the role of tourism in natural resource management in the okavango ...
the role of tourism in natural resource management in the okavango ... the role of tourism in natural resource management in the okavango ...
Figure 5.10: Map of Botswana showing how the country is now divided into two distinct systems I GHANZdDISTRICT I Source: Crowe, 1995. Movement of wildlife as noted by Ross (1987) is restricted between the two and within the systems. Within the Southwestern System, wildlife movements are inhibited by the Kuke veterinary fence and the eastern boundary of the Central Kalahari Game Reserve. Human settlements and livestock also add to the increasing pressure placed on the wildlife, especially in the Kweneng District. The Northeastern System restricts animal movement to and from the Okavango Delta via the Buffalo fence. According to Owens and Owens (1985), the restrictions that the veterinary cordon fences have caused have led to devastating effects on the wildlife populations of Botswana. Ross (1987) shows that in times of drought, when the rains have failed 212
for several consecutive years, the devastation that the fences and the increasing livestock population has on the wildlife can be seen on the largest scale. Wildebeest are often the most seriously affected species in the Southwestern System since they are completely dependent on water. The largest concentration of wildebeest during the wet season is along the boundary between the Ghanzi and Kgalagadi districts. However, their migration to the permanent water of the Okavango Delta in the dry season is restricted due to the Kuke Fence (Crowe, 1995). This restriction has caused a vast reduction in the wildebeest population. As Ross (1987) shows, the drought years of the 1980s had a huge effect on the wildebeest population, where approximately 52 000 of the 80 000 wildebeest that migrated died. Eland and hartebeest populations have also been greatly affected by the construction of the veterinary cordon fences. The hartebeest in the Southwestern System historically migrated in a north-easterly direction from the Kgalagadi and Ghanzi districts. This movement however, is now restricted due to the construction of fences and an increasing amount of human settlements in the area. Hartebeest numbers have therefore declined dramatically in the last 15 years, resulting in a loss of 83% of the population. As shown in Figure 5.11, the combined seasonal distribution of wildebeest, hartebeest and eland requires a vast area to sustain these populations over the long term. It is obvious that this movement can not be accomplished due to an increasing human population in Botswana (Crowe, 1995). Taolo (1997) notes that a comparison of the distribution of the biomass of wild species with that of domestic livestock suggests that the two seem to be mutually exclusive and thus wildlife numbers will only increase in areas where the livestock biomass has decreased. It is likely that with continued livestock expansion, wildlife will be displaced. This creates an inverse relationship between the wildlife and livestock populations, a relationship which is a reflection of human distribution and a result of the disturbance to the wildlife migration patterns to which this distribution has contributed. 213
- Page 185 and 186: third furrow planting and mechanica
- Page 187 and 188: farmer who supplies crops to the vi
- Page 189 and 190: I Unlike consumptive resource utili
- Page 191 and 192: southern edge of the Delta, the Bot
- Page 194 and 195: Bugakwe and Xanekwe people traditio
- Page 196 and 197: The leader in each San band or grou
- Page 198 and 199: Descendants of San groups that live
- Page 200 and 201: 5.4.1.6 Batawana and Natural Resour
- Page 202 and 203: payment of tribute as a way of ensu
- Page 204 and 205: more rifles, European-made clothing
- Page 206 and 207: wildlife products. Fish, reptiles,
- Page 208 and 209: However, Rey was anxious to establi
- Page 210 and 211: Figure 5.8: Structure of Natural Re
- Page 212 and 213: other hand, veterinary officers wer
- Page 214 and 215: • • • • As with other natur
- Page 216 and 217: • Problems with solid waste dispo
- Page 218 and 219: natural resources and to increase t
- Page 220 and 221: ineffective in ensuring that all to
- Page 222 and 223: development which emphasise the par
- Page 224 and 225: The National Conservation Strategy
- Page 226 and 227: The growth of tourism in the Okavan
- Page 228 and 229: fifteen year period. The community-
- Page 230 and 231: • The 5-year review policy left m
- Page 232 and 233: government also provides 85 percent
- Page 235: Prefodiafoka fence constructed in 1
- Page 239 and 240: and water, but fortunately the Bots
- Page 241 and 242: It is in the context of the above t
- Page 243 and 244: income, and presumably high spendin
- Page 245 and 246: Although several researchers noted
- Page 247 and 248: In order for local Botswana citizen
- Page 249: Figure 6.1: Percentage of Total Arr
- Page 252 and 253: Table 6.2: Total Arrivals in Botswa
- Page 254 and 255: earth's wilderness areas shrink rap
- Page 256 and 257: eference to the Okavango Delta regi
- Page 258 and 259: With regards to tourist/visitor num
- Page 260 and 261: European and North American origin,
- Page 262: most direct economic impacts of tou
- Page 265 and 266: Table 6.9: Number of Accommodation
- Page 267 and 268: tend to vary in terms of standards
- Page 269 and 270: Safari hunters or spot (commercial)
- Page 271 and 272: validated by the Tawana Land Board
- Page 273 and 274: companies, 6 (40 percent) to jointl
- Page 275 and 276: Lastly, wildlife tends to congregat
- Page 277 and 278: Table 6.17: Major Safari Companies/
- Page 279 and 280: indicates that Botswana has more ar
- Page 281 and 282: 6.4 The Economic Impact of Tourism
- Page 283 and 284: weakest with agriculture, construct
- Page 285 and 286: As noted earlier, the greater major
Figure 5.10: Map <strong>of</strong> Botswana show<strong>in</strong>g how <strong>the</strong> country is now divided <strong>in</strong>to<br />
two dist<strong>in</strong>ct systems<br />
I<br />
GHANZdDISTRICT<br />
I<br />
Source: Crowe, 1995.<br />
Movement <strong>of</strong> wildlife as noted by Ross (1987) is restricted between <strong>the</strong> two and<br />
with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> systems. With<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Southwestern System, wildlife movements are<br />
<strong>in</strong>hibited by <strong>the</strong> Kuke veter<strong>in</strong>ary fence and <strong>the</strong> eastern boundary <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Central<br />
Kalahari Game Reserve. Human settlements and livestock also add to <strong>the</strong><br />
<strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g pressure placed on <strong>the</strong> wildlife, especially <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Kweneng District. The<br />
Nor<strong>the</strong>astern System restricts animal movement to and from <strong>the</strong> Okavango Delta via<br />
<strong>the</strong> Buffalo fence.<br />
Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Owens and Owens (1985), <strong>the</strong> restrictions that <strong>the</strong> veter<strong>in</strong>ary cordon<br />
fences have caused have led to devastat<strong>in</strong>g effects on <strong>the</strong> wildlife populations <strong>of</strong><br />
Botswana. Ross (1987) shows that <strong>in</strong> times <strong>of</strong> drought, when <strong>the</strong> ra<strong>in</strong>s have failed<br />
212
Change language