20 years can see a lot of changes

… like successfully landing a craft on Mars – over 402 million kilometers away

Climate Change is no joke……

especially if you are hungry……

It can also bring major threats to our wellbeing

It is over 20 years since the concept of WMAs was first introduced

… what opportunities have we missed?

Review of the Wildlife Management Area Processes and Regulations

Maharaj Conference CentreGaborone

26th March 2009Biokavango Project

University of Botswana

Objectives of Workshop

• To review WMA establishment and management processes

• To determine requirements for new WMA regulations, especially biodiversity management via WMA Management Plans

• To Review existing WMA Lease requirements• To determine any new WMA Lease

requirements or procedures

The Origins of WMAs in Botswana

TGLP Perspectives

In the 1970s there was a growing concern over the large increase in the number of cattle in Botswana, particularly in respect of the serious dangers that they posed to the environment. The number of cattle was estimated to be about 3 million( this gave four cattle to every Motswana).

The need to sink more boreholes resulted from the increase in the herd of cattle. An unfortunate outcome was that some form of "land-grabbing" emerged. Concern was raised with regard to the possibility of the rich few taking control over the whole land. (Source: Kwame Frimpong)

Official Concern & TGLP

"The time has come to tackle a subject about which there has been a lot of talk but no action - the better use and development of our land.

As our human population and the numbers of our cattle and other livestock increase there is a growing danger that grazing will be destroyed by uncontrolled use of communal grazing areas by ever growing numbers of animals……."

Concern was outlined in a speech in 1975 by the then President, the late Sir Seretse Khama:

Official Concern & TGLP cont."Once grazing has been destroyed it is extremely

difficult to get grass re-established. And under our communal grazing system it is in no one individual's interest to limit the number of his animals.

If one man takes his cattle off, someone else moves his own cattle in. Unless livestock numbers are somehow tied to specific grazing areas no one has an incentive to control grazing ...We are faced with a situation which demands action (President Seretse Khama, 1975)."

And that demand informed the introduction of the

Tribal Grazing Land Policy(TGLP)

Quote from Wildlife Conservation Policy 1986

3.3.1 The concept of Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs) arose from Botswana's Tribal Grazing Land Policy (TGLP).

Three zoning categories for land, namely: Commercial Farming Areas, Communal Grazing Areas and Reserved Areas.

Reserved Areas divided into two categories: areas reserved for future use by those with only a few cattle and areas reserved for alternative uses such as wildlife, mining and cultivation.

The Wildlife Management Areas can therefore be considered as a form of zoning of land for wildlife utilization within the Reserved Areas category as differentiated by the TGLP.

Quote from WC Policy 1986

3.3.5 For those Wildlife Management Areas that have been identified and approved by the appropriate Boards and Councils the following steps are required: – establish the legal status by publication of the

boundaries in the Gazette; – develop and legislate appropriate WMA Regulations; – draft a management plan for each area; – implement a policy of sustained wildlife utilization

appropriate to each designated area.

Quote from WC Policy 1986

3.3.6 Wildlife utilization plans will include hunting, game ranching and farming, live capture and venison processing.

Regulations will address themselves to such matters as the control within WMAs of hunting, capturing, photography, filming, research, entry, erection of buildings, grazing and the keeping of livestock.

Quote from WC Policy 1986

3.3.8 The Wildlife Management Areas are still rich in wildlife. Some, such as those in the Okavango, are unique and important for tourism development.

Wildlife utilization and management will be the recognised primary form of land use in these designated Areas.

In some of the WMAs the exploitation of wildlife, including tourism, may well yield a higher economic return to the nation than some of the more conventional industries, including agriculture.

Quote from WC Policy 1986

3.3.9 The policy aims especially to promote commercial utilization of wildlife while at the same time assisting the poorer rural dwellers to increase their incomes and hence improve their standard of living. In many remote areas, wildlife is the only resource available.

Quote from WC Policy 1986

3.4.1 Wildlife Management Areas will differ from National Parks and Game Reserve in that Parks and Reserves are, as previously stated, primarily preservation areas: total preservation of the wildlife resource is practised.

In WMAs, on the other hand, sustained wildlife utilisation will be actively encouraged.

Some WMAs adjacent to NPs/GRs will act as buffer zones to prevent conflicts between the latter and areas of more intensive agricultural uses. Others will provide protection to migrating wildlife by safeguarding migratory corridors.

Quote from WC Policy 1986

3.4.2 In WMAs, wildlife utilization will be the primary land use. Other land uses will be permitted only if they are compatible with it.

Chob

e Nation

al Park

Central Kalahari Game Reserve

Gemsbok National Park

Khutse Game Reserve

Makgadikgadi Pans National Park

Nxa

i Pan

Nat

i ona

l Par

k

Moremi Game Reserve

Qwihaba WMA

Kwando WMA

Okavango WMA

Ngamiland State Land WMA Nata State Land WMA

Nunga WMA

Quabo WMA

Okwa WMA

Matlho-a-Phuduhudu

Kgalagadi District WMA 1

Kgalagadi District WM

A 2

Kgala

gadi

Distric

t WMA 3

Sout

hern

Dist

rict W

MA

Kweneng District WMA

Boteti State Land WMA

0 100 200 300 400 Kilometers

Produced by J .F. Broekhuis using ArcView 3.2. DWNP, Gaborone, September 2002.

N

EW

S

Protected areas in Botswana(Version J uly 2002)

WMA (Gazetted) 75.160 sq km (13.0%)

Proposed WMA 62950 sq km (10.9%)

Game Reserves 59.590 sq km (10.3%)

National Parks 44,420 sq km (7.7%)

Legend:

Chob

e Nation

al Park

Central Kalahari Game Reserve

Gemsbok National Park

Khutse Game Reserve

Makgadikgadi Pans National Park

Nxa

i Pan

Nat

i ona

l Par

k

Moremi Game Reserve

Qwihaba WMA

Kwando WMA

Okavango WMA

Ngamiland State Land WMA Nata State Land WMA

Nunga WMA

Quabo WMA

Okwa WMA

Matlho-a-Phuduhudu

Kgalagadi District WMA 1

Kgalagadi District WM

A 2

Kgala

gadi

Distric

t WMA 3

Sout

hern

Dist

rict W

MA

Kweneng District WMA

Boteti State Land WMA

0 100 200 300 400 Kilometers

Produced by J .F. Broekhuis using ArcView 3.2. DWNP, Gaborone, September 2002.

N

EW

S

Protected areas in Botswana(Version J uly 2002)

WMA (Gazetted) 75.160 sq km (13.0%)

Proposed WMA 62950 sq km (10.9%)

Game Reserves 59.590 sq km (10.3%)

National Parks 44,420 sq km (7.7%)

Legend:

Gazetted WMAs

1. Kwando2. Okavango3. Ngamiland Statelands4. Nunga5. Nata Statelands6. Southern district7. Matlho-Phuduhudu8. Okwa9. Quago

Identified future WMAs

1. Kgalgagadi 1

2. Kgalgagadi 2

3. Kgalgagadi 3

4. Kweneng

5. Qwihaba

6. Boteti

Where are the WMA Regulations?

• Various versions have been developed over time

• None have been approved by the stakeholders – Too far reaching– Overlaps of mandates across sectors– DWNP was to be overall Management

Authority– Too cumbersome and onerous for one sector

Reviewing the WMA Regulations

Our challenge

• Clarify the purpose or objectives of WMAs • Ensure that biodiversity is adequately protected through

new Regulations• Identify what elements or aspects need to be managed

through the WMA Regulations ie. – Protection of wildlife & habitats– Developments– Permitted activities and uses

• Identify how a WMA Management Plan will relate to individual leases within a particular WMA

• Suggest some indicators to be used in monitoring the process

Other Challenges

• Suggest a workable, efficient management system to cover the leases issued ie. – how can we streamline the process to minimise

bureaucracy and multiple interventions

• What management structure or institution will be needed to handle the complexity that exists – will the proposed new BTB Land Bank cover such issues?

• What system of appeal should be set up to ensure equity and fairness?

The biggest challenge

• Who is going to manage the leases?

Possible Approaches

• Simplify processes as much as possible• Use the Lease as the basic instrument of management

and compliance• Consider the use of a Scorecard to monitor performance

and compliance• Use overarching ‘pre-cursor’ mechanisms to create

‘default’ parameters ie. – Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEA)

• Minimise the need to invoke the Regulations ie. compliance is set in the Lease

• Use of Regulations should be a last resort NOT a First Stop

WMA Management Plan

WMA Strategic Environmental Assessment

Environmental Social Economic

Individual Leases

WMA Regulations & Guidelines

Simplified Management Plans for Each Lease

Na

tion

alL

and

sca

peL

oca

lIn

t. Conservation Conventions and Protocols

WC Policy 1986 & WCNP Act 1992

Research and Lessons Learned

Research

• Background into process establishing WMAs carried out

• Existing proposed WMA Regulations scrutinised and assessed

• Legal assessment of WMAs and WMA proposed Regulations carried out

• Questionnaire developed to interrogate proposed WMA Regulations but found out that all had been rejected and most versions were in-house DWNP ‘work-in-progress’ – questionnaire not sent out to stakeholders

• Interviews held with key stakeholders

Lessons Learned 1• Gazetted WMAs in the north behind the Veterinary Fence

were seen to be effective in protecting key ecosystems, wildlife populations, habitats and natural landscapes in terms of commercial and certain subsistence use

• Gazetted WMAs in other parts of the country appear to have played a role in protecting wildlife populations, their habitats and to a limited extent key processes such a migrations etc.

• Identified WMAs that have not been gazetted have continued to be used as livestock grazing areas, with some elements of wildlife continuing to survive amongst the livestock – although migrations etc. have been curtailed

• Question to be asked – have current WMAs outside of veterinary fence adequately promoted or supported the development of the Game Ranching or Farming industry?

Findings 1

• Lack of WMA Regulations have been a constraint on effective management of the areas

• Lack of WMA Management Plans have allowed ad hoc processes to creep in ie. – Carrying capacities of tourism operations in Kwando and

Okavango WMAs (as per van der Heiden Report 1991) have been escalated arbitrarily and without informed ‘due process’

– Access to lodge and camp operations for support purposes has been unplanned and has led to conflict between operators at times

– This same access has in some cases been detrimental to the environment

– Developments have been arbitrary ie. based upon investors proposals, rather than against a larger ‘management’ perspective

Findings 2

• Leasing and permitting systems for use rights in WMAs have largely been effective in managing use in terms of large-scale operations such as lodges, camps, mobile safaris and professional hunting etc. and protecting biodiversity

• Monitoring the compliance of Leases has been confusing, overly-complicated, at times antagonistic, inconsistent, and has lacked integration across sectors

• Permitting systems regarding subsistence use have been less effective – use not monitored or permitted – conflict between stakeholders exists ie. Tubu etc.

Emerging Results

Proposed Objectives of WMAs

• To manage and protect biodiversity and wildlife as the primary form of land-use

• To promote the sustainable utilisation of wildlife and other natural resources as a means of securing the livelihoods of land-holders and local communities

• To manage all other activities as subsidiary processes

WMA Regulations• Simplified to enable ALL stakeholders to use them

effectively• Major section to address biodiversity and wildlife

management aspects• Relate all other sectoral management requirements ie.

water issues, development etc. to the appropriate legally mandated sector in association with the Director of DWNP

• Requires the development and management of a WMA Management Plan for each WMA or group of WMAs

• Requires that a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) provides the basis of the WMA Management Plan

• Access for traditional use to be curtailed to reasonable levels

WMA Management Plans

• Overarching Plan for each MMA or group of adjacent WMAs

• WMA Management Plan to be based upon a Strategic Environmental Assessment that includes consideration of:– Environmental issues– Social issues– Economic issues

• Will set minimum standards

WMA Management Plans 2

• Management Plan will provide overall guidance to all activities or influences that will affect the use and development of the areas:– Environment

• Access• Developments• Infrastructure• Harvesting of natural resources• Carrying capacities & LAC• Waste Management • Transport, handling and storage of hazardous materials

WMA Management Plans 3

• Social– Skills development– Health and safety– Support to, and cooperation with communities– Recognition of local traditional & cultural

factors– Safeguarding of Indigenous Knowledge– Poverty alleviation

WMA Management Plans 4

• Economic– Employment creation– Business sustainability– Economic contribution to area– Investment incentives– Resource royalties– Lease renewals– Benefit sharing & distribution– Economic diversity

WMA Management Plans 5

• All leases will have to have site specific EIAs and Management Plans that conform to the mother WMA Management Plan

• The scorecard system will be outlined and described in the Management Plan, and included in the lease

Leases

• All three current leases to be consolidated into one single lease with elements that outline tourism, hunting or community specific sections

• Lease period to be extended to promote investment and better management suggested:– Initial 15 years with possible 10 year extension – total

to be 25 years

• Clause on ‘grace’ period to develop and become operational to be included – along with a performance bond to be deposited up-front

Leases 2

• Access of communities for traditional use activities to be moderated and carefully managed ie. through permits and mutual arrangements with concession holders etc.

• All relevant monitoring requirements and processes – especially biodiversity - to be specified – provision of Standard Operating Manual suggested

• Guidelines on sub-leasing to be specified• Rental reviews to be carried out through standardized,

consistent, transparent and fair framework ie. not ad hoc• Expiry period notification of lease to be extended to at

least two years

Leases 3• Management of lease to be carried out through

standardized ‘Scorecard’ system that relates to the Management Plan and related key aspects identified in each lease ie. management of biodiversity ‘hotspots’

• The scorecard will cover categories such as:– Biodiversity and wildlife management– Waste Management– Citizen empowerment & employment– Labour issues– Revenue and financial performance

Leases 4

• Scorecard elements will link to Management Plan and specified key performance areas (KPAs) in Lease and will be weighted for fairness and equity

• Compliance will be managed and enforced – suggested non-compliance based upon ‘two-strikes and you’re out’

• There will be an Appeal Process specified

Institutional Mechanism

• A WMA Management Committee to be formed for each WMA or group of WMAs, consisting of senior representatives from:– DWNP – Land Board– BTB / DoT– Public Sector

• An Integrated Inspection Unit comprised of specially selected / seconded / contracted professional people who will be specially trained to carry out cross-sectoral monitoring and evaluation processes – will report to the WMA Committee on a quarterly basis. Size of the Team will be determined by the extent of the WMA and its level of activities

Discussion

• Are the proposed aspects of the WMA Regulations viable and acceptable?

• Is the proposed approach to WMA Management Plans viable and acceptable?

• Are the Proposed changes to the Leasing process viable and acceptable?

• Is the proposed Institutional Mechanism viable and acceptable?

END

Working Groups

1. What critical elements need to be in the Regulations ie. what needs to be in the WMA Regulations in order to manage a WMA effectively

2. What critical elements are needed to be included in the WMA Management Plan to allow for its effective implementation

3. How can we ensure that the management of biodiversity is embedded in the regulations and the WMA Management Plan in order to protect biodiversity

Changes to the Lease Agreement

1. How could a performance monitoring process be introduced ie. use of a scorecard. How would non-compliance be addressed through the use of such a mechanism ie. “Two strikes and you’re out”. What would be included in such a scorecard?

2. What changes should be made to make the overall Lease allocation process more streamlined or effective ie. consolidating existing leases, making them more flexible and site specific – what would be included in a ‘check-list’.

3. How do we accommodate Leases for other land-use activities ie. Game Ranching, Game Farming, fish farming, crocodile breeding etc. What should be in such Leases.

Cone of Uncertainty

Present 3 years 5 years 10 years 20 years

Increasing levels of unpredictability or uncertainty as you plan into the future

The further we plan ahead into the future the less certain we become about what threats or opportunities will influence our ability to achieve our goals