Loading SafariFind...
Zambia’s elephant conservation picture is uneven: the Luangwa and Kafue landscapes are stable or possibly increasing, while Lower Zambezi is declining and Sioma Ngwezi has suffered catastrophic losses. Effective protection now depends on enforcement, connected habitats, community partnerships and reliable monitoring.
Quick answer: African elephant conservation in Zambia is producing mixed results in 2026. The Luangwa and Kafue landscapes hold stable or possibly increasing elephant populations, but Lower Zambezi is declining and Sioma Ngwezi National Park has lost elephants catastrophically, with the species almost extirpated there according to aerial-survey findings.
Zambia’s recovery is linked to sustained anti-poaching, protected-area management, community engagement and tourism partnerships. The country’s largest and most stable elephant population is in the Luangwa-Zambezi Valley, estimated at about 20,000 individuals by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Major challenges remain: illegal ivory killing, habitat degradation, human-elephant conflict, fragmented movement routes and limited conservation funding.
Last reviewed August 2026. Conservation data changes — see the cited sources for the latest figures.
Zambia is a southern African range state for the African savanna elephant, Loxodonta africana. Its large landscapes include the Luangwa Valley, Kafue National Park, the Lower Zambezi ecosystem and Sioma Ngwezi National Park. These areas form part of wider regional systems in which elephants move across administrative and international boundaries.
Elephants need extensive, connected habitat because they travel between dispersed food and water resources. Research on African savanna elephants identifies large, well-protected and connected landscapes as the strongest long-term conservation solution. Protected areas alone are not enough: the same research found that strictly protected areas contained only 48% of elephants in the region examined, making buffer zones, corridors and community-managed land important to conservation planning.
Zambia’s elephant history also explains why present-day protection matters. A prolonged poaching crisis from the 1960s through the late 1980s caused a collapse of more than 90% in the country’s elephant population, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. That legacy means current stability in some landscapes represents important progress, but it does not remove the risk of renewed losses.
Elephants are also a conservation priority beyond their intrinsic value. Their protection supports wider wildlife landscapes, ecological connectivity and nature-based tourism. However, conservation should not be judged only by visitor experience: population trends, law-enforcement performance, habitat security and benefits reaching neighbouring communities are more meaningful measures of success.
The available Zambia-wide results show strong geographical differences rather than one simple national trend. The 2015 Great Elephant Census survey found that elephant numbers appeared stable, or possibly increasing, in Luangwa and Kafue; Lower Zambezi showed a decline; and Sioma Ngwezi showed a catastrophic decline. These findings remain an important warning against presenting Zambia’s elephants as either wholly recovered or uniformly threatened.
| Landscape | Reported trend | Conservation significance |
|---|---|---|
| Luangwa | Stable or possibly increasing | One of Zambia’s two largest elephant landscapes and part of the Luangwa-Zambezi stronghold. |
| Kafue | Stable or possibly increasing | Protection and anti-poaching presence have been associated with more positive results in surveyed areas. |
| Lower Zambezi | Declining | Requires continued monitoring, law enforcement and landscape-level management. |
| Sioma Ngwezi National Park | Catastrophic decline | Elephants were described as almost extirpated in the survey findings. |
These results should be interpreted carefully. The 2015 survey is not a complete 2026 census, and elephant estimates differ according to survey coverage, methods and dates. The IUCN African Elephant Specialist Group’s 2024 forest-elephant report also notes that aerial counts can undercount elephants and that unsurveyed areas may contain additional animals. A separate African savanna elephant status report was scheduled for publication in 2026, so newer Zambia-specific figures should be checked against that assessment when available.
Ivory poaching remains one of the central risks to Zambia’s elephants. The country’s historical population crash demonstrates how quickly sustained illegal killing can undermine elephant conservation. Research across African savanna elephant landscapes identifies intensive and chronic ivory poaching as a major threat, specifically naming Kafue, Luangwa and Zambezi regions among areas that have been hard hit by illegal ivory poaching.
Poaching is particularly damaging because elephants reproduce slowly. The African Wildlife Foundation reports that elephant gestation lasts about 22 months and that cows generally produce one calf every three to six years. This means populations cannot quickly replace adult animals removed by poaching. Effective responses therefore require more than arrests: they depend on intelligence-led patrols, ranger welfare, evidence handling, prosecutions, monitoring and cooperation between protected-area operators and the Department of National Parks and Wildlife (DNPW).
Elephant habitat is under pressure when natural areas are converted, degraded or divided by farms, settlements and other land uses. Habitat change reduces access to food and water, can block movement and increases the likelihood that elephants encounter people.
Connectivity is especially important in Zambia’s wider transboundary setting. The Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area, or KAZA, includes Zambia, Angola, Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe and supports a combined elephant population estimated at about 228,000 in 2022. That figure is regional rather than Zambia-specific, but it illustrates why elephant management cannot stop at national borders. Maintaining movement routes and coordinating policies among range states are central objectives of KAZA planning.
Human-elephant conflict affects both rural livelihoods and elephant survival. Crop damage, risks to personal safety and losses to irrigation or other infrastructure can reduce community support for conservation when there is no fair and effective response.
The IUCN African Elephant Specialist Group identifies conflict as a direct threat to individual elephants and populations. It warns that governments must address crop losses and community safety if national elephant strategies are to retain local legitimacy. Practical responses may include better land-use planning, early warning, deterrents, rapid response teams, compensation or other locally appropriate benefit-sharing systems. The research supplied for this article does not establish that any single measure works everywhere, so interventions should be monitored rather than assumed to succeed.
Climate variability can intensify existing pressures by changing the availability of vegetation and water, increasing competition around permanent water sources and altering movement patterns. In Zambia, this matters because elephants use large landscapes and may enter farmland or settlements when resources become less available. Climate change should therefore be treated as a factor that amplifies poaching, habitat fragmentation and conflict, rather than as an isolated threat.
The Zambian Department of National Parks and Wildlife works with protected-area NGO operators and international partners on elephant protection, community engagement and tourism development. In Luangwa, sustained investment in these areas has contributed to an increase in the population since the historic poaching crisis, although the source does not provide a current Zambia-wide total.
Game Rangers International (GRI), the South Luangwa Conservation Society and the Frankfurt Zoological Society are among the organisations identified as contributing to positive conservation results in Zambia. The Nature Conservancy supported GRI’s anti-poaching work in Kafue, where the organisation reported that increased enforcement had reduced poaching, especially in areas with an active GRI presence. This is a partner-reported result and should be understood as evidence from particular areas, not proof that poaching has ended throughout Kafue or Zambia.
Support also includes ranger training, operational assistance and institutional capacity. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service says that, since 2003, it has invested more than $6 million in financial and technical assistance for Luangwa-Zambezi Valley conservation, including protected-area operations, leadership capacity and national institutions. African Parks reports that U.S. Department of State law-enforcement support in Zambia has helped with leadership and training infrastructure, air surveillance, ranger and canine welfare, communications, wildlife monitoring, information management, evidence management and judicial support.
Aerial surveys, carcass monitoring and the African Elephant Database help conservationists identify population changes and prioritise protection. The IUCN African Elephant Specialist Group collected new data in Zambia in 2023 to support an update of the African savanna elephant status report and to strengthen data-sharing and capacity-building relationships with range countries.
Monitoring is not a formality. Without comparable surveys, managers may mistake a local increase for national recovery or overlook severe losses in a remote landscape such as Sioma Ngwezi. Survey limitations must also be reported: the 2024 IUCN forest-elephant assessment notes uncertainty from old guesses, incomplete survey reports, unavailable data and the tendency of aerial counts to undercount animals.
Habitat protection increasingly extends beyond park boundaries. The African Wildlife Foundation worked with Zambia’s Sekute Chiefdom to create the Sekute Conservation Area, pairing protection of wild spaces with reconstruction of Lupani School. This example reflects a broader principle: conservation areas are more durable when communities have a recognised role and receive tangible benefits.
At regional level, KAZA provides a framework for coordinating elephant conservation across five countries. The 2023 IUCN report describes recent surveys in the five KAZA countries as a baseline for collective policies and management practices for the region’s large, connected elephant population.
Tourism can help conservation when revenue supports protected-area operations, local employment, community benefits and responsible wildlife management. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service identifies tourism development alongside protection and community engagement as part of the collaborative approach associated with Luangwa-Zambezi Valley recovery.
A wildlife safari is not automatically conservation-positive. Its contribution depends on how an operator manages waste, respects wildlife distances, employs local people, supports community initiatives and accounts transparently for conservation contributions. Travellers should ask who manages the concession or park, how fees are used, whether guides are locally trained and how the operator responds to human-elephant conflict.
For visitors comparing a South Luangwa walking safari, a Lower Zambezi safari or another walking safari in Zambia, the conservation context should be part of the decision. Travellers can book conservation-supporting safaris on SafariFind, while checking each operator’s claims and policies rather than assuming that every safari delivers the same benefits.
Tourism also has limits. It cannot replace government responsibility, long-term donor support or effective law enforcement, and it may not reach communities living far from major visitor routes. A balanced conservation model needs several income sources and strong local governance.
The clearest success is that some major Zambian elephant landscapes are no longer following the steep declines associated with the earlier poaching crisis. Luangwa and Kafue were assessed as stable or possibly increasing in the Great Elephant Census results, while Luangwa-Zambezi is described as Zambia’s largest and most stable elephant population at about 20,000 animals.
Collaborative protection has been an important part of that progress. The Nature Conservancy linked increased Kafue enforcement by GRI with reduced poaching in areas where the organisation was active, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reports long-term investment in protection, communities and tourism development in the Luangwa-Zambezi Valley.
The setbacks are equally important. Lower Zambezi was declining in the survey, and Sioma Ngwezi had suffered catastrophic losses. Scientific research continues to identify poaching and habitat degradation as serious threats in Kafue, Luangwa and Zambezi landscapes. Human-elephant conflict can also increase as elephants and people share increasingly fragmented spaces.
The responsible conclusion is cautious optimism, not victory. Zambia has demonstrated that sustained, collaborative conservation can stabilise important populations, but the results are uneven and vulnerable. Continued funding, accurate surveys, accountable management, connected habitat and community support will determine whether today’s strongholds remain secure.
Elephant conservation in Zambia is ultimately a landscape and governance challenge. Protecting individual animals matters, but long-term success will require connected habitat, professional protection, credible data, and communities that can live more safely and profitably alongside elephants.
There is no single complete 2026 Zambia-wide census in the supplied research. The Luangwa-Zambezi Valley is estimated at about 20,000 elephants, while the Great Elephant Census found stable or possibly increasing numbers in Luangwa and Kafue but declines in Lower Zambezi and Sioma Ngwezi.
Zambia’s African savanna elephants face serious conservation risks, especially poaching, habitat loss and human-elephant conflict. Their status is not uniform: some landscapes are stable or increasing, while others are declining severely.
Important elephant landscapes include the Luangwa Valley, Kafue National Park, the Lower Zambezi ecosystem and Sioma Ngwezi National Park. Protection also extends into community conservation areas and the wider KAZA transfrontier landscape.
Illegal killing for ivory has been one of the most important threats, and Zambia experienced a poaching-driven population collapse of more than 90% between the 1960s and late 1980s. Habitat fragmentation and conflict with people remain serious ongoing pressures.
Yes. Conservation partners report reduced poaching in some protected areas, including parts of Kafue with an active GRI presence, but research continues to identify illegal ivory poaching as a serious threat in Zambian elephant landscapes.
Tourism can support protected-area operations, community engagement and wildlife protection when revenue is managed transparently and benefits reach local people. Tourism is one part of a wider model that also requires government action, donor funding and effective law enforcement.
Named conservation partners include Zambia’s Department of National Parks and Wildlife, Game Rangers International, the South Luangwa Conservation Society, Frankfurt Zoological Society, The Nature Conservancy, the African Wildlife Foundation and international funding partners.
Connected habitat allows elephants to move between dispersed food and water resources and reduces the isolation of populations. Research identifies large, well-protected and connected landscapes as the strongest long-term conservation solution.
Visitors can choose transparent operators, support locally rooted businesses, follow wildlife-viewing rules, avoid ivory purchases and ask how tourism revenue benefits conservation and communities. They should also remember that elephant trends differ by landscape.
Some are stable or possibly increasing, particularly in Luangwa and Kafue, and the Luangwa-Zambezi Valley has increased since the historic poaching crisis. Recovery is uneven, however, with declines reported in Lower Zambezi and catastrophic losses in Sioma Ngwezi.
Explore curated safari packages and find your perfect African adventure with verified operators.
Community conservancies are becoming an important part of Zambia’s wildlife-management system, linking local governance, habitat protection and sustainable livelihoods. In Simalaha, community scouts help protect wildlife within the KAZA corridor, while newer initiatives such as Mize and Rufunsa are strengthening local conservation leadership.[8][5][11]
Mozambique is one of the African wild dog’s most important remaining range countries, with an estimated 65 packs and 497 individuals across three or four main populations. Niassa National Reserve remains the country’s stronghold, while reintroductions at Gorongosa National Park and Karingani are rebuilding lost range.
Leopard conservation in Namibia centres on reducing illegal and retaliatory killing across protected areas, communal conservancies and private farms. Although Namibia has helped wildlife populations recover in some landscapes, reliable nationwide leopard numbers remain limited in the available evidence.