PREAMBLE - Uganda Wildlife

Lake Mburo Conservation Area - General Management Plan (2015 - 2025)

Page ( i ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

PREAMBLE

Uganda Wildlife Authority prepared this General Management Plan with funds internally generated.

Prepared by: Uganda Wildlife Authority: Conservation Department

Edited by: Uganda Wildlife Authority Planning Unit

Layout and Design: Edgar Buhanga Justine Namara

Cover photograph: Zebras and Tourists on game drive


Page ( ii ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

APPROVAL

The Uganda Wildlife Authority Board of Trustees approved this General Management Plan for implementation at its sitting of 25th February 2015 at UWA headquarters

Dr. Andrew G. Seguya Mr. Benjamin OttoExecutive Director Chairman, Board of Trustees


Page ( iii ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

FOREWORD

Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) recognizes the importance of planning as a management tool and as such preparation of General Management Plans (GMPs) for Protected Areas is a statutory requirement. In fulfillment of this requirement, UWA is systematically preparing GMPs for all her Protected Areas (PA’s) to realize their potential in biodiversity conservation, tourism development and contribute towards poverty reduction. It has been ten years since we signed off the last management plan that ran from 2003 to 2013. The last ten years have been years of great achievements for Lake Mburo National Park, registering an increase in numbers for most wildlife species. The Zebra and Impala more than doubled while other species showed a positive growth trend. Over the ten years of implementing the GMP, the park also registered an increase in visitation levels and tourism revenues rose from less than 200 million in 2003 to 1.5 billion in 2013. The revenue sharing funds that were disbursed to the surrounding communities more than doubled, registering improved relations with our neighbors. However these positive trends have not been without challenges. The changes in the vegetation of the park becoming thick bush and woodland have led grazers to prefer more open areas in the surrounding ranches often causing conflicts with the ranch owners. Lack of water within the surrounding pastoral area has been a challenge that has put pressure on the park as a source of water and pasture especially during the dry conditions. This General Management Plan is therefore aimed at providing Lake Mburo National Park with guidance towards sustainable management of the natural ecosystems for their proper functioning in order to provide the services. The plan will also ensure proper development of both administrative and tourism infrastructure and facilities in order to realize the full potential of Lake Mburo National Park in contributing to the development given the fact that tourism is the engine of economic growth of this country.

The mission of Uganda Wildlife Authority is to “conserve, economically develop and sustainably manage the wildlife and Protected Areas of Uganda in partnership with neighboring communities and other stakeholders for the benefit of the people of Uganda and the global community”. Accordingly, GMPs for wildlife protected areas are prepared with full stakeholder participation. The preparation of this plan was through a multidisciplinary and consultative approach involving various stakeholders at community, district, national and regional levels to ensure that all relevant issues were adequately addressed. The Planning Team that prepared this GMP was composed of UWA staff as well as other stakeholders from the local governments of the 3 districts which neighbor Lake Mburo National Park i.e. Kiruhura, Mbarara and Isingiro. Consultations were held with resource user groups, local community leaders, district leaders, the tourism stakeholders, researchers and private sector representatives.

The UWA Board of Trustees after careful review has also endorsed the implementation of this plan by their approval at their sitting on 25th February 2015 at UWA headquarters. This plan that is therefore a product of wide consultations will enjoy the support of all stakeholders, to enhance the achievement of conservation and management objectives of Lake Mburo National Park for the benefit and enjoyment of the present and future generations.

It is therefore with great pleasure that I now entrust the Conservation Area Manager of Lake Mburo Conservation Area, with the authority to implement this General Management Plan for the next 10 years (2015-2025).

Dr. Andrew G. Seguya EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR


Page ( iv ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Uganda Wildlife Authority would like to thank all people who participated in preparation of this management plan.

Special thanks go to the following people who were members of the Planning Team and worked tirelessly to prepare this GMP:

Buhanga Edgar, Namara Justine, Namuli Susan, Tusubira Justus, Nakayenze Christine Lynn, Bwire Isaiah, Mbagaya Robert, Murinda Michael, Kaijutsya Robert, Namara Deborah, Mwesigye Joseph, Musingwire Jeconious, Malingi Sam and Charles Atuhe.

Mr. John Makombo and Mr. Charles Tumwesigye provided oversight of the whole planning process and their effort is greatly appreciated.

UWA appreciates the contributions of all her staff, partners, stakeholders, local communities and members of the Board of Trustees who were involved in one way or the other in preparation of this plan.


Page ( v ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

ACRONYMS

ACCA Ankole Cow Conservation Association

ACAO Assistant Chief Administrative Officer

AOP Annual Operations Plan

AWF African Wildlife Foundation

BDM Business Development Manager

BoT Board of Trustees

CA Conservation Area

CAM Conservation Area Manager

CAO Chief Administrative Officer

CBO Community Based Organization

CC Contracts Committee

CCC Community Conservation Coordinator

CCO Community Conservation Officer

CDO Community Development Officer

CE Chief Engineer

CEC Conservation Education Centre

CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora

CM Concessions Manager

CPI Community Protected Area Institution

CSR Cooperate Social Responsibility

CVC Cultural Value Conservation Project

CWA Community Wildlife Associations

DAO District Agricultural Officer

DC Director Conservation

DCAO Deputy Chief Administrative Officer

DCO District Commercial Officer

DCDO District Community Development Officer

DDC Deputy Director Conservation

DEO District Environment Officer

DISO District Internal Security Organization


Page ( vi ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

DPC District Production Coordinator

DRC Democratic Republic of Congo

DTBS Director Tourism Business services

DWRM Directorate of Water Resources Management

DVO District Veterinary Officer

ED Executive Director

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

ENR Environment and Natural Resources

FFI Flora and Fauna International

FMA

FNR Foreign Non Resident

FR Foreign Resident

GISO Gombolola Internal Security Organization

GMP General Management Plan

HRM Human Resource Manager

IBA Important Bird Area

IUCN World Conservation Union

IO Intelligence Officer

LC Local Council

LG Local Government

LLG Lower Local Governments

LM Legal Manager

LMCA Lake Mburo Conservation Area

LMNP Lake Mburo National Park

MAAIF Ministry of Agriculture Animal Industry and Fisheries

MoU Memorandum of Understanding

MRC Monitoring and Research Coordinator

M&R Monitoring and Research

MES Manager Engineering Services

MME Manager, Monitoring and Evaluation

MICE Meetings, Incentives, Conferences & Events


Page ( vii ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

MM Marketing Manager

MRO Monitoring and Research Officer

NAADS National Agriculture Advisory Services

NRO Natural Resources Officer

NEMA National Environment Management Authority

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NFA National Forestry Authority

NFP National Forest Plan

PA Protected Area

PACU Problem Animal Control Unit

PC Partnership Coordinator

PAMSU Protected Area Management and Sustainable Use

PLC Principal Leal Council

PMAC Park Management Advisory Committee

RS Revenue Sharing

SMRC Senior Monitoring and Research Coordinator

SPEIAC Senior Planning and Environment Impact Assessment Coordinator

SPEIAO Senior Planning and Environment Impact Assessment Officer

TAMP Trans-boundary Agro-System Management Project

PRM Public Relations Manager

RMNP Rwenzori Mountains National Park

SWIC Senior Warden in Charge

TM Top Management

UCOTA Uganda Community Tourism Association

UPDF Uganda Peoples Defense Forces

UWA Uganda Wildlife Authority

VC Veterinary Coordinator

WCC Warden Community Conservation

WCS Wildlife Conservation Society

W eng. Warden Engineering

WIC Warden in Charge


Page ( viii ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

WLE Warden Law Enforcement

WMR Warden Monitoring and Research

WPMAC Wildlife Protected Area Management Committee

WT Warden Tourism

WWF World Wide Fund for Nature


Page ( ix ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BackgroundLake Mburo National Park (LMNP) covers an area of 370sq.km and lies in south western part of Uganda. It lies in 3 districts of Mbarara, Kiruhura and Isingiro with the largest part lying in Kiruhura district. The protected area lies along the Kampala Mbarara road and it is the only park that is close to Kampala. It has a high population of wildlife with significant populations of wild animals residing on the public lands surrounding the park. Because of this, a wider Lake Mburo Conservation Area (LMCA) is recognized to describe the area of LMNP management activities. With the LMNP at its core, it radiates outwards to include adjoining parishes, recognizing the need to work with local people to achieve conservation goals.

GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLANNINGLMNP has had a GMP for the period of 10 years (2003-2013). A mid-term review was carried out in 2009 where some changes were made that were approved by the BoT. This planning took recognition of the review that was done but also incorporated the new ideas that came up as the stages below were carried out. The planning process followed the already established guidelines for wildlife protected areas planning. The following steps were undertaken during this planning process.

Publicizing the planning processAn advert was placed in the print media to inform the stakeholders that the process of developing the management plan for LMCA had started and to solicit their views and inputs into the plan. Written comments and ideas were received and considered during planning.

Team composition A Planning Team was constituted in accordance with the provisions of UWA GMP manual. The team comprising of 15 people; 3 representatives from the local governments of the three districts within which LMCA falls, the representative of tourism stakeholders, chairman of the Nshara community wildlife association, a representative from AWF, the Conservation Area Manager (LMCA), 5 staff from LMCA and 3 Headquarter staff was appointed by the Executive Director to undertake the planning process. This multi-disciplinary team was involved in the solicitation of views and identification of proposals for management of the protected area. The team went through an orientation, agreed on roles and responsibilities and drew up a programme for the planning process.

Field reconnaissanceAs part of the field information collection, a field reconnaissance exercise was carried out where planning team members were exposed to all issues in the field. Reconnaissance helped members to get first hand information, which was used to generate management objectives and actions. This information was further used for zoning.

Consultations Consultations were held with various stakeholders/community groups including resource user groups, community leaders, and District leaders in the six districts regarding their views on the protected area management. Throughout this process communities were provided with opportunities to voice concerns about planning and management of the protected area. These views were considered during the proposal generation workshop.


Page ( x ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Proposal generation workshopA proposal generation workshop was held for the planning team to harmonize views received from various stakeholders and agree on proposals for the general management plan. During proposal generation a statement of purpose for the protected area was developed. A description of exceptional resource and values, a list of management objectives describing the desired future for the protected area plus the actions to achieve these objectives were also developed. An estimate of the budget has been attached on the actions to give a feel of how much the plan will cost.

MANAGEMENT PROPOSALS/CONCEPTS

Management Purpose The purpose of managing Lake Mburo Conservation Area for the next 10 years is:To conserve LMNP as a Ramsar site, IBA and as a water source with its diverse ecosystems that sup-port high biodiversity including endemic impala and African fin foot, and the associated rich cultural heritage for sustainable development

Conservation Values 1. The Lake Mburo- Nakivale ecosystem is a Ramsar site which is an Important Bird Area,

particularly important as a breeding area for the regionally endemic shoebill (vulnerable) and hosts the African fin foot which is endemic to Lake Mburo. The park is a habitat to the papyrus yellow warbler (Chloropeta gracilirostris) (near threatened). The park also hosts a number of migratory birds both palaearctic and continental birds, examples of which in-clude the Abdmin stock and the pink-backed pelicans.

2. Lake Mburo National Park is the only park with significant populations of the Impala, eland, topi and zebras in Uganda. Although efforts have been made to translocate some impalas to Katonga, it will take a longtime to build the viable populations. The Ishasha Sector in QENP is the only other area where topi can be found though in small numbers. Elands and zebras are also found in Kidepo but the populations are equally small. Lake Mburo will therefore remain the only important strong hold as far as populations of impalas, eland, zebra and topi are concerned.

3. Lake Mburo is a critical water body within the River Rwizi catchment area that drains into Lake Victoria, providing direct and indirect values such as modification of climate to the surrounding environment and communities. It is the only source of permanent water in the area providing water for both wildlife and livestock.

4. The traditional and cultural relationship between the protected fauna and flora with the culture of Banyankore in the surrounding communities e.g clans and wildlife has positively contributed towards conservation of the park. A number of animal species including mon-keys, zebra, bushbuck, have linkages to the culture as most of them are totems. It is tradi-tionally abominable for someone to hunt, kill, or endanger in any way the animal that is his or her totem. Generally, the Bahima who mostly neighbor the park traditionally do not eat wild meat. This explains why large populations of wildlife have survived on private land and ranches.

5. Lake Mburo is associated with a rich cultural heritage that is built on keeping of the unique long horned Ankole cow. The long horned Ankole cow is a trademark for the pastoral com-munities around the park. Although some community groups are now improving their breeds, the Pastoralists still have a strong attachment to the long horned cow. There are cultural sites within LMNP which include Kigarama, Rubanga, Ruroko and Ihendamata. Rubanga site was originally used by groups of people to perform sacrifices to their gods for different reasons such as famine, drought and child bearing. Ruroko is an area where the


Page ( xi ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Bacwezi used to dwell and Kigarama where the pages (servants) of the king used to stay. Although these sites are no longer active, the communities still attach a lot of historical im-portance on them.

6. The park has a variety of ecosystems including lakes, wetlands, open grasslands, forests, woodlands that support a high biodiversity. Lake Mburo with its surrounding wetland sys-tem provides a very important habitat for a number of wildlife. Most animals use this area for watering especially during the dry season when water dries in other parts of the park. In addition, the ecosystems contain important medicinal and rare trees such as Craibea fagara which cures over 100 diseases, and “omuboro” tree believed to have aphrodisiac properties but a rare and threatened tree species.

7. LMNP is the only national park in Ankole region that has become the basis for tourism developments in the area such as hotels, cultural centers and sport hunting. The former Ankole kingdom is now partitioned into ten districts of Kiruhura, Isingiro, Mbarara, Ibanda, Ntungamo, Bushenyi, Sheema, Buhweju, Mitooma and Rubirizi. The culture of the Banyan-kore is closely associated with the wildlife conservation around LMNP as this used to be hunting grounds for their kings. With the current improvements and growth of the tourism sector in the country, LMNP will remain the nucleus and centre for tourism in the Ankole region.


Page ( xii ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Table of Contents

PREAMBLE iAPPROVAL iiFOREWORD iiiACKNOWLEDGEMENT ivACRONYMS vEXECUTIVE SUMMARY ix1.1 Purpose of the plan 11.2 The Planning Process 11.3 Enabling Policy and Legislation 11.3.1 The Constitution of Uganda (1995) 11.3.2 The Uganda Wildlife Policy (1999 Draft) 21.3.3 The Uganda Wildlife Act Cap 200 of the Laws of Uganda 2000 21.3.4 The National Environment Act Cap 153 of the Laws of Uganda 2000 21.3.5 The Tourism Policy of Uganda 2003 21.3.6 The National Forestry and Tree Planting Act, 2003. 21.3.7 The Wetlands Policy 1995 31.3.8 The National Environment (Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores Management) Regulations, 2000 31.3.8 International Conventions and agreements 32.0 DESCRIPTION OF LMNP 42.1 Area and Location 42.2 Physical and Biological Resources 62.2.1 Geology and Landscapes 62.2.2 Climate 62.2.3 Flora 62.2.4 Mammals 7Table 1: Wildlife trends in Lake Mburo National Park2.2.5 Birds 72.3 Social and Economic Background 8 Ethnography and Demography 82.4 History of Establishment and Management of LMNP 8 Cultural History 82.5 Land Tenure and Land Use 82.6 Local Government 93.0 ZONING PLAN 123.1 The Tourism Zone 143.2 Resource use zone 143.3 Wilderness Zone 143.4 Recovery zone 143.5 Administrative Zone 114.1 RESOURCE CONSERVATION PROGRAM 15


Page ( xiii ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

4.1.1 BOUNDARY MANAGEMENT 154.1.2 Illegal activities 164.1.3 Management of wildlife populations 194.1.4 Wildlife habitat management 205.0 COMMUNITY CONSERVATION PROGRAM 235.1 Problem animals 235.2 Wildlife on private land 275.3 Community awareness and education 285.4 Community Benefits 305.5 Revenue sharing 336.0 RESEARCH AND MONITORING PROGRAM 356.1 Research 356.2 Monitoring 377.0 PARK OPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION 417.1 Infrastructure 417.4 Capacity and governance 47

PART 3: BUSINESS PLAN 8.0 TOURISM DEVELOPMENT: 558.1 Tourism facilities and infrastructure 588.2 Tourism products and services 618.3 Marketing 628.4 Community tourism/cultural groups 668.5 Financial Analysis 688.5.1 Cost estimates for plan implementation 688.5.2 Revenue Projections and scenario analysis 69 REFERENCES 70


Page ( xiv ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

PART 1 - Background


Page ( 1 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE PLAN In order to successfully conserve LMNP and address the increasing level of human demands and limited natural resources, it is important that a management plan be developed. The purpose of the plan is to guide management in making decisions for the sustainability of the Protected Area. With the minimal resources, the plan will help management to prioritize the activities and locate resources to the most critical areas. In addition, the plan will contribute to the general management of the area. This plan therefore identifies the desired future conditions (management objectives) of LMNP during the 10-year period (2013-2023) and presents strategies to enable the PA managers achieve this objective.

1.2 The Planning ProcessIt is UWA policy to involve all stakeholders in all its activities but particularly in the preparation of GMPs. This plan is therefore the result of an interactive process that involved the various stakeholders with interest in LMNP. An interdisciplinary planning team composed of representatives from UWA and District local governments around the PA has been responsible for preparing this plan. There are three districts around the PA namely Mbarara, Isingiro and Kiruhura. A list of the Planning Team members responsible for the preparation of this GMP is presented in Appendix 1 In addition to having an interactive process, wide consultations were carried out to seek views of the various stakeholders as part of the planning process. A list of participants is attached in appendix 2. A list of issues/views that were raised during the various meetings conducted during the consultations is presented in Appendix 3. The process benefited from experiences gained by UWA staff over the years in preparing management plans of various protected areas and the lessons learnt from this process.

1.3 Enabling Policy and LegislationIt is essential for PA managers to understand some of the relevant laws that empower them and the legal notices by which the PA was established. With this knowledge, they can effectively conduct law enforcement work, ensure appropriate stakeholder participation in the management of the PA and address any challenges to its integrity. Some of the laws and policies pertaining to wildlife and biodiversity conservation in Uganda are summarized below:

1.3.1 The Constitution of Uganda (1995)The overall government policy on natural resource conservation in Uganda is enshrined in the Constitu-tion of the Republic of Uganda 1995. The principles are spelt out in the National Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy. The purpose of the objectives is to provide a legal foundation upon which future policies and juridical interpretation of the substantive constitutional provisions must be based. The rel-evant constitutional provisions in the National Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy include the following:

(a) Principle of State Policy XXVII mandates the State (both central and local government) to create and develop parks, reserves and recreational areas, and to ensure the conser-vation and promote the rational use of natural resources so as to safeguard and protect the biological diversity of Uganda;

(b) Article 237 of the Constitution provides that the Government or local government, as determined by Parliament by law, shall hold in trust for the people and protect, natural lakes, rivers, wetlands, forest reserves, game reserves, national parks and any land, to be reserved for ecological and touristic purposes for the common good of all citizens;


Page ( 2 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

1.3.2 The Uganda Wildlife Policy (1999 Draft)The draft Uganda Wildlife Policy of 1999 is a revision of a 1995 version prepared prior to the enactment of the 1996 Uganda Wildlife Statute. This policy aims at making wildlife management more acceptable to Ugandans by ensuring that resources contribute to the well being of present and future generations. The policy seeks to conserve areas with great biological diversity which are representative of the major habitats of Uganda and which, together, include all indigenous species.

1.3.3 The Uganda Wildlife Act Cap 200 of the Laws of Uganda 2000 The management of wildlife and protected areas including LMNP is guided by the Uganda Wildlife Act1 of 2000 (Chapter 200 in the Laws of Uganda, 2000). The Act authorizes UWA to assume responsibility for wildlife management in Uganda, both inside and outside its protected areas. Under the Act, a Board of Trustees is appointed by the Minister of Tourism, Trade and Industry as the governing body of UWA. The Act also includes all the Schedules of the repealed Game (Preservation and Control) Act, 1964, (the principal legislation of the former Game Department), and the National Parks Act, 1952. The Schedules from the Game (Preservation and Control) Act, 1964 are now included in the Uganda Wildlife Act 2000 as Chapter 198. Section 13 of the Wildlife Act requires that the Executive Director of UWA prepares a management plan for each of the protected areas.

1.3.4 The National Environment Act Cap 153 of the Laws of Uganda 20002The National Environment Act establishes the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) as the principal agency in Uganda for the management of the environment. Section 37(1) of the Act provides for the identification and sustainable management of wetlands. Wetlands according to Section 37 (2) can be of “local, national and international importance as ecosystems and habitats of species of fauna and flora…” Section 42 provides for NEMA to work with the lead agency to prescribe measures to ensure conservation of biological resources in situ. The section also requires NEMA to work with the lead agency to integrate traditional knowledge for the conservation of biological diversity with mainstream scientific knowledge. The Third Schedule of the Act requires that environmental impact studies be carried out when national parks, game reserves (now wildlife reserves) and buffer zones and several other developments are being established. Guidelines for this process are given in the National Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 1998.

1.3.5 The Tourism Policy of Uganda 2003The Tourism Policy recognizes that in the 1960’s Uganda was a main tourism destination in Eastern Africa and therefore tourism was one of the major economic sectors for the country. Unfortunately the turmoil of the 1970’s and 1980’s drastically reduced wildlife numbers and destroyed infrastructure resulting into reduced numbers of tourists. This policy is aimed at ensuring that tourism becomes a vehicle for poverty eradication in the future to the extent possible within the resource base and market limitations. It further recognizes UWA’s role and contribution towards the achievement of this objective. This is mainly in the area of managing and developing the extensive resource base as well as developing and marketing various products. The policy further emphasizes the need to facilitate the flow of tourists within the region and promotion of East Africa as a single tourist destination.

1.3.6 The National Forestry and Tree Planting Act, 2003.The Act provides for among other things, the conservation, sustainable management and development of

1 First enacted as the Uganda Wildlife Statute No. 14 of 19962 First enacted as the National Environment Management Statute No. 4 of 1995


Page ( 3 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

forests, and the promotion of tree planting for the benefit of people of Uganda and the international com-munity. It classifies forests in Uganda as central forest reserves, local forest reserves, community forests and forests forming part of a wildlife conservation area declared under the Uganda Wildlife Statute, 1996. The Act recognizes various stakeholders in the management of forest reserves, which should be guided by the Management Plan prepared by the responsible body. In addition the Act aims at ensuring that forests and trees are conserved and managed in a manner that meets the needs of the present generation without com-prising the rights of future generations by safeguarding forest biological diversity and the environmental benefits that accrue from forest and trees.

1.3.7 The Wetlands Policy 1995Wetlands cover about 10% of Uganda’s total land surface and provide a range of biophysical and socio-economic functions. The National Wetlands Policy for the conservation and management of wetland resources seeks to promote the conservation of wetlands in order to sustain their values for the present and future well being of the people. The Policy sets five goals:

• To establish the principles by which wetland resources can be optimally used now and in the future• To end practices which reduce wetland productivity• To maintain the biological diversity of natural or semi-natural wetlands• To maintain wetland functions and values• To integrate wetland concerns into the planning and decision making of other actors

1.3.8 The National Environment (Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores Management) Regulations, 2000The Regulations provide for management and protection of Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores. Lake Mburo is among the Lakes specified in the seventh schedule which have a protection zone of 200m. Where the lake shore is to be developed for purposes of promoting tourism or any other development, the developer should ensure that a) pre-treatment or full treatment of effluent or waste from the facility is carried out to prevent contamination of the waterb) litter is cleared and disposed in a manner in conformity with best environmental practices; andc) the river banks, lake shores or beaches are not degraded in addition the regulations provides that for any developer to conduct a project which may have a significant impact on a wetland, river bank or lake shore, shall be required to carry out an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

1.3.9 International Conventions and agreementsThe following conventions are some of the most relevant to the conservation of biodiversity in Uganda:

Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992: In 1993, Uganda became a signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity, which in Article 8, obliges member states to:

• Establish a system of protected areas• Develop guidelines for the selection, establishment and management of protected areas• Promote the protection of ecosystems, natural habitats and the maintenance of viable populations

of species in natural surroundings

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES): Uganda is a party to CITES, which obliges member states to adhere to the recommendations of the Conference of Parties with respect to trade in endangered species.

Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, 1971: The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands emphasises the need to


Page ( 4 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

conserve wetlands and requires member states to include at least one wetland on the list of Wetlands of International Importance. LMNP is one of the Ramsar sites found in Uganda which contains some of the endangered bird species.

Convention on migratory species of wild animals (CMS): Realizing that animal migration is a global phenomenon in response to biological requirements, several countries have come together under the CMS, also known as the Bonn Convention, to cooperate in the conservation of animals that migrate across national boundaries and between areas of national jurisdiction and the sea. The Convention aims to improve the status of all threatened migratory species through national action and international Agreements between range states of particular groups of species. Agreements can range from legally binding multilateral treaties to less formal memoranda of understanding. The object of such agreements is to restore the migratory species to a favorable conservation status or to maintain it at that status. The Convention has two appendices: Appendix I lists endangered migratory species, Appendix II lists migratory species to be subject to agreements. It also establishes a scientific council to provide advice on scientific matters.

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF LMNP2.1 Area and Location Lake Mburo National Park (LMNP) covers an area of 370sq.km and lies in south western part of Uganda. It lies in 3 districts of Mbarara, Kiruhura and Isingiro with the largest part lying in Kiruhura district. The protected area lies along the Kampala Mbarara road and it is the only park that is close to Kampala. It has a high population of wildlife with significant populations of wild animals residing on the public lands surrounding the park. Because of this, a wider Lake Mburo Conservation Area (LMCA) is recognised to describe the area of LMNP management activities. With the LMNP at its core, it radiates outwards to include adjoining parishes, recognizing the need to work with local people to achieve conservation goals.


Page ( 5 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Fig

1: M

ap o

f LM

NP

show

ing

the

loca

tion

of t

he p

ark


Page ( 6 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

AccessLMNP can be accessed through two routes from Kampala. It lies between the towns of Mbarara and Lyantonde, just to the south of the Mbarara - Kampala highway. It can also be accessed through Kampala Fortportal- Kasese -Mbarara route. There are three gates through which you can enter the park namely Sanga, Nshara and Kanyinanshara

2.2 Physical and Biological Resources2.2.1 Geology and LandscapesThe LMNP area is underlain by two major Precambrian rock systems: an older Basement Complex and a younger Karagwe-Ankolean system. These have been overlain, since the Pleistocene, by sediments; mainly swamp deposits and alluvium (Kamugisha et al., 1997). The Basement Complex comprises acidic and highly metamorphosed igneous rocks, principally granites and gneisses. The Karagwe-Ankolean System is composed of slightly metamorphosed sediments, dominated by dark grey and black slates, shales, sandstones, conglomerates, phyllites and mica schists intercalated with bands of reddish-brown quartzites (Breyer, 1993, as in Muhweezi, 1994).Average altitudes are about 1,210m above sea level, with local relief of 30-400m. The ancient rocks that underlie the area break the surface at some points, especially in the east of the park, as kopjes. The western sector is characterised by interlocking hill spurs and long ridges; these drain into a system of wide, inter-connected valleys running through the centre of the Park. Permanent or seasonal swamps and lakes occupy some of these valleys. The south-west shore of Lake Mburo and the adjacent River Rwizi are bordered by a strip of riverine forest (Kamugisha et al., 1997).

2.2.2 ClimateThe LMNP area exhibits a semi-arid savannah climate in which the minimum annual rainfall ranges from 400 mm in the south-east to 700mm in the west. The park and its environs are drier than the surrounding region, lying in a rain shadow caused by the Kabula hills. Rainfall is bimodal, occurring mainly from March to May and between September and November. The park experiences a long dry season between May and August and a shorter one from December to February. The mean maximum temperature is approximately 27.5oC and the mean minimum is 15o C. Relative humidity is rather high, averaging between 61-84% (noon and midnight respectively) (Kamugisha, 1997).

2.2.3 FloraLMNP contains a variety of vegetation types, including open grasslands (mainly in the flat, wide valleys), woodlands, thickets, swamps, and gully and riverine forests. Acacia hockii is the dominant tree. This has seriously invaded many previously open spaces, initially on hillsides and low hilltops but also increasingly on valley floors. Present day vegetation in LMNP has resulted from a combination of factors, including climate, soil, fire, grazing and human activities.

Open grasslands are found mainly in the eastern and central parts of the park, with Sporobolus pyramidalis, Sporobolus africana, Sporobolus stapfinus and Kyllinga sp. being the dominant grass species. Acacia gerrardii and Acacia sieberiana trees also occur here. On hilltops the dominant grasses include Sporobolus pyramidalis, Loudetia kagerensis, Themeda triandra and Hyperrhenia spp., while the dominant trees are Acacia gerrardii and Securidacae oblopendiculata. Some valleys also support woodlands: these largely consist of Acacia gerrardii. The west of LMNP also contains gully forests located between interlocking hill spurs. These are dominated by Combretum molle, Albizia maranquensis and Euphorbia cussonoides. Narrow belts of riverine forests, about 50m wide, line the western fringes of Lake Mburo and the River Rwizi: the dominant trees are Markhamia platycalyx, Teclea nobilis, Ficus spp., Acacia xanthropholea and Phoenix reclinata. Sporobolus spp., Encnocloa


Page ( 7 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

pyramidalis and Cyperus spp dominate seasonal swamps, while Cyperus papyrus and Typha spp. dominate permanent swamps.

2.2.4 MammalsLMNP is by far the smallest of Uganda’s grassland parks, but it still contains a significant variety of large mammal populations. Sixty-nine species of mammals have been recorded. These include Uganda’s only population of impala and one of only two populations of zebra (the others being in Kidepo Valley National Park). LMNP’s eland population is also notable: eland occurring elsewhere in Uganda only in small numbers in Kidepo and in Pian-Upe Wildlife Reserve. The park is also home to the waterbuck, hippopotamus, topi, buffalo, eland, bushbuck, warthog, bush duiker and the bush pig. There has been a general increase in most wildlife populations as illustrated in the table 1 below. Some species previously recorded in the area are now locally extinct. The giant forest hog is believed to have been eliminated in the 1950-60s during the tsetse eradication programme. The rhinoceros, wild dog and roan antelope are also locally extinct. While the lions were poisoned by cattle keepers during the 1980s, recent reports have indicated presence of at least 1 lion roaming in the areas of Miriti, Kashara, Warukiri and Rwonyo.

SPECIES 1992 DEC-1995

MAY-1996

OCT-1997

MAY-1998

FEB-1999

JUL-2002

JUN-2004

FEB-2006

MAY-2010

AUG -2012

Buffalo N/a 25 105 486 132 946 1,115 591 574

Eland N/a 273 88 285 1,442 199 28 606 296 1,323 1,378

Hippo N/a 51 76 303 97 213 357 250 296

Impala 18,691 6,599 7,442 6,817 4,124 1,595 2,956 3,300 4,705 33,565 29,285

Topi N/a 57 111 362 81 183 271 162 148 173

Warthog N/a 571 480 964 559 550 493 560 741

Waterbuck N/a 241 287 485 427 598 396 548 1,072 3,495 3,644

Zebra 3,446 2,430 1,574 3,254 3,748 2,249 2,665 4,280 5,968 11,778 11,974

Table 1: Wildlife trends in Lake Mburo National Park

A group of Animals in LMNP


Page ( 8 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

2.2.5 BirdsLMNP is rich in bird life and is an Important Bird Area containing globally threatened species, range-restricted species and biome-restricted species (Byaruhanga et al., 2001). The park has 312 bird species recorded including 19 afro-tropical migrants and 30 palearctic migrants (Kasoma and Pomeroy, 1993, cited in Muhweezi, 1994). There are 5 forest specialist species, 79 forest non-specialist species, 60 wetland specialist species and 33 wetland non-specialist species. 30 species have been identified as being of special conservation importance including the papyrus yellow warbler and the shoebill stork (Muhweezi, 1994). The African fin foot is locally endemic to Lake Mburo National Park and is a big attraction for Birders.

2.2.6 FishNine species of fish have been identified, including Oreochromis, Haplochromis, Protopterus sp., and Clarius sp. Most of these are important to the local fishing industry.

2.3 Social and Economic BackgroundEthnography and DemographyThe Banyankole are the dominant ethnic group around LMNP, comprising about three-quarters of the population. Within the Banyankole are two distinct groups of people: the Bairu (about 43%), who are traditionally cultivators, and the Bahima (about 29%), who are traditionally pastoralists. Other ethnic groups include the immigrant Bakiga and Banyarwanda. The level of immigration into the area is presently decreasing. The population has become stable and sedentary. Some pastoralists have moved away from the Ankole cow to improved breeds for dairy farming. A new dairy factory is being established within Nshara Government Ranch on the Masaka-Mbarara highway.

2.4 History of Establishment and Management of LMNPCultural HistoryDuring the nineteenth century, the Nshaara rangeland (i.e. the region of present day LMNP) was a traditional grazing and hunting area for the kings of Ankole. The area formed part of a cattle corridor stretching from Tanzania to Karamoja and was occupied mostly by the nomadic, cattle keeping Bahima. Bahima life was, and still is, inextricably linked to cattle. Cattle remains the main source of livelihood and the Bahima still consider that one’s standing in the community increases with the number of cattle owned. This has led to overgrazing as desire for local prestige causes cattle numbers to exceed the carrying capacity of the rangelands (Kamugisha et al., 1997). Cattle sales are the main source of income for pastoralist households, while milk sales have increased in importance following the liberalization of the dairy industry during the 1990s (Namara et al., 1998). Numbers of other livestock, like goats and sheep, have traditionally been low. This is changing however, as the livestock industry becomes increasingly commercialized. It was partly the traditional practices of the Bahima pastoralists which led to the high densities of wildlife in this area. Firstly, the Bahima shun game meat, their favored diet being milk, blood and ghee. This reduced hunting pressure on wildlife in the area. Secondly, overgrazing by Bahima cattle led to acacia encroachment that attracted browsing wildlife. Wild grazers also benefited from periodic bush burning by pastoralists, which encouraged fresh re-growth of pastures. Having been attracted to an environment modeled by human activity, wildlife populations found themselves better able to survive in it than cattle as, unlike domestic livestock, they are resistant to sleeping sickness (trypanosomiasis).

2.5 Land Tenure and Land UseSecurity of tenure around LMNP improved in the late 1990s, when many landless pastoralists who had settled in the park and on the adjacent government ranch were resettled on the former Ankole Ranching Scheme by the Ranches Restructuring Board. Increasing security of land tenure is causing the decline of traditional, nomadic pastoralism and an increase in mixed farming. This has diversified sources of income


Page ( 9 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

and strengthened the livelihood base. These changes present challenges to LMNP. Land tenure and increasing arable land-use both reduce the area available for cattle grazing. Unable to support their herds on their allocated plots – and no longer able to move them freely across open rangeland - pastoralists are eager to graze their cattle in the park. This is, however, prohibited, yet wildlife outside the park competes with cattle for grazing on private land and also damage crops. All of these factors generate negative attitudes towards the park (Marquardt et al., 1994; Namara et al., 1998). UWA needs to influence district-planning processes to support land use around the park that retains open rangeland, for example wildlife ranching/farming. Map 3 shows land cover and land use around Lake Mburo National Park.

2.6 Local GovernmentAll communities in Uganda are organized in the five-tier local government system that starts at the village level (Local Council (LC) 1) and rises to district level (LC 5). Councils at each level consist of elected representatives from local communities. Many functions of government e.g. income tax collection, service provision and aspects of environmental management have been decentralised to the district (LC5) and sub-county (LC3) according to the Local Government Act (1997). Revenue collected by sub-counties is shared between the different local government levels for development and service provision.LMNP is situated for most part within Kiruhura District but its boundaries also include a small area (within Biharwe subcounty) in Mbarara District. To the south, the park boundary also defines the district boundary of Isingiro and Kiruhura Districts. The park is bounded by 15 parishes as summarized in the table 2 below:The Community Protected Area Institutions (CPI) that used to be a link between the communities and the park was phased out on the argument that they were not legal entities. Community Wildlife Associations were formed although their mandate has a narrow focus on the use of revenues accruing from wildlife programs like sport hunting revenues and park entry revenue sharing funds. Therefore the linkage between the park and communities was weakened with the phasing out of the CPIs.

Table 2: Administrative Units that boarder Lake Mburo National Park

DISTRICT SUBCOUNTY PARISH POPULATION BOUNDARY DISTANCE (KM)

Isingiro Kabingo Kyarugaju 4,307 3.00Masha Rukuuba 2,890 0.80

Rwetango 5,401 18.5Rushasha Ihunga 2,876 6.00

Mirambiro 3,887 7.00Kiruhura Kanyaryeru Akaku 766 6.00

Akayanja 1,228 4.20Rwamuranda 892 7.60

Nyakasharara Nyakahita 4,700 4.00Rurambira 1,800 18.00

Sanga Nombe II 3,500 9.00Rwabarata 3,800 12.7

Sanga Town Council 1,985 4.00Mbarara Biharwe Rwenjeru 3,995 3.87


Page ( 10 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

PART 2 - The Conservation Plan

A Bushbuck


Page ( 11 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

3.0 CONSERVATION VALUES AND PURPOSE OF LMNPThere are several conservation values which are the reason why LMNP should be conserved. These are described in this section and have been considered when determining the overall purpose and management objectives of the PA.

Conservation Values 1. The Lake Mburo- Nakivale ecosystem is a Ramsar site which is an Important Bird Area,

particularly important as a breeding area for the regionally endemic shoebill (vulnerable) and hosts the African fin foot which is endemic to Lake Mburo. The park is a habitat to the papyrus yellow warbler (Chloropeta gracilirostris) (near threatened). The park also hosts a number of migratory birds both palaearctic and continental birds, examples of which in-clude the Abdmin stock and the pink-backed pelicans.

2. Lake Mburo National Park is the only park with significant populations of the Impala, eland, topi and zebras in Uganda. Although efforts have been made to translocate some impalas to Katonga, it will take a longtime to build the viable populations. The Ishasha Sector in QENP is the only other area where topi can be found though in small numbers. Elands and zebras are also found in Kidepo but the populations are equally small. Lake Mburo will therefore remain the only important strong hold as far as populations of impalas, eland, zebra and topi are concerned.

3. Lake Mburo is a critical water body within the River Rwizi catchment area that drains into Lake Victoria, providing direct and indirect values such as modification of climate to the surrounding environment and communities. It is the only source of permanent water in the area providing water for both wildlife and livestock.

4. The traditional and cultural relationship between the protected fauna and flora with the culture of Banyankore in the surrounding communities e.g clans and wildlife has positively contributed towards conservation of the park. A number of animal species including mon-keys, zebra, bushbuck, have linkages to the culture as most of them are totems. It is tradi-tionally abominable for someone to hunt, kill, or endanger in any way the animal that is his or her totem. Generally, the Bahima who mostly neighbor the park traditionally do not eat wild meat. This explains why large populations of wildlife have survived on private land and ranches.

5. Lake Mburo is associated with a rich cultural heritage that is built on keeping of the unique long horned Ankole cow. The long horned Ankole cow is a trademark for the pastoral com-munities around the park. Although some community groups are now improving their breeds, the Pastoralists still have a strong attachment to the long horned cow. There are cultural sites within LMNP which include Kigarama, Rubanga, Ruroko and Ihendamata. Rubanga site was originally used by groups of people to perform sacrifices to their gods for different reasons such as famine, drought and child bearing. Ruroko is an area where the Bacwezi used to dwell and Kigarama where the pages (servants) of the king used to stay. Although these sites are no longer active, the communities still attach a lot of historical im-portance on them.

6. The park has a variety of ecosystems including lakes, wetlands, open grasslands, forests, woodlands that support a high biodiversity. Lake Mburo with its surrounding wetland sys-tem provides a very important habitat for a number of wildlife. Most animals use this area for watering especially during the dry season when water dries in other parts of the park. In addition, the ecosystems contain important medicinal and rare trees such as Craibea fagara which cures over 100 diseases, and “omuboro” tree believed to have aphrodisiac properties but a rare and threatened tree species.

7. LMNP is the only national park in Ankole region that has become the basis for tourism


Page ( 12 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

developments in the area such as hotels, cultural centers and sport hunting. The former Ankole kingdom is now partitioned into ten districts of Kiruhura, Isingiro, Mbarara, Ibanda, Ntungamo, Bushenyi, Sheema, Buhweju, Mitooma and Rubirizi. The culture of the Banyan-kore is closely associated with the wildlife conservation around LMNP as this used to be hunting grounds for their kings. With the current improvements and growth of the tourism sector in the country, LMNP will remain the nucleus and centre for tourism in the Ankole region.

Management Purpose The purpose of managing Lake Mburo Conservation Area for the next 10 years is:To conserve LMNP as a Ramsar site, IBA and as a water source with its diverse ecosystems that sup-port high biodiversity including endemic impala and African fin foot, and the associated rich cultural heritage for sustainable development

3.0 ZONING PLAN Zoning is a planning tool used to map out protected areas into distinct spatial areas according to their resource values and sensitivity. The zoning seeks to balance conservation, research, tourism, management and sustainable use of resources by neighboring communities.

Zones and Zone descriptions Five zones have been identified to represent different areas within the Lake Mburo National Park. These are Wilderness, Tourism, Administrative, Resource Use zone and Recovery zone


Page ( 13 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Fig

2: Z

one

map

for

Lake

Mbu

ro N

atio

nal P

ark


Page ( 14 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

3.1 The Tourism ZoneThis zone represents areas of spectacular scenery and wild game for visitor enjoyment in Lake Mburo National Park. The Zone will constitute the central park area where the main game drive tracks are concentrated and where visitors experience the parks’ appeal through scenic viewing, day and night game drives, nature walks and bird watching among others. The Rwonyo Tourism hub will be part of this zone. The zone will extend further south to include water based tourism activities on Lakes Mburo and Kigambira, where visitors will be treated to boat rides on Lake Mburo and sport fishing on Lake Kigambira. The zone will extend to Rubanga riverine forest, connecting visitors on water tourism experience on Lake Mburo to a natural rain forest atmosphere and at the same time enabling birders to watch a variety of forest bird life. Kigarama hill where a number of tourism activities have been proposed will be part of this zone. All tourism gates will also be part of this zone.

3.2 Resource use ZoneIn this zone, regulated resource harvesting by communities will be permitted through negotiated Memoranda of understanding (MoUs). This zone consists of Kizimbi water corridor where communities from Kyakategyere, Byembogo and Kiribwa cross their cattle to go for watering within the wetland. This zone will also include the water access corridors which include, Kayanga, Kyaruhinda and Bisheshe. The corridors will be closed within three years when it is anticipated that water sources for livestock will have been constructed outside the park.This zone will also include Rukirane wetland where communities go for mudfish, the western part of Lake Mburo for fishing by communities at the Rubare Fishing Village and the wetlands adjacent to Lake Mburo for seasonal fishing of cat fish (Clarius) in Kashara and Nyabushenyi. The zone for harvesting of firewood, beekeeping, and medicinal plants has not been marked on the map. This will be within the 1km distance from the park boundary within the park under signed MoUs and these will be made as need arises. MoUs for firewood are already being implemented in Rubaare community, Rwamuhuku and Kiribwa.

3.3 Wilderness Zone The Wilderness Zone will be a representative of the natural area of Lake Mburo National Park comprising dense bush land and thicket. This zone will be subjected to minimal disturbance where infrastructure will be limited to access tracks for patrols where such will be deemed necessary. No resource extraction will be allowed in this zone. Routine patrols on foot shall be permitted.

3.4 Recovery ZoneThis zone defines areas that have been severely impacted by human activities and require active manage-ment interventions to have it recover. The zone will comprise of areas where overgrazing has taken place in the western part of the park specifically in areas of Kyaruhinda, Bisheshe and part of Katengyeto. These areas have been affected by soil erosion especially as you descend to River Rwizi. The other section of the park that has been degraded as a result of overgrazing lies close to the Kizimbi wetland. All these areas are ones that host the water access corridors. These areas will be left intact so that they recover from the overgrazing.

3.5 Administrative ZoneThis zone defines the administrative infrastructure and contains the developed areas of the PA where re-sources are allocated primarily for PA operations. Although the environment in this zone is kept as natural as possible, certain concentrations of management facilities are accepted, as prescribed by the Management Plan. The zone includes the Minekye valley (Rwanengo) that houses the new park headquarters and the outposts across the entire park. The outposts include Bwara, Rubanga, Katengyeto, Kizimbi, Sanga, Kany-inanshara and Nshara. Other administrative infrastructure within this zone includes the Kigarama observa-tion post (“Hotel Tango”). New outposts will include Mujwiguru, Bisheshe and Kyakategyere.


Page ( 15 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

4.0 MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS4.1 RESOURCE CONSERVATION PROGRAMResource conservation is the key program in terms of management of LMCA. This ensures the maintenance of healthy ecosystems through resolving conflicts that threaten the habitat and wildlife resources, enforcement of policies and wildlife laws, managing specific wildlife species to maintain viable populations and managing the wildlife habitat. This section describes the current challenges to resource conservation, outlines the objectives to be achieved over the plan period and actions to achieve these objectives.The key challenges facing resource conservation include poaching, grazing, illegal fishing, boundary encroachment, wildfires, threatened and extinct wildlife species, limited water resource distribution for wildlife and changing wildlife habitat due to invasive species such as Acacia hockii among others. Program Objective: To maintain healthy ecosystems

4.1.1 BOUNDARY MANAGEMENT

Output 1: The existing boundary conflicts resolved and the boundary managed

Issues and RationaleThe park boundary is generally marked with concrete pillars planted at intervals of 200 metres from each other on the northern side of the park. However, the inter-pillar distance of 200 metres has been abused by some community members especially around Rwehongyera area, in the western side of the PA. In some sections of the boundary, fences have been constructed to curve inside the park in between the pillars resulting in conflict. The southern boundary of the PA currently faces no conflict as it adjoins with the River Rwizi and Rukirane wetlands systems which are not yet threatened. The other conflict on the boundary is around Rwakobo area. Along this park boundary section, there are seven households occupying about 64 ha within the PA. This land was allocated to them under Kanyaryeru Resettlement scheme before the PA boundaries were opened in 2006. At that time, it was believed to have been part of Nshara government ranch. When the park boundary was opened and marked in 2006, it was realized that 64 ha of PA land had been allocated to communities in error. These families have established livestock farms and crop fields. There is need to resolve this boundary conflict. It was established that there is land claim by the family of Mashango. However this matter is still in court.

Management ActionsFuture boundary conflicts will be avoided by reducing the inter-pillar distance to 100 meters and sensitizing the communities on the need of boundary management. The existing park map showing the boundary will be updated with coordinates of all pillars around the park. Pillars which have fallen or been removed by communities will be replanted. In order to avoid future conflicts live markers of appropriate tree species will be planted along the park boundary in collaboration with the community. This action will begin with areas prone to boundary conflict. A perimeter track will be opened along the boundary with government ranch. The boundary conflict around Rwakobo area will be resolved through meetings with stakeholders with intention of either relocating them or compensation.


Page ( 16 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Summary table of actions

Activity Responsible person Others Time Estimated cost

(shs)

Replace and replant boundary pillars WMR CAM, WLE Year 1,

onwards 30,500,000

Plant new pillar to decrease inter-pillar distance to 100m around the park boundary

WMR CAM, WLE Year 1-4 249,000,000

Plant live markers WMR CAM, WLE, WCC Year 3-6

259,220,000

Sensitize communities and LCs on boundary management

WCC CAM, WLE, WMR

Year 1, onwards

12,000,000

Maintain the park boundary WMR CAM, WLE Year 1, onwards

99,000,000

Update the existing map with coordinates showing all pillars

WMR CAM, WLE Year 2 200,000

Get the two maps on the park and for Nshara ranch to determine level of inconsistence of the boundary

WMR CAM Year 1 200,000

Hold negotiation meetings with stakeholders to resolve the conflict

WMR CAM Year 1 1,440,000

Hold negotiation meetings with stakeholders to relocate Rwakobo community

CAM ED, DC Year 3 - 4 1,440,000

Implement recommendations resulting from the negations on Rwakobo issues

CAM ED, DC Year 4 256,000,000

4.1.2 Illegal activities

Output 2Incidences of illegal activities reduced to insignificant levels (levels that will have minimal im-pacts on the resources)


Page ( 17 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Issues and Rationale

PoachingWhereas in 2004-2005 poaching was widespread around the PA by 2012/2013, poaching had been controlled and remained in localized places within the PA. The current problem areas in terms of poaching include Bwara to the south East, Kyakategyere and Kiribwa areas to the North and Bisheshe – Katengyeto and Kyahi Forest Reserve in the West.

The figure below demonstrates that poaching within and around LMNP has been controlled to a few cases annually, mainly arising from poaching on private land. This has been achieved through a combination of strategies that include increased patrols, establishment of satellite outposts, gaining support from community leaders through sensitization meetings and setting up intelligence networks. The reduction in poaching has led to increases in wildlife populations both within and outside the PA as shown in the table of selected species.

Fig 3: Poaching trends between 2002-2013

Grazing Despite the fact that this illegal activity has of recent been controlled it still remains a treat. This is largely due to the fact that the immediate neighbors of the park derive their livelihood from live-stock rearing. Many of these have got big herds on small pieces of land. Another factor contributing to grazing in the PA is inadequate water resources on community land. During the dry season, most of the cattle keepers are given permits to access water in the PA. In the process, they illegally graze.

After the suspension of cattle fines in 2010, grazing in the PA increased as there was a challenge of handling suspected illegal grazers with police and courts of laws where they were released. With intensified patrols and support from UPDF, the incidences of grazing in the PA reduced tremen-dously as illustrated in the figures below. Camping in the park was eliminated and grazing exists around the periphery of the park.


Page ( 18 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Illegal FishingThere are a total of five lakes within the boundaries of Lake Mburo National Park. These include L. Mburo, L.Kigambira, L. Kazuma, L. Kibikwa and Lake Bwara. A limited number of community members have been allowed to fish in Lake Mburo through a signed MOU. Accessibility to other lakes has been difficult. However, some community members especially from Isingiro district ac-cess these lakes through the surrounding wetlands and carry out illegal fishing. A few fishermen have also been found illegally fishing on Lake Mburo. Other forms of illegal fishing include use of small size nets and ‘tycoon’ and fishing in prohibited areas by those permitted to fish on Lake Mbu-ro. Some areas have been identified to be commonly used by cattle keepers to cross and illegally graze in the PA.

There is still a challenge of handling suspects especially those involved in illegal grazing. This is largely due the community and other law enforcement agencies not taking grazing in the PA to be a punishable crime. Thus many suspects have not been prosecuted exacerbating the problem of illegal grazing in the PA.

Uncontrolled movement of people and livestock through the park from Isingiro and Tanzania.Lake Mburo is bordered with R.Rwizi in the South. During the dry season when the water levels go down people with their livestock cross from Isingiro and Tanzania heading to Kiruhura and Sembabule which continues to be a security challenge. Movement of the livestock through the park may transmit diseases to wildlife. They use the route because it is shorter and helps them to avoid being arrested during quarantine which has been in the area for over ten years. They use crossing points which are far away from the outposts and are not easy to monitor. Routine patrols will be conducted along the river to arrest those trespassing but also need for land owners across the river to fence their potions of land.

Management ActionsA number of actions will be undertaken to strengthen law enforcement operations to further re-duce the incidences of poaching, illegal grazing and fishing to insignificant levels. Patrols within and around the PA will strengthened through equipping staff, increasing the number of staff at out-posts and establishing new outposts at Kyakategyere, Bisheshe and Mujwiguru (near Lake Kigam-bira) and opening satellite outposts where necessary. A patrol boat will be procured to strengthen other enforcement mechanisms to control illegal fishing. Barriers will be constructed on points frequently used by cattle keepers to access the PA illegally and kraals maintained as supportive infrastructure to law enforcement operations.

Coordination with other partners will be maintained and strengthened especially with the Tan-zanian counterparts to control illegal activities outside the PA through conducting coordinated patrols along the border and sharing intelligence information.

Awareness campaigns will be conducted to key stakeholders who include the police, judiciary, community members and leaders to appreciate the need to control illegal activities within and outside the PA. The aim of these campaigns will be to solicit the necessary support for conserva-tion of wildlife resources around LMNP.

The intelligence unit has been established. It will be strengthened in terms of numbers and logisti-cal support to augment the efforts of controlling illegal activities within and outside the PA.


Page ( 19 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Summary table of actions Illegal activities

Activity Responsible person Other Time Cost (shs)

Conduct patrols to control illegal activities WLE CAM Year 1,

onwards 987,340,000

Conduct awareness among stakeholders on illegal activities in the Conservation Area (Judiciary, Police, community)

WLE CAM, WCC Year 1, onwards

5,600,000

Prosecute suspects WLE CAM, IO Year 1, onwards

85,480,000

Gather intelligence information on illegal activities

WI WLE, CAM, WCC

Year 1, onwards

96,000,000

Construct and maintain cattle confinement kraals WLE CAM Year 1,

onwards 124,800,000

Construct barriers on identified cattle crossing points

WLE CAM Year 1, onwards

5,000,000

Procure a boat for marine patrols WLE CAM Year 3

40,000,000

Conduct coordinated border patrols (TZ) WLE CAM, WI Year 1,

onwards 48,000,000

Participate and organize stakeholder security and law enforcement meetings

WLE CAM, WI Year 1 onwards

8,560,000

4.1.3 Management of wildlife populations

Output Wildlife populations of extinct and threatened species re-introduced and managed

Issues and Rationale A number of wildlife species are noted to be threatened or rare or have become extinct in occur-rence in the recent past. These include lions, hyenas, klipsplinger, Oribi, and reedbucks. The roan antelope is now extinct. Those which are still seen on private land but rarely seen in the PA include Oribi, reedbucks and hyenas.


Page ( 20 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

ActionsTranslocations will be undertaken to establish viable populations of rare and threatened species. The species to be targeted for translocation will include lions, klipspringer and oribi. Existing hye-na dens in the surrounding community will be identified and the hyenas in these dens trans-locat-ed to dens within the park. Feasibility studies will be conducted and when found possible giraffe and southern rhino species will be introduced in the park.


Activity Responsible person Others Time Cost (shs)

Establish viable population of lions WRM CAM, VC Year 2

17,800,000

Introduce Giraffe WRM CAM, VC, AWF Year 1

Re-introduce roan antelope, Klipspringer and Oribi

WMR CAM, VC Year 5

Carry out a feasibility study on introduction of southern white rhinos and implement the recommendations

WMR CAM, VC Year 2 50,000,000

4.1.4 Wildlife habitat managementOutput: The integrity of the wildlife habitat restored and managed

Issues and RationaleDespite LMNP having a variety of vegetation types, the areas which used to be predominantly open grassland have changed to woodland dominated by Acacia spp and thickets. The spread of Acacia is associated with reduction in foliage for grazers. This has been brought about by a combination of factors that include:-frequent unplanned wildfires, grazing, fluctuations in animal numbers and human activities. A variety of wildlife especially grazers which include zebras, hippos, buffaloes, water-buck eland, impala and topi have been affected by this vegetation change. The change in the quality of the habitat has affected the abundance, distribution and other ecological factors for a number of wildlife species. It is believed that some of the wildlife has moved to open areas on private land thereby causing conflict.

The other issue that affected the quality of habitat in LMNP were wild fires which were set frequently within and around the park. The cool fires brought about by limited fuel have been found to lead to germination and regeneration of Acacia spp. Frequent fires also destroy seed leading to emergence of unpalatable species.

Habitat management started LMNP in 2004. This has been on small scale and targeting uprooting Acacia hockii using both park resources and organized community groups. The activity has also been done haphazardly with no monitoring to understand the impact of Acacia removal both on flora and fauna. Selective harvesting of Acacia hockii has led to other shrubs to grow faster and thicker. There is need to carry out planned and holistic habitat management with a clear monitoring plan and to consider ways of improving efficiency and effectiveness of habitat management.


Page ( 21 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Periodically, fire has been used in LMNP as a management tool to control the spread of wildfires, provide fresh forage for wildlife and protect park property. However no fire management plan has been in place to guide the use of fire in the PA. The resulting effect is believed to have caused negative ecological changes.

Water is an important range resource that affects animal distribution. Water resources around LMNP are concentrated in lakes and along River Rwizi in the western part of the park. During the rainy season, some pools of water are formed in various areas within the park allowing. Two water dams have been constructed at Kanyinanshara and Sanga gate. Water availability has been noted to be affected by seasonality. During the dry season, water is concentrated around the lakes and River Rwizi. Wildlife finds it difficult to access this water due to the thick vegetation around some of these water bodies and in other instances the animals have been found dead after being stuck in drying muddy water especially in Miriti valley. A number of wildlife also moves from the PA to community dams and to Lake Kakyera in search of water during the dry season. This increases conflict and chances poaching.

Wildlife disease outbreaks have not been common among the wildlife populations within the PA. Outbreak of foot and mouth disease has been common among the livestock in the neighborhood with cases recorded among the buffaloes found on some ranches.

Management actionsIn order to contribute to reduction of conflict with the community park management will contin-ue to manipulate that habitat. This will be done through committing more financial resources to vegetation removal of invasive species and provision of water dams in selected points within the PA. Appropriate equipment will be procured and Partnerships with both communities and other stakeholders will be undertaken to increase effectiveness and efficiency of habitat management.

Fire will continue to be used as a management tool. A fire management plan will be prepared and implemented.

Surveillance of common wildlife diseases will be undertaken. Coordination with local authorities will be promoted for monitoring of any disease outbreak among livestock and human beings that is associated with wildlife. Routine monitoring will be undertaken to detect any disease outbreak.


Page ( 22 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Summary table of actions Activity Responsible

person Others Time Cost (shs)

Procure an excavator for habitat management CAM DDC,MME Year 2

400,000,000

Manage the habitat WMR CAM Year 1 onwards

492,000,000

Construct and manage water dams in the park (eland track, Nshara and Ruroko track, Kabusharara/Iborogota, Miriiti)

CAM DDC Year 2 10,500,000

Develop a fire management plan WMR CAM Year 1, 5

4,000,000 Implement a fire management plan WMR CAM Year 1,

onwards 20,000,000

Manage disease outbreaks WMR VC, CAM Year 1 onwards

5,700,000


Page ( 23 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

5.0 COMMUNITY CONSERVATION PROGRAMIntroduction Lake Mburo National Park pioneered Community Conservation (CC) as a management approach complimenting other programs in managing Wildlife and protected areas in Uganda. The community conservation program was intended to address issues and challenges that affect both communities and LMNP so that the two can co-exist. The issues include human-wildlife conflicts, accessing and sharing resources inside the park. The CC program also aims at increasing awareness through conservation education among the community and schools around the PA. LMNP management has made some successes in working together with all stakeholders in addressing these challenges and enlisting community support for conservation and harmonious co-existence.

Despite the success so far registered there are still challenges of human-wildlife conflicts resulting from human population increase with limited resources, change in land use and tenure systems. The increase in arable farming around LMNP has acerbated the problem as dispersal area for wildlife has reduced thus increased crop-raiding incidents, creating further conflicts between park and the communities.

Program objective: To enhance community support for conservation.

Outputs 1. Reported incidences of problem animals reduced by 50%

2. Number of complaints of animals on private land reduced3. Conservation education and awareness among the community improved4. Community benefits in and outside the park increased and diversified5. Revenue sharing funds benefit intended targeted communities

5.1 Problem animals

Output 1: Reported incidences of problem animals reduced by 50%

Issues and RationaleProblem animal management has been a great challenge to park management. Problem animals include hyenas, buffalos, hippos, leopards, elephants in Rakai district and croc-odiles that injure and kill people and livestock. There have been conflicts of wildlife destroying crop farms, fences, water dams, competing with livestock for pasture and water, predators killing livestock, human injuries and deaths.

This is escalated by the fact that a lot of wildlife live on private land outside the PA. Areas most prone to problem animals are in the districts of Kiruhura, Lwengo, Mbarara, Rakai, Isingiro, Lyan-tonde, Sheema, Ntungamo and Ssembabule. Inspite of the efforts by PACU in LMNP, the numbers, frequency and the range of wildlife in the dispersal area has remained overwhelming. The num-ber of reported cases have been increasing over the years as shown in the table below. The likely causes of this increase are increase in human population, change in land use from pastoral to cul-tivation. The shift from traditional Ankole cow to improved breeds e.g exotic breeds has interfered with the co-existence of wildlife with the Ankole cow.


Page ( 24 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Table 4: Incidences of problem animals in LMNP

Year No. of cases2006-2007 No records taken2007-2008 No records taken2008-2009 612009-2010 1232010-2011 1412011-2012 1122012-2013 162

UWA took into consideration the above issues and liaised with local governments to train vermin guards to control vermin of LLGs while at PA level the, Problem Animal Control Unit (PACU) was created to handle problem animals.

Poor response to reported cases of problem animals;Most of the communities around Lake Mburo are cattle keepers and cultivators. Therefore they face a challenge of wildlife destroying their crops and fences, silting dams, killing domestic animals and even claiming human life. Because of increased wildlife on private land all animals almost are considered problem animals. Although reports of problem animals are made frequently, there has always been slow response to reported cases in most areas because of inadequate staff in PACU. There is need to train and equip the unit to quickly respond to problem animals. Urgently needed is a truck (Land cruiser), specialized guns and capture equipments. This unit should be independent from CC so that it can be well facilitated.

Poverty of people living around the park Most people living around the park are fairly poor compared to big ranchers in far North and eastern ranches. They are mainly small scale cattle keepers and cultivators. They are not well educated which has made them remain unemployed. They mostly engage in activities like fishing, acacia uprooting, charcoal burning and even poaching in order to earn a living. There is need to sensitize them on alternative income generating activities/projects especially for women and youths in order to eradicate poverty.

Incompatibility of land use Some people around the park are cultivators and grow crops which attract wild animals. This results into crop raids which have increased human wildlife conflicts. Farmers should be discouraged to grow crops that attract animals like sorghum and millet. People should be advised to grow crops that are not palatable to wildlife e.g, coffee, cotton, tobacco.

VerminCommunities from around Lake Mburo face a problem of vermin and problem animals destroying their crops killing livestock and claiming their lives. However, it is the responsibility of local government to land vermin. In 2000 Lake Mburo together with Mbarara District production department trained two vermin guards from each neighboring sub county to handle vermin. They were e not active because they were not facilitated and equipped by local government as was agreed. There is need to recruit and empower vermin guards from areas with vermin to handle them with technical assistance from UWA.The initiation of community institutions stems far back as in1994 when the Park worked with Park Management Advisory Committee (PMAC) in the early stages of Community Conservation. This was in a bid to bring people more closely to the Park management using such small groups selected


Page ( 25 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

by a wider audience. This later came to be named Community Protected Area Institution (CPI) which was in line with Local Government Structures. The essence was to close the information gap between park management and the neighboring community by involving local people and leaders in active conservation. Under the current revenue sharing guidelines, the local government committees on natural resources and environment at sub county and district level have been man-dated to handle wildlife issues. Communities with wildlife on private land took interest in wildlife management and with the help of the park management, Wildlife Associations were formed to manage wildlife issues on private land. However the capacities of these associations have been limited to management of funds accruing from Sport Hunting not the entire Wildlife - community aspects.

Management actions Park management will partner with other stakeholders such as local governments and NGOs in addressing the issues of environmental education; problem animal and vermin control; and domestic and wild animal health. Whereas the control of vermin is legally a local government responsibility, Park management will offer technical support. The management will also lobby local governments at sub county and district level to incorporate budgets for vermin control interventions in their plans through councils and planning meetings.

UWA will further equip the PACU and build more capacity of the staff to handle the increasing number of cases of problem animal occurrences more effectively and efficiently. This will involve procuring more translocation equipment and increasing the number of staff under the unit and imparting problem animal management skills to staff.

The LMNP management will work with other partners and affected communities to carry out problem animal intervention demonstrations. Specifically management will construct short fences to deter hippos, fence off water points to deter zebra from destroying water points for livestock, strong pens for Leopards and Hyenas, fencing along the water fetching points to protect people collecting water from the danger of crocodile attacks and barriers for elephants in Sangobay.

Management will identify the dens and translocate the hyenas to the identified dens in the park. Other problem animals in dispersal areas like the crocodiles, hyenas, leopards will be translocated to other PAs.

Management will continue to give technical support to local government on the control of vermin. It will also collaborate with district leadership of Kiruhura district, Wildlife Associations, donor agencies e.g. AWF, Private companies like Game Trails and land owners to manage wildlife on private ranches.


Page ( 26 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)



Identify Hyena dens and draw translocation plan WRM CAM Year 1 3,560,000

Translocate Hyenas to the Park and crocodiles to other PAs (Train and equip staff in translocation)

WRM VC, CAM Year 1 on wards 87,000,000

Diversify and carry out interventions for handling problem animals -Hippos (construct short fences as a demonstration) elephants-Sango bay

WPACU CAM Year 1 on wards 19,440,000

demo on Zebra fence of water points WPACU CAM Year 1 -3 13,620,000

Demo - Leopards and Hyenas construction of strong pens

WPACU CAM Year 1 -3 6,420,000

Demo Crocodiles fencing along the water fetching points)

WPACU CAM Year 1 - 3 4,320,000

Demo on Elephants barriers (Sango Bay) Year 2 4,050,000

Respond to Problem animal cases PACU WCC,

CAMYear 1 on wards 240,000,000

Attend to problem animal victims Year 1 on

wards 54,000,000


Page ( 27 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

5.2 Wildlife on private land Output 2: Number of complaints of animals on private land reducedIssues and Rationale LMNP was reduced in size in 1986 from 650 km2 at the time of its gazettement as a national park to 370 km2. The reduction in the size of the park did not reduce the home range of wildlife. This resulted in plenty of wildlife remaining and or migrating into private land. Animals on private land around Lake Mburo NP mainly include buffaloes, bush bucks, zebras, impalas, elands, water bucks, topis and reedbucks. These animals compete with livestock for pasture, water and salt in addition to transmission of diseases and crop destruction. Due to the above, communities have resented wildlife and regard every wild animal on private land to be a problem animal. There have been efforts in involving communities in management of wildlife on private land which include sport hunting and formation of wildlife associations. Despite these efforts, many individual land owners still feel that they are not getting direct benefits. This is partly due to the fact that proceeds from sport hunting are used to implement community projects such as schools, health centers and roads rather than addressing individual challenges resulting from problem animals.

Community support and subsequent appreciation to conservation and in particular wildlife on private land depend on comparison of losses and profits an individual household incurs over a period of time. This explains the fact that despite the many community projects supported by con-servation implemented in many areas, there is limited impact on attitude change. LMNP realizes the current pressure against wildlife on private land by communities despite being well aware of the role played by wildlife to the country and in particular the benefits to the communities living in and around the Park.

Management ActionsManagement will consider licensing more sport hunting companies in order to increase on the benefits to the community and increase the quota aimed at reducing numbers of wildlife on private land.

Park management will work with partners in promoting activities that help the landowners to derive economic benefits from the wildlife on their land. These will include development of conservancies, wildlife ranching and other forms of wildlife use rights. LMNP management will offer technical support in partnership with other stakeholders to promote land-use systems compatible with wildlife conservation such as wildlife ranching and farming as well as community tourism.

LMNP will work with the wildlife beneficiaries and local governments to consider an arrangement where individual land owners can benefit from wildlife proceeds.

A feasibility study will be conducted to assess the carrying capacity and the possibility of sustainably harvesting wildlife on private land.

Some of the excess populations of wildlife on private land will be translocated from private land to other PAs with fewer populations.


Page ( 28 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)


Activity Responsible person Other Time Estimate

Establish conservancies WCC AWF, CAM, CCC, CWA Year 1 – 3 50,000,000

Work with private land owners to adopt wildlife ranching

WCC CCC, CAM, CWA, AWF

Year 1 on wards

55,350,000

Strengthen sport hunting program (Build capacity of wildlife Associations and land owners, increase the quota where possible)

WCC CCC, CAM, CWA Year 1 on wards

17,200,000

Translocate animals to other PAs (Katonga, Kidepo, Pian Upe)

WMR VC, CAM Year 1 on wards 50,000,000

Conduct a feasibility study for possible sustainable harvesting(to control the number of wildlife on private land)

WRM SMRC, CAM, CWA Year 3 70,000,000

Implement recommendations from feasibility study

WRMCAM, CWA, Sport hunting partners (SHP)

Year 3 on wards

10,600,000

Evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions CAM M&EM Year 5, 10

50,000,000

5.3 Community awareness and education

Output: Conservation education and awareness among the community improved.

Issues and rationale This programme in and around the Park was initiated by USAID Project through AWF, in 1991 to1998 and UWA took charge in the subsequent years to date. However, this did not take the same pace and progress as before due to limited funds and resources.The Schools and communities in neighboring Sub Counties regarded as focal interest groups could not afford hiring public transport to visit the Park. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that the community truck is old and dilapidated.

Conservation education is effected in two ways i.e. outreach extension and In Park Conservation education program with a fully fledged Education Centre facility in the park that support and co-ordinate the arrangements.

The Conservation Education Centre is one of the facilities expected to earn revenue for the Park and for its sustainability. UWA has made efforts to encourage communities and schools around the park to visit the park. Management needs to increase efforts and incentives to attract communities and school groups to visit the park.


Page ( 29 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Through awareness programs, the park has realized some support from communities around es-pecially in controlling illegal activities and showing interest in visiting the park.

Management actions LMNP Community Conservation Unit will enhance Conservation Education Outreach workshops, Seminars and meetings with relevant units. These will consider integrating conservation educa-tion into School Curriculum, developing and up grading conservation education manuals, tran-scripts and Brochures. Management will design and package conservation education information and materials to use at all levels concerning LMNP and the neighborhood for both formal and non formal Groups.

LMNP will intensify conservation education to communities especially on different forms on wild-life Utilization, Sharing of benefits accruing from conservation related projects and programs and improving house hold livelihoods through working with other Partners

LMNP will work with other partners and Stakeholders to promote and support individual or com-munity based “conservation” activities in and around LMNP using all possible means (meetings, workshops, seminars, Media, drama shows, public functions and gatherings).

Management will review and strengthen this program through training, equipping and facilitating Community Conservation Unit of LMNP. In addition management will renovate, equip and put addi-tional facilities at the Centre to suit the current demand for visitation by schools and communities.

Management will make deliberate efforts to target and sensitize local leaders and some neighboring communities who are negative about the park. The park will offer incentives to motivate leaders who are negative about the park. Such incentive will include but not limited to free entrance into the park. This also improves on the park community relationship. In addition, individuals who give information about poaching and any other information on illegal activities will be motivated in form of airtime, transport, free entrance in the park. This will also improve on the relationship between the Park and the neighboring communities.LMNP will develop communication materials, information, communication and education packag-es (materials, mobile van, workshops and meetings)Park management will work towards improving services at the Centre and effecting “Cost Shar-ing” arrangements for visiting group, both schools and communities.

Management will work with stake holders to address this trend of approach to conservation ben-efits by reviewing some policies and guidelines and enacting bye –laws that will address the chal-lenges at hand. In addition, management will further sensitize LGs on the roles of committees on natural resources and environment under the Revenue Sharing guidelines (2014)

LMNP will work with other stakeholders to improve the Capacity of these Associations through training in institutional development and management, and proposal generation.


Page ( 30 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)



Develop communication strategy WCC CAM,CCC Year 2 3,000,000

Develop information, communication and education materials

WCC CAM, CCC Year 2, 6 350,000,000

Carry out conservation education and awareness WCC CAM, WLE Year 1,

onwards 241,259,200

Carry out school and youth out –reach programs WCC CAM Year 1,

onwards 240,000,000

Recruit and train Community Conservation rangers in conservation awareness (refresher courses on communication skills, mobilization)

CAM CCC, WCC, HRM Year 2, 6

32,000,000

Hold annual retreat of stakeholders/ leaders (MPs, LCV, Security) to raise awareness on park programs

CAM WCC Annually 75,500,000

Build capacity of the environment committees and CWA to participate in wildlife conservation

WCC CAM Year 2, 6 18,000,000

Work with Local Government to train vermin guards WCC CAM, CCC Year 3, 7

15,920,000

Replace the old community conservation truck CAM DDC Year 2

400,000,000

Work with Wildlife Clubs and other related associations to create awareness

WCC CAM Year 1 onwards

Under school outreach

5.4 Community Benefits

Output 4: Community benefits in the Conservation Area increased and diversified.

Issues and rationale UWA has a policy of providing some non destructive resources through community collaborative arrangements. Scarcity of some resources from the community has led to some of them to put pressure to park management to access them in the PA. These resources include water, fish, fire-wood, medicinal plants and raw materials for crafts. Some of these are being accessed through signed MoUs.


Page ( 31 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Water accessIn the previous GMP provisions were made for communities to access water for livestock through designated corridors during the dry season. Annually over 70 households with over 8,000 heads of cattle were allowed to access water from R. Rwizi, Kizimbi wetland and Lake Mburo through entry permits under specific guidelines. However, it has been difficult to limit movement of livestock only within the corridors which has led to degradation of the corridors and surrounding areas leading to siltation of water sources. In addition there has been limited effort to create alternative water sources outside the PA.

FishingRubare fishing village with about 40 fishing canoes was established on Lake Mburo to provide fisheries resources in the community. An MoU was signed to regulate the activity and this has subsequently been reviewed. Annually the fishing community at Rubare harvest fish worth 240m. This has been achieved through enforcement by LMNP together with the beach management unit to ensure that there is no illegal fishing. There is also mud fish harvesting in Rukirane wetland by a regulated group under an MoU and seasonal cat fish harvest during the rainy season when the place floods under permit arrangement. Despite these existing arrangements, there is still de-mand for fish in other water bodies within the PA.

Firewood collectionCommunities have been allowed to access firewood on designated days in areas of Nyabushenyi, Rubare and Rwenshebashebe on specific agreed days and times of the day as specified in the MoU. In addition communities access firewood through acacia uprooting arrangements. However there is still demand for firewood in Katengyeto and Kyakategyere

Other benefits include poles for fencing and building materials, medicinal plants. Communities are also requesting for areas for beekeeping along the boundary

In the western part of the park, there is Rwehongyera village in Akaku parish where communities do not have any public access road in their village except through the park. This affects park opera-tions as any individual intending to go the village has to go through the park gate. There is need to work with appropriate LG to identify and construct an access road to Rwehongyera village to allow them free movement which does not pass through the park.

Management ActionsManagement will develop resource access guidelines to ensure that resources are efficiently and sustainably unitized by beneficiary communities. LMNP will work with community leaders to pro-vide alternative water sources for livestock on private land especially in areas of Rwehongyera, Rwamuranda, Rwabarata and Rwakobo. Management will progressively phase out the water ac-cess corridors so that by the fifth year of this plan, the corridors are closed.

Resource inventory will be conducted for allowing communities to access resources. Participatory rural appraisal will be conducted with the communities to draw collaborative resource manage-ment plans. Assessment of resource availability will be undertaken to ensure sustainable resource harvesting. Where necessary new MoUs will be negotiated and old ones reviewed.

Management will work with local governments of Kanyaryeru subcounty and Kiruhura district to identify and construct a road to Rwehongyera outside the park boundary. Communities will be guided to use revenue sharing funds due to this area in addition to any other sources of funds to construct the road.


Page ( 32 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

UWA will maintain water corridors for access of water during the dry season. These will be closed after water dams have been created outside the park but not later than 5 years within the implementation of this plan.

Sport hunting guidelines will be developed to harmonize tourism activities in areas where sport hunting is being carried out. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) interventions will be identified and implemented within the communities. These will be geared towards improving the image of the park and gain support for conservation.



Develop and review resource access guidelines (fish, firewood, water, acacia, beekeeping)

WCC CCC,Year 1, (Review in Year 5)

19,500,000

Evaluate the need for water access corridors in the park WCC CCC Year 2

560,000

Close all water access corridors in the park WCC CCC Year 5 no budget

Work with the LG and communities to construct community water dams (Rwehongyera, Rwamuranda, Rwabarata and Rwakobo)

WCC

CAM, CDOs, Water officer

Year 1-5 2,240,000

Conduct resource inventory for identified resource needs by the community

WCC WRM Year 1 onwards

13,200,000

Develop new MoUs and review existing ones for resource access WCC CAM Year 1

onwards 1,380,000

Work with other partners to identify and support income generating activities under revenue sharing program (RS)

WCC CAM Annually 96,000,000

Work with LG of Kiruhura District to develop access road to Rwehongyera

CAM

WCC, D Engineer D Environ-ment officer

Year 2-5 600,000

Develop guidelines to make sport hunting and tourism mutually exclusive

WCC CCC,CAM, AWF, CWA Year 2

200,000

Implement CSR interventions within the communities WCC CCC, CAM Annually

30,000,000


Page ( 33 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

5.5 Revenue sharing

Output 5: Revenue Sharing funds benefit intended targeted communities It is a legal requirement for Uganda Wildlife Authority to share 20% of revenue collected as Park entrance fees with the neighboring communities. The park has been implementing the Revenue sharing program since 1996. So far over 500 million has been shared with the neighboring parish-es as shown in the table below:

Year Amount distributed 2002-2003 3,869,6002003-2004 5,192,5002005-2006 50,849,0002006-2007 94,712,7952008-2009 60,634,2362009-2010 32,972,9802010-2011 276,026,4752011-2012 233,245,239

Table 5: Trends of Revenue sharing over 10 years

UWA developed guidelines in 2000 and these were reviewed in 2011 to address the challenges that were identified during the review. The new guidelines have not been adequately disseminated to all stakeholders for implementation. This has the caused the implementers not to follow the guide-lines leading to community complaints about lack of transparency in use of revenue sharing funds to implement community projects. In some cases, abuse of funds has been reported.

It has also been noted that the committees provided for in the guidelines for the implementation of Revenue Sharing projects such as procurement and project management committees lack capacity. There have also been complaints of lengthy bureaucracy in the disbursement of Revenue sharing funds leading to delayed implementation of projects.

The impacts of wildlife go beyond the frontline parishes that benefit from RS funds as stipulated within the guidelines. Because of this, some stakeholders who are not within the frontline parishes but are affected by wildlife express concerns to be included in the guidelines. However, this deci-sion is beyond the mandate of the management plan and should be handled at the organizational level.

Management Actions.The guidelines will be disseminated to all stakeholders who include district and sub county lead-ers, and committee selected for implementation of approved projects. LMNP will work other stake-holders to ensure publicity of released funds and projects to be implemented.

All projects implemented under revenue sharing will be branded to ensure visibility and further improve transparency. LMNP will work with other stakeholders to monitor implementation of RS projects and the use of guidelines.

LMNP will undertake periodic training of Project implementation Committees and Community


Page ( 34 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Procurement Committees (annually) in all Beneficiary Parishes and Sub Counties on Project devel-opment and management, management of funds, Procurement processes and accountability. Summary table of actions


Disseminate Revenue Sharing guidelines to all stakeholders WCC CAM Annually

26,200,000

Publicize revenue sharing fund disbursement at all levels (e.g. Radio program, Public Notice boards, etc)

WCC CAM, NRO Annually 17,200,000

Monitor project implementation of revenue sharing projects

WCC CAM Annually 24,000,000

Brand all Revenue sharing funded projects WCC CAM, PMC Annually

64,000,000

Train Project Management Committees (PMC) and Community Procurement Committees (CPC) and other relevant implementers in their roles and responsibilities

WCC CAM, CDO Annually 51,200,000


Page ( 35 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

6.0 RESEARCH AND MONITORING PROGRAMIntroductionLake Mburo National Park is one of the PAs which has had a number of researches being carried out. However most of these are socio economic and are carried out around the protected area mainly looking at the interface of cattle and the wildlife and attitude change due to interventions being implemented by park management. With more challenges in the park, management oriented research will need to be carried out in order to inform decisions. Under this program, a number of research areas have been identified which will need to be advertised to get researchers to imple-ment them.

Program Objective:To provide timely and accurate information for decision making

6.1 Research

Output 1: Management decisions made based on researched information

Issues and RationaleLimited research has been carried out in LMNP to provide scientific proven information for management decision making. The following are key areas where information is scanty or totally lacking to guide management:

Impact of cattle corridors, livestock sprays and drugs on wildlife resourcesLMNP is surrounded by pastoralist communities who graze or rear animals in their ranches and farms. These cattle keepers frequently use sprays and drugs to control ticks and disease in their livestock. There is notable interaction between livestock and wildlife especially on private land. These sprays and drugs are likely to cause negative impacts on wildlife and vegetation due to the interaction and may manifest after a long time. There is need to carry out research to determine the impacts of cattle corridors, cattle sprays and drugs on wildlife and its habitat.

Studies on carrying capacity of the PA and surrounding areasThe park has a variety of wildlife species and the numbers have been increasing over the past years as illustrated in table 5 below

Species Dec-1995

May-1996

Oct-1997

May-1998

Feb-1999

Jul-2002

Jun-2004

Feb-2006

May-2010

Aug2012

Buffalo 25 105 486 132 946 1,115 591 574Eland 273 88 285 1,442 199 28 606 296 1,323 1,378Hippo 51 76 303 97 213 357 250 296Impala 6,599 7,442 6,817 4,124 1,595 2,956 3,300 4,705 33,565 29,285Topi 57 111 362 81 183 271 162 148 173Warthog 571 480 964 559 550 493 560 741 Waterbuck 241 287 485 427 598 396 548 1,072 3,495 3,644Zebra 2,430 1,574 3,254 3,748 2,249 2,665 4,280 5,968 11,778 11,974

Table 5: showing trends of wildlife numbers over the years.


Page ( 36 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

It is likely that with the current management efforts, numbers may exceed the carrying capacity of the park. There has been vegetation change with Acacia colonizing most of the park reducing grazing areas for certain species e.g zebra, hippos, buffaloes, warthogs among others. No research has been carried out to assess the carrying capacity of the park both within the PA and ranches. Information from this research will be used in prescribing management measures such as cropping and determining sport hunting quotas for the wildlife populations especially those on private land.

Climate changeLMNP has been experiencing long droughts as a result of climate change. The park is a savannah National Park which lies in rain shadow of Lake Victoria with two dry seasons in a year. The long dry season starts from June to September while the short dry season from December to late February or early March. There has not been any studies to find out the impact of climate change on the park ecosystem in general and wildlife in particular. Therefore, research is needed to help UWA and Lake Mburo management to cope up with the changes.

Effects of pilot habitat management interventions on the ecosystemThe vegetation in LMNP has been changing from open grassland to woodland type dominated by Acacia species. The spread of Acacia species is often associated with the reduction in grazing areas, deterioration of herbs, and spread of unpalatable grasses and general deterioration of habitat quality. The park management has tried a number of methods to manage the Acacia which include uprooting Acacia and block burning. This in some areas has resulted in other species to multiply, grow faster and close up the areas. Therefore, there is a strong need for a research to be carried out to bring out the effective method of managing the habitat to improve habitat quality for the wildlife types in LMNP. The research will also provide information on contribution of habitat management in the PA on managing wildlife on private land.

Water qualityLake Mburo National Park has many water bodies which include Lakes, River Rwizi and permanent swamps. The water from these sources is used by the park staff, tourists, and communities without any treatment. River Rwizi passes through Mbarara Municipality where many pollutants are discharged into the river. Lake Mburo is the receiving end of this river and a variety of wildlife use the river and lake for watering. The level of pollution of this river and the likely impacts on the wildlife resources is not known. Therefore a thorough research is needed to determine the quality of water and its effects on wildlife resources in Lake Mburo and other Lakes around the park.

Attitude survey:LMNP has over the years involved communities in management of the park. Community conservation programs have been intensified to create awareness of communities about conservation. Revenue sharing has been implemented to help communities realize benefits from the park. In addition, sport hunting was introduced as a way of giving incentives to communities to appreciate the value of wildlife on their land. Despite all these initiatives limited surveys have been carried out to assess whether they have changed the community’s negative attitudes towards conservation and the existing of the park. There is need to carry out a detailed survey to assess the impact of these initiatives on the attitudes of communities towards conservation.

Management ActionsUWA will continue identifying other areas of research in addition to what has been identified in this management plan. Partners will be identified to work with UWA in carrying out the identified areas of research. A research symposium will be held to disseminate the research findings from different researchers. Efforts will be made to implement recommendation depending on management needs.


Page ( 37 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)



Identify areas of research WMR MRC, CAM Year 1,5 400,000

Identify partners to conduct research in the identified areas WMR MRC, PC,

CAMYear 2 on wards

4,000,000

Disseminate and implement research findings WMR CAM Year 2

onwards 8,800,000

6.2 Monitoring

Output 2: To establish Trends of the different ecosystem parameters established

Issues and RationaleLake Mburo National Park has a variety of animals and birds which are exposed to some disease outbreak e.g FMD, anthrax, Bird flu. This may result from the interaction of wildlife and livestock around the national park or from migrating birds. There is need for high level monitoring of wildlife in case of any disease outbreak before it gets out of hand. This monitoring should not be limited to wildlife in the PA but should also be extended to the surrounding areas in collaboration with other veterinary doctors from the neighboring districts. Apart from the outbreak mentioned above, disease transmission from wildlife to livestock and vice-versa, e.g. Brucella, Anthrax and Typhoid is also likely to occur. Therefore, there is a strong need for close monitoring of the transmission of diseases. This monitoring will help in determining time, season when this transmission is likely to occur so that measures are taken to prevent the transmission in time. This requires equipping staff with basic knowledge about diseases and their transmission and how these can be handled.

Negative impacts of developments There are a number of developments inside the park e.g. hotels, and other accommodation facilities. Other developments are being implemented outside the park e.g. Hotels, Charcoal burning, factories, improved farming etc. Several requests have been received by UWA to allow exploration and mining of gypsum in the park and these have been rejected for ecological reasons. These developments are likely to result into negative impacts like destruction of wildlife habitats, soil erosion, and air and water pollution, poor waste management, silting of lakes and rivers and other water bodies. These impacts may have long effects on wildlife and the habitat and these may not easily be recognized in a short period of time. Monitoring of these developments is needed in order to ensure a healthy ecosystem.

Invasive species Invasive species have invaded Lake Mburo National Park in recent years mostly Acacia species (A. hockii and A. geradii), but there are other species which have come up. These include Lantana camara, water hyacinth. Lantana camara is in the ranches and farms around Lake Mburo National Park most especially around Kizimbi and Katengyeto areas. Lantana camara is known to spread to prolifically if not controlled. Also the Water hyacinth which is an invasive water weed has been sighted along R. Rwizi with possible threat of invading all the lakes within the Lake Mburo ecosystem. There is need for mapping the extent and monitoring the spread of these two potentially invasive species.


Page ( 38 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Illegal activities:Lake Mburo National Park still faces the challenge of controlling illegal activities especially grazing, poaching, illegal fishing and boundary encroachment. These illegal activities have an impact on wildlife numbers, distribution and habitat. Information on these activities is collected using Ranger Based Data Collection (RBDC) tool. There is need to continue monitoring the impacts of the illegal activities on the park so as to minimize both short and long term effects.

Monitoring wildlife management interventions Management has been implementing a number of interventions e.g sport hunting, acacia removal, fire management. There is limited monitoring of these interventions to find out their effectiveness. There is need to monitor the effectiveness of these interventions to guide management and future scaling up.

Wildlife Populations:Wildlife populations in Lake Mburo Conservation Area have been increasing for some species while other species the numbers have decreased. Animal species like roan antelopes have disappeared while others like Oribi, have decreased. In addition reduction in poaching in and outside the Park has led to increase in population of wildlife in the ranches which has increased Human Wildlife Conflicts as animals compete for pasture and water. The increase of Wildlife outside the Park may also be caused by the vegetation change and seasonal movements of wildlife. There is therefore need for continuous monitoring of the wildlife within the park and areas around the park to establish trends that would guide management decisions on addressing the challenges.

Fencing the Park:Government has proposed fencing (Vision 2040) in order to control animals moving outside the park and minimize impacts of wildlife on communities. Ranchers around LMNP have also advo-cated for this intervention where they will require UWA to translocate wildlife from community/individual ranches to the park within three years after fencing. However, it is costly to construct and maintain a fence. The impacts of fencing LMNP on the social economic and ecological aspects are not known. There is need to carry out a feasibility study in order to provide information on the impacts of fencing for decision making.

Management actions Park management will continue collecting RBD on animal distribution, illegal activities, location and numbers of dead animals, sport hunted animals and ranger patrol coverage. This data will be analyzed and maps produced. This will help management in decision making

For all developments to be implemented in and around the Park, Environmental Impact Assess-ment (EIAs) will be conducted. Mitigation measures will be prescribed and implemented to min-imize negative impacts that are likely to occur. The management will also monitor compliance to the implementation of prescribed mitigation measures. Environmental audits will also be carried out for all the projects according to NEMA guidelines and the EIA regulations.

UWA will work with DWRM, to monitor the quality of water in the water bodies in and around the park. This will help in determining the water quality and preventing diseases both to humans and wildlife. The information will be shared with other stakeholders and used to prevent pollution of the water bodies. Inventories will be carried out to determine availability and quantity of resourc-es demanded by communities.

Sanga and Rwonyo weather stations will be maintained and new ones established at Nshara and Katengyeto. All these will be equipped with the necessary weather gadgets.


Page ( 39 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

UWA will continue carrying out periodic animal censuses including road side counts to determine numbers, species, population structure and the distribution in and outside the PA. Information from census results will be used in assessing the carrying capacity and setting sport hunting quo-tas among other things.

UWA in collaboration with Local Government will undertake disease surveillance in and outside the PA on both livestock and wildlife to determine whether there is any disease outbreak and trans-mission and how quickly it can be handled.

The park hosts a number of predators including the lion, leopards, hyenas, genets, civets, jackals, serval cats among others. A special program will be put in place to monitor large predators includ-ing lions, leopards and hyenas to determine the numbers, distribution in to contain their impacts in the neighboring communities.

Management will map the extent of Lantana camara and water hyacinth and monitor the spread of these two potentially invasive species. In addition, interventions for habitat management e.g Acacia removal will continuously be monitored to establish the effectiveness of the interventions.

The park will continue monitoring the sport hunting activity in order to establish the extent of ac-tivity, the numbers and species of animals sport hunted. This information will inform the decision makers in setting quotas and determining the benefits that go to UWA and the community.

As visitor numbers and activities increase in the park, waste management will increasingly become a challenge. In order to address the challenge, litter bins will be placed at appropriate locations like gates, offices, campsites and around accommodation facilities. Park management will also work with concessionaires inside the park to ensure proper management of waste.

A feasibility study will be carried out on the likely impacts of fencing on wildlife both inside and outside the park. The results of the study will inform the decision makers on whether to imple-ment this intervention.


Page ( 40 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)



Conduct RBDC WLE WMR Annually (budget under patrols)

Carry out EIA for park developments WMR EIA Unit Annually 4,800,000

Monitor negative impacts of developments in and around the PA

WMR EIA Unit Annually 4,400,000

Carry out environmental audits for developments WMR EIA Unit Annually 4,400,000

Monitor water quality in water sources in the park ( acidity, alkalinity, turbidity, conductivity, BOD and COD)

WMR CAM Year 1 onwards 5,000,000

Monitor resource use WMR WCC annually 13,200,000

Collect weather data WMR CAM 4,000,000

Carry out animal census WMR MRC Every 2 years

Headquarter budget

Monitor disease outbreaks and undertake disease surveillance

WMR VC, CAM Year 1, onwards 13,200,000

Conduct roadside wild animal counts WMR CAM Year 1

onwards 31,200,000

Monitor large predators WMR CAM, VC Year 1, onwards 7,300,000

Monitor habitat management interventions including invasive species

WMR CAM Year 1, onwards 13,200,000

Monitor sport hunting activities (2 blocks) WMR WCC, CAM Year 1

onwards 50,400,000

Manage waste in the park and surrounding areas WMR WCC Year 1

onwards 14,800,000

Carry out a feasibility study on effects of fencing on the park WMR CAM Year 3

onwards 50,000,000


Page ( 41 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

7.0 PARK OPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIONIntroduction This program deals with the capacity needs of the park in order to effectively and efficiently implement this management plan. The program addresses the administrative infrastructure requirements, human capacity and building a strong collaborative and coordination mechanisms with other partners that support the successful implementation of the plan

Program Objective: To effectively manage the conservation area

Outputs:

1. Adequate and improved infrastructure in and around the park provided2. Effective and efficient workforce put in place3. Collaboration and coordination amongst various stakeholders strengthened

7.1 Infrastructure

Output: Adequate and improved infrastructure in and around the park provided


Poor access roads:LMNP is located about 10 km off Kampala- Mbarara highway. There are 3 main access roads to Lake Mburo National Park. These are; Nshara, Sanga and Katengyeto access roads. Nshara and Sanga roads are in fair condition but need periodic maintenance. With the proposal of opening up the Katengyeto gate, this road will need to be graded. Currently efforts are being made by Igongo Cultural Centre through Mbarara local Government to grade this road. Although maintenance of these access roads is a responsibility of local governments, the local governments take long to maintain them and the park management has often come in to do the filling and grading where necessary.

Access road Distance (km)Akageti-Nshara Gate 10Sanga trading centre – Sanga Gate 13Biharwe trading to Katengyeto gate 10

Park Management roadsGate Distance (km)Katengyeto-Sanga gate 28.5Sanga gate to Rwonyo 10Nshara gate to Zebra truck junction 10Rwonyo to lakeside restaurant 1CEC to Sanga gate 1Nkwanzinungi junction to Kanyinanshara 6Rubare junction to Rubare fishing village 1TOTAL 57.5


Page ( 42 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

The main tourism activity in LMNP is game drives. There are a number of tourism tracks as summarized in the table below:

Track name Distance (km) Condition

Zebra (from Sanga gate to Impala track junction) 11 Good

Eland (Impala track to Zebra track) 11 Poor

Impala (Sanga gate-Rwonyo headquarters) 9 Good

Warukiri (Impala track to Lake side) 6 Good

Kigambira loop 12 PoorRuroko (Impala track to Kazuma track) 15 Poor

Kazuma (Lakeside-Ruroko junction) 4 Poor

Research track (Iborogota) 8 Poor

Lakeside track (Rwonyo HQ –Kazuma/Warukiri junction) 7 Poor

TOTAL 83

Most of these tracks were poorly designed to pass through the valleys and as a result they often flood. The tracks are also in poor condition and need maintenance in order to make the game drives comfortable for visitors. Of recent, the Local Governments of Kiruhura and Isingiro have been demanding for a road to connect the two districts through the park. The districts argue that this road will improve tourism, ease transportation of goods and services between the two districts. There has been pressure from politicians to construct a bridge across River Rwizi to connect the two districts in effect creating a public access road through the park. However there is an alternative road connecting to Isingiro via Nyamabare bridge which is short and can serve the same purpose. Creation of this road will create unnecessary fragmentation which will have negative impact on this small protected area. The road will in addition lead to increased illegal activities, affect wildlife movements and general disturbance to the park and reduce the aesthetic values of the park among others. Therefore, construction of the bridge was considered not feasible both ecologically and economically.

Poor communication network (Radio and Telephone). Currently communication in Lake Mburo is a challenge by both telephone and radio call. Weak signals of all telecommunication networks are received in the park. This has made communication within and outside very difficult affecting tourism and park operations. The radio call repeater station at Hotel Tango (Kigarama hill) is not functional making internal radio communication difficult. This repeater needs replacement. Hand held radios and base stations are inadequate.


Page ( 43 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Inadequate transport for park operations. LMNP faces a challenge of inadequate transport in terms of vehicles and motorcycles for effective operations. Currently the park has 4 pickups, one old Tata lorry, grader, one tractor and 2 old motorcycles. The vehicles and motorcycles are inadequate for park operations. Only one vehicle is in good condition while others are very old, in poor condition and need replacement. The park lacks a construction unit which has hindered quick and effective park operations. Construction of roads is not implemented as planned. The creation of this unit will help management to construct and maintain park building and roads on time.

Lack of an Airstrip:In early 1980s, an area near the former interpretation centre was identified and cleared to establish an air strip. The airstrip was adequate for small planes but was never operational. LMNP being proposed for MICE needs an airstrip to support implementation of this concept. In addition the improved tourism infrastructure and increase in tourist numbers in and around Lake Mburo necessitates construction of an air strip to support this development.

Poor staff accommodation and offices:Most staff accommodation facilities in LMNP are in a poor state. However efforts are being made to construct better staff accommodation at the new park headquarters at Minekye at the periphery of the park boundary. Currently the construction of two blocks is ongoing. It is planned that in the next three years, the staff accommodation will be ready and staff will shift from Rwonyo. However some staff will remain at Rwonyo to ensure the safety of tourists and other park infrastructure. Being a tourism hub, the majority of ranger guides will be retained in Rwonyo. There will therefore be need for accommodation for the remaining staff. Office space at Rwonyo is inadequate. Currently the park has 9 permanent outposts namely;- Nshara, Kizimbi, Kyakategyere, Sanga gate, Rubanga, Bisheshe, Katengyeto, Bwara, and Kanyinanshara. In addition there is a satellite outpost located at Ranch 49 established in partnership with Game trails to curb poaching in the ranches. Generally the number of outposts in LMNP is adequate and well distributed. The only gap is in Kibikwa where fishing, poaching and security issues exist. This management plan proposes to build an outpost at Mujwiguru in order to handle issues in Kibikwa and Kigambira. In all outposts, accommodation is still very poor and inadequate. UWA owns plots in Mbarara, one in Kakoba and another in Mbarara town on high street (Masaka-Mbarara road). There is a house on Kakoba plot which is occupied by UWA staff. The plot is fenced but someone has illegally built on the access road. The Mbarara high street is currently being occupied by Petro Uganda despite the fact that UWA won a case to re-possess the plot. However information about this case is still scanty and further investigations are still being carried out.

Management ActionsAll old staff houses at Rwonyo will be demolished except those currently occupied by the CAM, Accountant and law enforcement warden. These remaining houses will be renovated and allocated to some of the remaining staff. A two 10 roomed block will be constructed to cater for junior staff who will be providing services at Rwonyo. The current Hotel Tango outpost will be maintained and equipped to act as an observation post.The main road entering Rwonyo establishment will be diverted to pass near the current location of Tchagra banda. The quarter guard will be relocated to the new par headquarter at Minekye.

All office structures at Rwonyo will be demolished except the main office block currently housing the CAM. This remaining office block will be renovated. and the plan is to relocate to Minekye close to CEC. Clean water will be pumped from Lake Mburo to the staff quarters. A canteen will be constructed to serve staff and tourists. UWA will work with Rural Electrification to extend power from Sanga to the park.


Page ( 44 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

UWA will construct 6 unit blocks at all outposts with water harvesting system and other attendant facilities to cater for staff accommodation according to UWA standards. All gates will have 8 unit blocks except for Sanga gate which will have only the gate structure and other attendant facilities. The staff at Sanga gate will be accommodated at Minekye park headquarters. Hotel Tango will be developed and equipped to be operated as an observation post. A 3 unit block will be constructed to accommodate the 3 Staff on the site.

All structures in the park that are old and dilapidated will be demolished. These include structures at Hot Ice, Makerere camp, and former interpretation centre.

All administrative and tourism access roads and tracks within the park will be rehabilitated and maintained. UWA will work with the relevant Local governments to rehabilitate those roads within their jurisdiction.

All necessary equipment including vehicles, motorcycles, communication equipment, office equipment as identified in the table.7 will be procured to ease operations and transport in the park. UWA will make deliberate efforts to convince telephone companies to improve network coverage.

Signage will be installed throughout the park according to UWA signage plan.

UWA will work with the Nshara government ranch to construct a management road along the park-Nshara boundary from Nshara gate to ranch 46 to ease monitoring of illegal activities.

UWA will secure land titles and develop rental houses at Kakoba plot. UWA will also make efforts to recover the plot on high street and put the title in UWA’s names.



Demolish all old staff houses except the CAM’s, Accountant and Law Enforcement

CAM WA, W Civil Year 4 4,000,000

Redesign and renovate the remaining staff houses


Shift the main road to pass near Tchagra and connect with the road from the airstrip

CAM Civil Engineer, QENP Year 1 2,000,000

Demolish all office structures except CAMs and M&R offices after headquarters have moved to Minekye



Page ( 45 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Renovate the office block (CAMs and M&R offices) to cater for camp attendant, store


Relocate the quarter guard after diverting the road to Minekye

CAM WA, W Civil, Year 1-3 8,000,000

Construct a water supply system for Rwonyo facilities

CAM WA, W Civil Year 2-4 200,000,000

Construct 2 staff canteens at Minekye and Rwonyo


Construct a 2, 10-roomed blocks for junior staff at Rwonyo


Decommission the quadbike structure near Mantana guided by the concession agreement

CAM WA Year 1 500,000

Construct a 6-unit block for the staff accommodation according to UWA standards with water harvesting system and other attendant facilities in all outposts (Bwara, Bisheshe, Kizimbi, Rubanga, Kibikwa-Kigambira)


Construct 8 unit blocks at all gates except Sanga CAM WA, W Civil Year 1-4 600,000,000

Construct 4 roomed block for staff accommodation and observation platform equipped with a telescope at Hotel Tango


Rehabilitate all roads and tracks within the park


Maintain all roads and tracks CAM WA Year 1

onwards 70,250,000


Page ( 46 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Demolish structures in the following areas, Makerere camp, hot ice, former interpretation centre


Construct an access track to Hotel Tango CAM WA, W Civil Year 4 10,000,000

Procure motorcycles for outposts, law enforcement, inteligence, CC, tourism

CAM WA, MES Year 1-10 255,000,000

Procure communication equipments for all outposts and offices

CAM WA, WLE, IT Year 2, 6 167,880,000

Coordinate with telecom companies to improve network coverage

CAM WA Year 1 -

Construct office and accommodation at Minekye park headquarters (Rwanengo) with social amenities


Work with the Rural Electrification Agency to extend power to the park

CAM WA, W Civil Year 1-2 -

Create a boundary road between ranch and park (management road)


Develop Kakoba plot by constructing structures for rent (consider partnership)

BDM CAM, ED, DDC, W Civil Year 4-6 6,020,000,000

Secure title in UWA’s names for both plots (check with PLC)

CAM PLC, Year 2 2,000,000

Evict/negotiate with the encroacher on Mbarara high street plot

CAM PLC, DDC Year 1

NB: The visitor centre will include an office for warden tourism, toilet to be included in the VIC


Page ( 47 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

7.4 Capacity and governance

Output: Effective and efficient workforce put in place

Inadequate training for staff:Currently most staff have paramilitary training and a few others have been trained in wildlife management, visitor handling e.g customer care and interpretation. Although customer care trainings have been conducted, these have been basic lasting only 2-3 days and as a result have had very limited impact. In order to effectively perform their duties, staff in LMNP require to gain more skills in their areas of operation.

Inadequate staff:LMNP though a small park has various challenges which require a strong force and adequate staff. The last GMP identified staff gaps but these were never filled. This GMP has identified new need of increasing staff in different departments in order to be effective and efficient. For example, in order to effectively handle law enforcement operations, a number of outposts have been established and new ones proposed to control poaching and other illegal activities. Currently each outpost has got 2-3 staff who are inadequate to handle required operations at an outpost. In order to effectively handle law enforcement there is need to increase the number of staff at the outpost to 6.

Table 6: Staff requirements

Staff Category Present No. Required No. Shortfall

Chief Warden 1 1 0

Warden LE 1 1 0

Warden CC 1 1 0

Warden PACU 1 1 0

Warden Tourism 1 1 0

Warden MR 0 1 1

Warden Civil Engineer (construction) 0 1 1

Warden Intelligence 0 1 1

Intelligence staff 7 7 0

Warden Accounts 1 1 0

Assistant Warden Accounts 0 1 1

Secretary 1 1 0

LE Rangers 32 84 52

CC Rangers 5 8 3

Tourism Ranger Guides 15 25 10


Page ( 48 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Staff Category Present No. Required No. Shortfall

MR Rangers 3 4 1

PACU Rangers 4 10 6

Accounts Clerks 8 8 0

Stores clerk 1 1 0

Chef 1 2 1

Waitresses 4 8 4

Drivers 5 5 0

Grader operator 1 1 0

Coxswain 0 1 1

Office attendant 1 1 0

Camp attendant 4 2 2

Room Attendants 1 2 1

Porters 1 4 3

93 177 88

Equipments Generally LMNP lacks adequate equipments to facilitate its operations. The following table summarizes the equipment requirements for park.

Table 7: List of equipments

Equipment Current Condition Required Total Cost (shs)

Pickups 43 old (will be boarded off)1 new

4 5 250,000,000 each

Lorry 1 Old 1 1 400,000,000Tractor 1 Old 1 1 150,000,000Grader 1 Fair 1 0 -Tipper Lorry 0 - 1 1 150,000,000Wheel loader 0 - 1 1 150,000,000


Page ( 49 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Motorcycles (each outpost to have 1plus 1 for intelligence and 1 for LE)

2 Old 13 13 5,000,000 each, total650,000,000

Patrol boat 0 - 1 1 60,000,000

Tourism boat (need a modern boat)-12 seater

2 Old (will be boarded off) 2 2 120,000,000 each

Standby generator 53 in good condition, 2 in fair condition

1 6 50,000,000

Radio communication system (HF)-cordan

1 Poor (to be boarded off) 1 1 18m

VHF for all outposts and gates 3 Poor 14 14 2.5m each, total

25m

Repeater station 1 Poor 1 1 17m

Hand sets (walkie talkies), 14 outposts, 1 for each head of unit=8

10 Poor 22 22 900,000 each, total = 19,800,000

Chargers (walkie talkie) 10 Poor 22 22 70,000 per charger,

total=1,540,000

Batteries (VHF), 3 Poor 14 14 800,000 each, total 11,200,000

Battery (Walkie) 10 Poor 22 22 120,000 each total = 2,640,000

Solar system 4 Poor 14 14 700,000 each, total 9,800,000

Security equipments (metal detectors, handcuffs)

3 500,000 each

Office/Intercom phones 4 Good 12 16 200,000

Office phone 1 Good 2 3 200,000 each

Tents 5 Good 20 25 600,000 each

Cameras 2 Good 4 6 2,000,000 each


Page ( 50 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Voice recorders 6 6 600,000 each

Binoculars 6 Good 16 22 600,000 eachNight vision binoculars - - - 4 3,000,000 each

GPS 14 6 poor condition 12 20 1,000,000 each

Sleeping bags 0 20 20 400,000 eachSleeping mats 20 20 200,000 each

Rucksacks 90 90 200,000 eachCamelbak (water bottle) 90 90 100,000

Gumboots 120 pairsx2 25,000 each

Lifejackets 80 x3 120,000

Computers 8 (office) 2 (Internet)

4 in good condition, 4 old

8 8 3,000,000 each

Laptops 1 1 2 2,000,000

Printers 1 1 (colored) 5,000,000

Photocopier 1 Poor 1 2 3,000,000 each

Furniture (assorted) 20,000,000Telescope 0 1 3,000,000Assorted guide books

90 copies 40,000 each

Automatic Weather station 3 7,000,000

PACU equipment 25,000,000

Management ActionsStaff will be recruited to fill the vacant posts as identified in this management plan (refer to table 6). The recruitment will be done two times over the plan period in the second and seventh year. Management will also carry out periodic training needs assessment for all staff and in collaboration with human resource unit at headquarters and train staff according to the identified needs.

LMNP management will continue working with other government agencies and attend regular meetings, security meetings, planning, review and evaluation meetings.

Management from time to time will identify different incentives to motivate staff who excel in their work. This will also apply to individuals and institutions who support conservation. LMNP will continue participating in national, local and social events so as to improve UWA’s visibility and populalise wildlife conservation. In addition PA management will identify and undertake corporate social responsibility activities to promote the image of the park and UWA in general


Page ( 51 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Management will initiate procurement of adequate equipment for smooth running of park operations as identified in the table 7. All old equipment will be boarded off in accordance with the PPDA Act.



Carry out training needs assessment CAM HRM Year 1, 5 750,000

Recruit to fill vacant positions CAM HRM Year 2 3,600,000

Train staff in relevant fields CAM HRM Year 1 onwards 192,000,000

Mobilise financial resources for GMP implementation CAM PC Year 1

onwards -

Participate and hold regular management, planning, reviews and evaluation meetings

CAM WA Year 1 onwards 294,000,000

Carry out general CA administration CAM WA Year 1 onwards 60,000,000

Motivate and reward staff performance CAM HRM Year 1

onwards 20,000,000

Participate in local, national events CAM

WT, WLE, WCC, WMR

Year 1 onwards 105,000,000

Procure road unit equipments CAM MES, WEng Year 1-2 300,000,000

Procure vehicles, security equipments, office equipments, field equipments, problem animal management

CAM MES Year 2-7 1,974,000,000

Board off old vehicles and equipments CAM PM, MES Year 1

onwards 3,000,000

Create incentives for rewarding individuals and institutions that have supported LMNP programs

CAM HRM Year 1 onwards 10,000,000

Improve the visibility of the park through participating in social events such as sports

CAM

WT, WCC, WLE, WMR


Carry out prudent financial management WA CAM Year 1

onwards 70,000,000


Page ( 52 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Output : Collaboration and coordination amongst various stakeholders strengthened


Inadequate coordination and information sharing especially in security. LMNP management works with other sister security forces like police, UPDF and ISO to handle security issues. The CAM is a member of District security committees for the three districts around the park. In addition LMNP Law Enforcement unit conducts joint operations with other sister forces in respective areas. LMNP also participates in security meetings at lower local governments. LMNP management also benefits from sharing intelligence information with other security agencies. All these measures need to be strengthened.The park management involves different stakeholders in management of the Conservation area. For example, coordinated border patrols and meetings have been conducted with Tanzanian counter parts to control poaching and illegal trade along R. Kagera. Routine coordinated border patrols and regional meetings need to be strengthened to address challenges along the border. Management collaborates with local leaders and communities of the neighboring parishes to manage wild life on their land.Lake Mburo works closely with NEMA, Rwizi catchment Management Committee (local governments, government institutions, NGOs and private companies who have a stake in management of R. Rwizi), Nakivale resettlement scheme, Kagera Transboundary Agro-system Management Project (TAMP) to improve the livelihood of the neighboring communities and conserve River Rwizi and Nakivale area. In addition management has worked with district local governments of Kiruhura and Mbarara to improve on road network to the park and improving working relationship with other organs to conserve Lake Mburo.

Management ActionsPark management will implement the provisions in the signed protocols with security agencies as spelt out in the UWA strategic Plan (2013-2018)

LMNP will continue to hold and attend coordination meetings with other stakeholders to support wildlife conservation programs.



Implement the signed protocols with other security agencies as defined under the strategic plan

CAM WI, WLE Year 1 onwards

-

Hold/ attend coordination meetings with other stakeholders (security, LG, NGOs, Private partners)

CAM WI, WLE, WCC, WT

Year 1 onwards

72,000,000

Support Local Governments to manage vermin WCC CAM,

PACUYear 1 onwards

-

Establish collaborative arrangement to address wildlife management issues around the PA

WCC WLE Year 1 onwards

Strengthen joint operations by the ranch and UWA WLE CAM Year 1,

onwards


Page ( 53 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Harmonise program implementation with other stakeholders within the CA CAM WCC, WT Year 1

onwards

Work with other development partners including LG to advise on appropriate land use practices around the park

CAM WCC Year 1 onwards

20,000,000

Network with Rwizi catchment and local governments to manage issues in the landscape

CAM WCC Year 1 onwards

5,600,000

Establish community wildlife committees to handle problem animals in Rakai and Isingiro

WCC CAM, CCC Year 1-3 10,000,000

Establish a forum for conflict resolution, negotiation CAM WCC Year 1,

onwards 16,000,000


Page ( 54 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

PART 3 - Business Plan

Grey Growned Crane & African Finfoot


Page ( 55 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

8.0 TOURISM DEVELOPMENT:The Tourism Development program highlights the major actions through which the park will improve revenue generation so as to ensure plan implementation. With a variety of wildlife that is unique and signature to Lake Mburo National Park (e.g the Impala), the potential for developing a strong and vibrant tourism program is unequaled. The proximity of the national park to the central business city of Kampala makes it the only candidate for the Meetings, Incentives, Conferences and Events (MICE) concept. Program Objective: To generate more revenues for the Park

Outputs1. Tourism facilities and infrastructure in and around the park increases and improved2. Tourism experience improved3. Numbers of tourists visiting LMNP increased4. Community benefits from tourism enhanced

8.1 Tourism facilities and infrastructure

Output: Tourism facilities and infrastructure in and around the park increased and improved

Issues and RationaleLMCA is the nearest Protected Area close to Kampala which provides potential for it to be devel-oped for domestic tourism. It is the only Park with viable population of Impala and Eland species. Despite its suitable location, tourism has not been fully tapped. This has mainly been due to in-adequate accommodation. Currently, there are only two facilities for accommodation in the park. Arcadia cottages with a capacity of 20 beds and Mantana tented camp with a capacity of 18 beds.

In addition, these facilities are very expensive and are only meant for the high end tourists and don’t favor the budget and domestic tourists. Among the tourism facilities that are managed by UWA are 4 bandas with a capacity of 8 beds and buffalo tented camp with a 13 bed capacity. These cater for the low budget tourists but are few in number and in poor condition.

LMCA also has a number of other tourism accommodation facilities outside the protected area as below

Table 8: Accommodation outside the Protected Area.Mihingo Lodge 30 bed capacityRwakobo rock 20 bed capacityEagles nest Lodge 24 bed capacityMburo safari lodge 23 bed capacity

Although these facilities give additional accommodation they are still not enough and remain ex-pensive to both facilities and domestic tourists.

Currently, there are only 3 gates to the Park i.e Sanga gate, Kanyinanshara and Nshara gate. Al-though these gates are in fair condition they need to be upgraded to UWA standards. Also, there has been demand from tourism stakeholders to access the park through the western part claiming that these other gates are a bit far. Another gate is needed at Katengyeto area where an access road


Page ( 56 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

already exists. It has a good access road and connects visitors easily to the main road enabling the visitors to access the tourism culture center in Biharwe. The current track network totals to about 115km and most of them are poorly designed without loops making it so tiring for visitors on game drives and also becoming monotonous as visitors have to use the same route on return. Loops will be created midway eland truck through Mugunga to zebra truck and another one from Miriti valley via Rucherengye to Iborogota valley.

The Community Education Centre (CEC) exists with 12 rooms and bed capacity of 40 people. The facilities at the centre especially the kitchen, wooden decker (beds) and metallic tables and chairs are in poor condition. The existing conference room at a capacity of 80 people is small and lacks the necessary equipment for conservation education. There has been an increasing demand for accommodation for low budget tourists and students hence need for increase in bed capacity. The buildings are still in good condition but only need re-painting and renovation on some roofs like the kitchen. There is also need for catering services to cater for visitors staying at the centre.


Page ( 57 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Fig

3: T

ouri

sm fa

cilit

ies


Page ( 58 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Management actions.

Tourism infrastructure:In order to open up the tourism hub on the western part of the park, an entry gate will be con-structed at Katengyeto. UWA will work with tourism stakeholders especially Igongo cultural centre to publicize the use of this gate. The existing gates of Sanga, Kanyinanshara and Nshara will be up-graded to UWA standards to give good impression to the visitors as they come to the park. Efforts will be made to loop the tourism tracks to improve visitor experience as they carry out the game drives. A new game drive vehicle will be procured to cater for walk in visitors who may not have vehicles.

UWA will work with CAA to identify a suitable location for the airstrip and a revenue collection point will be established at the airstrip. This will monitor the visitors who enter the park by air. Observation platforms will be designed and constructed in Rubanga Forest, Miriiti, Warukiri and Kyempitsi. The Rubanga trail will be redesigned to move away from the river.

Management will re-design and re-equip the CEC accommodation section to cater for the increas-ing number of students, domestic tourists and low budget tourists.

A new conference hall will be constructed at CEC and more equipment’s added such as projectors, models and screens to facilitate the process of presentations.

The existing conference hall will be converted and expanded to a dining hall to cater for the increas-ing number of visitors. More dormitories will be constructed and capacity increased to 80 to cater for domestic tourists and students and some of these rooms will be upgraded to self-contained.

Tourism facilities: In order to further enhance visitor experience, an information centre will be constructed at Ak-ageti on Mbarara Kampala high way. Management will negotiate with Nshara government ranch to obtain userights of land for the information centre. The Rwonyo area will be redesigned into a tourism hub and the existing tourism facilities on the site will be improved. UWA will construct 10 more bandas and upgrade the Buffalo tented camp into self-contained tents. The current campsites of Kingfisher and Mazinga will be expanded and upgraded with attendant facilities. In addition, kazuma lookout will be developed into a wilderness camp with attendant facilities.

The former Rwonyo restaurant will be renovated to cater for the various tourism facilities that have been proposed at the Rwonyo tourism hub. The current Rwonyo bandas will be demolished and 10 new self-contained ones that will be constructed to cater for budget tourists. In order to improve water tourism, UWA will procure a new boat and expand the jetty to accommodate more boats.

UWA will concession out the construction and development of a tented camp of a 20 bed capacity at the former interpretation center. A trail will be created to link this lodge to the lake. Another luxury tented camp to be located at Mujwiguru of 20 bed capacity will be concessioned out. UWA will concession the construction and management of a five star hotel on Kigarama hills on the low-er slopes. A nature trail will be established along Kigarama hill. An exclusive campsite will also be established south of Kigarama hill.

UWA will use the specified area in the concession agreement to delineate Arcadia and Mantana concessions so as to limit the activities of these concessions. In order to cater for the increasing number of tourists, Park management will expand the lakeside restaurant.


Page ( 59 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)



Construct tourism gate at Katengyeto according to new designs WT CAM,

BDMYear 3 300,000,000

Upgrade existing gates to match the new designs (Nshara, Sanga, Kanyinanshara)

WT CAM, BDM

Year 3-6 1,500,000,000

Construct an Information centre at Karengo near Akageti on the Mbarara-Kampala high way

WT BDM, CAM Year 6 600,000,000

Divert the tracks from the valleys to the raised ground and maintain trucks WT CAM Year 1 80,000,000

Establish loops (after zoning)-eland truck, zebra to research truck WT CAM Year 3 35,000,000

Establish a trail from the proposed Rwonyo lodge to the lake (looped) –interpretation trail

WT CAM Year 4 37,000,000

Redesign Rwonyo hill as a tourism hub for the park WT CAM Year 2 60,000,000

Concession out the construction and management of a luxury tented lodge of 20 bed capacity with attendant facilities at Rwonyo Former Interpretation Centre

BDM CAM, WT Year 1 2,000,000

Establish tourism trails (Rubanga, Kigarama and interpretation) WT CAM,

AWF Year 1 80,000,000

Re-open the airstrip with attendant facilities – work with CAA to identify suitable site for airstrip

CAM MME, Airwing Year 4

120,000,000

Redesign the Buffalo tented site to create privacy WT CAM,BDM,

AWFYear 1-2 20,000,000

Upgrade the existing tents to self contained tents WT

CAM, BDM, AWF

Year 1-3

105,000,000

Construct and equip additional 10 self contained tents to be managed by UWA WT CAM Year

2-3 350,000,000

Construct the house for the attendant and store WT CAM Year 2

20,000,000


Page ( 60 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Improve/renovate former Rwonyo restaurant building and restore the restaurant and bar to cater for new proposed facilities i.e Rwonyo bandas and buffalo in proximity

WT CAM, BDM

Year 2-3 40,000,000

Redesign the Rwonyo bandas area and locate the bandas on the lower WT CAM,

BDM Year 1 -

Demolish existing bandas and restore the sites WT CAM Year 4 2,000,000

Construct 10 self contained bandas of 20 capacity in a circular way to be managed by UWA

WT CAM, AWF

Year 1-3 400,000,000

Build a jetty that will accommodate more boats WT CAM Year 2 15,000,000

Delineate concessioned areas for Mantana and Arcadia WT CAM Year 1 250,000

Improve and expand Lakeside restaurant at Mazinga WT CAM Year 3 60,000,000

Procure a game drive vehicle CAM MES, AWF Year 2 300,000,000

Construct a VIC at Mazinga CAM WT, AWF Year 5 300,000,000

Redevelop and upgrade Kingfisher campsite with attendant facilities WT CAM Year 1 5,000,000

Improve signage WT CAM, AWF Year 2 60,000,000

Develop Kazuma look out into a wilderness camp with attendant facilities

WT CAM Year 3 2,000,000

Concession the construction of Mujwiguru hill for Luxury tented camp (20 bed capacity)

WT CAM Year 1 2,000,000

Re design , renovate and re- equip the CEC to cater for low budget tourists WCC CAM,

AWFYear 2-3 63,000,000

Construct and equip the conference room at CEC WCC CAM Year

3-4 104,000,000

Convert and expand the existing hall into a dining to cater for increasing number of visitors

WCC CAM, AWF Year 3 38,200,000

Construct dormitories for students (up to 80 beds) WCC CAM,

MMEYear 3-4 294,000,000

Concession the construction and management of a 5 star hotel of 100 bed capacity with a conference facility at Kigarama hill on the lower slopes

WT CAM, BDM Year 2 2,000,000


Page ( 61 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Concession out a luxury tented camp south of Kigarama hill WT CAM,

AWF Year 2 2,000,000

Review the horse riding concession to establish terms and conditions to the partnership

WT CAM Year 2 -

Design and construct appropriate observation platform in Rubanga Forest, Miriiti, Warukiri, Kyempitsi

WT CAM, AWF Year 4 20,000,000

Redesign the Rubanga trail to move away from the river/swamp WT CAM Year 5 15,000,000

8.2 Tourism products and services

Output : Tourism experience improved

Issues and Rationale.LMCA the main product that visitors engage in is game drive. The other products that visitors en-gage in are nature walks, boat rides, bird watching, night game drives. These products are not well developed and are done on a limited scale. The night game drives started in 2013 but still lack the necessary equipment and have not been well advertised. In addition, there are other products like sport fishing, bicycle safaris that can prolong the visitors stay if introduced.

Management actions.Management will popularize the night game drives through print and electronic media. Appropri-ate equipment will be acquired like night visual equipment nocturnal interpretation/ guide books and guides will be trained. The buses being proposed to be procured under World Bank will be advertised and popularized. Attractive and affordable packages will be developed to attract more domestic visitors.

Sport fishing will be developed on Kigambira and Kazuma lakes and the necessary equipment will be procured. Staff training on sport fishing will also be done. In partnership with tourism stake-holders, bicycle safaris will be introduced as a new product and bicycle trails will be developed in the designated tourism zones. Training of staff on bird watching will be done and the necessary equipment to support the product will be procured.


Page ( 62 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)



Popularize night game drives and acquire appropriate equipment WT CAM Year 1 - 5 27,000,000

Develop sport fishing on lakes Kigambira, Kazuma WT CAM Year 1

onwards 28,500,000

Introduce bicycle safaris in the park (need more information), partner with Rwakobo Rock and any other partner

WTCAM, Rwakobo Rock

Year 1 16,500,000

Popularize bird watching in the PA WT CAM Year 2 9,000,000

Establish L. Mburo-Rubanga forest circuit WT CAM Year 3 12,000,000

8.3 Marketing

Output: LMNP promoted locally and internationally to increase the number of visitors by 5% annually

Issues and Rationale.Although tourism in LMCA has been increasing in the previous years, it has not yet reached the maximum levels. The park still has potential to increase tourism and revenues. Currently LMCA is among PAs that meet all its operational costs with some surplus and this is expected to increase in the next 10 years.

Figure 4: Trend of annual visitation of LMCA since 2001Source: LMCA visitor records

Visitation


Page ( 63 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

The park has been proposed for Meetings, Incentives, Conferences and Events (MICE) with a hotel at Kigarama Hill. This will be one way of increasing tourism in the park. One of the challenges in LMNP is inadequate marketing. LMCA has been participating in marketing of its products but this is still inadequate. Locally, talk shows are run on the local radio station and TV programs.

Fig 5: Domestic and foreign visitor trends

Guidebooks and brochures are also used for advertising the products but these are not well elabo-rate and updated. LMNP is included on the UWA website but the information is rarely updated. Al-though LMNP is included in the UWA general tariff, the information is generalized for all the parks and does not specifically detail LMCA.

Local exhibitions are used to market the protected area domestically. In addition, regional exhi-bitions and agriculture trade shows are part of the avenues that are used in advertising. UWA en-tered into a partnership with Igongo cultural centre to advertise LMNP. A stall was marked where UWA is supposed to put advertising material. However it has not been fully utilized because of lack of enough advertising materials.


Page ( 64 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Revenue trends Revenue trends for the last six years have shown positive growth trends registering the highest growth in 2013/2014. Fig 7 shows revenue trends over the last six years

Fig 6: Revenue trends over the last six years

Management actions.UWA will improve on advertisement and provide information on the various attractions within LMNP. There will be increased domestic tourism advertising through local radio talk show and TV shows. Deliberate efforts will be made to develop MOUs with the media to advertise the park so as to improve domestic tourism. In addition, guidebooks and brochures will be updated and will contain information about the park. A tourist map indicating trails/tracks with proper signage will be produced.

Advertising bill boards will be installed along Lyantonda – Mbarara - Ntungamo, Mbarara – Bushenyi and Mbarara – Ibanda high ways to create awareness on the main roads about LMCA. Interpretative themes and panels will also be developed to act as attractions and put at the visitor centre to advertise LMNP to the entire public.

UWA will advertise on social network e.g face book, twitter and update the organisation website. To improve on stakeholder tourism relationship, UWA will work with partners like Igongo cultural center to market LMNP. A link will be created on UWA website between Igongo and other tourism institutions/stakeholders.

UWA will ensure production of quality and better resale items of different items depicting LMNP and use them as adverts in places like Igongo cultural, information offices, gate entry points and the visitor Centre.

Revenue


Page ( 65 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

UWA will attend both locally organized trade shows and international exhibitions to advertise and market LMNP. In addition, the organization also will continuously work with tourism partners, stakeholders and tour operators in marketing of the park.

Summary of action table


Conduct domestic campaign through radio programs, Tvs, using musicians

WT CAM, WCC, AWF


Develop an MoU with print and electronic media to specifically advertise LMNP

MM CAM, WT Year 1 onwards

-

Update LMCA guide book MM CAM, AWF, WT Year 1-2

- Update the brochures WT CAM, WCC,

AWFYear 1,3,6,9

-

Hire advertising space on billboard (electronic) in Mbarara town and sign posts along Lyantonde-Mbarara-Ntungamo, Mbarara-Bushenyi, Mbarara-Ibanda

WT CAM, AWF Year 1 80,000,000

Participate in exhibitions both local, national and international WT CAM, WCC,

AWFYear 1 onwards 147,200,000

Create a link between Igongo, and other institutions/partners and UWA website

Website executive CAM, WCC Year 1

onwards -

Continuously update the LMNP information on UWA website WT CAM, WCC,

MMYear 1 onwards

-

Advertise LMNP on social networks e.g facebook, twitter, Youtube

CAM WT, WCC Year 1 onwards

-

Advertise the park on the UWA space in the Igongo Cultural centreby providing resale items, guidebooks etc)

WT CAM, Year 1 onwards

-

Produce a tourist map with trails and tracks well indicated and with proper signage

WT CAM, AWF Year 1 onwards 10,000,000

Pull out tariff for LMNP and flush it out- make an insertion in the UWA tariff

WT CAM, WCC, AWF


Develop interpretive themes and artifacts for the visitor centre WT

CAM, WCC, AWF, Partners


Develop interpretive panels along the tourism trails and tracks WT CAM, WCC,



Page ( 66 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

8.4 Community tourism/cultural groups

Output : Community benefits from eco tourism increased

Issues and Rationale.

Community tourism Initiatives.Currently, there are 12 community tourism groups that have united together and formed one um-brella tourism association called Lake Mburo Conservation Area Community Tourism Association (LMCCTA). Some of these members have had a training conducted by UCOTA covering areas of tourism development, marketing and management. The groups are composed of dance and drama groups, women group involved in handcraft making, bee keeping groups and campsite/cultural institution owners. This association has identified partners to work with i.e LMNP, Igongo cultural Institute, AWF and UCOTA.

There has been less interest in craft making in the communities around the park. Crafts that were being made were for personal use and not client oriented. Of recent, these groups have shown in-terest to tap into the tourism market in the park.

The groups are currently involved in activities such as entertaining guests through dance and dra-ma, provision of accommodation at community campsites, community lodges and to a small scale in sale of handcrafts. However, these are not yet up to standard in terms of quality and coordina-tion.

Ankole Cow Conservation Association (ACCA) The Ankole Cow Conservation Association (ACCA) was formed in 2007 with a membership of about 60 individuals supported by Fauna and Flora International (FFI). The Association has a constitu-tion in place and steered by a 9-person executive committee elected after every three years by the General Assembly as stipulated in the constitution. The major objective of ACCA is to preserve the Ankole cow and its association with wildlife for future generations. The Association has developed a five-year strategic plan and has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with UWA to manage the cultural centre within LMNP. The MoU is signed to be implemented within 2 years with a provision of being reviewed after the 2 years.

Currently, ACCA is engaged in negotiation with MAAIF to develop an MoU to have enyemebwa (An-kole cow herd) managed in the Government ranch neighboring LMNP.This was reached after a social economic environmental impact assessment was done and recom-mendations made.

Management ActionsUWA management will work with stakeholders interested in eco-tourism in developing communi-ty tourism programs. In addition, support in tourism product and service development will be ren-dered. The community tourism groups will be identified and linked to other partners like UCOTA, AWF in training programs to ensure standard for visitors are met in the fields of service provision, interpretation and quality products. Support will also be given in the area of marketing their prod-ucts.

UWA will offer technical support to the community tourism groups to establish community tour-ism centres in areas around Nshara, Sanga and Katengyeto gates in order to ease access of their products and services to the visitors.


Page ( 67 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

A cultural centre will be established within the park as provided for under the MoU between UWA and ACCA and guidelines on its management developed.

Management will support ACCA to develop the existing concept into a tourism product package and market the product through various channels such as brochures, flyers, banners, radio, TVs, newspapers and leaflets.

ACCA and her activities will be publicized at local, national and international levels through differ-ent fora in order to secure political, social and economic support from the different partners.

Guidelines for the management of the cultural centre at Nshara will be developed and the cultural tourism product integrated into the general Lake Mburo Conservation Area tourism offer.

Management will work closely with NEMA to carry out annual environmental audits on the ap-proved EIA for the CVC project in LMCA


Activity Responsible person Other Time cost (shs)

Identify and train community groups in ecotourism enterprises WCC CAM, WT,


Support the community to establish a community tourism centre WCC WT, CAM,

AWF Year 1-2 1,400,000

Support communities to improve tourism products and services WCC CAM, WCC,

AWF Year 1-2 1,400,000

Support community groups to market their products e.g dance and drama, crafts groups

WCCCAM, WT, AWF, UCOTA


Develop an MoU between UWA and ACCA for establishment of a cultural centre within the park

WCC CAM, ACCA, DDC,FFI

Year 1 1,500,000

Support ACCA to develop the existing concept into a tourism product WT

CAM, ACCA, DDC,FFI, WCC

Year 2 -

Develop mechanisms for management of cultural centre at Nshara WCC

CAM, ACCA, DDC,FFI

Year 1-2 1,500,000

Ensure that Environmental audit on the approved EIA for CVC project in LMCA is carried out

WRMCAM, ACCA, DDC,FFI

Year 1 750,000


Page ( 68 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

8.5 Financial Analysis8.5.1 Cost estimates for plan implementationAnalysis of financial implication of implementing this plan was undertaken where all the activity costing on annual basis was done. Further analysis showed that the first five years will form the investment phase of this plan where most implementation of capital items will be undertaken. The activities that will be implemented in the last years of the plan are those of routine nature like law enforcement patrols, with very limited capital investments hence the low costs towards the end of plan implementation. Fig……….. summarizes expenditure over the ten years in graphical form.

Fig 7: Cost estimates of activity implementation over the ten years


Page ( 69 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

8.5.2 Revenue Projections and scenario analysisRevenue projections were based on the trends for five years. Revenues generated by the park as a result of mainly tourism arrivals from financial year 2008/9 to 2013/4 were analyzed and an average annual growth determined. From the analysis, there was a big variance, exhibiting high fluctuations. Although the average annual growth for the last six years was 31% and in light of the fluctuations noted, the team adopted a moderate growth rate of 20% for revenue projection.

Fig 8. Revenue Projection

Further analysis was undertaken where the cost estimates were combined with the revenue pro-jections. From the graph below the park will break even in the fifth year of plan implementation

Fig 9: Combined cost estimate and revenue projection.


Page ( 70 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

9.0 MONITORING AND EVALUATION FRAMEWORK

The Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Lake Mburo National Park GMP is clearly stipulated to guide monitoring and evaluation of the programs in the GMP. It explains how the programs are supposed to work by laying out the components of the initiative and the order or the steps needed to achieve the desired results. It is also meant to stimulate the understanding of the programs’ goals, outputs and planned activities.

Within the framework each program has a log frame, Monitoring and Evaluation Plan, and indi-cator tracking table. The Log frame articulates the program goal, outcomes, outputs, indicators, means of verifications and assumptions. It defines relationships among inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes and impacts and clarifies the relationship between program activities and external fac-tors. The Monitoring Plan shall act as a monitoring tool which defines the indicators, explain data collection methods and when and how information from the programs shall be tracked. And then the indicator tracking table has the baseline information that shall be used to obtain information which will act as a basis for assessing the impact of each program. It also includes the detailed ac-tivity implementation schedule during the ten year period.

9.1 General Management Implementation processThe GMP will be implemented within ten Financial years thus in order to guide the annual imple-mentation process, the PA will be required to prepare operational work plans on an annual basis. The work plans shall be written using a standard format and shall have a budget for a particular year. Staff while developing the annual operations plan, will use the indicator tracking table to extract the activities to be implemented in a particular year as laid in the ten year implementation schedule.

9.2 MonitoringGenerally, monitoring as prescribed in this General Management Plan is a systematic collection and processing of data relating to the management programs in order to establish the progress of inter-ventions. This process will be done for all management programs and at all levels involving all staff with feedback given during coordination meetings. Among the tools to be used include indicators which are yardsticks that will help to assess the extent to which the planned program activities, outputs, outcomes and goals have been achieved. There will be a systematic collection and analysis of information that will aim at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the PA basing on the targets set as objectives and outputs planned during the period.

Staff quarterly meetings to enable them share and keep track of progress shall be held in the PA. Also monthly, quarterly and Annual reports shall be written and submitted as one of the tools for monitoring the performance of Park programs. The audit department will conduct annual internal audits to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the Park funds and resources.

9.3 ReportingSpecific monthly, quarterly and annual monitoring reports will then be written and discussed as well to keep truck of whatever is going on in the different programs. These reports on program implementation will be shared among the PA and Headquarter staff. Other types of reports that will be required throughout the implementation period, writing formats and tools shall be as stip-ulated in the organizational reporting standards and guidelines book.


Page ( 71 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

9.4 GMP Evaluation Evaluations will form part of the implementation and monitoring processes. These will help to de-termine the overall effects or outcomes of the Park purpose in relation to program objectives. This will indicate whether the various program objectives were met, and also, demonstrate program effectiveness, efficiency, understand the impact of program changes and include recommendations for improvement along with a set of lessons learnt. Both Mid and end of GMP evaluations will be conducted. The midterm will be done internally by staff getting technical support from the M&E Unit in the fifth year of GMP implementation. An external consultant will be hired to lead the process of the final evaluation during the tenth year of implementation. Results/ findings and recommendations from both types of evaluation shall be used to improve the proceeding planning, implementation and monitoring processes.


Page ( 72 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

REFERENCES

Byaruhanga. A. Kasoma, P. Pomeroy, D (2001). Important Bird Areas in Uganda. East Africa Nature History Society, KampalaBreyer, 1993, as in Muhweezi, A.B (1994). Lake Mburo National Park Management Plan. African Wildlife Foundation. Lake Mburo National Park Planning Project.Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992:Kamugisha, J.R. Ogutu, Z.A. and Stahl, H (1997). Parks, and People - Conservation and Livelihoods at the Cross Roads. Four Case Histories. Regional Soil Conservation Unit/SIDA. Technical Report No. 17. Published by SIDA’s Regional Soil Conservation Unit, RSCU, 1997.Kasoma and Pomeroy, 1993, cited in Muhweezi, A.B (1994). Lake Mburo National Park Management Plan. African Wildlife Foundation. Lake Mburo National Park Planning Project.Langdale-Brown, I. Osmaston, H. and Wilson, J.G (1964). The Vegetation of Uganda and its Bearing on Land-use. Entebbe: Uganda Government Printer.Local Government Act (1997)Marquardt, M. Infield, M. and Namara, A (1994). Socio-Economic survey of communities in the Buffer Zone of Lake Mburo National Park. MISR & LMCCP.Namara, A. and Infield, M (1998). “The Influence of the Lake Mburo Community Conservation Project (LMCCP) on farmers and pastoralists”. AWF, Kampala, Uganda.National Environment Management Statute No. 4 of 1995Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, 1971:Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA): Revenue Sharing guidelines 2013Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) : Strategic Plan, 2013-2018

Uganda Wildlife Statute No. 14 of 1996UWA, 2014: Approved budget estimates for the financial year 2014/2015Uganda National Planning Authority 2013: Vision 2040


Page ( 73 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Picture: Eland

Eland and Impala


Page ( 74 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Appendix 1: PLANNING TEAM MEMBERS

1. Mr. Buhanga Edgar, Senior Planning and EIA Coordinator2. Mr. Tusubira Justus, Conservation Area Manager3. Ms. Namuli Susan, Monitoring & Evaluation Manager4. Ms. Namara Justine, Senior Planning and EIA Officer5. Ms. Nakayenze Christine Lynn, Tourism Warden6. Mr. Bwire Isaiah, Community Conservation Warden7. Mr. Mbagaya Robert, Law Enforcement Warden8. Mr. Murinda Michael, Monitoring and Research Ranger9. Mr. Kaijutsya Robert, Igongo Cultural Centre 10. Ms. Namara Deborah, District Environment Officer, Kiruhura11. Mr. Mwesigye Joseph, District Environment Officer, Isingiro12. Mr. Musingwire Jeconious, District Natural Resources Officer, Mbarara13. Mr. Malingi Sam, Chairperson, Nshara Wildlife Associations, Nshara block, Kiruhura 14. Mr. Charles Atuhe, Africa Wildlife Foundation


Page ( 75 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Appendix 2: List of stakeholders

ISINGIRO DISTRICT STAKEHOLDERS # NAME DESIGNATION/TITLE CONTACT/ADDRESS1 Muhwezi Stephen NCCI-Nakivale Nakivale2 Ssemuju wahab VO/SNO Masha S/C3 Byaruhanga Athur S/C/C Masha S/C4 Natukwatsa Emmy ASP Kabingo S/C5 Mpairwe Nazarus CDO Kabingo s/c6 Byomuhangi O C/P Akabirakengeya7 Bwerere Enock Former CPI Rwentango/Masha8 Bigirwa Patreo Production Kabingo s/c9 KagandikA Josia CPI Rushasha s/c10 Byaruhanga Annah Ass. Envt Officer Masha11 Mubangizi Pauson Ass.Envt Officer Rushasha12 Basajja Mustapha Former CPI Rugaaga s/c13 Kamugisha Valeriano Former CPI Masha14 Natukunda Enos CDO Rushasha15 Tumwesigye Milton LC3 C/P Masha16 Rwamashaka Yosum LC1 C/P Kogogo17 Ishenkima Alex LC1 KyarugajuIsingiro Sub Counties Meeting1 Bukenya Denial LC3 C/P Kabingo s/c2 Byaruhanga Ignatius District C/P Insingiro3 Kaawa Mugisha GISO Kabingo s/c4 Twinomugisha Samuel S/C/C Rushasha5 Matsiko Vincent District commercial officer Masha6 Ssebulirwa Nasur GISO Masha s/c7 Ainembabazi Ann S/C/C Kabingo s/c8 Tumushabe Charles Chairman Rwentango9 Tukamuhabwa Bashir Head of finance Rushahsha s/c10 Ahimbisibwe JB District V/C/P Isingiro11 Twinomujuni Elly Sec. for education & CD IsingiroMbarara Subcounties Meeting 1 Akandwanaho Loy Agric Officer (AASP) Biharwe s/c2 Mwesigwa Charles Manager Rwenjeru campsite3 Kahangi Benon NAADs Coordinator Biharwe S/C4 Mwesigye Patrick GISO Kanyaryeru s/c5 Begumisa Myers V/C/Person LCIII Biharwe s/c6 Lt. Byomugisha Nickson GISO Biharwe s/c7 Mwesigye Nathan Former CPI Kanyaryeru s/c8 Bagatuzayo Wilson CPI-Treasurer 9 Bashaija Gordon C/P LC1 Akaku10 Ninsima Jesca CDO Biharwe11 David Muhumuza C/P LC1 Katengyeto12 Rukundo Simwa Animal Health Officer Biharwe13 Runyaburana Edward V/C/P Rwehongyera14 Bwerere Robert SEC.Production Katengyeto15 Nuwamanya Bright For. S/C Chief Kanyarweru s/c16 Tibasimwa Edward C/P LC1 Mpanga 7 cell17 Nabimanya Abel CPI Biharwe18 Bundende Edward LCII C/P Akayanja parish19 Karungi Moses C/P LC1 Rushororo cell20 Muhanguzi James C/P LC 1 Rwamuranda21 Turyahabwe Nathan C/P LC3 Kanyaryeru s/c


Page ( 76 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

22 Ruteera David C/P LC1 Bumaranjara23 Asiimwe Maureen CDO Kanyaryeru24 Muhangi Nelson S/C Chief BiharweKiruhura Sub-counties Meeting1 Mbwebwe Phenny C/P LC1 Nyakahita cell2 Kikashemera Benon C/P LC3 Nyakahita3 Atukunda Edith PROD & ENVT OFFICER Nyakasharara4 Luke Katungi CDO Nyakashara 5 Shibah Ntugire S/C CHIEF Nyakashara6 Tibaingana Moses SCDO Sanga TC7 Katondo John C/P.LC1 Rwitsiru cell8 Musiime Charles C/P LC1 Byembogo cell9 Tumuhairwe Stephen Wildlife Publicity Nshara Block10 Twinobusingye Jovanice Town Clerk Sanga Town Council11 Kanatukunda Dorcus D/councilor Nshara block12 Kasheija Godfrey Birundumi P/S13 Safari Mugyenyi C/P LC 3 Sanga TC14 Tayebwa Kwisoma FOR C/P LC3 Sanga s/c15 Mugume Donald C/P ACCA Sanga16 Acwamu Peter S/C/C Sanga s/c17 Bagwangi David LC1 S/C Kigarama- sanga18 Khira Stephen Kanyaanya/Kikatsi19 Mwesigye Emmy Councilor Nkongoro Ward20 Asiimwe Emmanuel GISO Nyakashashara21 Asiimwe Enos GISO Sanga TC22 Mwesigwa Wilber GISO Sanga s/c23 Rwehonda Ephraim Councilor Sanga TC24 Sempebwa Januario C/P LC1 KakagateDistrict Meeting For Mbarara/Isingiro Districts1 Arinda Moses AASP-crop District Prod Officer Isingiro district2 Kasagara Edward DCAO Isingiro3 Denis Kamukama Rep. Managing Director Igongo Cultural Centre4 Muhangi Asaph Sec. Prodn & Marketing Mbarara DLG5 Gershom Matsiko Exec. Director Mbarara CSO Mbarara6 Asiimwe Kyefura DISO Isingiro7 Mpora Vincent AG. DCDO isingiro8 Arianatwe Patrick Wetlands Officer Isingiro9 Kobusingye Babra DCCO Isingiro10 Bwengye Emmanuel DFO-FORESTRY Isingiro11 Ahabwe Irene COBWEB rep. Isingiro12 Musota Richard Senior water officer Mbarara13 Twijukye Arthur Manager Biharwe Trust SACCO14 Bomeera Fabian RDC Isingiro15 Col. Fred Rugadya DOTO Mbarara16 Tumusiime Deus District C/P Mbarara DLG17 Sp Muheirwe K DPC Isingiro18 Byamukama Alfred For CAO Mbarara19 Tumwebaze Herbert Envt Officer Mbarara20 Mushemeza Edward For Fisheries Officer Isingiro21 Kabatereine Patrick Radio west/NV Mbarara22 Abbey Nantale Radio west Mbarara23 Ram Edwin TV/West MbararaKiruhura District Meeting1 Evans Black N NRO Kiruhura district2 Keijwara Fredrick Fisheries officer Kiruhura3 Nkwasibwe James V/C/P Kiruhura


Page ( 77 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

4 Katemba Reuben Dep.RDC Kiruhura DLG5 Tukahirwa Marion CAO Kiruhura DLG6 Tayebwa Kwisoma For C/P Nyakisa 7 Mugisha Katugunda LC 5 Kiruhura8 Musinguzi Enock CAO Kiruhura9 Peter Hangamisho DISO Kiruhura11 Ralph Schenk Director Muhingo Lodge Mihingo lodge12 Christopher Roberts Managing Director Rwakobo Rock12 Kadokech Jude Manager Mburo safaris13 Julius Akanyijuka Manager Eagles nestResource Users Meeting1 Mugisha Joseph Member Rwabarata Rwabarata Drumer Actors2 Katungi Lawrence C/P LC1 Rwamuhuku3 Mugyenyi Annet Farmer Rwamuhuku4 Shallot Ahimbisibwe V/C/P Rwamuhuku craft5 Hajalah Kakoragye Sec AWG Abarihamwe group

6 Annet Mugyenyi Treasurer Rwamuhuku Women Art & Craft

7 Agnes Katungi V/C/P Abarihamwe Women’s group

8 Twinomujuni C C/P Rubare BMU9 Mirembe Justus Manager Rwabarata DM10 Ninsiima Agatha Member Rwabarata DN11 Masereka Elijah Data site clerk Rubare fishing community12 Tusingwire Milton General secretary BMU Rubare

13 Acima Gift SecretaryRwamuhuku community group

14 Linnet Geriga C/P Rwamuhuku community Association

15 Katsigaire Siraje Rwokiporwa Rwakiporwa16 Kikuna V/C/Abarisa Rwamuhuku17 Kabamba C/P/Abarisa Rwamuhuku18 Kajura Isah V/C/P Rwakiparwa19 Twijukye Bushir Monitoring Rwakiparwa20 Babwetera Johnmary C/P Sozi group21 Kasumba Joseph V/C/P Sozi group22 Kyobuhingi Generous C/P RWACA23 Doroth Muhimbura Bee Keeper Beekeeper24 Tubagye Alex C/P Beekeeper25 Mwesigye Grace C/P Rwabarata DA


Page ( 78 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

98

CATEGORY ISSUE SOLUTION Community Conservation

Problem animals destroying crops and killing people and livestock especially bushbucks and hyenas

slow response to reported cases of problem animals

Problem animals and their impacts on communities

Individuals directly affected by problem animals not directly helped as individuals

Wildlife on private land especially zebras (compete for water, pasture)

Limited intervention in management of wildlife on private land

Lack of compensation for loss of property and lives

Lack of compensations for persons injured by problem animal

Vermin Problems from the park affecting the

communities go beyond the adjacent parishes Crop damages as result of Problem Animals Poor facilities and structure at CEC low visitation of neighboring schools groups

and communities due to high charges inadequate health facilities limited awareness on sport hunting by

communities and other stakeholders Low community support inadequate knowledge of park business by

communities – inadequate awareness Inadequate information flow among

government sectors Inadequate awareness of conservation and

lack of exposure Inadequate coordination and collaboration

between communities and park management Lack of capacity for established community

institutions on their roles Inadequate collaboration between the park

and community leaders that brings conflicts limited benefits to local governments

Increasing revenue sharing

Compensation Collective

responsibility among stakeholders

Reduce zebra population on private land

Develop short term and long term intervention

Habitat manipulation

Sensitization Identify cattle

keepers around the park and their land parcels

Advise on stocking densities add value to wildlife products e.g wildlife meat in hotels

Park supporters should be given special recognition –people should sign for the work done

People should be given permission to access the raw materials

Park should work closely with leaders to minimize conflicts

Sensitization Marketing,


Page ( 79 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

99

People around the park not being given first preference when employment opportunities are available

Lack of employment for communities neighbouring the park

1. Communities adjacent to the park not benefiting from the employment opportunities in the park

2. No alternating of fishing licenses on Lake Mburo

Few sport hunters Shortage of water in the communities Lack of markets for the crafts People who support the park are not

appreciated Lack of raw materials for crafts e.g papyrus,

medicine, ropes, etc Lack of markets Inadequate training on craft making No sites for displaying the crafts limited resource use especially fishing in the

lakes and wetlands within the park Having same people to benefit from the park

e.g fishing lack of water within the communities Low benefits to the community Inadequate income generating activities Over-dependency on the park

resources/revenue Illegal grazing People don’t benefit from tourism Limited access to park resources e.g firewood,

water, Beekeeping – need area for beekeeping abuse of revenue sharing funds Inadequate understanding/dissemination of

RS guidelines Lack of understanding of revenue sharing

guidelines Lack of transparency of revenue sharing

projects Low revenue sharing percentage Lack of transparency in RS disbursement in

training Open more fishing

in other lakes Sensitize on self

reliance Open up the

benefits to other communities

Sensitization through drama

Apprehend the poachers

Provide employment

People should keep few animals

Park should support community tourism groups from revenue sharing

Build community tourism centre

Park should contribute to fencing people’s farms

Compensation for damaged/destroyed property

Develop MoUs Identify areas for

the groups to construct tourism accommodation facilities

Translocate lions to the zoo.


Page ( 80 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

Controversial park boundariesToo much hunting of eland


Page ( 81 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)


Page ( 82 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)


Page ( 83 ) - LMCA- GMP (2015-2025)

103

Lack of harmonization of different plans (park plans and Rwizi catchment)

Deterioration of water quality (degradation of catchment areas) and water hyacinth infestation

Changing vegetation in the park Use of sprays that may have negative

consequences Wildlife disease transmission to livestock disease transmission e.g brucella, anthrax,

typhoid wildfires – People do not understand why you

burn the park Park Operations

Poor/inadequate coordination and

information sharing especially on security Poor roads (access and within the park) which

hinder transport and comfortability Lack of public road connecting Isingiro and

Kiruhura through LMNP Corruption within the park – revenue leakages

at the gates Lack of airstrip Poor communication network (radios,

telephone) Inadequate transport, communication Insecurity created by people entering the park No access road through Rwisiru-Rurambira Poor park infrastructure Very slow implementation of CVC Project

(Ankole Cow Conservation) Threat to Ankole Cow which is central to the

culture of the people surrounding the park Limited coordination between security organs

in isingiro and the Park Security for the tourists Inadequate outposts/outposts far from people Few houses in Rubare fishing village

Regular security

meetings Park should work

with other security organs to ensure security

Outposts should be close to the communities (bringing services close to the people)

Park work with district to work on the roads

Construct more houses

Documents

PREAMBLE - Uganda Wildlife