Documentation and Analysis of Feedback Consultation With Communities

7/30/2019 Documentation and Analysis of Feedback Consultation With Communities

1/43

Okavango Delta Management Plan

Second Round of Kgotla Meetings

Results and Analysis of theFeedback Community Consultation Process

on the ODMP

Hannelore Bendsen

Research Fellow

Participatory Planning

University of BotswanaHarry Oppenheimer Okavango Research Centre

With support from the German Development Service (DED)August 2005


2/43

Table of Contents

1 The Process of Feedback to Communities after Initial Consultations on

the Okavango Delta Management Plan in the Okavango Delta

Ramsar Site

.......................................................................................................................10

1.1 Results of stakeholder consultation during the inception phase of the

ODMP

................................................................................................................

10

1.2 Feedback consultation with communities to obtain suggestions,

observations and concerns from local land users on the planned

ODMP activities

................................................................................................................

10

1.3 Attendance of the institutions responsible for the different ODMPcomponents at the kgotla meetings

................................................................................................................

11

1.4 Selection of villages for kgotla meetings

................................................................................................................

11

1.5 Attendance at kgotla meeting

................................................................................................................

11

1.6 Gender representation

................................................................................................................13

2 Summary of the Observations, Concerns and Recommendations

Resulting from the ODMP Feedback Community Consultation

Meetings

.......................................................................................................................

14

2.1 Observations, Concerns and Recommendations Related to Component

2: Dialogue, Communication and Networking

................................................................................................................

14

2.1.1 Ranking of communication issues

....................................................................................................

14

2.1.2 Interest of communities in being informed about and

participating in the ODMP

....................................................................................................

14

2.1.3 Stakeholder participation in the formulation of planning

recommendations

....................................................................................................14

2.1.4 Feedback to concerns raised by local stakeholders

2


3/43

....................................................................................................

15

2.1.5 Attendance of kgotla meetings

....................................................................................................

15

2.1.6 Integrated cross-sectoral consultation approach....................................................................................................

16

2.1.7 Presentation format at kgotla meetings

....................................................................................................

16

2.1.8 Inclusion of the private sector stakeholders in the consultation

exercise

....................................................................................................

16

2.1.9 Government development priorities

....................................................................................................16

2.1.10 Coordination of communication between components and

other projects

....................................................................................................

16

2.1.11 The use of village based organisations

....................................................................................................

17

2.1.12 Role of traditional leaders

....................................................................................................

17

2.1.13 Use of local technical knowledge

....................................................................................................

17

2.1.14 Training needs

....................................................................................................

17

2.1.15 Information needs of communities

....................................................................................................

17

2.1.16 ODMP documentation....................................................................................................

18


3: Research, Data Management and Participatory Planning

................................................................................................................

19

2.2.1 Local involvement in research

....................................................................................................

19

2.2.2 Community participation in the ODMP planning process

....................................................................................................19

3


4/43


4: Hydrology and Water Resources

................................................................................................................

20

2.3.1 Changes in the hydrological regime

....................................................................................................20

2.3.2 Control of boat movements

....................................................................................................

20

2.3.3 Channel Blockages

....................................................................................................

21

2.3.4 Salvinia

....................................................................................................

21

2.3.5 Water quality....................................................................................................

21

2.3.6 Water supply

....................................................................................................

21

2.3.7 Recommendations

....................................................................................................

22


5: Wildlife Management

................................................................................................................

23

2.4.1 The human - elephant conflict, a key issue for communities

....................................................................................................

23

2.4.2 Increase of the elephant population and expansion of their range

....................................................................................................

23

2.4.3 Crop damage by elephants

....................................................................................................

232.4.4 Destruction of the buffalo fence by elephants and strict

veterinary measures

....................................................................................................

24

2.4.5 Elephants threaten human lives

....................................................................................................

24

2.4.6 Destruction of the natural vegetation caused by elephants

....................................................................................................

24

2.4.7 Suggestions how to reconcile the human elephant conflict....................................................................................................

24

4


5/43

2.4.8 Access to the Conservation and Community Trust Fund

....................................................................................................

25

2.4.9 Rhinos in communal areas

....................................................................................................

252.4.10 Predation of domestic stock

....................................................................................................

25

2.4.11 Compensation rates and payment procedures

....................................................................................................

25

2.4.12 Land use restrictions due to the extension of the Moremi Game

Reserve

....................................................................................................

26

2.4.13 Monitoring of Tourism Hunting Activities....................................................................................................

26


6: Sustainable Tourism and CBNRM

................................................................................................................

27

2.5.1 Local communities request increased benefits from and more

direct involvement in the tourism sector

....................................................................................................

27

2.5.2 Delays in the land allocation process

....................................................................................................

27

2.5.3 Lack of skills to start community tourism projects

....................................................................................................

27

2.5.4 Financial assistance for community or citizen tourism projects

....................................................................................................

28

2.5.5 Problems in existing CBNRM projects

....................................................................................................28

2.5.6 Inadequate distribution of benefits generated by the tourism

sector

....................................................................................................

28

2.5.7 Possible negative impacts of tourism on the Delta ecosystem

....................................................................................................

28

2.5.8 Location of tourism activities and allocation of CHAs to

communities

....................................................................................................28

5


6/43


7: Sustainable Fisheries Utilisation and Management

................................................................................................................

29

2.6.1 Significance of fish in the household economy

....................................................................................................29

2.6.2 Sustainability of fishing practices

....................................................................................................

29

2.6.3 Training

....................................................................................................

29

2.6.4 New fishing regulations

....................................................................................................

29

2.6.5 Access to fishing grounds....................................................................................................

29

2.6.6 Fish stock assessment

....................................................................................................

30


8: Vegetation Resources Management

................................................................................................................

31

2.7.1 Impact of low attendance of representatives of the vegetation

component in the consultation process

....................................................................................................

31

2.7.2 Significance of vegetation for the livelihoods of rural

households

....................................................................................................

31

2.7.3 Substance use of vegetation resources

....................................................................................................

31

2.7.4 Commercialisation of vegetation resources....................................................................................................

31

2.7.5 Control of veld product utilisation

....................................................................................................

31

2.7.6 Sustainable harvesting techniques

....................................................................................................

32

2.7.7 Fire as a traditional management tool

....................................................................................................

322.7.8 Marketing of veld products

6


7/43

....................................................................................................

32


9: Physical Planning

................................................................................................................

332.8.1 Service provision to non-gazetted settlements

....................................................................................................

33


10: Land Use Planning and Land Management

................................................................................................................

34

2.9.1 Allocation procedures

....................................................................................................

34

2.9.2 Allocation Regulations....................................................................................................

34

2.9.3 Unclear responsibility

....................................................................................................

34

2.9.4 Repossession of undeveloped land

....................................................................................................

34

2.9.5 Cadastral record keeping system

....................................................................................................

35

2.9.6 Involvement of local institutions

....................................................................................................

35

2.9.7 Allocation of land in non-gazetted settlements

....................................................................................................

35

2.9.8 Transfer of land from citizens to foreigners

....................................................................................................

35

2.9.9 Monitoring of lease specifications....................................................................................................

35

2.9.10 Size of residential plots in rural settlements

....................................................................................................

35

2.9.11 New restrictive allocation regulation in the Okavango

Panhandle (500 m rule)

....................................................................................................

35

2.9.12 Land certificates for traditional flood recession farming

....................................................................................................37

7


8/43

2.10 Observations, Concerns and Recommendations Related to

Component 11: Waste Management

................................................................................................................

39

2.10.1 Litter

....................................................................................................39

2.10.2 Solid waste collection

....................................................................................................

39

2.10.3 Waste Management Strategy

....................................................................................................

39

2.10.4 Monitoring of waste management in tourism camps in the delta

....................................................................................................

39

2.11 Observations, Concerns and Recommendations Related toComponent 12: Sustainable Livestock Management

................................................................................................................

40

2.11.1 Maintenance and enforcement of the buffalo fence

....................................................................................................

40

2.11.2 Strict enforcement of veterinary regulations (killing of cattle in

the WMA)

....................................................................................................

40

2.11.3 Compensation rates for livestock killed for trespassing into the

WMA

....................................................................................................

40

2.11.4 Lack of veterinary services and livestock marketing facilities

....................................................................................................

40

2.11.5 Location and impact of the veterinary fence

....................................................................................................

40

2.11.6 Border fence....................................................................................................

40

Annex 1: List of contact persons,

second round of kgotla meetings

...............................................................................................................

41

Annex 2: Attendance of the ODMP Component's Representatives at the

Second Round of Kgotla Meetings

...............................................................................................................42

8


9/43

Annex 3: Population Break Down of Attendees at the Second Round of

ODMP Kgotla Meetings

...............................................................................................................

43

9


10/43

1 The Process of Feedback to Communities after InitialConsultations on the Okavango Delta Management Planin the Okavango Delta Ramsar Site

1.1 Results of stakeholder consultation during the inceptionphase of the ODMP

The results of the introductory round ofkgotla meetings held at the end of 2003 and the

beginning of 2004 were documented, analysed and grouped into hot spot areas by the

Participatory Planner. All twelve ODMP partner institutions were asked to include these

issues in their component activity plans which appear in the Inception Report.

Contributions were analysed by the Participatory Planner to assess whether there was

satisfactory consideration of stakeholder concerns. Where this was not adequate,

suggestions were forwarded to and discussed with the Chief Technical Advisor and with

the partner institutions. An analysis of stakeholder participation in the design and

inception phase of the ODMP was carried out and has been included in the Inception

Report. The results of this analysis were used to guide the second round of consultativecommunity meetings.

1.2 Feedback consultation with communities to obtainsuggestions, observations and concerns from local landusers on the planned ODMP activities

After the Inception Report was accepted by the ODMP Steering Committee on the 25 th

February 2005, communities were given feedback on the planned ODMP activities.

Between the 31st January and the 12th April 2005, 43 kgotla meetings were held in all

the major villages and remote area settlements in the Okavango Delta Ramsar site. The

objective was to inform the communities of what activities had been planned and

included in the Inception Report by the different project partner institutions, taking into

account the issues that local land users had raised during the introductory round of

kgotla meetings. The kgotla meetings provided a forum for exchange of views between

resource users and managers and helped to build consensus on key elements of the

planning process and of the approach to ensure sustainable use of the natural resources.

In every meeting the ODMP Outreach and Information Officer or a member of the

Project Management Group outlined the progress of the ODMP during the inception

phase. The Participatory Planner from HOORC presented a summary of the majorissues and key areas of conflict in natural resources management that had resulted from

an analysis of the first round of consultative meetings with communities.

Representatives of the different ODMP partner institutions outlined the activities that

had been designed to deal with these hot spots. The presentations were followed by an

extensive question and answer session.

Community representatives that will function as links among the ODMP Project

Management Group, the partner institutions and the communities were elected in all

villages (see Annex 1, List of contact persons).

10


11/43

1.3 Attendance of the institutions responsible for thedifferent ODMP components at the kgotla meetings

The consultation team was meant to be composed of one representative of each

institution responsible for an ODMP component. Annex 2, Attendance of the

components representatives at the second round ofkgotla meetings, shows that this

aim was not achieved. It needs to be borne in mind that the presence of the North West

District Councils Physical Planners, whose activities are confined to Shakawe village,were not expected at any of the otherkgotla meetings. Seven of the component

institutions showed great commitment and were present at all or most of the meetings.

The Department of Animal Health and Production attended only 42% of the meetings

because it was simultaneously engaged in carrying out a district-wide cattle tagging

(bola) campaign. The Environmental Health Department of the NWDC was present at

only 33% of the meetings. The representatives of the vegetation component had chosen

not to attend the kgotla meetings but held consultation workshops with representatives

of CBOs and resource user groups instead. The low number of vegetation issues

mentioned during the kgotla meetings reflects the absence of representatives of this

component. It is hoped that the results of this independent consultation exercise will be

documented and made available to the rest of the project team and that the vegetationcomponent team will work jointly with other project partners in future.

Some project partners like Tawana Land Board, the Department of Water Affairs and

the NWDC Environmental Health Department also attached a sub-district representative

of their institution to the consultation team. The presence of sub-district staff was

welcomed and even requested by some communities as the local officers were often in a

better position to clarify issues that were causing concern.

1.4 Selection of villages for kgotla meetingsIn an attempt to involve as much of the ODMP target population as possible in all

stages of the planning process the number ofkgotla meetings was increased from 33 in

the first consultation round to 43. Time factors and limited human resources dictated the

approach used in the consultation process. Selection of locations at which kgotla

meetings were to be held was based on a combination of criteria. The village had to be

located within the revised Ramsar site boundary. All gazetted villages with more than

500 inhabitants, all settlements that fall under the Remote Area Development (RAD)

policy, and some of the small settlements located in the delta proper or in the

floodplains close to the Buffalo Fence and along the ephemeral river outlets south of the

delta system were chosen as kgotla meeting points. Furthermore, some settlements

located far from a major village were consulted separately as people in theses remoteareas would not have been able to attend a kgotla meeting held nearby.

1.5 Attendance at kgotla meetingA total of 3,343 people attended the second round of ODMP kgotla meetings (See

Annex 3, Population Breakdown of Attendees at the Second Round of ODMPKgotla

Meetings). In the introductory consultation process, the project managed to reach only

1,841 people through traditional kgotla meetings. The main factors responsible for the

substantial increase of the attendance were the increase of the total number of meetings

by almost one third and improved promotion of the meetings. Prior to the kgotla

meetings, a one week workshop was held for 160 community representatives (CBOs,traditional leaders, representatives of resource user groups and NGOs) from throughout

the Ramsar site. This took place at Shakawe, and community representatives were

11


12/43

informed both about the progress of the ODMP and the intentions of the new Wetland

Biodiversity Project. The aim of the workshop was to determine the extent to which

communities can contribute to the development and implementation of the ODMP and

the assessment and monitoring of changes in biodiversity in the delta and to determine

the level of understanding of key resource management aspects. The schedule of the

kgotla meetings was given to all participants and thus was much better circulated than

when using only the Tribal Administration channels. Furthermore the ODMP Outreachand Information Officer announced the meeting often a day earlier but always a few

hours before the meeting, using a portable loudspeaker system.

122,372 people, that is 98% of the entire population of Ngamiland District (district total

124,712 people, according to the 2001 population census), live within the Ramsar site

boundary. 2.7% of the target population attended the feedbackkgotla meetings and has

been directly involved in the consultation process. However, one should not forget that

the traditional kgotla system is built on its multiplication effect. Those attending kgotla

meetings pass on the information to others who could not participate.

As was pointed out in the report on the introductory round ofkgotla meetings, theattendance at the kgotla meetings is directly related to the population size of the village.

Table 1 shows that attendance at kgotla meetings decreases drastically with increased

village size. The attendance rates suggest that in settlements up to 1000 inhabitants the

kgotla still functions reasonably well as a traditional forum for the discussion and

dissemination of information.

Table 1:People attending kgotla meetings

(second round) in relation to village Size

Number of

villages

Village sizeAttendance

rate15 500 19.8%

14 > 500 1000 11.8%

10 > 1000 2000 6.2%

2 > 2000 5000 2.8%

2 > 5000 0.3%

As pointed out in the analysis of the first round of kgotla meetings, the attendance of

kgotla meetings in the district capital Maun (43,776 inhabitants) is very poor. Only

0.1% of the population was present at the kgotla meeting. As 36% of the population of

the Ramsar site lives in Maun, additional means of communication might need to be

used to propagate enhanced stakeholder participation in the ODMP. There are variousreasons why people refrain from attending traditional gatherings like kgotla meetings.

Many people have jobs and cannot leave work to attend traditional meetings on a

regular basis. In Maun and in the sub-district capital Gumare, a relatively high

percentage of the population are government employees who do not originate from

Ngamiland and hence are not motivated to attend a kgotla meeting, where natural

resource and land use issues are discussed, as they feel not directly affected by those

matters. Despite the low attendance, it should not be overlooked that the kgotla meeting

at Maun had also the function to involve the newly installed Paramount Chief, the

highest traditional authority in Ngamiland, in this major management plan for her area

of jurisdiction.

To complement the feedbackkgotla meetings and to reach people in the large pre-

urbanised villages and in the numerous scattered lands area settlements and cattle posts

12


13/43

where 33% of the population of Ngamiland lives, the press (likeNgami Times) but in

particular the radio, could be used as alternative complementary media. The high

illiteracy rate in Ngamiland (36%) needs to be borne in mind when selecting the means

of communication.

1.6 Gender representationThe reason why gender representation was more evenly distributed during the feedback

consultation process in comparison to the introductory kgotla meetings could not be

established clearly. Female representation rose from 33% to 45% of all attendance while

the rate of male participation dropped from 67% to 55%. The use of a loudspeaker

contributed to the higher female attendance as according to the traditional task division

women spend more time in the village. Men might not have been able to attend the

kgotla meetings as they are often out of the village fishing, tending cattle or engaged in

formal employment. Unfortunately only very few women spoke out during the kgotla

meetings. Most of the concerns addressed by women were related to environmental

health issues (littering), veld product harvesting, marketing of crafts and problems in the

land allocation process.

13


14/43

2 Summary of the Observations, Concerns andRecommendations Resulting from the ODMP FeedbackCommunity Consultation Meetings

2.1 Observations, Concerns and Recommendations Relatedto Component 2: Dialogue, Communication andNetworkingInstitution responsible: National Conservation Strategy (Coordinating) Agency

(DEA)

2.1.1Ranking of communication issuesThe effort of the ODMP team to make stakeholder consultation an integral part of the

planning process, is recognised by the communities. In comparison to the first round of

kgotla meetings, where 11.4% of all concerns were related to poor communication and

lack of feedback, the frequency with which communication was raised as an issue

dropped to 4.5% during the second round ofkgotla meetings.

2.1.2 Interest of communities in being informed about andparticipating in the ODMP

Communities appreciated that they got feedback on the concerns they had raised during

the introductory kgotla meetings. Already during the first consultation round, many

statements reflected the eagerness of villagers to participate in the planning process.

People stated that: Consultation is important in a democracy, that We are happy to

have an active role in the plan and that We are thankful that government has changed

its approach, is acknowledging our expertise and gives us a chance to have an input into

the plan before decisions are made.

Even though people felt that their concerns had been well captured and summarised by

the Participatory Planner, they believed many problems are area-specific and should be

addressed by the ODMP at village level.

Recommendation:

For the selection of pilot project areas to test different intervention options, the

following criteria could be used: The fact that a particular land use problem has been

raised as a key concern in a village and that people expressed interest in participating in

a pilot project.

2.1.3Stakeholder participation in the formulation of planningrecommendations

Local land users requested that in the ODMP planning process stakeholder views should

be considered when proposals are still at a draft stage. It was suggested that especially

where planning recommendations come from consultants, who might not be well

familiar with local conditions, peoples views should be heard before any zoning

decisions or new regulations are adopted. People have learned from past experiences

that allocation restrictions, like the ones imposed by the Okavango Panhandle

Management Plan, can have a negative impact on their traditional land use practices.

Recommendation:Consultation should continue throughout the ODMP project and suggestions from the

communities should be an integral part of the plan.

14


15/43

2.1.4Feedback to concerns raised by local stakeholdersWhen communities complained that government did not take their opinions and

concerns seriously they were not specifically referring to the ODMP project. As an

example, the workshop held in 2002 on the elephant management strategy was

mentioned, where local leaders, representatives of community based organisations and

NGOs were invited. People complained that they never got any feedback from thisconsultative meeting where many suggestions had been made on how to solve the

conflict. The negative experiences with past consultation processes created a deep

feeling of mistrust that genuine stakeholder participation would also not be employed in

the ODMP planning process.

It will be a challenge to the communication component to eliminate these fears and

prove that the ODMP is taking stakeholder participation seriously.

2.1.5Attendance ofkgotla meetingsIn small and medium size settlements the kgotla meetings were well attended whereas

in the larger communities the turn out was very low (see Table 1). It seems that thekgotla as traditional information dissemination and discussion forum gets less effective

with increasing urbanisation level. One speaker attributed the low attendance to the

loss of power of the traditional leaders.

In the district capital Maun (43,776 inhabitants, 2001 census), only 0.1% of the

population was present at the kgotla meeting. As 34% of the population of the Ramsar

site lives in Maun, additional means of communication are need to be used to propagate

enhanced stakeholder participation in the ODMP. There are various reasons why people

refrain from attending traditional gatherings like kgotla meetings. Many people have

jobs and cannot leave work to attend the meetings on a regular basis. In Maun and in the

sub district capital Gumare, a relatively high percentage of the population are

government employees who do not originate from Ngamiland and hence are not

motivated to participate in kgotla meetings, where natural resource and land use issues

are discussed, as they feel not directly affected by these matters. Despite the low

attendance, the function of the kgotla meeting at Maun as a means of involving the

Paramount Chief, the highest traditional authority in Ngamiland, in this major planning

exercise affecting her area of jurisdiction should not be overlooked.

In small localities with less than 500 inhabitants, where 33% of the population of

Ngamiland live, attendance at the kgotla meetings was very good. 20% of the

population was present at the kgotla. In settlements up to 1000 attendance is still good(12%) and even in the villages with up to 2000 people the kgotla is still functioning

satisfactorily as an information dissemination body.

Recommendation:

To complement the information dissemination process and reach people in the large

urbanised villages and in some of the scattered lands area settlements and cattle posts

the press and the radio could be used as alternative complementary media.

In the three large villages of the Ramsar site, Maun, Gumare and Shakawe, the

individual ward kgotlas could be used to reach out to people more effectively. The high

illiteracy rate in Ngamiland (36%) needs to be borne in mind when selecting the meansof communication. The use of illustrative posters might be a good alternative to provide

information on some of the standard questions frequently raised by stakeholders.

15


16/43

2.1.6 Integrated cross-sectoral consultation approachThe communities had experienced a lack of communication and coordination among the

different departments working in their area. Hence the integrated approach used by the

ODMP was appreciated. Those component representatives that were not present during

all the kgotla meetings (mainly the Vegetation, Waste Management and Livestock

component staff) were requested to come back to make separate presentations.

2.1.7Presentation format at kgotla meetingsIt is remarkable to see how much patience people had to wait for other community

members to turn up for the meeting and how attentively participants listened to the

elaborate presentations made by the ODMP team. In a few instances complaints were

raised that the presentations were too complicated and complex for the education level

of the general public. Some attendees admitted that they had not been able to follow the

elaborate descriptions of the activities of all the ODMP components. Most of us are

illiterate and understand only slowly was a comment made by a village elder. The

amount of information confused some of the traditional land users. In two instances

some members of the community confessed that they were not able to speak Setswanawell enough to follow the deliberations.

Recommendation:

These experiences reflect the urgent need to for a communication specialist to translate

the information into an easily understandable outreach and communication format that

includes versions in all languages used in the study area.

2.1.8 Inclusion of the private sector stakeholders in theconsultation exercise

It has been suggested by the communities to have joint ODMP meetings with

representatives of the private sector as We all use the river and have an impact on its

resources. Most of the tour operators, who have their camps in remote areas, would not

learn about a kgotla meeting announced only through the traditional channels. They

need to be invited separately to be able to participate jointly with the community in the

ODMP discussions. Only one tour operator, who learned about the meeting from the

ODMP team, was present at the kgotla.

Recommendation:

Especially in workshops for representatives of the different stakeholder groups, like the

one held in Shakawe, representatives of the tourism sector should be invited in order to

discuss conflicting issues concerning the use of natural resources in a more objectivemanner.

2.1.9Government development prioritiesGovernment was accused of being more interested in the protection of the delta than in

the livelihoods and the well-being of the people who live from the natural resources of

the Okavango Delta. For example, the lack of action to control the rapidly increasing

elephant population and to solve the accelerated human-elephant conflict was most

frequently mentioned.

2.1.10 Coordination of communication between

components and other projectsIt will be an important task of the information component to streamline the information

and outreach activities of the different ODMP components to avoid contradictions and

16


17/43

duplication in efforts. To address this issue a workshop for the district extension staff is

planned.

It might also be necessary to coordinate the activities of other projects with similar

intentions that are working in the Ramsar site (like the Every River has its People

project and the work of the newly established Building capacity for conservation and

sustainable use of biodiversity in the Okavango Delta project financed by GEF. Someof these projects have started to carry out some of their outreach activities in

cooperation with the ODMP.

2.1.11 The use of village based organisationsEspecially when the ODMP will start to carry out pilot projects in specific areas, it is

suggested to mobilise the villages and form either working groups or use the existing

village based organisations like the VDC, the VTC and other particular user group

committees such as Fishermen Associations, Farmers Committees, etc. to discuss

specific issues and monitor effectiveness and unwanted impacts of particular

interventions.

2.1.12 Role of traditional leadersThe important role that traditional leaders had in the past in natural resource

management was highlighted. It was stated that some of the conservation regulations

and laws introduced by government oppressed the traditional land users. Already during

the first round ofkgotla meetings people had requested that the environmental laws

should be translated into Setswana to be more easily understood by the general public.

2.1.13 Use of local technical knowledgeLocal land users regarded their lifelong experience and profound knowledge of the

natural resources of the delta as crucial in the planning process: We know better than

the educated people what is happening in the delta as we lived here since many

generations. They declared their willingness to share this traditional knowledge on the

use and conservation of the natural resources with the ODMP team.

It is important that the communication component makes active use of this wealth of

knowledge, by selecting representatives of communities that hold expertise in specific

fields to be members and advisors in the different task force groups and pilot projects.

Community members expressed their willingness to assist in the identification of issues

that need to be addressed in the ODMP.

2.1.14 Training needsPeople realised that they need more technical knowledge and education to become partof the planning process and requested for educational workshops at local level. Some

people felt that such workshops would only benefit the community at large if they are

held in the village. Another suggestion was to use the Nxaraga Rural Training Centre

for outreach and training activities on natural resource management.

2.1.15 Information needs of communitiesAn analysis of the comments made by community members revealed the numerous

speculations about the reasons for changes in the hydrological regime and alterations in

the flood distribution pattern of the Okavango Delta. These misconceptions and

accusations need to be addressed by the communication component. Stakeholders needto be informed about the combination of natural and anthropogenic factors that have

contributed to hydrological changes such as flow reductions and drying up of certain

17


18/43

parts of the wetland. Research findings need to be translated into an easily

understandable format and made available to the general public. In response to all the

questions that arose from the kgotla meeting, the HOORC hydrologist developed a fact

sheet that provides answers to most of the questions. Even though the Director of the

Department of Water Affairs approved the fact sheet, the hydrological component staff

seemed not to be in the position to publicise the information.

Recommendation:It is important for the information component to bring the fact sheet in a user friendly

format and distribute it.

2.1.16 ODMP documentationAll stakeholder groups stressed that they would only be able to contribute to the project

in a meaningful way if they were provided with more detailed information on the

anticipated activities (project document). During the last consultative meeting the

tourism sector representatives stressed that a project of this magnitude needs to have a

communication specialist who could up-date stakeholders on the progress of the project.

The installation of a website was suggested as one possible communication medium.

18


19/43

2.2 Observations, Concerns and Recommendations Relatedto Component 3: Research, Data Management andParticipatory PlanningInstitution responsible: Harry Oppenheimer Okavango Research Centre, UB

Only very few comments (0.6%) referred to research and participatory planning.

2.2.1Local involvement in researchIn the Samochima area, where a crocodile research project was being carried out under

the supervision of the University of Stellenbosch, concern was raised that the team

consisted only of foreign students. People requested that relevant government

institutions should always be provided with the results of all research activities that are

carried out in the district. It was stressed that more Batswana should be involved in

research. The legality of the practice adopted by Stellenbosch University to charge

research volunteers fees to participate in the research work was questioned.

2.2.2Community participation in the ODMP planning process

Local land users showed great interest in participating fully in the planning process.They requested that the draft findings of the different consultancy studies should be

discussed at local level before final planning conclusions are drawn. People appreciated

the fact that they had been consulted, but they were worried that most ODMP activities

did not offer immediate solutions to the problems they had raised.

19


20/43

2.3 Observations, Concerns and Recommendations Relatedto Component 4: Hydrology and Water ResourcesInstitution responsible: Department of Water Affairs

Concerns related to the hydrology of the delta were a key issue raised by communities

during the kgotla meetings (15.8 % of all the comments). After the human wildlife

conflict, it was the issue group most frequently mentioned by traditional users (seeTable: Issue Frequency According to Components).

2.3.1Changes in the hydrological regimeMany speakers had observed long term alterations in the hydrological regime of the

Okavango Delta and expected an answer to their question as to why the water did not

reach their area any longer. Local land users had experienced that with the reduced

water flow, natural resources like fish, river reeds and other veld products that they need

for subsistence, had become scarce. Speculations were made about the factors that

might have contributed to the reduced water flow, the shifts in the flood distribution

pattern and the drying up of some parts of the wetland and its outlets. The changes were

attributed to vegetation blockages, to the spreading of the aquatic weed Salviniamolesta, to flow interventions Botswana Government had carried out in the past, to the

construction of pole bridges by the Department of Tsetse Fly Control and by safari

operators, to small earth bunds used in molapo cultivation, to the accelerated demand of

up stream users and physical barriers built in neighbouring countries. Only very few

members of the communities identified climatic change, resulting in the lack of rainfall

in the Angolan highlands, as the key driver of diminishing water levels.

The local communities regarded the development of a hydrological model as an activity

that did not directly address the concerns they had raised during the introductory round

ofkgotla meetings. A question such as Will the computer model restore the flow in

the delta? clearly indicates that people want pragmatic solutions to immediate

problems and are less interested in long term monitoring of changes in the flow

conditions, although as stated above, explanations of the reasons for changes are

wanted.

2.3.2Control of boat movementsThe increasing motor boat traffic was seen as a threat to people and to the ecology of

the delta. Communities requested stricter regulations on boat movements and on the

type of boats permitted in the Ramsar site. They pointed out that fast moving boats are

dangerous to fishermen who use traditional dug out canoes as a means of transport. In

this respect driving courses and the introduction of driving licences for motor boatoperators were suggested.

Furthermore, people expressed concern about the negative environmental impact of

motor boats on endangered bird species like the African Skimmer. They had observed

that the waves of big boats cause erosion of the river banks and destroy the nesting sites

of birds and crocodiles on the sandbanks. Some speakers referred to the findings in the

Panhandle Management Plan which indicated that the formation of waves was not

simply related to the size, but more to the shape of the boat and to the weight carried. It

was pointed out that despite the fact that boats have to be registered in a particular zone,

movement regulations and spraying of boats prior to translocation are not strictly

enforced. Hence the danger of infestation of the Okavango system with aquatic weeds(in particular Salvinia molesta) remains high. It was felt that outsiders would not know

20


21/43

and sometimes not be prepared to obey local regulations. Hence rigid control and even

limitation of the increasing influx of foreign boats was recommended.

2.3.3Channel BlockagesChannel blockages were reported by the local land users from various parts of the delta.

People were not satisfied with the explanation of the Department of Water Affairs that

its responsibility is limited to the monitoring of the water flow. Currently the DWA onlycarries out channel clearing measures in order to get access to its water gauges. People

felt that maintenance of the Okavango Delta as a wetland, which includes the restoration

of the water flow, should also be one of the responsibilities of the DWA. Furthermore,

the opening up of navigable channels to facilitate access for communal users to their

fishing and gathering areas is regarded by some community members as a Government

task. The communities stressed that they would like to be more involved in identifying

channel blockages and finding employment in vegetation clearing activities.

Other speakers warned that by clearing vegetation blockages the flow in the main

channel would be increased while adjacent shallow melapo might dry up. Some people

feared that human interventions might have no, or even negative impacts on the flowdistribution. As examples, the Boro dredging and the Thaoge restoration scheme

were mentioned as both having failed to increase water flow. The need for an

environmental impact study prior to flow interventions was recommended.

2.3.4SalviniaMost communities in the north western part of the delta had never seen Salvinia molesta

and asked for more information about the impact of this alien species. Salvinia started to

invade the east side of the delta in the 1980s. In the affected communities people

questioned the effectiveness of the biological control measures presently used by the

DWA. Concerns were also raised about the cost efficiency and possible ecological

impact of the introduction of a weevil from Australia. It was felt that the employment of

local labour, to physically remove the Salvinia mats, would be a more appropriate

method. From the various questions asked it became apparent that communities would

like to know more about how the rapid spread of the plant could be avoided and

controlled. In this respect stricter control of boat movements was requested.

2.3.5Water qualityThe threat of water pollution by inadequate management of fluid waste in the villages,

from houseboats and possibly also in tourism camps were regarded as potential dangers.

The application of fertilisers to vegetable gardens, but mainly by big irrigation schemes

in neighbouring countries upstream, which might cause water pollution was identifiedas a potential threat to the water quality in the delta. The DWA was requested to bring

up such issues at OKACOM level. A locally confined pollution problem caused by a

water treatment plant was raised in Makalamabedi village. In small settlements which

depend on open water sources for human consumption, elephants that use the same

water source were held responsible for the deteriorating water quality.

2.3.6Water supplyGreat concern about the lack of water supply for human consumption was raised in

many of the small, non gazetted settlements where one third of the district population

lives. Most of these settlements are located at the edges of the floodplains. People who

get their drinking water from nearby rivers ormelapo complained about poor waterquality causing diseases, about the danger of crocodiles they are exposed to and about

the long distances over which they carry water especially when the flood recedes.

21


22/43

Villages located near the lower Boro well-field, which had been developed for Maun

water supply, asked to be allowed to use these boreholes.

Remote dryland settlements, like Tsodilo, requested to be connected to the district water

supply system. In larger villages like Etsha and Nokaneng the supply of water to

individual homes was brought up.

2.3.7RecommendationsTo avoid the Department of Water Affairs being put under political pressure to carry out

interventions in the delta that are based on misconceptions, it is essential that

communities and their representatives are provided with information based on facts

from scientific investigations. In response to the questions raised by communities, the

HOORC hydrologist, Dr. Wolski, has compiled a hydrological fact sheet, which could

form the basis for information dissemination by the ODMP communication component.

22


23/43

2.4 Observations, Concerns and Recommendations Relatedto Component 5: Wildlife ManagementInstitution responsible: Department of Wildlife and National Parks

2.4.1The human - elephant conflict, a key issue forcommunities

The Department of Wildlife and National Parks is the institution to which mostconcerns (32.8% of all statements) of communities were directed. Issues related to

problem animals were the most frequently mentioned land use conflicts raised by local

stakeholders. People felt that the activities planned by the DWNP under the ODMP

were not directly addressing their concerns as they will only culminate in studies and

management plans. Local land users believed that there was enough evidence that the

human-wildlife conflict was increasing rapidly and demanded a more action oriented

approach to alleviate the problem. People had the impression that government was not

taking their contribution seriously. During a workshop on the human-elephant conflict,

community representatives had come up with proposals of how to deal with the

problem. No feedback had been given to communities thereafter and none of these

suggestions had been implemented so far. To emphasise their appeal, farmers suggestedMoving a thousand elephants to the capital and to the major villages in the south to

make decision makers more aware of the gravity of the conflict.

2.4.2 Increase of the elephant population and expansion oftheir range

The rapidly increasing elephant population was considered to be the main factor for the

augmented human-elephant interaction. Community members complained that

elephants expanded their range far beyond the Wildlife Management Areas inside the

buffalo fence into communal land. Concern was raised that the number of elephants had

increased, from 80,000 in 1998 to 120,000 in 2004, causing more and more damage to

the natural vegetation, to the buffalo fence and to farmers property. Local land users

stated that They could not live with so many elephants in communal areas. People had

experienced that the elephants had lost their fear of humans and intruded into communal

areas as they were not afraid of being shot. People explained that humans and wildlife

interact more frequently in the dry season when the water sources away from the delta

have dwindled.

2.4.3Crop damage by elephantsFarmers in most villages at the edges of the delta complained vehemently about

frequent crop damage caused by elephants (10.2% of all statements). They stressed the

importance of crop production as one of their main sources of livelihood. In order tocontinue growing their own food and not become dependant on government hand outs,

local farmers pressured government to take appropriate measures to solve the conflict.

Communities like Ditshiping, Mababe and Sankuyo, located in the Wildlife

Management Areas of the delta, are extremely exposed to elephant invasion and have

almost given up ploughing. However, the fact that they get some income from tourism

related activities under the Community Based Natural Resource Management

(CBNRM) Programme has raised their level of tolerance to co-exist with large,

potentially dangerous animals. Those communities that have not been granted the right

to administer a Controlled Hunting Area (CHA) and do not derive any direct benefit

from wildlife but have to bear the costs of living with wild animals, insisted on the

relocation and decimation of conflict animals and requested adequate compensation forthe losses with which local land users are faced. It was even suggested that the income

made by CBNRM community trusts could be used to settle compensation payments.

23


24/43

2.4.4Destruction of the buffalo fence by elephants and strictveterinary measures

Local land users reported that the veterinary cordon fence was constantly broken down

and trespassed by the large elephant population. They complained that as the

Department of Animal Health and Production was unable to maintain the fence,

domestic stock that crossed into the FMD infection zone had to be killed and destroyed.Communities found the rationale behind the strict veterinary regulation difficult to

understand and were unsatisfied with the low compensation rates paid in these

instances. Livestock owners considered it unfair that their cattle had to be shot when

found in the Wildlife Management Area, whereas buffalos that entered the communal

land were merely driven back by helicopter into the delta. Farmers got the impression

that government was more interested in the protection of the environment than in the

well-being of the local residents.

Recommendation: In this context it is suggested that a fact sheet be compiled and

distributed to the communities that explains the rationale behind the enforcement of the

veterinary measures.

2.4.5Elephants threaten human livesInstances where elephants have threatened humans at their homes, at the lands and at

the cattle posts or even killed people have become more frequent. Particularly women

who collect veld products in the bush for food or house building mentioned that they

felt unsafe or even reported unpleasant encounters with elephants. Communal land users

appealed that the Problem Animal Control Unit should assist them to either trans-locate

or shoot elephants that have become a menace to people. Furthermore the payment of

compensation to the family of a person killed by elephants, hippos or crocodiles was

requested.

2.4.6Destruction of the natural vegetation caused byelephants

People described that elephants are causing severe damage to the natural vegetation.

The impact human land use has on the flora of the delta was regarded as minor in

comparison to the alteration of the vegetation cover caused by elephants. In some

instances even channel blockages were blamed on elephants that had pushed trees into

the river, blocking the water flow.

2.4.7Suggestions how to reconcile the human elephant

conflictMost communal land users held the opinion that the number of elephants in general hadsurpassed the carrying capacity of the range and had to be reduced either by culling or

increasing the hunting quota. Many local land users stated That they cannot live with

so many elephants in the communal areas and demanded their relocation to wildlife

management or protected areas and a clear division between communal land use and

wildlife. Traditional land users had observed that the increasing number of fences

(border fence and veterinary fences) hampered the free movement of these large

mammals. The redistribution of elephants by providing watering points for them in

dryland areas far away from human land use activities or by allowing them to move to

neighbouring countries was suggested.

Recommendation: The natural migration routes of elephants have to be taken into

consideration using remote sensing materials complemented with local knowledge to

24


25/43

establish movement corridors for elephants. However it needs to be borne in mind that

elephant movements are driven by the availability of food and water and the fluctuation

of the natural conditions.

2.4.8Access to the Conservation and Community Trust FundMany questions were raised relating to the different funds derived from the sale of the

stockpile of ivory and earmarked for development and conservation projects incommunities faced with the human-elephant conflict. As the application procedures

seem to be quite complex, it appears that interested communities will need, apart from

detailed written guidelines, assistance from the DWNP staff or from consultants to

successfully access these funds.

Recommendation: A fact sheet should be produced, explaining the application

procedures and listing institutions or consultancy companies that can provide help to

communities to access these funds.

2.4.9Rhinos in communal areas

In the area around Lake Ngami (Tsao, Sehithwa, Bothatogo) people felt threatened by arhino that that had moved into the communal area and requested the Department of

Wildlife and National Parks to move it back into the game reserve or the wildlife

management area.

2.4.10 Predation of domestic stockOther burning problems raised by communities was predation of domestic stock (11.3%

of all statements), mainly by lions but also by smaller predators. Communities called for

an increase of the compensation rates for losses of domestic animals to market value.

Local livestock owners did not agree with the selection of predators that had been

included in the compensation list, which implies that farmers can claim compensation if

these animals cause damage to their livestock. Even though communities appreciated

that the cheetah was added to the compensation list, they felt that this species was not

considered a main threat in the district. On the other hand, farmers are faced regularly

with stock losses by hyenas, which are not eligible for compensation. People urged the

DWNP to consider the inclusion of small predators such as hyena and jackal, which

cause a lot of damage, in the compensation list.

2.4.11 Compensation rates and payment proceduresThe inadequate compensation rates for crop losses by elephants and hippos and for

livestock killed by predators was a main concern to local land users, raised in 5.9% of

all statements. Farmers felt that the losses they faced were way above the compensationpayments and requested government to consider increasing the rates to the full market

value of their crops or their livestock. The communities were not pleased to hear from

the

DWNP staff said that due to shortage of funds government does not intend to raise the

damage payments. It was explained that the payments are only meant to alleviate the

impacts of damage by wildlife but do not intend to replace what has been lost and that

the word compensation (which means: replacement of the value) will be replaced by

the term ex gratia (which means: out of kindness).

Community members gave many examples describing the complicated, slow damage

assessment and payment procedures and appealed for a revision of the present practices.Many suggestions were made how the process could be improved. Generally farmers

25


26/43

would like to have clear guidelines on the different compensation rates used by the

DWNP and the DAH.

Especially in remote areas, where the wildlife conflict is most pronounced, people faced

problems in reporting the damage incidence in time (within a week) as there is

frequently no wildlife office in the vicinity and no public transport available. Often,

when the officers are not able to assess the damage promptly, farmers have difficultiesin proving the evidence as the tracks of the intruding wildlife became faint. To

overcome this problem it was advocated to let the Agricultural Demonstrator or the

Tribal Police Officer handle the damage assessment. Some affected farmers described

that they had waited a year or more to receive the compensation. Others had given up

altogether in claiming their losses as the travelling costs involved in the procedures

outweighed the expected payments.

In some cases the DWNP officers were criticised for not taking their job and the

problems of farmers seriously. The community members were relieved to hear that to

speed up the process, the ex gratia payments will now be directly made by DWNP and

not by the NWDC as in the past. This will be done at the kgotla in all villages following

announcements. People urged the DWNP to inform the community well in advance oftheir arrival and give them enough time to come to the kgotla toreceive their payments

and bring their cases forward.

Recommendation: A fact sheet with all the compensation rates for crops, livestock and

other assets and the procedural steps to follow when claiming should be distributed to

every kgotla to inform the affected farmers about their rights.

2.4.12 Land use restrictions due to the extension of theMoremi Game Reserve

Problems brought up by communities at the south eastern edge of the Delta were the

unclear boundary between the communal areas and the extended Moremi Game Reserve

and mistreatment of community members by government officials, e.g. when suspected

poaching or trespassing the boundary. From the motions raised in several communities

bordering the reserve it appeared that the extension of the protected area conflicted with

their traditional fishing and gathering rights.

Recommendation: It might be interesting to consider the latest management planning

proposal for Moremi, worked out by the Durudec Wildlife Conservation project, which

recognises some traditional user rights at the reserve boundaries.

2.4.13 Monitoring of Tourism Hunting ActivitiesCommunities around the Lake Ngami, which used to be a bird hunting concession buthas recently been declared a bird sanctuary, had observed a decline in certain bird

species (guinea fowls). People stressed that the tourism hunting activities need to be

closely monitored to avoid negative environmental impacts.

26


27/43

2.5 Observations, Concerns and Recommendations Relatedto Component 6: Sustainable Tourism and CBNRMInstitutions responsible: Department of Tourism, North West District Council

Tourism Office

Issues related to the tourism component have been rated as number four on the

frequency list of all the problems mentioned by communities. 7.5% of all the concernswere related to tourism or Community Based Natural Resource Management

(CBNRM).

2.5.1Local communities request increased benefits from andmore direct involvement in the tourism sector

Communities realised that the tourism sector offers new alternative income

opportunities. However, they stressed that at present they are not benefiting adequately

from tourism. It was observed that like most businesses in Botswana the tourism

industry was also dominated by foreigners. Communities would like to see more jobs

created for Ngamiland residents in this sector and showed interest in starting their own

tourism ventures. People demanded that safari companies (like Okavango Houseboats)should not be allowed to employ foreigners for jobs that could be filled by qualified

local staff.

2.5.2Delays in the land allocation processLand Board was blamed for holding up all local initiatives to enter the tourism sector.

The difficult, long, bureaucratic procedures to obtain land rights for a community

projects, the insufficient transparency in the land allocation process and the lack of

Government support for local business incentive were considered severe impediments

for communities to enter the tourism sector. People reported that in some cases the

approval process to start a tourism project was pending since several years as advice of

many different Government departments, DLUPU and the TAC was required. It was

feared that an allocation ban might be enforced by the ODMP like during the Okavango

Panhandle Management Plan process that would bring all developments to a halt and

were relieved to learn that this was not going to happen.

2.5.3Lack of skills to start community tourism projectsMany critical voices came from communities already involved in tourism activities.

They identified the lack of basic education and specialised skills as main obstacles in

running community tourism enterprise successfully. People realised that They need

training in tourism before they can venture into this business successfully and that

they have to send their children to school to have a brighter future as they could findformal employment in the tourism sector. It was raised that some tour operators did not

provide adequate training to local staff to fill management positions.

It was pointed out that at present the government tourism programs were only accessible

to well educated citizens and not to the high percentage of illiterate people in

Ngamiland. Communities requested government assistance in the formation of trusts, in

drawing up management plans, in starting, running and marketing community tourism

projects and asked for training in areas related to the tourism industry.

27


28/43

2.5.4Financial assistance for community or citizen tourismprojects

People stressed that most of the funding programs to start economic enterprises like

tourism projects were very bureaucratic and too difficult to access without government

assistance.

2.5.5Problems in existing CBNRM projectsSome communities (Etsha, Ikoga, Jao) asked for assistance and advice from the

Department of Tourism and from the NWDC tourism office to solve issues that

paralysed the functioning of their trust like lack of accountability, land right conflicts

between different communities and failure to come to an agreement with a joint venture

partner.

2.5.6 Inadequate distribution of benefits generated by thetourism sector

Some communities, particularly those that have not been given the right to administer

the natural resource use of one of the wildlife management areas under the CBNRM

strategy, felt that they did not get an adequate share from the enormous revenue thissector generates. A few speakers were critical about the lack of accountability of

community trusts und suggested that CBNRM funds should rather be handled by

Government institutions, while communities could identify projects and apply for funds

to implement them. Most communities expressed interest in having a tourism project

implemented in their area. This statement reflects the somewhat passive attitude of the

communities in this process. Particularly in the dryland areas around like Lake Ngami,

concern was raised that the introduction of tourism was only acceptable to local land

users as long as it would be compatible with livestock rearing, the main land use activity

in this area.

2.5.7Possible negative impacts of tourism on the Deltaecosystem

The increase of tourism facilities in the Okavango Delta and the lack of appropriate

control and monitoring mechanisms raised the fears of stakeholders that natural

resources might get overexploited. Examples were given of over (Xakanaxa) und under-

utilised areas (CHA NG 12) in the Delta. In this respect the intention of the tourism

component to draw up a tourism management plan that would set carrying capacity

guidelines was welcomed by local stakeholders. It was recommended that tourism

generates incomes but government has to monitor how it is conducted.

Communities requested that the number of speedboats that are operating in the Deltashould be controlled and that boats from outside should not be allowed into the Delta to

avoid the spreading of aquatic weeds. Questions were raised if fluid and solid waste was

handled adequately in the tourism camps in the Delta to avoid pollution.

2.5.8Location of tourism activities and allocation of CHAs tocommunities

In the Nokaneng Habu area it was suggested that tourism camps and lodges should be

located in communal areas at the fringes of the Delta to create direct employment and

stimulate other small business activities.

The Shorobe community requested that it be allocated Santawane Lodge as they hadtraditionally used parts of NG 32.

28


29/43

2.6 Observations, Concerns and Recommendations Relatedto Component 7: Sustainable Fisheries Utilisation andManagementInstitution responsible: DWNP, Fisheries Division

From all the concerns raised by communities 6.9% were related to fishing.

2.6.1Significance of fish in the household economyMany traditional land users stressed the importance of fish as one of their sources of

livelihood. However, it is essential to understand that fishing is only one of the many

economic activities traditional land users are involved in. Arable farming, livestock

rearing, the production of crafts, the use and sale of veld products and formal

employment in the tourism sector are other economic activities simultaneously carried

out by subsistence fishermen as a means of reducing risks in the unstable hydrological

conditions of the delta. In areas with permanent open water sources, such as the

Okavango Panhandle, fishing plays a more prominent role in the household economy

than in temporarily inundated floodplains at the southern edge of the delta. Hence

comments related to fishing were raised more frequently in the permanent swamps.

2.6.2Sustainability of fishing practicesIn general fishermen agreed on the need to use the fish resource of the Ramsar site in a

sustainable way. However they stressed that by applying their traditional fishing

methods, the Okavango waters had never been over-fished. Several speakers suggested

that if indeed, fish stocks are declining; it would be mainly due to the reduced water

levels in the delta. Fishermen were optimistic that, in years of good flood, fish might be

available to them in quantities such as in the past. The practice of taking all the fish out

of drying lagoons was not seen as detrimental to the fish population. Local fishermen

pointed out that the fish population would build up again when the next flood came.

People felt that it would be wasteful not to make use of this resource, as fish would

merely die naturally or be eaten by birds instead. It was recommended that the impact of

modern fishing techniques on fish stock status be investigated and that sport fishing

activities in the delta be monitored more closely.

2.6.3TrainingWhile some fishermen welcomed the proposal of the Fisheries Division to provide them

with training in sustainable fishing methods, others could not envisage that they could

benefit from such an extension offer, since they already perceived their own methods to

be sustainable.

2.6.4New fishing regulationsWhen representatives of the fishery component talked about the introduction of new

fishing regulations, the idea was met with scepticism, fear and a certain degree of

resentment by the communities. People only saw a need for more control in the

commercial fishing sector. Apart from restricting the mesh size of fishing nets,

subsistence fishermen felt that their traditional fishing practices should not be

constrained.

2.6.5Access to fishing groundsRestricted access to fishing grounds in concession areas was only mentioned in one

instance. However the loss of traditional fishing grounds by the expansion of theMoremi Game Reserve was raised by a number of subsistence fishermen in the south

east of the delta as a serious erosion of their traditional land use rights.

29


30/43

2.6.6Fish stock assessmentWhen the representative of the Fisheries Division mentioned the fish stock assessment

as one of the activities planned by the fishery component in the ODMP, most people

could not imagine how such an assessment could be carried out.

30


31/43

2.7 Observations, Concerns and Recommendations Relatedto Component 8: Vegetation Resources ManagementInstitution responsible: Forestry, ARB, Range Ecology

2.7.1 Impact of low attendance of representatives of thevegetation component in the consultation process

Representatives of the vegetation component only attended two out of 43 kgotlameetings during the second round of consultations. In contrast the introductory

consultation round was well attended by staff of the component, matters associated with

vegetation and veld fires were the third largest issue group brought up by local land

users (13% of all the concerns raised). The frequency of comments related to this

component dropped drastically during the feedback consultations (ninth issue group out

of twelve and out of 1035 comments only 3% related to vegetation and veld fire issues).

The results of the feedbackkgotla meetings reflect the poor attendance of

representatives of the vegetation component in this consultation process rather than the

actual decrease in importance of problems related to vegetation. Even though all

activities planned for the component were outlined in the presentation made by the

project secretariat, communities did not feel encouraged to raise concerns and questionsas the department in charge of managing this sector was not present to give them

immediate response. In general women showed greater interest and participated more

actively in questions related to vegetation resources.

2.7.2Significance of vegetation for the livelihoods of ruralhouseholds

Traditional land users stressed the importance of veld products to sustain their

livelihoods. People pointed out that the rural poor in particular with no cash income,

depend on the use of natural vegetation for food, fuel, material for house building and

fencing and as medicine. Women pointed out how important for them was the small

income they derive from the production of crafts (mainly baskets made out of the leaves

of the Hypaene petersiana palm) and collection and sale of reeds and thatching grass. In

this context, the need to improve the marketing outlets for these products was raised.

2.7.3Substance use of vegetation resourcesThe opinion that the traditional use of veld products for subsistence purposes was

sustainable was shared by most speakers. In general, the impact of elephants on the

deterioration of the vegetation was seen as far more severe than the increasing demand

on this resource by humans.

2.7.4Commercialisation of vegetation resourcesPeople were mainly concerned about the overexploitation of veld products forcommercial purposes, often initiated or carried out by outsiders.

2.7.5Control of veld product utilisationIt was observed that since the authority to regulate the use of the vegetation resources

has been taken away from traditional leaders, it has become difficult to enforce

regulations on vegetation harvesting methods and periods when harvesting may occur.

People, who had formed conservation committees and tried to intervene when they

believed that unsustainable harvesting techniques were used, where told that they had

no right to tell others how to use wild plants which they had not cultivated. The

capacity of government institutions as regulatory organs to set and enforce restrictionsand rules for veld product utilisation was questioned. Some people lamented this lack of

control and identified the need for a regulatory mechanism. At the same time traditional

31


32/43

users feared that the introduction of new rigid regulations might have negative impacts

on their household economy and restrict their traditional ways of using veld products.

More responsibility for community based organisations and traditional leaders in this

respect were repeatedly suggested as one of the possible solutions.

2.7.6Sustainable harvesting techniques

The issues of the importance of creating awareness of sustainable harvesting techniquesof veld products and the revitalisation of traditional harvesting regulations were raised

repeatedly.

2.7.7Fire as a traditional management toolThe important role of fire as a traditional management tool, especially in floodplain

areas, was mentioned by many speakers, however the negative impacts of veld fires

(both in timing and extent) on the vegetation was also recognised by the communities,

who were concerned about uncontrolled fires. It is usually seen as an unwanted impact

if fires spread from the floodplains into the dryland. Several examples for the

effectiveness of fire in controlling vegetation growth in watercourses and fishing

grounds, managing of grazing land and clearing vegetation in fields prior to ploughingwere given. Summarizing the statements, it appears that the traditional land users are of

the opinion that fires should be restricted to the floodplains and only applied in a

controlled manner.

2.7.8Marketing of veld productsThe need for improved market outlets for veld products and local crafts (baskets) was

raised by a woman.

32


33/43

2.8 Observations, Concerns and Recommendations Relatedto Component 9: Physical PlanningInstitution responsible: North West District Council

As the activities of the Physical Planning Component are confined to the Shakawe area,

the activity plan of this ODMP component was not outlined in all community

consultation meetings. The Physical Planners of the NWDC attended only the kgotlameetings at Shakawe and Mohembo East, where no comments were made that need to

be followed up.

2.8.1Service provision to non-gazetted settlementsHowever, during

Documents

Documentation and Analysis of Feedback Consultation With Communities