europe.

Two of the Master Trackers, /Ui G/aqo and /Ui /Kunta have travelled to France and Germany to interpret Palaeolithic Cave Art and to present their findings at an international science conference on Tracking and Palaeolithic Cave Art. The Master Tracker Training Team has also visited the Kruger National Park and the Shamwari Game Reserve in South Africa.

Additionally, the Tracker School hosts groups from Europe and North America. These visitors are often experienced trackers who want to learn more about tracking. This is a tracker learning
experience which is much more advanced than the cultural experience at other cultural tourism
venues.

The Ju/’hoansi Trackers Association has been collaborating with CyberTracker since 2017. The CyberTracker software, which was originally developed for Kalahari Master Trackers in 1997, is playing an increasing role in environmental conservation worldwide, not just for trackers, but for scientific research, wildlife monitoring, conservation management and anti-poaching. The software, which is free, has been downloaded more than 500 000 times worldwide.

CyberTracker is now developing a custom-built CyberTracker Online for the Ju/’hoan Tracker School. New features will include the development of CyberTracker Online for simple Online Apps and backend database for community projects. It will include Story Maps, that will combine data in tables and maps, photos and videos to make the data come alive and tell the stories of the Nyae Nyae landscape. Once the new CyberTracker Online software has been field-tested at the Ju/’hoan Tracker School, it will be made available to indigenous communities worldwide.

The Nyae Nyae Conservancy in the Kalahari, north-east Namibia, presents an opportunity to develop a conservation programme in one of the last true wilderness areas that can have far-reaching implications for indigenous communities and biodiversity conservation worldwide. The largest elephant population in Namibia is found in Nyae Nyae and the adjacent Khaudum National Park. Highly endangered species include the African Wild Dog, Cheetah and Pangolin, while Lion and Leopard also requires increased protection in the wild.

Kalahari San Master Tracker Programme: A New Platform to Scale Up and Replicate Biodiversity Field Projects that Empowers Indigenous Communities

The world is experiencing a period of rapid environmental change caused by climate change, habitat destruction and pollution. Monitoring biodiversity is critical for effective conservation management. There are too few professional ecologists to deal with the scale of environmental challenges. Furthermore, global biodiversity conservation is seriously challenged by gaps in the geographical coverage of existing data. Locally based monitoring is particularly important in developing countries, where it can empower local indigenous communities to manage their natural resources.

Louis Liebenberg has been working with Kalahari San Master Trackers since 1985. Over this period about 90% of these elder Master Trackers have passed away, showing a rapid decline over the last few decades. In 2018 only 15 hunters still actively hunted with the bow-and-arrow in the Nyae Nyae Conservancy in Namibia. The exceptional skills of indigenous Kalahari San Master Trackers may soon be lost. These trackers represent a unique part of humanity’s cultural heritage and are an invaluable resource for nature conservation worldwide. It is crucial that a programme of employment creation be initiated in order to ensure that their invaluable tracking expertise is passed on to the younger generation and that they mentor trackers from other parts of the world.

Case studies reported in scientific papers demonstrate the value of employing indigenous trackers using smartphones in large-scale, long-term monitoring of biodiversity, ecosystems and landscapes for conservation management. Trackers play a critical role in preventing poaching and the monitoring of rare and endangered species. Trackers are also employed in wildlife surveys using animal track counts and scientific research on animal behaviour.

The Nyae Nyae Conservancy in the Kalahari, north-east Namibia, presents an opportunity to develop a conservation programme in one of the last true wilderness areas that can have far-reaching implications for indigenous communities and biodiversity conservation worldwide. The largest elephant population in Namibia is found in Nyae Nyae and the adjacent Khaudum National Park. Highly endangered species include the African Wild Dog, Cheetah and Pangolin, while Lion and Leopard also requires increased protection in the wild. The central Kalahari in Botswana and the southern Kalahari dune field in South Africa also provide important locations for the proposed field programmes.

The Kalahari San Master Tracker Programme will:

1. Identify and mentor indigenous Kalahari San Master Trackers who can mentor a new generation of young trackers.
2. Develop the CyberTracker Online software platform that will provide remote support to trackers, so that the programme can be scaled up and replicated worldwide.
3. Develop a core team of specialists who can provide remote technical, scientific and financial support to indigenous trackers.
4. Develop employment opportunities for indigenous trackers to ensure long-term sustainability.

The initial CyberTracker Online application will be custom-built for the Kalahari San Master Tracker programme as a pilot project. Once it has been field tested, it will be developed into a customisable CyberTracker Online platform that will make it possible to replicate the remote support model with indigenous communities worldwide.