District Intergrated Land Use Plan - Ngwaketse Land Board

SOUTHERN DISTRICT
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
CONSULTANTS:
Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with
GISPlan (Pty) LTD
E-mail: environmetrix@mega.bw; tel: 3939283
December, 2005

SOUTHERN INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF CONTENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III
LIST OF MAPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI
LIST OF CHARTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI
1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
1.1 BACKGROUND. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 LOCATION AND SIZE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 STATUTORY FRAMEWORK AND POLICY PROVISIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.4 PURPOSE OF THE PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.5 UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES, APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.6 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.7 PREVIOUS PLANNING INITIATIVES AND EFFORTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.0 ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . .11
2.1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
2.2 EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITY IN MANAGEMENT OF THE DISTRICT LAND
AREA AND ITS RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.4 DECISION MAKING AND LAND USE CONFLICT RESOLUTION MECHANISM . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.5 LAND USE AND RELATED LEGAL PROVISIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.6 EXISTING POLICIES, STRATEGIES, PROGRAMMES AND PROJECTS AND THEIR
IMPACT ON THE DISTRICT’S ECONOMY, LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.7 IMPACT OF RELEVANT PROGRAMMES AND PROJECT ON THE DISTRICT’S
ECONOMY, LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.0 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM
OF RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
3.1 IMPORTANCE OF THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.2 CLIMATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.3 GEOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.4 SOILS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
3.5 SOIL FERTILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
3.6 SOIL EROSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.7 WATER RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3.8 VEGETATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
4.0 LAND AND RESOURCE USE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72
4.1 LAND TENURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
4.2 LAND AND RESOURCE USE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
4.3 ARABLE AGRICULTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
4.4 MINERAL RESOURCES AND EXPLOITATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
DRAFT LAND USE PLAN
ToC-I

TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.5 PHYSICAL PLANNING AND SETTLEMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
5.0 HUMAN RESOURCES, SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND
DEVELOPMENT PROFILE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
5.1 POPULATION SIZE AND GROWTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
5.2 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND DENSITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
5.3 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE POPULATION AND LABOUR FORCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
5.4 LABOUR FORCE, EMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
5.5 MIGRATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
5.6 HOUSEHOLD SIZE, DEPENDENCY AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT . . . . . 111
5.7 SOCIO-ECONOMIC TRENDS, TECHNOLOGY USED AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS
THE USE AND QUALITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
5.8 ENERGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
5.9 SANITATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
6.0 SOCIAL FACILITIES AND PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
6.1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
6.2 EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
6.3 HEALTH FACILITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
6.4 SANITATION AND WASTE MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
6.5 OTHER COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
6.6 ROAD NETWORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
6.7 WATER SUPPLY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
6.8 ELECTRIC POWER SUPPLY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .132
7.0 THE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
7.1 SETTLEMENT PATTERN AND DISTRIBUTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
7.2 THE GROWTH AND DECLINE OF SETTLEMENTS IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
7.3 SETTLEMENT HIERARCHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .139
7.4 ROLE, PROVISION AND ADEQUACY OF INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIES AND SERVICES. . 144
8.0 IDENTIFIED ISSUES, CONFLICTS, CONSTRAINTS, LAND
USE CONSIDERATIONS AND ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES . . . . . . . . . . 150
8.1 ISSUES, CONFLICTS AND CONSTRAINTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
8.2 LAND USE PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
8.3 ALTERNATIVE LAND USE STRATEGIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
8.4 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE LAND USE STRATEGIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ZONES, PROPOSED LAND USE AND MANAGEMENT173
9.1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
9.2 ENVIRONMENTAL (LAND USE) ZONING OF THE DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
9.3 ESTABLISHMENT OF LAND USE ZONES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
9.4 LAND USE MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .198
9.5 LAND MANAGEMENT PLANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
9.6 LAND USE PLANS FOR SEKHUTLANE, MAHOTSHWANE AND LOROLWANE (RADS) . . . . . . 246
9.7 IMPLEMENTATION, MONITORING AND RESEARCH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
ToC-II
DRAFT LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1.1 DELIVERABLES AND ACTIVITY SYSTEM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
TABLE 2.1
THE IMPACT OF SOME MAJOR RELEVANT POLICIES AND LEGISLATION ON
THE LAND USE PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
TABLE 3.2 GEOLOGICAL UNITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33
TABLE 4.2 LAND USE DISPOSITION IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73
TABLE 4.3
TOTAL AREA PLANTED AND YIELDS OF SORGHUM, MAIZE AND PULSE BY DISTRICT
IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .89
TABLE 4.4 LIVESTOCK POPULATION 2001-2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91
TABLE 4.5 CATTLE DISTRIBUTION BY DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91
TABLE 4.6 WILDLIFE POPULATION IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .92
TABLE 4.7
NATURAL, HISTORIC, ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND SCENIC BEAUTY SITES OF
SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .96
TABLE 4.8 SLATE AND ORNAMENTAL STONE SOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .98
TABLE 4.9 CLAY BRICKEARTH SOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .100
TABLE 4.10 CRUSHED STONE AND SAND SOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .102
TABLE 4.11 PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND STATUS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .103
TABLE 4.13 LOCATION OF CEMETERIES IN RELATION TO RIVER COURSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .105
TABLE 5.1 POPULATION GROWTH TREND, 1981-2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .106
TABLE 5.2 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND DENSITY 1981-2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .107
TABLE 5.3 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION BY CENSUS DISTRICT 1981-2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .107
TABLE 5.4 POPULATION BY SEX AND AGE GROUP, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .108
TABLE 5.5
POPULATION AGED 12 YEARS AND OVER BY SEX AND USUAL
ECONOMIC ACTIVITY, 2001. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109
TABLE 5.6 EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY AND SEX, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
TABLE 5.7
TABLE 5.8
POPULATION BY SEX AND PRESENT DISTRICT OF RESIDENCE
(FIVE YEARS AGO), 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
POPULATION BY SEX AND PREVIOUS DISTRICT OF RESIDENCE
(FIVE YEARS AGO), 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
TABLE 5.9 NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS AND HOUSEHOLD SIZE BY CENSUS DISTRICT, 2001 . . . . . . 111
TABLE 5.10 HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD BY SEX, DISTRICT AND SIZE OF HOUSEHOLDS, 2001. . . . . . . . . 112
TABLE 5.11 NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS BY TYPE, 2001. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
TABLE 5.12
NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS BY SOURCE OF ENERGY FOR LIGHTING
AND COOKING, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
TABLE 5.13 NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE OF TOILETS FACILITY, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
TABLE 6.1 NUMBER AND OWNERSHIP OF PRIMARY SCHOOL IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . 115
TABLE 6.2
NUMBER AND OWNERSHIP OF JUNIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL IN THE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
TABLE 6.3 NUMBER AND TYPE OF HEALTH FACILITIES IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT 2004 . . . . . . . . . . 118
TABLE 6.4 SANITATION FACILITIES IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
TABLE 6.5 ROAD MAINTENANCE IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .122
TABLE 7.1 SETTLEMENT TYPE AND SIZE IN 1991 AND 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .135
TABLE 7.2
TABLE 7.3
TABLE 7.4
SETTLEMENTS THAT LOST THEIR POPULATION BELOW THE MINIMUM POPULATION
THRESHOLD OF 250 PEOPLE IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .137
SETTLEMENTS THAT FAILED TO REACH A MINIMUM POPULATION OF 250 PEOPLE
PER THEIR 1998 POPULATION FORECASTS IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT, 2001 . . . . . . . . . .138
SETTLEMENTS THAT GREW TO AT LEAST 250 PEOPLE IN 2001 TO QUALITY
FOR PROVISION OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .138
DRAFT LAND USE PLAN
ToC-III

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE 7.5 SETTLEMENTS THAT LOST THEIR QUALIFICATION FOR PROVISION OF INFRASTRUCTURE 139
TABLE 7.6 EXISTING SETTLEMENT HIERARCHY IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT, 1981-2003 . . . . . . . . . . 140
TABLE 7.7 THE LOCATIONAL CRITERIA FOR PROVISION OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES . . . 144
TABLE 7.8
TABLE 7.9
THE ASSESSMENT OF THE PROVISION, ADEQUACY OR INADEQUACY OF
INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIES AND SERVICES IN RECOGNISED SETTLEMENTS
OF THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIES AND SERVICE PROVIDED IN
DISQUALIFIED SETTLEMENTS, 2002. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
TABLE 8.1 GOAL ACHIEVEMENT MATRIX OF VARIOUS STRATEGIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
TABLE 9.1 LAND AREA OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
TABLE 9.2 MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
TABLE 9.3 THE DISTRICT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
TABLE 9.4 ROLONG LAND BOARD LAND USE MANAGEMENT PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
TABLE 9.5 ROLONG LAND BOARD -LAND USE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
TABLE 9.6 KANYE SUB LAND BOARD- LAND USE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
TABLE 9.7 KANYE SUB LAND BOARD- LAND USE MANAGEMENT PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
TABLE 9.8 MOAKANE SUB LAND BOARD -LAND USE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
TABLE 9.9 MOAKANE SUB LAND BOARD -LAND USE MANAGEMENT PLAN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
TABLE 9.10 MABUTSANE SUB LAND BOARD -LAND USE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
TABLE 9.11 MABUTSANE SUB LAND BOARD -LAND USE MANAGEMENT PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
TABLE 9.12 MMATHETHE SUB LAND BOARD -LAND USE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
TABLE 9.13 MMATHETHE SUB LAND BOARD -LAND USE MANAGEMENT PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
TABLE 9.14 PITSANE MOLOPO SUB LAND BOARD -LAND USE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX . . . . . . . . . 238
TABLE 9.15 PITSANE MOLOPO SUB LAND BOARD -LAND USE MANAGEMENT PLAN. . . . . . . . . . . . 239
TABLE 9.16 MOSHUPA SUB LAND BOARD -LAND USE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
TABLE 9.17 MOSHUPA SUB LAND BOARD -LAND USE MANAGEMENT PLAN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
TABLE 9.18 DETAILED LAYOUT PLANS FOR SEKHUTLANE, MAHOTSHWANE AND LOROLWANE . . . . 246
TABLE 9.19 IMPLEMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252
TABLE 9.20 MONITORING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
LIST OF MAPS
MAP 1.1 LOCATION MAP. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
MAP 2.1 LAND BOARDS AND SUB LAND BOARD BOUNDARIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
MAP 3.1 AVERAGE ANNUAL RAINFALL AND COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION OF SUMMER RAINFALL . . 25
MAP 3.2 AVERAGE MONTHLY MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
MAP 3.3 WIND VELOCITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
MAP 3.4 HEIGHT ZONES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
MAP 3.5 PHYSIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
MAP 3.6 GEOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
MAP 3.7 SOILS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
MAP 3.8 SOIL DEPTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
MAP 3.9 DRAINAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
MAP 3.10 TEXTURE CATEGORIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
MAP 3.11 PH CATEGORIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
MAP 3.12 AVAILABLE WATER HOLDING CAPACITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
MAP 3.13 EXCHANGEABLE CATION CAPACITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
MAP 3.14 SOIL FERTILITY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
ToC-IV
DRAFT LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
MAP 3.15 SUSCEPTIBILITY TO WATER AND WIND EROSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47
MAP 3.16 SURFACE WATER RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48
MAP 3.17 GROUNDWATER POTENTIAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51
MAP 3.18 AQUIFER LOCATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53
MAP 3.19 DEPTHS TO GROUNDWATER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56
MAP 3.20 GROUNDWATER POLLUTION VULNERABILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58
MAP 3.21 DISTRIBUTIONS OF BOREHOLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59
MAP 3.22 LIVESTOCK WATERING POINTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60
MAP 3.23 MAJOR ECOLOGICAL ZONES IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61
MAP 3.24 EAST-WEST GREENNESS SPATIAL PROFILE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63
MAP 3.25 VEGETATION STRUCTURAL CATEGORIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64
MAP 3.26 VARIABILITY OF VEGETATION DEVELOPMENT IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65
MAP 3.27
MAP 3.28
MAP 3.29
WEST-EAST PROFILE OF BIOMASS PRODUCTION ESTIMATES OVER
SOUTHERN DISTRICT (AVERAGE FOR THE GROWING SEASONS 2001-2004 . . . . . . . . . .67
BIOMASS PRODUCTION ESTIMATES OVER SOUTHERN DISTRICT
(GROWING SEASONS 2001/02 TO 2003/03. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .68
RANGELAND GRAZING CAPACITY APPROXIMATE OVER SOUTHERN DISTRICT
(GROWING SEASON 2001/02 TO 2003/04) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70
MAP 4.1 LAND TENURE SYSTEM IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72
MAP 4.2 EXISTING LAND USE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74
MAP 4.3 EXISTING LAND USE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75
MAP 4.4 EXISTING LAND USE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76
MAP 4.5 EXISTING LAND USE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77
MAP 4.6 EXISTING LAND USE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78
MAP 4.7 EXISTING LAND USE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79
MAP 4.8 EXISTING LAND USE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80
MAP 4.9 RANGELAND DEGRADATION IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT (JANUARY 1984 AND 1994) . . . . . .83
MAP 4.10 DISTRIBUTION OF SUITABLE AND UNSUITABLE SOIL FOR ARABLE FARMING. . . . . . . . . . .85
MAP 4.11 LAND SUITABILITY FOR RAINFED CROP PRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .86
MAP 4.12 SOIL SUITABILITY FOR IRRIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .87
MAP 4.13 AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .88
MAP 4.14 LENGTH OF THE GROWING SEASON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .88
MAP 4.15 WILDLIFE DISTRIBUTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .93
MAP 4.16 BIRD VIEW ON BATHOEN DAM AND SURROUNDING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .95
MAP 4.18 HISTORIC SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .97
MAP 4.19 MINERAL RESOURCES IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .99
MAP 6.1 DISTRIBUTION AND ACCESSIBILITY TO EXISTING CJSS IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . 116
MAP 6.2 DISTRIBUTION OF SSS, VTC AND BRIGADE CENTRES IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . 117
MAP 6.3 DISTRIBUTION OF HEALTH FACILITIES IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
MAP 6.4 MAIN TELECOMMS TRANSMISSION NETWORK IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . .120
MAP 6.5 POSTAL FACILITIES IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .120
MAP 6.6 POLICE STATIONS IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .121
MAP 6.7 ROAD NETWORK IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .124
MAP 6.8 ANNUAL AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .126
MAP 6.9 RAILWAY NETWORK IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .128
MAP 6.10 DISTRIBUTION OF BOREHOLES USED FOR VILLAGE WATER SUPPLY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .131
DRAFT LAND USE PLAN
ToC-V

TABLE OF CONTENTS
MAP 6.11 POWER SUPPLY IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF SER . . . . . . . . . . . 132
MAP 7.1
AN EXAMPLE OF A TYPICAL SCATTERED /DISPERSED SETTLEMENT IN SOUTHERN
DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
MAP 7.1 AN EXAMPLE OF A TYPICAL NUCLEATED SETTLEMENT IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . 135
MAP 7.3 EXISTING SETTLEMENT DISTRIBUTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
MAP 7.4 EXISTING SETTLEMENT HIERARCHY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
MAP 7.5 DISTANCE TO SETTLEMENTS IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
MAP 8.1 REGIONAL SCALE DEVELOPMENT SUITABILITY MODEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
MAP 8.5 ALTERNATIVE I: STATUS QUO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
MAP 8.5 ALTERNATIVE II: MIXED LAND USE AND DEZONING OF WMA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
MAP 8.7 ALTERNATIVE III: RATIONAL LAND USE DEVELOPMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
MAP 9.1
BIOPHYSICAL PARAMETERS USED FOR GENERAL PURPOSE LAND RESOURCE BASE
CLASSIFICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
MAP 9.2 ENVIRONMENTAL ZONES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
MAP 9.3 ENVIRONMETANL ZONE “A”: LAND SUITABIULITY CLASSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
MAP 9.4 LAND USE ZONES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
MAP 9.5 POTENTIAL AREA FOR TOURISM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
MAP 9.6 PROPOSED MAIN ROAD NETWORK IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
MAP 9.7 PROPOSED RAILWAY LINKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
MAP 9.8 PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES FOR ROLONG LAND BOARD AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
MAP 9.9 PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES FOR KANYE SUB - LAND BOARD AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
MAP 9.10 PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES FOR MOAKANE SUB - LAND BOARD AREA . . . . . . . . . . 223
MAP 9.11 PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES FOR MABUSTANE LAND BOARD AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
MAP 9.12 PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES FOR MMATHETHE SUB - LAND BOARD AREA . . . . . 232
MAP 9.13 PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES FOR PITSANE - MOLOPO SUB - LAND BOARD AREA . 237
MAP 9.14 PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES FOR MOSHUPA SUB - LAND BOARD AREA . . . . . . . . . . 241
MAP 9.15 DETAILED LAYOUT PLAN FOR LOROLWANE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
MAP 9.16 DETAILED LAYOUT PLAN FOR SEKHUTLANE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
MAP 9.17 DETAILED LAYOUT PLAN FOR MAHOTSHWANE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 2.1
LINKAGE BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF PLANS IN THE DISTRICT PLANNING
PROCESS WITHIN THE NATIONAL CONTEXT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
FIGURE 3.1 SOIL EROSION ASSESSMENT APPROACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
FIGURE 4.1 AN ILLUSTRATION OF ‘PIOSPHERE EFFECTS’ AROUND WATER POINT IN THE DISTRICT . . 82
FIGURE 9.1 SPATIAL PROFILE OF BIOMASS PRODUCTION ESTIMATES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
LIST OF CHARTS
CHART 9.1 STATISTICAL CONTRIBUTION OF EACH PROPOSED AND EXISTING LAND USE ZONE . . . 182
ABBREVIATION AND ACRONYMS
AI
AVHRR
AWC
BRIMP
CBA
Artificial Insemination
Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer
Available Water Holding Capacity
Botswana Range Inventory Monitoring Project
Cost Benefit Analysis
ToC-VI
DRAFT LAND USE PLAN

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CBNRM
DDP
DEM
DLUPU
DOL
DPA
DSM
DSS
DSWM
DTRP
ECC
EPA
EZA
GAM
ISNDVI
LBs
LSU
MVC
NAMPAADD
NDP
NDVI
NIR
NPP
NSP
NSP
NWMP
PET
RADs
RMP
RSA
SD
SDILUP
SDP
SDPS
SEPR
SERMP
SHHA
SLBs
TKH
TLIMS
USLE
WMA
Community Based Natural Resources Management
District Development Plan
Digital Elevation Model
District Land Use Planning Unit
Department of Lands
Development Planning Area
Department of Survey and Mapping
District Settlements Strategy
Department of Sanitation and Waste Management
Department of Town and Regional Planning
Exchangeable Cation Capacity
Extension Planning Areas
Environmental Zoning Analysis
Goal Achievement Matrix
Integrated Seasonal Normalized Difference Vegetation Index
Land Boards
Livestock Unit
Maximum Value Composites
National Agriculture Master Plan for Arable
Agriculture and Diary Development
National Development Plan
Normalized Difference Vegetation Index
Near Infrared
National Physical Plan
National Settlement Plan
National Settlement Policy
National Water Master Plan
Potential Evapotranspiration
Remote Area Dwellers
Resource Management Plan
Republic of South Africa
Southern District
Southern District Integrated Land Use Plan
Settlement Development Plan
Southern District Planning Study
South Eastern Planning Region
South Eastern Region Master Plan
Self Help Housing Agency
Sub Land Boards
Trans Kalahari Highway
Tribal Land Information Management System
Universal Soil Loss Equation
Wildlife Management Area
ToC-VII
DRAFT LAND USE PLAN

REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
INTRODUCTION
1
1.1 BACKGROUND
1.1.1 In 1987, a Land Use Zoning Plan was prepared for Southern District. The plan was approved
by Ngwaketse Land Board and Southern District Council respectively. It was however not
gazetted because the Tribal Land Act had no provision for the gazettement of land use plans.
The non-statutory nature of the land use plan made it non-binding on the various
implementing bodies. This to a large extent explains why the plan was largely ignored and not
implemented. Over time, the plan has been overtaken by events and as a result is currently
out-dated. Therefore, the quest by the Local Authorities to have an Integrated Land Use Plan
which will be a tool in resolving current land use conflicts experienced in the District cannot be
underscored.
1.1.2 The absence of an Integrated Land Use Plan could only mean that land and other natural
resources were being committed or allocated for uses for which there was no sound
assessment of their potential, vulnerability and risks. All decisions for land use zoning and
apportionment must at all times be based on the need to achieve sustainable use. Sustainable
use of land and other natural resources can only be achieved in situations where carrying
capacities and vulnerability of resources are known and accordingly zoned. It is in this light
that a thorough analysis of the prevailing state of the environment will be undertaken.
1.1.3 Some of the crucial land use issues and problems that are discernible in the District include
the following:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
high competition between livestock and wildlife for grazing areas, with the former
encroaching into the latter;
conflicts between pastoral and arable farming resulting in mixed farming being
advocated;
pressure to allocate fields and other land uses within the Wildlife Management Areas
(WMA);
commercialisation of sand and gravel extraction leading to despoliation of the
environment;
over-harvesting of natural resources such as fuel woods;
depletion of rangeland resources.
settlement encroachment into good arable land;
(viii) the protection of the wildlife migration corridor between Kweneng and Kgalagadi
Districts;
(ix)
(x)
(xi)
(xii)
the location of cemeteries along river beds and on flood plains thereby constituting a
danger to ground water resources;
overwhelming applications received for the development of tourism related facilities
e.g. guest houses, camping sites, lodges etc along the Trans Kalahari Highway
(TKH);
the Remote Area Dweller (RAD) settlements of Sekhutlane and Thankane are
surrounded by ranches providing no direct access to communal land for these
settlements; and
self allocation of land in planning areas, unrecognized settlements and lands areas.
REPORT OF SURVEY
1

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1.4 It is evidently clear that the Government is sensitive to the situation and the concern is well
founded. Without doubt, the intention of Government is to address the land use problems
and issues discernible in the district. It is against this backdrop that the Government
commissioned Environmetrix Proprietary Limited to prepare an Integrated Land Use Plan
for Southern District. The Southern District Integrated Land Use Plan (SDILUP) is expected
to provide guidance on what land use activities should take place and where, in a
sustainable manner in the District.
1.2 LOCATION AND SIZE
1.2.1 The Southern District is located in the South Eastern Planning Region (SEPR) of Botswana,
between latitudes 23 and 29 degrees South of the Equator and between 23 and 29 degrees
East of Greenwich Meridian. The Plan Area is bordered to the north by Kweneng District; to
the east by South East District; to the south by the Republic of South Africa (RSA); and
Kgalagadi District to the west. (See Map 1.1). With a land mass of 26 776 km 2 it is the
sixth largest district in Botswana and the second largest in SEPR.
1.2.2 In 1981, a total of 119 653 people resided in the district. A decade later, the population
increased to 147 389 people. The 2001 Population and Housing Census revealed that a
total of 171 652 people resided in the plan area. Correspondingly, population density
increased from 4.5 person per km 2 in 1981 to 5.5 and 6.4 persons per km 2 in 1991 and
2001 respectively. It is important to note, that the District’s national share of population
declined from 12.7 percent in 1981 to 11.1 percent and 10.2 percent in 1991 and 2001
respectively. While the various districts of Gaborone, Kweneng and South East that are in
close proximity to Southern District have shown an increase in the national share of
population, the converse is the case with the Southern District. The situation is easily
attributable to the decline in the attractiveness of the District.
1.2.3 There are two major centres in the District namely: Kanye and Moshupa. Kanye is the
administrative headquarters of the district. Currently, there exist two sub-districts, namely:
Mabutsane and Good Hope in the District. However, the South Eastern Region Master
Plan (SERMP) proposes two additional sub-districts of Moshupa and Maokane.
1.3 STATUTORY AND POLICY PROVISIONS
1.3.1 The legislation that underpins the land use plan is the Tribal Land Act amended in 1993.
The amendment in the Act is designed to create a statutory framework for the preparation
and adoption of the land use plan for the District.
1.3.2 Section 17 of the Tribal Land Act as amended in 1993 provides in subsection (1) that “A
land board shall, after due consultation with the district council, determine and define land
use zoning within the tribal areas, and may from time to time make amendments thereto”.
1.3.3 Section 17(2), require the Land Board to furnish the Minister with details of all
determinations, definitions or amendments made under subsection (1). In addition, section
17(2) also provides that if the Minister is satisfied with the descriptions of the land
concerned and that the land use zoning is in accordance with section 37 in respect of which
the types of land use for which land may be zoned, he shall give notice thereof in the
gazette. Specifically, section 17(3) provides that “The land board shall not make grants of
land under this part for any land use which is in conflict with the use for which the land is
zoned”
2 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
100000
7150000 7200000 7250000 7300000 7350000
Morwamosu
Kokong
100000
150000
Mabutsane
Keng
Khakhea
Kgalagadi
150000
200000
Sekoma
Thankane
200000
Semane
250000
300000
350000
Kweneng
Jwaneng
Pitseng/Ralekgetho
Sese
Mokhomma
Manyana
Moshupa
Tsonyane Sesung Moshaneng Ranaka
Maokane
Seherelela
Gasita
Lorolwane
Selokolela
Mmathethe
Kanye
Lotlhakane
Magotlhwane
Segwagwa
Maisane
Molapowabojang
Mogojwegojwe
Lekgolobotlo
Gopong
Ntlhantlhe
Kgomokasitwa
Lorwana
Maruswa
Gathwane Digawane
Sekhutlane
Metlobo
Gamajalela Leywana
Mogoriapitse
Kgoro Pitsane
Good Hope
Potokwe
Pitsane
Tswaaneng
Siding
Mokgomane
Tlhareseleele
Metlojane
Rakhuna
Sedibeng
Hebron
Ramatlabama
Mabule
Leporung
Phihitshwane
Tshedilamolomo
Dikhukhung
R.S.A
250000
300000
350000
South East
Source: DSM
Scale: 1:1,600,000 Map 1.1
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Client: Southern District Council
REPORT OF SURVEY
Cultivated Area
Farms/Ranches
Settlement
Main (Primary) Road
Railway
Secondary Road
District Boundary
International Boundary
Jwaneng_Planning_area
South Africa
Kgalagadi
Southern
South East
Kgatleng
Kweneng
Ghanzi
Central
Namibia
North East
Ngamiland
Zimbabwe
Chobe
Zambia
LOCATION MAP
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
3 REPORT OF SURVEY

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.3.4 The Tribal Land Act at Section 17(4) provides that “After consultation with the district
council, village development committee, tribal authorities and any other interested
institutions, the land board may determine management plans and their revision from time
to time, for the purpose of assisting or giving guidance on the use and development of such
land use zone within a tribal area”.
1.3.5 By logical extension, both the Ngwaketse and Rolong Land Boards require an integrated
land use plan which will guide the rational utilisation of land within the district. This in effect
makes the SDLUP an important tool in the decision making of the two Land Boards.
1.3.6 The National Policy on Tribal Grazing Land (Government. Paper No.2 of 1975) under Part
V: The Rules for Zoning, Allocation and Leases, require the Land Board to zone tribal
grazing land. Under the policy, tribal grazing land is zoned for communal grazing,
commercial grazing and reserved grazing land to accommodate future farmers.
1.4 PURPOSE OF THE PLAN
1.4.1 The main purpose of the Southern District Integrated Land Use Plan (SDILUP), is to provide
a single unifying document that will guide and shape land and other resources utilisation
and development in a rational, equitable, sustainable and balanced manner throughout the
entire district. Equally important, the plan is meant to serve the following purposes:
(i) It is expected to provide a solid practical guide to decision making processes and
implementation of land use activities.
(ii) It should provide a basis for land use zoning and allocation to the Land Boards
and Subordinate Land Boards in the district.
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
The plan also translates, supplements and implements National, Regional and
District policies, programmes, strategies and plans.
It will be a source of information about the district from a planning and
development perspective.
It is expected to be used by the Central Government, Local Authorities and
Parastatals to coordinate land use activities in the district.
It will help identify sub regions that are poorly endowed and examine ways to
improve the situation, thereby assisting in bridging the gap between the less
endowed areas and the more endowed areas of the district.
It will provide a framework for the promotion of conservation of natural resources for
the benefit of present and future generations.
1.5 UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES, APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY
1.5.1 A number of principles underpin the preparation of the SDILUP. These include the following:
(i)
(ii)
Procedural Fairness – in preparing the plan, the people who could be potentially
affected by a decision will be given an opportunity to participate in the planning process.
Consultation Before Action – public involvement is considered a fundamental
requirement in the preparation of the SDILUP. The purpose is to develop planning
products that, to the greatest extent possible, are based on substantial effective
agreement on a course of action. Planning recommendations that are supported by
a wide range of interests generally result in more durable decisions.
4 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
Systematic Procedure – strategies for managing lands and resources into the
future, including the resolution of resource-use conflicts, will in this plan be
addressed through a series of sequential, systematic planning steps that include
identifying objectives and needs, collecting and analyzing information, developing
land use alternatives, choosing appropriate strategies, and defining implementation
actions.
Plans Address Problems – in addition to setting land use strategies for the future,
integrated planning will be undertaken to resolve priority resource management
issues and address conflicts between resource uses. Issues can be the result of
conflicting land use policies at a broad scale or area-specific. In all cases, the plan
will respond to the needs of planning participants – either resource management
organisation that need a particular solution, or local governmental participants who
are concerned about potential effects of decisions.
Responsiveness – the plan is designed to be responsive to changing needs and
circumstances during the planning process and in the future when revisions or
amendments are needed. With regard to this it should be pointed out that flexibility
exists to adjust planning and public involvement procedures to suit specific
situations and the requirements of various planning participants.
1.5.2 A number of complimentary approaches have been adopted in the preparation of this plan
as follows:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
Interdisciplinary Approach, which will ensure the comprehensive consideration of
the full range of natural resources, interests and values within the Southern district
area, these resources, interests and values within the Southern district area. These
resources and their uses (both renewable and non-renewable) are reflected in the
information, concerns and interests that stakeholders will bring to the planning process
and plan preparation.
Sectoral Approach, which suggests that the study will be undertaken sectorally to
ensure that all critical components are covered. These sectors include: Physical
environment (natural and manmade); economic; social/human; and institutional/
management. Each deliverable will be analysed in terms of the above sectors. The
reason for this approach is to ensure integration of all disciplines without being
departmentally bound.
Fundamental Approach, which suggests that the study will not be bound by
administrative divisions but will relate to functional areas and divisions because the
environment, as well as development, especially resource-based economic
activities, and urban and rural dynamics relate to functional areas rather than
administrative boundaries. Due to the fact that the above-mentioned sectors
normally function within administrative boundaries we believe that functional areas
should be the basis of planning. Management systems could later be implemented
without severing the functionality. This suggestion should lead to the optimization of
both natural and man-made resources.
Integrated Land Use and Resources Management Approach, will be deployed
to ensure that development programmes, plans and proposals are linked and
coordinated with the environmental (land and resource) management strategies.
Due to the fact that development depends on relationships between various
sectors, it is of utmost importance to integrate spectrally in order to optimize land
and resource use opportunities, while minimizing conflicts, as well as resources
degradation and depletion.
REPORT OF SURVEY
5

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.5.3 The state of land and other natural resources have guided the plan preparation in terms of
potentials/carrying capacities, threats, conflicts, opportunities and impacts exerted by
human, livestock and wildlife populations as well as the outcome from consultations with all
relevant stakeholders in meetings and workshops to seek their inputs; consultation with the
communities to incorporate their views, needs and aspirations into the plan; regular contact
and reporting of work progress to the client, derivation of land use zones, evaluation of
options and determination of major and secondary uses within zones; making of proposals
for an integrated, sustainable and optimal land use zoning; and implementation plan,
including monitoring and review.
1.5.4 Essentially, the plan has two major parts: state of the environment or prevailing situation
and land use proposals. The details can be gleaned from Table 1.1
Table 1.1: Deliverables and Activity System
Source: Environmetrix Pty Limited, 2004
6 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
1.6 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
1.6.1 Goal 1: To establish an applicable land use zone system to provide sufficient knowledge
and information on the limits of land use zones for different utilisation and development.
This will be achieved through:
Objectives
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
The identification and delineation of land on the basis of comparable physio-biotic,
characteristics (climate, elevation, landforms, soils, hydrology), into land zones.
The assessment of the inherent land qualities and their constraints and
opportunities of the identified land use zones with the identification and
characterization of present forms of land cover or land use per land zone.
The identification of prospective land utilisation types or production systems in
accordance with the wishes of the stakeholders, as well as the identification of the
physio-biotic and socio-economic utilisation (technologic) requirement of the
preferred land utilisation types.
1.6.2 Goal 2: To establish an applicable land use zone system that will be able to serve as a
direct basis for the improvement and/or formulation of a sound long term development as
well as land and other natural resources management strategies. This will be realised
through:
Objectives
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
The analysis, determination and publication of land use zones in terms of their
receptive capacities, threats, opportunities and quality to sustain the preferred land
utilisation option.
The formulation of different “what if” land use scenarios based on the socioeconomic
conditions and expected population growth and distribution in the district.
The identification and formulation of policies, strategies and measures with active
participation of all stakeholders to be implemented to move from the current to the
recommended land use.
Provision of assessment of alternative land uses, through the use of platforms for
negotiation and decision making that include all stakeholders, against the needs
and aspirations of all the population groups to be and involved and affected.
1.6.3 Goal 3: To determine a long term strategy for the sustainable use of the environment and its
component system of resources, including measures to mitigate/eliminate negative
consequences of the hitherto practice. This will be achieved through:
Objectives:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
The inventorisation and analysis of the district’s natural resources in terms of their
qualitative and quantitative values, receptive capacities and spatial distribution.
The identification of major issues of the district’s current development in relation to
the receptive capacity of its natural resources available and their evaluation with
regard to the socio-economic and environmental disturbances they cause.
The review of outcomes of the existing economic and social trends in the district in
terms of their implications on the use and quality of natural resources.
REPORT OF SURVEY
7

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
The assessment of the existing problems of utilisation of natural resources.
The evaluation of the loss and fragmentation of habitats as a result of development.
The assessment of the impact of the current programmes and policies, as well as
institutional and legal measures and their effectiveness in relation to the sustainable
utilisation of natural resources in the district.
The setting of sustainability objectives and criteria for the district along with the
review of the capacity, potentials and constraints of its natural resource base to
sustain the existing and future development.
(viii) The determination of a long-term strategy best suited to facilitate the realisation of
imum level of benefits from all of the district’s natural resources along with concept
and measures of protection and enhancement of the quality of the district’s
environment, including critical habitats and the areas of high natural value and
cultural heritage.
(ix)
The preparation of a series of maps and accompanying key information showing
receptive capacity and sensitivity of the environment, as well as quantity, quality
and distribution of its component system of resources within the district.
1.6.4 Goal 4: To provide an integrative platform in legislative and administrative sphere for the
effective land use and resource management, monitoring and resolution of conflicting
demands on the use of land. This will be achieved through:
Objectives
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
The cadastal survey and registration of plots in primary and secondary centres, and
eventually in tertiary centres, before allocation.
Preparation and updating maps showing plot numbers, street and location names.
Provision of Land Boards with adequate Land Surveyors, Physical Planners and
Lands Officers to provide advice, execute Land Boards decision, prepare and
update maps.
The preparation of management plans for each of the Sub Land Board areas and
delegation of all land allocation to Sub Land Boards where they have been
established, while in such arrangement, the Land Board will deal with policy,
legislation and appeals from the Sub Land Boards.
The level of qualifications for Land Board and Sub Land Board members be further
increased as land matters are increasingly becoming more complex.
1.6.5 Goal 5: To provide a GIS capability within the Land Boards, Sub Land Boards, and DLUPU
in the district. This will be achieved through:
Objectives
(i)
(ii)
The creation of a common GIS data base to provide various GIS applications in
supporting a range of plan preparation and implementation activities.
The use of the GIS as a complete and well-documented system for managing data
and supporting spatial analysis and modeling, especially in environmental zoning,
land capability/sustainability analysis, as well as for execution of the “what if” type of
land use scenario analysis used to examine and evaluate the consequences of
different planning scenarios.
8 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
(iii)
Provision of GIS knowledge, operation and application by Land Boards, Sub Land
Boards and DLUPU.
1.7 PREVIOUS PLANNING INITIATIVES AND EFFORTS
Southern District Settlement Strategy (1981)
1.7.1 A District Settlement Strategy was prepared by the Department of Town and Regional
Planning in 1981 on behalf of Southern District Council. The plan was never approved and
therefore was not implemented. Subsequently, there was a need for the preparation of a
new Settlement Strategy.
Southern District Planning Study (1988)
1.7.2 In 1988 Environmental Consultants produced the final report of Southern District Planning
Study (SDPS) on behalf of the Ministry of Local Government and Southern District Council.
The major goals of the study were two fold and were aimed at compiling an inventory of the
District’s resources and using the resource inventory to delineate potential Development
Planning Areas (DPA) and Extension Planning Areas (EPA) in the District.
1.7.3 The study provided invaluable information on physiography, biology / ecology, agro-ecology,
population, land tenure and use, extension and administration areas, the settlement
hierarchy including infrastructure and services. The Report made proposals on DPAs and
EPAs.
1.7.4 The SDPS proposed 6 DPAs of Mabutsane, Jwaneng, Moshupa, Kanye, Mmathethe and
Good Hope. It further proposed EPAs be developed with each DPA, resulting in a total of
22 EPAs for the Southern District.
1.7.5 The Planning Study created the DPAs and EPAs for the following reasons:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
Manageable areas would improve execution and monitoring of existing Government
policies and programmes.
Greater consultation and participation at grass-roots (settlement) level which would
improve plan formulation and implementation.
Extension services offered by various Ministries and Departments could be
coordinated more effectively in smaller units such as the EPAs.
EPAs and DPAs would make supervision of field projects more efficient and
integrated rural development could be implemented more readily at this level.
1.7.6 Information garnered from the planning study has proved to be useful in subsequent
planning efforts in the District. Similarly, DPAs and EPAs have provided a basis for the
delineation of Land Board and Sub-Land Board areas of jurisdiction.
1.7.7 It is essential highlighting that care should be taken not mistake this planning study for a
plan although it makes planning recommendations within the limited scope defined in the
Terms of Reference regarding the compiling of the resource inventory and delineation of
DPAs and EPAs. In this respect, although the study has given insight into planning issues
unraveled this study they have not been grappled with head-on in an attempt to resolve the
identified problems. In order to deal with land and related issues inn the District it therefore
became necessary to prepare an Integrated Land Use Plan for the District.
REPORT OF SURVEY
9

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Southern District Settlement Strategy (1991-2011)
1.7.8 The District has an operative settlement Strategy with a 20 year operational time horizon
(1991-2011) with 6 years remaining before it expires. The primary purpose of the plan was
to delineate a settlement hierarchy for the provision of infrastructure and services. The
District’s settlement strategy preceded the preparation of the integrated land use plan which
should have provided the spatial development framework for the development of the entire
District. The settlement strategy is essential in dealing with the settlement hierarchy and
provision of infrastructure and services but cannot adequately address other pressing land
use issues in the District without deviating from its core purpose.
1.7.9 While the Southern District Settlement Strategy has dealt profoundly with its core function
an attempt has been made to ensure that other sectors such as land and resource use,
agriculture, wildlife, tourism, district administration etc are catered for since settlements are
not surrounded by a vacuum. However, it is apparent considering the various issues
emanating from the District that apart from settlement hierarchy, infrastructure and service
issues more focus is required in order to deal with the District’s issues more widely and
comprehensively regarding all major land use issues.
1.7.10 The Settlement Strategy recommended the designation of land for specific uses such as
arable agriculture, livestock production and settlements with a view to minimizing land use
conflicts. Land use conflicts have not been resolved to date and continue to flourish
impeding the rational development of the District. The Integrated Land Use Plan provides
prospects for integrated development of the District.
Settlement Development Plans
1.7.11 A number of settlements in the District have settlement development plans. Kanye is the
only declared planning area in the District. It has an operative development plan. Other
settlements with development plans are Moshupa, Goodhope, Mmathethe, Manyana and
Mabutsane. As these settlements expand laterally, land use conflicts arise as arable fields
and pasture become displaced. It is fundamental that settlement development plans be
complemented by an integrated land use plan that caters for land and resource use on the
edges of settlements.
10 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTITUTIONAL
ARRANGEMENTS
2
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.1.1 This section outlines the administrative and institutional arrangements that exist in the
Southern District linking the different elements of the integrated land use planning process to
the District Development Plan and other plans that is, Economic and Social plans, Physical or
Settlement, Environmental and Annual plans (See Figure 2.1)
2.1.2 The different elements of the integrated land use plan are closely interrelated to other
planning processes therefore the understanding of the interrelationship between the
institutional framework that drives the different types of plans is a pre-condition for
understanding the administrative and institutional arrangements in the land use planning
process.
Figure 2.1: Linkages between the Different Levels of Plans in the District Planning Process
within the National Context.
National Development Plan
(NDP)
National Physical Plan
(NPP)
National Settlement
Policy (NSP)
National Sector Plans
(National Water Master Plan;
Agricultural Master Plan)
Regional Master Plan
District Development Plan
(DDP)
District Settlement Strategy
(DSS)
Integrated District Land
Use Plan
Settlement Development
Plans (SDP)
Resource Management
Plan (RMP)
District Environmental
Action Plan
REPORT OF SURVEY
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD
11

CHAPTER 2
ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
2.1.3 The District’s Integrated Land Use Planning supports settlement planning and forms the
basis for the socio-economic, environmental and other sectoral plans to meet the District’s
developmental needs. It provides the basis that serves the Local Authority (District Council,
District Administration, Land Board and Tribal Administration) to select and put into practice
the optimal land use that ensures the protection and the conservation (wise-use) of the
District’s natural resource (capital) base.
2.1.4 The process of planning, preparation, and implementation of the District’s Integrated Land
Use Plan brings together all the institutions at the District level through a specialised
committee made up of District Offices co-ordinating Central and Local Government policies
and District Development.
2.2 EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
The Overall Responsibility for Land Use Planning
2.2.1 Reminiscent of Central Government statutory portfolios, the Ministry of Lands and Housing
is charged with the overall responsibility for land use planning through the Department of
Lands (DoL), the Department of Town and Regional Planning (DTRP) and Land Boards
(LBs). Owing to the crosscutting nature of land use planning, other Central Government
institutions involved are:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
Division of Land Utilization, Ministry of Agriculture for agricultural land utilization
Department of Wildlife and National Parks, Ministry of Environment, Wildlife and
Tourism for wildlife management areas, parks protection, reserves, community and
commercial wildlife ranches
Forestry and Agricultural Resources Conservation, Ministry of Environment, Wildlife
and Tourism for forestry resources management, herbage preservation, veldt and
range resources conservation
National Conservation Strategy Agency, Ministry of Environment, Wildlife and
Tourism for the co-ordination of the National Policy on Natural Resources
Conservation and Development
Specific Responsibility
2.2.2 In terms of specific responsibility, DTRP is responsible for the preparation of settlement
development plans for declared Planning Areas under the Town and Country Planning Act
(Cap.32:09) on behalf of the Minister for adoption, approval or modification as deemed fit.
DTRP in concert with the District Council are responsible for the preparation of the District
Settlement Strategy, Development Plans for non-declared Planning Areas and Detailed
Layout Plans.
2.2.3 Land Boards in collaboration with the Department of Lands are responsible for the
preparation, implementation and monitoring of the District’s Integrated Land Use Plan.
2.2.4 To facilitate the Land Boards and the Department of Lands functional responsibility at the
District level, a District’s Land Use Planning Unit (DLUPU), a technical committee, is in
place to undertake the preparation, implementation, land-use conflict resolution and the
general co-ordination of the District’s integrated land use planning process. The trend in
the District is that the DLUPU is chaired by an officer from the Land Board. Other
members are the Lands Officer, the Physical Planner, the Economic Planner, a Land Use
12 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Officer or Range Ecologist, the Land Board Secretary, the District Agricultural Officer, the
Game Warden, the Animal Health & Production Officer and the Secretary to the District
Conservation Committee.
2.2.5 In general, DLUPU performs the following functions:-
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
Plans co-ordination of the land use plan.
Provides technical support including national planning standards.
Provides technical support in an advisory capacity to the Land Boards in land
allocation and land use conflict resolution.
Responds by prioritising and synthesising the community needs in land utilization.
Interprets the land use plan and zoning in terms of the community needs and
wants.
Considers existing settlement characteristics and environmental setting in line with
the land use plan.
Assesses the implementation capacity of existing institutional frameworks for future
improvement and modification of the District Integrated Land Use Plan.
Administrative Structures
2.2.6 In the Southern District, the land administrators are the 2 main Land Boards, the Ngwaketse
and the Rolong Land Boards. With the exception of the Rolong Land Board, the Ngwaketse
Land Board operates through 5 Sub Land Boards (SLBs) for Kanye, Mmathethe,
Mabutsane, Phitshane Molopo and Moshupa. The LBs and SLBs boundaries of jurisdiction
are represented on Map 2.1.
2.2.7 Land Board functions: The functions of the 2 main LBs in the District are as defined under
section 13 of the Tribal Land Act (Cap.32:02) as amended in 1993 and are as follows:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
The granting of rights to use land;
The cancellation of the grant of any rights to use any tribal land;
The imposition of restrictions on the use of tribal land;
Authorising any change of user of tribal land;
Authorising any transfer of tribal land as vested in and performed by the Land
Board acting in accordance with powers conferred on it or under the Tribal Land
Act; and
Hearing of appeals from any decision of Sub Land Board in respect of any of its
functions conferred on such Sub Land Board.
2.2.8 Functional restriction: The LBs are required under section 17 of the Tribal Land Act to
determine and define land use zoning within tribal land, which once approved and gazetted
by the Minister, the LBs are barred from granting any land that is contrary to the gazetted
land use zoning plan. It is provided under the same section that the Boards may determine
management plans and their revision for the purposes of assisting or providing guidance on
the use and designation of land use zones.
2.2.9 Sub Land Board function: The Ngwaketse SLBs perform the following functions on behalf of
the main LB:
REPORT OF SURVEY
13

CHAPTER 2
ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
Allocation and variation of customary land rights for grazing, arable lands (masimo),
civic and community and residential purposes;
making of recommendations for cancellation of customary law land rights and
common law land grants to the main LB; and
hearing and deciding on disputes regarding customary law land rights in their areas
of jurisdiction.
2.2.10 Appeals against LB decisions: All appeals against the decisions of the LBs in the Southern
District are lodged with the Land Tribunal in Gaborone. Both the Appellant and the LB
appear before the Tribunal to give evidence, either on their own or through their legal
representatives. Either the Appellant or the LB at the High Court of Appeal may appeal the
decisions of the Land Tribunal.
Map 2.1 Land Boards & Sub Land Boards Boundaries
160000 240000 320000
Morwamosu
Kokong
Mabutsane
!(
Kweneng
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
REPORT OF SURVEY
Scale: 1:1,650,000
´
0 10 20 40 60
Kilometers
Legend
Khakhea
Keng
Sekoma
Thankane
District Boundary
International Kgalagadi
Boundary
Ngwaketse/Rolong Land Board Boundaries
Ngwaketse Sub Land Board Boundaries
") Land Board Headquarter
!( Sub Land Board Headquarter
Ngwaketse Land Board
Kanye Sub Land Board
Moshupa Sub Land Board
Mabutsane Sub Land Board
Mmathethe Sub Land Board
Pitsane Sub Land Board
Rolong Land Board
Jwaneng_Planning_area
Jwaneng Township
Mine
!( Settlemnts
Semane
Mokhomma
Maokane
Lorolwane
Sekhutlane
Mabule
Jwaneng
Sese
Tsonyane
Tshedilamolomo
Seherelela
Gasita
Tswaaneng
Metlobo
Dikhukhung
Sesung
Selokolela
Sedibeng
Phitshane
Molopo
Pitseng/Ralekgetho
Mokgomane
!(
Moshaneng
Kanye
Mmathethe
!(
")
Lotlhakane
Hebron
!(
Lorwana
Ranaka
Maisane
Segwagwa
Molapowabojang
Mogoriapitse
Moshupa
Gathwane
")
Manyana
Gopong
Maruswa
Digawane
Gamajalela
Leywana
Pitsane
Kgoro Potokwe
Metlojane
Magotlhwane
Mogojwegojwe
Good Hope
R.S.A
Phihitshwane
Lekgolobo
Ntlhantlh
Kgomokasitwa
Tlharese
Rakhuna
Ramatlabam
Source: Southern District Council
2.3 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES IN MANAGEMENT OF THE DISTRICT
LAND AREA AND ITS RESOURCES
2.3.1 The LB and SLBs are in charge of tribal land allocation for residential; commercial;
industrial; civic and community; transport and infrastructure; agriculture, wildlife and
forestry; open spaces; sports and recreational purposes in settlements. They are
14 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
responsible for granting land rights on tribal land outside settlements for pastoral and arable
agriculture; commercial farms and ranches; wildlife management areas, surface rights for
mining minerals and extraction of water, river sand, pit sand, gravel, clay, etc. In addition,
the extraction of water requires permission from the Water Apportionment Board, while
permission will also be required to be sought from the Director of Mines for the extraction of
river sand, pit sand, gravel and crushed stones.
2.3.2 The Ngwaketse LB and its SLBs are responsible for managing an area of 25 796km 2 of
land, while Rolong LB manages an area covering 946km 2 . The remaining 34 km 2 of
Ramatlabama – State Land is managed by the DoL. However, when the tribalisation of
Ramatlabama State Land, is complete it will become tribal land under the management of
the Rolong LB increasing the area of land under its management to 980km 2 .
2.3.3 It is the LBs responsibility to ensure thorough inspections that land is being used and
developed for the purpose it was allocated. Land that is being used or developed for a
different purpose or is not being used at all may be forfeited by the applicant and the rights
cancelled by the LB. For rights to be changed, the Board’s approval must first be secured
and endorsed on the land rights certificate before the applicant can effect such changes.
2.3.4 The role of the Department of Surveys and Mapping (DSM) is to provide maps required for
land use planning and the guiding of land allocation by LBs. DSM is responsible for
ensuring that land surveying is carried out by qualified Land Surveyors including those of
the LB. This is achieved through the registration of qualified Land Surveyors and approval
of land survey diagrams and plans prepared by registered Land Surveyors.
2.3.5 There is a serious mismatch between the statutorily expected roles and the observed or
actual achievements of the various insititutions with respect to land use planning in the
District. First, DSM does not have the staturtory boundaries of the Land Boards and Sub -
Land Boards. Furthermore, these boundaries have not been demarcated on the ground.
This causes a problem of cross boundary allocation. Second, there is a serious shortage of
professionals, most in terms of number and quality. The two Land Boards are ill-equipped
with professional staff, most especially qualified Land Surveyors. This has a serious
bearing on the efficiency of the institution. Third, most of the settlements in the District are
developing amorphously or organically, thereby resulting in settlements sprawl and unwise
use of land. This is largely because the settlements do not have development plans guiding
their growth. DTRP which is charged with the responsibility of preparing settlement plans
nationwide does not have the adequate staff or the financial resources to accomplish this
task.
2.4 DECISION MAKING PROCESS AND LAND USE CONFLICT
RESOLUTION MECHANISM
2.4.1 The decision making process in the District is democratic, in that half of the members of the
LBs are directly elected by the communities served while the Minister appoints the other
half. The members, being residents of areas they serve, are very knowledgeable of the
needs and aspirations of their communities and are accountable to them.
2.4.2 The District has been apportioned into the Rolong LB area and 5 Ngwaketse SLB areas in
order to decentralise and speed up the decision making process. However, it is noted that
the decision making process is still lengthy, particularly in the Kanye SLB, where the public
has raised concern regarding several applications that still take over a year before
decisions are made. In order to seek redress to this situation, the Botswana Government
REPORT OF SURVEY
15

CHAPTER 2
ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
has approved a proposal to establish a new SLB in Maokane to relieve Kanye SLB of its
congestion. The new SLB is expected to be operational before the end of the current
financial year and will serve an area encompassing the settlements of Maokane, Gasita,
Samane, Mokhomma, Tlhankane, Sese, Naledi, Selokolela, Sesung, Lehoko, Seherelela
and Betesankwe. In addition, boundaries are to be aligned between Phitshane Molopo and
Mmathethe in order to reduce the workload for Mmathethe SLB.
2.4.3 Land use conflict resolution is an intricate and involving exercise, demanding patience,
thorough consultation of the concerned parties. Conflicts arise because of two main
reasons as follows:
i) Conflicts Between Natural Capability and Existing Land Use: Beneficial utilisation of land
is usually hampered by some existing land uses that do not permit the realisation of the full
potential of land. This may arise from ignorance on the full potential of the Land prior to
undertaking the less beneficial use on the land. However, there may be instances, where for
social or economic reasons it might be more appealing to use fertile land for activities that
will not utilise its full potential such as urban expansion on fertile land.
ii) Conflicts Between Competing Land Uses: Such conflicts occur where land is used or is
capable of being used for a number of different land uses as occur in some classification
systems. For example, such land while best suited for arable agriculture, is also equally
suited for producing high returns when utilised for livestock or wildlife grazing. Depending
on interests and customs, different people may want to use the same land or parcels
adjacent for both arable and pastoral agriculture although the two primary uses are not
compatible. One of the uses must become secondary otherwise conflicts arise. In such a
scenario, conflict resolution should apply multi-criteria analysis on the competing uses.
Scales of economy, opportunity costs of use and benefits will assist in optimising the use of
the land under reference.
2.5 LAND USE AND RELATED LEGAL PROVISIONS
2.5.1 Land use planning and management comprises a myriad of land use elements that are
subject to a variety of statutory instruments and policies for the regulation of land uses. The
statutory framework for land use management is provided by multi-sectoral institutional
arrangements charged with different responsibilities on the management of different
categories of land use. Different statutory instruments impact on land use differently. While
the various instruments seek to achieve rational utilisation and management of resources,
the reality on the ground is that some instruments may impede land use or reduce the
socio-economic benefits that should maximise returns from the land and its contribution to a
sustainable District Development path.
2.5.2 Table 2.1 provides a summary of some major policies and legislation relevant to the
concepts of integrated land use and their impacts on different land use categories. A
notation of the sign (+) denotes that the particular legislation or policy supports the land use
category while the sign (-) denotes possible conflicts or weakness that should be turned into
an opportunity or strength through land use planning.
2.5.3 The Town and Country Planning Act (Cap. 32:09) established the Town and Country
Planning Board to advise the Minister of Lands and Housing on Town and Country Planning
matters. The Act provides for the declaration of any land in Botswana as a Planning Area by
the Minister. It mandates the Minister to prepare a Development Plan for the area within two
years, and requires that planning permission be sought for development of land in the
16 REPORT OF SURVEY

CHAPTER 2
ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
LAND USE CATEGORY
HUMAN SETTLEMENTS
Table 2.1 The Impact of Some Major Relevant Policies and Legislation on the land Use Plan
Town And Country Planning
Tribal Land Act
Waste Management Act
Wildlife (Conservation) & National Parks
Agricultural (Conservation) Resources Act
Fencing Act
Monuments and Relics Act
Mines, Quarries and Minerals Act
Water Act
National Settlement Policy
Impact of Policies and Legislation*
National Policy on Land Tenure
National Policy on Agricultural
Development
National Food Strategy Objectives
Flora and Fauna
National Policy on Arable Agriculture and
Dairy Development (NAMPAADD)
Community Based Natural Resources
Management Policy (Draft)
Access to Infrastructure + + + - - + +
+
Access to Water +
Preserve Good Soils for Agriculture + +
Preserve Natural Resources & Forests + -
Population Intensity + + + + +
Avoidance Residential Encroachment + + +
-
Avoidance Windward Direction +
Avoidance WMA + + +
Avoidance of Slopes & Poor Drainage + + + +
Avoid Pollution of water Sources +
Avoidance of Seismic Areas +
Avoidance of Heavily Vegetated Areas + + + + +
AGRICULTURAL ISSUES
Convention on Biodiversity
National Development Plan
Preservation of Agricultural land + + + + + - + + + + + + - -
Avoidance of degraded areas + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Avoidance of veldt resource endowed areas + - + + - + + + + - - - - -
Avoidance of Water Sources + + + +
Access to Markets + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Avoidance of Woodlands + - + + + + - - - +
Preservation of good soils + - + + + + + + + +
Avoid highly vegetated areas / rangelands + + + -
Avoid Saline soils + +
Avoid lands areas close to settlements + + -
Avoidance of Monumental sites +
Core existence – Permaculture + + +
Core existence – pastoral & veldt resources + + +
Avoid WMA and Game reserves + -
FORESTS AND VELDT PRODUCTS
Permaculture uses + + + + - + - + + + + + + +
Protect Areas with Veldt Resources + - + + + + - + + + - + - +
Protect Areas with Forest Reserves + - + + + + - + + + - + - +
Access to water + + + + + + + + + + - + + +
Avoidance human settlement encroachment + + + + + - + - +
Endowed wildlife resources - - + + - + - + + + - + + +
CBNRM Activities + - + - + - + + + + + + +
Avoidance of Arable practices - - - - - + + + - + - -
Mixed Use compatibility
WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREAS
Access to Infrastructure + + + + - + + +
Access to Water + +
Preserve Natural Resources & Forests + + - + + + +
Population Intensity - - - - - - - - -
Avoidance Human Settlement Encroachment - + + +
Endowed Wildlife Resources + + - + + + +
CBNRM Activities + + + + + + + + +
+
-
+
+
LAND USE CATEGORIES
Other Protected Areas and Monuments Sites
Archaeological Sites + + - + - + + - - + +
Cultural Activities + + + + - + - + - - + +
Monuments + + + - + - + + - - + +
Protected Areas + - + - + + - - + + +
Forest Reserves + + + + - + - + + - - + + +
Preserve Natural Resources & Forests + - + - + + - - + -
Source: Format Adapted from Kweneng Integrated Land Use Plan, (Geoflux)
Other instruments not included are explained in the text.
Note: sign (+) denotes supportive and (- ) conflicting
Act
Privatisation Policy
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Planning Area. The Act seeks to ensure the orderly development of settlements and the builtenvironment
in Botswana. It requires that planning permission should be obtained for any
REPORT OF SURVEY
17

CHAPTER 2
ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
development on, under or above land to take place. All applications for development are
routed through the Local Planning Authority ( Southern District Council) to the Town and
Country Planning Board. From the planning permission requirement, development should
conform to a series of conditions and standards contained in the Development Control
Code. The enforcement of the Town and Country Planning Act especially the provisions of
the Development Control Code are problematic. This is particularly the case with low
income housing within urban villages such as Kanye. Poor enforcement mechanisms and
unrealistic building and plot development standards have been cited as responsible for the
violation of the provisions of the Act in urban-villages.
2.5.4 The Tribal Land Act (Cap.32:02) (as amended in 1993) provides for the establishment of
LBs and SLBs; vesting of tribal land in LBs, allocation and certification of land rights either
under customary law land rights or common law land rights; preparation of integrated land
use plans or zones and the establishment of the Land Tribunal, which adjudicates on
appeals against the decision of the LBs. Inspite of the fact that the Act provides for the
preparation and adoption of an integrated land use plan for the District, the reality is that the
District has not had the benefit of having such a plan.
2.5.5 The State Land Act (Cap.32:01) confers on the President powers to dispose of State Land
under Section 3. Section 4 provides for delegation of the President’s powers to appropriate
bodies or individuals. Traditionally, such powers have been delegated to the Minister
responsible for Lands and officers of the Attorney General’s Chambers (Land Division).
2.5.6 The Deeds Registry Act (Cap 33:02) establishes the Deeds Registry for the three land
tenure systems of tribal, state and freehold land where such land may be registered.
Although Section 18 of the Deeds Registry Act was amended in the past to remove all
subsections that discriminated against women, the section still requires only women to
reveal their marital status when registering a deed. The Land Policy Review has
recommended that section 18 be further amended to require both men and women to
reveal their marital status when registering title deeds.
2.5.7 The Waste Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 15 of 1998) established the Department of
Sanitation and Waste Management (DSWM) and requires Local Authorities to prepare and
submit local waste management and recycling plans to the Director. The DSWM has
prepared a National Waste Management Plan and a National Wastewater and Sanitation
Master Plan which provide safe handling and disposal of waste strategies and guidance,
including hazardous waste. The Act also requires registration and licensing of waste
carriers, registration of waste disposal sites and licensing of waste management facilities,
as well as for household waste. The Act further provides for removal of illegally deposited
waste by the Local authorities. It incorporates the tenets of the Basel Convention which
prohibits the movement of hazardous waste. The District is faraway from preparing a local
waste management and recycling plan.
2.5.8 The Agricultural Resources (Conservation) Act (Cap.35:06 of 1974) provides for the
conservation of Botswana’s agricultural resources. The Act defines agricultural resources
as animals, birds, plants, waters, soils, vegetation and vegetation products, fish, insects,
etc. The Act also establishes the Agricultural Resources Board with District Conservation
Committees to strengthen the DLUPU in matters dealing with the sustained utilisation of
agricultural veldt resources.
2.5.9 Herbage Preservation (Prevention of Fires) Act (Cap.38:02 of 1978): The Act deals with the
prevention, control and management of veldt fires. All persons require permission from the
Herbage Preservation Committee to set fire to any vegetation on land of which one is not
18 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
the owner or lawful occupier. The existence of this piece of legislation has not deterred
people from indiscriminately setting fire to bushes in the District.
2.5.10 The Land Survey Act (Cap. 33:01) established the Land Surveyors Board and requires the
registration of qualified Land Surveyors by the Board and prohibits unregistered surveyors
from practicing. All cadastral surveys are required to be approved by the Director of
Surveys and Mapping for all land tenure categories.
2.5.11 The Monuments and Relics Act, 2001 (Act No. 12 of 2001) provides for appointment of the
Commissioner of Monuments and Relics, Inspectors and Honourary Officers by the
Minister, for the purpose of protecting monuments and relics. The Act provides for
declaration of any monument, relic or recent artifact to be a national monument. It gives the
State right of option to acquire the ownership of any protected area or national monument,
relic or recent artifact together with the suite thereof, and open payment of fair and
reasonable compensation to the owner.
2.5.12 The Tourism Act, 1992 (Act No. 22 of 1992) provides for the regulation of the tourism
industry to promote its development. The Act establishes the Tourism Industry Licensing
Board and prohibits any person from operating a tourism business such as hotels, motels,
lodges, guesthouses, campsites, etc. without a license issued by the Board. Appeals
against the decisions of the Board may be lodged with the Minister within a period of 30
days of the date the decision was made.
2.5.13 The Wildlife Conservation and National Parks Act, 1992 (Act No. 28 of 1992) established
the Southern District Wildlife Management Area (Third Schedule) and the Bathoen Dam
Bird Sanctuary (Second Schedule). Under Section 12(2) of the Act, the President may by
Order published in the gazette declare any area to be a game reserve or something or alter
the boundaries or abolish such a game reserve or sanctuary. The Act under section 17
protects some annual species that are listed in the Sixth Schedule of the Act. The hunting,
capture, farming and ranching of wildlife is also controlled under the Act for their protection
and conservation.
2.5.14 The Water Act (Cap. 34:01) provides for the grant of water rights and servitudes; and allows
for free but responsible access and use of public water by individuals and occupiers or
owners of land for domestic, mining operations and forestry operations. The Act establishes
the Water Apportionment Board and provides for appeals to the Minister. It provides for the
registration of water rights by the Water Registrar on application by the rights holder through
application and granting of water rights by the Water Apportionment Board.
2.5.15 The Atmospheric Pollution (Prevention) Act (Cap.65:03 of 1971) provides for the prevention
of pollution of the atmosphere by the carrying on of industrial processes and for matters
incidental thereto. The Atmospheric Pollution Control (Prevention) Act has a narrow scope
of application and it is only applicable in urban areas. Apart from its restricted geographical
coverage, it is also restricted in content. As the name clearly states it deals only with
atmospheric pollution and not other forms of pollution such as water, soil and noise. A
revision of this legislation to holistically cover other forms of pollution at both the urban and
district level is anticipated.
2.5.16 The Diseases of Animals Act (1977): controls diseases affecting animals as well as
regulates the trade, movement and quarantine of animals.
2.5.17 The Fencing Act (1962) provides for the construction of fences dividing farms and the
sharing of the costs, where applicable. Establishes penalties against persons that may
REPORT OF SURVEY
19

CHAPTER 2
ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
neglect to clear inflammable matter near the fence and for wilful damage hereof. The
purpose is to prevent the mixing of animals from different farms as well as mixing of
livestock with wildlife so as to prevent cross-infection.
2.5.18 The Forest Act (Cap.38:04 of 1968) gazettes forest reserves, protected trees and the
control of forest products. There is provision for the protection of trees on state land that
occur within 100 m of a riverbank. The Act is weak since it only applies to gazetted forest
reserves. The problem with this Act is that it is only confined to forest reserves and leaves
wood resources outside the reserves to the mercy of the users. This anomaly is under
revision to make it applicable to all types of forested areas
2.5.19 Industrial Development Act (1968) controls the usage of the land resource in relation to the
development of industries and ensures that certain regulations are followed in this
development.
2.6 EXISTING POLICIES, STRATEGIES, PROGRAMMES, AND PROJECTS
AND THEIR IMPACT ON THE DISTRICT’S ECONOMY, LAND AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
2.6.1 The District Development Plan has entered into the 6th six-year plan period from 2003 to
2009. The theme of DDP 6 is linked to that of the National Development Plan 9, which is
“Towards realisation of Vision 2016: Sustainable and Diversified Development through
Competitiveness in Global Markets.” The Southern District’s focus in driving towards the
attainment of sustainable and diversified development during the plan period is to provide
new and improve basic physical infrastructure and services including road network,
telecommunication, safe water, waste disposal, health, education and recreational facilities.
The implementation of the planned developments drives the District economy, however, the
planned developments are implemented within the framework of existing policies and
strategies some of which do have implications .
2.6.2 The National Settlement Policy (NSP): The matrix in Table 2.1 provides a summary of the
impact of the NSP on the District’s economy in terms of the different land use categories in
Southern District. The National Settlement Policy advocates for the development of
concentrated settlements with parameters that qualify such settlements for the provision of
services, which in turn fosters rural development. Whilst the impact of the NSP is classified
as a supportive policy, conflicts do arise in terms of access to infrastructure services as a
result of population densities of the respective settlements. In the Southern District
misinterpretation of the NSP coupled with political pressure has resulted in areas, which are
not recognised settlements being provided with services therefore setting a precedence
which leads to proliferation of settlements which makes it impossible to provide services
equitably and also leads to settlements encroaching into fertile agricultural areas. The
District is also characterised by scattered and dispersed settlements (Barolong area,
Ngwaketse West, Mabutsane, along the Molopo River) making provision of services and
infrastructure difficult and very costly and failing to serve their purpose due to distances
involved. The impact from this situation is negative on the development of the agriculture,
poverty alleviation and livelihood generation from lack of infrastructure services. To remedy
the situation, the update of the draft District Settlement Strategy is advocated to be
prepared during the current plan period to provide a comprehensive settlement pattern,
population distribution and socio-economic status to aid the application of the NSP to
resolve conflicts in allocation, distribution of resources, and services to settlements.
2.6.3 The National Policy on Land Tenure advocates for the rigorous enforcement of grazing
20 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
lands conservation including communal areas, commercial grazing areas, state and
freehold land. The policy, however supportive in terms of land use zoning, it also leads to
population intensity, misuse and mismanagement of grazing areas as well as overstocking.
2.6.4 National Policy on Agricultural Development: The fencing component is more relevant to
land use in terms of its drive to conserve agricultural land and other resources for future
generations as well as range management through fencing of ranches. The impact on the
District’s economy, land and natural resources is negative on the majority of subsistence
farmers who are or will be left out as a result of land availability and affordability. Especially
most of the communal land will be fenced and used as ranches hence depriving small
farmers access to the land.
2.6.5 The National Food Strategy advocates for an enhanced food security status and food
sufficiency for all, however, with encroachment of agricultural fertile lands for settlement,
and lack of the District implementation capacity of the Agricultural Resources Conservation
Act, overexploitation of veldt resources and the wise-use of natural resources is
compromised.
2.6.6 The National Agriculture Master Plan for Arable Agriculture and Dairy Development
(NAMPAADD) emphasises on rain-fed farming, improved dairy production and irrigation.
The Southern District has been identified for piloting irrigation and rain fed farming, the
water resources of the District lacks an extensive investigation especially on the
underground water resources of the District. The programme proposes farming scales of
economy at 150 hectares, this calls for more farm production labour which can lead to
mushrooming of settlements in land areas and eventually requiring services provision
contrary to the aspirations of the NSP.
2.6.7 The Community Based Natural Resource Management Policy devolves management rights
over natural resources directly to qualifying local communities. However, the inadequacy of
the local communities capacity to manage natural resources leads to uneconomic utilisation
of veldt resources endowed areas, degradation of soil conservation and preservation
woodlands, through inappropriate arable practices and the tendency of population intensity
in qualifying communities. In the Southern District a Community-based Natural Resource
Management Area in the Mabutsane Sub District (SO2 Wildlife Management Area) has
been created to protect and conserve the environment, generate revenue for the local
community from tourism and sustainable harvesting of wildlife resources. However, whilst
the concept is laudable, its socio-economic contribution in the District has not been
significant as expected mainly because there is no management plan to guide the local
community and no clear boundary between the WMA and other land uses especially
resulting in the exacerbation of the competition between wildlife and livestock. This is
contrary to the Wildlife Conservation Policy, which advocates for sustainable wildlife
utilisation.
2.6.8 The National Policy on Natural Resources Conservation and Development advocates for
the efficient and effective natural resource conservation and management. The District’s
economy is negatively impacted on due to serious mismanagement of natural resources
through indiscriminate cutting of trees, over-harvesting of fuel-wood by Educational and
Correctional institutions in the District, over-harvesting of thatching grass, overgrazing
within communal areas, uncontrolled stocking rates, lack of regulatory mechanisms for the
harvesting and commercialisation of sand and gravel, inadequate water conservation and
frequent outbreak of veldt-fires. The impact on the District’s economy as a result of these
dis-economies is overwhelming. The policy also advocates for the incorporation of
environmental considerations, concepts and principles into all development activities. With
REPORT OF SURVEY
21

CHAPTER 2
ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
the impending environmental impact assessment legislation (expected to be enacted), it
would be mandatory for the environmental impacts of all activities to be mitigated through
an environmental management plan for each activity that would be approved for
implementation be it a policy, a plan, a programme or a project either initiated by the Local
Authorities or non-governmental organisations, Community based organisations and Civil
Society, the Community and Private Sector Developers.
2.7 IMPACT OF RELEVANT PROGRAMMES AND PROJECTS ON THE
DISTRICT’S ECONOMY, LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES
2.7.1 The review of the achievements of the immediate past District Development Plan 5 period
indicates that prioritised programmes and projects were either not completed or
implemented at the expected rate, and hence did impact negatively on the District’s
economy, land use and the natural resource base. Some of the major programmes and
projects, which impacted on the District economy are as highlighted.
2.7.2 Physical Infrastructure: Roads: In the Southern District, road transport is a vital and
necessary infrastructure to meet the basic need of mobility and a necessary condition to
promote the District’s economic development. The target of the past 5th Development Plan
period was to provide reliable access to communities and to areas with economic potential
and supporting decentralisation of services by improving or upgrading the external road
network and strengthening the implementation capacity for development and maintenance
of roads. In terms of accessibility 62 out of 83 villages (with Primary Schools) could be
accessed by tarred or gravelled road. The re-construction of the Jwaneng – Sekoma road
(part of the Trans-Kalahari Road), the Lobatse – Kanye By-pass and the fencing of the
Kanye – Ramatlabama road, and the Mogobane – Ranaka road that were planned for
completion during the past plan period have spilled into the current plan period. This major
road infrastructure would boost the District’s economy in terms of facilitating the movement
of people, goods and services within and through the District. Whilst the District has made
tremendous efforts in making linkages between villages possible by either gravel or graded
roads, the maintenance of the infrastructure lacks manpower as well as the financial
resources and limited equipment.
2.7.3 Telecommunication: The on-going telecommunication network project in the Barolong areas
including Ngwaketse West is expected to also impact positively on the District’s economy.
2.7.4 Housing: Evidence based on the 2001 Census reveals that 3 out of every 10 households in
the District still use traditional building materials (mud, poles, and thatch) hence impacting
negatively through deforestation, biodiversity loss, land degradation and natural resources
depletion. In general, housing delivery is short of supply creating a perpetual inadequacy
especially for the District Council, Land Boards, Tribal and District Administration.
Inadequate housing has grown also due to decentralisation of operations to Sub District
levels. Housing delivery is constrained by uncoordinated and proliferation of settlement that
make provision of infrastructure and social services difficult and expensive.The poor
housing market in the District is also a deterrent to attract the private sector to invest and
provide private and rental housing. In 2001, Self Help Housing Agency (SHHA) was
introduced to Southern District. There is a total of 21 settlements that are currently covered
under the programme. The number of applications approved between 2001 and 2003
totalled 292. This programme is bound to have a spin-off effect on housing in the
foreseeable future.
2.7.5 Water Infrastructure: Improving the reliability of village water supply systems impacts
22 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
positively on the District’s economy. Issues that contribute to the negative impact on the
District’s economy include low groundwater potential of areas with acute water shortages
especially Ngwaketse West, Manyana, Ntlhantlhe, Ranaka, and Kgomokasitwa area.
Watering livestock from public standpipes also contributes to water wastage in the District.
Theoretically, the completion of the water reticulation scheme has gone a long way to
augment the water supply to Kanye and Moshupa. In reality, the water supply situation in
Kanye has worsened. That notwithstanding, the expansion has resulted in increased
number of water consumers with subsequent increase in revenue accruing from private
water connections. The introduction of the computerized water billing system has
significantly improved the efficiency in the billing and revenue collection system.
2.7.6 Land Servicing and Village Infrastructure: Projects involved with upgrading and improving
land servicing and village infrastructure such as tarred roads, bus rank, parking space,
storm water drainage, street lighting especially to the major villages of Kanye, Good Hope
and Moshupa contribute positively to the District’s economy. These projects have not been
met due to the magnitude of their funding requirements. During the 5th Development Plan,
Kanye and Good Hope had improvements to their physical infrastructure. Infrastructure
development for the second phase of Kanye developments and Moshupa are to be
undertaken during the current planning period. Constraints in these projects include the use
of labour intensive methods, which cause delays especially in the road works and lack of
adequate manpower to decentralise for better supervision of the projects. Delay in the
release of funds that are usually insufficient to fully undertake the project is also a
contributory factor.
REPORT OF SURVEY
23

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
3 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS
COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
3.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
3.1.1 The physical environment is a summation of climatic subsets of rainfall, temperature, wind,
evaporation and evapotranspiration, humidity, solar radiation and physical elements namely:
topography, hydrology, hydrogeology, geology and soils.
3.1.2 The state of the physical environment is an important determinant of the distribution of fauna
and flora in the district. It determines the land use activity system and the nature of
development activities being undertaken across the district. The physical environment
provides the land for land use activities to take place, it provides a set of resources to be
exploited and conserved, natural functions to be maintained and hazards to be avoided for
sustainable utilisation of land.
3.1.3 There is a higher population density and settlement development in the eastern part of
Southern District with a significant decrease in population density and sparse settlement
development to the west. This is as a result of the hospitable physical environment which
offers good conditions for human habitation, settlement development and exploitation of
natural resources in the eastern part of the district. On the other hand, the western part of the
district is less attractive to the population and settlement due to a less favourable physical
environment.
3.1.4 Southern District has a semi-arid sub-tropical climate with summer rainfall between November
and March. There is a high spatial variation of rainfall from east to west where a higher
average rainfall is received in the eastern part of the District. As a result, the eastern part is
suitable for most development activities with the result that there are more development
pressures, competition and conflicts between land use activities in the east.
3.1.5 Rainfall received in the District does not only have a high spatial variation, it results in the
accumulation of insignificant surface water resources and has limited distribution to
groundwater recharge. Subsequently, groundwater resources become an important source of
water supply necessitating that land use planning take cognizance of the need to preserve
and protect aquifers from pollution. At the same time limited groundwater recharge has
implications for the security of groundwater resources as a source of water supply in the long
term where there is more groundwater abstraction than replenishment.
3.1.6 The district has environmentally sensitive and fragile areas that require sustainable
exploitation and protection from the harmful effects of wanton resource utilisation. In
particular, settlement development and the discharge of pollutants such as from sanitation
facilities, constitute a threat to groundwater pollution considering that the District largely
depends on on-site sanitation systems. The rugged topography in the eastern part of the
District is particularly vulnerable to water erosion and when adequate environmental
protection measures are not put in place land degradation is likely to escalate. Wanton
destruction of vegetation through human activities and overgrazing is inclined to cause
material range and land degradation.
3.1.7 The physical environment provides opportunities for development such as in the eastern part
where there is higher rainfall and fertile soils. It may however, constitute a constraint to the
use of land as in areas with hilly terrain and steep slopes, rocky ground, collapsible and
24 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
volumetric soils, bare and sandy soils, fault zones and poor groundwater resources.
Therefore, a good appreciation of the constraints presented by the physical environment is
essential in the preparation of the integrated land use plan.
3.2 CLIMATE
Rainfall
3.2.1 The District experiences summer rainfall between November and March although rainfall
may occur during winter months. Rainfall occurrence during winter is insignificant where
between 7 and 10 percent of the mean average rainfall may occur albeit with a 35 to 40
percent chance of occurring.
3.2.2 Rainfall occurs mainly in the form of convectional rainfall. The rainy season usually has a
mid-summer drought period of about a month. Rain occurring before the mid season
drought occurs mostly as a result of westerly winds while the post mid-summer rainy period
is influenced by the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone. Rainfall variability ranges from 80
percent between December and February exceeding 100 percent in the remaining part of
the season.
Map 3.1 Average Annual Rainfall and Coeficient of Variation of Summer Rainfall
150000 225000 300000 375000
150000 225000 300000 375000
Average Annual Rainfall (in mm/a)
Variation Coeficient of Summer Rainfall
7200000 7275000
Mabutsane
325
375
´
Kgalagadi
Kweneng
Jwaneng
425
Maokane
475
Mosopa
Kanye
525
Goodhope
575
South
East
Mabutsane
50%
Kgalagadi
´
40%
Maokane 35%
Kweneng
Jwaneng
Mosopa
Kanye
30%
Goodhope
South
East
7200000 7275000
0 15 30 60
Kilometers
0 15 30 60
Kilometers
East - West Spatial Profiles
Average Annual Rainfall Values
mm/annum
Percent
Variation Coeficient of Summer Rainfall
E Distance
W E Distance
W
Source: MoA
3.2.3 There is a high spatial variation of rainfall in the District. Map 3.1 shows the average annual
rainfall variation in the Southern District. A higher average annual rainfall of up to 575mm is
received in the eastern part decreasing to about 325mm in the western parts of the District.
Rainfall is localised and unevenly distributed with a coefficient of variation of 30 percent in
REPORT OF SURVEY
25

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
the eastern part of the District and a higher coefficient of variation of 50 percent in the
western part of the District.
3.2.4 As can be gleaned from Map 3.1, a small portion of the District stretching from the boundary
with the South East District and encompassing Molapowabojang, Gopong, Lotlhakane East
has an average annual rainfall of 575mm. The area stretching from the border with Republic
of South Africa through Good Hope and part of Barolong Farms, Kanye and Moshupa has
an annual average rainfall of 525mm. The portion of the District from the western half of
Barolong farms through Gasita, Selokolela and Pitseng receives an average of 475mm.
Rainfall decreases to an annual average of rainfall 425mm further over a wider area to the
west from Phitshane Molopo, Mabule, Lorolwane through to Jwaneng. Most of Mabutsane
Sub- District has an average annual rainfall of between 325mm and 375mm. Rainfall
amount and variability have implications for land use.
Temperature
3.2.5 Temperatures in the northern part of the District are generally cooler by about 2.5°C owing
to the higher elevation of about 1350m between Kanye and Manyana compared to lower
altitudes of less than 1050m in the western part of the District. Temperatures are highest
during the summer (October to March) with an average of 27°C. Kanye which is in the
northeastern part of the District has a lower average high temperature of 24.5°C in the
cooler part of the District. The higher temperatures averaging between 32°C and 35°C are
experienced during the month of January otherwise there is no high temperature variation
during the summer months.
Map 3.2 Average Monthly Minimum and Maximum Temperature
150000 225000 300000 375000
July - Minimum Temperature
Kweneng
150000 225000 300000 375000
Mabutsane
July - Maximum Temperature
Kweneng
4.5 0 C
7200000 7275000
4.0 0 C
´
Kgalagadi
Maokane
Jwaneng
Mosopa
Kanye
4.5 0 C
Goodhope
South
East
0 15 30 60
Kilometers
150000 225000 300000 375000
January - Minimum Temperature
23.0 0 C
23.5 0 C
Kgalagadi
´
Maokane
Jwaneng
23.5 0 C
Mosopa
Kanye
Goodhope
South
East
0 15 30 60
Kilometers
150000 225000 300000 375000
January - Maximum Temperature
7200000 7275000
7200000 7275000
19.5 0 C
Mabutsane
Kgalagadi
´
0 15 30 60
Kilometers
Kweneng
Jwaneng
Mosopa
Maokane Kanye
19.5 0 C
Goodhope
South
East
7200000 7275000
C
C
33.0 0 C
32.5 0
32.0 0
´
Mabutsane
Kgalagadi
0 15 30 60
Kilometers
Maokane
Kweneng
Jwaneng
31.5 0
32.0 0
C
C
Mosopa
Kanye
32.5 0 C
Goodhope
South
East
Source” MoA
3.2.6 The District experiences a decrease in temperatures at the beginning of the winter season
26 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
in April to June remaining cool until temperatures begin to rise in mid – August.
Temperatures average about 12°C during the winter months. The coolest month during the
winter season is June where temperatures may plunge to a minimum average of between
2°C and 5°C. The District is also prone to early morning mid-winter frost.
Wind
3.2.7 The prevailing wind in the
District is the eastnortheasterly
although winds
may change to southerly
owing to the effect of
thunderstorms. The low
pressure zone that develops
during the summer results in
wind being more common
during the season as cold
fronts blow across the District.
Southern District experiences
strong winds in the the
beginning or end of the rainy
season in association with
thunderstorms during the
summer
months.
Southeasterly winds occur in
January in association with
the high pressure zone that
develops off the southeast coast in the Indian Ocean and in association with thunderstorms.
Southeasterly winds are sxperienced in July in association with the high pressure system in
the Atlantic Ocean..
3.2.8 According to Larsson (1998) Southern District has the highest average wind speeds of
greater than 4.0m\sec in the southwestern part of District. Wind speed decreases to under
3.0m\sec in the northern and the far Southwestern parts. The average wind speed ranges
between 3.0m\sec and 4.0 m\sec. Strong winds have the tendency to cause structural
damage to property, crops and have the propensity to fuel aeolian erosion and subsequent
environmental degradation
Evaporation and Evapotranspiration
3.2.9 Potential evapotranspiration in the District is about 3 to 4 times annual rainfall while
evaporation ranges from 3.5 to 4.5 times the annual rainfall. Evapotranspiration is highest
during summer (October - March) where it is about 5.5 to 6.6mm\day owing to high
temperatures and increased intake of water by plants. During winter evapotranspiration is
at its lowest in June where it ranges between 2 and 2.5mm\day. On account of increased
aridity westwards, evapotranspiration increases gradually westwards with about 1mm\day.
Evaporation and evapotranspiration have implications for surface water retention and crop
production in the District.
Topography
7280000
7200000
Morwamosu
Kokong
Mabutsane
!(
3.5 m/sec
Mmathethe !(
Phitshane !(
Molopo
!( Moshupa
Kgoro
!(
Good Hope
3.2.10 Map 3.4 shows the altitude in Southern District. The highest altitude occurs in the eastern
part of the District where higher attitudes of between 1300m and 1400m occur around
Khakhea
Keng
Thankane
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
REPORT OF SURVEY
160000 240000 320000
Scale: 1:3,000,000
0 12.5 25 50 75´
Kilometers
Map 3.3 Wind Velocities
Kweneng
Semane
Mokhomma
Maokane
Lorolwane
3.0 m/sec
Sekhutlane
Mabule
Jwaneng
Sese
Tsonyane
Tshedilamolomo
Seherelela
Gasita
Tswaaneng
Sesung
R.S.A
Sedibeng
Dikhukhung
Selokolela
4.0 m/sec
3.5 m/sec
Pitseng/Ralekgetho
Moshaneng
Kanye
!(
Mokgomane
Segwagwa
Mogoriapitse
3.0 m/sec
Lotlhakane
Hebron
Ranaka
Maisane
Lorwana
Gamajalela
Metlojane
Magotlhwane
Molapowabojang
Mogojwegojwe
Gathwane
Phihitshwane
Manyana
Lekgolobotl
Gopong
Ntlhantlhe
Kgomokasitwa
Maruswa
Digawane
Leywana
Pitsane
Potokwe
Tlhareselee
Rakhuna
Ramatlabama
Source:Southern District Planning Study, DTRP
7280000
7200000
REPORT OF SURVEY
27

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7200000 7275000
150000 225000 300000 375000
Source: DSM
R.S.A
Goodhope Pitsane
Mmathethe
Molapowabojang
Kgalagadi District
Gasita
Lotlhakane
South East
Kanye
Maokane
Manyana
Mosopa
Jwaneng
Sekoma
Mabutsane
Kweneng District
W Distance in m
E
meters
Mean
West-East Elevation Profile
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
HEIGHT ZONES
Elevation Zone Area (km 2 ) Area (%)
< 1050 790.11 2.9
1050 - 1100 9118.07 33.5
1100 - 1150 6367.65 23.4
1150 - 1200 4383.27 16.1
1200 - 1250 3233.80 11.9
1250 - 1300 2476.57 9.1
1300 - 1350 727.91 2.7
< 1350 146.43 0.5
< 1350
1300 - 1350
1250 - 1300
1200 - 1250
1150 - 1200
1100 - 1150
1050 - 1100
< 1050
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
REPORT OF SURVEY
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Kilometers
0 12.5 25 50 75
N
Scale:
(UTM Zone 35 - Datum Cape)
1:1,600,000 Map 3.4
28 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Kanye through Ranaka to the border with South East District. Altitude decreases to the east
of Kanye with a more significant fall to the west where the western half of the District lies
between 1000 m and 1200m.
3.2.11 Higher ground in the east coincides with the hardveld which protects as 10 kilometre wide
tongue with a westward trend through Mokhomma and Samane. Higher altitude owes to the
presence of erosion resistant felsites on undulating terrain with hills and kopjes and active
drainage.
3.2.12 The western portion of the District comprises of a featureless sandveld that lies between
1000m and 1150m. About 790,1km 2 (2,9 percent) of an area south of Khakhea lies in a
zone of 1050m and less. The sandveld has no active drainage.
Physiography
3.2.13 Two physiographic units in the form of the hardveld and sandveld make up the Southern
District. The Physiographic units bear topographic features that their form to these
physiographic units. Map 3.5 shows the Physiography of the Southern District.
HARDVELD
3.2.14 The hardveld occurs in the eastern part of the District and occupies about 22,7 percent of
the extent of the District. Part of the hardveld protrudes to the west as a 10 kilometre wide
tongue in a zone that marks the transition between the hardveld and sandveld. The
hardveld stretches from the Botswana/South Africa boundary as an approximately 20
kilometre wide belt from the boundary with the South East District to the Northern border
with Kweneng District. It encompasses Barolong farms and the associated settlements,
Mmathethe, Kanye, Letlhakane East, Moshaneng, Lotlhakane West, Ranaka, Lekgolobotlo
and Moshupa. The 10 kilometre wide sandveld extends westwards from Moshaneng
through Mokhomma to 2 kilometres west of Samane.
3.2.15 The topography of the hardveld is characterised by hilly terrain with undulating pediments
from Kanye eastwards to Mogonye and southwards through Letlhakane East. To the north
and east of Kanye in an area around Moshupa, the hardveld occurs as an almost flat to
gently undulating plain with kopjes and associated pediments. The Southern portion of the
hardveld south of Kanye extending from Selokolela through Mmathethe and Barolong farms
to the Botswana/South Africa border is characterised by a gently undulating plain with fossil
valleys. Part of the hardveld with hilly terrain has been evaded by arable farming. The
hardveld has soils with very low fertility although the greater extent is characterised by soils
with moderately fertile soils while fertile soils occur in the southern part of the hardveld.
3.2.16 The transition between the hardveld and sandveld covers 12,3 percent of the District, is
covered with Kalahari sand and occurs as an almost flat to gently undulating plain with
occassional valleys. This area is characterised by soils with low to moderate fertility.
SANDVELD
3.2.17 The sandveld covers about two-thirds (63,4 percent) of the Southern District and has an
altitude of up to 1 250m with an area south of Khakhea being less than 1 050m. It is mostly
covered with Kalahari sand while the mid to southern portion being a flat to almost flat plain
with major calcrete rimmed pans. The slope aspect in the sandveld ranges from less than
0,2 percent or 1,0 percent. The sandveld has low to moderately fertile soils. Arable
agricultural activities have avoided most of the sandveld which is devoted to grazing.
REPORT OF SURVEY
29

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7200000 7275000
150000 225000 300000 375000
Kweneng
Sa10
Sa8
Ss1
Sa15
Sa13
Sb5
Hi1
Hv1
Kgalagadi
Sb4
Hi2
Hg12
Sa7
South East
Land System
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
Symbol
Ss1
Sb5
Hi1
Sa8
Sb4
Sa15
Sa13
Sa7
Sa10
Hg12
Hv1
Hi2
Land System
Almost flat plain
Almost flat plain with hills and ridges
Almost flat to gently undulating plain
with kopjes and assoc. pediments
Almost flat to gently undulating plain
with major calcrete rimmed pans
Almost flat to gently undulating plain
with occasional valleys
Flat to almost flat fossil valley system
Flat to almost flat plain
Flat to almost flat plain with
broad fossil valleys
Flat to almost flat plain with major
calcrete rimmed pans
Gently undulating plain with fossil valleys
Hills with undulating pediments
Undulating plain with occasional kopjes
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
PHYSIOGRAPHY
REPORT OF SURVEY
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
N
Scale:
Source: MoA
Kweneng
160000 240000 320000
South East
160000 240000 320000
Kalahari Sand Cover
Kweneng
Kalahari Sand Area (%)
Surface covered
Surface exposed
74. 7 %
25.3 %
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
Physiographic Units
Hardveld
Transition Hardveld-
Sandveld
Sandveld
22.7 %
12.3 %
63.4 %
1:2,000,000 Map 3.5
Unit Area (%)
River Valley
1.6 %
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
South East
7120000 7200000 7280000
7200000 7280000
30 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
3.3 GEOLOGY
3.3.1 Map 3.6 shows geology while Table 3.1 gives a description of the geological units in the
District. The geology of the Southern District may be categorized into the following units:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
Karoo Supergroup
Waterberg Supergroup
Transvaal Supergroup
Ventersdorp Supergroup
Kanye Volcanics
Basement Complex and
Intrusives
KAROO SUPERGROUP
3.3.2 The Karoo Supergroup occurs along the Southern/Kweneng District boundary on the
northwestern part of the District. It stretches from the west of Jwaneng to the north and
northeast of Sekoma and Mabutsane respectively. It is a fine-grained aeolian sandstone
and carbonaceous sandstone of the Ecca and Ecca-Dwyka group. On the western tip it
takes the form of the Ntane sandstone.
WATERBERG GROUP
3.3.3 The Waterberg supergroup consists of well-cemented, hard, ferruginous sandstones, grits
and conglomerates with minor shales. The waterberg stretches from the west of Jwaneng
to the east and west of Mabutsane and Khakhea from where it becomes isolated formations
around Sekoma. A contiguous belt of the waterberg supergroup runs from the boundary
with Kgalagadi District through Maokane to the northern parts of Kanye and thereafter
occurs around Ranaka and Manyana. It does not weather easily.
TRANSVAAL SUPERGROUP
3.3.4 The Transvaal supergroup covers the tract of land from Khakhea to Mokhomma and
Jwaneng. It also occurs from Molopo farms to Kanye and north of Mmathethe. It consists of
undifferentiated quartzites and argillites, banded ferruginous and occasionally
manganiferous shale. Quartzite and sandstone forms low ridges with intervening valleys.
VENTERSDORP SUPERGROUP
3.3.5 The unit is exposed in the hardveld tongue and around Dipotsana. It comprises Ignimbrite,
tuff and shale, agglomerates and quartzites. Tuff and shale are susceptible to weathering
while other lithologies are resistant. Agglomerates, porphyries and rhyolites form low hills
while tuffs and shales form flat plains.
KANYE VOLCANICS
3.3.6 The unit occurs around Kanye and as a belt running southeast of Kanye towards
Mmathethe. It is also found around Jwaneng, as a narrow strip west of Khakhea and in the
eastern part of the District. Kanye volcanics occur as fine-grained quartzites, feldspar and
as undifferentiated venterdorp supergroup. The unit is very hard, not susceptible to
weathering and forms low hills.
REPORT OF SURVEY
31

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7200000
7275000
Kweneng District
Kgalagadi District
South East
150000 225000 300000 375000
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
GEOLOGY
REPORT OF SURVEY
Mabutsane
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Sekoma
N
Scale:
1:1,200,000 Map 3.6
Jwaneng
Mosopa
Manyana
Diorite
Diorite
Granite
Granite
Granite sheet and stock
Amphibolite
Norite
Syenite
Basal quartzite (Black Reef Quartzite)
Assorted glacial deposits
Banded, quartzofeldspathic gneiss
Dolerite sheet and stock
Felsic
Homogeneous felsite
Interbedded coal
Interbedded reddish quartzite & shale
Ironstone
Orange, red or white sandstone
Reddish sandstone and conglomerate
Reddish siliciclastic sedimentary rocks
Reddish siltstone
Rhyolitic volcanics, breccio-conglomerate
Undifferentiated Ultrabasic
White to reddish quartzite
Rock Description Lithological Name
Doleritic dyke
Fault
Kgoro Complex
Kubung Complex
Gaborone Granite
Mmathethe Granite
Granite sheet and stock
Archaean amphibolite
Upper Molopo Farms Complex
Segwagwa Complex
Lower Transvaal Supergroup
Dwyka Group
Archaean gneiss
Late Karoo dolerites
Archaean Felsic
Kanye Formation
Ecca Group
Upper Transvaal Supergroup
Archaean Ironstone
Lebung Group
Mannyelanong Hills Fm.
Undifferentiated Waterberg
Lokgalo Siltstone Fm.
Nnywane and Mogobane Fms.
Lower Molopo Farms
Olifantshoek Group
Source: DGS
Maokane
Gasita
Kanye
Mmathethe
Lotlhakane
Molapowabojang
Goodhope Pitsane
R.S.A
7200000
7275000
32 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 3.2 Geological Units
Unit Lithology Location T opography
KAROO
SUPERGROUP
WATERBERG
SUPERGROUP
Kl Fine grained sandstone
K Fine to coarse grained
sandstone, mudstone, shale
and coal
Confined to thin strip
along northern edge of
District west of Jwaneng
and on western boundary
Small area in north west
corner of District
Outcrops in Kanye-
Well cemented, hard, Manyana area and on
ferruginous sandstones,
grits and conglomerates with
minor shales
hardveld tongue. Beneath
surficial deposits south of
hardveld tongue and in
west of District
Does not outcrop
Weathering
Characteristics
Weathers easily to fine
grained sand
Groundwater
Potential
Moderate to Good
Does not outcrop Weathers easily Moderate to Good
Forms flat plateaus at
outcrop
Doest not weather easily,
has very little soil cover
Moderate to Good,
decreasing under
surficial deposits
TRANSVAAL
SUPERGROUP
Tu Dominantly quartzites,
shales, sandstones and
andesite
Out-crops in Kanye-
Mmathethe area, south Quartzite and
and south west of sandstone forms low
Jwaneng and near ridges. Remainder
Khakhea. Beneath surfical forms intervening
deposits in the south and valleys
west of the District
Low lying lithologies
have relatively thick
surficial deposits.
Good, decreasing
under surficial
deposits
VENTERSDORP
SUPERGROUP
TD Dolomite with
ferruginous banded cherts
(TI), chert breccia and
sandstone
V Mainly tuffs, shales and
agglomerates with high
potash content. Quartz
feldspar porphyries and
rhyolite on hardveld tongue
As above
Dolomite forms flat
plains. Sandstone
forms low ridge
Exposed around
Agglomerate,
Dipotsana and in hardveld
tongue. Possibly beneath
surficial deposits in
narrow strip west of
Khakhea.
porphyries and
rhyolites often form low
hills Tuffs and shales
form flat plains
Dolomites susceptible to Good, decreasing
weathering. Forms sandy under surficial
soil overlying calcrete. deposits
Tuffs and shales
susceptible to
weathering. Other
lithologies are not.
Poor to moderate,
decreasing under
surficial deposits
KANYE
VOLCANICS
K Fine grained rock mostly
quartz and feldspar
Outcrops in broad belt
running south east of
Kanye, south of Jwaneng
and eastern boundary of Forms low hills
District. Possibly beneath
surfical deposits in narrow
strip west of Khakhea.
Very hard and not
susceptible to
weathering
Poor
BASEMENT
COMPLEX
Xa Mostly gneisses,
migmatites and granites
Xm Schists, greenstones,
cherts and banded
ironstones
Southern portion of
District
As above
Flat lying plains
Very hard and not
susceptible to
weathering
Flat lying plains except
As above. Banded
banded ironstones form
ironstones sometimes
ridge (Mmusi’s Ridge)
resistant to weathering.
in south
Moderate,
decreasing under
surficial deposits
Moderate,
decreasing under
surficial deposits
G Granites of various
compositions
North of Ramatlabama and
north of a line from
Digawana and then to
Jwaneng. Around
Mmathethe and Isolated
areas west of Jwaneng
under surfical deposits
Forms flat plains and
isolated kopjies
Generally moderately
susceptible to
weathering
Poor to moderate,
decreasing, under
surfical deposits
INTRUSIVES
D Dolerite
Thin dykes throughout
District, only mappable
south of Khakhea and
Jwaneng (under surficial
deposits)
Generally forms
negative topographic
features
Generally susceptible to
weathering
Poor to moderate,
decreasing under
surficial deposits
N Norite
Small areas west of
Jwaneng (all under Unknown
Unknown
surficial deposits)
U Periodotite and pyroxenite As above Unknown Unknown Unknown
Source: Southern District Planning Study, 1988
REPORT OF SURVEY
33

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
BASEMENT COMPLEX
3.3.7 The Basement Complex covers the southern part of the District in an area stretching from
Molopo farms through Metlobo and Tswaanyaneng to the southeastern part of the District.
The unit comprises of undifferentiated gneisses, migmatites and granites with minor
amphibolite and metasediments including banded iron formations. It also takes the form of
undifferentiated basic schists, greenstones with minor banded iron formation, cherts, acid
schists, marbles, acid gneisses and granites. The unit forms flat plains except banded
ironstones ridges. The lithologies in the unit are generally resistant to weathering.
INTRUSIVES
3.3.8 The eastern and northeastern part of the District is characterised by intrusive lithologies
mostly the Gaborone and Mmathethe granites. These are found in the southeastern part in
Pitsane, Mmathethe, from Digawana, throughout Molapowabojang, Moshupa to Jwaneng.
Some thin dykes occur throughout Southern District notably; northwest of Mabutsane and
south of Khakhea. Granites are generally moderately susceptible to weathering.
3.4 SOILS
3.4.1 Information on soils is important in land use planning as soils have different characteristics
that either render them suitable or unsuitable for specific purposes. Soil contains air, water
and organic materials that are crucial for it to support plant life. The natural functions of soil
revolve around fertility , underlying geology and depth, drainage and filtering capacity,
composition and texture, slope, available water holding capacity, pH categories
exchangeable cation capacity, electrical conductivity and exchangeable sodium percentage
categories. These soil characteristics determine the resource value of the soil fertility for
agriculture, forestry, plant life and its suitability for settlement development and as a
construction material.
3.4.2 Map 3.7 shows the major soil types found in the Southern District. Luvic Arenosols are the
most extensive covering 17632,9 km2 or 64.7 percent of the District, Haplic Lixisols are the
second most common (8.5 percent) while Ferralic Arenosols cover 7.2 percent of the
District. Maps 3.8 to 3.13 present detailed soil charcteristics of the District.
3.4.3 Leptosols take the form of Eutric Leptosols and Lithic Leptosols which vary from very
shallow to shallow soils with depth of less than 25cm to 50cm. Lithic Leptosols occur in the
hardveld while Eutric Leptosols are found in the transition between the hardveld and
sandveld south of the hardveld tongue. Lithic Leptosols are very shallow with depth of less
than 25cm. The topography associated with these soils ranges from rolling to hilly terrain
with slopes between 8 percent and in excess of 16 percent. Leptosols are well- drained to
somewhat excessively drained coarse textured sands, sandy loams and loamy sands.
Lithic Leptosols have a high pH of between 7.51 and 8.3 percent. Leptosols are classified
under the category of soils with moderate to low fertility.
3.4.4 Lixisols occur as Ferric Lixisols and Haplic Lixisols. They are found in the northeastern part
of the District around Pitseng, Moshupa and in the south, east of Mmathethe and in the
eastern part of Ngwaketse Agricultural District. The soils are associated with undulating to
hilly topography in the northeast and gently undulating to undulating topography in the
south. They are moderately deep between 50cm and 100cm in depth, are weld-drained in
Ngwaketse North and Ngwaketse Central agricultural district and range from moderate to
imperfectly well-drained in Ngwaketse South Agricultural district. The soils are coarse
textured sands, sandy loams and loamy sands in the north east. South of Mmathethe they
34 REPORT OF SURVEY

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
7200000 7280000
160000 240000 320000
ARo1 ARo1
ARl15
ARl17
Kweneng
ARo1
ARo1
ARl17
ARo51
ARo47
ARo1
ARo1
ARo11
ARl34
ARo11
ARo41
ARo65
CLp22 CLp22
ARo35
LVk14
LVf13
LVk37
LXf5
LXh15
ARo35
LPq4
LXf17
ARo66 RGe10
LPe9 LXh9
LVx25
LPq15
ARl27 RGe46
ARl34
CLp7
ARl3
LVk26
ARl1
CLp13
LPe23
ARl34
CLh19
ARl48
LPq11
RGe33
RGc8
RGe39
CLl1
LXh26
RGe9
LPq1
LVg1 LPq15
ARo60
LXh1
LVh21
LVk19
LXh8
LVk40
LXh1
LXh11
ACh1
ARo6
RGe3
LPq15
RGe3
ARo61
R.S.A.
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
ARo2
South East
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
SOILS
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
REPORT OF SURVEY
N
Scale: 1:1,200,000 Map 3.7
Source: MoA
Soil Type
Area (in
km 2 )
Area (%)
Calcaric Regosols 158.6 0.6
Calcic Luvisols 728.9 2.7
Chromic Luvisols 72.5 0.3
Eutric Leptosols 734.3 2.7
Eutric Regosols 934.5 3.4
Ferralic Arenosols 1971.2 7.2
Ferric Lixisols 144.8 0.5
Ferric Luvisols 20.5 0.1
Gleyic Luvisols 28.4 0.1
Haplic Acrisols 558.3 2.0
Haplic Calcisols 141.9 0.5
Haplic Lixisols 2321.6 8.5
Haplic Luvisols 288.8 1.1
Lithic Leptosols 1196.6 4.4
Luvic Arenosols 17632.9 64.7
Luvic Calcisols 64.9 0.2
Petric Calcisols 243.2 0.9
REPORT OF SURVEY
35

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
are medium textured sandy clay loams, clay loams, silty clay loams and silt becoming fine
textured clays, silty and sandy clays in Barolong Farms. The soils have no pH and sodium
limitations and low CEC values are moderately fertile.
3.4.5 There are five types of Luvisols in the District namely; Calcic Luvisols, Chromic Luvisols,
Ferric Luvisols, Gleyic Luvisols and Haplic Luvisols. They occur in the southern part of the
District as a thin belt from Pitsane through Good Hope and northwards to around
Mmathethe, south of Kanye, Maokane, through Jwaneng and east of Jwaneng.
3.4.6 South of Kanye, and in Maokane Luvisols soils are flat with a slope of less than 0,5 percent,
almost flat around Jwaneng and undulating north of Barolong Farms and south of
Mmathethe. Luvisols are moderately deep between 50cm and 100cm in the southern part
of the hardveld becoming deep (100cm-150cm) in the sandveld. Calcic Luvisols in
Maokane are well- drained coarse sands, sandy loams and loamy sands while in the
southern part of the hardveld they are imperfectly well-drained fine textured clays, silty and
sandy clays. Southeast of Jwaneng the soils are moderately well-drained medium textured
sandy clay loams, clay loams, silty clay loams and silt. Chromic Luvisols in the Metlobo
area are moderately well- drained medium textured sandy clay loams, silty clays and sandy
clay in the hardveld tongue. Luvisols on the hardveld tongue have a low pH (5.4-5,5) while
to the southeast and east of Jwaneng they have a high pH (7,51-8,3) in addition to sodium
limitations. South of Kanye, in Maokane, east of Mmathethe and north of Barolong Farms
Luvisols have no pH and sodium limitations. The soils have a low CEC value (5,1-10 Meq/
100gr) in Maokane and Barolong Farms while around Metlobo, the hardveld tongue and
east of Jwaneng the have higher CEC values (10,1- 20Meq/100gr). Luvisols ranges from
fertile to very fertile.
3.4.7 Regosols occur as Calcaric and Eutric Regosols which are associated with the hardveld
tongue, are found in the northern part of Kanye and to the north, northwest and southwest
of Kanye They are found to the west of Mmathethe and northeast of Good Hope along the
boundary with South East District. They are associated with hilly terrain in Kanye and the
northwest of Kanye. Regosols range from very shallow depths of less than 25cm to
moderate depths of between 50cm and 100cm. Regosols occur mostly as coarse textured
sands, sandy loams and loamy sands. While Regosols generally have no sodium limitations
and few pH limitations, these soils have pH limitations around Kanye, Sedibeng and
northeast of Good Hope. They range from moderately well-drained and well-drained in the
south to somewhat excessively drained in Kanye and northeast of Kanye. Regosols have
moderate to low fertility soils.
3.4.8 Haplic Acrisols cover about 558km 2 in the gently undulating eastern part of the District from
south east of Kanye to Digawana. The soils are moderately well-drained to well drained fine
textured clays, silty and sandy clays; medium textured sandy clay loams, clay loams, silty
clay loams and coarse textured sands, sandy loams and loamy sands. The soils are
moderately deep with a depth range of between 50cm and 100cm. Haplic Acrisols generally
have no sodium and pH limitations save in isolated areas with high and low pH values.
Exchangeable Cation Capacity (CEC) ranges from a low of less than 5 to 20Meg/100gr.
They are moderately fertile soils.
3.4.9 Calcisols are less extensive covering only a small area and occur in the southern part of the
hardveld tongue and the sandveld are flat to gently undulating well drained to moderately
well drained coarse textured sands, sandy loams and loamy sands. The soils range from
moderately deep to deep with depths of 50-100cm and 100-150cm respectively. Along the
fossil valley in the sandveld, the soils have no pH and sodium limitation with the exception
of the soil in the hardveld. Exchangeable Cation Capacity of between 5 and 10Meg/100gr.
36 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
3.4.10 There are two types of Arenosols in the District namely Luvic and Ferralic Arenosols. Luvic
Arenosols are the most extensive soils in the Southern District and cover 17 632,9km 2 or
64,9 percent of the land while Ferralic Arenosols are the third most extensive covering
1971,2 km 2 (7,2 percent). The latter are found in the southeastern corner of the District,
north of Good Hope and Mmathethe, the hardveld tongue and the western part of the
District mainly in Khakhea. Ferralic Arenosols occur on topography which is almost flat to
gently undulating and undulating on the hardveld tongue. Arenosols have low pH limitations
north of Mmathethe and on the hardveld tongue. Exchangeable Cation Capacity values are
high north of Good Hope becoming low around Mmathethe and on the hardveld tongue.
Farralic Arenosols have low fertility.
3.4.11 Luvic Arenosols are associated with gently undulating topography of a slope range between
2 and 5 percent. The soils are deep (100-150cm) to very deep (in excess of 150cm) well
drained coarse sands, sandy loams and loamy sands. Luvic Arenosols have no pH and
sodium limitations and low Exchangeable Cation Capacity (CEC) values. They have low to
moderate fertility.
3.4.12 Most soils in the hardveld with the exception of Haplic Lixosols in the northeastern part and
the Arenosols on the hardveld tongue have a high Available Water Holding Capacity (AWC)
of between 110mm/m and 160mm/m. Arenosols on the other hand have a lower Available
Water Holding Capacity of between 70 and 109mm/m.
REPORT OF SURVEY
37

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7150000 7200000 7250000 7300000
250000 300000 350000
Kweneng
Jwaneng
Moshupa
Maokane
Kanye
Mmathethe
Good Hope Pitsane
Siding
R.S.A
South East
Source: MoA - NAMPAD
N
Scale: 1:1,000,000 Map 3.8
0 10 20 40 60
Kilometers
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Client: Southern District Council
REPORT OF SURVEY
> 150 Very deep 1261.9 6.2
100 - 150 Deep 12428.6 61.3
50 -100 Moderately deep 4431.1 21.9
25 - 50 Shallow 432.2 2.1
< 25 Very shallow 1720.7 8.5
Depth (in cm) Category
Area in Area
km 2 %
Westernpartofthe
District was not
surveyed since it
is highly infertile.
Good Hope Pitsane
Siding
R.S.A
Mmathethe
Kanye
Maokane
South East
Kgalagadi
Mabutsane
Surveyed Area
Sekoma
Jwaneng
Khakhea
Moshupa
Kweneng
Morwamosu
SOIL DEPTH
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
38 REPORT OF SURVEY

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
7150000 7200000 7250000 7300000
250000 300000 350000
Kweneng
Jwaneng
Moshupa
Maokane
Kanye
Mmathethe
Good Hope Pitsane
Siding
R.S.A
South East
Source: MoA - NAMPAD
N
Scale: 1:1,000,000 Map 3.9
0 10 20 40 60
Kilometers
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Client: Southern District Council
REPORT OF SURVEY
Surveyed area only
Excessively drained 127.9 0.6
Somewhat excessively drained 765.7 3.8
Well drained 14162.8 69.9
Moderately well drained 3016.5 14.9
Imperfectly well drained 2100.9 10.4
Poorly drained 100.7 0.5
Drainage Category
Area in
km 2 Area %
Western part of the
District was not
surveyed since it
is highly infertile.
Good Hope Pitsane
Siding
R.S.A
Mmathethe
Kanye
Maokane
South East
Kgalagadi
Khakhea
Moshupa
Mabutsane
Surveyed Area
Sekoma
Jwaneng
Kweneng
Morwamosu
DRAINAGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
REPORT OF SURVEY
39

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7150000 7200000 7250000 7300000
250000 300000 350000
Kweneng
Jwaneng
Moshupa
Maokane
Kanye
Mmathethe
Good Hope Pitsane
Siding
R.S.A
South East
Source: MoA - NAMPAD
N
Scale: 1:1,000,000 Map 3.10
0 10 20 40 60
Kilometers
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Client: Southern District Council
REPORT OF SURVEY
Entire District area
Fine textured: clays, silty clays,
sandy clays
2390.0 8.8
Medium textured: sandy clay loams,
clay loams, silty clay loams, silt
1774.6 6.5
Coarse textured: sands, sandy
loams, loamy sands
23077.1 84.7
Texture Category
Area in
km 2 Area %
R.S.A
Good Hope Pitsane
Siding
Mmathethe
Kanye
Maokane
South East
Kgalagadi
Khakhea
Moshupa
Mabutsane
Sekoma
Jwaneng
Kweneng
Morwamosu
TEXTURE CATEGORIES
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
40 REPORT OF SURVEY

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
7150000 7200000 7250000 7300000
250000 300000 350000
Kweneng
Jwaneng
Moshupa
Maokane
Kanye
Mmathethe
Good Hope Pitsane
Siding
R.S.A
South East
Source: MoA - NAMPAD
N
Scale: 1:1,000,000 Map 3.11
0 10 20 40 60
Kilometers
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Client: Southern District Council
REPORT OF SURVEY
Surveyed area only
Low (5.4 - 5.5) 1562.6 7.7
Correct ( 5.51 - 7.5) 16661.9 82.2
High (7.51 - 8.3) 2050.0 10.1
pH Categories Area in km 2 Area %
Western part of the
District was not
surveyed since it
is highly infertile.
R.S.A
Good Hope Pitsane
Siding
Mmathethe
Kanye
Maokane
South East
Kgalagadi
Khakhea
Moshupa
Mabutsane
Surveyed Area
Sekoma
Jwaneng
Kweneng
Morwamosu
pH CATEGORIES
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
REPORT OF SURVEY
41

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7150000 7200000 7250000 7300000
250000 300000 350000
Kweneng
Jwaneng
Moshupa
Maokane
Kanye
Mmathethe
Good Hope Pitsane
Siding
R.S.A
South East
Source: MoA - NAMPAD
N
Scale: 1:1,000,000 Map 3.12
0 10 20 40 60
Kilometers
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Client: Southern District Council
REPORT OF SURVEY
Surveyed area only
< 19 mm/m 20.2 0.1
40-69 mm/m 89.2 0.4
70-109 mm/m 14667.0 72.3
110-160 mm/m 5498.1 27.1
AWC Categories Area in km 2 Area %
Western part of the
District was not
surveyed since it
is highly infertile.
Good Hope Pitsane
Siding
R.S.A
Mmathethe
Kanye
Maokane
South East
Kgalagadi
Khakhea
Moshupa
Mabutsane
Surveyed Area
Sekoma
Jwaneng
Kweneng
Morwamosu
AVAILABLE WATER HOLDING CAPACITY (AWC)
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
42 REPORT OF SURVEY

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
7150000 7200000 7250000 7300000
250000 300000 350000
Kweneng
Jwaneng
Moshupa
Maokane
Kanye
Mmathethe
Good Hope Pitsane
Siding
R.S.A
South East
Source: MoA - NAMPAD
N
Scale: 1:1,000,000 Map 3.13
0 10 20 40 60
Kilometers
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Client: Southern District Council
DRAFT LAND USE PLAN
Surveyed area only
< 5 (Meq/100 gr) 13987.6 69.0
5.1 - 10 (Meq/100 gr) 4120.0 20.3
10.1 - 20 (Meq/100 gr) 1884.7 9.3
> 20.1 (Meq/100 gr) 282.2 1.4
CEC Categories
Area in
km 2 Area %
Western part of the
District was not
surveyed since it
is highly infertile.
R.S.A
Good Hope Pitsane
Siding
Mmathethe
Kanye
Maokane
South East
Kgalagadi
Mabutsane
Surveyed Area
Sekoma
Jwaneng
Khakhea
Moshupa
Kweneng
Morwamosu
EXCHANGEABLE CATION CAPACITY (CEC)
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
REPORT OF SURVEY
43

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
3.5 SOIL FERTILITY
3.5.1 Map 3.14 shows the classification of soils by fertility in the District. The bulk of the western
part of the District has soils with moderate to low fertility. Almost the whole of Ngwaketse
West agricultural district has moderate to low fertility soils with the exception of small
pockets of fertile soils on the hardveld tongue and the area south of Maokane. The whole
portion of Ngwaketse South agricultural District comprises of soils with low fertility while the
eastern part, east of Metlobo and Tswaaneng is characterised by soil ranging from
moderately fertile to fertile. Barolong agricultural district has moderately fertile to fertile soils
save for the eastern corner from Ranaka to Pitsane where soil fertility is low. Soil on the
western and eastern portion of Ngwaketse Central agricultural District have moderate to low
fertility while the middle portion is characterised by soils with very low fertility. Most of
Ngwaketse North agricultural district has low to moderately fertility soils. A belt of soil with
very low fertility runs in the middle of Ngwaketse North in an east-west direction.
Map 3.14. Soils Fertility
121548 201548 281548 361548
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
REPORT OF SURVEY
Mabutsane
7197716 7277716
Legend
Very Fertile
Fertile
Moderately Fertile
Moderate to Low
Low
Very Low
Unknown
1:1,650,000
´
RSA
Jwaneng
Kanye
Moshupa
Good Hope
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
Source: MoA
3.5.2 What is emerging is that most of Southern District 19 145 km 2 or 71.5 percent has
moderate to low fertility soils and coincides with the sandveld and the sandveld/hardveld
transition. Soils with very low fertility occur on the hardveld in a northeast-southeast
alignment through Kanye. Soils that are considered moderately fertile occur in the
southeastern and northeastern portion of the District where the latter is associated with hilly
44 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
terrain. A small portion in the southeastern corner of the District has pockets of fertile soils
which lack contiguity.
3.6 SOIL EROSION
3.6.1 Among the different land degradation processes observed throughout the District, soil
erosion is the one that certainly poses a threat to the conservation and rational use of its
resources. Forms of erosion that have been identified include the two major types, namely:
water and wind erosion.
3.6.2 Wind erosion has been reported as a problem in the southern part of the District where
agricultural fields at the beginning of the planting season are bare and seedlings are
susceptible to scouring and abrasion. As far as the western part is concerned the sediments
being principally removed by wind do not have a profound impact on soil quality bearing in
mind already low natural soil fertility. Instead, sand encroachment into rangeland silting of
roads, as well as deposition of sand on buildings and other infrastructure are problems
prevailing in this sandveld environment.
3.6.3 The incidences of water (especially gully) erosion have been observed in the eastern,
hardveld part of the district with the extent mostly limited to higher elevation areas where
slopes leading to a neighbouring valley are steeper. In addition, soil (sheet) erosion is also
reported to be a problem around flatter populated areas mostly used for agriculture,
housing and related activities. A significant clearance of vegetation in general and
harvesting of trees in particular leaves land within the District unprotected from soil erosion
agents. As far as the district’s rangeland is concerned there seems to be widespread
agreement that “uncontrolled” grazing undoubtedly step up actual soil erosion processes
and range deterioration.
ASSESSMENT OF EROSION RISK
3.6.4 Although there are no studies that quantify actual erosion in the District, there seems to be
an agreement that the volume of sediments being removed either by wind or water is still
not as high as it has been observed in other, especially north-eastern hilly parts of the
country. However, the fragility of the District’s ecosystems, the importance of its rangelands
and agriculture, and the need for higher production require a comprehensive assessment
and evaluation of the erosion phenomena. With regard to this an effort has been made in
this study to assess potential soil erosion risk in the District using Universal Soil Loss
Equation (USLE) and FAO’s Provisional Methodology for Soil Degradation Assessment as
a widely accepted starting point for analysis. For various reasons, however neither of these
could be used in their original form. Instead the methods had to be adapted (simplified) to
meet the needs and constraints of this evaluation. This was mainly influenced by the lack of
consistent data which at this point in time is limited by both namely (a) the approach that
could be followed and; (b) the level of detail that could be achieved. Consequently the
potential soil erosion risk model developed hereby is seen solely as a first approximation.
Further refinement, including avoidance of over-generalization, will undoubtedly be feasible
and indispensable as the data availability and quality improves.
THE ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE
3.6.5 An outline of potential soil erosion risk model is shown in Figure 3.1. As can be seen,
assessment is carried out on a three-point scale ranging from 1 (low) to 3 (high
susceptibility to erosion). As such it clearly represents a significant simplification of erosion
REPORT OF SURVEY
45

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
models mentioned above. Nevertheless, it is felt that the results (although generalized)
provide sufficient discrimination of potential erosion risk areas in the District where active
measures to control this phenomenon may be needed.
3.6.6 Assessment is carried out in two steps.
Firstly, potential rainfall erosion risk is
calculated by aggregating the indices
on:
(i) Soil erodibility - defined on the basis
of soil texture, depth and stoniness.
The main source used to obtain this
information was the National Soils
Map of Botswana where the range
of descriptive information available
for each soil class provided only a
broad and aggregate picture of conditions
thus disguises more local
variation.
(ii) Rainfall erosivity – calculated from
the modified Fournier index and
Bagnouls-Gaussen aridity index);
and
(iii) Topography (Slope angle) – derived
from Digital Elevation Model (DEM)
prepared for the District.
Soil Texture
0 Bare rock
1 C,SC,ZC
2 SCL,CL, ZCL, LS, S
3 L, ZL, Z, SL
Soil Depth
1 > 75 cm
2 25 - 75 cm
3 < 25 cm
Stoniness
1 > 10%
2 < 10%
Fournier Index
1 < 60
2 60 - 90
3 91 120
4 121 - 160
5 > 160
Aridity Index
1 < 0
2 > 0 - 50
3 > 50 - 130
4 > 130
Source: CORINE Project
Figure 3.1 Soil Erosion Assesment
Approach
Soil Erodibility
0 0
1 > 0 - 3
2 > 3 - 6
3 > 6
Erosivity
0 0
1 > 0 - 3
2 > 3 - 6
3 > 6
Slope Angle
1 < 5%
2 5 - 15%
3 15 - 30 %
4 > 30 %
Potential soil
erosion risk
0 0
1 > 0 - 5
2 > 5 - 11
3 > 11
3.6.7 Secondly, the climatic aggressivity of wind is estimated using a modified form of the
Chepil’s wind erosivity index which takes into account both the average wind speed and the
soil moisture content. This index was calculated for eight synoptical stations throughout the
country for which average monthly data related to wind velocity and potential
evapotranspiration (PET) were available. The values are then interpolated in order to
produce contour lines showing different susceptibility to wind erosion. With regard to this it
should be pointed out that the potential wind erosion differentiation in the district is highly
generalized. However, the results seem to provide a sufficient basis to meet general
conclusions.
POTENTIAL SOIL EROSION RISKS IN THE DISTRICT
3.6.8 Potential soil erosion risk can be best defined as the inherent susceptibility to erosion,
irrespective of current land use or land cover. Therefore, a map of potential risk prepared on
the basis of assessment approach described above, can be regarded as the worst possible
scenario that might be reached.
3.6.9 As illustrated on Map 3.15 a certain degree of variability in potential erosion risk is apparent
across the District. A clear band of high risk follows steep slope and hilly areas in the
northeastern hardveld part of the District where the natural conditions favour soil erosion. In
other words, soil erosion in these areas is likely to occur whenever land use and
management practice do not provide active protection of the soil. Areas with a high
susceptibility to water erosion account for 387,5km 2 or 1 percent of the District include the
stretch from Lekgolobotlo through north of Ranaka to Kanye and the north of Kanye
46 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
encompassing Lotlhakane West and Moshaneng including Lotlhakane southeast of Kanye.
Part of this area suffers a moderate risk to water erosion.
Map 3.15 Suspectibility to Water and Wind Erosion
100000 200000 300000
Kweneng District
Mabutsane
Sekoma
Jwaneng
Kgalagadi District Gasita
Kanye
Distribution of Water Erosion Risk Classes
Potential Rainfall Erosion Risk Area (Km 2 ) Area (%)
High 387.51 1.42
Moderate 4057.13 14.89
Moderate to Low 8943.24 32.83
Low 13855.64 50.86
70
Maokane
60
50
Mmathethe
40
Moshupa
Goodhope
Lotlhakane
30
South East
South East
Pitsane
7200000 7300000
Susceptibility to Wind Erosion
High (Wind Index >= 50)
Moderate (Wind Index 20 - 50)
´
Kilometers
0 12.5 25 50
Source: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD & GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Areas of moderate erosion risk tend to coincide with the district’s valuable rangeland and
agricultural areas where vegetation clearance is likely to exacerbate the erosion problem.
3.6.10 The portion of the district with a moderate risk to water erosion alternates with high erosion
risk areas outlined earlier and occupy 4057,1 km 2 or 14,9 percent of the District land mass.
It extends as a predominantly moderate erosion risk area from west to the south of
Moshaneng, west and south of Kanye through Segwagwa to west and east of Mmathethe.
Settlements such as Gathwane, Goodhope, from Goodhope to west of Pitsane to
Tshwaanyaneng and Mokgomane fall within a zone with a moderate risk to erosion. An area
stretching about 10 kilometres east of Gasita to about 20 kilometres from north through
west to south of the settlement has a moderate risk to erosion. It is important in these areas
to ensure that development, agricultural innovations, as well as livestock grazing do not
lead to excessive damage and/or removal of vegetation cover. Instead, policies are required
which would help to protect the vegetation and thus minimize soil erosion. This also
includes necessity for more detailed studies on protective soil erosion measures such as
contour ploughing, zero tillage etc.
3.6.11 About one-third or 8943.2 km 2 of the District with a moderate to low risk to water erosion is
found in the eastern half of the geographical extent of the District. It stretches from the
southern boundary of the district to the northern boundary from Jwaneng to Moshupa save
REPORT OF SURVEY
47

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
that its contiguity is broken by the moderate and high erosion risk areas.
3.6.12 Lack of relief, along with high infiltration capacity and rapid hydraulic conductivity of soil
mean that water erosion in the District’s sandveld is unlikely. This is the western half of the
district that encompasses farms to the west of Lorolwane, Mokhomma, Samane, Thankane,
Mahotshwane, Sekoma, Khonkhwa, Keng, Mabutsane, Khakhea, Kokong and Morwamosu.
Wind erosion risk in this area is without doubt a greater hazard. With regard to this it is
worth mentioning that although potential susceptibility to wind erosion in this area of the
District is potentially high, the actual erosion is expected to be less significant becoming
serious only in localized stormy conditions.
3.7 WATER RESOURCES
SURFACE WATER
3.7.1 The water is a scarse resource in Botswana and the Southern District is no expection. Due
to low and variable rainfall amounts and high evaporation rates coupled with long
incidences of droughts experienced especially in the last two decades, there are limited
sufrace water resources throughout the District. They are usualy in a form of ephemeral
streams, and temporary surface water held in natural pans for a short period of time
following the rainy season.
Map 3.16 Surface Water Resources
160000 240000 320000
Palamaokuwe Pan
Palamaokuwe
Motokwe Pan
Kue Pan
Kwekwe Pan
Diridiri Pan
Tatswe Pan
Motsobonye
Pan
Ngwanapokojwane Ditlhako Pan
Nyetse Pan
Pitsakgolo Pan
Borotse Pan
Semane Pan
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
REPORT OF SURVEY
Samosadi Pan
Kanaku Pan
Khwisi Pan
7280000
Kgama Pan
Sekoma Pan
Khalwa Pan
Konkhwa Pan
Keng Pan
Kutuku Pan
Okie Pan
Tobane Pan
Tshinka Pan
Machana Pan
7280000
Khakhea Pan
Kong Pan
Khakhaiwane Pan
Khakhaiwa Pan
Honye Pan
Lepapa Pan
Tshono Pan
Logogwe Pan
Malote Pan
Kesekwe Pan
Kue Pan
Tshonyane
Khwekhwe Pan Pan
Phala Pan
Mmakgope Pan
7200000
Legend
Pan
Ephemeral or Perennial Stream
Fossil River
District Boundary
Ukh wi
Meselebe
Honye Pan
Tswaiing Pan
Tsele Pan
Gadikao Pan
Selokolela
Nganalabaloi
Selokolela
Moselebe
7200000
Scale: 1:1,750,000
Kilometers
N
0 17.5 35 70
(UTM Zone 35 - Datum Cape)
Sekhut
lane
Matlesi
R.S.A
Source: DSM
3.7.2 The Southern District, as shown on Map 3.16 is drained by the three drainage basins
namely; the Limpopo, Molopo and the Makgadikgadi Pans drainage basins.
48 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
3.7.3 The eastern part of the Southern District is drained by the Limpopo drainage system which
begins in the north-eastern part of the hardveld. Undulating terrain forms a dentritic
drainage pattern that joins with the Limpopo drainage system through Metsimotlhabe and
Notwane Rivers.
3.7.4 The southern part of the District is characterised by fossil valleys that drain westwards from
the hardveld and across the sandveld. The dry river valleys connect the Molopo drainage
system.
3.7.5 The northern portion of the District is drained by the Makgadikgadi drainage system. Three
river valleys namely; Naledi, Makirapetse and Dikudu form part of the drainage system.
3.7.6 The eastern and western sandveld area comprises of an internal drainage system through
pans. As illustrated on Figure 3.2 calcrete rimmed pans are common in the western
sandveld area where the topography is a flat to almost flat plain. It is suggested in the
National Water Master Plan (NWMP, SMEC et al., 1991) that in a good raining season close
to 20% of livestock water requirements may be met from these and other ephemeral
sources in the District.
Figure 3.2 Landsat FCC Illustrating Calcrete Rimmed Pans Nearby Morwamosu Village
104000
112000
120000
128000
7336000
7336000
Palamaokuwe Pan
Motokwe Pan
Morwamosu
7328000
Kue Pan
7328000
Diridiri Pan
Kekwe Pan
Polokabatho Pan
7320000
Ramokapane
7320000
Motsobonye Pan
Landsat ETM+
Falsecolor Composite
Band Comb. 741
104000
112000
120000
128000
REPORT OF SURVEY
49

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
3.7.7 DHV consulting Engineers (1979) classified pans according to the following categories:
(i) Sand Pans – The topsoil has a sandy texture, is non-saline and is covered with
vegetation. The solum (weathered rock) is deep to very deep. Waterlogging occurs for
relatively short periods. Were the flooding to last for long periods then the vegetation
would die, the sandy topsoil deflate, finally leading to the formation of a clay pan.
(ii) Clay Pans – The moderately deep to deep solum has a clayey texture and is devoid
of vegetation. Water logging occurs less frequently than at Type C.2 and D pans.
They are sub-divided depending on the salinity of the topsoil in B.1, non-saline and
B.2, saline clay pans. Saline clay pans are devoid of vegetation.
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
Calc Pans or Kalkpanne – Depressions in calcretized and solicified sands. The
solum is shallow to moderately deep. A subdivision is made on the salinity of the
subsoil in C.1, non-saline and C.2, saline calc pans.
Non saline calc pans. - Water logging occurs for relatively short periods,
supposedly as a result of the structure of the underlying calcrete or silcrete. It is
suggested that the permeability is too high to allow for long periods of waterlogging.
Grass or shrub vegetation is present on the pan floor.
Saline calcic pans. - Waterlogging occurs frequently because of the low
permeability (massive structure) of the underlying calcrete or silcretes. Type C.2
pans are devoid of vegetation.
Rock pans – Depressions in pre-Kalahari formations. The solum is shallow to
moderately deep. Waterlogging occurs frequently and for long periods due to the
low permeability of the underlying rock. They are usually saline, have a clayey
texture and are devoid of vegetation.
GROUNDWATER RESOURCES
3.7.8 Because of limited surface water resources, almost all areas in the District depend on
groundwater sources to meet the domestic, industrial and agricultural needs for water
supply. Groundwater potential and replenishment of aquifers are crucial elements of the
District’s water supply. As shown on Map 3.17, it is evident that over a large portion of the
District,the groundwater recharge is virtually non-existent (less than 1mm/a) therefore
highlighting the issue of sound utilisation of static (or fossil) groundwater whose extraction
inevitably leads to mining of “one-time” aquifer reserves. Yet another problem the District
and the country as whole will face relates to provision of water beyond year 2020. At this
time, according to NWMP and many other research studies, it is expected that all water
sources originating in Botswana will be committed. This implies that the Country (and the
District as well) will experience a so-called “water stress” and will have to look at
neighbouring (regional) sources for its water supply
3.7.9 Taking into consideration the above feasible scenario it is of utmost importance for
Botswana in general and the District in particular to make an effort in enhancing the current
source/water demand management at the both the, central and local level, to incourage
futher assessmement and development of groundwater resources. In connection with this,
an effort has been made here to make use of existing national plans (NWMP, NPAAD),
research studies (DWA) and databases (National Borehole Inventory, DGS) in order to
summarizes potentials and issues related to groundwater resources in the District.
50 REPORT OF SURVEY

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
7200000 7275000
150000 225000 300000 375000
Phuduhudu
Kgalagadi
Kokong
Sekoma
Sekoma
Sekoma
Jwaneng
Kgalagadi E
Sekoma E
Tshono
Gaborone-Jwaneng
Moshaneng
Ramaka
Kgalagadi E
Molopo
Kgalagadi South
Kanye
Pitsane
Mmathethe
Pitsane
Pitsane
South East
Groundwater Potential
Kweneng
Legend
Kgalagadi
High but Variable
Fair but Variable
Generaly Poor but Localy Fair
Pitsane Aquifer Name
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
Summary of Aquifer with High Groundwater
Potential in the District
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
GROUNDWATER POTENTIAL
Aquifer
Total Storage
(10 6 m 3 )
Kanye Dolomite 290
Sekoma Dolomite 2900
Molopo Dolomite 1250
Moshaneng Dolomite 34
REPORT OF SURVEY
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
N
Scale:
Source: DWA - NWMP
Kweneng
160000 240000 320000
South East
160000 240000 320000
Extractable Groundwater Resources
Kweneng
Kgalagadi
Legend
< 28.0 mm/a
28.1 - 35.0 mm/a
35.1 - 50.0 mm/a
50.1 - 80.0 mm/a
>80.1 mm/a
Calculated by using a concept
of a generic field.
12.5
Kilometers
Groundwater Recharge
Legend
< 1.0 mm/a
1:1,750,000 Map 3.17
0 25 50 75
1.0 - 3.0 mm/a
3.1 - 5.0 mm/a
5.1 - 10..0 mm/a
> 10.0 mm/a
Calculated by soil-water
balance modelling
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
South East
7120000 7200000 7280000
7200000 7280000
REPORT OF SURVEY
51

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
HYDROGELOGY (SUMMARY OF AQUIFERS TYPES FOUND IN THE DISTRICT)
3.7.10 The disscusion on aquifers is based on the geological formation in which the groundwater
resources occur. Four types of aquifers are found in the Southern District namely:
fractured, fractured porous, porous and the karstified fractured aquifer (See Map 13.8)
ARCHEAN BASEMENT FORMATION AQUIFERS
3.7.11 The Archean bedrock is made up of metarmorphic or plutonic rocks. This geological
formation forms the parent for the fractured aquifer where groundwater is found in fractures
and joints. The Archean basement in Southern District occurs as granite, gneisses or
felsites while in the south southwestern corner, the bedrock is covered by Kalahari Beds.
3.7.12 Gaborone Granite occurs in the eastern part of the District. The granite aquifer extends over
a large mass of land from southeast of Kanye through Ranaka, Moshupa to Jwaneng. Other
granite aquifer formations occur as the Mmathethe Granite and Pitsane Granite. Where the
granite is overlain by Kalahari Beds, the groundwater is the NaHCO3 type with TDS values
of up to 3 000mg/L.Geothechnical Consulting Services indicate that a low pH plus low total
hardness make the groundwater corrosive in the Moshupa area.
3.7.13 The Gaborone-Jwaneng aquifer occurs in a zone characterised by granite sheet and stock.
It stretches from Digawana on the boarder with the South East and Kweneng Districts
northwestwards through to Jwaneng having leapfrogged Ranaka and Manyana. The aquifer
has a generally poor but locally fair groundwater potential with less than 28mm/a of
extractable groundwater resources. The portion of the aquifer that runs northeast from
Kanye through Moshupa to the boarder with South East and Kweneng Districts has a high
groundwater recharge in excess of 10mm/a. The portion that adjoins the hardveld tongue
from the west of Moshupa has a recharge of between 1mm/a and 3mm/a.
3.7.14 Mmathethe granite aquifer has a fair but variable groundwater potential to the east and west
and a generally poor but locally fair groundwater potential in the middle portion. The aquifer
falls in the category of aquifers with the least (28mm/a) extractable groundwater resources
in the District. The groundwater recharge ranges from 5.1mm/a to 10mm/a from east to
west in an area with 25 percent surface exposure and gently undulating plain with fossil
valleys.
3.7.15 Pitsane granite aquifer has a generally poor but locally poor groundwater resources of less
than 28mm/a and a groundwater recharge of between 3,1mm/a to 5,0mm/a.
3.7.16 Gneisses in the Barolong area have a high groundwater content which points to a high
recharge in the area. The southern gneisses has a fair but variable groundwater potential in
the northern part of Mmathethe Sub Land Board area and the eastern part in most of
Rolong Land Board area and along Molopo River. A belt ranging between 15km and 30km
wide running from Magoriapitse, between Tswaaneng, east of Sekhutlane to adjoin the
Molopo dolomite north of Lorolwane has a generally poor but locally fair groundwater
potential. The extractable groundwater resources in the south gneisses ranges from
35,1mm/a to 50/mm/a. The western portion of the southern gneisses with a 75 percent
Kalahari Sand cover has a low groundwater recharge of less than 1 percent.
TRANSVAAL AND WATERBERG SUPER GROUP FORMATIONS
3.7.17 Transvaal and Waterberg Supergroup formations comprise mainly of sedimentary rocks.
The Transvaal formation covers much of the western part of the District and includes the
following dolomite aquifers: Kgalagadi, Kanye, Molopo, Sekoma and Ntane sandstone.
52 REPORT OF SURVEY

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
7200000
7275000
150000 225000 300000
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
Phuduhudu
Kweneng
AQUIFERS LOCATION
REPORT OF SURVEY
Kgalagadi
Client: Southern District Council
Kokong
Kgalagadi
Sekoma
Kweneng
Sekoma
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
N Scale: 1:1,200,000 Map 3.18
Khakhea N
Sekoma
Jwaneng
Gaborone-Jwaneng
Sekoma E
Kgalagadi E
Tshono
Gabane
Formation
Dolomite
Ecca
Ecca-Dwyka
Felsite
Gaborone_Granite
Kalahari Beds
Ntane Sandstone
South Gneisses
Syenite
Ultrabasic
Waterberg
Waterberg-Transvaal
Molopo
Kgalagadi South
Pitsane
Moshaneng
Masoke
Kanye
Kanye
Pitsane
Mmathethe
Ramaka
Pitsane
Pitsane
Pitsane
Pitsane
Kilometers
0 7.5 15 30 45
Kilometers (UTM Zone 35 - Datum Cape)
Source: NWMP, DGS
R.S.A
7200000
7275000
REPORT OF SURVEY
53

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
3.7.18 The Kalahari aquifer of the Transvaal and Waterberg Supergroup covers most of the District
from west of Kanye and Mmathethe to the boundary with Kgalagadi District. This is an area
with a thick sandveld cover where the groundwater potential is fair but variable. Extractable
groundwater resources range from 35,1mm/a to 50mm/a. Except for localised areas
between Sekoma and Khakhea, groundwater recharge in the sandveld is less than 1
percent.
Dolomite Aquifers
Kanye Dolomite
3.7.19 The Kanye dolomite aquifer of the Transvaal Supergroup is about 360km 2 and occurs about
4 km south and southwest of Kanye. The aquifer extends about 32km towards Mmathethe.
Groundwater in this aquifer occurs in fractures and is a Mg(Ca) HCO3 type where the Ca/
Mg ratio is smaller than is typical of dolomite aquifers. According to the Kanye Wellfield
Investigation Report the water quality on the aquifers varies with 10 percent of boreholes
analysed in 2001 having nitrate levels in excess of the standard recommended by the World
Health Organisation.
3.7.20 Kanye dolomite aquifer has a high but variable groundwater potential. It is estimated that
the aquifer has a total storage capacity of 290 106m 3 . Tests carried out by BRGM (1986,
1988) at high yielding borehole sites show that the fractured zones of the Kanye dolomite
has extractable groundwater resources of between 80/mm/a. The aquifer has a
groundwater mean annual recharge of about 10mm/a. Kanye dolomite aquifers is classified
under promising groundwater resources and is therefore of strategic importance to the
District’s water supply and protection from pollution.
Molopo Dolomite
3.7.21 The Molopo dolomite covers an area of 1 200km 2 southwest of Kanye. Molopo dolomites
are covered by thick Kalahari beds which imply a larger borehole depth. Molopo dolomite
aquifer has a total storage capacity of 1250 106m 3 and has a high but variable groundwater
potential. The aquifer has extractable groundwater resources of between 80,1mm/a and
100mm/a.It is covered by the thick Kalahari sandveld and has a low groundwater
replenishment of less than 1,0mm/a. It is considered as a promising aquifer with the same
hydraulic properties and the Kane dolomite aquifer.
Sekoma Dolomite
3.7.22 Sekoma dolomite covers about 2 600km 2 in the northwestern part of the District. The
dolomite is covered by Kalahari beds with a significant thickness. Sekoma dolomite aquifer
has a total storage of 2900 106m3. The aquifer has a high but variable groundwater
potential with between 80,1mm/a and 100mm/a of extractable groundwater resources. Two
recharge zones of less that 1,0mm/a to 3,0mm/a occur in the western part of the dolomite
and the eastern portion adjoining the hardveld tongue. While groundwater recharge is
generally low owing to the Kalahari sandveld cover with a considerable thickness, the
eastern portion has a higher recharge on account of remote association with hardveld
tongue where groundwater generally flows northwest from the tongue. It is considered as a
promising aquifer.
Moshaneng Dolomite
3.7.23 Moshaneng dolomite aquifer has a total storage of 34 106m 3 with a high but variable
groundwater potential. The aquifer has extractable groundwater resources of between
54 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
80,1mm/a and 100mm/a with a groundwater replenishment of 10mm/a.
Kalahari Beds
3.7.24 The southwestern corner of the District is covered by Kalahari beds. This is a sand-covered
tract in Molopo farms that include loose sand at the surface becoming compacted below the
topmost 10 metres. They comprise sandstones with calcareous or ferruginous cement,
calcrete, silcrete, minor ferricrete, clays, gravel and conglomerate.
3.7.25 Clays occur in the lower part of the Kalahari Beds where a well-developed red clay horizon
with varying proportions of sands and silt occurs about 120m below the surface. Water
usually occurs in the bottom 15m to 20m of the clay horizon. When they have a good
thickness, the Kalahari Beds in the areas from a better aquifer than the underlying bedrock
of pre-Kalahari origin.
3.7.26 The Kalahari beds have a fair but variable groundwater potential. Extractable groundwater
resources range from 35.1mm/a to 50mm/a while groundwater recharge is less than
1,0mm/a, the least in the District in an area with a Kalahari sand cover of 74 percent.
3.7.27 The District has four aquifers of the felsite formation. Felsites occur on the edge of the
Gaborone Granite and are namely: Pitsane aquifer, Tshono felsite, Sekoma felsite and the
Kokong felsite aquifer. The aquifers have a generally poor but locally fair groundwater
potential and low extractable groundwater resources of less than 28mm/a. The Pitsane
aquifers at Pitsane, the higher ground on the eastern part of the District and the Tshono
aquifer on the hardveld tongue have a groundwater recharge of 5mm/a to above 10mm/a.
However, Sekoma and Kokong aquifers have a low groundwater recharge of less than
1mm/a.
3.7.28 The Sekoma diorite aquifer belongs to the ultra basic formation which has a generally poor
but locally fair groundwater potential. The extractable groundwater resources from the
aquifer range between 28mm/a and 35mm/a with a low groundwater recharge of less than
1mm/a.
3.7.29 The Jwaneng syenite aquifer has a generally poor but locally variable groundwater
potential, low extractable groundwater recharge of between 1mm/a and 3mm/a.
Kweneng (Ecca) Aquifer
3.7.30 The Kweneng aquifer occurs on the northern part of the District and extends into adjoining
Kweneng District. It belongs to the Ecca formation which comprises sandstones
mudstones, siltstones and coal-seams. The Ecca aquifer to the west of Jwaneng has a high
but variable groundwater potential while to the northwest of Mabutsane it has a fair but
variable groundwater potential. Recharge into the aquifer is low at less than 1mm/a.
3.7.31 The Kgalagadi aquifer which within the Ecca-Dwyka sequence has a fair but variable
groundwater potential and low extractable groundwater resources of less than 28mm/a. It
has a low groundwater recharge of less than 1mm/a.
Ntane Sandstone (Phuduhudu) Aquifer
3.7.32 The Ntane sandstone belongs to the Lebung Group and consists of a substantial thickness
of medium to fine-grained aeolian sandstone with mudstone intercalations. There is little
groundwater potential in the Ntane Sandstone aquifer in the Phuduhudu aquifer in the
REPORT OF SURVEY
55

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7200000 7275000
150000 225000 300000
Kweneng
Kokong
Mabutsane
Mahotshwane
Kutuku
Kgalagadi
Keng
Thankane
Khonkhwa
Semane
Lorolwane
Sekhutlane
Tsonyane
Sese
Ralekgetho
Betesankwe
Gasita
Metlobo
Tswaaneng
Selokolela
Moshaneng
Leporung
Segwagwa
Dikhukhung
Mogoriapitse
Hebron
Magotlhwane
Maisane
Manyana
Gopong
Lorwana
Phihitshwane
Rakhuna
Ramatlabama
Kweneng
160000 240000 320000
South East
South East
160000 240000 320000
Depth to Groundwater
Kweneng
Probabilty for Borehole
with Yield >= 3.6 m 3 /hour
South East
Probabilty for Borehole
withYield>=18.2m 3 /day
Legend
101m
!( Village
District
Boundary
International
Boundary
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
Legend
Kgalagadi
80.0%
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER
REPORT OF SURVEY
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
N
Scale:
Legend
50.0%
7120000 7200000 7280000
7200000 7280000
56 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
western tip of the District. The Phuduhudu aquifer has a fair but variable groundwater
potential, extractable groundwater resources of between 28mm/a and 35mm/a and low
groundwater recharge of less than 1mm/a.
PROMISING AQUIFERS AND VULNERABILITY TO POLLUTION
3.7.33 As presented in Maps 3.17 and 3.19, most of the District area is classified as having a fair
but variable or generally poor potential for successful boreholes. High potential and the
most promising groundwater sources in the District are to Kanye, Sekoma, Molopo and
Moshaneng Dolomite aquifers where median yield of boreholes, based upon field
observation (NWMP), exceed 7.7 m 3 /day. There is need to ensure that these and other
groundwater resources in the District are of drinking quality, by protecting them against
pollution sources such as landfills, pit latrines, industries, agricultural pesticides and
industrial waste.
3.7.34 Regarding vulnerability to pollution, groundwater resources differ from surface water in that
they are not distinct, visible channels, move very slowly and are less prone to rapid
temporal variation than surface water. Without proper monitoring and management human
impacts are usually difficult to detect. With regard to this it is noteworty that an analysis of
water samples from 2000 boreholes (some of them located in the District) by the Water
Affairs Department revealed that close to 20% of the boreholes showed signs of bacterial
and nitrate pollution, where some of them are no longer suitable for drinking purposes. In
the District the pollution problem is particularly evident in the eastern area that is densely
populated.
3.7.35 Groundwater in the District is primarily polluted through pit latrines, although disposal of
wastes, spillage of solvents and fuel oils, as well as livestock excrements and agricultural
pollution throughout less controlled used of pesticides and fertilizers should not be
disregarded. As the rehabilitation of polluted aquifers is difficult technically, lengthy and
costly, a careful approach to groundwater protection is required. Map 3.20, shows areas of
the District’s groundwater sensitivity from the perspective of potential vulnerability to
contamination as a result of land development or land use activities. Areas are classified in
risk categories (negligible, low, moderate, high, extreme) based on the assumed vertical
permeability of the soils and geological settings.
3.7.36 Areas with high vulnerability to pollution are along Molopo River and around Lorwana
where groundwater lies close to the surface and where according to NWMP the probability
of a borehole yield of 18.2m 3 /day is above 80 percent. In the north eastern corner of the
District, there is a high vulnerability to pollution save that the area has poor groundwater
resources.
3.7.37 Kanye Dolomite aquifer where the probability of a borehole yield of 18.2 m 3 /day ranges
between 70 and 80 percent has an extreme vulnerability to pollution since it is underlain by
rocks with high permeability and significant fracturing. Vulnerability to pollution in this
aquifers is compounded by pollutants associated mostly with settlement activities, although
other sources as mentioned above should not be disregarded.
3.7.38 Most of the aquifers in the District’s hardveld have moderate vulnerability to pollution. On
the other Land, the western sandveld is characterized by low to negligible vulnerability to
pollution where rainfall is diminished, groundwater recharge is low at less than 1mm/a and
where groundwater is deep in the range of 50m to in excess of 100m. The area around
Sekoma and Mabutsane has a moderate vulnerability to pollution. Comprehensive
REPORT OF SURVEY
57

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
measures to groundwater pollution are essential in most of the hardveld while the sandveld
with low to negligible vulnerability to pollution requires minimum protective measures.
160000 240000 320000
Morwamosu
Groundwater Pollution Vulnerability
Kweneng
Mabutsane
7200000 7280000
Legend
Khakhea
Kgalagadi
Vulnerability Class
Extreme
High
High but Poor Groundwater
Resources
Moderate
Low
Negligible
Sekoma
Jwaneng
Maokane
Moshupa
Kanye
Mmathethe
Good Hope
S o u t h E a s t
Pitsane
Siding
Source: Geological Survey Dept.
Morwamosu
Protection Measures
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
Khakhea
Legend
Mabutsane
Sekoma
Comprehensive
Minimal
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
Jwaneng
Maokane
Mmathethe
Moshupa
Kanye
Good Hope
Pitsane
Siding
7200000 7280000
Client:
GROUNDWATER POLLUTION
VULNERABILITY
Consultants:
N
Scale:
REPORT OF SURVEY
Southern District Council
Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
1:1,750,000 Map 3.20
160000 240000 320000
3.7.39 The regional-scale vulnerability information as presented in the Map 3.20 is used to gauge
the relative vulnerability of an area. This evaluation, however should not be considered
definitive as the actual risk of groundwater contamination for the given area. An area may
be judged to be more sensitive to contamination than another area under the same
development conditions. Actual risk can only be determined by a site-specific investigation.
Accordingly, the vulnerability evaluation presented here aims at identifying groundwater
contamination as an issue that would guide the formation of land use proposals through
source-directed controls, alternative site selection and /or mitigation strategies.
58 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
BOREHOLE DISTRIBUTION
3.7.40 The District depends on groundwater resources supplied through boreholes for human and
livestock consumption. Government gives priority to the provision of water to settlements,
while livestock owners are (in most cases) responsible for their own water supply through
sinking boreholes and getting the allocation of water rights.The DWNP is drilling wildlife
boreholes in the WMA to compensate for mobility losses.
3.7.41 Based on National Borehole Inventory it is estimated that there are curently around 1603
boreholes scattered in various parts of the District (See Map 3.21). Close to 25 percent of
them, as shown in Figure 3.3, belong to category of dry boreholes, no longer in use while
almost 27% refers to “other” for which exact usage is unknown. However, the majority of
this unknown boreholes seems to be used for either domestic or livestock water supply.
160000 240000 320000
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
!(
!(
LAND USE PLAN
!( !(!(!(
!( !( !(!(
!(
DISTRIBUTION OF BOREHOLES
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
Kweneng District
!(
REPORT OF SURVEY
!(
!( !(
!( !(
!( !(!( !(
!(
!( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Client: Southern District Council
!( !(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(!(
Mabutsane
!(
!(
!(!(!(!(!(
!( !(
!( !(
!(
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
!( !(
!( !(
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
!( !(
!(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(
!(
!(!( !(
!( !(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( Sekoma
!(
!( !(
!( !( !( !(
!( !( !( !(!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(!( !(
!(
!(!(
!( !(
!(
!(!(
!( !(!(
!( !(
!(
!(
N
Scale:
1:1,625,000 Map 3.21
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(!( !(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(!( !( !(
!( !(
!(
!( !(
Jwaneng
!(
!(
!(
!(!( !(
!(
!( !( !( !( ") !( !( !(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!( !(
!(
!( !(!( !(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
")!(
") !(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(
!( !(!(!( !( !(
!( !(
!(
!(!(!(!(!( !(
!( !(
!(!(!(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
") !(
!(
!(!(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(!(!(
!( !(!( !( !(!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!( !(
!(
!(!(!(
!( !(
!( !(
!(
!(!( !(
!( !(
!( !( !(
!( !( !(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!( !(
Mosopa
!( !( !(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(!(
!( !( !(
!(") !(
!(!(
!( !(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!( !( !(!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!( !( !( !(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
Manyana
!(!(
!(
!(
!(!( !(!(
!( !(
!( !(
!( !(
!( !(
!(
!( ")
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(!(
!( !( !(
!( !(
!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!( !(!( !( !(
!( !(
!(")!(
!(!(!(!(
!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!( !(
!(
!( !(
!( Maokane
!(!(!(
!( !(!(!( !(
!(
")")
!(
!( !(!( !(
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!( !(
!( !(!(
!(!(
!(!(
!( !( !(
!( !(
!(
!(!(
!(
!( !(
Legend
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!( !(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
Kanye
!(
!(
!(
!( !(!(
!( ")
!( !(
!(!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(!(
!(
") ")
!( !(
!(!(
!(
!(
Category
Distance to Borehole
!(
!(
!(
") !(
!( !( Lotlhakane
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(!(
!( !(
!(!(
!( !( !( !( !(
!(
!(!( !(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!( !( !(
!( !(!( !(!(
!(!(
!(!(
!( General/Village Supply > 4,0 km
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(
!( !( Gasita !(
!(
!( !(!(
!( !( !( !( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(!( !(
!( !( !(
!(
!(!( !(
!(
") Industrial
4,1 - 8,0 km
!(
!(
!( !(
!( !(!(!(!( !(
!(
!( !(!( !(!(!(
!(
!(!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
Molapowabojang
!( Irrigation
> 8,0 km
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( !( !(
!( !(
!( Livestock
!(
!(!( !(
!( !(
!( !( !( !(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(!( !( !(
!( Dry
!( !( !(
Mmathethe
!( !(
!(
!( Others Note: Dry borehole excluded from
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
the distance calculation
!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(!(!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(!( !( !(
!(
!( !(!(!(!(
!( !(!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!( !(
!( !(
!( !(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(!(!(
Number of Boreholes by Categories
!( !( !( !( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!( !(
!(!( !( !(
!(
!(!(
!( !(
!(
!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(
!(!(!( !(
!(
!(!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
Dry
GoodhopePitsane
!(
!(!(
!(!(
!(!( !(
!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(!(
!( !( !( !(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
General/Village Supply
!(
!(
!(!(!( !(
!( !(
!(
!(!( !(
!(!( !(!( !(!(!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!( !(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!(!(
!( !(
!( !( !(!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(!(!(
!( !( !(!(
!(!(
!( !(!( !( !( !(
!(
!(!( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!( !( !(
!(!(
Industrial
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( !(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(!( !(
!(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
Irrigation
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
Livestock
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Others
!(
!(
!(
0 100 200 300 400 500
Kilometers
0 10 20 40
R.S.A
Source:National Borehole Inventory, DGS
(UTM Zone 35 - Datum Cape)
S o u t h E a s t
3.7.42 There is no doubt that borehole technology has opened the western part of the District, for
livestock causing their rapid expansion in term of both distribution and density. With regard
to this several issues merit disscussion:
(i)
Firstly, based on data obtained from Department of Geological Survey and shown
on Map 3.22 it is apparent that the 8 kilometer spacing rule in order to control overgrazing
has not been adhered to throughout the District. On the contrary, mapped
REPORT OF SURVEY
59

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
(ii)
(iii)
data shows that in many cases distance between boreholes are less than 4 km
from each other.
Secondly, there seems to be no imposed rules and/or regulation as to the number
of livestock permited per borehole in order to control overgrazing. This in turn brings
into a focus the issue of bush encroachment, as well as irreversible degradation
around livestock water points. According to studies and research there seems to be
an agreement that most boreholes have a sacrafice zone (0-400m) with little
biological productivity.This is surrounded by a nutritious grass zone (200-800m)
followed by a bush encroachment zone (200-2000m). Beyond this there is a
relatively unaffected grazing reserve area.
At present the situation in the District concenring the above issues has not yet
reached alarming levels of degradation, but the carefull control of boreholes density
remains critical. If it continues without proper resource-directed measures it is likely
that a bush-dominant ecosystem would be creatred affecting pastoral production
figures, as decreased heterogenity of fodder resources occurs.
150000 225000 300000
!(
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
LIVESTOCK WATER POINT
REPORT OF SURVEY
!(
!(
Kweneng District
Client: Southern District Council
!(
!(
!(
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
!(
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
!(
!(
Mabutsane!(
!(
Scale: 1:1,250,000 Map 3.22
!(
!( !(
N
!( !(
!(
!(
!(!( Sekoma !(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Jwaneng
!( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Mosopa
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(
Manyana
!( !( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
Maokane !(
!( !(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!( !(
!(
Kanye
!(!(!(!(!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( Lotlhakane
!(
!( !(
Legend
!(
!(
!( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
Kgalagadi District
!( Gasita
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( Molapowabojang !(
!( Livestock Water Point Location
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(
!( !( !(
!(
Mmathethe
!(
!(
!(
Distance from Livestock Water Point
!(
!(
!( !( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
< 4.0 km
!(
!( !(
!( !( !(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( !(
!( !(!(
!(!( !(
4,1 - 8,0 km
!(
GoodhopePitsane !(
8,1 - 12,0 km
!(
!(
!(
> 12.1 km
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(!(
!( !(
!( !( !(
!(
!( !( !(
Proximity to Livestock Water Point
!(
!(
!( !(
Kilometers
Source:National Borehole Inventory, DGS R.S.A
0 10 20 40
7200000 7275000 7350000
S o u t h E a
(iv)
The haphazard distribution of village supply boreholes and livestock watering points
is consistent with the lack of rational land use planning in the District. In particular,
the random distribution of village supply boreholes indicates the proliferation of
settlements across the District. The mixed land use activity system is projected
through the proximity of village supply boreholes to livestock watering boreholes.
60 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
The intensity of village and livestock water supply boreholes is highest around
settlements especially in the eastern part of the District.
While the concentration of livestock around livestock watering points contributes to
nutrient enrichment of soils, dung and urine also subjects groundwater resource to
nitrate pollution. When livestock watering boreholes are close to village supply
boreholes the latter are vulnerable to pollution from nitrates.
Boreholes around and within settlements are susceptible pollutants from waste
emanating from settlements. The use of on-site sanitation systems is responsible
for the contamination of the village supply boreholes. In terms of vulnerability to
pollution of aquifers, the Kanye and Moshaneng dolomite aquifers have extreme
vulnerability.
Another noteworthy issue refers to “de facto” control over grazing in areas
throughout the District which has with no doubt gone to those who can afford
individual or syndicate boreholes. In addtion, recent agricultural policy allowed
fencing of grazing around these boreholes and therefore “de jure” control of the
grazing. This has left the small cattle-owner disadvantaged and many have (or are
bound) lost their cattle during droughts.
3.8 VEGETATION
VEGETATION TYPES AND ASSOCIATIONS
Map 3.23 Major Ecological Zones in SD
150000 225000 300000 375000
7200000 7275000
Kgalagadi District
Mabutsane
Sandveld Vegetation (64.8%)
Terminalia-sericea,Lonchocarpus-nelsii,
Acacia-erioloba
Acacia-mellifera,Acacia-luederitzii,
Boscia-albitrunca
Transitional Vegetation (12.5%)
Terminalia-sericea,Acacia-tortilis,
Ziziphus-mucronata
Hardveld Vegetation (22.8%)
Peltophorum-africanum,Acacia-tortilis,
Acacia-karroo,Ziziphus-mucronata
Peltophorum-africanum,Acacia-tortilis,
Terminalia-sericea
Source: MoA
Sekoma
Maokane
Kweneng District
Jwaneng
Gasita
Mabalane
Kanye
Mmathethe
Mosopa
Lotlhakane
Goodhope
Manyana
Lekolobotlo
Molapowabojang
South
East
Pitsane
Kilometers ´
0 10 20 40 60
3.8.1 As illustrated in Map 3.23, Southern District is divided into three ecological zones, namely
the Kalahari sandveld covering most of the District, the hardveld occupying the eastern
REPORT OF SURVEY
61

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
part, and a centrally located zone having elements of both and forming the ecological
transition between them.
3.8.2 The Kalahari sandveld occupies the greater part (64 percent) from west to east of the
District where its eastern boundary runs close to Ralekgetho west of Moshupa, Sese, west
of Samane, Seherelela, Maokane and Gasita to the north of Metlobo. The Kalahari
sandveld in the District is the domain of shrub savanna dominated by Acacia associations
(Acacia melifera, Acacia luederitzii and Boscia albitrunca). Frequent pans observed
throughout the northwestern section are, in most occasions fringed with relatively dense
(shrub) canopy cover with the central part that is either bare or covered by grassland.
Sandveld in the southeastern part of the District is interspersed by fossil valleys which, due
to microclimatic factors, soil effects and shallowness of groundwater, cause vegetation
changes relative to adjacent sandveld. Frequently observed in the fossil valleys are stands
of camel thorn trees (Acacia erioloba). They have roots that extend to the groundwater
enabling them to withstand drought conditions. These trees can grow up to 8 metres and
often provide shelter for livestock near water points.
3.8.3 Transitory vegetation zone constitutes about 12,5 percent of the District and consists of
Terminalia-sericea, Acacia-tortilis and Ziziphus-mucronata. It covers settlements that
include Samane, Mokhomma, Seherelela, Maokane and Gasita.
3.8.4 The hardveld vegetation zone lies to the east of Ralekgetho, Selokolela Metlobo and
Phitshane Molopo stretching from west to east and from south to north of the District. The
vegetation of the hardveld in the east is more diverse than in the sandveld. This ecological
zone is characterized by denser and taller vegetation due to higher precipitation, heavier
soil texture and higher nutrient content.
VEGETATION DISTRIBUTION AND MAJOR STRUCTURAL CATEGORIES
3.8.5 Studies undertaken by the Botswana Range Inventory Monitoring Project (BRIMP) – MoA in
collaboration with the Meteorological Department have shown that Normalized Difference
Vegetation Index (NDVI) derived from the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer
(AVHRR) satellite imagery can be effectively used in wide-range monitoring (studying))
vegetation dynamics and distribution over the Southern District. Briefly, AVHRR-NDVI is a
ratio of the measured intensities in the red (R) and near infrared (NIR) spectral bands of
AVHRR imagery. It provides a useful measure of photosynthetically active biomass over the
larger area being observed. It has also been shown to be well correlated with climate
variables especially rainfall in semi-arid environmental conditions.
3.8.6 Analysing mean AVHRR-NDVI values calculated for the three year period (2001-2004) and
shown on Map 3.24 it is clear that the distribution of vegetation in Southern District
generally follows the gradient in precipitation and soil moisture. Schematically, the
vegetation forms orderly progression of increasing greenness with rainfall gradient. To the
far west of the District where the climate becomes more arid, the sandveld vegetation
grades into a sparse and shrubby Acacia-dominated savanna eco-region. Moving eastward
the climate becomes moister and vegetation greenery slowly increases until the point where
the higher soils nutrient content of the hardveld together with greater amounts of rainfall
allow vegetation to develop more abundantly, hence forming a denser and diverse mix of
structural types.
62 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Map 3.24 East-West Greenness Spatial Profile
150000 225000 300000 375000
Seasonal NDVI - Mean Values (2001-2004)
Mabutsane
Kweneng
7200000 7275000
Vegetation
Greenness
High
325
´
Kgalagadi
1:2,500,000
W-E Profile L in e
375
425
Jwaneng
475
Kanye
Mosopa
525
Goodhope
South
East
RSA
Low
0 15 30 60
Kilometers
Mean Annual Railfall (mm/a)
Trend Line
Mean
Distance (in m)
Source: MoA, MD, GISPlan (Pty) LTD
3.8.7 From the point of view of cover types, four major vegetation structural categories can be
distinguished in the District. The most prominent are closed/open shrub savanna. Shrub
canopy cover in these vegetation domains is usually greater than 15 percent with canopy
height less than 3,5m. The tree layer is lacking due to a lack of rainfall. Going westwards
towards drier conditions shrub canopy cover becomes sparse leaving room to open
grasslands with herbaceous cover typically between 15 to 40 percent.
3.8.8 It should be noted that open/closed shrub savanna domains in the Southern District are
highly responsive to climate (rainfall) variability on relatively short time scales. This can be
best illustrated by Map 3.26 where the intra and inter-annual variations of the AVHRR-NDVI
values (as explained before) are used to demonstrate variability of the District’s vegetation
development over the period of three years 2001-2004. From the map one can clearly
observe that the vegetation cover especially in the open/closed shrub savanna is highly
variable. Namely, the minimum vegetation was developed during the 2001/02 growing
season characterized by extremely unfavourable (mostly dry) weather conditions. Very low
rainfall values over the whole 2001/02 period suppressed vegetation growth both directly
and through a reduction in the rate of rangeland resources. The situation has during
successive growing seasons (2002/03, 2003/04) improved illustrating resilience of the
open/closed shrub savanna domains and their ability to recover on a relatively short time
REPORT OF SURVEY
63

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
scale. However, the high responsiveness to climate variability coupled with comparatively
low rainfall values, reduced atmospheric humidity and soil nutrient deficits make these
vegetation domains very sensitive. The plant growth is, in comparison with the other
structural vegetation zones in the district, highly unpredictable, unstable and prone to
disturbance.
Map 3.25 Vegetation Structural Category in SD
150000 225000 300000 375000
Vegetation Structural Categories
Kweneng
Mabutsane
Sekoma
Bare Ground
Closed Shrubland
Open Shrubland
Kgalagadi
0.1
12.9
48.4
Maokane
Jwaneng
Gasita
Mabalane
Kanye
Mosopa Manyana
LekolobotloSouth
NtlhantlheEast
Lotlhakane
Molapowabojang
Mmathethe
7200000 7275000
Cropland
Grassland
4.4
29.3
Goodhope Pitsane
Wooded Grassland
Woodland
4.8
0.1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0 10 20 40 60
Kilometers
Source: USGS Interpreted: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD & GISPlan (Pty)LTD
¯
3.8.9 The second major vegetation structural category in the District refers to grassland which
covers most of the southern and eastern parts of the District. It is characterized by
herbaceous cover very often greater than 40(50) percent and tree and shrub canopy cover
less than 15(20) percent. In the southern part of the District, grassland is mixed with
agricultural fields (cropland) making a mosaic of agriculture and non-forest vegetation. As
illustrated on Map 3.26, this vegetation structural domain is also highly responsive to
climate (rainfall) variability. However, inter-annual vegetation composition and growth seem
to be less variable in comparison with adjacent open/closed shrublands. This is without
doubt a consequence of more favourable climatic conditions (higher gradient in
precipitation and soil moisture) which make this structural vegetation zone comparatively
more suitable for communal grazing and commercial livestock production.
3.8.10 Moving towards the District’s northeastern hilly area trees and shrubs begin to occur in
thickets forming mosaics of either wooded grassland or open woodlands with the tree
canopy cover between 15 percent to occasionally 40 percent. In these structural vegetation
domains the herbaceous stratum is almost continuous, while the tree layer increases with
increasing availability of water to the plants. The increase in woody cover is also associated
64 REPORT OF SURVEY

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
Growing season 2001/02
October November December January February March
Growing season 2002/03
October November December January February March
Growing season 2003/04
October November December January February March
Low
Vegetation Greenness
High Vegetation Greenness
Intra and Inter-annual Variations of the AVHRR-NDVI Values -
Used to Illustrate Variability of Vegetation Development in SD
over the period of 2001-2004
Map 3.26
Source: MoA - BRIMP, DMS
REPORT OF SURVEY
65

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
with an increase in woody plant diversity as well as with a decrease in the relative
importance of grasses as overall contributors of the area biomass. This vegetation zone is
often mixed with croplands periodically representing more than 30 percent of the vegetation
cover. From the point of view of inter-annual vegetation cover variability, it appears that this
vegetation domain is, in comparison with adjacent grassland and shrublands the most
stable. Owing to comparatively greater amounts of rainfall, it supports richer assemblages
of species and it is without doubt the major contributor of the overall District’s vegetation
production.
APPROACH FOLLOWED FOR ESTIMATION OF BIOMASS PRODUCTION IN THE DISTRICT
3.8.11 Since the combination of climatic, topographic and geological features in the Southern
District (especially its central and western part) limits crop production, most of the District’s
area belongs to rangeland used for communal grazing, commercial livestock production,
nature conservation and game ranching. In connection with that of the primary drivers of
sustainable rangeland use is the need to estimate its production potential usually expressed
as the total amount of plant material produced by the photosynthetic process during the
growing season.
3.8.12 Studies undertaken by the Botswana Range Inventory Monitoring Project (BRIMP)-MoA
showed that it is achievable to estimate total biomass production over a large area from the
AVHRR NDVI imagery by means of using them as surrogates of the production trends. With
regards to this an interactive method combining ground biomass measurements and
AVHRR NDVI indicators (MVC method on decades) has been developed as part of the
BRIMP Project and country-wide studies of the relationships between NDVI and vegetation
biomass production during and at the end of the plant-growing season has been
undertaken. As a result of this effort a strong functional relationship between plant materials
produced during the growing season and the AVHRR Normalized Difference Vegetation
Index (NDVI) was established. The growing season 2000/2001 was used to derive the
equation:
BIOMASS = 941.7519 + 11.2087 * ISNDVI (R2 =0.963) where: Biomass = green dry matter; ISNDVI = Integrated
Seasonal Normalized Difference Vegetation Index
3.8.13 The above equation is used in this study for the preparation of the Biomass map which
would indicate plant production potential over the Southern District. The process is not
trivial since it involved acquisition of a large number of 10-day (decad) AVHRR NDVI
imagery, known as Maximum Value Composites (MVC). Such MVCs are assumed to
represent the maximum vegetation “greenness” over the study area during the analyzed
period. A total of 54 AVHRR-NDVI decad MVC images for the three successive growing
seasons (2001 to 2004) were obtained from the BRIMP Project - MoA and the
Meteorological Department. Growing seasons’ worth of decad images (October-March) are
then integrated to construct three Integrated Seasonal NDVI images (ISNDVI). These three
ISNDVI images were then averaged in order to produce the 3-year Mean Integrated
Seasonal NDVI. A three-year growing seasons period was chosen for two reasons:
(i)
(ii)
To avoid extreme values in biomass production estimations as a consequence of
either unfavourable (dry) or favourable (wet) weather conditions prevailing during
the particular growing season and what is even more important;
To illustrate inter-annual variability in biomass production which is closely correlated
to total rainfall and its distribution over time.
66 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
THE BIOMASS PRODUCTION POTENTIAL MAPS OF THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT
3.8.14 Based on a calculation approach described above, two biomass maps for Southern District
are prepared. The first one (Map 3.27) indicates the District’s mean biomass values and
production pattern observed during three successive growing seasons 2001-2004. The
second map points to the growth pattern and quantity of plant material produced over the
District during each of the growing seasons analyzed (2001/2002, 2002/2003 and 2003/
2004). The two maps are a high-level aggregation of the biomass estimations determined in
tonnes per hectare and nominally categorized into just three classes (low-average-high).
Kg dry matter per ha
Map 3.27 W-E Profile of Biomass Production Estimates Over SD
(Average for the Growing Seasons 2001 to 2004)
Trend Line
Mean
W
Distance (in m)
E
!(
Morwamosu
´
0 20 40 80Kilometers
7200000 7275000
Kgalagadi
Khakhea
Vegetation Production
(tonnes dry matter/ha)
Low vegetation
production
Low to average
veg. production
Average to High
!(
< 2,3
2,31 - 2,4
2,41 - 2,5
2,51 - 2,6
> 2.61
!(
Kweneng
Maokane
Jwaneng
!(
Mmathethe
Mokgomane
Moshupa
!(
Kanye
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Good Hope
!(
South
East
Pitsane
Siding
R.S.A
Source: MoA, DMS Interpreted: GISPlan (Pty)LTD, Envirionmetrix (Pty)LTD
150000 225000 300000 375000
3.8.15 Summary statistics over the whole District for the analyzed three-growing seasons period
showed diverse biomass production approximations that ranged from 5.9E+06 tonnes in
2001/2002 to nearly 7.2E+06 tonnes during the 2003/2004 growing season. These shortscale
temporal differences are undoubtedly the results of inter-annual rainfall variations
between the plant-growing seasons. As illustrated on Map 3.28, the lowest total biomass
production is recorded at the end of the 2001/2002 growing season. That season was, as
already mentioned characterized by extremely unfavourable (dry) weather conditions which
noticeably restrained vegetation growth. On the other hand, much better weather (rainfall)
conditions recorded in the District during growing seasons 2002/2003 and especially 2003/
REPORT OF SURVEY
67

CHAPTER 3
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENT SYSTEM OF RESOURCES
2004 had as an outcome, a sharp rise in total biomass production over the whole district’s
area.
Map 3. 28 Biomass Production Estimates Over Southern District - (Growing Seasons 2001/02 to 2003/04)
!( Morwamosu
Growing Season 2001/02 Growing Season 2002/03
!( Morwamosu
Kweneng
Kweneng
Jwaneng
!(
Jwaneng
!(
Khakhea !(
Moshupa!(
Khakhea !(
Moshupa!(
!(
Maokane
!(
Kanye !(
!(
Maokane
!(
Kanye !(
Kgalagadi
Mmathethe !(
Kgalagadi
Mmathethe!(
!( !( Pitsa
Sidi
Good Hope
Mokgomane !(
!( !( Pitsan
Siding
Good Hope
Mokgomane !(
!( Morwamosu
Khakhea !(
Kgalagadi
Growing Season 2003/04
!(
Maokane
Kweneng
Jwaneng
!(
Moshupa!(
!(
Kanye !(
Mmathethe!(
!( !( Pitsan
Siding
Mokgomane
Good Hope
!(
Vegetation Production (tonnes dry matter/ha)
Very Low
Low

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
(usually above 2.6 tonnes/ha) and comparatively the most stable biomass production in the
District corresponds to its northeast part characterized by the presence of woody cover and
almost continuous herbaceous stratum. The medium (average) range production (>2.4
tonnes/ha) is usually associated with the District’s central and southeastern grassland area.
The western (open/closed scrubland) portion of the District usually exhibits low production
levels although there are situations recorded (such as the 2003/2004 growing season)
where production reached almost medium (average) level. As illustrated in the west-east
spatial profile accompanying Map 3.28, biomass production in the District is extremely
variable making it very sensitive and prone to disturbance.
THE DISTRICT’S RANGELAND GRAZING CAPACITY
3.8.17 The above efforts to estimate the total combined production of herbaceous layer and tree/
shrub leaf layer across the entire District at the end of the analyzed growing (wet) seasons
provided a sound basis for the preparation of Carrying Capacity Maps for the subsequent
dry seasons. The approach followed the methodology and recommendations developed by
the BRIMP Project. It is summarized along these lines:
(i)
(ii)
Studies undertaken in phase 2 of the BRIMP project have established the daily feed
requirements of a Livestock unit (LSU) as the equivalent to 12.00kg of dry matter
per day or 1920kg dry matter over the course of dry season. According to them this
is a critical figure and therefore it is used in this study for approximation of District’s
rangeland carrying capacity.
As far as the amount of biomass that can be assessed and consumed by LSU, a
figure of 50 percent biomass availability is assumed in calculation of the District’s
range carrying capacity. This figure is in line with a correction factor adopted by the
BRIMP Project during 2000/2001-season countrywide carrying capacity map
preparation. It means that although one Livestock Unit (LSU) requires approx. 2
tones of dry matter feed to survive a dry season, it should in reality have access to
four tones of range production in order to take account of the various losses and
level of unavailability. (BRIMP-Phase 2)
3.8.18 Following the assumptions and figures summarized above carrying capacity maps of the
District’s rangeland have been prepared for each of the growing season analyzed (2001/
02,2002/03,2003/04). These maps represent an attempt to approximate grazing capacity of
the District’s range that is based on reality rather than potentiality. They are categorized into
four nominal classes with approximation values expressed as number of hectares of range
in the District required to support one Livestock Unit (LSU).
3.8.19 Generally, the eastern, south-eastern and the central parts of the District recorded,
throughout the whole observation period, higher grazing capacity in the range of 3.4 Ha/
LSU. Towards the west grazing capacity declined as a result of the higher rainfall variability.
As illustrated on Map 3.28 in the area near and west of Khakhea rangelands can be
expected to be in a constant state of disequilibrium and the concept of grazing capacity has
little meaning.
3.8.20 In accordance with the above there is no doubt that the rangeland production in the District
follows the rainfall pattern. Therefore its potential expressed through biomass production,
and grazing capacity measured at a particular point in time and/or under certain ideal
conditions can give rises to error due to great spatial and temporal rainfall variability. While
long term averages may be required for general forward projections, the limitations of such
data should be fully recognised in the light of sharp fluctuations over time and space.
REPORT OF SURVEY
69

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7200000 7275000
7200000 7275000 7350000
Morwamosu
Khakhea
Morwamosu
Khakhea
150000 225000 300000
150000 225000 300000 375000
0 20 40 80
Kilometers
Mokgomane
Good Hope
Mokgomane
Pitsan
Sidin
Good Hope
Pitsan
Siding
Mmathethe
Mmathethe
Kgalagadi
Kgalagadi
Kanye
Kanye
Maokane
Maokane
Moshupa
Moshupa
Khakhea
7200000 7275000
>4.1
3.66-4.0
3.36-3.65
3.0-3.35

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
3.8.21 Apparently there is an operational need to monitor the production of the District’s rangeland
on a continuous basis. Activities already undertaken by the BRIMP project - MoA suggest
that constant monitoring of rangeland using remote sensing techniques together with
localised ground biomass measurements, provide the potential:
(i)
(ii)
To detect near real-time effects of local climate variability on rangeland production
potential against which immediate management actions can be assessed: and
To decouple, through continuous, long-term monitoring, the effects of local climate
variability from the effect of rangeland state due to management.
REPORT OF SURVEY
71

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
4 LAND AND RESOURCE USE
4.1 LAND TENURE
4.1.1 The land tenure system in the Southern District falls under two categories; Tribal and State
land. Most of the District’s areal extent 26 554 km 2 or 99.2 percent is tribal land. The
remaining 222 km 2 or 0.8 percent of the land is state land. Table 4.1 shows the disposition of
the land tenure system while Map 4.1 depicts the extent of the land tenure system in the
District.
Map 4.1 Land Tenure System in Southern District
160000 240000 320000
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
Morwamosu
Kokong
Mabutsane
Kweneng
REPORT OF SURVEY
Scale: 1:1,650,000
´
0 10 20 40 60
Kilometers
7200000 7280000
Legend
WMA
Land Tenure
Tribal Land
State Land
Khakhea
Kgalagadi
Keng
Sekoma
Tlhankane
Semane
Mokhomma
Maokane
Lorolwane
Jwaneng
Sese
Tsonyane
Seherelela Sesung
Selokolela
Gasita
Pitseng/Ralekgetho
Moshaneng
Mmathethe
Kanye
Lotlhakane
Moshupa
Ranaka
Magotlhwane
Maisane
Segwagwa
Molapowabojang
Mogojwegojwe
Lorwana
Gathwane
Manyana
Lekgolobo
Gopong
Ntlhantlh
Kgomokasitwa
Maruswa
Digawane
District Boundary
International Boundary
Ngwaketse/Rolong Land Board Boundaries
Ngwaketse Sub Land Board Boundaries
Wildlife Management Area
Sekhutlane
Tswaaneng
Metlobo
Sedibeng
Magoriapitse
Mokgomane
Gamajalela Leywana
Pitsane
Kgoro Potokwe
Good Hope
Tlharesele
Metlojane
Rakhuna
Hebron
Ramatlabama
Jwaneng_Planning_area
Jwaneng Township
Mine
!( Settlemnts
Source: DSM
Mabule
Tshedilamolomo
Dikhukhung
Leporung
Phitshane
Molopo
R.S.A
Phihitshwane
4.1.2 Tribal land may be further categorized into settlements, arable land, ranches, communal
rangeland grazing, and the Wildlife Management Area which cumulatively occupy 26 555km 2
or 99.2 percent of the District’s land mass. Common problems encountered under the tribal
land tenure system relate to conflicts between the different types of land uses under the
system of land tenure. Pressure from the community has led to the invasion of the Wildlife
Management Area through livestock grazing by communities close to the WMA. Another
notable conflict exists between grazing in ranches and communal rangeland grazing. This
arises from pressure on communal grazing areas through dual grazing by farmers from
private ranches, a practice that disadvantages farmers on communal grazing areas.
72 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
4.1.3 State land occupies 222km 2 or 0.8 percent of the District’s extent. State land comprises of
the Sedibeng Corridor Farms which occupy 222 km 2 (0.8 percent) and the two farms
namely: Panyane (15km 2 ) and Morule (14km 2 ) which were acquired by the Government in
1992 to reduce the shortage of land in Rolong Tribal area. The two farms remain State land
until the process of their tribalisation is finalised. Panyane and Morule farms are currently
being utilised for artificial insemination and as NAMPAADD production and training farms.
Non-tribalisation of Panyane and Morule farms hampers effective and sustainable utilisation
of the farms.
Table 4.1 Land Tenure System and Extent
Source: DSM
4.1.4 In the absence of a land use zoning system based on an integrated land use plan, there is
no rational land use activity system in the District. Subsequently,there is a myriad of land
use problems and conflicts between the different categories of land uses under the land
tenure system.
4.2 LAND AND RESOURCE USE
4.2.1 Southern District covers 26 776 km 2 of
land. Map 4.2 shows the major land uses in
the District at the general level, while Maps
4.3 to 4.9 detail land use within its parts.
The land use disposition for the District is
shown on Table 4.2. The major land use
category comprises of rangeland which is
the most extensive covering 15 094.6 km 2
or 56.4 percent of the total area. Ranches
occupy a total of 6239. km 2 (23.3 percent)
while arable fields occupy 2689.62 km 2
Table 4.2 Land Use Disposition in SD
Land Use Area in km 2 Percent
of Total
Settlements (Built-up Area) 212.5 0.8
Major Infrastructure Corridors 45.7 0.2
Agriculture 2689.6 10.0
Farms/Ranches 6239.2 23.3
Wildlife Management Area 2494.4 9.3
Rangeland 15094.6 56.4
Total 26776.0 100.0
Source: DSM, Environmetrix (Pty)LTD
which represents 10.0 percent of the total area. The Wildlife Management Area covers
2494.4 km 2 or 9.3 percent of the District’s total area. Settlement built-up areas occupy 212.5
km 2 of land (0.8 percent). The remainder 45.7km 2 ( 0.2 percent) is devoted to the major
infrastructure corridors.
RANGELAND
4.2.2 Rangeland is the most extensive land use covering 15 094 km 2 or 56.4 percent of the
District’s area. Communal rangelands are commonly used as pasture for domestic animals
and wildlife and the gathering of veld products. Non designation of land use zones subjects
it to invasion and depletion by other land uses.
REPORT OF SURVEY
73

!
7150000 7200000 7250000 7300000
100000
150000
Source: DSM, DTRP, Environmetrix (Pty) LTd, GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Open Shrubland
Sparse Vegetation Cover and/or Bare Soil
Grasland/Shrubland
Grassland /Natural Tree and Shrub Vegetation Cover
Rangeland
Hilly area with Natural Tree and Shrub Vegetation Cover
Pan
Wildlifw Management Area
4 km Transition Buffer
Agricultural
Farms/Ranches
Settlement/Village (Built-up Area)
Tertiary Road/Major Track
Railway
Secondary Road
Primary Road
Ngwaketse Sub Land Board Boundaries
!
Ngwaketse/Rolong Land Board Boundaries
Jwaneng Planning Area
International Boundary
District Boundary
Legend
Khakhea
Kgalagadi
Keng
Wildlife
Management
Area
District
Kokong
Mabutsane
100000
150000
Tlhankane
200000
Sekoma
200000
Mahotshwane
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! !
250000
300000
350000
Kweneng District
Jwaneng
Sese
Ralekgetho
Semane
Mokhomma
Lotlhakane
West
Mosopa
Manyana
Maokane
Tsonyane
Gasita
Seherelela
Sesung
Selokolela
Segwagwa
Moshaneng
Kanye
Lotlhakane
Ranaka
Ntlhantlhe
Magothwane
Molapowabojang
Lekolobotlo
Kgomokasitwa
Gopong
Lorolwane
Sekhutlane
Mabule
Tshedilamolomo
Metlobo
Tswaaneng
Dikhukhung
Leporung
Mmathethe Mogojwagojwe Maruswa
Digawane
Motsentshe Gatwane
Leywana
Gamajalela Kgoro
Magoriapitse Mogwalale Bethel
Pitsane
Goodhope
Tlhareseleele
Tswaanyaneng Metlojane Pitsane Potokwe
Mokgomane
Madingwana Rakhuna
Logogane Sheep
Farm
Sedibeng
Phitshane
Molopo
Hebron
Papatlo
Phiphitshwane
Ramatlabama
R.S.A
250000
300000
350000
South East
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
EXISTING LAND USE
REPORT OF SURVEY
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Kilometers
0 7.5 15 30 45
(UTM - Zone 35, Datum: Cape)
N
Map 4.2
74 REPORT OF SURVEY

7225000 7250000 7275000
300000
325000
350000
Ralekgetho
Lotlhakane
West
ne
ne Moshupa
Manyana
Seherelela
Sesung
Selokolela
Moshaneng Lekolobotlo
Ranaka
Kanye
Ntlhantlhe
Magothwane
Lotlhakane
Gasita
Kgomokasitwa
Segwagwa
Molapowabojang
300000
325000
350000
South East
Kweneng District
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
Kweneng
Kgalagadi
R.S.A
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
N
Map 4.3
South East
EXISTING LAND USE
Legend
District Boundary
International Boundary
Jwaneng Planning Area
Ngwaketse Sub Land Board Boundaries
Primary Road
Secondary Road
Railway
Tertiary Road/Major Track
Settlement/Village (Built-up Area)
Farms/Ranches
Cultivated Area
Dense Natural Tree and Shrub Vegetation Cover
Moderate Natural Tree and Shrub Vegetation Cover
Grasland/Shrubland
Grassland and/or Once Cultivated Area
Bare Soil and/or very Sparse Vegetation Cover
REPORT OF SURVEY
0 2.5 5 10 15 20
Kilometers (UTM - Zone 35, Datum: Cape)
REPORT OF SURVEY
75

South East
7150000 7175000 7200000
300000
Gasita
Metlobo
Tswaaneng
Leporung
Dikhukhung
300000
Segwagwa
Sedibeng
Pitsane
Molopo
325000
Lotlhakane
350000
Kgomokasitwa
Molapowabojang
Mmathethe
Motsentshe
Gamajalela
Mogojwagojwe
Gopong
Gatwane
Digawane
Leywana
Maruswa
Kgoro
Mogoriapitse
Mogwalale
Bethel
Pitsane
Mokgomane
Tswaanyaneng
Goodhope
Metlojane
Pitsane
Malokaganyane Potokwe
Madingwana
Tlhareseleele
Rakhuna
Logogane Sheep Farm
Ramatlabama
Hebron
Papatlo
Phiphitshwane
R.S.A
325000
350000
South East District
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
EXISTING LAND USE
Kweneng
Kgalagadi
R.S.A
Legend
District Boundary
International Boundary
Jwaneng Planning Area
Ngwaketse/Rolong Land Board Boundaries
Ngwaketse Sub Land Borad Boundaries
Primary Road
Secondary Road
Railway
Tertiary Road/Major Track
Settlement/Village (Built-up Area)
Farms/Ranches
Cultivated Area
Dense Natural Tree and Shrub Vegetation Cover
Natural Tree and Shrub Vegetation Cover
Grasland/Shrubland
Grasslandand/orOnceCultivatedArea
Bare Soil and/or very Sparse Vegetation Cover
REPORT OF SURVEY
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
0 2.5 5 10 15 20
Kilometers (UTM - Zone 35, Datum: Cape)
N
Map 4.4
76 REPORT OF SURVEY

South East
7150000 7175000 7200000
225000
225000
R.S.A
250000
Lorolwane
Sekhutlane
Mabule
250000
275000
Tshedilamolomo
275000
Gasita
Metlobo
Tswaaneng
Dikhukhung
300000
Leporung
300000
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
EXISTING LAND USE
Kweneng
Kgalagadi
R.S.A
Legend
District Boundary
International Boundary
Jwaneng Planning Area
Ngwaketse Sub Land Borad Boundaries
Primary Road
Secondary Road
Railway
Tertiary Road/Major Track
Settlement/Village (Built-up Area)
Farms/Ranches
Cultivated Area
Dense Natural Tree and Shrub Vegetation Cover
Natural Tree and Shrub Vegetation Cover
Grasland/Shrubland
Grasslandand/orOnceCultivatedArea
Bare Soil and/or very Sparse Vegetation Cover
REPORT OF SURVEY
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
0 2.5 5 10 15 20
Kilometers (UTM - Zone 35, Datum: Cape)
N
Map 4.5
REPORT OF SURVEY
77

7225000 7250000 7275000
hwane
225000
225000
Semane
250000
250000
Mokhomma
Maokane
275000
Jwaneng
275000
300000
Kweneng District
Sese
Tsonyane
Sesung
Seherelela
Gasita
300000
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
Kweneng
Kgalagadi
R.S.A
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
N
Map 4.6
South East
EXISTING LAND USE
Legend
District Boundary
International Boundary
Jwaneng Planning Area
Ngwaketse Sub Land Board Boundaries
Primary Road
Secondary Road
Railway
Tertiary Road/Major Track
Settlement/Village (Built-up Area)
Farms/Ranches
Cultivated Area
Dense Natural Tree and Shrub Vegetation Cover
Natural Tree and Shrub Vegetation Cover
Grasland/Shrubland
Grasslandand/orOnceCultivatedArea
Bare Soil and/or very Sparse Vegetation Cover
REPORT OF SURVEY
Kilometers
0 3.75 7.5 15 22.5
Kilometers (UTM - Zone 35, Datum: Cape)
78 REPORT OF SURVEY

7250000 7275000 7300000
Keng
175000
175000
Sekoma
Tlhankane
200000
200000
225000
Kweneng District
Mahotshwane
225000
Semane
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
N
Map 4.7
South East
EXISTING LAND USE
Kweneng
Kgalagadi
R.S.A
Legend
District Boundary
Jwaneng Planning Area
Ngwaketse Sub Land Board Boundaries
Primary Road
Secondary Road
Railway
Tertiary Road/Major Track
Settlement/Village (Built-up Area)
Farms/Ranches
Cultivated Area
Dense Shrub Vegetation Cover
Shrub Vegetation Cover
Grasland/Shrubland
Sparse Grassland/Shrub Vegetation Cover
Bare Soil and/or Very Sparse Vegetation Cover
Pan
REPORT OF SURVEY
Kilometers
0 3.75 7.5 15 22.5
Kilometers (UTM - Zone 35, Datum: Cape)
REPORT OF SURVEY
79

South East
7250000 7275000 7300000 7325000
100000
Kokong
100000
125000
125000
150000
Khakhea
150000
Mabutsane
175000
Kweneng District
Keng
175000
Sekoma
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
EXISTING LAND USE
Kweneng
Kgalagadi
R.S.A
Legend
District Boundary
International Boundary
Jwaneng Planning Area
Primary Road
Secondary Road
Railway
Tertiary Road/Major Track
Settlement/Village (Built-up Area)
Farms/Ranches
Shrub Vegetation Cover
Grasland/Shrubland
Sparse Grassland/Shrub Vegetation Cover
Bare Soil and/or Very Sparse Vegetation Cover
Wildlife Management Area
Pan
REPORT OF SURVEY
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
0 10 20
5
Kilometers
(UTM - Zone 35, Datum: Cape)
N
Map 4.8
80 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
4.2.3 Dense natural tree or shrub vegetative cover occupies close to 2 percent of the District’s
communal rangeland area. Rangeland with dense natural tree and vegetation cover occurs
in disjointed vegetation communities east to west from the border with South East District to
east of Sekoma and the boundary with Kgalagadi District.
4.2.4 Rangeland with moderate tree and shrub vegetation cover is more extensive than dense
vegetation where the former covers close to 10 percent of the communal rangeland and lies
interspersed with the latter from the eastern to the western part of the District. There is a
considerable decrease in the intensity of moderate tree shrub vegetation cover in
Mabutsane Sub-Land Board’s area of jurisdiction.
4.2.5 Most of the rangeland in the District is characterised by grassland and open shrubland
which occupy approximately half of the communal rangeland area. It occurs from the
eastern part of the District decreasing between Sekoma, Mabutsane and Khakhea and
remerging with a higher intensity from the Wildlife Management Area to the border with
Kgalagadi District.
4.2.6 Rangeland which is characterised by sparse shrub/grassland (or in some cases abandoned
arable areas) is the second most prevalent covering close to 32 percent of the communal
rangeland’s areal extent. This type of rangeland is more common in the western part and
decreases to the eastern part of the District.
4.2.7 Part of the District’s communal rangeland (around 7 percent) consists of either bare land or
land with very sparse vegetation. It is less common in the eastern part of the District
becoming more prevalent in the western half of the District.
RANGELAND DYNAMICS
4.2.8 The state of the rangeland is influenced by climatic factors and the utilisation of range
resources by humans, domestic and wild animals. Therefore, the condition of the rangeland
is never static and is subject to change over time.
RANGELAND ISSUES
4.2.9 The District is experiencing a depletion of rangeland resources. Rangeland depletion in the
eastern part of the District is mainly as a result of encroachment by arable land onto the
former and to a lesser extent through settlement expansion. The southeastern portion of the
District is a predominantly arable farming area that represents an area with a considerable
amount of rangeland depletion. The tract of land in Ngwaketse South agricultural district
stretching from Pitsane westwards through Barolong Farms to Metlobo has a limited
amount of rangeland left due to displacement by arable farming activities.
4.2.10 Rangeland depletion due to displacement by arable farming activities and settlement
growth coincides with the more populated eastern part of the District which has a higher
rainfall and is more suitable for rainfed crop production. Towards the western part of the
District, the effect of range depletion by arable farming and settlement development
diminishes owing to the unsuitability of this portion of the District to arable farming.
However, there is a marked reduction of the communal rangeland through the
establishment of private farms, ranches and the Wildlife Management Area in the western
part of the District.
4.2.11 The expansion of arable fields into the rangeland has resulted in the reduction of pasture for
domestic animals and wildlife especially in the eastern part of the District. Apart from the
REPORT OF SURVEY
81

CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
loss of forage for domestic and wild animals, rangeland depletion creates conflicts between
arable and pastoral farmers. In the western part of the District, the scarcity of fertile
cultivable soils compels farmers to identify soils that are suitable for cultivation in grazing
areas thereby reducing pasture for animals. Furthermore, the stimulation of interest in
arable farming by NAMPAAD causes a deterioration in conflicts between arable and
pastoral farming through the encroachment of the former onto the latter.
4.2.12 Grazing of animals in rangelands that are interwoven with arable fields gives rise to conflicts
between arable and pastoral farming which becomes further compounded by the residential
land use element sharing the same space in areas such as Barolong Farms. Mixed farming
activities are difficult to manage and do not permit the realisation of economic returns from
the optimum utilisation of the land resource among the competing uses.
4.2.13 Overstocking poses a huge threat to the environment in Southern District. In terms of
Southern District Settlement Strategy (1991 - 2001), the District has a maximum potential
carrying capacity of 227 821 cattle. Statistics reveal that in 2001, 2002 and 2003 the District
had 292 919, 336 915 and 302 325 cattle respectively which exceeds its carrying capacity.
This excludes other domestic stock such as goats, sheep, donkeys and horses and wildlife.
Farmers keep large numbers of cattle resulting in overgrazing of the rangeland and its
eventual degradation.
4.2.14 With regard to the above it
should be pointed out that
rangleland carrying capacity,
treated as biophysically
determined, depends to a
large extent on herd
composition and the temporal
and spatial patterns of grazing
pressure, all of which are
affected by livestock
management decisions.
7188818 7189568 7190318
Figure 4.1 An illustration of “Piosphere Effects” around Water
Point in the District.
269258 270008 270758
Furthermore, potential
carrying capacity is with no
doubt variable is heavily
correlated to total rainfall and
its distribution over time and
space. Consequently a longterm
average, including upper
and lower limits are required
for making more realistic
conclusions. However, the
current grazing pressure,
especially in terms of spatial
pattern should be fully
recognized as an issue
leading to rangeland
deterioration.Rangeland degradation in the District is also noticeable in the multiplicity of
boreholes which has breached the 8km borehole spacing rule with some boreholes being
as close as 300m apart. Since the District has poor water resources, overstocking takes
place around watering points. This has resulted in the ‘piosphere effect’ which is a high
herbivore pressure around the water point (See Fig 4.1) as the combined effect of grazing,
excretion and trempling by domestic stock resulting in the depletion of vegetation cover. It is
generally agreed that most boreholes affected have a sacrafice zone (0-400m) with little
82 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
biological productivity. This is surrounded by a nutritious grass zone (200-800m) followed
by a bush encroachment zone (200-2000m). In the event of the degraded areas around
boreholes merging serious land degradation and loss of pasture in the widened piosphere
occurs.
4.2.15 Patches of bare ground are noticeable in the rangeland, representing the trempling effect of
livestock or abandoned formerly cultivated pieces of land. These are common in the
western part of the District and constitute a threat to the ecological stability of the
rangelands.
4.2.16 Over-harvesting of veld products such as fuel wood, grass, poles, etc constitutes a serious
threat to the environment. Wanton removal of vegetation cover exposes the land to
degradation through soil erosion and the exacerbation of desertification. In particular, the
removal of vegetation in the hilly eastern part of the District that receives higher rainfall
results in a significant increase in soil erosion and a reduction in the water holding capacity
of the land.
Map 4.9 Rangeland Degradation in Southern District (January 1984 and 1994)
1984 1994
Percentage
> 40 %
30-39.9 %
20-29.9 %
7-19.9 %
RSA
4-6.9 %
< 3.9 %
´
Kilometers
RSA
0 25 50 100
Source: NCSA
4.2.17 Maps 4.9 and 4.10 show changes in
the state of the rangeland between
1984 and 1994. The year 1984 was
about mid-way through the drought
that ravaged the nation between 1981
and 1988 while 1994 falls within the
post-drought recovery period. Most of
the Southern District’s rangeland was
about 40 percent degraded save for
the area between Pitsane and
Ramatlabama which had insignificant
degradation. Barolong and Sedibeng
farms area was the worst hit with a
range degradation in excess of 40
percent.
´
Map 4.10 Rangeland Degradation Change in Southern
District between 1984 and 1994
Kilometers
0 25 50 100
RSA
Percentage
> 60 %
45-60 %
30-44.9 %
20-29.9 %
10-19.9 %
< 9.9 %
Source: NCSA
4.2.18 By 1994, the northeastern corner and the southernmost part of the District from Pitsane
through Barolong and Sedibeng Farms through to Sekhutlane had significant improvement
of between 30 and 60 percent. The mid-portion of the District had some improvement in the
state of the range of between 20 and 29 percent. The extreme eastern part and the
REPORT OF SURVEY
83

CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
southwestern corner of the District had a slight positive change of between 10 and 19
percent. The northwestern end of the District showed negative change with drought
conditions prevailing in the area between Mabutsane and Kokong.
4.3 ARABLE AGRICULTURE
4.3.1 Arable fields in Southern District cover 2689.6 km 2 which is equivalent to 10 percent of the
total area. There is no discernible rational arable land use pattern in the District. A striking
feature of the arable land use pattern however, is that most cultivation takes place in the
eastern part of the District. Arable farming activities are conspicuously absent in the
western portion of the District in the area under Mabutsane Sub Land Board’s jurisdiction.
FACTORS INFLUENCING DISTRIBUTION OF ARABLE FIELDS
4.3.2 Apart from the lack of a rational land use zoning system, the distribution of fields in the
District is influenced largely by climatic factors, topography, soils and other factors such as
rangeland activities, built-up areas, ranches, Wildlife Management Area, service
infrastructure, etc.
LAND USE PLANNING
4.3.3 A limited extent of planned arable land is in the form of ranches. Arable land is therefore
largely unplanned existing in mixed farming settings separated by intervening communal
rangeland grazing and settlements. Arable farmland is much more contiguous albeit
interspersed with communal rangeland in the southeastern part of the District in the
Barolong Area.
4.3.4 SOIL SUITABILITY FOR ARABLE FARMING
A total of 17 108.5 km2 (63.9 percent) of land is characterised by soils which are considered
suitable for arable farming as shown on Map 4.11. This land lies in the eastern part of the
District east of Sekoma. Pockets of soils considered unsuitable for arable farming however,
occur and are associated with the hardveld tongue, river valleys and the hilly terrain in the
eastern part of the District. Of the 17 108.5 km 2 of land classified as suitable for arable
farming, 2676.5 km 2 or 15.6 percent is under cultivation. Most of the land with soils
considered suitable for arable farming towards the western part of the District are not under
cultivation as they have moderately low to unreliable suitability for rainfed cultivation in view
of the low rainfall range from 375mm/a to 425mm/a. Consequently the bulk 14 432 km 2
(84.4 percent) of land with soils considered suitable for arable farming is devoted to
communal rangeland pastoral farming and private ranches. In view of some settlements in
the District falling within land considered suitable for arable farming, land use conflicts arise
when settlement expansion occurs displacing arable fields.
4.3.5 Some cultivation in the eastern part of the District takes place on land which is considered
not suitable for arable farming. Cultivation on such land is bound to result in low yields and
losses to farmers in terms of the inputs into the farming activities with the result that the
economic livelihoods of farmers and their households become threatened in both
subsistence and commercial farming activities. It is therefore imperative that the land use
plan provides guidance to arable farming in terms of directing arable farming activities to
land with soils classified as suitable for arable farming.
84 REPORT OF SURVEY

South East
CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
100000
150000
200000
- Soils with Water Holding Capacity (AWC) of not
less than 70 mm at field capacity;
- Soils with depth not less than 100 cm;
- Soils with depth of 50-100cm with AWC above 110 mm;
- Terrain with the maximum slope of 8%;
- Soils with Electrical Conductivity (ECe) of less than 2 mS
intopspil(0-50cm)andlessthan4mSinsubsoil(51-100cm)
- Soils acidity (pH) shoudl be within the range of 5.5 - 8.3.
7150000 7200000 7250000 7300000 7350000
Suitabilty criteria used:
Kgalagadi
Khakhea
Sekoma
Mabutsane
Morwamosu
100000
150000
200000
250000
250000
Kweneng
Jwaneng
Maokane
300000
R.S.A
300000
Mmathethe
350000
Moshupa
Kanye
Good Hope
350000
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
DISTRIBUTION OF SUITABLE AND
UNSUITABLE SOILS FOR
ARABLE FARMING
200000
150000
100000
50000
00
Suitable
Soils
Unsuitable
Soils
Cultivated
Land
Category Area in km 2
Suitable Soils 17208.5
Suitable Soils by Texture
Coarse 13628.2
Medium 1366.8
Fine 2213.5
Unsuitable Soils 10033.3
Cultivated Land 2676.5
REPORT OF SURVEY
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
N Scale: 1:1,500,000 Map 4.11
Source: MoA - NAAMPAD
REPORT OF SURVEY
85

CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
LAND SUITABILITY FOR RAINFED CROP PRODUCTION
4.3.6 Arable fields are concentrated in the eastern part of the District where land generally ranges
from moderate to high suitability for rainfed crop cultivation. This part of the District
experiences high rainfall that ranges between 475mm\a and 575mm\a. The eastern portion
of the District has a lower average percentage coefficient variation of summer rainfall of 30
percent. Most soils in this part of the District range from moderately fertile to fertile.
However, cultivation has eluded land which is either unsuitable or classified as having low
suitability for rainfed crop farming as a result of the presence of rugged topography. Map
4.12 shows land suitability for crop production.
4.3.7 Land suitability for rainfed crop production decreases toward the western part of the District
where rainfall decreases from 425mm\a and 325mm\a. In addition, there is a higher
average percentage coefficient variation of summer rainfall of 50 percent. Soil fertility in the
western part of the District is low.
4.3.8 While land in the eastern part of the District is considered suitable for rainfed arable farming
there exist pockets of land which are considered unsuitable for rainfed crop production and
which may be considered for other land use activities. However, where different land use
activities exist side by side, land use conflicts do arise.
100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
Morwamosu
Kweneng
LAND SUITABILITY FOR RAINFED
CROP PRODUCTION
REPORT OF SURVEY
7150000 7200000 7250000 7300000
Kgalagadi
Khakhea
Mabutsane
Suitability Class Area %
High 0.2
Moderately high 6.9
Moderate 10.4
Moderately low 22.3
Low 0.8
Very low 3.6
Mostly not suit 2.8
Not suitable 2.4
Unreliable 50.6
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
Sekoma
Jwaneng
Maokane
N Scale: 1:1,600,000 Map 4.12
Mmathethe
Kanye
Good Hope
Moshupa
R.S.A
South East
Source: MoA - NAMPAADD
86 REPORT OF SURVEY

CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
7125000 7200000 7275000 7350000
Morwamosu
Khakhea
150000
Mabutsane
Kgalagadi
150000
Sekoma
225000
300000
Kweneng
D+Dr
Dr
Jwaneng
Dr
Dr Dr
T
T
T
Maokane
Dr Dr
T
T
T Moshupa
T
D+Dr
T
D+T T T
D+Dr T T
T T T T
Dr D+T
T T
T
D+T D+T
Dr
T
T
T T T
T
T
T
Dr
Kanye Dr
T
Dr T T T
T
Dr
T
T
Dr+T
T
Dr Dr
T
T
D+Dr+T
Dr T Dr
Dr
Dr+T
D+T
Dr T
T
T
Dr+T
D+Dr
T
T
D
Dr Dr
T T
T Dr
Dr T T
T
T
T T
T T
T
Dr
T
D
T
T
T
Dr
Good Hope
Dr+T Dr
Dr+T
Dr
Dr
Dr
T
T
Dr Dr
T T
Mmathethe
R.S.A
225000
300000
South East
T
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
SOIL SUITABILITY FOR
IRRIGATION
Nongabe
Irrigable
High HghLm Limitations aon
Moderate ModeaeLm Limitations aon
Slight SghLm Limitations aon
00 0 100 200 300 400 500
%ofTotal
* Limitation Factors:
D - Depth
Dr - Drainage
T - Topography
Suitability Class Area in km 2
Slight Limitations 1441.8
Moderate Limitations 12019.2
High Limitation 4587.4
Non Irrigable 9193.3
REPORT OF SURVEY
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
N Scale: 1:1,500,000 Map 4.13
Source: MoA - NAMPAADD
REPORT OF SURVEY
87

CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
SOIL SUITABILITY FOR IRRIGATION
4.3.9 The suitability of soils for irrigation is shown on Map 4.13. As outlined earlier, most arable
farming activities occur as rainfed crop production in the eastern part of the District. There
are no prospects for irrigated crop production in the eastern part of the District in view of the
limitations presented by rugged topography, soil drainage and depth. Land considered
moderately suitable for irrigation has moderate soil and topography deficiences. These
soils are found in the central part of the District. The main limitation in this area however, is
the low natural soil fertility and limited water supply. Most of the land with moderate
limitations for irrigation has been devoted to grazing in the communal rangeland and private
ranches.
CROP PRODUCTION BY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
4.3.10 The District is divided into 5
agricultural districts namely Barolong,
Ngwaketse North, Ngwaketse Central,
Ngwaketse South and Ngwaketse
West as shown on Map 4.14.Crop
production is mostly undertaken on a
traditional subsistence basis
techniques resulting in low crop yields.
4.3.11 Ngwaketse North agricultural district’s
growing season ranges from 101 to
120 days. The bulk of the eastern part
of Ngwaketse Central and Barolong
have a growing season of 101 to 120
days with their western limits having
between 81 to 100 days respectively.
The greater western part of
Ngwaketse South has a shorter
growing period of between 61 and 80
days. A small portion in the eastern
part of Ngwaketse West agricultural
district has a growing season of 81 to
100 days while between Tsonyane
and Sekoma the duration of the
growing season shortens to between
61 and 80 days. Map 4.15 shows the
duration of the growing season in
Southern District
4.3.12 The Land Board allocates subsistence
arable of 400m x 400m (16ha).
NAMPAAD recommends larger farm
sizes in order to make farming
economically viable. Table 4.3 shows
the yields of the main crops planted in
each agricultural district.
7200657 7280657
105006 185006 265006 345006
´
Mabutsane
Kgatleng
Kilometers
0 25 50 100
Agricultural Districts
Ngwaketse Central
Ngwaketse North
Ngwaketse South
Mabutsane
41-60 days
Ngwaketse West
Barolong
61-80 days
Kweneng
Jwaneng
Jwaneng
Moshupa
Kanye
81-100 days
Kanye
Good Hope
Moshupa
RSA
S o u t h E a s t
Source: MoA
112579 192579 272579 352579
´
Kilometers
0 25 50 100
Map 4.14 Agricultural District in SD
Map 4.14 Length of the Growing Season
Kgatleng
Kweneng
101-120 days
Good Hope
S o u t h E a s t
RSA
Source. MoA
88 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 4.3-: Total Area Planted and Yields of Sorghum, Maize and Pulse by District in Southern District
Source: Tahal Consulting Engineers Ltd. NAMPAADD
4.3.13 The main crops which are grown in the District are sorghum, maize and pulses. The highest
crop yield per hectare comes from sorghum, a drought resistant crop with a total yield of
1263 kg/ha. Barolong agricultural district is the most productive for each of the three crops
per hectare. This happens in the backdrop of the small areal extent of the District and mixed
farming practices in the latter which threaten the realization of the full potential of the
agricultural district’s full productivity potential. Ngwaketse Central has the second highest
yield of sorghum per hectare. However, Ngwaketse South is best suited to maize and the
production of pulses. Ngwaketse West showed a fairly high productivity in the production of
pulses at 166 kg/ha. Agro-climatic conditions play a major role in crop production in the
District making it imperative that measures be put in place for the maximisation of crop
production through land use planning and the application of good management and
production techniques.
ARABLE FARMING ISSUES
4.3.14 Arable fields are often interspersed with intervening rangeland which is used for grazing
and livestock watering points The mixed farming set up which is common in the eastern part
of the District creates conflicts through competition between cultivation, settlements and
pastoral farming for the finite land resource where settlements encroach onto arable and
grazing land and fields expand onto grazing land diminishing the animals’ habitat. A case in
point is the Barolong Farms area where there is mixed arable and livestock farming as well
as residential development. Non-seperation between arable and grazing land often results
in animals destroying crops leading to conflicts between arable farmers and pastoral
agriculturalists.
4.3.15 There is a correlation between the distribution of arable fields and settlements. Arable fields
have an affinity for location at the outskirts of settlements except in cases where limitations
to arable farming exist such as around Kanye. Where fields lie on the edge of built-up areas
they become impediments to settlement growth. On the other hand arable land is lost where
fields have to give way to settlement expansion.
4.3.16 Settlement encroachment onto arable land puts households in a great disadvantage since
in order for them to be empowered economically, be self-sustaining and productive they
should retain and utilise land close to their homes. Where alternative suitable arable land is
scarce, farmers are unwilling to surrender their land to other development pressures and
relocate to far away. Interest in arable farming has been further stimulated by policies such
as NAMPAADD with more allocations around settlements whose growth cannot be directed
REPORT OF SURVEY
89

CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
towards fields but to grazing land. It is therefore a great challenge for the planner to protect
the agricultural economic bases of households around settlements while at the same time
ensuring that settlements are accorded room for expansion.
4.3.17 Some farmers in the District are converting their arable fields into small stock farms against
the backdrop of the potential for rainfed arable farming being limited to only a portion
(eastern part) of the District. This has the effect of reducing the potential for crop production
in the District.
4.3.18 The eastern part of the District is on account of higher rainfall and fertile soils considered
suitable for rainfed crop farming. While the primary use of this part of the District should be
arable agriculture the community prefers instead to practise mixed farming of crop
cultivation and livestock farming alongside residential land use. In the western part of the
District there is a shortage of soils that are suitable for arable farming therefore whatever
little soil there is that might be used for cultivation in grazing areas, people prefer to be
allocated fields thereon. In both instances farmers believe that mixed farming would result
in the optimum utilisation of land. Land use conflicts are associated with such practices and
the full potential of the land is never realised.
4.3.19 Some cultivation is taking place on land with soils considered not suitable for arable
farming. Such practice is inclined to result in low yields that are inconsistent with input
thereby putting farmers at a great disadvantage. There might be need to improve soil
fertility through the use of fertilisers. Cultivation on fragile soil on the hilly terrain in the
eastern part of the District is inclined to exacerbate land degradation through soil erosion.
4.3.20 Some soils considered suitable for arable farming are not under cultivation as the land has
been set aside for ranches, coincide with communal grazing land, have low suitability for
rainfed crop farming or irrigation. In the eastern part of the District those soils that are
considered suitable for arable farming but remain uncultivated coincide with grazing land in
a mixed farming set up where ideally land should be devoted to crop farming. The
aforementioned shortcomings highlight problems emanating from the absence of rational
zoning of land for specific uses.
4.3.21 The potential for irrigation in the District is severely constrained by depth of groundwater,
drainage and topographical limitations. Therefore rainfed crop farming emerges as the
viable alternative in the eastern part of the District.
4.3.22 The absence of a clear boundary between Southern and Kweneng Districts has led to cross
boundary allocations of arable fields. This creates administrative problems that deserve
speedy resolution.
LIVESTOCK FARMING
4.3.23 Livestock farming in Southern District is undertaken through pastoral farming in the
communal rangeland and on private ranches. Livestock farming involves the rearing of
cattle, sheep, goats, horses, donkeys, ostriches and other small stock. Table 4.4 provides
statistics on the livestock population in the District between 2001 and 2003. Cattle
constitute the bulk of the livestock in the District totaling 302 325 or 60.2 percent of the
livestock population in 2003. Goats and sheep together totalled 167 682 or 26.4 percent.
Donkeys numbered 59 178 (11.8 percent) while there were 6 992 horses or 1.4 percent and
1 464 ostriches or 0.3 percent of the total livestock population.
90 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 4.4: Livestock Population 2001-2003
Source: MOA, Gaborone, 2004
4.3.24 In terms of the Southern District Settlement Strategy (1991-2011) the District has a
maximum potential carrying capacity of 227 821 cattle. With a total of 302 325 cattle in
2003, the District has exceeded the potential carrying capacity by 74 504 cattle. This
translates into pressure on land and associated resources. The excess of cattle above the
carrying capacity is inclined to result in overgrazing, removal of vegetative cover and soil
erosion. The large number of cattle would require more grazing land resulting in conflicts
between pastoral and arable farming.
4.3.25 It should, however be pointed out that rangleland carrying capacity, treated as biophysically
determined, depends to a large extent on herd composition and the temporal and spatial
patterns of grazing pressure, all of which are affected by livestock management decisions.
Furthermore, potential carrying capacity is with no doubt variable heavily correlated to total
rainfall and its distribution over time and space. Consequently a long-term average,
including upper and lower limits are required for making more realistic conclusions.
However, the current grazing pressure, especially in terms of spatial pattern should be fully
recognized as an issue leading to rangeland deterioration.
4.3.26 Table 4.5 shows that most cattle are found in
Ngwaketse South and Ngwaketse North
Table 4.5: Catle Distribution by District
respectively. Barolong agricultural district has the
least number of cattle. However, since Barolong
District
Barolong
Cattle population
12 025
agricultural district is prime arable farming area, Ngwaketse North 59 731
mixed arable and livestock farming subject crop
Ngwaketse Central 88 608
farming to disruption by livestock farming. The
Ngwaketse South 68 157
western part of the District is devoted mostly to
Ngwaketse West 88 653
pastoral farming therefore livestock farming in this
TOTAL 317 174
part of the District is not bound to cause conflicts
Source: MOA, Gaborone, 2004
with other land uses except with the Wildlife
Management Area. Livestock farming in the eastern part of the District creates conflicts with
arable farming as this part of the District is suited to crop cultivation.
4.3.27 The District has ranches established in terms of the Tribal Grazing Land Policy. The
creation of ranches was achieved through fencing part of the communal rangelands whose
primary objective was geared towards preventing over-exploitation of the communal
grazing lands. A number of problems have arisen as a result of the establishment of
ranchers Communities in the District felt that people from outside their areas would have
access to their land. Some ranches are overstocked and overgrazed. In some instances
ranchers still hold onto their cattle posts and practise dual grazing transferring livestock
between ranches and communal grazing areas depending on grazing conditions. This
REPORT OF SURVEY
91

CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
practice exerts excessive pressure on the communal grazing area to the disadvantage of
those farmers on communal rangelands who do not practise dual grazing. Ranches have
also been criticised for preventing the free mobility of animals over large areas and
preventing access by communities to range resources.
4.3.28 The demarcation of ranches in parts of the District has not taken cognisance of
neighbouring settlements and other land uses. Cases in point are Tlhankane, Lorolwane
and Sekhutlane where ranches have surrounded settlements with no provision for
settlement expansion, arable farming and direct access to communal land. There is no
doubt that rationality is required in the dedication of land around settlements for other land
uses.
TREK ROUTE
4.3.29 Livestock has free movement in the open rangeland except that movement may be
obstructed by developments that include settlements, fenced fields and ranches. In
particular, the ranches in the mid-western portion of the District emerge as major barrier to
the movement of livestock. In order to break such barriers there are two major livestock
trek routes in Southern District. The northern trek is the Ghanzi - Lobatse trek route that
runs through the District from the north of Morwamosu through Samane, Tsatsu,
Mmathethe exiting the District through Gopong. The southern trek runs from Molopo farms
through JN17 farm eastwards to Tsatsu where it joins the Ghanzi – Lobatse trek route. The
trek ranges in width from 200m to 1.5km. Boreholes have been drilled for watering cattle
along the route. The trek route is an important feature in the livestock farming sector and
has influence in land use planning.
WILDLIFE
4.3.30 Wildlife in Southern District is found in the rangeland and the S02 Wildlife Management
Area and private game ranches. Table 4.6 shows wildlife trends between 2001 and 2003
while Map 4.15 shows the distribution of wildlife in the District. Southern District has 4
private ranches namely; Doornlaagte, Kojane, Bonyamabono and Vikings. There is a total
of 8 ostrich farms namely: Maradu, Itlholatau, BDF, Pitsane, Neejoy nee, Ostrich
Development Company, Ultimate Ostrich farm, Sunben and Carlfe De Bruyn Springbok
constituted the most wildlife species which numbered 5 497 or 41.9 percent of the wildlife in
the District in 2003. Hartebeest was the second most populous species numbering 2 540 or
19.3 percent followed by Kudu (1 599) or 12.2 percent and steenbok with a population of
1430 or 10.9 percent of the District’s wildlife population.
Table 4.6: Wildlife Population in Southern District, 2001-2003.
Source: Department of Wildlife Gaborone 2004
92 REPORT OF SURVEY

CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
7250000 7300000
100000 150000 200000
Kweneng District
Kokong
Mabutsane
Mahotshwane
Wildlife
Management
Area
Sekoma
Keng
Khakhea
Tlhankane
Kgalagadi District
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
WILDLIFE DISTRIBUTION
REPORT OF SURVEY
Kilometers
0 7.5 15 30 45
(UTM - Zone 35, Datum: Cape)
N
Map 4.15
Legend
District Boundary
Wildlife Management Area
4 km Transition Buffer
Community managed Wildlife
Utilisation in Livestock Area
Major Road
Settlement/Village (Built-up Area)
Farms/Ranches
Pan
Wildlife Distribution
Hartebeest, 1994 Hartebeest, 2003
Springbok, 1994 Springbok, 2003
Steenbok, 1994 Steenbok, 2003
Source: Department of Wildlife, 2004
REPORT OF SURVEY
93

CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
4.3.31 On account of the concentration of population, settlements and arable fields, there is a clear
absence of wildlife in the eastern part of the District. The western part of the District
provides much of the wildlife habitat with the TGLP ranches and the SO2 Wildlife
Management Area having the highest concentration of wildlife.
4.3.32 The Wildlife Management Area covers 2510 km2 in extent. It was established in order to
provide a migratory corridor for wildlife as a link between Central Kalahari Game Reserve
and Kgalagadi Transfrontier National Park. The utilisation of the area has been bestowed
upon Mekgatshi Community Trust which comprises of the villages of Mabutsane, Sekoma,
Mahotshwana, Khonkhwa, Keng, Itholoke, Khakhea, Kanaku, Kutuku, Kokong and
Morwamosu. The trust was formed in order to manage as well as protect the environment
and conserve natural resources within the game farm and the SO2 community area with a
view to promoting tourism. The formation of the Trust was also meant to support research
on nature conservation, generate revenue for the local community from tourism as well as
ensure equitable sharing of the benefits of the natural resources within the WMA and SO2
community area. However, the utilisation of the Wildlife Management Area by the
community has not yet commenced.
4.3.33 The community living around the WMA feels that the Wildlife Management Area is a vast
piece of land that is underutilised. The community is therefore exerting pressure on the
Land Board to allocate arable fields and cattle posts in addition to the few allocations
already made within the Wildlife Management Area. Grazing of livestock and arable
agriculture within the Wildlife Management Area are in direct conflict with the use of the
area as a wildlife habitat. Grazing of domestic animals in the WMA results in conflicts
between cattle and wildlife through competition for land, water and grass, predation and
animal disease risks.
4.3.34 The Trans Kalahari highway traverses the WMA thereby disturbing the free movement of
game within the WMA and between Gemsbok National Park and Central Kalahari Game
Reserve. Vehicular traffic along the highway has increased wildlife mortality through
accidents. Unless measures are adopted to reduce wildlife mortality along the road, wildlife
would remain under the threat of accidents.
4.3.35 The Bathoen Dam bird sanctuary is located about 1.61km from Bathoen dam in Kanye.
The sanctuary provides a habitat for birds. The sanctuary is under threat from activities that
have encroached into the area gazetted as the sanctuary. Mmakgodumo Dam is a source
of water for livestock farmers some of whom have established cattle posts within the
sanctuary. In addition, the Land Board has allocated residential, commercial and industrial
plots which have subsequently been developed within the sanctuary. Apart from the threat
and conflicts exerted by the encroaching land uses no compensation has been made in
respect of encroaching developments.
4.3.36 Bathoen Dam Nature Sanctuary Management Trust seeks to manage the sanctuary with
the following objectives:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
To utilise the natural resource in the area in a way that would protect, maintain and
promote nature conservation.
To highlight the importance of nature conservation with a view to boosting tourism.
To use the natural resource sustainably for the benefit of the surrounding
communities and the District.
4.3.37 Encroachment into the bird sanctuary by other land uses constitutes a threat to the viable
utilisation of the area as a nature conservation area. The need for the protection of the area
from invasion by other land uses cannot be over-emphasized.
94 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
329000
7231000
7232000
7233000
7234000
329000
330000
330000
331000
331000
332000
332000
333000
334000
Map 4.16: Bird View on Bathoem Dam and Surroundings
Meters
´
0 125 250 500 750
333000
334000
7231000
7232000
7233000
7234000
95 REPORT OF SURVEY

CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
HUNTING
4.3.38 The area zoned as a Controlled Hunting Area in the District is the S02 Wildlife Management
Area. Abutting the S02 Wildlife Management Area to the west and east are the S01 and
S03 community multipurpose areas respectively. Wildlife species in the District include:
eland, kudu, hartebeest, wildbeest, springbok, duiker, steenbok, warthog, baboon and
jackal. The population of wildlife species in the District has been declining over the years.
In view of the declines in wildlife numbers, the Department of Wildlife and National Parks
has placed a moratorium on hunting in order to permit the replenishment of the wildlife
population in the District. It is indeed fundamental that there be sound management of
wildlife resources in order to boost the tourism potential of the District and exploitation of
wildlife resources for the benefit of communities.
TOURISM
4.3.39 The District does not have a well-developed, vibrant tourism sector. However, it has a
tourist potential that hinges on sites of historic interest and nature conservation areas. Map
4.18 and Table 4.7 show sites of historic, archaeological, scenic beauty and natural interest.
Table 4.7: Natural, Historic, Archaeological and Scenic Beauty Sites in Southern District
Source: National Museum and Art Gallery
4.3.40 The wildlife management area in the western part of the District has a variety of wildlife
species that include eland, kudu, hartebeest, wildbeest, springbok, duiker, steenbok,
warthog, jackal and baboon. Wildlife areas are attractive to tourists for game viewing,
photography and hunting in Controlled Hunting Areas.
4.3.41 Bathoen Dam Bird Sanctuary – It is located in Kanye and was founded by the late Kgosi
Bathoen II. It is a bird conservation site. The sanctuary is under the threat of encroachment
by other land uses such as residential, commercial and industrial development including the
grazing of livestock.
4.3.42 Manyana Rock Paintings - The site lies close to Manyana and is of archaeological
significance with an approximately 8m high rock with an overhang and animal paintings on
the face.
4.3.43 Livingstone’s Tree – It is located in Manyana settlement on a site where Dr Livingstone
96 REPORT OF SURVEY

Mabutsane
Ph itshan e
Molo po
Mmathethe
Kany e
Moshupa
Good Hope
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
delivered his sermons.
4.3.44 The Gorge at Kanye– The Ngwaketse nation used the gorge to hide away from the
Matebele.
4.3.45 Mosenekatse Hill – The double-peaked hill lies close to Molapowabojang. On the hill is a
stone-walled village where it is reckoned that Mzilikazi king of Matebele ordered the
Ngwaketse to meet to pay tax in the 19th Century.
7200000 7240000
Sesung
tl b
Selokolela
Pitseng/Ralekgetho
Æ·2
Moshaneng
Æ·5
Segwagwa
Mmathethe
320000 360000
Kanye
Kgalagadi
Æ·3 Æ·4
Æ·1 Æ·2
Lotlhakane
Lorwana
Gamajalela
Source: DSM
Kweneng
Manyana
Æ·7
Æ·6
Moshupa
Ranaka
Æ·2
Magotlhwane
Maisane
Molapowabojang
Mogojwegojwe
Gathwane
Æ·9
Gopong
Lekgolobotlo
Maruswa
Digawane
Leywana
Ntlhantlhe
Kgomokasitwa
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
SO2
WMA
Client:
Consultants:
HISTORIC SITES
Æ·1 Bathoen Dam Bird San
Æ·2 Early Kanye Stone Wa
Æ·3
Makaba's Tree
Æ·4 The Gorge at Kanye
Æ·5 Early Ngwaketse Vill
Æ·6
Æ·7
Livingstone Tree
Manyana Roack Painti
REPORT OF SURVEY
!( !( !(
!( !(
!(
!(!(
·8 Ranaka Old Stone Settlement
Æ·9 Mosenekatse Hill
Southern District Council
Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
N Scale: 1:750,000 Map 4.18
Source: National Museum & Art Gallery
!(
4.3.46 Early Ngwaketse Village – The village lies about 18 km from Kanye and comprises an
extensive complex of stone walls at the foot of a ridge. Access to the village is difficult.
4.3.47 Dimawe – Dimawe is an early Ngwaketse settlement and a scene of a battle. The site lies
close to Dimawe Hill and is accessible via the Thamaga-Ramotswa road about 3.5 km to
the east of this road.
4.3.48 Sobe Ruins – The stone wall ruins are located at Sobe southeast of Moshupa towards Sobe
Valley. The settlement is not maintained and overgrown with vegetation.
4.3.49 Kanye Hill Stone Walls – Built by Chief Makaba II in 1798 they are located to the right of the
road leading uphill to the hospital.
4.3.50 Makaba’s Tree - This a large Olive (Motlhware) Tree in the middle of Sebako Kgotla and is
several hundred years old. Chief Makaba established his Kgotla under the tree.
4.3.51 Pharing Gorge – It is located near Pharing nursery on the southern edge of the dam and is
REPORT OF SURVEY
97

CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
the site where those accused of witchcraft were pushed over the edge of the gorge.
Bangwaketse also used the gorge to seek shelter from attacks from other tribes.
4.3.52 Kgwakgwe Hills – History has it that Matsieng, the ancestor of Batswana left his footprints
on the rocks. It is also the site of iron digging by Bangwaketse long ago.
4.3.53 Ranaka Old Stone Settlement – Located in Ranaka village it is an old settlement built during
the time of invasions by Matebele in the 1820s. Evidence of iron smelting in the form of
furnaces also exists.
4.3.54 Mmasechele Gorge – King Sechele found a fortress for the Queen, Mmasechele in this
cave in 1852 when the Boers attacked Bahurutshe, Bakgatla and Balete. People who
committed adultery and witchcraft including social deviants were detained in the cave.
Bushmen paintings in the cave give the site added historic interest.
4.4 MINERAL RESOURCES AND EXPLOITATION
4.4.1 Southern District has a number of mineral resources that include iron, lead-zinc,
manganese and copper. The mineral deposits occur in the eastern part of the District. Also
found are brickearths and clays, crashed stones and sands. Maps 4.19 and 4.20 show the
distribution of mineral resources in Southern District.
SLATE AND ORNAMENTAL STONE
*
Source Material
CARBONATE SOURCES
Dolomite
Diphawana QDS
2525A2, Southern
District
SLATE AND ORNAMENTAL STONE SOURCES
Syenite/ornamental
stone
Slate
Table 4.8: Slate and Ornamental Stone Sources
Locality Latitude (S) Longitude(E) Comments
3km SE of
Letlapana QDS
2525A1, Southern
District
Dipotsana QDS
2525A1, Southern
District
25°05’10” 25°18’20”
25 0 05’10” 25 0 10’20”
25 0 13’45” 25 0 25’40”
Road, 7km SE of
Banded ironstone
Magoriapitse QDS
2525A4, Southern
25 0 29’30” 25 0 20’30”
District
Banded ironstone
7km NE of
Segwagwa Pna
QDS 2525A1,
Southern District
25 0 08’-25 0 10 25 0 14’-
Dolomites of Transvaal Super group.
Laboratory tests indicate dolomites are
suitable for quicklime burning and as a
neutraliser for soil acidity.
Reserves > 25 000m 3 . Red-brown
syenite, part of the Segwagwa
intrusion. Suitable as ornamental
stone.
Thickness in order of 10m. Slate of
Ventersdorp Supergroup. Well
exposed on E flank of NNW-SSE
trending ridge. Fine- laminated slateeasily
cut into thin slabs for flooring,
paving or facings without much
processing.
Reserves>several thousand tonnes.
Suitable as ornamental stone (e.g
Post Ofice in Lobatse)
Banded ironstone overlying dolomite.
Being
exploited
*
Exploitation
Not yet
exploited
*
*
*
*
Source: DGS, 2003
98 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
4.4.2 Table 4.8 shows slate and
ornamental stone sources. Slates
and ornamental stones occur in
metarmorphic rocks. These
resources may be processed for
use in the construction industry,
ornaments and for special
industrial manufacturing.
4.4.3 Slate occurs in the eastern part of
the District in Dipotsana as slate
of the Ventersdorp supergroup
with a thickness of 10m. The
slate is well-exposed on a ridge
and can be easily cut into slabs.
4.4.4 Ornamental stone occurs 3km
southeast of Letlapana as redbrown
syenite on the Segwagwa
intrusion. The deposit is suitable
for ornamental use.
4.4.5 Banded ironstone is found 7km
southeast of Magoriapitse and 7
km northeast of Segwagwa pan
respectively. The deposits have
not been exploited and are
considered suitable for use as
ornamental stone.
4.4.6 Iron occurs in basement rocks
southwest of Kanye, north of
Mmathethe, in Segwagwa,
Tshidilamolomo, northwest of
Phitshane Molopo in Sedibeng
Farms and west of Goodhope.
4.4.7 Lead-Zinc is found west of
Magoriapitse and west of Kanye.
Manganese occurs west of
Kanye. Copper is found in the
outskirts of Manyana.
CARBONATE SOURCES
$+
")
Jwaneng
%,
Kanye
Southern District
Map 4.19 Mineral Resources in SD
")
Moshupa
")
") ")
")
Mmathethe
Molepolole
")
Good Hope
Jwaneng
")
Major Kimberlite Fields
Mochu
$+ Diamond Mine
%, Kimberlite Field
$+ Lamprophyres
Mogoditshane
MetalsGaborone
") Copper
") Iron
Tlokweng
")
") Lead-Zinc
") Manganese Ramotswa
")
") Silver
South
East District
Pitsane
Lobatse
R.S.A.
´
0 10 20 40 60
Kilometers
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!( !(
!( !( !(
!( !(
!(
Lobatse
Kanye
Southern District
Mmathethe
Legend
!( Sand Sources Lentsweletau
!( Slate & Ornamental Stone Sources
!(
Mogoditshane
Thamaga
Moshupa
!(
Good Hope
!(
!(
!(
R.S.A.
Molepolole !( Brickearths & Clays Sources
!( Crashed Stone Sources
!( Carbonate Sources
Pitsane
Gab
T
Ramo
South
East D
4.4.8 Limestone occurs as a
sedimentary deposit and consists
mostly of calcium carbonate and
some magnesium carbonate.
Carbonates occur as calcrete
Source: DGS
and are associated with dolomites of the Transvaal Supergroup. Calcrete deposits in the
District have not yet been exploited. Laboratory tests indicate that calcretes may be used
for quicklime burning.
!(
´
0 12.5 25 50
Kilometers
REPORT OF SURVEY
99

CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
4.4.9 In the Barolong Farms area, calcrete deposits cover large areas where calcrete thickness in
excess of 2m are found in Matlasi valley from south of Sedibeng village to Molopo river.
Large areas around Segwagwa pan are covered by calcrete deposits exceeding 2m in
depth. These deposits have not been exploited but promise good results according to tests
carried out by the Department of Geological Surveys.
CLAY BRICKEARTHS
4.4.10 Table 4.9 provides details on the occurrence and suitability of clay and brickearth resources
in Southern District. Since the western part of the District is predominantly a sandveld area,
clays and brickearths are found in the eastern part of the District. The occurrence of
brickearths in the District is widespread. Materials occur mostly as floodplain sediments
with a high quartz content and a low plastic clay mineral content.
4.4.11 The exploitation of brickearths is being undertaken at Moshaneng and are considered
suitable for brick making. Brickearths being extracted at Ranaka and Ntlhantlhe (Makwena
River) are unsuitable for brick making as they have poor plasticity. Unexploited brickearth
deposits which have not been exploited and are suitable for the manufacture of bricks are
found at the former manganese mine at Kgwakgwe, Moshupa, Kolobeng River, 2km south
of Manyana, Kanye, Mmathethe and Mokape River. Some brickearth deposits have not yet
been exploited and are considered not suitable for brickmaking are located 5km east of
Moshupa, Diabo, 2,5 km north of Mmathethe, Mmathethe, Lotlhakane River, Gamoswaane
River, Molapowabojang River and Digawana. Uncontrolled extraction of clays and
brickearths results in environmental degradation especially considering that the brickearths
mostly occur in fragile ecological environments as riverine deposits.
Table 4.9: Clay Brickearth Sources
Deposit
Brickearth
Brickearth
Brickearth
Brickearth
Brickearth
Source
material
Flood plain
sediments
Flood plain
sediments
Tailings
dump
Flood plain
sediments
Flood plain
sediments
Locality Latitude Longitude Comments
Moshaneng
QDS 2425C3,
Southern District
Kanye QDS 2425C4,
Southern District
Former manganese
mine at Kgwakgwe
Hill/Kanye
QDS 2425C4,
Southern District
5km E of Moshupa
QDS 2425C4,
Southern District
Moshupa
QDS 2425C4,
Southern District
24°54’00” 25°14’00”
24°58” 25°20’
Between 1500 and 3000 bricks
are produced daily (1985)
Flood plain sediments
Suitable for productions of lowquality
stock bricks
Flood plain sediments
Not suitable for brickmaking
24°59’40” 25°18’30”
Reserves for more than 13
million bricks
Tailings dump of former
manganese mine
Suitable for manufacture of highquality
bricks
Recommend to blend with
Moshaneng brickearth
(2425C/4) to upgrade that
material
24°48’00” 25°28’00”
Considerable reserves
Flood plain sediments
Poor plasticity. Not suitable for
brickmaking
Good plasticity
24°25’50” 25°25’10”
Suitable for brickmaking
Being
exploited
*
Exploitation
Not yet
exploited
*
*
*
*
100 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Deposit
Brickearth
Brickearth
Brickearth
Brickearth
Brickearth
Brickearth
Brickearth
Brickearth
Brickearth
Brickearth /
Mudstone
Brickearth
Brickearth
Source
material
Flood plain
sediments
Flood plain
sediments
Tailings
dump
Flood plain
sediments
Flood plain
sediments
Flood plain
sediments
Flood plain
sediments
Flood plain
sediments
Clayey silty
sand
Weathered
mudstone
Flood plain
sediments
Flood plain
sediments
Locality Latitude Longitude Comments
Moshaneng
QDS 2425C3,
Southern District
Kanye QDS 2425C4,
Southern District
Former manganese
mine at Kgwakgwe
Hill/Kanye
QDS 2425C4,
Southern District
5km E of Moshupa
QDS 2425C4,
Southern District
Moshupa
QDS 2425C4,
Southern District
Ranaka village
QDS 2425C4,
Southern District
Ntlhantlhe, Makwena
River QDS 2425D3,
Southern District
Kolobeng River 2km
south of Manyana
QDS 2425D3,
Southern District
Kanye, junction to
Mmathethe
QDS 2525A2
Southern District
Diabo QDS 2525A2,
Southern District
Road 2,5km N of
Mmathethe
QDS 2525A4,
Southern District
Mmathethe
QDS 2525A4,
Southern District
24°54’00” 25°14’00”
24°58” 25°20’
Between 1500 and 3000 bricks
are produced daily (1985)
Flood plain sediments
Flood plain sediments
24°59’40” 25°18’30”
Reserves for more than 13
million bricks
Tailings dump of former
manganese mine
Suitable for manufacture of highquality
bricks
Recommend to blend with
Moshaneng brickearth
(2425C/4) to upgrade that
material
24°48’00” 25°28’00”
Considerable reserves
Flood plain sediments
Poor plasticity. Not suitable for
brickmaking
Good plasticity
24°25’50” 25°25’10”
Suitable for brickmaking
24°54’30” 25°27’30”
24°58’00” 25°36’00”
24°47’00” 25°34’40”
25°00’00” 25°21’20”
25°12’40” 25°21’20”
25°17’40” 25°16’40”
25°19’30” 25°16’15”
Suitable for productions of lowquality
stock bricks
Not suitable for brickmaking
Reserves for more than 5
million bricks
Poor plasticity. Not suitable for
brickmaking
Fairly large reserves.Very poor
plasticity. Not suitable for
brickmaking
Considerable reserves. Flood
plain sediment. Good
plasticity. Suitable for lowquality
stock bricks
Clayey silty sand. Thickness
>1m. Not suitable for
brickmaking
Fairly large reserves.
Weathered mudstone of
Ventersdorp Supergroup
overlain by 2m to 8m
calcrete.Due to thick
overburden, mudstone probably
not suitable for industrial use.
Thickness >1,6m. Flood plain
sediments. Poor plasticity.
Only suitable for lowest quality
stock bricks
Thickness >1,5m. Poor
plasticity. Not suitable for
brickmaking
Table 4.9 Continued
Exploitation
*
Being
exploited
*
Not yet
exploited
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
REPORT OF SURVEY
101

CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
CRUSHED STONE AND SAND SOURCES
4.4.12 . The District has fair to large stone resources in the form of granite, dolerite, felsite and
ferrucrete. Sources are found at Moshaneng, Kgwakgwe Hill, Polokwe Hill, Ntlhantlhe,
Kgoro Hill and the area around Thipe Pan. The exploitation of crushed stone provides
prospects for employment creation. Table 4.10 shows crushed stone and sand sources.
4.4.13 . Sand is in high demand in the construction industry in the District. The extraction of sand
is undertaken in river courses and the former manganese mine south of Otse. The latter
has considerable reserves in the form of mine dump. Limited reserves are found in the river
beds in Ntlhantlhe river, Lotlhakane river and Gamoswaane river. Indiscrimate extraction of
sand from rivers has a bad impact on the physical environment.
Table 4.10: Crushed Stone and Sand Sources
Source
material
Dolerite/
crushed
stone
Chert
breccia/
crushed
stone
Felsite
Granite/
crushed
stone
Ferricrete
Locality Latitude Longitude
Moshaneng QDS 2425C3,
Southern District
Kgwakgwe Hill, Kanye QDS
2425C4, Southern District
Polokwe Hills QDS 2425C4,
Southern District
1km N of Ntlhantlhe QDS
2425D3, Southern District
Area ground Thipe Pan, SW of
Mmathethe QDS 2525A3,
Southern District
24°54’00” 25°14’00”
25°00’00” 25°18’30”
24°53’30” 25°21’20”
24°57’30” 25°35’20”
25°24’ 25°13’
Comments
Being
exploited
Reserves >1 million tonnes. Dolerite sill 310m
thick. A quarry is operated intermittently by
Mineral Holdings Trust / Kanye. The
material has been used successfully for the
surfacing of the Kanye-Iwaneng road.
Fairly large reserves.Chert breccia hillwash
which has been crushed.Suitable for low
quality crushed stone.
Enormous reserves.Felsite of the Kanye
Volcanics, Gaborone Granite. A large
proportion of the hillwash material is partly
weathered. Not well suited for crushed stone
due to rather low strength due to strong
jointing.
Ntlhantlhe Granite is part of Gaborone
Granite. Suitable for crushed stone
Thickness of ferricrete sometimes >1m. Can
be used for road construction
Exploitation
*
closed
Not yet
exploited
*
*
*
Granophyre/
crushed
stone
Kgoro Hill QDS 2525A4,
Southern District
25°25’40” 25°29’30”
Fairly large reserves, but considerable
quantities need to be removed before the
fresh rock can be used for crushed stone.
*
Sand
Small river course.5km E of
Moshupa QDS 2425C4,
Southern District
24°48’00” 25°28’00”
Approximately 1500m3.River sand derived
from weathered granite – medium to coarse
grained sand. Suitable for mortar and
rendering
*
Sand
Ntlhantlhe, Makwena River QDS
2425D3, Southern District
24°58’00” 25°36’00”
Limited reserves. Coarse grained
feldspathic sand from river bed. Suitable for
local construction industry (rendering, etc.)
*
Sand
Gamoswaane River, Kanye-
Lobatse road QDS 2525A2,
Southern District
25°07’40” 25°29’00”
Very limited reserves. Sand in river bed.
Replenishment during wet season
possible.Suitable for mortar and plaster
*
Sand
Former manganese mine south
of Otse mountains QDS 2525B1,
Southern District
25°01’40” 25°43’00”
Several thousand tonnes reserves. Gravelly
sand on tailings dump of former
manganese mine. Used locally to
manufacture low-quality concrete blocks.
Suitable for rendering.
*
Source: DGS
102 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
4.5 PHYSICAL PLANNING AND SETTLEMENTS
4.5.1 The National Settlement Policy adopted in terms of Government White Paper No.2 of 1998
provides a five-tier hierarchy of Development Plans in the country as follows:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
National Physical Plan for the whole country;
Regional Master Plan for the four planning regions
District Settlement Strategies and District Land use Plans for rural Districts as well
as District Development Plans
Urban and Rural Settlement Development Plans
Detailed Layout Plans
4.5.2 The National Settlement Policy stipulates that all towns and villages, the latter being
settlements with a minimum population of 500 people shall have development plans to
guide their development.
4.5.3 Table 4.11 shows the level of development plans that have been prepared in Southern
District. The National Physical plan at the apex of the hierarchy has not been prepared.
The South Eastern Region Master Plan under which the District falls has been approved
although its implementation has not commenced. Southern District settlement strategy is
operational and deals principally with settlement issues. Southern District Development
Plan 6 has been adopted and operational and is being implemented within the ambit of
National Development Plan 9.
Table 4.11: Physical Development Plans and Status
Level of Plan Name of Plan District Status
Gaborone, Jwaneng,
Lobatse, South
Regional Plan South Eastern Region Master Plan East, Southern,
Kweneng &
Kgatleng.
Adopted and Operational
District Strategy/ Southern District Strategy Southern Adopted and Operational
District Development
Plan
iv) Southern District Development Plan VI Southern Adopted and Operational
(Planning Areas)
i) Kanye Development Plan Southern Adopted and Operational
( Non-Planning Areas)
i) Moshupa Development Plan Southern Adopted and Operational
ii) Mmathethe Development Plan Southern Adopted and Operational
iii) Manyana Development Plan Southern Adopted and Operational
iv) Mabutsane Development Plan Southern Adopted and Operational
iv) Good Hope Development Plan Southern Being prepared
Source: DTRP, Environmetrix (Pty)ltd
4.5.4 The District has 66 centres (excluding Jwaneng) with 500 or more people. They comprise
of Kanye as the single primary centre, 3 secondary centres namely; Moshupa, Goodhope
and Mabutsane and 62 tertiary centres. In terms of the National Settlement Policy,
developments within these settlements should be guided by development plans. Apart from
rational guidance of development within settlements, development plans provide harmony
between settlements and land uses on the edge through a clear cut demarcation of
settlement boundaries that provide a good basis for uncontrolled expansion of settlements.
It is therefore difficult to manage the outward expansion of those settlements without
development plans.
REPORT OF SURVEY
103

CHAPTER 4
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
4.5.5 Table 4.11 shows that development plans have been prepared in respect of the primary
centre of Kanye, the secondary centres of Moshupa, Good Hope and Mabutsane and
Tertiary centres namely Mmathethe and Manyana.
4.5.6 The lack of rational comprehensive development planning guidance to most settlements
whose development growth should be guided by Development Plans constitutes a huge
problem for land use planning in the District. Settlements are developing amorphously with
no rational assignment of space to different land uses resulting in lack of functionality in the
land use activity system. Subsequently, there is a prevalence of land use conflicts between
incompatible land uses and lack of economy, efficiency and cost – effectiveness in the
provision of services and infrastructure. Residents of unplanned settlements are
inadequately provided with requisite services and facilities as required by the National
Settlement Policy.
4.5.7 A number of problems have arisen in relation to some operative development plans or the
lack of development planning in some settlements. Regarding the former, although Kanye
Development Plan is operational there are land use conflicts between the Bathoen Dam
Bird Sanctuary and encroaching land uses such as residential, industrial and livestock
grazing. In addition Kanye Dolomite acquifer is under the threat of pollution by waste from
on-site sanitation systems.
4.5.8 The absence of Integrated Settlement Development Plans and an Integrated Land Use
Plan for the District results in the prevalence of conflicts between settlements and activities
in the fringes. Unplanned settlement growth results in unwarranted displacement of arable
and livestock farming activities on the edges of settlements. Mixed land uses such as
residential, arable and grazing in the outskirts of settlements present problems to land
management in the District.
4.5.9 On the other hand, the demarcation of ranches and arable fields on the edge of settlements
does not recognise the need for settlement growth. This problem is endemic to settlements
such as Tlhankane, Lorolwane and Sekhutlane where settlements growth is constrained by
ranches on the edge. A common trait to most settlements in the District is that arable fields
on the edge impede settlement expansion.
4.5.10 Settlement development planning is an essential component of the Integrated Land use
Plan. It is therefore fundamental that settlement development plans be prepared if land is to
be used rationally.
CEMETERIES
4.5.11 Cemeteries constitute an integral component of the land use activity system in the District
as they provide resting places for the departed members of the community. By the nature of
their function cemeteries should be located on prime land with no environmental sensitivity
particularly in respect of ground conditions. When located on sensitive, fragile environments
cemeteries may cause a deterioration in the state of the environment.
4.5.12 Southern District Council considered it imperative to undertake a survey on the location of
cemeteries in relation to pans, rivers and floodplains. The findings are shown on Table 4.13.
The affinity of cemeteries for location near river courses is of grave environmental concern.
The survey revealed that cemeteries in Moshana and Gasita under Kanye Sub-Land Board
and Moshupa (Jerusalema) under Moshupa Sub-Land Board are located within river
channels. In addition a cemetery in Moshupa (Mmamohuhumedi) lies 17m from the river. A
cemetery in Phitshane Molopo (Tlhaping) is located 35m from Molopo river while another
cemetery in Mmakgori lies 50m from Molopo river. The survey further reveals that 15 out of
104 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
36 cemeteries or 40 percent of cemeteries are located within 1 km from the river course.
4.5.13 The location of cemeteries close to rivers in inclined to cause pollution of water resources.
Locating cemeteries without due consideration to consequences on water resources
exposes surface and groundwater resources to pollution. The District especially relies on
groundwater for human and livestock consumption. Therefore the protection of surface and
groundwater resources from pollution by cemeteries is fundamental in Southern District.
Table 4.13: Location of Cemeteries in Relation to River Courses
Settlem ent / Village Distance From River (m ) River
KANYE SUB-LAND BOARD
Lotlhakane East 4 000m Lotlhakane River
Moshana
On Stream s
S elokolela 1 500 from V alley S elokolela R iver
Sesung
1 500 from the Pan
Sese
2 000 from the Pan
Mokhom m a
1 500m
Maokane
2 000m
Tsonyane
1 000m
G asita O n the Stream Selokolela Valley
PHITSHANE MOLOPO SUB-LAND BOARD
Phitshane Molopo (Tlhaping) 35m Molopo River
Phitshane Molopo (Gaetsalwe) 326m Molopo River
Mabule 450m Molopo River
Mabule 308m Molopo River
Mm akgori 50m Molopo River
Leporung 700m Molopo River
Leporung 100m Molopo River
Mm anako 170m Molopo River
Dikhukhung 200m Molopo River
Mm adikobotlo No. 1 120m Molopo River
Mm adikobotlo No. 2 270m Molopo River
Tankeng 650m Molopo River
MOSHUPA SUB-LAND BOARD
Moshupa (Mm am ohuhum edi) 17,6m Mosopa river
Moshupa (Maunatlala) 100m Mosopa river
Moshupa (Jerusalem a) The last corner right in the river Mosopa river
Manyana
690m
Ranaka
2 060m
Ranaka
1 800m
Kgom okasitwa
960m
Ntlhantlhe
820m
Lekgolobotlo
720m
Pitseng
3 180m
Letlhakane
850m
MMATHETHE SUB-LAND BOARD
Mothibakgosi W ard 1 200m Moselebe
Tebogo 1 400m Moselebe
Digawana
1 500m
Molapowabojang
2 000m
MABUTSANE SUB- LAND BOARD
For Mabutsane, there are no rivers and cem eteries are sited away from flood plains
ROLONG LAND BOARD
There are no cem eteries along the river beds
Source: Southern District Council
REPORT OF SURVEY
105

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
5 HUMAN RESOURCES, SOCIO-ECONOMIC
AND DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
5.1 POPULATION SIZE AND GROWTH
5.1.1 Information on population size and growth, the extent of poverty and the availability of natural
resources in the district are or fundamental importance for the evaluating of environmental
change. Furthermore, there seems to be a correlation between the demands for agricultural
land, energy and water resources on the one hand and population growth and size on the
other.
5.1.2 The Southern District has a population of 186 831 people according to the 2001 Population
and Housing Census as shown in Table 5.1. According to the 1981 and 1991 Population and
Housing Censuses, the District had a population of 125 221 and 158 577 people respectively.
The district had annual growth rates of 2.4 percent and 1.7 percent between the 1981-1991
and 1991-2001 intercensal periods, showing a decrease in the annual growth rate. The
population increased by 26.6 percent between 1981-1991 and 17.8 percent between 1991-
2001 also at a decreasing rate. The decrease in both the annual growth rate and percentage
increase has been influenced by the incidences of HIV/AIDS which have been experienced in
the district and the country as a whole.
Table 5.1: Population Growth Trend, 1981-2001
Source: 1981, 1991 and 2001 Population and Housing Censuses, Central Statistics Office, Gaborone.
¹Includes urban areas where appropriate.
5.2 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND DENSITY
5.2.1 In 1981, the District was the second most populous District in the country after Central district
as shown in Table 5.2. It accounted for 13.3 percent of the total population of Botswana. In
contrast, the district had the fourth largest population in 1991 with South East and Kweneng
coming second and third after Central District. The Southern district accounted for 12 percent
of the total population for Botswana in 1991. The 2001 Population and Housing Census shows
that the Southern district is still the fourth most populous district in Botswana after Central,
South East and Kweneng Districts accounting for 11.1 percent of the total population. There
has been a decrease in the proportion of the district’s population to that of the country from
13.3 percent in 1981 to 11.1 percent in 2001.
5.2.2 The Southern District had a density of 4.7 persons per km² in 1981, 5.9 persons per km² and
7.0 persons per km² in 2001. This was higher than the population density for the country
which was 1.6 persons per km² in 1981 while in 1991 and 2001 it was 2.3 and 2.9 persons per
106 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
km² respectively. From 1981 to 2001 the Southern District has been the fourth most dense
district in the country after South-East, North-East and Kgatleng Districts as shown in Table
5.2.
Table 5.2: Population Distribution and Density, 1981-2001
Source: 1981, 1991 and 2001 Population and Housing Censuses, Central Statistics Office, Gaborone.
¹Includes urban areas where appropriate.
5.2.3 The Southern District was divided into three census districts of Ngwaketse, Barolong and
Jwaneng Township in the previous censuses. In the 2001 Population and Housing Census,
the Ngwaketse Census district was split into two creating Kanye/Moshupa and Ngwaketse
West Census district. On the basis of the three census districts, about 83.2 percent of the
district’s population was located in Ngwaketse while Barolong and Jwaneng accounted for
12.4 and 4.4 percent respectively as shown in Table 4.3.
5.2.4 In 1991, about 81.3 percent of the population was located in Ngwaketse while Barolong and
Jwaneng census districts accounted for 11.6 and 7.1 percent of the total population
respectively. In 2001, the distribution was 66.5 percent for Ngwaketse, 25.5 percent for
Barolong and 8.1 percent for Jwaneng. The majority of the District’s population is located in
Ngwaketse census district. However, over the years there has been a decrease in the
proportion of the population in Ngwaketse from 83.2 percent in 1981 to 66.5 percent in
2001. Jwaneng has experienced a steady increase from 4.4 percent in 1981 to 8.1 percent
in 2001 due to the mining industry. The population of both Barolong and Jwaneng census
districts almost trebled from 1981 to 2001.
Table 5.3: Population Distribution by Census District, 1981 - 2001
Source: 1981, 1991 and 2001 Population and Housing Censuses, Central Statistics Office, Gaborone.
¹Includes urban areas where appropriate.
REPORT OF SURVEY
107

CHAPTER 5
HUMAN RESOURCES, SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
5.3 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE POPULATION AND LABOUR FORCE
AGE AND SEX STRUCTURE
5.3.1 The age and sex structure of the population in the Southern District is shown in Table 5.4
and Figure 5.1. According to the 2001 Population and Housing Census, the male population
was 89 984 while the female population was 96 847 accounting for 48.2 percent and 51.8
percent of the total population respectively. Thus the district has more females than males
hence a sex ratio of 83.
5.3.2 The majority of the population was
in the 10-14 age group which had
25 694 people or 13.8 percent of
the total population. The age
groups from 0-4 to 15-19 had
more male than female population
hence the sex ratios of more than
100. From 20-24 to 75+ there
were more female than male
population as shown by sex ratios
of less than 100.
Age Group
Figure 4.1 Age and Sex Structure, 2001
5.3.3 The total population in the 0-14
age group was 73 997 or 39.6
percent of the District’s population.
The 15-64 age group had 100 784
people or 53.9 percent of the total
population while the 65+ age
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4
groups had 12 050 people or 6.4
percent of the total population. As
15000 10000 5000 0
Population
5000 10000 15000
such, the district had a
dependency ratio of 85 which means that there were 85 people in the dependent age
groups for every 100 people in the working age groups. The dominance of the working age
population has implications for the provision of employment opportunities in the district
which in turn will have an impact on the demand for land.
Unknown
75+
70-74
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
Male
Female
Table 5.4: Population by Sex and Age Group, 2001
Source: National Statistical Tables Report, 2001 Population and Housing Census, Government Printer,
Gaborone, December, 2003.
108 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
5.4 LABOUR FORCE, EMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT
5.4.1 The District had a potential labour force of 116 287 people or 62.2 percent of the total
population in 2001. The potential labour force consisted of 54 402 males and 61 885
females accounting for 46.8 and 53.2 percent of the total potential labour force respectively
as shown in Table 4.5. The economically active population (labour force) was 44 993 or
38.7 percent of the potential labour force while the economically inactive population was 71
294 or 61.3 percent of the total.
5.4.2 The economically active population consisted of the employed (seasonal and non-seasonal
work) and the unemployed (job-seekers). The employed population accounted for 76.7
percent of the economically active population while the unemployed accounted for only 23.5
percent. About 62.3 percent of the employed population was engaged in non-seasonal work
while 14.2 was engaged in seasonal work.
5.4.3 The economically inactive population consisted of home makers, students, retirees, the
sick, prisoners and non-residents. This category was dominated by home makers and
students who accounted for 48 and 43.1 percent of the economically inactive population
respectively. The majority of home makers are women accounting or 73 percent of the total.
Table 5.5: Population Aged 12 years and over by Sex and Usual Economic Activity, 2001
Source: National Statistical Tables Report, 2001 Population and Housing Census, Government Printer,
Gaborone, December, 2003.
5.4.4 Employment by industry and sex is shown in Table 5.6. The District had 38 742 people
employed in various industries in 2001 consisting of 23 657 males and 15 085 females
representing 61.1 and 38.9 percent of the total employment respectively. The agriculture,
hunting and forestry industry employed 8 189 people or 21.1 percent of the total. Since this
industry depends on land, this has implications on the availability of this resource in the
district. Public administration was second accounting for 14 percent of the total employment
while construction was third with 12.8 percent of the total employment.
5.4.5 More than 80 percent of those employed in agriculture, hunting and forestry, mining and
REPORT OF SURVEY
109

CHAPTER 5
HUMAN RESOURCES, SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
quarrying, electricity, gas and water supply and construction were men. Women accounted
for 91 percent of private households with employed persons. Other industries where women
were in the majority include hotels and restaurants, health and social work and education.
Table 5.6: Employment by Industry and Sex, 2001
Source: National Statistical Tables Report, 2001 Population and Housing Census, Government Printer,
Gaborone, December, 2003.
5.5 MIGRATION
5.5.1 Tables 5.7 and 5.8 show migration data for the District. According to Table 4.7, about 23
135 people or 12.4 percent out-migrated from the District to other districts in the country
and abroad. About 7 717 or 33.4 percent of the out-migrants relocated to Gaborone of
which 48 percent were male and 52 percent were female. Kweneng District accounted for
13.9 percent of the out-migrants while Lobatse accounted for 15.2 percent. Those abroad
accounted for only 0.5 percent.
Table 5.7: Population by Sex and Present District of Residence (Five Years Ago), 2001
Source: National Statistical Tables Report, 2001 Population and Housing Census, Government Printer,
Gaborone, December, 2003.
110 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
5.5.2 Table 5.8 shows the in-migrants to the Southern District. About 37 610 people or 20.1
percent of the population migrated to the District of which Gaborone accounted for 11
percent, Lobatse-7.6 percent, Kweneng-3.9 percent and Abroad-4.3 percent. The inmigrants
have implications on the demand for land and other natural resources in the
District. In general, there were more in-migrants than out-migrants. Therefore, the Southern
District experienced a net increase of 77 people per 1 000 through migration.
Table 5.8: Population by Sex and Previous District of Residence (Five Years Ago), 2001
Source: National Statistical Tables Report, 2001 Population and Housing Census, Government Printer,
Gaborone, December, 2003.
5.6 HOUSEHOLD SIZE, DEPENDENCY AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR
DEVELOPMENT
5.6.1 Table 5.9 shows that that the district had 41 883 households in 2001. This was 10.3 percent
of the total households in Botswana. The highest number of households in the district were
in Kanye/Moshupa area which accounted for 58.4 percent while Ngwaketse West had the
lowest accounting for only 5.7 percent.
5.6.2 With a population of 186 831 people, the Southern District had a household size of 4.5
people per household which was higher than the national average of 4.2. The rural parts of
the District had the highest household sizes with Barolong and Kanye/Moshupa having an
average household size of 4.6 people per household. Jwaneng an urban area has the
lowest household size in the District of 3.2. High household sizes are associated with high
dependency rates hence have an impact on household income.
Table 5.9: Number of Households and Household Size by Census District,2001
Source:
2001 Population and Housing Census, CSO, Gaborone.
REPORT OF SURVEY
111

CHAPTER 5
HUMAN RESOURCES, SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
5.6.3 Table 5.10 shows the heads of households by sex and household size in the Southern
District in 2001. There were 37 202 heads of households of which 19 274 or 51.8 percent
were male while 17 928 or 48.2 percent were female according to the 2001 Population and
Housing Census. There were 7 064 households or 19 percent which had one person only of
which 4 913 or 69.5 percent and 2 151 or 30.5 percent were male and female headed
respectively. Female headed households accounted for more than 50 percent of the
households with household sizes of 3-8 and 10+ persons per household in the District in
2001.
Table 5.10: Heads of Households by Sex, District and Size of Households, 2001
Source: National Statistical Tables Report, 2001 Population and Housing Census,
Government Printer, Gaborone, December, 2003.
5.7 SOCIO-ECONOMIC TRENDS, TECHNOLOGY USED AND THEIR
IMPLICATIONS ON THE USE AND QUALITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL
RESOURCES
HOUSING
5.7.1 The 2001 Population and Housing Census identified 11 different types of housing units in
the country. These are traditional (Lolwapa), Mixed, Detached, Semi-detached, Town
House/Terraced, Flats/Apartments, part of Commercial Building, Movable, Shack, Rooms
and Shared Rooms.
5.7.2 In the Southern District, 16 823 households or 40.2 percent have detached housing units of
which 56 percent are in Ngwaketse South as shown in Table 5.11. About 9 837 households
(23.5 percent) have traditional housing units while 9 664 households (23.1 percent) have
mixed housing units. Ngwaketse South also accounted for 68.2 and 66.2 percent of the
mixed and traditional housing units in the district. The high prevalence of Lolwapa housing
units has implications on the environment as they use natural resources such as trees and
grass for construction.
112 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 5.11: Number of Housing Units by Type, 2001
Source: National Statistical Tables Report, 2001 Population and Housing Census,
Government Printer, Gaborone, December, 2003.
5.8 ENERGY
5.8.1 The sources of energy which are used for lighting and cooking in the District include gas,
electricity, candle/paraffin, solar power wood and coal as shown in Table 5.12. There were
31 779 and 6 437 households which used candle/paraffin electricity for lighting respectively.
They accounted for 72.9 and 15.4 percent of all households in the district respectively. The
small number of households using electricity in the District is due to high tariffs for
connection which negates accessibility to the resource by most households.
5.8.2 Wood and gas are the most common sources of energy for cooking as they were used by
23 786 and 14 425 households respectively. They accounted for 56.8 and 34.4 percent of
all households respectively. The high consumption of wood as a source of energy in the
district can cause environmental problems such as land degradation if not alleviated.
Table 5.12: Number of Households by Source of Energy for Lighting and Cooking, 2001
Source: National Statistical Tables Report, 2001 Population and Housing Census,
Government Printer, Gaborone, December, 2003.
5.9 SANITATION
5.9.1 Table 5.13 shows the number of households by type of toilet facility in 2001. There were 9
721 households or 23.2 percent which had own pit latrines, 20.1 percent had own VIPs
REPORT OF SURVEY
113

CHAPTER 5
HUMAN RESOURCES, SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
while 14.1 percent had own flush toilets. About 3 360 households or 56.8 percent of the
households which had own flush toilets were in Jwaneng. Own VIPs and pit latrines were
concentrated in Kanye/Moshupa and Barolong. About 11 077 households or 26.4 percent in
the District did not have any toilet facility in 2001. The fact that 3 out of every 10 households
in the District do not have toilet facilities is a serious source of concern. The large number of
households without toilet facilities and those who use pit latrines can adversely affect the
underground water in the District through pollution. It must be kept in mind that the District is
not well endowed with underground water resources. The protection of this resource
remains of vital importance for the survival of its population.
Table 5.13: Number of Households by Type of Toilet Facility, 2001
Source: National Statistical Tables Report, 2001 Population and Housing Census,
Government Printer, Gaborone, December, 2003.
5.9.2 The declining population growth rates and share of total population of the Southern District
indicate that the District has lost or lacks full-effect to retain and attract population. The
District‘s situation may be explained by various factors: the closure of the Moshaneng talc
mine in 1980 and the Kgwakgwe manganese mine in mid nineties lead to job losses; lack or
inadequate real job creating ventures in the District’s and opening up of new and better
employment opportunities when Jwaneng diamond mine was opened in 1982 and the
creation of more job openings in Gaborone in the 1980s. The challenge is that in order to
reduce population out-migration in the District, that more job creating opportunities should
be designed and implemented, and adequate land be made available for such new
ventures, which Land Board and the District Council should support and publicise to attract
investors and shelled labour force.
5.9.3 The population density has increased in the Southern District, as well as in other rural
Districts, since 1981, indicating more loading of human population on land. The challenge is
to carefully determine the carrying capacity of the land and associated natural resources
and ensure that the population loading does not compromise the need to use land
sustainably. Sustainable use of land is more likely be achieved where land use prepared are
followed and implemented properly monitored and where problems arise for situation
change is noticed, land use plans are revised to better dual with issues at hand. Table 5.5
shows population densities for the various districts.
114 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
SOCIAL FACILITIES AND
PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
6
6.1 INTRODUCTION
6.1.1 Social facilities and physical infrastructure facilities constitute an essential element of the
District’s land use activity system in so far as they satisfy the social and utility needs of the
population. Similarly, infrastructure systems provide comprehensive services that impact on
flora and fauna in different ways. An evaluation of the social facilities that include educational,
health and postal facilities and infrastructure services such as roads, water supply, electric
power supply and telecommunications is therefore essential.
6.2 EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
6.2.1 Pre-primary institutions are the cornerstone of education. The District has a number of these
institutions which are either run by the private or public sectors the latter being mainly Village
Development Committees. Pre-primary institutions are mostly located at the primary and
secondary centres with very few schools at the tertiary centres. This leaves gaps in the
distribution of lower order educational institutions over a wider area of the District’s extent.
6.2.2 The Revised National Policy on Education recommends a long term enrolment of 660 pupils
and a short term enrolment of 880 pupils per primary school. There are 104 primary schools
which in 2003 had a total enrolment of 35 350 pupils giving an average enrolment of 340
pupils therefore falling short of the stipulated enrolment. The majority of the schools are
located in the eastern part of the District which is densely populated. Fewer schools are
located in the sparsely populated western sandveld. The National Settlement Policy provides
for the establishment of a primary schools to settlements with a minimum of 500 people within
a 5 kilometre radius as the maximum walking distance to the facility. Table 6.1 shows the
number and ownership of primary schools in the District
Table 6.1: Number and Ownership of Primary Schools in the Southern District
Source: Education Statistic, CSO
6.2.3 Map 6.1 shows the distribution of junior secondary schools in the District. Southern District
has a total of 24 public junior secondary schools which had a total enrolment of 14 360 pupils
in 2003. Measured against the recommended enrolment of 720 students per junior secondary
school, the schools had an average enrolment of 598 students. In line with population
distribution most junior secondary schools are in the eastern part of the District. The western
catchment area for the junior secondary in Mabutsane falls mostly within the Wildlife
Management Area which renders the school not readily accessible to the communities west of
the WMA.
REPORT OF SURVEY
115

CHAPTER 6
SOCIAL FACILITIES AND PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
Table 6.2: Number and Ownership of Junior Secondary Schools in the Southern District
Source: Education Statistic, CSO
Map 6.1 Distribution and Accessibility to Existing CJSS in SD
160000 240000 320000
Morwamosu
Kokong
!(
Mabutsane
Kweneng
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
REPORT OF SURVEY
Scale: 1:1,650,000
´
0 10 20 40 60
Kilometers
Sekoma
Jwaneng
!(
Khakhea
Community Junior Secondary School
!(
!(
!(
6
2
1
Distance to CJSS
!(
< 10 Km
>10 - 20 Km
>20 - 30 Km
>30-50 Km
> 50 Km
Proximity Boundary
District Boundary
International Boundary
Jwaneng_Planning_area
Jwaneng Township
Settlemnts
Keng
Thankane
Kgalagadi
Semane
Mokhomma
Lorolwane
Sekhutlane
!(
Sese
Tsonyane
!(
!(
!( !(
!( Seherelela Sesung
!(
Maokane
Mabule
Tshedilamolomo
Gasita
Tswaaneng
Metlobo
Dikhukhung
Selokolela
Pitseng/Ralekgetho
Sedibeng
Moshaneng
Kanye
Mmathethe
Mokgomane
Moshupa
Segwagwa
Mogoriapitse
Lotlhakane
Phitsane
Molopo
Ranaka
!(
Maisane
!( Digawana !(
Gamajalela
Hebron
Ntlhantlhe
!(
Magotlhwane
Molapowabojang
Mogojwegojwe
!(
Manyana
Kgoro
!(
!(
Phihitshwane
Lekgolobo
Kgomokasitwa
Gopong
Maruswa
Leywana
!(
Pitsane
Good Hope
R.S.A
Tlharese
Rakhuna
Ramatlabam
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
6.2.4 There are two senior secondary schools in Southern District. One is located in Kanye and
the other in Moshupa. The southern and western parts of the District have no senior
secondary school facilities resulting in them being skewed in favour of the eastern part of
the District. The two schools have a total enrolment of 3 080 students. The increase in
enrolment has necessitated the expansion of the two institutions. Secondary school
institutions have the effect of attracting population to the eastern part of the District which
already has a higher population concentration. Map 6.2 depicts the distribution of Senior
Secondary Schools and Vocational Training Centres in Southern District.
6.2.5 Vocational Training Centres perform a vital function in the impartation of skills in various
trades. There are two public vocational training centres namely Ramatea Vocational School
in Kanye and Barolong Vocational Training Centre in Pitsane. The third institution is Stump
Vocational Training Institute a non-governmental institution in Good Hope. The expansion
116 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
of these institutions is fundamental as the existing facilities cannot adequately cater for
increased demand for this service especially in the densely populated eastern part of the
District. Kanye and Moshupa Brigade amongst other things provide training in automechanics
and electrical installations.
6.2.6 Kanye SDA College of Nursing offers education and training to nurses. It is owned by the
Seventh Day Adventist Church and is affiliated with the University of Botswana with support
from the Ministry of Health. It is an important tertiary institution in the District. The expansion
of the training institution is constrained by the unavailability of space for expansion.
Map 6.2: Distribution of SSS, VTC and Brigade Centres in SD
160000 240000 320000
160000 240000 320000
7200000 7280000
Kgalagadi
!(
Senior Secondary School
Distance to SSS
< 25 Km
>25 - 20 Km
> 50 Km
R.S.A
Kweneng
Moshupa
!(
!(
Kanye
0 15 30 60
Kilometers
Khakhea
Keng
Sekoma
Thankane
Kgalagadi
Semane
!( Vocational Training Centre
!( Distance Education Centre
") Vocational Training Centre
Mokhomma
Jwaneng
Sese
Gasita
Moshupa ")
Tsonyane
Moshaneng
Maokane
Sesung
Seherelela
Lorolwane
Sekhutlane
Metlobo
Tswaaneng
Pitseng/Ralekgetho
Sedibeng
!( ")
Kanye !(
SegwagwaMaisane
Molapowabojang
MogojwegojweGopong
Maruswa
Gamajalela
Mogoriapitse
Mokgomane
Kweneng
Kgoro
Pitsane ")
Hebron
Ranaka Lekgolobo
Ntlhantl
Magotlhwane
Kgomokasitw
Leywana
Phihitshwane
Rakhuna
Ramatlabam
Kilometers
0 12.5 25 50 75
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
7120000 7200000 7280000
6.2.7 Non-formal educational services offer literacy tutorship to the community. Literacy services
are directed from offices in Kanye, Mabutsane and Good Hope. There is a need to revive
literacy clusters in Maokane, Hebron and Moshaneng following the departure of officers.
Non Formal Education does not have premises of their own from which to conduct lessons
necessitating therefore that the department secure premises at strategic locations from
which to conduct literacy classes. A literate population is an invaluable resource to
sustainable land utilisation which is why literacy outreach programmes are essential in the
District’s education system.
6.3 HEALTH FACILITIES
6.3.1 The delivery of health services in Botswana is a tripartite responsibility between Central
Government, local authorities and the private sector. Primary Health Care is based on a
hierarchical structure with the mobile health stop at the base and the national referral
hospital at the top. The provision of facilities is guided by the threshold population and the
distance factor. In particular, the distribution of health facilities in the District is based on a
radius of 8km to a mobile stop, 15km to a clinic without maternity ward and 30 kilometres to
a clinic with a maternity ward. Map 6.3 shows the distribution while Table 6.3 shows the type
and number of health facilities in Southern District.
REPORT OF SURVEY
117

CHAPTER 6
SOCIAL FACILITIES AND PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
Table 6.3: Number and Type of Health Facilities in Southern District 2004
Source: Health Statistic Unit, Ministry of Health
6.3.2 The District has two hospitals namely: Kanye Seventh Day Adventist and Good Hope
primary hospital. The former is a mission hospital which acts as a referral hospital for the
central and northern parts of the District while the latter is a public referral hospital for the
southern part. Higher order health facilities are not readily accessible to the western parts of
the Southern District. The western part of the District refers patients to Jwaneng Mine
Hospital. Kanye Seventh Day Adventist hospital cannot adequately service its catchment
area which includes Kanye and Moshupa. The community in this part of the District is
calling for the establishment of another hospital in the area. The District has 3 District
Health Teams in the sub districts of Kanye, Good Hope and Mabutsane. The environmental
Health section has 3 offices in the sub districts
Map 6.3: Distribution of Health Facilities in SD
160000 240000 320000
Morwamosu
Kokong
Mabutsane
Kweneng
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
REPORT OF SURVEY
Scale: 1:1,650,000
´
0 10 20 40 60
Kilometers
Keng
Sekoma
Jwaneng
Khakhea
Semane
Kubung
Mokhomma
Ralekgetho Moshupa
Manyana
Kgalagadi
") District Hospital
!( Primary Hospital
!( Clinic
!( Health Post
Proximoty Boundary
Distance
< 8 Km
> 8 - 15 Km
> 15 - 30 Km
> 30 Km
R.S.A
Bonyamabogo
Maokane
Lorolwane
Sekhutlane
Seherelela
Moshaneng
Sesung
Kanye
Selokolela
Dinaka
Mamudungwa
Mokgomane
Sedibeng
Mabule
Leporung
Mmakgori Phitsane
Molopo
Tshidilmolomo
Ranaka Ntlhantlhe
Magotlhwane
Kgomokasitwa
Lotlhakane
Molapowabojang
Diabo
Mogojwagojwe
Mmathethe
Digawane
Gatwane
Metlobo
Mogoriapitse Kgoro
Hebron
Phihitshwane
Good Hope
Gamogapi
Pitsane
Rakhuna
Sebolae
Ramatlabama
Source: Ministry of Health
6.3.3 Lower order health facilities in the District include 11 clinics with maternity wards, 14 clinics
without maternity wards, 50 health posts and 53 mobile stops. In terms of accessibility of
the population to higher order health facilities, 93 percent of the population is within a 30km
118 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
radii of clinics with maternity wards, 83 percent within a 15km radii of clinics without
maternity wings and 95 percent within radii of 8km from mobile stops. The western part of
the District does not have good accessibility to higher order health facilities.
6.4 SANITATION AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
6.4.1 The Waste Management Act regulates the management of waste in order to prevent harm
to human, animal and plant life, prevention of environmental pollution, conservation of
natural resources as well as controlling the movement of hazardous waste and its disposal.
Sanitation and waste management in the District is the responsibility of the Council’s
Department of Environmental Health.
6.4.2 Table 6.4 shows on-site sanitation facilities in Southern District. There being no waterborne
sewerage reticulation system, the District depends on on-site sanitation facilities. In terms
of the 2001 Census, out of 37202 households, 10833 households or 29 percent had no
sanitation facilities implying the use of ‘bush toilets’, 2708 households (7.3 percent) used
flush toilets and septic tanks while 23661 household (63.6 percent) used pit latrines. The
use of on-site sanitation facilities exposes the environment to pollution especially the
pollution of aquifers. The pollution of groundwater resources is cause for concern since the
District depends on groundwater for water supply. Groundwater resources within or close to
settlements have a high vulnerability to pollution.
Table 6.4: Sanitation Facilities in the Southern District
Source: NMPWWS - SMEC
6.4.3 Waste disposal problems are widespread at the main centres of population concentration
such as Kanye and Moshupa. As the primary focal point in the District, Kanye has health,
educational and other civic and community facilities that attract large numbers of people.
Kanye Seventh Day Adventist hospital disposes effluent into small pond that cannot
adequately handle all waste generated from the overspill of effluent. In terms of vulnerability
to groundwater pollution, the areas around Kanye and Moshaneng which are the locations
for the most promising dolomite aquifers have extreme vulnerability to groundwater
pollution.
6.4.4 The District has no landfill site. Solid waste disposal in Kanye and Moshupa areas is
undertaken at medium-sized dumping sites for each village and surrounding areas. There
are small dumping sites at Molapowabojang, Manyana, Goodhope, Digawana, Phitshane
Molopo, Mabule, Mabutsane, Khakhea and Sekoma. Very small waste disposal sites in the
Goodhope area are at Borobadilepe, Mokgomane and Tshidilamolomo. These waste
disposal sites are not adequate for the handling of waste and were established without the
assessment of the likely environmental impacts. Waste disposal sites such as these
increase the possibility of land and groundwater resource pollution in the District.
6.4.5 Clinical waste disposal is a major problem in the District incineration facilities available at
health institutions at Moshupa, Manyana, Maokane, Digawana, Mmathethe, Khakhea and
Mabutsane cannot handle waste adequately necessitating the transfer of waste to Lobatse.
REPORT OF SURVEY
119

CHAPTER 6
SOCIAL FACILITIES AND PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
The problem is further compounded by the inadequacy of clinical waste disposal vehicle in
the District.
6.5 OTHER COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES
TELECOMMUNICATIONS.
6.5.1 Communication plays a functional role in land use planning. The Botswana
Telecommunications Corporations (BTC) is charged with the responsibility to develop,
operate and manage the country’s telecommunications system. The Corporation strives to
improve telecommunications with a view to integrating the District into the national and
global economy.
6.5.2 Guidelines on the provision of infrastructure and services in line with the National
Settlement Policy require that settlements with a minimum population of 1 000 people be
provided with full telecommunication services. Settlements of between 500 and 999 people
should be provided with a public telephone where this is technically and economically
feasible. Settlements with between 250 and 499 require two-way radio communications.
6.5.3 The District is serviced with a Fibre
Optic Network link between
Gaborone, Ramatlabama and South
Africa and another from Gaborone to
Jwaneng as shown on Map 6.4. A
Digital Microwave Trunk network
services the District from Gaborone
through Jwaneng to the western part.
Rural Automatic Exchanges have
been provided in Moshupa,
Goodhope and Pitsane. The District is
connected to switching centres in
Lobatse and Jwaneng
POSTAL SERVICES
6.5.4 Botswana Postal Services is charged
with the responsibility to provide
efficient and effective postal services
in the country. Postal services are
provided through postal kiosks, postal
agencies and post offices.(See Map
6.5).
6.5.5 The District has a head post office in
Kanye and a sub-head post office in
Mmasekou. There are 12 post offices
in the District in Kanye, Mmasekou,
Moshupa, Mafhikana, Digawana,
Goodhope, Mabule, Mmathethe,
Pitsane, Sedibeng, Mabutsane and
Khakhea. There are 8 postal agencies
7197328 7277328
!(
Map 6.4: Main Telecomms Transimision Network in SD
Motokwe
")
")
Morwamosu
")
Kokong
Mabutsane
")
Sekoma
")
") Keng
")
Khakhea
Main Dev. Plan I
Main Dev. Plan III
") Main Switching Unit
#* Remote Line Unit
") Remote Subscriber
Multiplex
!( Multi-access Radio
Base
!( Multi-access Kilometers Radio
25 Terminal
12.5 0 25 50
Jwaneng")
!(
RPT E8
")
Mokhomma
So u t h C e n t raa l
Letlhakeng")
Thebephatswa
") Mahetlwe
Pilane
Molepolole
Southern
!(
Selokolela
Molapowabojang ")
Mmathethe
namely:Lotlhakane, Molapowabojang, Ranaka, Hebron, Metlojane, Papatlo, Manyana and
Ntlhantlhe. Postal agencies are considered crucial in the improvement of postal services as
[
Mabutsane
")
#*
#*
Good Hope !(
Mabule
!( !(
Kilometers Ditshukudu
25 12.5 0 25 50
Map 6.5: Postal Facilities in SD
Maokane !(
#*
#* !(
Thamaga Gabane
Moshupa
#*
#*
Kanye Otse
#*
")
To RSA
#* #* ")
#*
#*
Lobatse
Pitsane
Source: BTC
118352 198352 278352 358352
Legend
Kgalagadi
!( Postal Agency
") Post offices
Kilometers
0 15 30 60´
Source: BPCN
Kweneng
#*
Gab
Ram
Manyana
Moshupa ") !(
Ranaka
!(
")
!(
Kanye Ntlhantlhe
Lotlhakane !(
Molapowabojang!(
Mmathethe ") ")
Metlobo
Digawana
!(
")
Good Hope
Hebron !(
Mabule
")
RSA
Sou tth Eas E a s tt
120 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
they increase accessibility in the rural parts of the District. The eastern part has more postal
facilities than the western part of the District.
POLICE
6.5.6 Southern District police headquarters
is located in Kanye. Other police
stations are located in Moshupa,
Goodhope, Phitshane Molopo,
Ramatlabama and Mabutsane. The
increase in the incidence of crime
such as rape and burglary requires
that there be an increase in law
enforcement in the District.
Notwithstanding that the western part
is less populated than the eastern
part, it is underserviced with police
stations resulting in long travel
distances to the nearest police
station. The western part of the
District is therefore subject to
inefficient service delivery and
7177293 7252293 7327293
110425 185425 260425 335425
Morwamosu
Kokong
Khakhea
Mabutsane
vulnerability to crime of communities in this part of the District. Map 6.6 shows police
stations in the District.
!(
Keng
Police Stations
") District HQ
!( Station
Kilometers
´
0 15 30 60
Map 6.6: Police Station in SD
Thankane
R.S.A
!(
Mokhomma
Semane
Maokane
Lorolwane
Kweneng
Jwaneng
Seherelela
Gasita
Metlobo
Tswaaneng
Pitsh. Molopo
Mabule Tshedilamolomo
Moshupa
!(
")
Kanye
!(
Good Hope
!(
Segwagwa
Maisane
Gamajalela
Manyana
Lotlhakane
!(
!(
Pitsa
Mokatako
Ramatlabama
Phihitshwane
Source: DSM
PRISONS
6.5.7 There is a state prison in Kanye and a boys’ prison in Moshupa. The prison in Kanye faces
congestion problems, shortage of offices, staff housing and building infrastructure being in
generally bad condition. This has implications for land use through the demand for space
for expansion.
6.6 ROAD NETWORK
6.6.1 The road network performs a central role in according accessibility to and facilitating the
development of different parts of the District, neighbouring districts and other parts of the
country. A well-developed and well-maintained road network is essential in the
transportation of the population within and between settlements and land uses such as
arable and grazing areas and the Wildlife Management Areas. It also facilitates the
movement of goods and services. Good roads are critical in the integrated development of
the District.
6.6.2 The construction and maintenance of roads is a shared responsibility between the Ministry
of Works and Transport and the Ministry of Local Government. The Department of Roads
under the Ministry of Works Transport is responsible for the construction and maintenance
of primary and secondary roads. Southern District Council in the Ministry of Local
Government is charged with the responsibility to construct and maintain tertiary and access
roads.
6.6.3 Map 6.7 shows the road network in the District while Table 6.5 shows roads whose
maintenance rests with the Roads Department (Ministry of Works and Transport) and
Southern District Council (Ministry of Local Government).
REPORT OF SURVEY
121

CHAPTER 6
SOCIAL FACILITIES AND PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
Table 6.5: Road Maintenance in SD
122 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 6.5 Cont.
Source: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
REPORT OF SURVEY
123

CHAPTER 6
SOCIAL FACILITIES AND PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
Motokwe
Kokong
Khakhea
Chapetese
Mabutsane
Keng
Dutlwe
Thankane
Map 6.7: Road Network in SD
23°0'0"E 24°0'0"E 25°0'0"E 26°0'0"E 27°0'0"E
23°0'0"S
24°0'0"S
25°0'0"S
To Nami bia
A2
B205
R.S.A
To Werda
Category/Quality
Primary Road (A) -
Paved
Secondary Road (B) -
Paved
Secondary Road (B) -
Gravel
Secondary Road (B) -
Earth
Secondary Road (B) -
Earth/Sand
Local Road - Gravel/
Earth/Sand
A20
Kgalagadi
Takatokwane
A2
R.S.A
Semane
Maokane
Maboane
Kweneng
Mokhomma
Letlhakeng
Ditshegwane
Thebephatswa
Seherelela
Gasita
Moshupa
Kanye
Ngware
Molepolole
Moshaweng
Kubung
Jwaneng
B202
A10
Lentsweletau
Mogoditshane
Thamaga
Gaborone
Manyana
B105
Lotlhakane
A2
Maisane
B102
B102
Lorolwane Mmathethe
B202
Metlobo
Good Hope
B101
Tswaaneng
B101
Leporung
Mokatako
B101
Phihitshwane
Mabule
Tshedilamolomo
Kilometers
To Shoshong
A1
Lobatse
Source: Department of Roads
Ra
Bo
Pioneer
Border Po
Pitsane
A1
Ramatlabama
Border Post
´
0 12.5 25 50 75
A1
6.6.4 The A1 road runs as a tarmacked road through the southeastern part of the District
providing a regional link from Ramatlabama to northern parts of the country through
Lobatse. This road provides access to this part of the District. Between Ramatlabama and
Lobatse in South East District traffic volume along the A1 road averages about 1 000
vehicles per day. The road traverses the settlements of Pitsane and Rakhuna while
ranches and fields lies along its spine between Ramatlabama and Rakhuna as well as
between Rakhuna and Pitsane respectively.
A2 - TRANS KGALAGADI HIGHWAY
6.6.5 The A2 or Trans Kgalagadi is the major inter-regional link that traverses the District as a
61m wide corridor. It runs from east to west providing a linkage between the southeastern
and western parts of the country through the District. The A2 also provides international
linkage between the country and Namibia to the west; Angola to the north west; South
Africa and Mozambique to the east. The road is therefore, an important medium for traffic
movement and conveyance of goods locally, regionally and internationally.
6.6.6 Traffic volumes along the road may be categorized in three sections namely: Kanye-
124 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Lobatse, Kanye-Jwaneng and Jwaneng-Morwamosu. Traffic volume per day decreases
westwards with the first section Lobatse-Jwaneng emerging as the busiest with between 2
500 - 4 000 vehicles per day. The section between Kanye and Jwaneng has a volume of
between 500 and 1 000 vehicles per day while Jwaneng-Morwamosu has between 100 –
200 vehicles per day. It is expected that with further developments in the western part of the
district and the country and as economic interaction between Botswana, Namibia and South
Africa intensifies, the volume of traffic would increase along the western portion of the
District. Annual traffic growth road averages between 6 and 15 percent. The road is
considered adequate for the current traffic demand.
6.6.7 In order to avoid haphazard development along the road during construction land
allocations and development including drilling of boreholes were prohibited with a zone
15km wide from either side of the road. Lifting of the prohibition of development was
subject to development control guidelines that include the following:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
Preparation of development plans and detailed layout for all settlements immediately
adjacent to the roadway.
No allocation of borehole within the road reserve and that livestock watering points
be located at a minimum distance of 3km from the road.
In order to facilitate wildlife migration fences should not be erected along the Tran-
Kgalagadi highway except within settlements immediately abutting the road.
Commercial development outside existing settlements should be discouraged in
order to avoid the proliferation of settlements along the highway.
In order to promote compact settlement development and the minimisation of
pedestrian-vehicular conflicts settlements adjacent to the road should develop on
one side of the road.
Only one junction and a minimum of two highway junction to settlements within the
15km zone and settlement immediately abutting the road.
6.6.8 The A2 provides prospects for the development of settlements along its spine notably:
Molapowabojang, Lotlhakane East, Kanye, Sekoma, Mabutsane and Morwamosu. In view
of long distances intervening between some settlements such as between Kanye and
Jwaneng as well as between Jwaneng and Sekoma, there are opportunities for
development at strategic points along the road. In fact, the highway is the main focus, for
entrepreneurship in the tourism sector with Ngwaketse Land Board receiving applications
for the establishment of commercial facilities such as guest houses, lodges and camping
sites. There is need for effective facilitation of development in order to exploit and realise
the development potential of land and resources associated with the highway. At the same
time there is need for control of development in view of the development pressure and the
likely land use conflict along the prime highway corridor.
6.6.9 Apart from the opportunities presented by the highway, the A2 is the major cause for the
dislocation of land uses along its path. The road is a barrier to free rangeland grazing by
livestock and wildlife. In particular, there is a high mortality of wildlife as a result of accidents
along the road. The highway constitutes a major structuring element in land use planning
for settlement development, arable farming, ranching, communal grazing area and livestock
watering points. There is no doubt that the Trans-Kgalagadi Highway constitutes an
important element of the Integrated Land Use Plan for the District.
REPORT OF SURVEY
125

CHAPTER 6
SOCIAL FACILITIES AND PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
A10
6.6.10 The A10 primary national road joins the A2 highway at Kanye offering a linkage between
the District and Kweneng District and the capital city Gaborone. It provides an important link
between the eastern and western parts of the country through Southern District. The A10 is
an important medium for traffic movement between the northeastern parts through
Moshupa and the rest of the District. It runs as a long tarred single carriageway between
Kanye and the Southern/Kweneng District boundary. The stretch of road between Kanye
and Moshupa has a higher traffic volume of between 1 000 and 2 500. In the eastern part of
the District the A10 traverses Moshupa and mixed arable and livestock farming while
towards Kanye it runs across communal grazing on undulating terrain.
Map 6.8 Annual Average Daily Traffic
107116 187116 267116 347116
7185587 7265587 7345587
To Nami bia
Motokwe
A2
Kokong
B205
Khakhea
To Werda
Chapetese
Mabutsane
Keng
A20
Average Daily Traffic
R.S.A 4000
Kilometers
0 10 20 40 60
Dutlwe
Kgalagadi
Thankane
Takatokwane
Maboane
Letlhakeng
Kweneng
Ditshegwane B120
Lentsw
Thebephatswa
B123
Molepolole
Moshaweng
A12
B12
Kubung
B111
A2
Jwaneng
Mogoditshane
Thamaga A10
Gaborone
Moshupa
Semane Mokhomma
Manyana
A10
Ra
Bo
Maokane
Seherelela
B105
Kanye
Lotlhakane
Gasita
B202
A2
A1
Maisane
Lobatse
B102
B102
B120
Lorolwane
Metlobo
Tswaaneng
Leporung
B101
Mabule
Tshedilamolomo
Mmathethe
B202
Good Hope
B101
Mokatako
B101
B112
Pitsane
A1
Ramatlabama
Border Post
Phihitshwane
Pioneer
Border Pos
Source: Department of Roads
B202
6.6.11 The B202 provides a secondary road connection from Ramatlabama through Good Hope
and Mmathethe to Kanye. Its connection with the A2 and A10 provides an alternative link
between the southern, western and northern parts of the country. In particular it offers a
linkage between Barolong Farms and the northern parts of the country.
B101
6.6.12 Phitshane Molopo and Pitsane are connected via the tarred B101. The road provides a vital
126 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
linkage in the southeastern part of the District. Beyond Phitshane Molopo in the Molopo
Farms area it becomes a gravel road. It runs through a predominantly arable farming area
and Sedibeng Farms thereby according the farming community in this part of the District
with the rest of the country.
A20
6.6.13 The A20 is a primary national road linking Sekoma and Khakhea through to the
southeastern part of Kgalagadi District. It provides an important link between settlements in
the southwestern corner of the District.
B102
6.6.14 The B102 secondary road provides a connection between Southern and South east District
as a tarred road between Gopong and Mmathethe beyond which it stretches as a gravel
road through Molopo Farms eventually linking with the A20 in Kgalagadi District. The gravel
condition of the road comprises efficiency in traffic movement and accessibility in the
southwestern part of the District.
6.6.15 The intensity of the road network is higher in the eastern part of the District where there is
more settlement development and a higher concentration of the population. The eastern
part of the District enjoys a good road network with more roads tarmacked. On the other
hand, the western part of the District has gravel, sand or earth roads which are usually in a
poor state of maintenance or when maintained they are not durable and wear out easily.
Communities in Southern District have requested that they should be provided with tarred
roads in order to overcome difficulties resulting from the current poor state if roads in some
parts of the District. There is no doubt that a sound and well-maintained road network is
central in the integration of land uses activities for integration of development through the
conveyance of traffic, goods and services.
6.6.16 In the absence of a functional link between the A2 and B120 in Southern and Kweneng
Districts respectively, connections between the two districts other than through the A10 is
poor. Similarly accessibility between Southern and Kgalagadi District from the southwestern
part of the latter is compromised by the poor state of roads.
RAIL TRANSPORT
6.6.17 The railway line that links Botswana with South Africa and Zimbabwe to the south and north
respectively passes through the District at Ramatlabama and Pitsane with public siding at
Pitsane and Rakhuna. This is a 20km long line whose impact in the District is marginally felt
within a limited area although it offers a railway link with the capital city and the eastern
corridor portion of the country. Road transportation had overshadowed railway
transportation where the latter mainly serves in the transportation of goods between
Botswana and South Africa.
6.6.18 The absence of a rail network in the western part of the District creates a void and poor
accessibility to railway services where the service is accessible through a road to rail
change-over and vice versa in the eastern corridor.
REPORT OF SURVEY
127

CHAPTER 6
SOCIAL FACILITIES AND PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
!(
Mononyane
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Kweneng
!(
!(
Artisia
Maboane
!(
!(
!( Letlhakeng
!(
Kgatleng
!(
!( !(
!(
Ditshegwane
Lentsweletau
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
Kgope
!(
!(
!( Mochudi
!(
!(
Moshaweng Molepolole
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( Pilane
!(
!(
!(
Malolwane
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
Jwaneng Mogoditshane !( Gaborone
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
Thamaga !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
Mabalane
!(
!(
Tlokweng
!(
!(
!(
Moshupa
!(
Manyana!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
Ramotswa
Maokane
!(
!( !(
Seherelela
!(
!( !(
!(
South East R.S.A
Mogobane
!(
Kanye
!(
!(
Gasita
Otse
!( !(
!(
Segwagwa
!(
Southern
!(
Maisane
!( Lobatse
Lorolwane
!(
!( !(
!(
Mmathethe !(
!( !(
!(
!( !(
!(
Metlobo !(
!(
!( !(
!( !( Pitsane
Good Hope !( !(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
Tswaaneng
!(
!(
!(
Ramatlabama
!(
Mokatako !( !(
Leporung
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Sorilatholo
!(
Diphuduhudu
!(
Salajwe
!(
Ngware
RSA
Map 6.9 Railway network in SD
Sojwe
!(
!(
!(
!(
Kweneng
Kgomodiatshaba
!(
To Francistown
Railway
lela
e
Good Hope
!(
!(
!(
!(
Phihitshwane
!(
Kgoro
!(
Pitsane !(
Potokwe
!(
Leywana
!(
Pitsane
Siding
!(
Tlhareseleele
!(
Rakhuna
Ramatlabama
R.S.A
Railway
Kilometers
25 12.5 0 25 50
Source: DSM
AIR TRANSPORT
6.6.19 Air transportation plays a limited role in transportation in the District. The 2 Governmentowned
airfields, 3 private owned airfields and 2 emergency landing areas in Southern
District.
GOVERNMENT AIRFIELDS
6.6.20 The two Government-owned Airfields in the District are maintained by the Department of
Civil Aviation.
KANYE AIRFIELD
6.6.21 Kanye Airfield has a single runway 1000m long and 25m wide has an orientation of 03/21
and is located at S25°03E025°19E at an elevation of 4200 feet.
GOODHOPE AIRFIELD
6.6.22 The airfield’s runway is sealed and measures 1100m long and 18m wide with an orientation
of 08/26. It is located at S25°26’06.06E025°24’31.0 at an elevation of 4200 feet. The
airfield has the capacity to accommodate a range of aircraft up to the Beechcraft King Air
200 (MTOW 5670 kg)
PRIVATE AIRFIELD
JWANENG AIRFIELD
6.6.23 The airfield is owned by Debswana Diamond Company. It has a sealed 1676m long runway
with an orientation of 08/26 located at S24°35’30.0 E 024°42’42.0. The runway is equipped
with a precision approach path indictor and edge lights. The airfield has the capacity to
handle aircraft up to a maximum all up weight of 5700kg (Beechcraft King Air 200 or similar
size aircraft). International flights may be accommodated prior to arrangements for customs
clearance.
128 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
6.6.24 Private airfields at Khakhea and Phitshane-Molopo are used by the flying mission and
Molopo ranches respectively.
EMERGENCY LANDING GROUNDS
6.6.25 In the western part of the District there are 3 emergency landing grounds on salt pans at
Sekoma, Mabutsane and Morwamosu. Landing on these grounds require precaution as
surfaces are vulnerable to elements of the weather such as water logging during the rainy
season.
6.7 WATER SUPPLY
6.7.1 Water is an invaluable resource that nourishes human, animal and plant life. Potable water
is suitable for drinking while non-portable water may be suitable for agricultural and
industrial purposes. Settlement development, domestic and industrial operations, arable
agriculture, livestock farming, wildlife and natural vegetation all depend on the availability of
water. Therefore the availability of water has considerable influence in the land use activity
system in Southern District.
6.7.2 The supply of water in the District is a shared responsibility between the Department of
Water Affairs in the Ministry of Minerals, Energy and Water Resources and Southern District
Council in the Ministry of Local Government. The Department of Geological Surveys plays
critical role in the hydrogeological component of water resources. The responsibility of the
Ministry of Agriculture in water supply relates to the development of small dams used
mainly for agricultural purposes.
6.7.3 The Department of Water Affairs is responsible for the development and construction of all
village water supply schemes prior to their handover to the responsible authorities. In
Southern District the Department of Water Affairs supplies water to the two major villages:
Kanye and Moshupa. Southern District Council supplies all small villages and settlements.
The private sector has a role to play in water supply through groundwater investigations and
drilling of boreholes.
6.7.4 Like the rest of the country, Southern District has a semi-arid climate with low rainfall, high
evaporation, low runoff and low groundwater recharge rates. The low rainfall received in
the District has led to the poor development of surface water resource. The District
therefore depends on groundwater resources for water supply. Within the backdrop of
insignificant recharge, groundwater is mined from groundwater resources accumulated
over long periods of time. Mining of groundwater therefore means that the reserves are
being depleted with no replenishment.
6.7.5 The District has acquifers with groundwater potential that ranges from high but variable to
poor. Aquifers with a total storage of 290106m 3 Sekoma dolomite (2900 106m 3 ) Molopo
dolomite (1250 6m 3 ) and Moshaneng dolomite with a shortage of 34 6m 3. Most of the
acquifers have a fair but variable to poor groundwater potential. The aforementioned
dolomites have extractable groundwater resources of between 500mm/a and 100mm/a.
Kanye and Moshaneng dolomites have the highest groundwater recharge rate in excess of
10mm\a although this is an insignificant contribution to the replenishment of groundwater
resources.
6.7.6 The probability of obtaining a borehole with a yield of plus 3.6m 3 /hour in the four dolomites
REPORT OF SURVEY
129

CHAPTER 6
SOCIAL FACILITIES AND PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
is 50 percent while the probability of a borehole yield of 10.2m 3 /day in the main dolomites
ranges between 70 and 80 percent. Map 6.10 shows the village supply boreholes.
KANYE AND MOSHUPA WATER SUPPLY
6.7.7 The Department of Water Affairs supplies water to Kanye and Moshupa. The water supply
for Moshupa is connected to that of Kanye. Kanye is supplied from two groundwater
sources namely Ramonnedi and Kgwakgwe well-fields through a total of 12 boreholes.
Ramonnedi has a total production of 2000m 3 per hour while Kgwakgwe produces 4900m 3
per hour.
6.7.8 The two wellfields have total output of 200 000m 3 per month. Kanye and Moshupa have a
total consumption of 151 000m 3 per month or about 5000m 3 per day. In view of falling yields
pumping at the borehole is stretched to limit indicating inadequate yield. There is therefore,
a need for the identification additional water sources to cope with the rising demand for
water at the two villages. Power failure and pipe burst usually result in water supply
interruptions.
WATER SUPPLY TO THE REST OF SOUTHERN DISTRICT
6.7.9 Southern District Council supplies water to the rest of the villages and settlements
excluding Kanye and Moshupa. The Borehole Act (1956) stipulates that boreholes shall be
spaced at a radial distance of 8 km from an existing borehole.
6.7.10 Based on the National Borehole Inventory database obtained from DGS, the District has
close to 500 village supply boreholes plus additional 430 in the database assigned as
unknown, but are assumed to be used mostly for village an livestock supply. In populated
areas, the high demand for water has put pressure on groundwater resources resulting in
the clustering of boreholes for both human consumption and agricultural purposes in
violation of the 8 km spacing standard.
6.7.11 In the more populated settlements the demand for water is higher. Increased demand for
water for livestock consumption occurs mainly during the dry season where livestock
watering encroaches to standpipes. The depth to groundwater increases from the eastern
to the western part of the District implying increased cost of groundwater abstraction. There
are prospect for obtaining higher water yield from the dolomite acquifers namely Kanye,
Sekoma, Molopo and Moshaneng which have a 70-80 percent probability of a bore yield
above 18.2m3 / day.
6.7.12 The vulnerability of groundwater to pollution is low to negligible in the western sandveld part
of the district becoming moderate to extreme in the hardveld which is the more densely
populated part of the District. In the sandveld areas around Mabutsane and Sekoma
aquifers are moderately susceptible to pollution. The northeastern corner of the district has
a high vulnerability to pollution save that groundwater resources in this area are classified
as poor. The promising aquifers of Kanye and Moshaneng dolomites are extremely
vulnerable to groundwater pollution requiring therefore that comprehensive measures be
adopted to protect these groundwater resources from pollution.
130 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Map 6.10 Distribution of Boreholes Used for Village Water Supply
160000 240000 320000
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
!(
!(
LAND USE PLAN
!(!(!(
!( !( !(
!(
DISTRIBUTION OF BOREHOLES
!(
!( !(
!(
Kweneng District
!(
REPORT OF SURVEY
!( !(
!(
!( !(!( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
Client: Southern District Council
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!( !(
Mabutsane
!(
Consultants: Environmetix (Pty) LTD
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(!(
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( Sekoma
!( !( !(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(
!(!( !(
N
Scale:
1:1,625,000 Map 6.10
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!( !( !(!( !( !(
!(
!( !(
Jwaneng
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( ")
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!( !(
!(
!(!(
!( !(
!(!(
!(
")!(
!(
") !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(
!(!(!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(!(!(!(!( !(
!(
!( !(!(
")
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(!(!(!(!( !(!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!( !(
Mosopa
!(
!( !(
!(!( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!( !(
!(") !( !( !(
Manyana
!( !( !(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!( ")
!(
!(!( !(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(!( !( !(
!(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!(
!( !(
!( !( !(
!( !(
!(!(
!( !(!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(")
!(!(!(!(
!(
!( !(!( !(!( !( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!( Maokane
!(
!( !(
!(
")")
!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Kanye
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( ")
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( ") !( ")
!( !(
") !( !( Lotlhakane
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!( !(!( !(
!(!(!(!(!( !(!(
Legend
!( Gasita
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!(
!( !(
!( !(
!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(!( !(!(!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!( !( !(
!(
!( !(
!(!( !( !(
Category
Distance to Borehole
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!( !(
Molapowabojang
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!( !( !( !(!(!(
!( !(
!( !( !(
!(!(!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!( General/Village Supply > 4,0 km
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
") Industrial
4,1 - 8,0 km
!(
!( !( Mmathethe!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( Others
> 8,0 km
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(!( !(
!(
!( !(
!(!(!(!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(!( !(
!( !(
!( !(
!( !( !( !( !( !(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(!( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(
!( !(
!(
!(!(!(
!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( !(
!(
GoodhopePitsane
!(
Note: Dry borehole excluded from
!(
!(!(
!(
!(!(
!(!( !(
!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!( !(
!(
!(!(
!( !(!( !(
the distance calculation
!( !(
!(!( !( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(!(!(
!( !( !(
!(
!( !( !( !(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( !(!(
!( !( !(!(
!(
!( !(!( !(
!(
!( !(!( !(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!( !(
!(
!(!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(
!( !(
Kilometers
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!( !( !(
!( !(
!( !( !(
!(
!( !( !(
0 12.5 25 50 75
!( !(
(UTM Zone 35 - Datum Cape)
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !( R.S.A
Source:National Borehole Inventory, DGS
!(
!(
7200000 7280000
S o u t h E a s t
6.7.13 The proximity of livestock watering points to village supply boreholes results in the
discharge of nitrates into groundwater. The use of nutrients and pesticides in arable
farming increases the vulnerability of groundwater to pollution. In addition, on-site
sanitation facilities such as pit latrines and effluent from septic tanks are major causes of
groundwater pollution around settlements. Mabutsane Subdistrict experiences shortages of
water which in addition, is of poor quality. Lack of a rational land use zoning system and
inadequate protection of groundwater resources are a threat to the quality of groundwater
requiring urgent intervention. A deliberate effort is especially required to control excessive
watering of livestock.
6.7.14 Community consultations (DDP 6) revealed deep dissatisfaction regarding water shortage
in the western part of the District particularly in Mabutsane Sub District. This part of the
District has deep lying groundwater reserves which exceed depth of 100 meters.
Compounding the problem further is the fact that water quality is poor. The provision of one
borehole per settlement subjects some settlements to water shortages where boreholes are
unreliable necessitating that back-up borehole be provided.
6.7.15 The provision of private water connections to settlements costly and cannot be afforded by
all residents. In addition, where residents depend on standpipes settlement expansion
renders accessibility to standpipes difficult as consumers endure long distances to water
points. It is essential that accessibility to water be improved and that water supply be made
REPORT OF SURVEY
131

CHAPTER 6
SOCIAL FACILITIES AND PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
affordable to the community.
6.8 ELECTRIC POWER SUPPLY
6.8.1 The supply of electric power in the District is the responsibility of Botswana Power
Corporation. The Corporation is mandated to provide full electric power reticulation to
settlements with a population of 1000 people and above. Where the population is less than
1000 people electric power service is provided where this is technically and economically
feasible.
Map 6.11: Power Supply in Southern District within the context of SER.
Tsetseng
Khutse Game
Reserve
Sojwe
From Morupule PS
Mahalapye
Salajwe
Kweneng
Dutlwe
Tswaane
Motokwe
Mabutsane
Khakhea
Werda
22 kV
Takatokwane
Masope
Jwaneng
Maokane
Southern
Tsatsu
Ditshegwane
Moshaweng
Sese
Metlobo
Gasese
Sedibeng
Khudumelapye
Artesia
Lentsweletau
Kgatleng
From Eskom Spitzkop PS
Lekgolobotlo South East
Kanye
Ntlhantlhe
Magotlhwane
Kgomokasitwa
Mmathethe
Gathwane
Ngware
Hatsalatladi
Mahetlwe
Kopong
Lobatse
Mochudi
Malolwane
Ramonaka
Gaborone
22 kV
Mabalane
R.S.A
Oliphants Drift
Mabule
Bethel Ramatlabama
Kilometers
Pitsane
0 12.5 25 50 75
22 kV
11 kV
Transmission Line Towns/Villages
City/Town
Major/Other Village
Cross Border Supply
High Voltage Lines
400kV Line
220kV Line
220kV Line (proposed)
132kV Line
132kV Line (proposed)
66kV Line
33kV Line
Electrified Village
Future Electrification
Source: BPC
6.8.2 Map 6.11 shows electric power supply in Southern District. The District is supplied from two
sources namely: South Africa’s Eskom Spitzkop Power Station through transmission lines
entering the country through Tlokweng border post and the local Morupule Power Station in
Central District. The northwestern part of the District is supplied through a 132kV line that
steps down to a 66kV line to service the area west of Jwaneng. The southern portion of the
132 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
District is supplied via two 66kV lines through the northeastern border and along the
southeastern boundary respectively.
6.8.3 Southern District is not fully electrified with the following settlements connected to the
national electric power reticulation network where the majority were electrified under the 72
Villages Electrification Project:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
Kanye/Moshupa Subdistrict: -Kanye, Moshupa, Molapowabojang, Lotlhakane East,
Ranaka, Manyana, Lokgotlobotlo, Ntlhantlhe, Magotlhwane, Kgomokasitwa, and
Lotlhakane West.
Goodhope Subdistrict: -Goodhope, Mmathethe, Digawana, Phitshane Molopo,
Ramatlabama, Gathwane, Sedibeng, Metlojane, Pitsane, Papatlo and Mabule.
Mabutsane Subdistrict: -Mabutsane and Khakhea.
6.8.4 The 2001 Census revealed that out of 37202 households in the District 3737 households
were connected to the national power grid in that year. This translates to 10 percent of
households having electric power connections in that year. The low rate of connection may
be attributed to the high costs of electricity connection and tarrifs charged. In addition, the
unplanned nature of settlements makes the provision of linear services generally costly.
6.8.5 In view of the low rate of electrification in the District, residents depend on other sources of
energy for lighting and cooking. The 2001 Census revealed that the majority 29 846
households (80.2 percent) used candles and paraffin for lighting, 3123 (8.4 percent) used
wood fuel while 140 (0.4 percent) used solar power. The census further revealed that
10731 households (28.8 percent) used gas for cooking, 365 (1.0 percent) used electricity,
1914 (5.1 percent) used paraffin while 3690 (9.9 percent) used wood for cooking. The use
of wood as an energy source constitutes a threat to the environment particularly with
regards to the destruction of vegetation.
REPORT OF SURVEY
133

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7 THE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM
7.1 SETTLEMENT PATTERN AND DISTRIBUTION
7.1.1 The District settlement pattern is characterised by the following: a concentration of
settlements, human population, lands areas and livestock in the hardveld. The ecological
hardveld zone is located in the eastern corridor of the District. Soil and climatic conditions in
the hardveld are much more favourable and it enjoys a longer growing season compared to
the sandveld. The good soils and climatic conditions in the hardveld are conducive for arable
and livestock farming, and settlement development.
7.1.2 The Southern District settlement system is largely guided by the National Settlement Policy
(NSP). The Revised NSP provides a definition of an officially recognised settlement as a
“conglomeration of a minimum of 500 people and be more than 15km from the periphery of
the main or parent village, have a permanent water source, be located outside National Parks
and Game Reserves, preserved arable lands, forest reserves and environmentally sensitive
areas”. Essentially, a settlement is officially entitled to some form of infrastructure facilities and
service development, if it meets the dictates of the definition. Furthermore, the facilities and
services provided depend on the level of the settlement in the settlement hierachy.
7.1.3 In 2002, the minimum population threshold that a settlement needs to satisfy to be officially
recognised changed from 250 people to 500 people. This had a great deal of implication in
settlement proliferation and wastage of capital resources in the development of infrastructural
facilities and services that are abandoned.
7.1.4 Five settlement patterns are recognizable in the District. These include: (a) lands areas; (b)
farmstead settlements; (c) dispersed homestead settlements; (d) village (urban-village)
settlements; and (e) townships (SERMP, 2004). Two major settlement types are distinctly
recognizable in the District. These include: the dispersed homestead settlement; and the
nucleated settlement system (See Maps 7.1 and 7.2). Barolong area is typified by a dispersed
homestead settlement system. Characteristically, the settlements have the three land uses of
residential, grazing and arable activities rolled into one. This tends to encourage scattered or
dispersed settlement which is certainly a highly inefficient settlement system. It leads to a
proliferation of settlements and makes the cost of providing infrastructure facilities and
services highly expensive. The nucleated settlement system has the village as the nucleus of
activities, and the existence of lands areas and cattle posts. It is not uncommon to find drift
fences being used to demarcate the land use activities.
7.1.5 Experience in the District has shown that numerous small settlements have developed as a
result of people settling in lands areas and cattle posts. (See Map 7.3) This has implication for
infrastructure facilities and services. That notwithstanding, the separation of the village
settlement from the lands areas and cattle posts minimizes the conflict between the various
land uses.
7.1.6 Table 7.1 shows the distribution of settlements by type and size in 1991 and 2001. Excluding
the population of Jwaneng District, in 1991, 29 percent of the District’s population was urban
as against 71 percent being rural. A decade later, 34 percent of the District’s population was
located in urban areas as against 66 percent of the total population residing in rural areas. In
effect, this means that approximately 7 out of every 10 people in Southern District reside in the
rural areas. This has implication for the provision of infrastructure facilities and services to a
highly dispersed population.
134 REPORT OF SURVEY

CHAPTER 7
THE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM
Table 7.1: Settlement Type and Size in 1991 and 2001
Source: Population and Housing Census, CSO, 1991 & 2001.
Note: The population of Jwaneng Urban District is not included in the population of the Southern District.
Map 7.1 An Exampe of a Typical Scattered Dispersed Settlement in Southern District
357000 357500 358000 358500 359000
7172000 7172500
Map shows part of Rakhuna Village
Map 7.1 An Exampe of a Typical Nucleated Settlement in Southern District
0 50 100 200 300
Meters ´
Source: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
357000 357500 358000 358500 359000
7259000 7259500
Map shows part of Manyana Village
0 50 100 200 300
Meters ´
Source: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
REPORT OF SURVEY
135

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7150000 7200000 7250000 7300000
100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
!( Morwamosu
Khekhu Cattle Post
Keaditile
Cattle Post
Ramokapong
Motsobonye
Cattle Post
Matlhatlhane Cattle Post
Kweneng
EXISTING SETTLEMENT
DISTRIBUTION
REPORT OF SURVEY
Montshe
Cattle Post
!(
Kgosi
Cattle Post
Kokong
Pitswe Cattle Post
Molatswana
Settlement
!(
!(
Urban
Rural
Sekgwasentsho
Mabutsane Kanaku
Post
Cattle Post
Cattle Post Nakalatlou
!(
Cattle Bokhutlo Mosalagatsane
Post Molalamitlwa
Lokotsane
MotweneCattlePost
Cattle Zolo !( Sekoma
Majwane
Ngwasegwane
Cattle Post
!( Khakhea
!( Keng
Seokopi
Cattle Post
Kgalagadi
!( Small Settlemet/Locality/Catle Post
Main (Primary) Road
Railway
Secondary Road
District Boundary
International Boundary
Jwaneng_Planning_area
0 10 20 40 60
Kilometers
Source: DSM,DTRP
!( Thankane
Bonyamabogo
Cattle Post
Semane !(
Lehoko
Cattle Post
Taung Cattle Post
Maokane !(
Lojwaneng
Tshane Matshogo
Moretlwa
!( Lorolwane
Sekhutlane
!(
!(
Jwaneng
!(
Sese
Mokhomma
Senyamadi
!(
Taka
Cattle Post
Tsonyane Sesung
!(
!( !(
Seherelela
Pitseng/Ralekgetho
!(
Tlanege
Moshaneng
!(
!(
Selokolela Kanye
!(
!(
Manyana
!(
Ranaka Lekgolobotlo
!( !(
!( Ntlhantlhe
Magotlhwane !(
Kgomokasitwa
Segeng
Lotlhakane !( !(
!(
Gasita Mamudungwa
Maisane !(
!( Molapowabojang !(
Segwagwa
Mogojwegojwe Gopong
!(
!(
Mmathethe !( Lorwana
!( Maruswa
!( !(
Kgajane Gathwane Digawane
!( !(
Metlobo Tlolobe Gamajalela !( Leywana
!(
!(
!( Pitsane
Mogoriapitse
Good Hope !( Kgoro
Pitsane
!( Potokwe
!(
Tswaaneng
!(
!(
Mokgomane !( Siding Tlhareseleele
!( Metlojane !(
Rakhuna
Sedibeng !(
Mabule
!(
!( Leporung
!(
!( Dikhukhung
Tshedilamolomo
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
N Scale: 1:1,300,000 Map 7.3
Dinaka
Moshupa
Hebron !(
!( Ramatlabama
!(
Phihitshwane
R.S.A
136 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7.2 THE GROWTH AND DECLINE OF SETTLEMENTS IN SOUTHERN DISTRICT
7.2.1 In the District, a number of factors account for settlement growth, stagnation and decline.
These include:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
A number of past government policies such as the Tribal Grazing Land Policy
(TGLP), and the construction of small dams in lands areas encouraged the development
of permanent settlements in arable and grazing areas.
Trade licences and land rights issued to businessmen without a restriction on where
to locate also encouraged the development of new settlements. This is mostly
exemplified in the establishment of permanent settlements around bottle stores and
general dealers along major roads.
Political pressure to provide infrastructure facilities and services to settlements far
less than 500 people has in the past contributed immensely to the proliferation of
settlements in the District.
The election of headmen by communities in lands and grazing areas and the
subsequent official acceptance by the Ministry of Local Government exerted
pressure on the District Council provide facilities to such as primary schools and
health posts to such communities.
The eradication of tsetse fly and other pests in the country in general and the
District in particular provided the opportunity for rearing cattle and the establishment
of settlements in places where hitherto it was impossible to do so.
Out migration from small settlements and permanent settlements at lands areas
and cattle posts because of drought and the attraction in larger settlements as a
result of perceived opportunities and better prospects of self improvement.
Table 7.2: Settlements that lost their Population below the Minimum Population Threshold of 250
people in Southern District, 2001.
Source: Population and Housing Census, CSO, 2001
7.2.2 In 2001, a total of 23 settlements which hitherto qualified officially as recognized
settlements became disqualified because of the decline in population to below the
REPORT OF SURVEY
137

CHAPTER 7
THE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM
population threshold of 250 people. This can be gleaned from Table 7.2. The implication is
that most of these settlements had been provided with infrastructure facilities and services
under Schedule 1 of the NSP. This is tantamount to wastage of financial capital since these
facilities are either utilised or far underutilized.
7.2.3 In 1998, the population forecasts upon which the NSP was based indicated that a total of 14
settlements had a population of over 250 people each and therefore qualified as recognized
settlements. As can be observed from Table 7.3, paradoxically when the 2001 Census was
conducted, it was revealed that these settlements all fell short of the threshold of 250
people.
Table 7.3: Settlements that failed to Reach a Minimum Population of 250 People per
Their 1998 Population Forecasts in Southern District, 2001
Source: 2001 Population and Housing Census: Population of Towns, Villages Associated Localities in August 2001. CSO, 2002.
7.2.4 Furthermore, a total of 13 settlements which were non-existent in 1991 attained the
threshold of 250 people and qualified to be provided infrastructure facilities and services in
2001. These settlements are presented in Table 7.4.
Table 7.4: Settlements that Grew to at Least 250 People in 2001 to Qualify for Provision
of Infrastructure and Services, 2001
Source: 2001 Population and Housing Census: Population of Towns, Villages Associated Localities in August 2001. CSO, 2002.
7.2.5 The issuance of the Presidential Directive CAB 28/2002 of 4th July 2002, revised the
criteria for settlements to qualify for the provision of infrastructure and services. Essentially,
the minimum population threshold was raised from 250 to 500 people for a settlement and
RAD settlement with a minimum of 250 people to qualify for the provision of infrastructure
facilities and services. The implication was that a total of 30 settlements in the District lost
their status as recognized settlements as can be gleaned from Table 7.5.
138 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 7.5: Settlements that lost their Qualification for Provision of Infrastructure and Services
as a Result of Revision of NSP, July, 2002
Source: 2001 Population and Housing Census: Population of Towns, Villages Associated Localities in August 2001. CSO, 2002.
7.3 SETTLEMENT HIERARCHY
7.3.1 The enactment of the National Settlement Policy in 1998, provided for a three-tier
settlement hierarchy of primary, secondary and tertiary centres in the country in general and
in Southern District in particular. The criteria for determining a settlement’s status in the
hierarchy is as follows:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
population size;
economic potential and employment generation;
availability of infrastructure and services or the ease with which they can be
provided;
availability of natural resources, especially water to sustain the settlement; and
the role of the settlement as a service centre or its potential as a service provider to
its hinterlands.
REPORT OF SURVEY
139

CHAPTER 7
THE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM
7.3.2 In 1981 there were a total of 35 settlements with a population of 500 and more people. Ten
years later, the number of settlements with a population of 500 and more people increased
to 46. This can be compared to a total of 64 settlements exclusive of Remote Area Dweller
Settlements (RADS) in 2001, displaying a population of 500 or more people in the District.
Based on the 2001 Census, the District settlement hierarchy is presented in Table 7.6 and
Map 7.4. Based on the Districts population projection for 2003, inclusive of RADS, there are
a total of 71 recognised settlements in the District. The breakdown in terms of the hierarchy
is as follows:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
one primary centre;
three secondary centres; and
sixty seven tertiary centres.
Table 7.6: Existing Settlement Hierarchy in Southern District, 1981-2003.
140 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 7.6 Cont.
Source: 2001 Population and Housing Census: Population of Towns, Villages Associated Localities in August 2001. CSO, 2002.
REPORT OF SURVEY
141

7200000 7280000
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
160000 240000 320000
Morwamosu
Kweneng
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
EXISTING SETTLEMENT
HIERARCHY
REPORT OF SURVEY
Kokong
Mabutsane
Sekoma
Jwaneng
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD in
association with GISPlan (Pty)LTD
N Scale: 1:1,250,000 Map 7.4
Keng
Pitseng/Ralekgetho
Centre
!( Primary III
!( Secondary
!( Tertiary II
!( Tertiary III
!(
Khakhea
Other Settlement/Locality
Proximity Area Boundary
Main (Primary) Road
Railway
Secondary Road
District Boundary
International Boundary
Jwaneng_Planning_area
Thankane
Kgalagadi
Semane
Mokhomma
Maokane
Lorolwane
Sekhutlane
Sese
Tsonyane
Seherelela
Gasita
Sesung
Selokolela
Moshupa
Kanye
Lorwana
Gopong
Metlobo
Gamajalela Leywana
Mogoriapitse
Kgoro Pitsane
Good Hope
Potokwe
Pitsane
Tswaaneng
Siding
Mokgomane
Tlhareseleele
Metlojane
Rakhuna
Sedibeng
Moshaneng
Mmathethe
Lotlhakane
Hebron
Ranaka
Magotlhwane
Segwagwa
Maisane
Molapowabojang
Mogojwegojwe
Manyana
Lekgolobotlo
Ntlhantlhe
Kgomokasitwa
Maruswa
Gathwane Digawane
Ramatlabama
0 10 20 40 60
Kilometers
Source: DSM.DTRP
Mabule
Tshedilamolomo
R.S.A
Dikhukhung
Leporung
Phihitshwane
142 REPORT OF SURVEY

CHAPTER 7
THE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM
100000
7150000 7200000 7250000 7300000 7350000
Kokong
Morwamosu
100000
150000
Mabutsane
Keng
Khakhea
Kgalagadi
150000
200000
Sekoma
Thankane
200000
Semane
250000
300000
350000
Kweneng
Jwaneng
Pitseng/Ralekgetho
Sese
Mokhomma
Manyana
Moshupa
Tsonyane Sesung
Maokane
Seherelela
Gasita
Selokolela
Moshaneng Ranaka Lekgolobotlo
Kanye
Lotlhakane
Ntlhantlhe
Magotlhwane
Kgomokasitwa
Segwagwa
Maisane
Molapowabojang
Lorolwane
Mmathethe
Mogojwegojwe
Gopong
Maruswa
Lorwana
Gathwane Digawane
Sekhutlane
Metlobo
Gamajalela Leywana
Mogoriapitse
Kgoro Pitsane
Good Hope
Potokwe
Pitsane
Tswaaneng
Siding
Mokgomane
Tlhareseleele
Metlojane
Rakhuna
Sedibeng
Hebron
Ramatlabama
Mabule
Leporung
Phihitshwane
Tshedilamolomo
Dikhukhung
R.S.A
250000
300000
350000
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
DISTANCE TO SETTLEMENTS IN
SOUTHERN DISTRICT
Centre
!( Primary III
!( Secondary
!( Tertiary II
!( Tertiary III
!(
Other Settlement/Locality
Distance from Centre
30km
Main (Primary) Road
Secondary Road
District Boundary
International Boundary
Jwaneng_Planning_area
REPORT OF SURVEY
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
N
Scale:
1:1,500,000 Map 7.5
Source: MoA - NAMPAD
REPORT OF SURVEY
143

CHAPTER 7
THE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM
7.4 ROLE, PROVISION AND ADEQUACY OF INFRASTRUCTURE
FACILITIES AND SERVICES
7.4.1 The status of a settlement in the settlement hierarchy determines its role and function. The
higher the order, the higher the level of infrastructure facilities and services the settlement
qualifies for. All settlements at the same level of the hierachy qualify for the same quality
and quantity of infrastructure facilities and services.
7.4.2 Table 7.7 presents the locational criteria for the provision of infrastructure and services in
the District. Table 7.8 shows the infrastructure facilities and services provided in the various
recognised settlements in the District. Against the backdrop of Schedule 1 of the NSP, the
level of adequacy can be established. Applying the GAP Analysis and Multiple Criteria
Utility Assessment Techniques establishes the infrastructure and services that are provided
against what ought to be officially provided in each of the settlement hierarchy.
Table 7.7: The Locational Criteria for Provision of Infrastructure and Services
(Schedule1 to NSP Report to Each Level of Settlement Hierarchy in Southern District).
144 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 7.7 Continued
Note: 1. MTto = Money Order, Savings Bank, Telegraph and Telephone Office
2. MTO = Money Order, Savings Bank, Post and Telegraph Office.
3. MO = Money Order and Savings Bank
Table 7.8: The Assessment of the provision, Adequacy or Inadequacy of Infrastructure
Facilities and Services in Recognised Settlements of the Southern District
REPORT OF SURVEY
145

CHAPTER 7
THE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM
Table 7.8 Continued
146 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 7.7 Continued
7.4.3 Table 7.8 presents the assessment of infrastructure and services in the secondary centres
in the District. The following deductions can be made:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
Moshupa and Mabutsane lack primary hospitals.
The nature of the road network is unplanned, untarred and dusty.
Mabutsane lacks a senior secondary school.
7.4.4 In 2001, no settlement qualified to be ranked as tertiary I centre in the District. Based on the
population projections to 2004, the settlements of Molapowabojang and Mmathethe qualify
to be ranked as tertiary I centres.
7.4.5 There are a total of six RAD settlement namely: Sekhutlane, Tlhankane, Mahotshwane,
Itholoke, Kutuku, and Kanaku. The settlements of Sekhutlane and Tlhankane have
REPORT OF SURVEY
147

CHAPTER 7
THE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM
projected populations in excess of 500 people.
7.4.6 All recognised settlements qualify to be provided water reticulation network and supply;
primary school buildings and primary education; and health post buildings and primary
health. These are considered basic infrastructure and services which should be provided in
tertiary III and IV settlements. The latter is restricted to only RADs.
7.4.7 The revision of the population criteria in NSP in 2002 resulted in a total of 28 settlements in
the district, no longer qualified as recognised settlements. Paradoxically, these settlements
have been provided with some infrastructure facilities and services as depicted in Table
7.9.The implication is that amongst other things the schools provided in these settlements
become a waste of capital and such settlements should no longer have headmen of
records.
Table 7.9: Infrastructure Facilities and Services provided in Disqualified Settlements, 2002
Source: Environmetrix Pty Ltd, 2004
7.4.8 Map 7.5 shows that most settlements lie within a radius of 15 kilometres and less of each
other. This implies a high cluster of services and facilities in the eastern part of the District.
However, the accessibility to services and facilities detoriorates towards the west where
distances in excess of 30 kilometres between settlements. Access to services and facilities
148 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
in the ranches in the mid- portion of the District is poor on account of the long intervening
distance.
REPORT OF SURVEY
149

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
8
IDENTIFIED ISSUES, CONFLICTS,
CONSTRAINTS, LAND USE PLANNING
CONSIDERATION AND ALTERNATIVE
STRATEGIES
8.1 ISSUES, CONFLICTS AND CONSTRAINTS
ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT
8.1.1 The Ngwaketse and Rolong Land Boards are currently under-staffed not having the required
number of professional staff for a meaningful and efficient land use planning system. This
problem is more acute with the Ngwaketse Land Board because of its sheer size, number of
Subordinate Land Boards and complexity.
8.1.2 At present, the responsibility of preparing physical plan for non-declared planning areas
administratively rest with the Department of Town and Regional Planning. NSP require all
recognised settlements to have Development Plans. In reality, less than 10 percent of the
existing recognised settlements have development plans guiding their spatial growth. It is
clear that DTRP does not have the capacity and resources to accomplish this task in the
District.
8.1.3 Currently, the statutory boundaries of the Subordinate Land Boards have not been surveyed
and demarcated on the ground.
8.1.4 A number of related legal provisions which have possible conflicts or weakness that ought to
be turned into an opportunity or strength through land use planning include -Fencing
Act;Tribal Land Act; Agricultural (Conservation) Resources Act; and Mines, Quarries and
Mineral Act.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND ITS COMPONENTS SYSTEM OF RESOURCE
8.1.5 Favourable agro-climatic conditions in the eastern part of the District present favourable
conditions for arable farming and settlement development and subsequently a higher
population consideration. Less favourable climatic conditions prevailing in the western part of
the District limit rainfed crop farming to drought resistant crops. Livestock farming emerges as
the dominant activity with fewer settlements and a lower population density.
8.1.6 Topographical constraints in the form of hilly terrain characterised by undulation pediments in
the northeastern part of the District constitute limitations and the desire by residents to
cultivate close to their places of residence in the outskirts of settlements has led to arable
farming in parts of the rugged terrain. This environment is fragile and vulnerable to water
erosion and requires the use of sustainable arable farming methods that are geared towards
conservation of the environment.
8.1.7 Soils that are classified as moderately fertile to very fertile are found on the hardveld in the
eastern part of Southern District where there is a higher amount of summer rainfall, arable
farming and settlement development. The contiguity of fertile soils is broken by intervening
soils with low fertility. Arable farming, livestock grazing and settlements are in competition for
the limited and fertile soil resources in this part of the District.
8.1.8 The western sandveld and part of the hardveld tongue comprise of soils with moderate to low
150 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
fertility. There is less arable farming taking place on the less fertile soils where livestock
farming is more dominant. Cultivation on the less fertile soils which also coincide with an
area with lower rainfall implies that crop yields could be lower, necessitating the application
of fertilisers and the growing of drought resistant crops. Susceptibility of the land to waterinduced
erosion is in the eastern part of the District where there is moderate to high
elevation and undulating pediments including higher rainfall. When soil conservation
measures are not adopted in land use activities such as arable farming, soil erosion in the
eastern part of the District is likely to occur.
8.1.9 Although susceptibility to water erosion is low in the western sandveld, the potential for wind
erosion is high. It is crucial that the removal of vegetation in this part of the District be
avoided as a safeguard against wind erosion.
8.1.10 The accumulation of surface water resource in the District occurs seasonally in ephemeral
streams. Therefore, the contribution of surface water resource to the District’s water
demand is negligible and limited to seasonal watering of livestock.
8.1.11 Southern District depends on groundwater resources for its water supply demands. There
being insignificant groundwater recharge, there is no groundwater replenishment resulting
in the mining and depletion of aquifers. This has adverse implications for the District’s
water supply in the long term.
8.1.12 Aquifers with a high groundwater potential in the District comprise of the Kanye, Sekoma,
Molopo and Moshaneng dolomite aquifers. It would be crucial that land use planning
deliberately ensure that these potential water resources be protected from pollution agents
such as land fills, pitlatrines, agricultural pesticides and industrial waste.
8.1.13 Vulnerability of aquifers to pollution is high in the eastern part of the District where the most
promising aquifer is located. Extreme vulnerability of Kanye and Moshaneng dolomite to
pollution constitutes a threat to the exploitation of these promising groundwater resources
for the District’s water demands.
8.1.14 Comprehensive measures for the prevention of groundwater pollution are essential in the
eastern hardveld especially where settlements are located close to aquifers. Proactive land
use planning guidance would be required for the protection of groundwater resources
against pollution.
8.1.15 The demand for groundwater resources for livestock and human consumption has led to
the proliferation of boreholes. The 8-kilometre borehole spacing rule has been violated with
borehole spacing being 4 kilometers and less.
8.1.16 The intensity of boreholes results in the emergence of sacrifice zones of about 400m
around boreholes. These zones are characterised by range degradation in the vicinity of
boreholes due to overgrazing and the trembling effect of livestock. The proximity of
boreholes to each other subjects the land to widened range degradation with the possibility
of coalescence of sacrifice zones if borehole allocations are not controlled.
8.1.17 Livestock watering points contribute to groundwater pollution through the discharge of
nitrates. Proximity of livestock watering points to village supply boreholes subjects the latter
to pollution by the former. Similarly, on-site sanitation systems are a source of pollution to
village water supply boreholes.
8.1.18 Vegetation cover and greenness decreases from the eastern to the western part of the
REPORT OF SURVEY
151

CHAPTER 8
District in line with the climatic conditions. Vegetation cover is highly responsive to climatic
variation where the cover decreases during drought periods while it recovers during the
rainy season.
8.1.19 Changes in vegetation growth has significance for biomass production between the eastern
and western parts of the District where rainfall and soil moisture decreases from east to the
west. The northeastern part of the District has a higher biomass production while the
central part has medium biomass production and the western part, the least.
8.1.20 The district’s rangeland grazing capacity is higher in the eastern part of the District where
there is higher rainfall and biomass production. On the other hand the grazing capacity
decreases to the western part on account of lower rainfall and lower biomass production.
Specifically, the eastern, southeastern and central parts of the District have a grazing
capacity of approximately 3.4 ha per livestock unit. It would however, be noteworthy that
grazing capacity is varies in space and time.
8.1.21 The eastern part of the District has more fertile soils, higher rainfall and is more suitable for
arable farming. At the same time it has higher biomass production and higher grazing
capacity. This set the stage for competition for land between livestock and arable farming
and which is manifested through conflicts between the respective land use activities.
LAND AND RESOURCE USE
8.1.22 The District is experiencing the depletion of the communal rangeland due to encroachment
by arable land and to lesser extent through settlement expansion. The establishments of
ranches and the Wildlife Management Area have resulted in a significant reduction in the
extent of the communal range in the western part of the District.
8.1.23 The loss of rangeland as a result of arable farming activities has negative impact on the
environment as it involves the clearing of vegetation to make way for cultivation of crops.
The removal of vegetation subjects the soil to water and soil erosion. The vulnerability of
the soil to erosion is higher in the eastern part of the District where large tracts of cleared
arable fields without intervening rangelands is bound to expose the soil to aeolian erosion.
8.1.24 The depletion of the rangeland results in the reduction of pasture for wildlife and livestock in
communal grazing areas. Conflicts arise between arable and livestock farmers where both
parties feel they are entitled to utilise the land for agricultural activities of their choices with
the Land Board blessing.
8.1.25 Considerable rangeland degradation occurs around livestock watering boreholes with
sacrifice zone of 0 – 400m where vegetation loss and soil degradation occurs as a result of
the combined effect of grazing excretion and trampling by domestic stock. The closeness
of boreholes to each other as in instance where they lie 300m apart sacrifice zone may
merge resulting in degradation of rangeland over wider area.
8.1.26 Over-harvesting of rangeland resources such as fuel wood, grass, poles etc expose the
land to agents of environmental degradation. The removal of vegetation exposes the soil to
erosion by water in the eastern part of the District while it exposes the soil to aeolian
erosion and desertification in the western part of the District.
8.1.27 The state of the rangeland is not static and it changes over time in response to changing
climatic conditions. Where the exploitation of rangeland resources is not matched with the
condition and capacity of the rangeland, considerable harm is inflicted on the environment.
152 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
8.1.28 Mixed land use activities such as grazing, arable agriculture and settlements in the eastern
part of the District creates conflicts among these activities. These land use activities are in
competition with each other for the finite land resource. Such competition and conflicts are
manifested through settlement encroachment onto arable land and rangeland grazing land
and arable fields displacing grazing land and arable fields becoming impediments to
settlement growth. Rational land utilisation and the realisation of the full potential of the
land are not possible under these conditions.
8.1.29 Households prefer cultivation on fields that are within easy reach in the outskirts of
settlements. Settlements expansion onto arable fields is a threat to the economic
empowerment of households whose arable fields are subject to displacement by settlement
encroachment. According settlements room for expansion and protecting arable fields on
the edge from displacement by settlement growth are challenges which land use planning
ought to contend with.
8.1.30 On account of higher rainfall and fertile soils most of the eastern part of Southern District is
suitable for crop cultivation. However, the community prefers to use the land for mixed
farming comprising arable agriculture and livestock farming in the communal rangeland.
Subsequently, the full crop production potential of the eastern part of the District has not
been unlocked. This has implications for the District’s sub-economy and its contribution to
the national economy.
8.1.31 Some arable farming activities are being undertaken on infertile soils that are considered
unsuitable for crop farming. This points to lack of expert guidance to farmers on soil
suitability for crop cultivation. Cultivation on infertile soils often results in low yield and
weakening of the soil and vulnerability to water erosion in the hilly terrain in the eastern part
of the District.
8.1.32 There is limited potential for arable farming in the western part of the District in view of the
shortage of fertile soils suitable for crop production.
8.1.33 The potential for irrigation in Southern District is severely constrained by water availability,
depth of groundwater, drainage and topographical limitations.
8.1.34 The National Agriculture Master Plan for Arable Agriculture and Dairy Development has
stimulated an interest in the District. It has not however, been implemented extensively with
regards to its key sectors of focus namely: rainfed crop farming, irrigation and dairy
production. While rainfed crop farming and dairy production have prospect for success,
irrigation is largely dependent on the availability of groundwater for irrigation.
8.1.35 Based on a maximum carrying capacity of 227 821 cattle, the District’s 302 325 cattle had
exceeded the carrying capacity by 74 504 cattle by 2003. The excess capacity exposes the
land to degradation through overgrazing, removal of vegetation cover weakening of the soil
leading to soil erosion.
8.1.36 The carrying capacity of the rangeland is determined by climatic factors and biophysical
state of the rangeland which varies spatially across the District. Livestock management
decisions are therefore essential in ensuring that livestock numbers are kept within the
carrying capacity of the land.
8.1.37 There are limited arable agricultural activities in the western part of the district, which
explains why there are no major conflicts between crop production and livestock farming.
However, biomass production in the western part of the District is low than in the eastern
REPORT OF SURVEY
153

CHAPTER 8
part implying sound livestock management is essential if degradation of the environment is
to be averted.
8.1.38 The mid-portion of the District is devoted to livestock farming in ranches established
through the fencing of communal rangeland with the view to preventing the overexploitation
of communal grazing areas. The fencing of communal lands has been
criticised for reducing the size of communal rangelands and squeezing farmers into smaller
communal areas subjecting communal grazing lands to increased degradation.
8.1.39 The establishment of fenced ranches has the problem created by dual grazing by ranchers
who still hold onto their cattle post in communal grazing areas. When the leased ranches
become overgrazed, ranchers release their livestock onto communal grazing areas with the
result that excessive pressure is applied on the communal grazing area. Those farmers on
communal grazing lands who do not practice dual grazing are disadvantaged as they have
no alternative grazing lands elsewhere.
8.1.40 Exclusive leasehold tenure over ranches does not only reduce the extent of communal
rangeland, it prevents communities from accessing veld resources such as wood, thatching
grass, etc.
8.1.41 The confining effect of ranches prevents the free movement of animals over large areas.
Some ranches are overstocked as farmers keep more livestock than the carrying capacity
of ranches can sustain leading to overgrazing. Poor livestock management techniques in
ranches often leads to the transference of livestock into communal grazing areas.
8.1.42 The National Policy on Agricultural Development (Fencing Component) guidelines
recommend a 20km buffer between ranches and settlements in order to permit the
expansion of the latter. The demarcation of ranches around the settlement of Tlhankane,
Sekhutlane and Lorolwane does not provide adequate room for the expansion of the
settlements. When settlements are surrounded by ranches residents do not have easy
access to communal rangelands beyond.
8.1.43 The community Wildlife Management Area (SO2) is an important wildlife conservation area
which when fully utilised could benefit surrounding communities immensely. In view of the
decline in wildlife numbers over the years, the management of the area by Mekgatshe
Community Trust provides the opportunity for the building of wildlife numbers through
mutual coexistence between people and wildlife in a sustainable manner. This has the
potential to boost tourism in the District.
8.1.44 The allocation of arable fields and grazing of livestock within the WMA is in direct conflict
with the use of the area as a wildlife habitat and therefore runs contrary to the objective of
Mekgatshe Community Trust. At worst, the grazing of livestock and arable farming activities
might lead to the displacement of game within the backdrop of an already declining
livestock population.
8.1.45 The Wildlife Management Area (SO2) serves as buffer zone and migratory corridor
between Kgalagadi Transfrontier National Park and the Central Kalahari Game Reserve.
The national park and game reserve serve as a resource bank for the WMA. High wildlife
mortality along the A2 Trans-Kalahari Highway is a threat to wildlife migration. In a nutshell,
the Wildlife Management Area (SO2) performs an important function in wildlife
management.
8.1.46 The Wildlife Management Area lies in an area with low vegetation production and grazing
capacity as a result of low rainfall in the open shrubland. Intensive grazing of livestock
154 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
could result in competition for land, water and grass between livestock and wildlife resulting
in accelerated depletion of rangeland resources and deterioration of the fragile ecology.
8.1.47 The eastern part of the District has some mineral resources which when exploited could
contribute to employment creation. However, uncontrolled extraction of sand and
brickearth and clays as riverine deposit in floodplains is inclined to have adverse impact on
the environment.
8.1.48 Save for the primary centre of Kanye, the secondary centres of Moshupa, Good Hope,
Mabutsane and the tertiary centres of Mmathethe and Manyana, the growth of most
settlements in the District is not planned. Consequently settlements are developing
amorphously, with no defined boundaries and functional land use activity systems. The
prevalence of land use conflicts within settlements and on the edges is common.
8.1.49 Cemeteries that are located close to river courses are bound to cause the pollution of
groundwater resources especially considering that the District depends on groundwater for
human and livestock consumption.
HUMAN RESOURCES, SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
8.1.50 Southern District’s population increased at a decreasing rate from 2.4 percent to 1.7
percent during the 1981-1991 and 1991-2001 intercensal periods respectively. The decline
in the population growth rate may be attributed partly to the prevalence of the HIV/AIDS
pandemic and out-migration to other districts. The tragedy of the pandemic is that it claims
the working age population, the driving force for economic development. Therefore, the
decline in the human resource population undermines development of the District.
8.1.51 The District’s population grew albeit at a decreasing rate. The growth in population and in
particular, the dominance of the working age group translates to an upsurge in the demand
for land, pressure on land resources, demand for facilities and services as well as the
creation of employment opportunities. With respect to water supply population growth
implies increased abstraction of groundwater resources.
8.1.52 Population density has increased in Southern District. The eastern part of the District has a
higher population density which implies increased loading of the human population and
human activities on land. It is therefore imperative that the carrying capacity of the land and
associated natural resources be determined to ensure that population loading does not lead
to unsustainable land utilisation to communities in this part of the District. The sparse
settlement pattern in the western part of Southern District has less educational facilities
which are not readily accessible to some settlements. A literate population is essential in
the sustainable utilisation of land and its resources.
8.1.53 In-migration puts pressure on land and other natural resources in the District.
8.1.54 Dependence on the veld resources such as sand, wood and thatch as building materials or
in the case of wood, as a source of energy for cooking has implications on the environment.
8.1.55 A healthy population is requisite for the development of the District. While the population in
the eastern part has better access to primary healthcare, the distance to health facilities
increases towards the west implying poor accessibility of health facilities. Primary
healthcare is an integral part of land use planning as land use activities are primarily for the
benefit of man.
REPORT OF SURVEY
155

CHAPTER 8
8.1.56 Groundwater resources in the District are vulnerable to pollution as households and
institutions depend on on-site sanitation facilities. Groundwater resources underlying in the
vicinity of settlements have high vulnerability to pollution from on-site sanitation facilities.
8.1.57 The disposals of solid waste on site established without the assessment of environmental
impacts coupled by inadequate waste handling capacity are agents for land and
groundwater pollution. Necessary intervention is required if environmental pollution is to
curtailed.
8.1.58 Unless proper clinical waste disposal facilities are established in Southern District, a
sanitary environment would be hard to attain and the threat of infectious diseases would
obtain.
8.1.59 A functional land use activity system depends on good communication across the District.
A good and reliable telecommunication system is requisite for communication in Southern
District.
INFRASTRUCTURE
8.1.60 The A2 Trans Kgalagadi Highway provides opportunities for the development of tourism
related activities along the road. As the major corridor for local and international traffic the
A2 is developing into a busy traffic corridor that has become the major focus for
development through entrepreneurship in tourism-related projects. There is therefore a
need for the facilitation of development for the exploitation of opportunities and realisation of
the development potential of the corridor. In view of the development pressure and the
likely land use conflict development guidelines would ensure the control of development.
8.1.61 The poor condition of some roads which are either gravel, sand or earth roads impedes
accessibility and smooth movement of traffic and transportation of good and services.
8.1.62 There is a void in railway transportation in the western portion of the District where road
transportation is the medium for traffic movement.
8.1.63 The District has poor surface water resources and therefore depends on groundwater
resources for water supply.
8.1.64 Insignificant groundwater recharge in the District has led to the mining of groundwater
resources which accumulated over long periods of time. Low groundwater recharge rates
are a threat to water supply in the long term as aquifers are being depleted with no
replenishment.
8.1.65 There is need to identify a secure long term water supply for the District in view of the
declining borehole yields.
8.1.66 The prospect for boosting water supply in the District lies in the promising dolomite aquifers
namely; Kanye, Molopo, Sekoma and Moshaneng dolomite aquifers.
8.1.67 Aquifers underlying or located close to settlements and village supply boreholes located
close to livestock watering points have a high vulnerability to pollution. Necessitating it is
vital that comprehensive measures be adopted to protect water sources from pollution.
8.1.68 The unplanned nature of settlements makes electrification costly. The low rate of
electrification leads to dependency on rangeland resources for source of energy. This has
implication for the conservation of natural resources.
156 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
THE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM
8.1.69 The dispersed settlement pattern in part of the District is highly inefficient and lead to a
proliferation of settlements making the cost of providing infrastructure services very
expensive.
8.1.70 A total of 30 settlements which were recognised as settlements based on old minimum
threshold of 250 people have lost their status following the new minimum population
threshold of 500 people based on the Presidential Directive CAB 28/2002. Technically,
infrastructure and services provided amounts to wastage of financial capital since there is
implied under utilisation of services and facilities.
8.1.71 In terms of the National Settlement Policy settlements should be provided with the
stipulated level of services and facilities in consonance with their level in the settlement
hierarchy. Some settlements have not been provided with the requisite services and
facilities.
8.2 LAND USE PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
ZONING PARAMETERS
8.2.1 Land use zoning emerges as an important feature of the land use plan through the creation
of land use zones namely arable agriculture, commercial livestock farming, communal
grazing, Wildlife Management Area, Community Based Natural Resource Management
Areas, protected areas, settlements and corridors for infrastructure services. Broad land
use zones signify the primary land use activities where secondary land uses may take place
within the same land use zones. Land use zoning in the District should be based on a set of
parameters considered crucial in delineating the land use zones.
PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
8.2.2 The designation of land use zones is primarily aimed at achieving the goals and objectives
of Southern District Land Use Plan. The land use plan seeks to define a land use zone
system for rational and equitable land utilisation and resource management as well as
ensuring the provision of the right perspectives on sustainable development in the long
term. The designation of land use zones eliminates ambiguity through clear-cut land use
proposals and management strategies which constitute important prerequisites for optimal
land utilisation and the minimisation of land use conflicts.
8.2.3 The proposed land use zoning system is expected to provide practical guidance to the Land
Boards, Sub-Land Boards and Physical Planners in decision-making and land allocation, as
well as development implementation and management by other relevant stakeholders. The
District’s Land Use zone system is therefore a direct spatial translation and a means for the
attainment of goals and objectives and land use management strategies.
COMMUNITY ASPIRATIONS AND THE PROFESSIONAL PERSPECTIVE
8.2.4 The designated land use zones would be an outcome of a consultative process between
the community and the interdisciplinary professional team working on the Land Use Plan.
The approach is informed by the notion that the people know better and have great ideas.
The land use zones therefore reflect community sentiments and professional inputs on the
appropriate land use activities which in some instances may constitute compromise
between community aspirations and the professional perspective.
REPORT OF SURVEY
157

CHAPTER 8
EXISTING LAND USES
8.2.5 The creation of land use zones has to be conscious of existing land use activities across the
District. Zoning considers both the positive and negative impacts of either the perpetuation
or discontinuance of land use activities based on the perceived gains achievable from the
preferred use of land. In order to ensure sustainable utilisation of land, it therefore
becomes necessary under certain circumstances to discontinue some land use activities
with a view to bringing about positive change such as through minimisation of land use
conflicts, optimal land utilisation including conservation and protection of natural resources
among other considerations.
8.2.6 Specifically, while it is considered that the eastern part of the District is suitable for crop
production on account of higher rainfall and fertile soils, there is need for the plan recognise
existing livestock farming activities, mining, settlements and related activities. Where the
proposed use departs from the existing use, the latter may be retained if it does not conflict
with the proposed use and together with other land use activities may be undertaken as
conditional uses. However, in the event of land use incompatibilities occurring the
recommended land use activity should prevail while the conflicting use is phased out
gradually.
CLIMATE
8.2.7 Climate constitutes an important criterion in the determination of land use zones in the
District. Climate directly or indirectly influences the type of land use activities to be
undertaken in different parts of the District which is characterised by a semi-arid subtropical
climate with a high spatial variation of rainfall between the eastern and western
parts. High and low rainfall received in the eastern and western parts of the District
respectively, means that the eastern parts of the District may be devoted to those activities
that require a high amount of rainfall. Similarly, zoning of land in the western part of the
District takes cognisance of the low rainfall and the suitable land use activities for climatic
conditions prevailing in this part of Southern District.
8.2.8 Other climatic factors with an influence on zoning include temperature and wind. Cooler
temperatures provide a more favourable environment for lower evaporation and
evapotranspiration, moisture retention and therefore a favourable environment for crop
production.
TOPOGRAPHY
8.2.9 Zoning of land takes into consideration the effect of topography as either a constraint or an
opportunity for development. Most of the western sandveld is a flat to almost flat plain while
the eastern hardveld is characterised by hilly terrain. The delineation of land use zones
avoids placing certain categories of land uses that cannot thrive on land with topographic
limitations. Topographic constraints to land use planning are considered in conjunction with
other factors such as rainfall, soil fertility etc. It would be noteworthy however, that areas
with difficult terrain are not homogeneously so, with the result that intervening spaces in
areas with rugged terrain may be put to productive use. It would be essential highlighting
that gulleys constitute a huge impediment to development on hilly terrain in the hardveld in
the eastern part of the district and the hardveld tongue. However, hilly topography itself
may be set aside for those land uses that do not involve physical alteration of the land such
as grazing and forest areas.
158 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
SOIL FERTILITY AND LAND SUITABILITY FOR CROP PRODUCTION
8.2.10 Soil fertility plays an important role in land use zoning. Soil fertility is considered alongside
climatic factors, the length of the growing season and biomass production. In zoning land
for different uses the plan takes into account the need to ensure that fertile soil is reserved
for crop production. The setting aside of fertile soils for arable farming takes into
consideration other factors such as rainfall and groundwater availability. In using soil fertility
as a parameter for zoning, moderately fertile to very fertile soils are set aside for arable
farming while less fertile soils are set aside for other land use activities such as grazing that
can be undertaken on less fertile soils. Zoning of land based on soil fertility criteria does not
necessarily create zones exclusively for the designated primary use as secondary land
uses may be undertaken either conditionally or without conditions.
PROTECTION OF GROUNDWATER RESOURCES
8.2.11 In the absence of surface water resources in the District, groundwater resources deserve
protection from contamination from pollutants such as cemeteries sanitary landfills,
agricultural fertilizers, pesticides and discharges from sanitation facilities. The plan has
therefore identified areas that have promising aquifers for the supply of water in the District.
Those areas with a high vulnerability to pollution are mapped to ensure that land use
activities in these zones are controlled to prevent threats to groundwater resources.
PROTECTION OF CRITICAL HABITATS
8.2.12 The protection of wildlife resources is of utmost importance in Southern District. Zoning
therefore considers the need to provide for the protection of wildlife resources by
designating wildlife conservation zones. In particular, it is considered a critical element of
the land use plan to protect the wildlife migratory corridor between Kalahari Transfrontier
National Park and Central Kalahari Game Reserve. In like manner, the plan seeks to
protect birdlife in Bathoen Dam Nature Sanctuary. While the aim for zoning is to protect
critical wildlife habitats from displacement by competing uses, conservation of wildlife
resources would provide for their utilisation by adjoining communities as well as promoting
tourism.
SUITABILITY OF DISTRICT AREA FOR DEVELOPMENT
8.2.13 As a part of planning considerations, a Regional Scale Development Suitability Model has
also been prepared. The model aimed at the assessment on what areas in the District are
best suited for development (urban/rural growth) while causing the least environmental
impacts or loss of valuable land resource base.
CONCEPT OF SUITABILITY
8.2.14 The identification of site suitability for development is one of the critical issues in SDILUP
preparation as it makes possible the rationalization of the early evaluation of development
possibilities. The evaluation is made by means of identifying the set of spatial factors
influencing the suitability of a site for development. The cumulative effect of these factors
determines the degree of suitability and also helps in further categorizing the land into
different priorities for development. This, in turn, can be used as a measure against the
economic aspect of development.
8.2.15 The basic concept of suitability was formalized by relating the suitability to limitations of the
land to development. This limitation concept is derived from land quality. For instance, if the
REPORT OF SURVEY
159

CHAPTER 8
slope - one of the land parameters - is steep, the limitations it offers is higher than site that
has gentle slope or is flat. Therefore, the development of the steeply sloped land would
require higher investment and therefore may be less suitable than flat land where the
required investment is considerably lower.
8.2.16 Furthermore, the identification of site suitability for development, can be also defined by
analysis of interaction between three sets of mutually related factors: locations,
development actions and environmental effects. It means that in the case of carrying out of
certain development actions (such as urban/rural growth) and control of specific
environmental effects (such as preservation of agricultural land), it is possible to identify
most and least suitable location for these actions. This concept incorporates a close
connection between site suitability assessment and environmental impacts prediction.
8.2.17 In keeping with the above-mentioned, suitability model implemented could be briefly
described as follows:
TASK:
What areas are best suited for development (urban/rural growth) while causing the least
environmental impact?”
FUNCTIONAL GOAL:
(i) Preservation of Valuable Natural Resources;
(ii) Minimization of the cost of location;
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS TO BE MINIMIZED:
(i) Loss of agricultural land;
(ii) Water pollution
FINDINGS:
Four zones of suitability based on the limitations that the land present to development:
(i) Zone 1: Minimal Limitation (suitability is high)
(ii) Zone 2: Moderate Limitation
(iii) Zone 3: High Limitation
(iv) Zone 4: Very High Limitation (suitability is low)
GROUP OF RELEVANT LOCATION CRITERIA USED IN THE MODEL AND THE METHOD
OF THEIR APPLICATION
8.2.18 In keeping with the defined functional goals and environmental effects of the proposed
model, the following factors were chosen:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
Site Slope;
Terrain drainability)
Groundwater potential
Land suitability for agriculture;
Groundwater vulnerability
Road/Centers proximity
Interaction Potential of different zones in the District
8.2.19 In accordance with the model's objective it was necessary to rank each of the above factors
into suitability classes and then assess the site suitability determined as a combination of all
160 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
the selected location factors and their ranking. This process actually begins with application
of a quantitative (or rating) method whose mathematical structure is based on a linearweighted
expression of the following type:
8.2.20 This ranking method consisted of two parts. Firstly, it included the determination of the
weights associated with different factors as well as the determination of the rating scale
associated with the values of each particular class of suitability for each selected factor.
Second, it entailed a design of the final rating scale as a measure of combining the selected
factors and their values in the case of each particular site.
8.2.21 Starting with the first part, each selected factor was divided into the classes of suitability
which were rated from 1 to 4. The value given the mark of '4' designated the highest degree
of suitability of the selected factor to stimulate development, whereas '1' designated its
lowest degree.
8.2.22 Along with the rating scale, each factor was given a certain weight (weighting coefficient) as
a measure of its relative importance in the assessment of site suitability for development in
the District. Since weighting is a result of the subjective judgment many alternatives of
combining the weights might be further developed as a part of the applied linear-weighted
method. In this model, only one combination of weights which favors protection of natural
resources was developed. This combination of weights, however, are related to the specific
situation defined by the applied model and are not intended as measures of the relative
importance of the selected factors for development in general
8.2.23 Once the basic elements of the linear weight-rating model were defined, it was possible to
use the above mathematical equation in order to obtain the final rating scale. It rendered
possible the following:
(i)
(ii)
ranking of all analyzed sites in relation to their total rating value;
conclusion about the degree of site suitability for development in the District.
8.2.24 The output of the applied suitability model is presented in Map 8.1.
8.3 ALTERNATIVE LAND USE STRATEGIES
8.3.1 The primary goal of the Southern District Integrated Land Use Plan is to provide guidance
to development and utilisation of land in a rational, equitable, sustainable and balanced
manner across the District. This goal is derived within the context of the problems, land and
resource use conflicts and adverse physical and environmental impacts identified in the
District. There are several possible courses of action that may be undertaken to solve the
problems encountered. To plan means to choose the best among possible alternative
courses of action to solve the problems uncovered in the District. Possible strategies that
have been considered and from which the best strategy is to be selected include a nonintervention
strategy and interventionist land use strategies as follows:
REPORT OF SURVEY
161

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7150000 7200000 7250000 7300000
Kgalagadi
District
Source: GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Site Slope
Soil Drainability
Groundwater Potential
Land Suitable for Agriculture
Groundwater Vulnerability
Proximity to Centres
Accessibility to Major Roads
Site Interaction Potential
10
10
20
Dikhukhung
R.S.A
Leporung
20
Phitshane
Molopo
Phiphitshwane
20
20
20
10
10
20
Sedibeng
10
5
5
10
5
5
Sekhutlane
Hebron
Papatlo
Ramatlabama
Tswaaneng
Metlobo
Motsentshe
Gatwane
Leywana
Gamajalela Kgoro
Mogoriapitse Mogwalale
Bethel
Pitsane
Goodhope
Tlhareseleele
Tswaanyaneng Metlojane Pitsane Potokwe
Mokgomane
Madingwana Rakhuna
Logogane Sheep
Farm
Land Variables and their relative
importance (weighting coefficient )
in the assessment of site suitability )
Minimization of the
cost of location
Protection of
agricultutral land
Groundwater
protection
Associated
weights
Lorolwane
Mmathethe
Mogojwagojwe
Digawane
Maruswa
Gopong
Minimal Limitations
Molapowabojang
Segwagwa
Moderate Limitations
High Limitations
Gasita
Kgomokasitwa
Lotlhakane
Very High Limitation
South East
Kanye
Suitability/Limitation for Urban/Rural Growth
Magothwane
Ntlhantlhe
Seherelela
Selokolela
Maokane
Sesung
Mabalane
Ranaka
Lekolobotlo
Tsonyane
Semane
Manyana
Mokhomma
Mosopa
Khakhea
Lotlhakane
West
Sese
Ralekgetho
Keng
Jwaneng
Wildlife
Management
Area
Sekoma
N
Scale: 1:1,250,000 Map 8.1
0 7.5 15 30 45
(UTM - Zone 35, Datum: Cape)
Mahotshwane
Kilometers
Mabutsane
Kokong
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Kweneng District
Client: Southern District Council
REPORT OF SURVEY
REGIONAL SCALE DEVELOPMENT
SUITABILITY MODEL
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000
162 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
Status Quo - Permit Existing Situation to Prevail
Mixed Land Uses and Dezoning the Wildlife Management Area
Rational Land Use Development
STRATEGY 1
STATUS QUO – PERMIT EXISTING SITUATION TO PREVAIL
8.3.2 This strategy has been adopted in planning and is commonly known as the ‘Do Nothing
Approach’. The development option is a non-interventionist planning strategy where the
status quo is allowed to prevail and shape development of the District. Under this strategy,
development of the District is not directed at attaining an end-desired state. There are no
clearly-defined unified strategies to solve the prevailing and envisaged future problems,
land use conflicts and adverse environmental impacts. Instead, planning intervention is
undertaken in an adhoc and unsystematic approach. This land use strategy implies that
Southern District would develop on the basis shown on Map 8.2 where development would
follow the current land use and development trends.
8.3.3 The planning approach implies that the effort of role players in the development of the
District which among others include: Central Government departments and parastatals,
Southern District Council, Ngwaketse and Rolong Land Boards, Non-Governmental
Organisations and various communities are not coordinated and directed towards the
achievement of common goals.
8.3.4 The Status Quo approach to the development of the District means that development would
not be geared towards sustainable exploitation of physical and natural environmental
resource opportunities neither would there be comprehensive measures to prevent adverse
environmental impacts of development. For example, unsustainable land and resources
utilisation would continue to cause rangeland degradation and little would be done in order
to prevent pollution of groundwater resources. The absence of effective planning control
over development would not help arrest depletion of the rangeland by arable farming and
settlements. Conflicts between settlements, arable agriculture, livestock farming and the
Wildlife Management Area would be hard to resolve and the utilisation of land and natural
resources is not executed on carrying capacity considerations.
8.3.5 The Do Nothing Approach perpetuates mixed land use practices in the District where in the
eastern part crop farming is practiced alongside livestock farming in the intervening
communal rangeland with settlements occupying a fair share of the space. Towards the
western portion of the District there is a mix of communal grazing as the predominant
activity with a dispersed settlement pattern. Communal grazing areas are subject to dual
grazing practiced by livestock farmers from ranches in the mid-portion of the District.
Another mixed land use system would intensify in the Wildlife Management Area where
livestock grazing, arable farming and the wildlife habitat exist side by side. Land use
conflicts would intensify while land is being devoted to unsuitable land use activities with the
result that optimum land utilisation is not realised.
STRATEGY 2
MIXED LAND USES AND DEZONING OF THE WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA.
8.3.6 The second land use option is predicated on planning intervention where land use activities
are mixed and the Wildlife Management Area being devoted to other land use activities (see
Map 8.3).
REPORT OF SURVEY
163

!
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7150000 7200000 7250000 7300000
100000
150000
200000
Source: Environmetrix (Pty) LTd, GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Grassland /Natural Tree and Shrub Vegetation Cover
Grasland/Shrubland
Open Shrubland
Sparse Vegetation Cover and/or Bare Soil
Pan
Rangeland
Hilly area with Natural Tree and Shrub Vegetation Cover
Wildlifw Management Area
4 km Transition Buffer
Settlement/Village (Built-up Area)
Farms/Ranches
Agricultural
Primary Road
Secondary Road
Railway
Tertiary Road/Major Track
!
Ngkwaketse/Rolong Land Board Boundaries
Nkwaketse Sub Land Board Boundaries
District Boundary
International Boundary
Jwaneng Planning Area
Legend
Khakhea
Kgalagadi
Keng
Wildlife
Management
Area
Sekoma
District
Kokong
Mabutsane
100000
150000
200000
Mahotshwane
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! !
250000
300000
350000
Kweneng District
Jwaneng
Sese
Ralekgetho
Semane
Mokhomma
Maokane
Tsonyane
Seherelela
Gasita
Sesung Mabalane
Selokolela
Segwagwa
Lotlhakane
West
Kanye
Lotlhakane
Mosopa
Ranaka
Ntlhantlhe
Magothwane
Molapowabojang
Manyana
Lekolobotlo
Kgomokasitwa
Lorolwane
Sekhutlane
Metlobo
Tswaaneng
Leporung
Dikhukhung
Gopong
Mmathethe Mogojwagojwe Maruswa
Digawane
Motsentshe Gatwane
Gamajalela
Kgoro
Leywana
Mogoriapitse Mogwalale Bethel
Tswaanyaneng Pitsane
Goodhope
Tlhareseleele
Metlojane Pitsane Potokwe
Mokgomane Logogane Madingwana Sheep
Rakhuna
Farm
Sedibeng
Hebron Papatlo
Ramatlabama
Phitshane
Molopo
Phiphitshwane
R.S.A
250000
300000
350000
South East
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
ALTERNATIVE I: STATUS QUO
REPORT OF SURVEY
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Kilometers
Map 8.2
N
0 7.5 15 30
(UTM - Zone 35, Datum: Cape)
164 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
8.3.7 Strategy 2 is an improvement of the Status Quo which unlike the lack of planned
intervention in the latter, planning intervention seeks to promote mixed land uses based on
planning guidance. The approach is based on the proven preference for mixed farming
activities by communities in Southern District. It is based on the assumption that land is
capable of supporting more than one land use activity within the same space and that
suitability analysis and carrying capacity parameters are unduly restrictive on land use
types.
8.3.8 In this strategy, the eastern portion of the District is set aside for settlement development,
crop production and livestock farming purposes. Settlements form an integral component
of the land use activity system as this part of the District has a high intensity of settlement
development. On account of favourable climatic conditions with higher rainfall and fertile
soils the eastern part of the District is considered suitable for rainfed crop farming. At the
same time the option recognises that there is higher biomass production as favourable
climatic conditions permit vegetation growth.
8.3.9 The option envisages mixed land uses from the mid-portion to the western part of the
District where livestock farming is the dominant activity with rainfed crop production being
limited only to patches with fertile soils. Livestock farming is practiced through ranching in
fenced leasehold farms and on open access communal rangelands. Farmers who practise
ranching on leasehold ranches are at liberty to practise dual grazing on the ranches and
communal rangelands. Livestock farmers on communal rangelands may carry out farming
on an individual subsistence basis.
8.3.10 In view of the mounting pressure from the community to have access to the Wildlife
Management Area for livestock grazing and arable farming, the land use strategy seeks to
dezone the WMA to accommodate other land uses. The WMA is therefore rezoned such
that the area acts as a corridor for the movement of wildlife between Kgalagadi -
Transfrontier National Park and Central Kalahari Game Reserve and also permits livestock
farming.
8.3.11 The mix between wildlife and livestock farming in the Wildlife Management Area is based
on the finding by Barnes (1998) that wildlife land as in the Southern District, has poor
justification for its maintenance through direct use values. The WMA in the District has
specifically been cited as a low value community – based wildlife area with low wildlife
diversity and number in addition to an uninspiring scenery.
STRATEGY 3
RATIONAL LAND USE DEVELOPMENT
8.3.12 The strategy is borne out of a rational comprehensive planning approach which revolves
around the core purpose of the Land Use Plan which is to guide and shape land and
resources use utilisation and development in a rational, equitable, sustainable and
balanced manner. Map 8.4 shows the Rational Land Use Development Strategy.
8.3.13 The land use strategy is to a large extent based on environmental zones derived from a
combination of biophysical parameters for the designation of land and resource use zones
with a view to resolving the problems afflicting the District. It seeks to put the land into more
beneficial use through identified development potentials in the District. It is however, not
oblivious of the constraints of existing development and proposes radical change where
necessary. The strategy seeks to facilitate environment-friendly natural resource utilisation
and good management of natural resource in a way that would bring positive change to
people’s lives.
REPORT OF SURVEY
165

!
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7200000
7275000
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
Tshedilamolomo
Kilometers (UTM Zone 35 - Datum Cape)
Mabule
Dikhukhung
0 12.5 25 50 75
Marojane
Leporung
R.S.A
Kilometers
Phitshane Molopo
Musi
! ! ! ! ! !
Phihitshwane
Hebron
Papatlo
Ramatlabama
Proposed Road
Sekhutlane
Sedibeng Sheep Farm
Existing Major Road
Mokgomane
Metlojane Logogane
Rakhuna
Proposed Railway Line
Tswaaneng
Æ·T
Tourism Related Activities
Existing Railway Line
BuildupArea
Metlobo
Lorwana Digawane
Mmathethe Motsentshe
Gathwane
Gamajalela Leywana
Kgoro
Mogwalale
Bethel
Mogoriapitse
Pitsane Siding
Good Hope
Tswaanyaneng
Ngwatsau Tlhareseleele
! ! !
Woodland
Sub Land Board Boundary
Lorolwane
Protected Area
! !
Land
Board Boundary
Mogojwegojwe
Maruswa
7200000
Open (Communal) Grazing
Jwaneng_Planning_area
Gopong
Commercial Ranch/Farm
International Boundary
Legend
Kgalagadi District
Cropland/Grazing
Segwagwa
Molapowabojang
District Boundary
Maisane
Gasita
Dinatshana
Lotlhakane
Kgomokasitwa
Kanye
Ntlhantlhe
Magotlhwane
Selokolela
South East
Maokane
Seherelela
Sesung
Lekgolobotlo
Tsonyane
Moshaneng
Ranaka
Lehoko
Moshupa
Manyana
Semane
Khakhea
Thankane
Mokhomma
Lotlhakane
West
Betesankwe
Kutuku
Sese
Naledi
Ralekgetho
Keng
Æ·T
7275000
Khonkhwa
Jwaneng
Sekoma
Æ·T
N
Scale: 1:1,100,000 Map 8.3
Mahotshwane
Consultants: Environmetix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Kokong
Mabutsane
Client: Southern District Council
Æ·T
REPORT OF SURVEY
Kweneng District
ALTERNATIVE II - MIXED LAND USE
AND DEZONING OF WMA
Morwamosu
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
150000 225000 300000 375000
166 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
8.3.14 The designation of the land use zone in line with the suitability of natural resources to
specific land uses and the exclusion of those uses which are considered unsuitable in
certain areas. Areas are designated for specific land uses with a view to minimising land
use conflicts and protection of some land uses against encroachment and displacement by
competing activities. Fragile areas or areas that are considered vulnerable to pollution are
designated as protected zones.
8.3.15 The land use strategy is based on the zoning of the District into five major land use zones
viz; crop farming, commercial livestock farming, communal grazing areas, Wildlife
Management Area and Community Based Natural Resource Management Areas and
Protected Areas. Other salient land uses are areas devoted to settlements, commercial
developments and industrial operations including infrastructure corridors.
8.3.16 The eastern part of the District is zoned primarily as an arable agricultural zone. This part of
the District is especially considered suitable for rainfed crop production on account of
favourable agro-climatic conditions with moderately fertile to very fertile soils and higher
rainfall. Areas with topographic limitations have been excluded from crop farming. Aquifer
areas with a high vulnerability to pollution have been designated as protected areas where
land utilisation is subject to stipulated guidelines. In view of the problem and conflicts
arising from the prevailing situation livestock farming in this zone is not recommended.
8.3.17 Communal grazing areas have been designated immediately west of the crop production
area and in the western extreme of the District around the Wildlife Management Area.
This area would be set aside for communal grazing and cattle posts and shall be protected
from dual grazing practices of commercial livestock farmers.
8.3.18 The middle portion of the District has been set aside as a commercial livestock farming
area. It consists of the existing leasehold ranches and proposed extension of the
commercial ranching area by reducing the size of communal grazing area. This land would
be further subdivided and allocated to individuals and syndicates.
8.3.19 The Wildlife Management Area is to be retained at its current size as it provides the habitat
for the conservation of wildlife and has the potential to boost tourism in the District. The
WMA and the Community Based Natural Resource Management areas could be utilised by
neighbouring communities for their benefit.
8.3.20 The strategy has set aside areas with aquifers that are vulnerable to pollution as protected
areas. These areas coincide with Kanye dolomite aquifer, Molopo river and the area around
Lorwana in the southeastern corner. Comprehensive protection measures would be
required in these areas.
8.3.21 The Strategy also hinges on planned settlements and the avoidance of settlement
proliferation. It recognises the absolute importance of development planning, the control of
settlement growth and minimisation of land use conflicts within and in the edges of
settlements whose growth is impeded by surrounding land uses and recommends planning
solutions.
8.3.22 Integrated land use planning under the strategy is predicated on an integrated road network
system complemented by a railway network. Other infrastructure services are provided on
an equitable basis across the District.
8.3.23 In order to stimulate the weak tourism sector the strategy incorporates measures to
facilitate the development of tourist facilities including the revitalisation of potential tourist
sites in the District.
REPORT OF SURVEY
167

!
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7200000
7275000
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
Tshedilamolomo
Kilometers (UTM Zone 35 - Datum Cape)
Mabule
Dikhukhung
0 12.5 25 50 75
Marojane
Leporung
R.S.A
Kilometers
Phitshane Molopo
Musi
! ! ! ! ! !
Phihitshwane
Hebron
Papatlo
Æ·T
Tourism Related Activities
Ramatlabama
Sedibeng Sheep Farm
BuildupArea
Sekhutlane
Mokgomane
Metlojane Logogane
Rakhuna
Woodland
Proposed Road
Tswaaneng
Protected Area
Existing Major Road
Community Based Natural Resource
Managemet Ranch
Proposed Railway Line
Metlobo
Lorwana Digawane
Mmathethe Motsentshe
Gathwane
Gamajalela Leywana
Kgoro
Mogwalale
Bethel
Mogoriapitse
Pitsane Siding
Good Hope
Tswaanyaneng
Ngwatsau Tlhareseleele
! ! !
Existing Railway Line
WMA - Transitional Zone
Lorolwane
Wildlife Management Area
Sub Land Board Boundary
Mogojwegojwe
Maruswa
7200000
Communal Grazing
!
!
Land
Board Boundary
Gopong
Proposed Commercial Ranch/Farm
Jwaneng_Planning_area
Segwagwa
Molapowabojang
Commercial Kgalagadi Ranch/Farm District
International Boundary
Maisane
Agricultural
District Boundary
Gasita
Dinatshana
Lotlhakane
Kgomokasitwa
Legend
Kanye
Ntlhantlhe
Magotlhwane
Selokolela
Maokane
Seherelela
South East
Sesung
Lekgolobotlo
Tsonyane
Moshaneng
Ranaka
Lehoko
Moshupa
Manyana
Semane
Khakhea
Thankane
Mokhomma
Lotlhakane
West
Betesankwe
Kutuku
Sese
Naledi
Ralekgetho
Keng
Æ·T
7275000
Khonkhwa
Jwaneng
Sekoma
WMA
Æ·T
N
Scale: 1:1,100,000 Map 8.4
Mahotshwane
Consultants: Environmetix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Kokong
Mabutsane
Client: Southern District Council
Æ·T
REPORT OF SURVEY
Kweneng District
ALTERNATIVE III -RATIONAL LAND
USE DEVELOPMENT
Morwamosu
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
150000 225000 300000 375000
168 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
8.4 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE LAND USE STRATEGY
8.4.1 The evaluation of the three land use strategies provide the basis for selecting the best
strategy to shape the land use activity system and guide development of the District in a
rational manner. Evaluation accords the evaluators insight into comparative advantage and
disadvantages of each land use strategy. The evaluation tools applied are the Goal
Achievement Matrix (GAM) and the Constraint Based Analysis (CBA). The evaluation
terminates with the adoption of the best strategy to guide development of the District.
8.4.2 The checklist used in the evaluation of the land use strategies using the GAM technique is
as follows:
(i) Promotes rational land use zone and activity system.
(ii) Promotes sustainable utilisation of natural resources.
(iii) Promotes balanced and sustainable development of the District.
(iv) Promotes conservation of natural resources.
(v) Promotes employment creation and empowerment of households.
(vi) Promotes functional settlement hierarchy.
(vii) Facilitates development of an integrated transportation network.
(viii) Promotes development of social facilities and infrastructure services.
(ix) Implementability and costs.
(x) Flexibility.
8.4.3 The weighting system to the checklist applied is as follows; 3 – most important, 2 – very
important and 1 – important. The weighting given to each criterion represents the
performance toward the attainment of the end desired state of the plan. In addition, the
criteria are ranked with scores from 1 - 5. The score 5 represents an excellent performance
of the criyerion while score 1 shows that the criterion performs the least on the strategy. In
view of the weighting of each criterion the rank score is multiplied by the weighted value in
order to derive the weighted score. A multi – disciplinary team participated in the scoring
using the Delphi technique. Table 8.1 shows the relative performance of the different
strategies.
Table 8.1: Goal Achievement Matrix of Various Strategies
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD
REPORT OF SURVEY
169

CHAPTER 8
STRATEGY 1 (STATUS QUO)
8.4.4 The land use strategy had the least performance with a total of 66 points. The following are
advantages and disadvantages of the strategy;
ADVANTAGES
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
The way activities are being carried out has already been established and proven
over the years.
Since it is not bound by any rational comprehensive integrated land use plan,
development under the strategy is piece –meal and the most flexible.
Implementation of the strategy is the cheapest in the short run.
DISADVANTAGES
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
There is no defined planning framework for the guidance of development in the
District therefore development is subject to the influence of social, political and economic
forces in the District
The absence of plan-led guidance leads to conflicts between land use activities.
There is no effective control over land use activities and development while the
limited control over development is weak.
Development is not aimed at achieving goals and objectives for integrated
development of the District.
The strategy does not offer comprehensive measures for the protection of the
environment and natural resources.
The potential of the land under the various categories of land uses isnot fully
exploited and therefore the full benefit are not realised.
STRATEGY 2 – MIXED LAND USE AND DEZONING OF THE WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT
8.4.5 The land use strategy had a total score of 81 points. It has the following advantages and
disadvantages:
ADVANTAGES
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
The strategy provides for planning intervention and control over land use activities
through the zoning of land for defined categories of mixed land uses.
The various land uses are to be undertaken in areas which are classified as
suitable for those activities.
It causes minimum disruption to the current mixed land use activity system where
crop farming and livestock grazing and settlements undertaken side by side.
Dezoning the Wildlife Management Area would be welcomed by communities close
to the WMA as it would enable them to graze their livestock in the wildlife habitat.
DISADVANTAGES
(i)
The strategy does not offer concrete proposal for the minimisation of land use conflicts.
170 REPORT OF SURVEY

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
It does not accord protection of land use activities against encroachments from
other land use activities such as settlements expanding and displacing arable fields
and arable fields reducing the size of grazing land.
The land use strategy does not assign land uses to space in terms of suitability
based on agro-climatic conditions and carrying capacity of the land.
Maximum economic benefits are not achievable under the strategy.
The strategy does not promote sustainable utilisation of natural resources.
It does not provide protection of environmentally sensitive areas such as aquifers
that are vulnerable to pollution and the erosion – prone hilly northeastern part of the
District.
The land use strategy does not seek to boost the economy of the District through
tourism development.
(viii) The dezoning of the Wildlife Management Area would constitute a threat to the
conservation of wildlife which would be under threat of displacement by livestock
farming. The loss of the WMA would threaten the potential for tourism and the
utilisation of wildlife resources for the benefit of neighbouring communities.
STRATEGY 3 – RATIONAL LAND USE DEVELOPMENT
8.4.6 The Rational Land use Development strategy emerged as the preferred land use strategy
with a total score of 111 points. It has the following advantages and disadvantages.
ADVANTAGES
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
The strategy provides a rational land use activity system based on land use zones
for the utilisation of land in a national, equitable, sustainable and balanced manner.
Designated land uses zone facilitate planning and control of development within the
zone.
The different land use zones are derived from a combination of biophysical
parameters which determine the suitability of natural resources to specific land
uses.
It encourage diverse economic opportunities and specialisation of activities to
improve economy efficiency and cost-effectiveness in land and resource utilisation
It seeks to maximise output from the utilisation of land through the minimisation of
encroachment and competition among land use activities.
The strategy seeks to minimise land use conflicts by setting aside the eastern part
of the District for crop production taking advantage of higher rainfall and fertile soils.
Livestock production would be improved through the extension of commercial
livestock farming areas resulting in better management realisation of higher
economic benefits from livestock farming.
(viii) Communal grazing areas are protected from pressure from dual grazing by
commercial livestock farmers in commercial livestock ranches.
(ix)
The retention and fencing of the Wildlife Management Area would promote the
conservation of wildlife and its protection from encroaching activities. The WMA
would provide a corridor for wildlife migration between Kgalagadi Trans-frontier
National Park and Central Kalahari Game Reserve. In addition, the WMA and the
REPORT OF SURVEY
171

CHAPTER 8
(x)
(xi)
(xii)
Community Based Natural Resource Areas could be utilised to boost tourism in the
District as well as benefiting surrounding communities.
The strategy would stimulate growth in the tourism sector by unlocking the potential
of the Trans Kgalagadi Highway and through the revitilisation of potential tourism
sites in the District.
The land use strategy makes comprehensive proposals for the protection
environmentally sensitive areas such as erosion prone areas and aquifers that are
vulnerable to pollution.
It provides the framework for a settlement hierarchy, planned settlements and
avoidance of settlement proliferation.
(xiii) Uncontrolled settlement expansion and land use conflicts would be avoided through
settlement boundaries based on development plans.
(xiv) The integrated transportation network system helps achieve integrated
development of the District through functional transportation linkages, improved
accessibility and efficient traffic circulation.
DISADVANTAGES
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
The department from the current mixed land use activity is bound to disrupt activities
result in losses to communities and would likely be met with opposition from
affected parties. However, awareness campaigns on the comparative advantages
of the proposed land use activity system could allay fears paving way for the attainment
of gains in future.
The extension commercial livestock farming areas would reduce the amount of
communal grazing land resulting in increased pressure on rangeland resources.
However, the prohibition on dual grazing and a reduced number of livestock
including improved management of grazing areas could mitigate the foreseen
negative impact.
The rational comprehensive basis for the formulation of the land use strategy
including the designated zones reduce flexibility of the strategy to changing
8.4.7 After giving due consideration to the evaluation matrix of the alternative strategies,
Alternative III with a total score of 111 points turned out to be the preferred option that best
meets the goals and objectives of the integrated land use plan.
172 REPORT OF SURVEY

INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
ENVIRONMENTAL ZONES, PROPOSED
LAND USE ZONES AND MANAGEMENT
9
9.1 INTRODUCTION
9.1.1 The Report of Survey explored the existing land use situation and provided an understanding
of the nature of land use activities and resource use, land use issues and conflicts. It gave an
appreciation of the components of the physical environment, their importance and effect on
land use planning in the District. Apart from highlighting the land use problems confronting
the District the Report of Survey uncovered the opportunities for resolving the problems to
facilitate rational and sustainable use of land.
9.1.2 At the end of the Report of Survey three possible alternative strategies for the use of land in
the District were presented and evaluated with a view to selecting and adopting the best land
use strategy. Strategy 3 – Rational Land Use Development emerged as the preferred option
providing broad zoning proposals for the major land use categories in the District.
9.1.3 The following account expounds on the land use zoning proposals based on the preferred
land use strategy. It also explains the methodology used in the designation of zones. While
broad zones have been designated, this does not always imply single use zones as existing
land use activities, land capability and the suitability of land for different uses promote mixed
land use activity systems in some parts of the District. The challenge always is to overcome
land use conflicts.
9.2 ENVIRONMENTAL (LAND USE) ZONING OF THE DISTRICT
9.2.1 Natural resources, as well as socio-economic features of the District have so far been
analyzed as separate issues. The aim of this section is made to integrate and categorize the
District’s area into zones of different “environmental constraints” or “development
opportunities” for a set of sustainable land use types. This analysis may be understood as a
resource inventory at District level and the important requirement in the assessment of optimal
spatial resource allocation, especially with regard to underlying principles (objectives) of
promoting (achieving) ecologically sound resource use and sustainable economic
development in the District.
9.2.2 The first step in the aforementioned effort focused on abridged Environmental Zoning analysis
(EZA) that used biophysical attributes of the District’s land for clustering land resources into
more homogeneous areas and assessing their potentials and feasible land use options. This
analysis is considered important in ensuring the sustainable resource allocation especially
with regard to:
(i)
(ii)
Long-term crop cultivation and livestock production (which is the most widespread
form of land use in the District) and;
Further economic diversification, including wildlife use and commercial utilization,
natural conservation and tourism.
9.2.3 Without assessment of the potential and protection of the District’s resource land base (even
at the District level), there is a risk that some of the lands (areas) could be inappropriately or
prematurely converted into land uses incompatible with long-term resource production. The
premature conversion of resource lands into incompatible uses would without doubt place
additional constraints on remaining resource lands throughout the District leading to further
erosion of its resource land base.
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
173

CHAPTER 9
ABRIDGED EZA APPROACH
9.2.4 The abridged Environmental Zoning Analysis of the District area can be best summarized
as integration of class values of a set of individual biophysical parameters considered
essential for general purpose land resource base classification at the district level. The
process, as outlined on Map 9.1, included the following:
(i)
(ii)
Identification of biophysical parameters required for AE zoning and their ranking
according to single resource sensitivity and/or significance they pose to different
land use options. (The biophysical parameters used in this abridged EZA analysis
and their rankings are shown in Map 9.1);
Aggregation (overlay) of the selected biophysical parameters and delineation of the
area where biophysical (environmental) characteristics are more or less
homogeneous. The overall result of this procedure is a composite Environmental
Zones map containing for each location in the District area the combination of
conditions, or resource-related sensitivities that can be expected. These
combinations of conditions served as a basis for clustering land resources and
assessing their potentials with regard to different land use options.
ENVIRONMENTAL ZONES DELINEATION
9.2.5 According to biophysical land resource base classification as summarized above, the whole
district area can be generally divided into diverse zones showing different sensitivities to
various land-use options. These zones are marked on Map 9.2 as A, B, C, D ,E, F and G.
ZONE “A”
9.2.6 This zone occupies close to 18 percent (aprox. 480,000 Ha) of the district and in
comparison with other zones it is characterized by a combination of conditions that render it
suitable for crop production.
9.2.7 In terms of incidence of biophysical factors that render this zone as cropland it is observed
that, in addition to relatively moderate soil deficiencies, the climatic conditions analyzed in
terms of both, namely the length of growing period and average biomass production
capacity, are important values and thus have comparative advantages.
9.2.8 As can be gleaned from Map 9.3, much of the land in this zone shows a combination of
conditions that render it highly to moderately highly suitable for rainfed crop production.
Land suitability for irrigation on the other side, renders in many cases incidences of
moderate to high limitations (drainability, topography, soils deficiency) calling for necessary
improvements required to cover development production costs and, at the same time leave
a reasonable profit. Groundwater potential and availability is yet another limitation factor
bearing in mind its rule as being, besides rainfall, a major source in providing water
resources for crop production in this zone. With regard to this it should be pointed out that
almost the whole zone “A”, with the exception of Kanye aquifer, is characterized by fair to
poor and variable groundwater potential. Consequently resource-directed measures will
continue to play an important role in the management of groundwater resources,
specifically to ensure their sustainable usage.
9.2.9 Another important consideration regarding this zone relates to a largely contiguous land
resource base suitable for crop production. It is well-known that smaller, discontinuous
agricultural areas are more vulnerable to conversion pressures resulting from longer
hauling routes, difficulty in transporting farm equipment and supplies, conflicts with
neighbouring non-agricultural land uses, and the reduced importance of agriculture in the
174 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

CHAPTER 9
7200000
7280000
7200000
7280000
Source: GISPlan (Pty)LTD & Environmetrix (Pty)LTD
N
Scale:
DRAFT LAND USE PLAN
Consultants: Environmetix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
BIOPHYSICAL PARAMETERS USED
FOR GENERAL PURPOSE LAND
RESOURCE BASE CLASSIFICATION
Client: Southern District Council
1:3,650,000 Map 9.1
ENVIRONMENTAL ZONING
Climatic Data
Length of Growing Season
Land Suitability for Rainfed Crops
Soils
Land Suitability for Irrigation
Enviro.
Zones
Landsat ETM+
Land Cover
NOA AVHRR
NDVI
Biomass
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
Contour Lines
DEM
Terrain Slope
Flow Chart Illustrating Approach to Environmental Zonning in SD
Low
High
Non Irrigable
High Limitations
Moderate Limitations
Slight Limitations
High/Moderately High
Moderate
Moderately Low/Low
Mostly Not Suitable
South East
7200000
Legend
Kgalagadi
Kgalagadi
South East
7280000
7200000 7280000
Legend
Legend
Kgalagadi
South East
Kweneng
Kweneng
Kweneng
Biomass (Growing Seasons 2001-2004) Soil Suitability for Irrigation
Soil Suitability for Rainfed Crops
160000 240000 320000
160000 240000 320000
160000 240000 320000
0-0.2%
0.2 - 1.0%
1.01 - 3.0%
3.01 - 5.0%
5.01 - 7.0%
7.01 - 10%
10.01 - 20.0%
>20%
Open Shrubland
Closed Shrubland
Grassland
Woodland/Cropland
41-60 days
61-80 days
81-100 days
101-120 days
Legend
South East
7200000
Legend
Kgalagadi
Kgalagadi
South East
7280000
7200000 7280000
Legend
Kgalagadi
South East
Kweneng
Kweneng
Kweneng
Site Slope Land Cover Length of Growing Season
160000 240000 320000
160000 240000 320000
160000 240000 320000
7200000 7280000
7200000 7280000
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
175

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7200000
7275000
South East
150000 225000 300000 375000
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
Kweneng District
ENVIRONMENTAL ZONES
DRAFT LAND USE PLAN
WMA
Mabutsane
Sekoma
Jwaneng
! E ! D
! ! C
A
Mosopa
! B
Manyana
! F
Maokane
G 1.8
Kanye
F 1.4
Lotlhakane
E
7.4
D Kgalagadi District
38.9
Gasita
! B C
26.6
Molapowabojang
B
A
!( A
!( B
!( C
!( D
!( E
!( F
6.3
17.6
Cropland
Cropland - Rangeland (Intensive Livestok Production)
Rangeland (Intensive Livestok Production)
Rangeland (Extensive Livestok Production)
Rangeland (Low Production Area)
Non-Productive Area (Hills/Woodland)
! C ! C
Mmathethe
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
N
Scale: 1:1,200,000 Map 9.2
! A ! A
Goodhope Pitsane
R.S.A
Built up Area
0 12.5 25 50 75 100
Kilometers (UTM Zone 35 - Datum Cape)
Source: GISPlan (Pty)LTD & Environmetrix (Pty)LTD
7200000
7275000
176 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
local economy. Accordingly, preservation of the large and contiguous agricultural land
resource base throughout this Zone “A” should be an integral part of overall land use and
management strategy. For that purpose, the legislative and planning measures should be
reinforced to prevent further unnecessary loss and/or fragmentation of the agricultural land
resource base This especially refers to Barolong agricultural district which with regards to
its potential for drought tolerant rainfed crop farming can become the breadbasket for the
wider area and a generator of local economic growth.
300000 350000
neng
Ralekgetho
Lotlhakane West
Mosopa
Manyana
7150000 7200000 7250000
Seherelela
ne
Gasita
Metlobo
Dikhukhung
Sesung
Tswaaneng
Selokolela
Leporung
Malokaganyane
Sedibeng
Segwagwa
Phitshan Molopo
Mmathethe
Mabalane
Mogoriapitse
Kanye
Motsentshe
Lotlhakane
Kgoro
Mogwalale
Hebron
Ranaka
Ntlhantlhe
Magothwane
Molapowabojang
Mogojwagojwe Gopong
Gamajalela Gatwane
Papatlo
Phiphitshwane
Maruswa
Digawane
Lekolobotlo
Kgomokasitwa
Bethel
Leywana
Ramatlabama
S o u t h E a s t
Goodhope
Pitsane
Tswaanyaneng
Metlojane
Tlhareselee
Mokgomane
Madingwana
Rakhuna
Logogane
Sheep Farm
ZONE A
Suitable for Rainfed Crop
Production
Suitable for Irrigation
Suitable for Irrigation and Rainfed
Crop Production
Extreme/High Aquifer Vulnerability
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
ENVIRONMENTAL ZONE "A"
LAND SUITABILITY CLASSES
Client:
Consultants:
N
DRAFT LAND USE PLAN
Southern District Council
Environmetix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Scale:
1:800,000
Map 9.3
Source: GISPlan (pty)LTD & Environmetrix (Pty)LTD
9.2.10 In terms of incidences of environmentally sensitive factors, it is observed that almost the
entire zone “A” is characterized by a relatively higher groundwater contamination risk based
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
177

CHAPTER 9
on assumed vertical permeability of the soils and subsurface geological material.
Therefore, any land based activities, especially intensification of agriculture for any given
area within zone “A” should be preceded by the assessment of the risk to ground water
quality so that, necessary source-directed control and/or mitigation measures can be
introduced.
9.2.11 Map 9.3 summarizes incidences of land suitability classes for crop production at this
Environmental Zone “A”.
ZONE B, C, D
9.2.12 Nearly three quarters of the District is rangeland comprised of the low rainfall and variable
climate in a semi-arid area. Zone “B” has a combination of conditions that also renders it as
a land resource base moderately suitable for crop production. However, low rainfall and
climatic variability pose a risk to crop production and therefore, considering main ecosystem
types dominating in this zone (grassland, shrub/wooded grassland), it is more suitable as
rangeland resource.
9.2.13 Zone “C” and “D” are characterized by a combination of conditions that renders them as
typical rangelands. Differences are mostly connected to dominating ecosystem types
(grassland/closed scrublands – Zone C; open/closed scrublands - Zone D) and related
biomass production capabilities and carrying (grazing) capacities. As shown in Figure 9.1 it
appears that inter-annual vegetation composition and growth in zone “C” seems to be
higher in comparison with adjacent open/closed scrublands (Zone “D”). The medium
(average) range production (> 2.4 tonnes/ha) is usually associated with this zone, while the
western open/closed scrubland portion of the district (Zone “D”) in most cases exhibits
lower biomass production levels. This is without doubt a consequence of more favourable
climatic conditions (higher gradient in precipitation and soil moisture) in zone “C”, thus
making it comparatively more suitable for communal grazing and commercial livestock
production.
9.2.14 The above agro-ecological zones are facing the same problems and should be managed in
similar way. In these zones, and particularly Zones “B” and “C” pastoralism has a long
history and is the widespread form of land use. Borehole technology has also opened the
western part of the district for livestock (Zone “D”) causing increasing pressure on wildlife
resources in this zone. With the benefit of hindsight there is now a growing appreciation that
the current utilization and management practices in these zones proved not quite
appropriate to the rangelands calling into question their long-term sustainability. The
challenge these zones are facing is related to preventative and remedial action and ongoing
178 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
management of rangelands targeting to protect declining biological diversity and
maintaining the ecological processes which provide the productive capacity of its natural
resources. This challenge is made more difficult by the fragility of these eco-zones including
the unpredictable nature of rainfall and a harsh economic environment.
9.2.15 With regard to the above it should be pointed out that there is evidence that the above
rangeland zones, besides rapid decline of wildlife resources, are also experiencing changes
in range vegetation. They include changes from perennial to seasonal grass species and
increases in bush density which in turn raises the issue of the importance of browsing for
domestic and wild animals. In addition to this, evidence of degradation and increase of bare
land especially around settlements and boreholes, some of which is likely to be permanent,
is also becoming a subject of growing concern.
9.2.16 Land-cover change in these zones appears to be the product of the synergies between
changes in precipitation, climatic variability, as well as the spatial pattern of increasing
grazing pressure and stocking strategies. These synergies are perhaps more important
than ever due to the changing perceptions and the community’s commitment to achieving
ecologically sustainable rangeland management that no longer provides a large ‘‘safety
net’’ for pastoralists, allowing them to ‘‘make a go of it’’. A further complication the sound
management of these district eco-zones will face with, especially in relation to grazing
pressure and stocking strategies relate to estimates of the likely consequences of climate
changes. According to various climatic models it appears that these eco-zones are likely to
experience both increasing aridity and frequency of extreme precipitation events. Some
models go further to show that one of the possible results of global warming could be a 10
to 20 percent decrease in rainfall, along with 5-20 percent increase in rates of evapotranspiration.
This, if happens, would without doubt cause substantial changes in range
vegetation and biomass distribution.
9.2.17 Taking into consideration the aforementioned projections along with current problems and
indices of vegetation changes in the district’s rangelands, there is a need to establish
sound, as well as near-real time monitoring systems at the local (district) level that can
inform stakeholders in the District about strategic points of intervention. Activities already
undertaken at the Central level by the BRIMP project - MoA suggest that constant
monitoring of rangeland using ground-based and remote sensing technologies provides the
potential:
(i)
(ii)
To detect near real-time effects of local climate variability on rangeland production
potential against which immediate management actions can be assessed: and
To decouple, through the continuous, long-term monitoring the effects of local
climate variability from the effect of rangeland state due to management.
9.2.18 There is no doubt that the monitoring system as described above is a must for the district in
order to maintain rangeland resilience assuming that commercial stocking activities will
continue to be dominant land use activity in these district eco-zones. Although useful for
planning purposes, exclusive reliance on the concept of carrying capacity in maintaining
sustainable rangeland resource use can give rise to error due to variable climate and
related sharp fluctuations over time and space.
9.2.19 In addition to the above it is also important to re-emphasize that the expansive nature of
bush encroachment as recorded in the district’s rangeland zones implies that if borehole
density continues to increase with no regulation with regard to the number of livestock
permitted per borehole, it is likely that more uniform stands of bush-dominant land will be
created. At present however this problem is not prominent to the extent that would lead to
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
179

CHAPTER 9
substantial loss of the district’s rangeland heterogeneity and with it the most economically
productive pastoral resources. However, warning over the need to control borehole density
in the district rangelands remains accentuated since it is one of the main factors that could,
in conjunction with overgrazing, influence bush encroachment and reduction in the current
vegetation diversity. With regard to this it is of crucial importance for the District to embark
ZONE “E”
9.2.20 This zone, located at the far west, occupies 7.4 percent of the district area. The zone
belongs to a dry Kalahari environment characterized by great variation in both temperature
and rainfall. As a result of the high rainfall variability, rangelands can be expected to be in a
constant state of disequilibrium and the concept of an average livestock carrying capacity
has little meaning in the area. Soils of the study area are mostly sandy and have a low
water- holding capacity accompanied by low nutritional status. Surface water is virtually
non-existent except a couple of pans. The potential for extracting groundwater is rather
limited and the water tends to be saline. These climatic, hydrological and rangeland
conditions severely restrict development opportunities posing a very high risk for
commercial and, even traditional livestock production. Consequently, alternative land use
options, which could in some instances, have greater profitability than livestock production
should be taken into consideration. This especially refers to sustainable veld production and
processing, commercial wildlife use/production, as well as wildlife and natural conservation.
ZONE “F”
9.2.21 This zone is a hilly terrain located at the north-eastern part of the district. Steep
slopes,water erosion and run-off during the wet season are the principal problems in this
zone,making it unsuitable for development and cultivation. The conservation effort should
therefore be focused on preservation/regeneration of natural vegetation cover (woodland)
because of their role in diminishing seasonal run-offs and reducing erosion.
9.3 ESTABLISHMENT OF LAND USE ZONES
DISTRICT PROPOSED LAND USE ACTIVITY SYSTEM
9.3.1 The proposed District land use activity system or land use zones can be easily gleaned
from Map 9.4. Equally important, the land area and statistical contribution of each proposed
and existing land use zone can be observed from Table 9.1. Existing commercial ranches
allocated under TGLP and the Sekhutlane farms have the largest land area contributing 22
per cent of the District’s land area.
AG: AGRICULTURAL ZONES
9.3.2 Agriculture is the most extensive land use in the District and it takes the form of livestock
farming or crop production. A number of problems have arisen as a result of conflicts
between livestock farming and arable farming as well as between the respective land use
activities and other land uses such as settlements. A survey of the state of agricultural land
use activities and agricultural production shows that land use conflicts, cultivation of soils
with low fertility and poor farming practices and techniques have compromised unlocking
the full agricultural potential of the District.
9.3.3 Agricultural zoning provides the spatial framework undertaking the appropriate livestock or
arable agricultural activities on the agro-ecological zones considered suitable for specific
agricultural activities. The zones act as a land use control mechanism for the protection of
180 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

CHAPTER 9
7200000
7275000
South East
150000 225000 300000 375000
Morwamosu
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES
Æ·T
Kweneng District
Client: Southern District Council
Consultants: Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Kokong
Mabutsane
Mahotshwane
Scale: 1:1,100,000 Map 9.4
WMA N
Æ·T
Sekoma
Jwaneng
Khonkhwa
Æ·T
Keng
Kutuku
Khakhea
Tlhankane
Semane
Mokhomma
Sese
Naledi
Betesankwe
Ralekgetho
Lotlhakane
West Moshupa
Manyana
Lehoko
Legend
Urban Growth Area
Rural Growth Area
Agro-Industrial Zone
Kgalagadi District
Rural Village Area
AG-1
AG-2
Agro-Forestry
AI Camp
Ranches
Rg-1a (Commercial)
Rg-1a- Arable (Irrigated)
RG-1b (Communal)
Ap-1
Rg-2a (Commercial)
Rg-2b (Communal)
P-1gw
P-2gw
Kilometers
0 7.5 15 30 45
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
Æ·T
UTMZone35-DatumCape
P-3wma
P-3wma (4km buffer)
P-4cbnr
P-5 (Afforestation)
Main (Primary) Road
Secondary Road
Proposed Road
Local/Access Road
Existing Railway
Proposed Railway
District Boundary
International Boundary
Mine
Special Development Zone
Tourism Related Activities
Lorolwane
Mabule
Sekhutlane
Maokane
Tsonyane
Marojane
Tshedilamolomo
Seherelela
Gasita
Metlobo
Tswaaneng
Dikhukhung
Sesung
Selokolela
Musi
Kanye
Dinatshana
Segwagwa
Moshaneng
Mmathethe
Mokgomane
Mogoriapitse
Sedibeng
Leporung
Phitshane Molopo
Motsentshe
Tswaanyaneng
Gamajalela
Hebron
Ranaka
Lotlhakane Kgomokasitwa
Gopong
Mogojwegojwe
Kgoro
Papatlo
Lorwana
Maisane
Metlojane Ngwatsau
Logogane
Gathwane
Ntlhantlhe
Magotlhwane
Mogwalale
Good Hope
Sheep Farm
Phihitshwane
R.S.A
Molapowabojang
Maruswa
Digawane
Leywana
Bethel
Lekgolobotlo
Pitsane Siding
Tlhareseleele
Rakhuna
Ramatlabama
7200000
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7275000
181

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.1 Land Area of the Existing and Proposed Land Use Zones
Land Use Zones Hectares Km 2 %
Urban/Rural Zones
UGA: Urban Growth Area 14941.0 149.4 0.56
RGA: Rural Growth Area 22358.3 223.6 0.84
Ag-In (Agro-Industrial Zone) 505.0 5.1 0.02
RVA: Rural Village Area 28908.0 289.1 1.08
Agricultural Zones
AG-1: Restricted Arable Agricultural Zone 167986.0 1679.9 6.27
AG-2: General Agricultural Zone 82790.0 827.9 3.09
Agro-Forestry 133754.0 1337.5 5.00
Intensive Rangeland Utilization Zones
Existing Ranches (Commercial Farms) 586094.3 5860.9 21.89
AI Camp 11603.0 116.0 0.43
Rg-1: Communal Rangeland Utilisation Zone 512021.5 5120.2 19.12
Ap-1: Agro-Pastoral Zone 245414.0 2454.1 9.17
Western Rangeland Utilisation Zones
Rg-2:Communal Rangeland Utilisation Zone 428913.6 4289.1 16.02
Preservation Zones
P-1gw: Vulnerable Zone-High Groundwater Potential 80127.0 801.3 2.99
P-2gw:Vulnerable Zone-Low Groundwater Potential 31272.8 312.7 1.17
P-3wma: Wildlife Management Area 231328.3 2313.3 8.64
P-3wma: WMA Buffer Zone (500) 9288.5 92.9 0.35
P-4cbnr:CBNRM Area 41582.6 415.8 1.55
P-5: General Preservation Zone (Afforestation) 48712.1 487.1 1.82
Total District 2677600.0 26776.0 100.00
Chart 9.1: Statistical Contribution of Each Proposed and Existing Land Use Zone (percent of total)
P-5
P-4cbnr
1.8
1.6
P-3wma (500m buffer)
0.3
P-3wma
8.6
P-2gw
1.2
P-1gw
3.0
Rg-2
16.0
Ap-1
9.2
Rg-1
19.1
AI Camp
0.4
Ranches
21.9
Agro-Forestry
5.0
AG-2
3.1
AG-1
6.3
RVA
1.1
Ag-In
0.02
RGA
UGA
0.8
0.6
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0
182 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
agricultural land and the minimisation of land use conflicts. The purpose of zoning is also
aimed at ensuring optimum utilisation of land for the most suitable agricultural activities and
the maximization of agricultural output. In particular, the zones represent the primary
agricultural activities earmarked for a particular zone. This takes into consideration that
land may be devoted for secondary land use activities which may be undertaken within
zones designated for specific primary agricultural uses.
9.3.4 Agricultural development is key to the District sub economy and indeed the national
economy. The Land Use Plan seeks to reinforce the role of agriculture in the District
economy. Subsequently, land use zoning promotes Barolong Agricultural District as a prime
arable farming area in view of its potential for drought tolerant rainfed crop farming.
Barolong possesses the potential to become the breadbasket for the wider area and a
generator for local economic growth.
AG-1: RESTRICTED ARABLE AGRICULTURAL ZONE
9.3.5 The zone occurs in the southeastern part of the District. The intent of the AG-1 Restricted
Agricultural Zone is to conserve and protect prime arable agricultural land for the
performance of agricultural functions by permitting only those uses which perpetuate the
retention of these lands in production of food, feed, forage, fiber crops and horticultural
plants.
9.3.6 The guiding principle for the creation of this zone is the need to maintain a large contiguous
land base for crop production as the primary agricultural activity and imposing restrictions to
various non-agricultural land use activities that could result in agricultural land
fragmentation. To promote economy of services and utilities as well as efficient use of the
area for agricultural pursuits, agricultural clusters of more than 150 contiguous hectares
should be encouraged in this zone. The zone is set aside for rainfed crop production
although a limited extent may be devoted to irrigated crop farming depending on the
availability of water for irrigation.
9.3.7 The designation of this zone takes into account the existing land use activity system
comprising of mixed farming systems of crop production and livestock farming in
intervening rangelands. Interwoven into the same space are settlements. Therefore, while
rainfed crop production is recommended as the primary land use activity, existing livestock
grazing may be undertaken in intervening rangelands so as to minimize disruption of these
activities which are critical for the economic well-being of households.
AG-2: GENERAL AGRICULTURAL ZONE
9.3.8 The General Agricultural Zone is contiguous with the restricted agricultural zone in the
southeastern part and also occures in the northern part of the District. It comprises of land
with a potential for agricultural production or those agricultural production activities which
are of different types and lack spatial contiguity. General agricultural activities include both
livestock farming and crop production. The size of agricultural holdings is smaller than the
NAMPAADD stipulated minimum plot size such that arable farming is undertaken in
agricultural clusters. Small farm sizes would enable more farmers to have access to
agricultural plots. Other agricultural activities in the zone should include intensive activities
such as grazing of livestock, poultry-keeping and piggery projects. In order to ensure that
this zone is devoted to agricultural production, land allocation should prioritize agricultural
activities.
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
183

CHAPTER 9
AGRO-FORESTRY ZONES
9.3.9 The purpose of Agro-Forestry Zones is to encourage a land use system that deliberately
combines trees (woody plants) with small-to-medium size crop and livestock production
agricultural holdings and communal grazing areas. These zones are located in the eastern
part of the District and are characterized by erosion prone, undulating terrain and narrow
valley bottoms of arable land lacking spatial contiguity. The management of these zones
involves both, namely:
(i)
(ii)
Planting of rows of trees at wide spacing and intercropping with annual row crops
and/or communal grazing areas. The wide spaces seek to provide long-term economic
activities without compromising the tree stand, growth and yield. This
approach seeks to abate soil erosion, protect watersheds by trapping sediments
and storing nutrients.
Mixing (integration) of various land use components on the small to medium size
holdings such as planting of tree stand and/or fruit trees, small livestock rearing
(poultry, piggery), vegetables and other short-term crops. This mixing of farming
activities is also referred to as agro-forestry and aims at maximizing land use and
diversifying farm income.
URBAN GROWTH AREA
9.3.10 Urban Growth Areas are zones designated for urban settlements. The zone comprises the
existing built-up area and the proposed future growth area. The zone coincides with the
settlement development plans where the main guiding principles are planned development,
economy and efficiency in land utilisation and the avoidance of sprawl. The extent of the
zone is not fixed as it permits planned and managed expansion onto adjoining land.
RURAL GROWTH AREA
9.3.11 The zone represents the area designated for the growth of tertiary and smaller settlements.
Growth in this zone should be in terms of Development Plan and detailed settlement layout
plan guidance. The aim is to manage settlement growth and minimization of haphazard
displacement of land on the edge of the settlements.
RVA: RURAL VILLAGE AREA
9.3.12 Rural Village Areas, designated in the south-eastern part of the District, are intended to
provide transitory zones from the edge of village built-up areas towards prime arable
agricultural land. From a settlement planning perspective these are functional zones in the
outskirts of settlements (rural villages) allowing more flexibility in practicing small scale
agricultural production (gardening), livestock rearing, as well as local agro-processing. It
also serves as the buffer area preventing encroachment of small scale agricultural holdings,
as well as non-agricultural land use activities on to neighbouring prime agricultural land.
INTENSIVE RANGELAND UTILIZATION ZONE
9.3.13 The Intensive Rangeland Utilization zone is divided into three sub – zones namely: existing
ranches, RG-1 and Ap-1. The intent of the Intensive Rangeland Utilisation Zone is to
protect and maintain grass dominant rangeland resources for commercial and communal
livestock production by permitting only those uses and management practices which allow
continuation (intensification) of sustainable commercial livestock farming in the area.
Protection of these areas is expected to be achieved through improved ecological
understanding of grazing and resource management practices rather than restrictions on
184 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
land use. However, land uses and pastoral practices considered to have significant land
degradation potential are nonetheless opposed.
EXISTING RANCHES
9.3.14 The central portion of the District is set aside as commercial ranches and comprises of
those ranches allocated under the Tribal Grazing Land Policy and Sekhutlane ranches.
Ranches to the east fall within a zone that has higher rates of biomass production while in
the western part of the District inter-annual biomass production decreases. While this
portion of the District is generally suitable for livestock production, the Plan proposes the
diversification of farming activities to include other activities that may improve the economic
viability of the land and increase profits to farmers. Such activities would include arable
farming, small stock production, poultry and wildlife farming. Ranches should be properly
fenced and internally subdivided into paddocks to improve the management of grazing
areas.
9.3.15 RG - 1: focuses on communal utilisation of rangeland resources, and involves communal
grazing and livestock husbandry as the primary activity and the veldt products utilisation as
a secondary use. Livestock farming is of a traditional subsistence type so as to support
existing farming activities including the protection of traditional farmers from encroachment
by commercial livestock farmers in neighbouring ranches. The zone is contiguous with
other land use zones such as the General Agricultural Zone and dispersed settlements
which should be separated from the Communal Rangeland Utilisation Area to avoid
conflicts between incompatible land use activities.
9.3.16 The purpose of AP-1 Agro-Pastoral Land Use Zone is to allow arable agricultural clustering
on land predominantly classified as prime (rangeland) grazing area, but with patches of
land having minor constraints and suitable for irrigable crop production. Though arable
production, from the economy of scale point of view, has limited potential in these zones,
they are intended to provide for some (medium and/or small-scale) agricultural uses and
supporting services. The guiding principle for the management of these zones refers to
integration and harmonization of commercial livestock and agricultural production.
RG-2: WESTERN RANGELAND UTILIZATION ZONE
9.3.17 The plan proposes designation of the western portion of the District for communal livestock
farming and utilisation of rangeland resources. This zone occurs in the western part of the
District. The zone generally experiences climatic variability and low rainfall which renders it
less suitable for crop production but is more suitable as a rangeland resource. It is
characterised by extremely variable biomass production levels which ranges from low in the
western portion to average biomass production in the eastern parts of the District.
9.3.18 The guiding principle for the management of these zones is minimization of the risk of
resource deterioration which is to be achieved through:
(i)
Guided or regulated grazing, stocking and other pastoral management strategies
and practices, given that pastoralism will continue to be the dominant land use
activity in the zone. The objective is to conserve central and western rangelands
and to avoid the environmental problems (e.g. bush encroachment, loss of heterogeneity
of fodder landscape and disappearance of valuable pasture plants), now
threatening the viability of the zone.
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
185

CHAPTER 9
(ii)
Encouragement of more flexible land use which would permit commercial ranch
lease holders and rural communities to diversify the use of the land they hold. This,
especially refers to the western part of the District where climatic, hydrological,
rangeland conditions, as well as distances from centers severely restrict
development opportunities thereby posing a risk for commercial and traditional
livestock production. Consequently, alternative land use options, in particular lowimpact
or non-consumptive use of resources such as veldt production and
processing, game ranching, wildlife, nature conservation and tourism tend to
emerge as having greater potential than livestock production.
PRESERVATION ZONES
9.3.19 These are natural resource conservation areas where natural resources face threats from
the harmful effects of some land use activities and processes. Groundwater and wildlife
resources deserve protection as they are vulnerable to the harmful effects of other land use
activities. An important goal of the Land Use Plan is to protect and as much as possible
enhance the District’s environmental quality. Essential to this is the establishment of safe
development patterns that do not significantly disrupt natural resources and that ensure the
preservation of clean water, natural areas, farmlands, rangelands, forest lands, and wildlife
habitat.
9.3.20 Relative to environmental protection, this plan gives considerable attention to groundwater
resource protection. To achieve the desired level of protection the plan focuses on issues
related to limits and constraints that must be imposed on the land based activities especially
in the areas that are considered to have a critical recharging effect on promising aquifers,
as well as in the areas coinciding with the immediate vicinity of the existing production
boreholes, well fields and reservoirs.
9.3.21 Not only the quality of life, but the economic health of Southern District depends on the
maintenance of a safe and reliable water supply. All stakeholders should therefore
cooperate to ensure the protection of the quality of the District's existing and potential water
resources.
9.3.22 As already pointed out in the Report of Survey groundwater resources differ from surface
water resources in that they are not confined to visible channels. In the absence of proper
monitoring and management, human impacts are usually difficult to detect. Consequently a
careful approach to groundwater protection is required, focusing primarily on land-based
activities that impact on underlying groundwater bodies.
9.3.23 Regarding groundwater resource protection in the District it should be pointed out, that the
widespread, but also highly localized occurrence and use of groundwater makes it
impossible to economically protect all sources to the same degree. To achieve the desired
protection of groundwater resources, this Plan adopts an approach based on different
levels of priority area classification designed specifically to control a range of land use
allocations. This approach seems to be successfully implemented worldwide and includes
definition of different risk management priority classification areas.
P–1GW: VULNERABLE GROUNDWATER ZONE–HIGH GROUNDWATER POTENTIAL
9.3.24 This zone coincides with the promising dolomite aquifers of Kanye, Moshaneng and Molopo
including the area immediately south of Digawana extending to Gathwane and Lejwana.
The aquifers are considered as highly vulnerable to groundwater pollution. The creation of
this zone therefore is aimed at ensuring that there is no increased risk of pollution to
groundwater resources which are potential sources of water supply for the District. For
these areas the guiding principle is risk minimization. This implies that certain land use
activities may be allowed under specific guidelines.
186 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
P-2GW: VULNERABLE GROUNDWATER ZONE – LOW GROUNDWATER POTENTIAL
9.3.25 Land Use Zone District (P-2gw) aims at minimizing the risk of pollution to the potential
groundwater sources. It refers to areas highly vulnerable to groundwater pollution but with
groundwater potential that is rather low. Protection of these areas is to be achieved through
guided or regulated environmental (risk) management for land use activities rather than
restriction on land use. However, land uses considered to have significant pollution
potential are nonetheless opposed or may be permitted subject to conditions. Extensive
and/or organic agricultural crop production, communal grazing, as well as agro forestry are
the primary land use activities. Others such as intensive agriculture and especially
settlements activities, and industrial installations require adoption of appropriate measures
and environmental management practices in meeting groundwater quality protection
objectives.
9.3.26 The regional-scale vulnerability information as presented on Map 3.20 is used to gauge the
relative vulnerability of an area to groundwater pollution. The evaluation and subsequent
definition of P-1gw should not be considered definitive as the actual risk of groundwater
contamination for the given area. An area may be judged to be more sensitive to
contamination than another area under the same development conditions. Actual risk can
only be determined by a site-specific investigation.
WELLHEAD AND RESERVOIR PROTECTION ZONES
9.3.27 The regional scope of this plan has constrained the ability for determination of specific
protection zones targeting to protect potable water sources from contamination in the
immediate vicinity of water extraction facilities. It should, therefore be a task of Local
Authorities to designate these areas through site-specific groundwater exploration projects
supervised by the Department of Water Affairs. This refers to:
(i)
(ii)
Definition of Wellhead protection zones used to protect underground sources of
drinking water. They are usually circular (unless information is available to determine
a different shape), with a radius of at least 300 m. Within these areas by-laws
may prohibit, restrict or approve defined land uses and activities to prevent groundwater
source contamination or pollution. Special conditions, such as restrictions on
storage and use of chemicals, may apply within these zones.
Reservoir protection zones - which may consist of at least 1 kilometre wide buffer
area around the top water level of storage reservoirs including the reservoir waterbody.
These protection zones aim at prohibiting public access to prevent
contamination (physical, chemical and biological) of the water source.
P-3/4: COMMUNITY BASED NATURAL RESOURCE AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREAS
9.3.28 These areas belong to a dry Kalahari environment characterised by great variation in both
temperature and rainfall. As a result of the high rainfall variability, they can be expected to
be in a state of disequilibrium. Consequently, they require sensitive management and,
where feasible, restoration of ecological values on the landscape. In these land use zones
the low impact of non-consumptive use of resources, such as veldt product processing,
game viewing, camping, tourism and other activities are bound to have high value and
higher potential to contribute to rural development than traditional agro-pastoralism or
commercial livestock production.
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
187

CHAPTER 9
P– 3WMA: WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA
9.3.29 The P3-wma zone is in the western end of the District and aims at ensuring that there is (or
will be) no degradation of the existing or potential biodiversity and wildlife habitat. The zone
is designated as Wildlife Management Area which is a wildlife migration corridor linking
Kgalagadi Transfrontier National Park with Central Kgalagadi Game Reserve. The zone
has economic significance in that it has the potential to boost wildlife-based tourism. The
guiding principle for the management of this area is risk avoidance so that allocation of land
use activities that could ultimately lead to degradation of biodiversity in general and wildlife
habitat in particular are restricted. Activities to be undertaken in the WMA include hunting,
photography and camping.
9.3.30 The plan proposes the maintenance of a 500 meters buffer between WMA and adjoining
land uses. A 20 meters wide strip of land on the edge of the buffer zone should be cleared
of vegetation and maintained as a firebreak.
P–4CBRM: COMMUNITY BASED NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AREA
9.3.31 Community Based Natural Resource Management Area (zone P4-cbrm) are set aside for
the sustainable conservation and utilisation of natural resources by communities living
adjacent to these zones in the western part of the District. The aim is to promote
diversification of the District’s rural economy and the social and economic empowerment of
communities. CBNRMs would be used in livestock production and wildlife management in
addtion to utilization of other available natural resources by adjoining communities. It is
therefore essential for the zones to be contiguous with communities for easy access to the
latter. Zoning therefore aims at minimizing land use conflicts that may diminish the potential
and resource value of the area.
P-5 – GENERAL PRESERVATION DISTRICT (AFFORESTATION)
9.3.32 The purpose of this preservation zone is to preserve and manage forestry areas unsuitable
for other uses due to topographic constraints, including areas of scenic beauty and historic
significance.
9.3.33 This area encompasses hilly terrain located at the north-eastern part of the District. Steep
slopes, susceptibility to water erosion and run-off during the wet season are the principal
problems in this zone, making it unsuitable for development and cultivation. The
conservation/management effort should therefore be focused on preservation/regeneration
of natural vegetation cover (woodland) because of their role in diminishing seasonal runoffs,
reducing erosion, as well as providing recreation land and visual relief and contrast to
the neighbouring built up environment.
AG-IN: AGRO INDUSTRIAL ZONE
9.3.34 The purpose of the Ag-In (Agro Industrial) zone is to encourage establishment of medium to
large scale industries, especially agro-processing and ancillary services to locate (cluster)
in designated areas. This approach seeks to minimize as far as practicable the combined
effects which processing industries, their support services and allied smaller industries may
have on the environment whilst also achieving a more efficient utilisation of existing and/or
future infrastructure near major centers, cross roads and other transportation systems
(railway) in addition to the presence of locational characteristics required to support
industrial clusters.
188 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
AI CAMP
9.3.35 AI camps are very important facilities for livestock production in the District. They are used
as holding camps for cattle from communal areas. Cattle are kept in the camps from
September/October until March the following year for artificial insemination.
SETTLEMENTS
9.3.36 Settlements constitute an important element of the District’s land use activity system as
magnets for population growth and development activities that exert considerable influence
especially on land use activities in the fringes of settlements and broader District context.
9.3.37 The establishment of settlements in the District should be in line with the guidelines set out
in the National Settlement Policy which stipulates the settlement hierarchy and the
minimum number that qualifies a conglomeration of people as a settlement. In terms of the
National Settlement Policy, a settlement is a conglomeration of a minimum of 500 people or
a minimum of 250 people or more settled in a remote area, must be located outside
National Parks and Game Reserves and should have a water source.
9.3.38 The plan seeks to discourage haphazard establishment of settlements in the District except
for special purposes such as mining settlements.
9.3.39 It is proposed that development of all recognised settlements in the District should be in
terms of the appropriate planning guidance befitting of the level of the settlement in the
settlement hierarchy.
9.3.40 Development of Primary, Secondary and Tertiary centres should be guided by rational,
comprehensive development plans showing clearly settlement boundaries and the land use
activity system. In the absence of adequate capacity for the preparation of comprehensive
settlement development plans for all tertiary settlements, development should be guided by
detailed layout plans based on sound town planning principles prior to the preparation of
comprehensive settlement development plans.
9.3.41 All secondary centres should be declared as planning areas to facilitate the preparation of
settlement development plans. Development plan boundaries should be made to coincide
with Water Works boundaries. Development plans should accord settlements space to
accomodate future growth of respective settlements.
9.3.42 The conversion for settlement purposes of land peripheral to settlements (settlement
sprawl) should be managed proactively through development plans ensuring that land is not
prematurely incorporated into settlement. Generalized urban and rural settlement growth
areas have been designated to manage the growth settlements. The guiding principle is to
limit development within the defined settlement boundary to achieve densification through
infilling prior to spilling over into the settlement fringes.
9.3.43 The areal expansion of settlements should seek to minimize conflicts in land use and attain
efficient growth patterns through progressive and orderly growth.
9.3.44 Settlement growth should be directed away from:
(i)
(ii)
Promising aquifer areas which are potential groundwater resource areas.
Fertile arable soils
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
189

CHAPTER 9
(iii)
(iv)
Fragile and ecologically sensitive environments
Rivers, streams and floodplains including fossil valleys.
FIRE PROTECTION ZONE
9.3.45 Veldt fires constitute a major threat to rangeland resources as they destroy vegetation
which is crucial to the ecosystem, animal grazing, veldt products regeneration and the
various species of small animals, reptiles and insects. Therefore the management of veldt
fires is an important element of the Land Use Plan.
9.3.46 A network of well-maintained firebreaks should be developed throughout the District for
controlling the spread of fire and avoiding destruction of rangeland resources. A
comprehensive firebreak network should cover both communal and private rangelands.
9.3.47 Fire breaks are no – development areas where encroachments into these zones by
conflicting land uses such as arable fields and service infrastructure that undermine their
functions and maintenance should be avoided.
9.3.48 There are instances in the District where service infrastructure constitutes an impediment to
the maintenance of firebreaks. It is imperative that the relevant service providers affected
by such conflict should work in collaboration with each other in order to remove
impediments for proper maintenance of firebreaks. In particular, Botswana Power
Corporation’s powerline poles that obstruct the maintenance of firebreaks should where
economically feasible, be relocated to outside the firebreak. All future BPC poles should be
placed outside the firebreaks.
9.3.49 Fire breaks cause enormous harm to the environment through the removal of vegetation.
The Plan proposes that in order to preserve vegetation firebreaks on communal land should
be placed on the edge within linear public service infrastructure servitudes where
practicable. This is in order that only vegetation within the servitudes would be removed.
TOURISM
Map 9.5: Potential Area for Tourism
9.3.50 It was noted in the Report of
Survey that the District’s tourism
potential is weak and needs
rejuvenation. The limited potential
for tourism lies in wildlife – related
activities, historic sites and tourist
– oriented facilities along the A2.
The aim is to exploit available
opportunities to boost tourism as
one of the economic bases in the
District.
9.3.51 The Plan proposes stocking up
the two Community Based
National Resource Management
areas with wildlife for utilisation by
communities living adjacent to
CBNRMs. Stocking the CBNRMs
with wildlife is meant to boost
Morwamosu
CBNRM
Kokong
tourism through game viewing and hunting. Increasing the wildlife population is essential to
ensure that CBNRMs are economically viable yet accommodating wildlife within the
Æ·T
WMA
AI Camp
B205
Mabutsane
Communal Rangeland
Utlisation
Keng
Kutuku
Khakhea
B102
Kweneng District
A20
Æ·T
A2
Ranches
Sekoma
Khonkhwa
Thankane
Ranches
Kgalagadi District
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
190 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
carrying capacity of the rangeland. It is imperative that proceeds arising from the use of
resources in the CBNRMs should benefit communities living adjacent to the area.
9.3.52 The Wildlife Management Area is an important natural resource area for wildlife – based
tourism in the District. It is proposed that the area be used for game viewing and that when
the wildlife population grows, the area be opened to hunting.
9.3.53 The A2 Trans-Kgalagadi highway is considered ideal for the development of tourist facilities
in the form of stop-over facilities such as lodges at strategic locations to break the distance
between settlements. The plan proposes a tourist facility along the A2 highway between
the CBNRM area and the WMA in the western part of the District. The site has the potential
for the development of a tourist facility for use by tourists visiting the wildlife management
areas.
9.3.54 Southern District has a number of sites of historic and archaeological significance. These
sites should be preserved and well-maintained for visitors from within and outside the
District.The plan proposes the forging of a partnership with the private sector by the
relevant authorities in the management of these sites.
9.3.55 Effective strategies should be adopted to market tourist facilities through print and
electronic media to sell the tourist facilities to would-be tourists.
INFRASTRUCTURE
ROAD NETWORK
9.3.56 The plan recognises that roads perform a central function in the integration of development
in the District’s land use activity system. The plan therefore proposes the development of an
integrated road network based on the national road hierarchy. The road network is
intended to provide linkages between the different parts of the District and between the
various components of the District’s land use activity system essentially through the
movement of population, goods and services. It is therefore fundamental that the roads
should be well developed and well maintained.
9.3.57 Road network proposals are predicated on the existing road network including proposals for
the development of new roads. In view of map scale limitations the proposals only show the
alignment of higher roads namely, primary and secondary roads. Road network proposals
are however, comprehensive covering the different categories of the road hierarchy. The
plan seeks to address imbalances in accessibility through improving the permeability of the
District by way of new roads. Land use proposals are made along some roads with a view
to exploiting development opportunities associated with these roads.
A2 TRANS – KGALAGADI HIGHWAY
9.3.58 It is considered that land use and development guidelines set during the construction of the
A2 Trans – Kgalagadi Highway are highly restrictive of development along the highway
corridor. Southern District Land Use Plan through enabling policies seeks to facilitate
development of land along the A2 corridor albeit with reasonable control over development
along the highway.
9.3.59 As the most prominent infrastructure corridor in the District the A2 deserves planning focus
on both the use of land within the corridor and adjoining or land uses associated with it. It is
therefore imperative that guidelines on the utilisation of land within and in the vicinity of this
corridor should be spelt out. To achieve this, the plan proposes 100 meters buffer zone
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
191

CHAPTER 9
between the road and settlement built up areas and 2 kilometre special development zone
on either side of the A2 as a basis for facilitation and control of development along the
highway.
Map 9.6: Proposed Main Road Network in Southern District
160000 240000 320000
Motokwe
A2
Kokong
Legend
B205
Khakhea
To W erda
Chapetese
Mabutsane
Keng
A20
Dutlwe
Dual Lane (Proposed)
Single Lane
Proposed Road
Major Local Road
´
0 12.5 25 50 75
Kilometers
Thankane
Takatokwane
A2
R.S.A
Semane
B102
Maokane
Maboane
Kweneng
Lorolwane
Mokhomma
Gasita
Mabule
B101
Tshedilamolomo
Ditshegwane
Jwaneng
Seherelela
Metlobo
Tswaaneng
Leporung
Moshaweng
Letlhakeng
Thebephatswa
Moshupa
Kanye
Mmathethe
B202
Good Hope
B101
B202
Phitsane
Molopo
Molepolole
Kubung
Ngware
Thamaga
A10
Phihitshwane
Mogoditshane
Manyana
B105
Lotlhakane
A2
Maisane
B102
B101
A1
A1
Pitsane
Ramatlabama
Border Post
Kweneng
South South East
Pioneer
Border Post
Len
Source: Environmetrix(Pty)LTD, SERMP, 2004
7200000 7280000 7360000
R
B
ROAD RESERVE
9.3.60 The road reserve shall be devoted to road purposes and related service infrastructure only.
In order to minimize conflicts between the highway and adjoining land uses the plan
proposes fencing of the whole length of the road save for the stretch of road traversing
settlements and the Wildlife Management Area. Fencing of the portion of road across the
Wildlife Management Area is not recommended as it would constitute a barrier to wildlife
migration.
9.3.61 The A2 inflicts a high toll on the wildlife population through accidents. In order to reduce
wildlife mortality the plan proposes the installation of effective signage on both ends of the
road entering the WMA warning motorists to beware of wildlife crossing over a specified
distance. Additional wildlife crossing warning signs should be placed at intervals within the
WMA as a reminder to motorists of the need to watch out for animals crossing the road.
192 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
BUFFER ZONE
9.3.62 It is proposed that where practicable a 100m buffer zone be provided between settlements
built – up areas and the highway. The buffer zone would reduce the incidence of land use
conflicts between settlements and effects of the highway. The buffer zone should be kept in
a natural vegetation state. Tree – planting is recommended in buffer zones with little or no
vegetation. Development should be directed away from this zone.
SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT ZONE
9.3.63 The plan proposes the designation of a special development zone which extends 2 km on
either side of the road. The designation of this zone is meant to provide Land Boards and
the Council with some degree of control over the area adjoining the A2 whose
attractiveness for development is bound to experience a proliferation of land use activities
and multiple land use problems. Development within this area shall be subject to the
following development guidelines:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
Development of settlements adjoining the A2 highway or falling within 2km on either
side of the road shall be guided by settlement development plans and detailed layout
plans.
The development of commercial and industrial activities outside settlements should
be discouraged. Development of these activities outside settlements should be
undertaken at designated sites selected based on rational planning guidance.
Settlement development along the A2 highway shall as much as possible be
confined to one side of the road.
Access to settlements adjoining the highway shall be kept at a minimum and with
adequate traffic control measures at intersections to promote efficient traffic
circulation and the minimisation of accidents.
A10
9.3.64 In order to improve connectivity between the nation’s capital (Gaborone City) and the
District through the A2 Trans – Kgalagadi Highway the plan proposes dualisation of the A10
Gaborone – Kanye road linking up with the A2 at Kanye.
B102
9.3.65 . Road network connectivity and the condition of roads in the southwestern parts of the
District are poor. The plan proposes the improvement of road network connectivity through
upgrading of the B102 link between the District and Kgalagadi District through Mmathethe.
B120
9.3.66 . It is proposed that in order to improve connectivity between the southwestern and western
parts of the District, the B202 should be extended from Mmathethe to link with the A2
highway at Sekoma through Gasita, Maokane and Semane.
B101 – A2 LINK
9.3.67 . In order to provide a connection between the southern and northern parts of the District,
the plan proposes a road link between the B101 and A2 at Jwaneng through Sekhutlane,
Lorolwane and Maokane.
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
193

CHAPTER 9
GENERAL ROAD NETWORK
9.3.68 The plan proposes that the road network system within settlements should be based on the
road hierarchy stipulated in the Urban Development Standards 1992, development plan
guidance and detailed layout plans. The objective is to achieve a functional integrated and
well-maintained road network in all settlements in the District. The upgrading and
rationalisation of the road network in the existing unplanned built-up areas is particularly
essential for improved circulation in unplanned settlements.
9.3.69 It is critical that the road network in the District be maintained in good condition for improved
accessibility and efficient traffic circulation within the District’s land use activity system
RAILWAY INFRASTRUCTURE
9.3.70 The greater part of the District
save for the limited extent of
the southeastern portion has
no access to railway
transportation. There is a need
to connect the District to the
national railway transportation
system for the improvement of
passenger transportation and
movement of goods in bulk. It
is therefore proposed that
there be a railway link between
Lobatse and Jwaneng and
another link between
Gaborone and Kanye along
the A2 and A10 roads
respectively.
WATER SUPPLY
Monwane
Rasesa
Kweneng
Molepolole
Bokaa M
Kotolaname
Mmanoko
Kopong
Morw
Moshaweng
Jwaneng
Losilakgokong
Gamodubu
Matebe
Gakgatla
Sese
Kubung
Mogoditshane Gaborone
Naledi
Ralekgetho
Thamaga
Gabane Tlokweng
Mokhomma
Betesankwe Moshupa
Lotlhakane
Mmankgodi
West Manyana
Maokane Tsonyane
Moshaneng
Mogonye Ramotswa
Seherelela Sesung
Ranaka Mogobane South
East
Selokolela
Kanye
Dinatshana
Lotlhakane Otse
Lorolwane
Gasita
Southern
Map 9.7: Proposed Railway Links
Segwagwa Maisane
Molapowabojang
Mmathethe
Motsentshe
Lobatse
Metlobo Mogoriapitse
Pitsane
Siding
Tswaaneng
Good Hope
Tlhareseleele
Mokgomane
Rakhuna
Sekhutlane Legend
Musi
Metlojane
Existing Rail Line Sedibeng
Ramatlabama
´
Rail Line Pitsane Molopo
Leporung
Extension
0 7.5 15 30 45
abule
Marojane
Kilometers
Phihitshwane
300000 360000
Source: Environmetrix(Pty)LTD, SERMP, 2004
Digawane
9.3.71 An integrated water supply for the District is required. In particular, the District requires a
secure long term water supply to alleviate water supply problems to cater for the projected
population growth and upsurge in the anticipated development activities in the District.
9.3.72 On account of the poor surface water resources in the District, groundwater resources
constitute the primary source of water supply. It is therefore imperative to explore the
feasibility of exploiting the promising dolomite aquifers for the development of an integrated
water supply in the District.
Gopong
Lorwana
7200000 7260000
PROTECTION OF GROUNDWATER RESOURCES
9.3.73 The District depends on groundwater resources for domestic, industrial and agricultural
purposes. It is critical for the District to embark on sound management of groundwater
resource exploitation and water demand. This should assist in the development of water
resources in the District.
9.3.74 While the plan proposes general protection of groundwater resources in the District there is
a need for site specific measures to be undertaken to protect promising aquifers.
194 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
9.3.75 Aquifers with a high groundwater potential are Kanye, Sekoma, Molopo and Moshaneng
dolomite aquifers. The spatial extent of these aquifers is delineated on the proposals map.
Comprehensive measures to prevent groundwater pollution are required to ensure that
pollution agents such as landfills, pit latrines, agricultural pesticides and industrial waste do
not result in the pollution of the groundwater resources. The Land Board and the Council
should especially play a leading role in monitoring and ensuring that pollutive land use
activities are not undertaken on aquifer sites.
9.3.76 It is proposed that where settlements are located close to promising aquifers settlement
growth areas should be on the advice of water resource management professionals in order
to limit the adverse effect of settlement uses on water resources. In particular, there should
be reasonable satisfaction that pollutive waste from settlements would not come into
contact with groundwater resources in spite of the buffer zone provided.
9.3.77 On-site sanitation systems should be designed in such a way that solid and liquid waste are
prevented from polluting groundwater resources.
CEMETERIES AND PREVENTION OF POLLUTION OF WATER RESOURCES
9.3.78 It is proposed that the location of all new cemeteries be guided by settlement development
plans or settlements layout plans based on sound planning principles and environmental
considerations. In order to prevent further pollution threats to surface and groundwater
resources, it is essential for the Land Boards to assess the location of cemeteries in relation
to water resources. The plan proposes that cemeteries be located within a minimum
distance of 1 km from river courses and promising aquifers or distance to be determined by
site conditions and advice from hydrogeological specialists The use of all cemeteries that
constitute a threat to water resources should be terminated and new sites identified.
9.3.79 Land adjoining boreholes sites should be protected from land use activities that are bound
to cause pollution of groundwater resources.
BOREHOLES
9.3.80 The allocation of boreholes sites shall adhere to the allocation guidelines set out in the
National Policy on Agricultural Development, 1998. The 8km borehole spacing rule shall be
applied in the District. However, considering that some boreholes are spaced less than 8km
apart, the plan proposes a relaxation of the rule to permit to permit borehole spacing at less
than the stipulated distance. Applications for boreholes at less than 8km to the nearest
borehole should be treated on individual cases’ merits and should be preceded by range
assessments to determine the carrying capacity of specific areas.
9.3.81 The allocation and use of boreholes shall be guided by the range of permitted uses within
the zones. It is crucial to ensure that boreholes are not allocated for those uses that are
against the designated land uses thereby promoting the incidence of land use conflicts.
9.3.82 In order to maximize use and facilitate control over the use of land, boreholes used for
village, industrial, irrigation and livestock supply purposes should be used solely for the
intended purpose with adequate measures adopted to prevent encroachment from other
uses.
9.3.83 Redrilling of boreholes should conform with land use planning proposals and shall not
infringe on the rights of other land users. Redrilling of boreholes shall be limited to 1km of
the original site.
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
195

CHAPTER 9
9.3.84 High concentrations of livestock around livestock watering points often result in land
degradation and the emergence of sacrifice zones around livestock watering boreholes due
to trampling and over-grazing by livestock. It is therefore imperative that areas around
livestock watering points be considered as fragile and deserving of protection. Therefore, it
is vital that livestock owners should be encouraged to maintain livestock within the carrying
capacity of land to prevent overgrazing and land degradation around boreholes.
9.3.85 In order to control exploitation of groundwater resources on the promising aquifers it is
proposed that borehole intensity at these potential groundwater resources be kept at a
minimum. The promising aquifers are considered as strategic District water supply sources
and should therefore be protected.
9.3.86 The western portion of the District is characterised by rangeland which is in a state of
disequilibrium and is under threat from the widening piospheres (zones of range
degradation around boreholes). The intensity of boreholes in the western part of the District
should be minimized by ensuring that boreholes are not allocated closer than 6(8) km to
one another thereby minimizing the risk of the merger of piospheres and wide scale
rangeland degradation.
MINERAL RESOURCES
9.3.87 Mineral resources are key to the development of the District and the nation in terms of
economic development and employment creation. The exploration of minerals in different
parts of the District is encouraged subject to the relevant guidelines and conditions relating
to mineral exploration.
9.3.88 In order to facilitate the extraction of minerals in the District the plan permits such extraction
on condition that the activity is compatible with the zone and that sound extraction
management practices would be observed. In view of the harm that mineral extraction
activities often cause to the environment, the relevant authority should consider the
application for mineral extraction which should be informed by an Environmental Impact
Assessment. Where mineral extraction is likely to cause harm to the environment or
negatively affect neighbouring development structurally or degrade the aesthetics of the
environment it should be prohibited. Meticulous control or outright prohibition of sand,
brickearths and clays on sensitive environments such as floodplains is recommended.
Where extraction of minerals is undertaken, it is imperative that rehabilitative measures be
carried out to make good the harm caused to mineral resource extraction sites. Severe
penalties should be imposed on illegal extraction of minerals in the District. Mineral
processing is either incompatible with most zones or should be undertaken subject to
conditions set by the authorities.
SANITATION AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
9.3.89 The use of onsite sanitation facilities is inclined to cause pollution of groundwater resources
in a District which relies on groundwater resources. Therefore, the need for the District to
use environmentally friendly sanitation systems and waste management methods is a
matter which is worthy of attention.
9.3.90 In view of the high concentration of population, large amount of sewage waste and the
correspondingly high probability of environmental pollution, measures should be put in
place to reduce environmental pollution from on-site sanitation systems in Southern District.
It is proposed that all primary and secondary centres be serviced with a waterborne
sewerage system depending on the availability of a reliable water supply system.
196 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
9.3.91 Considering the difficulties of providing waterborne sewerage systems to all settlements on
account of inadequate water supply and prohibitive costs, tertiary settlements and below
should utilise affordable and environmentally sustainable on-site sanitation systems. Onsite
sanitation systems should be designed so as to prevent air, land and groundwater
pollution. Extra caution should be taken to ensure the protection of the promising aquifers
from pollution.
9.3.92 All households in the District should be encouraged to build or be assisted to have the
capacity to construct sanitation facilities. The minimum standard for a Ventilated Improved
Pitlatrine design should incorporate a sealed base to prevent waste from coming into
contact with groundwater resources. The intesification of the National Rural Sanitation
Project is particularly essential in this regard.
9.3.93 It is proposed that a site be identified for the establishment of an environmentally
sustainable landfill site in the District. The site should be accessible within the District
context, be preceded by an Environmental Impact Assessment and should have the
capacity to handle waste from the entire District. In the event that logistics and accessibility
considerations dictate the need for local medium size landfills, these should be based on
approved designs. The basic guideline in the establishment of landfill sites should be the
need to minimise land use conflicts and the avoidance of negative environmental impacts.
ELECTRIC POWER SUPPLY
9.3.94 There is a need to extend the electric power supply network to all settlements with the
minimum population threshold to qualify for electric power supply in the District. Electric
power supply provides the impetus for overall development through provision of power to
settlement uses, agricultural, mining and a variety of land uses in the District. Power
connection costs are more affordable in planned settlements where development is
compact and the lenght of linear electric infrastructure is shorter.
ALTERNATIVE SOURCES OF ENERGY
9.3.95 The high costs of electric power connections can not be afforded by some households who
have no choice but to rely on alternative sources of energy. Some sources especially solar
energy is environmentally friendly and is therefore recommended. However, the use of
veldt products especially wood as a source of energy is a threat to rangeland resources
especially in the western part of the District where the environment is in a state of
disequilibrium and under threat of degradation. Reliance on wood as a source of energy
should be discouraged.
9.3.96 Awareness campaigns on the value of vegetation and the negative effects of loss of
vegetation would consolidate the cause for environmental conservation. Intervention
strategies such as tree - planting are essential in the protection of rangeland resources.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
9.3.97 The development of an district-wide integrated telecommunications system is requisite for
efficient communication between land users in different parts of the District. There is
therefore a need for upgrading telecommunications systems and widening the scope of
services throughout the District in support of a functional land use activity system.
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
197

CHAPTER 9
9.4 LAND USE MANAGEMENT
9.4.1 The delineated land use zones provide a broad spatial framework for the use of land in
District. In order to provide guidance on the use of land in each zone it is imperative that
land use management guidelines be clearly spelt out. Land use management guidelines
are projected in the form of goals and objectives to be achieved strategies and policies to
guide Land Boards, Physical Planners, Government departments, communities and other
land users for efficient, effective and rational utilisation of land in Southern District. The
section also provides a land use compatibility matrix which is a list of uses that may be
permitted or prohibited within specific zones.
TABLE 9.1: MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
A RABLE AGRICULTURE
GOAL / OBJECTIVES
To conserve and enhance the
District’s agricultural land
base for the continued
production of food.
MANAGEMENT POLICIES / STRATEGIES
- Conserve productive arable resource lands, including areas with
prime soils which are not devoted to productive arable agriculture
by developing a long range conservation strategy which should
include:
• A program which facilitates the removal of development rights
from productive farmland and provides permanent protection of
those agricultural lands through the use of conservation easements
or other legal mechanisms.
• Maintenance of a sufficient quantity of arable land to support a
healthy agricultural industry.
• Required mitigation in the event that designated arable land is
converted to another use.
• Protection buffers on all new non-arable agricultural related enterprises.
• Development assistance to enterprises engaging in arable agricultural
activities.
• Farming friendly regulations should be developed to control as
well as facilitate arable agricultural activities.
• Incentives and cooperation between farmers and government
organisations (agencies)
- Support conservation of productive arable land by requiring the
use of best management practices including soil and water
conservation, livestock waste management e.t.c.
- Discourage conversion of productive arable land into incompatible
non-arable agricultural uses.
- Applicants for change from arable agriculture to other uses should
demonstrate that changed site conditions or circumstances have
occurred since the original designation to the effect that the site is
no longer suitable for the original designation.
- Prioritize arable agricultural activity in land use decisions when
land is composed of prime and/or productive agricultural soils and
agriculture is the highest resource use value.
- Establish flexibility in local land use plans and regulations to
encourage maintenance of the productive agricultural land base.
- Maintain soil surveys locally as a basic guideline for protecting and
designating agricultural resource lands.
198 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

CHAPTER 9
A RABLE AGRICULTURE
GOAL / OBJECTIVES
MANAGEMENT POLICIES / STRATEGIES
- Protect/conserve and ensure rational use of water resources from
both a quantitative and a qualitative perspective for utilisation for
arable agricultural purposes.
- Where water for irrigation is available water rights should be
granted to farmers.
- The DLUPU shall advise the Land Boards/Sub-Land Boards and
District Council on arable agricultural issues and agricultural land
use. The District Council should support the Agricultural Advisory
Committee with staff and other resources.
- Involve those who are actually engaged in agricultural activities in
the planning process. Utilize groups working effectively with the
agricultural community to help preserve and/or create a
sustainable agricultural economic base.
To increase the productivity
and economic viability of
agricultural holdings
- On new field allocations the Land Boards should allocate bigger
economically viable plots in line with NAMPAAD which
recommends a minimum agricultural holding of 150 hectares
where the use of mechanized farming techniques is
recommended. Minimum plot sizes should, however, be area
specific reflecting the land situation in different parts of the District.
- Arable agricultural production would be encouraged through the
enforcement of statutory Instrument No.23 of 2005 (Tribal Land)
Act Cap 32:02 – Tribal Land (Amendment) Regulations, 2005.
Regulations 16A and 14A which empower the Subordinate Land
Board and the Land Board respectively to recommend and cancel
a grant of customary right to use land for arable farming if after the
expiration of 5 years from the date of the grant the land had not
been developed without sufficient excuse to the satisfaction of the
Land Board.
- Where feasible farmers should be assisted by the Land Board in
increasing the size of their arable fields through field extensions in
order to make arable farming activities economically viable.
- In line with NAMPAADD recommendations non-producing farmers
should be encouraged to lease their land to investors wishing to
put the land into productive use.
- Arable farming activities should be undertaken on soils with proven
soil fertility and favourable climatic conditions.
- Where cultivation is being carried out on soils with low fertility,
farmers should be encouraged to use fertilizers under the
guidance of the Department of Crop Production and Forestry
agricultural extension services.
- Farmers should be encouraged to use pesticides to reduce output
reductions from pests.
- Crop farming activities should adopt crop varieties that are suitable
for the prevailing agro-climatic conditions.
- The types of crops grown should be chosen principally based on
the arable zone being ideal for rainfed crop production considering
the amount of rainfall and length of the growing season among
other agro-climatic considerations.
-
199 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
A RABLE AGRICULTURE
Goal / Objectives
MANAGEMENT POLICIES / STRATEGIES
- Irrigation crop farming has high limitations in most of the District
therefore, the limited extent of land in Barolong and Ngwaketse
South agricultural districts may be irrigated depending on the
availability of water. Exploitation of water for irrigation should be
controlled as to safeguard water supply for human and livestock
consumption.
- Management intervention in arable farming activities is essential
as a means of reducing losses and increasing out-put from crop
production activities.
To reduce land use conflicts
between arable agriculture
and non-arable agricultural
activities
- Establish at the local level, zoning regulations which protect
productive agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance
from conversion to incompatible uses.
- Zoning should recognize the diversity of agricultural land uses and
should provide flexible regulations which encourage all farmers in
maintaining the productive agricultural land base while protecting
them from conflicting uses
- Support improved communication and understanding between
farmers and the public through such mechanisms as agricultural
management plans, community forums and educational programs
- Fenced boundaries should be drawn between arable and
incompatible non-arable farming activities so as to minimize
conflicts between the respective land use activities.
- Encourage the fencing of livestock grazing areas away from crop
production farms
- Encourage utilization of integrated pest management practices,
including herbicides and pesticides that protect water quality
- Encourage proper storage and application of manure.
- Encourage the maintenance and operation of drainage systems
such that the negative impacts from such systems are minimized
for agricultural uses to remain viable.
- Adoption of residential, industrial and commercial development
plans or zoning designations in agricultural areas must comply with
the criteria for “limited area of more intense rural development”
- Within designated agricultural zones allow appropriate
development in small self-contained communities through the use
of the “Small Village” land use designation.
- Support agricultural activity in mixed farm/rural residential areas,
with the understanding that certain farm practices may conflict with
other neighbouring rural land uses and therefore the need to
minimize such conflicts
- Where possible, encourage increased densities within existing
settlement boundaries before expanding into arable agricultural
resource lands and protect resource land by controlling or
buffering adjacent areas.
- Settlement growth areas should be directed away from fertile
arable land in order to avoid disturbance to agricultural production
and depletion of the District’s arable land resource base.
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
200

CHAPTER 9
A RABLE AGRICULTURE
GOAL / OBJECTIVES
MANAGEMENT POLICIES / STRATEGIES
- Discourage development of new communities outside designated
settlement growth areas.
- Ensure that service providers do not extend sewer and water
services to serve new areas outside designated growth areas
unless emergency or health hazards exist. Ensure that adequate
on-site wells and sanitation systems are properly installed,
monitored and maintained.
- Accommodate the location of designated mineral resource lands in
or near agriculture zones when deemed by Land Boards, Council
or other stakeholders to be in the best interest of the community.
- Land for resource-based industries (agro-industry) should be
provided in areas that have access to transportation routes and
adequate infrastructure and can meet the demand (near major
villages and cross road communities)
G ENERAL RANGELAND
To manage the District’s
rangeland in an integrated,
coordinated and participatory
approach with a strong local
focus that includes local
stakeholders.
To ensure recognition of the
values and aspirations of all
residents and rangeland
resource users.
- Institute participatory processes to link with Government policies
and programs that be utilised to meet District objectives as
appropriate.
- Southern District needs to develop locally tailored strategies to
further ecologically sustainable management and economic
viability of the rangelands.
- Engage in extensive consultation with all relevant stakeholders
and focus on opportunities offered by the natural, economic and
social characteristics of each area. Where necessary, they should
utilize available government support programs.
- Local (rural) communities must be effectively involved in decisions
that meet their local goals and have a direct bearing on their
livelihoods. By fostering and facilitating local approaches the
management of rangelands can be more directly related to the
distinctive character and opportunities within specific areas and
ensure greater local ownership and responsibility for management
decisions.
- In line with Land Use Policy Review document, reverse
overcentralisation of communal rangeland management to place
resource management in the hands of resource users. How this is
might be achieved through the modification of the current
institutional framework needs further analysis and discussion.
- Secure the knowledge and skills of the broader community, in
particular, groups with specialist expertise on environmental,
business, social and cultural issues.
- Identify stakeholders and clarify their roles and responsibilities to
ensure those with the right to manage land are aware of their
management responsibilities. (Without clear identification of roles
and responsibilities there is a risk that any identified actions will not
be pursued)
- Communicate with communities and stakeholder groups to ensure
a coordinated approach to the development of strategies and to
engage their involvement;
201 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
G ENERAL RANGELAND
GOAL / OBJECTIVES
MANAGEMENT POLICIES / STRATEGIES
- Undertake a continuous stocktaking of natural, human and other
resources;
- Identify national objectives for rangeland management and how
local objectives may relate;
- Develop partnerships between Government and the community
(including relevant stakeholders and industry bodies) to jointly fund
activities
- Investigate and develop as appropriate, alternative production
systems and resource uses with linkages to individual business
planning strategies;
- Access and promote information research and intervention
required to overcome identified information and/or knowledge
gaps; and
- Continue to evaluate the process of developing and implementing
strategies based on experience.
To review policies and practices
by District authorities in general
and Land Boards in particular
and ensure that rural
communities are aware of
utilization thresholds and the
need to manage local rangeland
resources in a sustainable way.
To encourage diversification in
the use of rangelands for the
enhancement of the community’s
social and economic upliftment
as well as the ecological wellbeing
of the District.
To increase rangeland use
values in livestock dominated
areas namely ranches and
communal areas
- Authorities must help rural communities to participate in, and share
ownership of legislation and policy development processes.
- Provide explicit and increased clarity of roles and responsibilities of
rangeland users especially with respect to issues such as grazing
rights, lease allocation, accessibility to resources and duty of care.
- Promote programs for the identification of alternative and multiple
uses of rangeland resources.
- Emphasise wildlife utilization and related low-impact or nonconsumptive
use of resources, such as tourism, and recreation in
the use of rangelands as alternatives to the predominant livestock
farming.
- Encourage a fundamental shift in the hitherto perceptions that land
not being used for livestock or crop production is land
unproductively used.
- Institute land use policy adjustments that would recognize the
validity of wildlife and tourism as competitive land uses with
livestock farming to promote the effective introduction and
integration of wildlife/tourism enterprises in communal areas and
ranches.
- Assess the potential contribution that tourism, wildlife utilization
and related activities can make to the District, as well as their likely
impacts
- Undertake more in-depth (village level) investigation of local
potentials in the District, a market perception analysis, survey and
analysis of residents’ attitudes to different types of tourism and
wildlife utilization etc. This initiative has so far been mostly underfunded
and weakly coordinated.
- Diversify livestock products, in particular through the development
of a dairy sector where suitable;
- Exploit the remaining wildlife and veldt product opportunities in
communal areas.
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
202

CHAPTER 9
G ENERAL RANGELAND
GOAL / OBJECTIVES
MANAGEMENT POLICIES / STRATEGIES
- Facilitate more flexibility in land use which would permit holders of
commercial ranches leases to diversify the use of the land they
hold. This refers to removal of any restrictions to introduce
activities other than commercial livestock production. i.e.
(commercial wildlife farming, game farming and tourism related
activities.)
- Draw multiple land use options that can further increase
profitability of new or existing enterprises such as through
commercial wildlife farming and tourism-related activities.
ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE RANGELAND MANAGEMENT
To improve ecological
understanding and sensitive
management of the District’s
rangeland resources to
protect and restore, where
possible, biodiversity,
commercial and noncommercial
values and
provide opportunities to
improve viability of rangeland
enterprises while ensuring
that they have a sustainable
future.
- Ensure that range managers and other stakeholders understand
and are able to work with the uncertainties of climate,
understanding of grazing and resource management practices,
manipulating total grazing pressure, managing invasive species
(bush encroachment), using fire as a management tool in
controlling woody weeds in grazing areas and protecting areas of
particular resource values.
- Apply improved ecological understanding and management
practices to prevent the bush encroachment problems
encountered in the rangelands
- Reduce the physical defoliating effects of cattle on grasses during
drought events through provision of rapid reaction de-stocking
programs or the movement of livestock to areas with adequate
fodder supplies. The latter option would enable increased
restocking rates in subsequent wet years.
- Impose limits on the density of boreholes, if the convergence of
bush-dominant areas is to be prevented, and therefore
maintenance of a heterogeneous fodder landscape achieved.
Currently the only indirect measure to control borehole density is
the borehole spacing policy of 8 km which was not consistently
enforced throughout the district
- Monitor rangeland resource use to prevent overall stock numbers
rising above the capacity of the range around the borehole,
livestock limitations and/or re-distribution, duty of care and other
currently unused instruments and regulations should also be taken
into consideration in controlling bush encroachment and the
District’s rangeland heterogeneity. These activities should
systematically be extended to cover all grazing areas in the
District.
- Employ fire management strategies in controlling woody weed
growth and bush encroachment in grazed rangelands.
- Carry out studies to examine the possibilities for incorporation of
prescribed burning practices in maintaining grass-dominant areas
therefore allowing the continuing intensification of pastoral
utilization of the designated pastoral areas in the District. Studies
should scientifically determine the impact of fire on rangeland
heterogeneity and ways to conserve it.
203 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
M ONITORING AND RESEARCH
GOAL / OBJECTIVES
To detect and monitor the
condition and trends of
rangeland resources at a
zonal and local level as a
basis for rangeland
conservation.
To ensure ecological
sustainability of the District’s
rangeland resource use
values and effective pastoral
management practices.
MANAGEMENT POLICIES / STRATEGIES
- Put in place a permanent monitoring program with special attention
to niche grazing resources in order to facilitate:
• Detection of near real-time effects of local climate variability on
rangeland production potential against which immediate management
actions such as de-stocking can be assessed;
• Determination of trends in the long term health of rangelands at
regional, zonal and local levels;
• Provision of basic data for analyzing tradeoffs and downside of
various land use management options;
• Improved understanding of climatic history and more reliable long
term forecasting tools that would enhance the risk management
strategies of livestock farmers who are subject to climatic uncertainties..
- Monitoring of socio-economic changes within the rangelands,
access to services and gaps and deficiencies in delivery
mechanisms.
- Authorities should consider utilization of satellite (remote sensing)
technology which has proven very effective in monitoring short and
long-term variations of rangeland conditions. However, although
satellite (remote sensing) technology is available throughout
Botswana (mostly at the Central Government level – MoA, Dept.
of Meteorological services, etc.), lack of a critical mass of current
users and the level of expertise in using technology in the District
make its effective introduction premature and cost-prohibitive.
- Government should examine options for kick-starting the adoption
of satellite (remote sensing) technology until adequate expertise
and economies of scale are obtained. Such activities have already
been undertaken at the Central Government level by the Botswana
Range Inventory and Monitoring Project (BRIMP) – Ministry of
Agriculture.
- District Authorities and local stakeholders should develop agreed
criteria and indicators for ecologically sustainable rangeland
management and business viability in the District. Indicators of
rangeland condition should be based on demonstrable science.
- Authorities must foster collaboration between scientists working in
relevant fields with the District’s rangeland users and communities
to utilize their knowledge and practical experience in finding
optimal solutions;
- Encourage relevant research and development organizations in
the District and throughout the country to direct a regular portion of
their research effort specifically towards addressing issues facing
the District’s rangelands and to consult with rangeland users,
managers and communities in setting research priorities.
- Research organizations should work with communities and
rangeland users to implement the practical outcomes of their
research efforts. Research information should be made accessible
and easy to understand.
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
204

CHAPTER 9
A GRICULTURAL PRODUCTS INDUSTRY
GOAL / OBJECTIVES
To maintain and enhance
District’s agricultural products
industry as a long-term and
sustainable industry.
MANAGEMENT POLICIES / STRATEGIES
- Develop agriculture related industries and activities in order to
promote a viable agricultural resource in the District.. These
include processors (for example, vegetable packers and mild
processors), farm implement sales and repair, fertilizer and
pesticide suppliers, trucking firms, certified meat inspectors and
processors, a pool of farm labour,e.t.c. These activities, in turn
depend on a stable (or expanding) agricultural products economy
which is in turn dependent on maintaining a stable agricultural
resource land base. If agricultural production is reduced to below
a certain level in a particular geographical area, then it becomes
no longer economical for the agriculture related activities to remain
in that area. Loss of these support industries results in further
reduction and conversion of the agricultural land base and an
accelerating downward spiral for the local agricultural economy.
- Promote the expansion and stability of local and regional
agricultural economies.
- Assist the agricultural industry in the pursuit of its long-term
economic potential. This should include the development of
strategies and policies necessary to reach this potential, in terms
of both production and diversity.
- Support agricultural product processing facilities through
appropriate planning zoning, and land use regulations.
- Encourage the sustainable development of rural processing
industries through clustering of Rural Industrial Zones at
designated areas. The aim is to reduce the combined effects of
processing industries, their support services and allied smaller
industries on the rural environment, thus preserving the
agricultural land base of the District as far as practicable and
ensuring that adverse effects on the rural environment avoided,
remedied or mitigated.
- Land Boards/Sub-Land Boards, and the District Council should
consider the risk of acting or not where there is uncertain
information regarding the location of Rural Industrial Zones.
Demand for industrial land is dependent on both the regional and
national economy. This makes it difficult to predict exactly what
quantity of lands may be required or exactly by whom. It is
considered on balance that it is better to identify an industrial zone
in a suitable location to encourage a cluster of such activities, than
it is to respond to demand from industrial operators to rezone land
on a piece-meal basis.
- Support methods and strategies to manage and promote the
District’s agricultural sector in ways which ensure that agricultural
activities (such as dairying) and entities such as processors will be
established and remain in the long term.
C OMMUNAL RANGELAND GRAZING
To maintain communal
rangelands as contiguous
grazing areas
- Avoid fencing within communal rangelands except where there is
need for the prevention of hazards along specified roads or the
need to protect existing arable fields or prevent contact between
communal rangelands and other conflicting land uses.
205 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
C OMMUNAL RANGELAND GRAZING
GOAL / OBJECTIVES
To utilise communal
rangelands within the limits of
their sustainable carrying
capacity.
To prevent land use conflicts
between communal grazing
areas and other land use
activities.
To enable communal resource
users to have an increased
say in the management of
communal grazing areas.
To provide access to livestock
watering points by small
farmers on communal areas
MANAGEMENT POLICIES / STRATEGIES
- Prepare Comunal Area Management Plans to facilitate
management of resources.
- The production and removal of foliage by both livestock and
wildlife should be monitored on an on-going basis.
- Undertake periodic livestock censuses to determine the livestock
population and which should be measured against the carrying
capacity of the rangeland.
- The Department of Animal Production and communal farmers
should maintain liaison between the two parties in order to
maintain the livestock numbers within the carrying capacity of the
rangeland in both space and time.
- Manage grazing in response to site-specific information generated
through monitoring initiatives by both the Department of Animal
Production and communal farmers
- Fence all ranches adjoining communal grazing areas in line with
guidelines in the Fencing Component of the National Policy on
Agricultural Development to accord separation between communal
grazing areas and commercial ranches.
- Fence off arable fields on fertile soils in predominantly communal
grazing areas, to prevent conflicts with livestock grazing.
- Protect against encroachment by other land use activities of all
communal rangeland through the prohibition of conflicting, nonconforming
uses to the designated communal grazing zone.
- Prevent livestock interfering with the transportation infrastructure
through fencing along roads and railway lines..
- Decentralise management of communal grazing to resource users
who should work closely with agricultural extension officers at the
local level.
- District authorities should consider the option of organizing
community boreholes to be developed and managed by a VDC or
“communal grazing committee” and be open to all members of a
particular community.
- Controls should be made to prevent overall stock numbers rising
above the capacity of the range around the borehole.
- Consideration should be made to use boreholes for watering at
certain times of the year in line with an agreed rotational grazing
scheme.
C OMMERCIAL LIVESTOCK FARMING (RANCHING)
To resolve problems
associated with dual grazing
practices of farmers from
leased ranches
- Careful consideration should be given to the problem of dual
grazing rights in the District.
- Regulate dual grazing more explicitly and within the requirements
for ecologically sustainable resource use if abolishing it is not
possible.
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
206

CHAPTER 9
COMMERCIAL LIVESTOCK FARMING (RANCHING)
GOAL / OBJECTIVES
MANAGEMENT POLICIES / STRATEGIES
. - Enact legislation as stated in Botswana Land Policy Review,
requiring that persons wishing to move livestock from a fenced
ranch to a communal area should obtain permission from the body
responsible for that area’s management. At present this will be the
Land Board, but in future it might be a communal grazing
committee.”
- Require ranchers who wish to revert to communal grazing to
surrender leases and let the land to be utilised as communal
grazing land having removed the fence.
To facilitate profitable
utilisation of ranches.
To reduce ranch-settlement
conflicts in competition for
land.
To improve ranch and
livestock management for
efficient and increased
production.
- Allocate by tender or auction leases for fenced ranches in order to
ensure an appropriate commercial farming approach and business
viability as proposed in the Draft Revised National Policy on Rural
Development
- Ranch allocations and lease conditions must provide sufficient
scope for commercial viability and flexibility within the
requirements for ecologically sustainable resource use and for
ecosystem management.
- Charge lease (rents) on tribal land at commercial rates in order to
compel inefficient farmers and speculators to review their
management practices and tenure arrangements
- Adopt strategies to ensure that ranches are managed profitably by
lifting restrictions that compromise the realisation of profits by
ranchers.
- Permit ranchers to diversify the use of ranches to other profitable
non-conflicting uses without deviating from ranching as the primary
use.
- Give farmers with existing borehole rights priority in the allocation
of ranches.
- Consideration should be given to allocate a maximum of 2 ranches
to farmers with more than one borehole which are being affectively
used subject to NPAD guidelines.
- Accord vehicular access to each ranch by means of access roads
which find connectivity to the District’s road network system
- Limit ranches to a minimum distance of 20 kilometres away from
neighbouring settlements except where other land use
considerations do not permit.
- Where ranches lie close to settlements, the growth areas for
settlements should as much as practicable be directed away from
neighbouring ranches unless settlement development plans
designate part of ranches as growth areas.
- .Adopt adaptive planning and livestock farming management
practices to regulate the use of niche resources in relation to local
stocking rates, seasonal primary production levels. This pastoral
management system is more likely to be sustainable than the
current practices of imposed grazing restrictions and de-stocking
based solely on a concept of average carrying capacity.
- The size of the herd should be based on the carrying capacity of
the land through de-stocking.
207 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
COMMERCIAL LIVESTOCK FARMING (RANCHING)
GOAL / OBJECTIVES
MANAGEMENT POLICIES / STRATEGIES
. - Adaptive planning and pastoral management should be based on
continuous monitoring of range conditions and biomass
productivity as determined by climatic variations over time and
space, herd composition and the temporal and spatial patterns of
grazing pressure. Learning lessons from experience and practice
could provide the better framework for development of plans and
making of livestock management decisions that allow an
appropriate response in a wide variety of circumstances and
especially at the rural community level where land use decisions
are made.
- Provide range users/managers and other stakeholders access to
up-to-date information about the resource base and current best
practices in responding to prevailing situations. They also need the
skills and commitment to manage the rangelands sensitively.
- Identify and remove barriers that impact on a rangeland user’s
ability to access the information and training they require in order
to develop appropriate management skills, apply relevant
technological developments and engage in ongoing learning.
- District Authorities should, in close cooperation with Central
Government departments and educational institutions, develop
training programs, share available knowledge on best practice in
ecologically sustainable rangeland management and encourage
acquisition by rangeland communities of broader management
skills.
WILDLIFE
To prevent land use conflicts
between the Wildlife
Management Area and other
land use activities.
- The allocation of land for those land use activities which are bound
to couse a conflicts with the WMA should be avoided.
- The Land Board should not allocate arable fields in the Wildlife
Management Area.
- Limit the allocation of borehole sites within the Wildlife
Management Area to wildlife watering purposes only.
- No residential and ancillary facilities should be developed within
the Wildlife Management Area except for tourist facilities which are
geared towards boosting tourism in the area.
- Any conflicts arising between wildlife and other land use activities
should be resolved at forums held between the communities and
sectors affected by the conflicts.
- In order to reduce encroachments into the Wildlife Management
Area from conflicting land use activities, a 500 metre buffer zone
should be provided between the WMA and abutting land uses.
-
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
208

CHAPTER 9
WILDLIFE
GOAL / OBJECTIVES
To coordinate, plan and
manage the existing WMA as
a continuous landscape with
wildlife utilization as the
primary use
To encourage local
participation in the
sustainable utilisation of
wildlife resources in the
District.
MANAGEMENT POLICIES / STRATEGIES
- Build up wildlife populations and encourage development of
tourism (wildlife viewing, hunting, wildlife based handcraft etc.) as
the economically viable options that would not threaten the
integrity of the District’s rangeland ecosystems
- Stock up the Wildlife Management Area and the Community Based
Natural Resource Management area with wildlife within the limits
of its carrying capacity so as to improve its economic value to the
neighbouring communities. Livestock grazing should be
undertaken within the CBNRMS..
- Develop community institutions to ensure that the local community
is responsible for the management of wildlife resources with the
assistance of Government, Non-Government Organisations and
other relevant stakeholders.
- Establish communities’ views and priorities in the management of
wildlife resources.
- Involve communities in setting hunting quotas and should have
access to both cash and project benefits which eventually should
be geared towards wildlife conservation. Wildlife conservation
would be achieved as communities begin to have a sense of
ownership of wildlife resources.
- Make communities to have a sense of ownership of the resources
so that they may sustainably utilise the resources and reap
benefits for the betterment of their livelihoods.
BIRD SANCTUARY
To protect Bathoen Bird
Sanctuary from
encroachment by conflicting
land use activities with a view
to promoting nature
conservation.
- The bird sanctuary should be fenced to prevent encroachment by
other land use activities
- No development should be permitted within the bird sanctuary
save for development which is ancillary to or is intended to
enhanced natural resources.
209 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
SETTLEMENTS
GOAL / OBJECTIVES
To provide planning guidance
for rational comprehensive
settlement development.
MANAGEMENT POLICIES / STRATEGIES
- Settlement development and growth should be guided by
development plans within clearly demarcated boundaries.
- Future settlement growth should ensure the preservation of
productive agricultural land by directing growth away from such
prime agricultural land.
- Settlement growth should not be directed to those environmentally
sensitive areas. Similarly, settlement development should be
directed away from zones designated as protected areas.
- The allocation of land for non-urban land use activities on land
earmarked for future settlement growth should take into
consideration the need for conversion of this land into settlement
uses in future.
- Detailed land use plans shall be prepared around settlements
which are either sandwiched between surrounding land uses or
there is competition and conflict between land use activities.
- Extreme care should be taken to ensure that settlement waste
disposal and on-site sanitation facilities shall be prevented from
causing environmental degradation.
VULNERABLE GROUNDWATER RESOURCES
To protect groundwater
resources form pollution.
- Limits must be imposed based on site-specific conditions on those
land use activities which are considered as having a contaminating
recharge effect on the promising aquifers.
- Minimize the risk to the pollution of groundwater resources by
permitting certain land use activities on or within aquifer sites
subject to specific guidelines and conditions.
- Undertake site specific investigation of aquifer sites to determine
the level of risk to contamination of groundwater resources.
- Cause an Environmental Impact Assessment to be undertaken for
land uses which are likely to contaminate aquifers upon
consideration of applications for development on aquifer sites.
- Define well-head protection zones to protect groundwater sources
of drinking water.
- Designate buffer zones around aquifers and reservoirs to restrict
development and minimize contamination to water supply sources.
- Direct cemeteries away from aquifers and rivers.
- The use of fertilizers and pesticides on aquifer sites should be
controlled.
- Prohibit the use of on-site sanitation system such as pitlatrines on
promising aquifer sites if the design permits the leakage and
recharge of waste into underlying aquifers.
- Periodic tests should be undertaken to measure and monitor the
contamination of groundwater resources. This is imperative in
order to guarantee safe drinking water as well as facilitate the
decommissioning of contaminated groundwater sources.
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
210

Table 9.3: Landuse Compatibility Matrix
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
211
Land Use Activity
Extensive Crop Production
Intensive Crop Production
Organic Agriculture
Agro-Forestry
Livestock Grazing (Intensive)
Livestock Grazing (Extensive)
Livestock Farming
Wildlife farming
Livestock Ranching
Game Ranching
Wildlife (game) viewing
Community wildlife use
Wildlife conservation
Veldt product processing
Safari hunting
Animal product processing
Agricultural product processing major
Agricultural product processing (local)
Veterinary services
Stockholding and sale yards
Sale and service of machinery use in agric.
Warehousing
Forestry
Natural parks/reserves
Historic monuments
Public uses and Structures
Utility Installation, type A
Utility Installation, type B
Transport routes
Land Use Zone
P-1gw P-2gw P-3wma P-4cbnr P-5 Ag-1 Ag-2 Ag-Fo Ap-1 Ranch Rg-1 Rg-2 RVA RGA UGA Ag-In
Cp Pr In In In Pr Pr Co 14 Cp In Co 25 In In In In In
Co 17 Co 17 Co 9 Co 9 Co 14 Pr Pr Co 14 Pr Co 25 Co 25 Co 9 Cp 9 Cp 9 Co 9 In
Pr Cp In In Co Pr Pr Co 14 Pr In Co 25 In Cp 14 Cp 14 Cp 14 In
Pr Cp In Co 9 Cp Pr Pr Pr Pr Co 25 Co 25 In Cp Cp Cp In
Co 18 Co 18 In In In Cp Cp Cp Pr Pr Pr Co 18 In In In In
Cp Pr In In Co Cp Cp Cp Pr Cp Pr Pr In In In In
Co 19,20 Cp 22 In In Co 5 Cp Cp Cp Co Pr Co Co In In In In
Co 19,20 In Co 1 Cp In Cp Cp Co 12 Co Cp Co Co In In In In
In In In In In In In In In Pr In In In In In In
In In Co 1 Co In In In In In Co 25 In In In In In In
In In Pr Co In In In Cp In In In Co In In In In
In In Pr Pr Cp In In In In In In Cp In In In In
Co Co Pr Pr Cp In In In In In In Co 25 In In In In
Cp Cp Cp Pr Cp Cp Cp Pr Cp Cp Cp Cp In In In In
In In Cp Cp In In In In In In In Co 25 In In In In
In Co 21 Co 13 Cp In In In Co 13 Co Cp Co 13 Co 13 Co Co Co 21 Pr
In Co 20 In In In In In Cp In In In In Co Co Co 21 Pr
Co 12 Cp In In In Co 1 Co 1 Cp Co 1 Co 1 Co 1 Co 1 Cp Cp Co 21 Cp
Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Co
Co 20 Cp Co 1 Co 1 In Co 2 Co 2 Cp Co 2 Co 1,2 Co 1,2 Co 1,2 In Co 25 Cp Pr
In Co 20 In In In Co 1 Co 1 In Co 1 In In In Cp Co 25 Cp Pr
Co 20 Co 20 In In In In In In In In In In Cp Cp 25 Cp Pr
Pr Pr Cp Cp Pr Cp Cp Pr Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Cp Cp Cp Cp Pr In In Co 18 In In In In In In In In
Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Co
Co 20 Cp 20 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp 3 Co 1,2 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp Cp Cp Cp
Cp 4 Cp Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Co 9 Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Co 4 Co 4 Cp
H1 H1 H1 H1 H1 H1 H1 Co 9 H1 H1 H1 H1 Co 4 Co 4 Co 4 Cp
Co 21 Cp In Co 10 Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Pr Principal land use H1 To be defined at the higher level
Cp Compatible - activity is compatible with the management objectives of the zone Co Conditional - activity may be compatible with the zone, with appropriate site managem
In Incompatible - activity is incompatible with the management objectives of the zone practice. Should be referred to the authorities for assessment on a case specific basis
Extensive: Where limited additional input are required to the land to support the desired land use e.g. supplementary feed during seasonal dry periods.
Intensive: Where regular additional input are required to support the desired land use. E.g. irrigation, additional feed, fertilizers.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

212 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Land Use Activity
Resources extraction
Mineral exploration
Mineral processing
Heavy Industry
Light Industry
Cottage Industry
Commercial Development
Farm Dwellings
Group living Facilities
Rural village
Low Intensity Urban
High Intensity Urban
Sport and Recreation
Tourism
Civic and Community
Cemetery
Waste disposal and processing
Waste water treatment plant
Storage of toxic and hazardous substances
Notes:
1) May be permitted if the use is incidental to the overall land use in the area.
2) Only products which are essential for agro-pastoral activities shall be permitted.
3) Refer to uses conducted by or structure owned by the Central Government or local authorities to
fulfill a government function, activity or service for public benefit.
4) Include uses or structures, including transmission lines, used directly in the distribution of utility
services. Type A refers to those utility installations with minor impact on adjacent land uses.
5) Conditions apply to the storage of fuels and chemicals, the depth of excavation with strict
guidelines for rehabilitation.
6) Refers to dwelling located on and used in connection with a farm where agro-pastoral activities
provide income to the family occupying the dwelling.
7) May be conditionally approved if activities associated with proposed group living facilities are of
agro-pastoral nature.
8) May be approved through the use of the “small village” land use designation. Requires
appropriate planning justification.
9) Refer to small-scale gardens at the village level.
10) May be approved for the provision of access which will not restrict movement of wildlife.
11) May be approved if dwellings are used in connection with prevailing land use activity.
12) Subject to conditions and approval placed by relevant authorities.
13) May only be approved for small-scale units at the village level.
14) May be permitted for small scale agricultural activities. Requires appropriate studies on
protective soil erosion measures such as contour plaguing, zero tillage etc.
Table 9.2: Continued
P-1gw P-2gw P-3wma P-4cbnr P-5 Ag-1 Ag-2 Ag-Fo Ap-1 Ranch Rg-1 Rg-2 RVA RGA UGA Ag-In
Co 21 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 21 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5,12 Co 5,12 Co 5,12 In
Co 21 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 12 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 In In In In
In Co 5 In In In In In In In Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 In In In In
In In In In In In In In In In In In In Co 21 Co 21 Co 21
Co 20 Cp 20 In In In In In In In In In In Cp Cp Cp Cp
Co 20 Cp 20 In In In In In In In Co 25 Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp Cp Cp
Co 20 Cp 20 In Co 26 In In In Co 21 In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Co 20,6 Cp 20 In Co 11 In Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 In In In
Co 20 Cp 20 In In In Co 7 Co 7 Co 6,12 Co 7 Co 7 Co 7 Co 7 Cp Cp Cp In
Co 20,8 Cp 20 Co 8 Co 8 In Co 8 Co 8 In Co 8 Co 8 Co 8 Co 8 Pr Pr Pr In
In Cp 20 In In In In In In In In In In In Cp Cp In
In Co 20 In In In In In In In In In In In Cp Cp In
Cp Cp Cp Cp Pr In In Co 12 In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp Cp Cp In
Co 20 Cp Cp Pr Cp In In Co 12 In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp Cp Cp In
Co 20 Cp In Co 26 Co 26 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Co 25 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Cp Cp Cp Co 3,25
Co 12 Cp 12 In Co 12 In Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Cp Cp Cp In
In In In Co 12 Co 21,15 In In Co 21 In In In In Co 21,15 In In Co 25
In Co 23 In Co 12 Co 21,15 Co 21 Co 21 Co Co 21 Co 21 Co 21 Co 21 Co 12 Co 21,15 Co 21,15 Co 25
In Co 21,24 In In In In In Co 5 In In In In In In In Co 25
15) May be approved where topological conditions allow appropriate development.
16) Restrictions apply on road types and construction
17) Refers to non-irrigated crop production. Restrictions apply to fertilizer application rates, with
strict controls on the application of pesticides and field operations.
18) Can be approved if stocking level (animals per hectare, guided by the relevant authorities) are
consistent with the area protection objectives at the local level.
19) The land use is normally incompatible, but may be conditionally approved. Require incorporation
of appropriate measures and environmental management practices. Refers mostly to housed
establishment, engaged in commercial, small animal husbandry.
20) Must be connected to deep sewerage, where practical or otherwise to an approved waste
disposal system that meets groundwater quality protection objectives.
21) Subject to approval after Environmental Impact Assessment.
22) Require incorporation of appropriate measures and environmental management practices in
meeting groundwater quality protection objectives.
23) Conditions apply to type and location of wastewater disposal systems Alternative wastewater
treatment systems, where approved by the relevant authorities may be accepted with ongoing
maintenance requirements.
24) Activity is incompatible in a wellhead protection zone.
25) May be permitted if the proposed use does not alter character of the surrounding area in a
manner substantially limiting, or precluding the use of surrounding properties for the principal
uses.
26) May be approved if activity is used in conjunction with prevailing land use activity.
CHAPTER 9

9.5 LAND USE MANAGEMENT PLAN BY LAND/SUBLAND BOARDS ADMINISTRATIVE AREAS (CONT
Table 9.4: Rolong Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 213
Urban Growth Area 10.2 0.9 This is an area designated to manage the
areal extension of Good Hope. The zone
comprises the existing built-up environment of
Good Hope and the proposed growth area.
Good Hope’s growth area is confined to the
northern side of Metlojane – Pitsane Siding
road. Growth of the settlement from northeast
to southwest. Immediately adjoining the
growth area is the Rural Village Area while
there is little contact with the Restricted Arable
Agricultural zone.
Rural Growth Area 43.0 3.9 The zone defines the area designated for the
growth of all Tertiary settlements and smaller.
The growth areas provide framework for the
direction of growth by Development Plans or
detailed settlement layout plans. The Rural
Growth Area is intended to serve as a tool for
managing growth and minimizing haphazard
displacement of surrounding agricultural land.
- The urban growth area will primarily be shaped by the settlement
Development Plan when preparation of the Plan has been
finalized.
- Detailed site investigations should be carried out to guide
decisions on development in the zone.
- It is the aim of this Land Use Plan to ensure that development of
the designated growth area be guided by the principles
compactness and densification. These require economy in land
utilisation and controlled areal expansion (sprawl) which entails
infilling of undeveloped spaces intervening between the built-up
elements of the settlement prior to outward lateral expansion.
- All future growth should be accommodated within the designated
growth area boundaries until it is ascertained by physical planner
that such growth can no longer be accommodated therein.
- The outward expansion of the growth area should be managed to
limit premature displacement of agricultural activities in the prime
arable agricultural zone.
- Urban Growth Areas expand and encompass non-urban uses.
These developments should be phased out gradually to make way
for urban uses.
- As a Declared Planning Area, development within the urban
growth area should comply with the Development Plan, Town and
Country Planning Act, Development Control Code and all relevant
statutory instruments relating to Declared Planning Areas
- Haphazard settlement development should be avoided.
- Development within this zone should be in terms of settlement
development plans and where this is not feasible detailed layout
plans should guide development.
- Site specific analyses and investigations should inform
development in the designated growth area.
- Development should be limited to the Development Plan boundary
and densification of development within the growth area should be
achieved before development overspills into adjacent Rural Village
Area.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

214 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.4: Rolong Land Board Land Use Management Plan (Cont.)
LAND USE ZONES
Rural Growth Area
(cont.)
Rural Village Area 179.4 16.3 This is a zone which is contiguous with Urban
Growth Areas, Rural Growth Areas,
commercial ranches and the Restricted Arable
Agricultural Zone. It marks a transition
between settlement growth areas and the
prime arable agricultural land. The area is set
aside as a mixed farming area for livestock
production, arable farming and poultry farming
Restricted Arable
Agricultural Zone: AG-1
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
814.1 74.1 The zone is the most extensive covering 74.1
percent of Rolong Land Board’s administrative
area. It is provides for arable farming as the
primary land use activity. The zone is
considered a prime arable zone in view of the
fertile soils and favourable climatic conditions
with adequate seasonal rainfall for rainfed
crop production.
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
- Development in settlements declared as Planning Areas would be
subject to the Town and Country Planning Act, the Development
Control Code and all relevant statutes.
- Sound planning principles should seek to prevent the incidence of
land use conflicts with adjoining land uses.
- Non-settlement uses should not be permitted within this zone.
Existing non-urban uses that fall within the Growth Area should be
phased out gradually.
- The mixed farming set up calls for the minimisation of land use
conflicts by separating incompatible uses through buffer zones
and/or fencing between land uses in the zone and adjoining land
use zones.
- The size of agricultural plots should be small scale plots allowing
intensive farming practices.
- The allocation of new agricultural plots should be based on
planning guidance to avoid the prevalence of land use conflicts
within the zone.
- Existing land uses should be respected as they enjoy the existing
use right.
- It is crucial to ensure that land use activities in the southern most
part of the District do not threaten the highly vulnerable
groundwater resources in Molopo River.
- The Land Board, Agricultural Land Use Management, Physical
Planners and the farmers should bear in mind that this area is
earmarked for transformation to being the Breadbasket for the
District in addition to making a significant contribution to the
national economy in food.
- Allocation of land should prioritize arable agricultural production.
- Since it is not possible to allocate farms should be allocated based
on a minimum of 150 hectares minimum farm sizes should reflect
the prevailing land situation in Rolong.
- The clustering of small farms should be encouraged in order to
make rainfed crop production profitable. Farmers can hold their
leases and cultivate land by mechanized techniques. Alternatively
farmers may form cooperatives, agricultural associations or lease
land to larger entrepreneurs.
CHAPTER 9

320000
340000
360000
Motsentshe
Gamajalela
Gathwane
Kgoro
Leywana
A1
South East
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES
ROLONG LAND BOARD
Mogoriapitse
Bethel
Mabutsane
Moshupa
Mogwalale
Pitsane Siding
Maokane
Kanye
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 215
7160000 7180000
edibeng
Mokgomane
320000
Tswaanyaneng
B101
B101
Good Hope
Metlojane
340000
Logogane
Hebron
Madingwana
Phihitshwane
Papatlo
Sheep
Farm
Malokaganyane
Ngwatsau
B202
R.S.A.
Rakhuna
Ramatlabama
360000
Tlhareselee
Client:
Consultants:
N
Scale:
Legend
Mmathethe
Phitsane Molopo Barolong
Urban Growth Area
Rural Growth Area
Rural Village Area
Agro-Forestry
Ranches
Ag-In (Agro-Industrail Zone)
AI Camp
Main (Primary) Road
Secondary Road
Local/Access Road
Railway
District Boundary
International Boundary
Kilometers
0 1.5 3 6 9
UTMZone35-DatumCape
Southern District Council
Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
1:350,000 Map 9.8
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

216 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.4: Rolong Land Board - Matrix of Land Use Compatibility
Land Use Zone
Land Use Activity Ag-1 RVA RGA UGA Ag-In
Extensive Crop Production Pr In In In In
Intensive Crop Production Pr Cp 9 Cp 9 Co 9 In
Organic Agriculture Pr Cp 14 Cp 14 Cp 14 In
Agro-Forestry Pr Cp Cp Cp In
Livestock Grazing (Intensive) Cp In In In In
Livestock Grazing (Extensive) Cp In In In In
Livestock Farming Cp In In In In
Wildlife farming Cp In In In In
Livestock Ranching In In In In In
Game Ranching In In In In In
Wildlife (game) viewing In In In In In
Community wildlife use In In In In In
Wildlife conservation In In In In In
Veldt product processing Cp In In In In
Safari hunting In In In In In
Animal product processing In Co Co Co 21 Pr
Agricultural product processing major In Co Co Co 21 Pr
Agricultural product processing (local) Co 1 Cp Cp Co 21 Cp
Veterinary services Cp Cp Cp Cp Co
Stockholding and sale yards Co 2 In Co 25 Cp Pr
Sale and service of machinery use in agric. Co 1 Cp Co 25 Cp Pr
Warehousing In Cp Cp 25 Cp Pr
Forestry Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Natural parks/reserves In In In In In
Historic monuments Cp Cp Cp Cp Co
Public uses and Structures Cp 3 Cp Cp Cp Cp
Utility Installation, type A Cp 4 Cp 4 Co 4 Co 4 Cp
Utility Installation, type B H1 Co 4 Co 4 Co 4 Cp
Transport routes Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Resources extraction Co 5 Co 5,12 Co 5,12 Co 5,12 In
Land Use Zone
Land Use Activity Ag-1 RVA RGA UGA Ag-In
Farm Dwellings Co 6 Co 6 In In In
Group living Facilities Co 7 Cp Cp Cp In
Rural village Co 8 Pr Pr Pr In
Low Intensity Urban In In Cp Cp In
High Intensity Urban In In Cp Cp In
Sport and Recreation In Cp Cp Cp In
Tourism In Cp Cp Cp In
Civic and Community Co 3,25 Cp Cp Cp Co 3,25
Cemetery Co 12 Cp Cp Cp In
Waste disposal and processing In Co 21,15 In In Co 25
Waste water treatment plant Co 21 Co 12 Co 21,15 Co 21,15 Co 25
Storage of toxic and hazardous substances In In In In Co 25
Notes:
1) May be permitted if the use is incidental to the overall land use in the area.
2) Only products which are essential for agro-pastoral activities shall be permitted.
3) Refer to uses conducted by or structure owned by the Central Government or local authorities to
fulfill a government function, activity or service for public benefit.
4) Include uses or structures, including transmission lines, used directly in the distribution of utility
services. Type A refers to those utility installations with minor impact on adjacent land uses.
5) Conditions apply to the storage of fuels and chemicals, the depth of excavation with strict
guidelines for rehabilitation.
6) Refers to dwelling located on and used in connection with a farm where agro-pastoral activities
provide income to the family occupying the dwelling.
7) May be conditionally approved if activities associated with proposed group living facilities are of
agro-pastoral nature.
8) May be approved through the use of the “small village” land use designation. Requires
appropriate planning justification.
9) Refer to small-scale gardens at the village level.
12) Subject to conditions and approval placed by relevant authorities.
14) May be permitted for small scale agricultural activities. Requires appropriate studies on
protective soil erosion measures such as contour plaguing, zero tillage etc.
15) May be approved where topological conditions allow appropriate development.
21) Subject to approval after Environmental Impact Assessment.
25) May be permitted if the proposed use does not alter character of the surrounding area in a
manner substantially limiting, or precluding the use of surrounding properties for the principal
uses.
CHAPTER 9
Mineral exploration Co 5 In In In In
Mineral processing In In In In In
Heavy Industry In In Co 21 Co 21 Co 21
Light Industry In Cp Cp Cp Cp
Cottage Industry In Cp Cp Cp Cp
Commercial Development In Cp Cp Cp Cp
Pr Principal land use
Cp Compatible - activity is compatible with the management objectives of the zone
In Incompatible - activity is incompatible with the management objectives of the zone
H1 To be defined at the higher level
Co Conditional - activity may be compatible with the zone, with appropriate site managem
practice. Should be referred to the authorities for assessment on a case specific basis

Table 9.4: Rolong Land Board Land Use Management Plan(Cont.)
LAND USE ZONES
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 217
Restricted Arable
Agricultural Zone
(cont.)
Agro-Industrial Zone:
Ag-In
1.6 0.1 There are 3 areas designated as Agro –
Industrial Zone namely on the edge of Pitsane
Siding, Rakhuna and Metlojane. The zones
are located along transportation infrastructure
on the edge of strategically located centres.
- Existing land use activities may be retained in the prime arable
land provided they do not impact negatively on the primary arable
land use. Measures should be put in place to prevent the negative
impacts of other land use activities in order to safeguard arable
agricultural production.
- It is fundamental that crops be adapted to the physical
environment (i.e. climate and soil).
- Fields should be fenced to prevent livestock from destroying crops.
- Herding of livestock in intervening rangelands should be practised
to prevent conflicts between crop and livestock farming.
- Farms should be based on planned farm layouts in line with the
recommended minimum plot sizes.
- While the bulk of the land is to be devoted to arable agriculture,
there is a need to retain vegetation communities in order to
maintain the ecosystem functional
- No additional watering boreholes should be allocated in the prime
arable land so as to ensure that the land is not diminished by
competing land use activities.
- The site should be used for the establishment of medium to large
industrial operations. Agro – industrial activities would support the
agricultural production sector through product processing.
- The sites should be considered as part of the adjoining settlement
Development Plans and should therefore be based on rational
planning.
- Detailed agro – industrial layouts should be prepared and serviced
with the requisite service infrastructure.
- Industrial plots should be allocated to genuine entrepreneurs in
order to ensure that land is put to good use for the development of
the District
- Industrial operations should be such that they do not cause
environmental degradation.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

218 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7225000 7250000
Gasita
Betesankwe
Seherelela
Sesung
300000 325000 350000
A2
Selokolela
Ralekgetho
Lotlhakane
West
Moshaneng
Dinatshana
B202
Kanye
Moshupa
A10
B105
A2
Ranaka
Lotlhakane
Ntlhantlhe
Magotlhwane
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES
KANYE SUB-LAND BOARD
Mabutsane
Legend
Moshupa
Maokane
Kanye
Mmathethe
Phitsane Molopo Barolong
Urban Growth Area
Rural Growth Area
AG-2
Agro-Forestry
Ranches
RG-1 (Communal)
Ap-1 (Agro-Pastoral)
P-1gw
P-5 (Afforestation)
Special Development Zone
Main (Primary) Road
Secondary Road
Proposed Road
Local/Access Road
Major Track
Proposed Railway
CHAPTER 9
District Boundary
Kilometers
0 2 4 8 12
Maisane
UTMZone35-DatumCape
Segwagwa
Mola
Client:
Southern District Council
Consultants:
Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
N
Scale: 1:350,000 Map 9.9

Table 9.5: Kanye Sub-Land Board - Matrix of Land Use Compatibility
Land Use Zone
Land Use Zone
Land Use Activity P-1gw P-5 Ag-2 Ag-Fo Ap-1 Rg-1b RGA UGA
Land Use Activity P-1gw P-5 Ag-2 Ag-Fo Ap-1 Rg-1b RGA UGA
Extensive Crop Production Cp In Pr Co 14 Cp Co 25 In In
Rural village Co 20,8 In Co 8 In Co 8 Co 8 Pr Pr
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 219
Intensive Crop Production Co 17 Co 14 Pr Co 14 Pr Co 25 Cp 9 Co 9
Organic Agriculture Pr Co Pr Co 14 Pr Co 25 Cp 14 Cp 14
Agro-Forestry Pr Cp Pr Pr Pr Co 25 Cp Cp
Livestock Grazing (Intensive) Co 18 In Cp Cp Pr Pr In In
Livestock Grazing (Extensive) Cp Co Cp Cp Pr Pr In In
Livestock Farming Co 19,20 Co 5 Cp Cp Co Co In In
Wildlife farming Co 19,20 In Cp Co 12 Co Co In In
Livestock Ranching In In In In In In In In
Game Ranching In In In In In In In In
Wildlife (game) viewing In In In Cp In In In In
Community wildlife use In Cp In In In In In In
Wildlife conservation Co Cp In In In In In In
Veldt product processing Cp Cp Cp Pr Cp Cp In In
Safari hunting In In In In In In In In
Animal product processing In In In Co 13 Co Co 13 Co Co 21
Agricultural product processing major In In In Cp In In Co Co 21
Agricultural product processing (local) Co 12 In Co 1 Cp Co 1 Co 1 Cp Co 21
Veterinary services Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Stockholding and sale yards Co 20 In Co 2 Cp Co 2 Co 1,2 Co 25 Cp
Sale and service of machinery use in agric. In In Co 1 In Co 1 In Co 25 Cp
Warehousing Co 20 In In In In In Cp 25 Cp
Forestry Pr Pr Cp Pr Cp Cp Cp Cp
Natural parks/reserves Cp Pr In Co 18 In In In In
Historic monuments Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Public uses and Structures Co 20 Cp 3 Cp 3 Co 1,2 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp Cp
Utility Installation, type A Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Co 9 Cp 4 Cp 4 Co 4 Co 4
Utility Installation, type B H1 H1 H1 Co 9 H1 H1 Co 4 Co 4
Transport routes Co 21 Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Resources extraction Co 21 Co 5 Co 5 Co 21 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5,12 Co 5,12
Mineral exploration Co 21 Co 5 Co 5 Co 12 Co 5 Co 5 In In
Mineral processing In In In In In Co 5 In In
Heavy Industry In In In In In In Co 21 Co 21
Light Industry Co 20 In In In In In Cp Cp
Cottage Industry Co 20 In In In In Co 25 Cp Cp
Commercial Development Co 20 In In Co 21 In Co 25 Cp Cp
Farm Dwellings Co 20,6 In Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 In In
Group living Facilities Co 20 In Co 7 Co 6,12 Co 7 Co 7 Cp Cp
Low Intensity Urban In In In In In In Cp Cp
High Intensity Urban In In In In In In Cp Cp
Sport and Recreation Cp Pr In Co 12 In Co 25 Cp Cp
Tourism Co 20 Cp In Co 12 In Co 25 Cp Cp
Civic and Community Co 20 Co 26 Co 3,25 Co 25 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Cp Cp
Cemetery Co 12 In Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Cp Cp
W aste disposal and processing In Co 21,15 In Co 21 In In In In
Waste water treatment plant In Co 21,15 Co 21 Co Co 21 Co 21 Co 21,15 Co 21,15
Storage of toxic and hazardous substances In In In Co 5 In In In In
Notes:
1) May be permitted if the use is incidental to the overall land use in the area.
2) Only products which are essential for agro-pastoral activities shall be permitted.
3) Refer to uses conducted by or structure owned by the Central Government or local authorities to fulfill a
government function, activity or service for public benefit.
4) Include uses or structures, including transmission lines, used directly in the distribution of utility services.
Type A refers to those utility installations with minor impact on adjacent land uses.
5) Conditions apply to the storage of fuels and chemicals, the depth of excavation with strict guidelines for
rehabilitation.
6) Refers to dwelling located on and used in connection with a farm where agro-pastoral activities provide
income to the family occupying the dwelling.
7) May be conditionally approved if activities associated with proposed group living facilities are of agropastoral
nature.
8) May be approved through the use of the “small village” land use designation. Requires appropriate planning
justification.
9) Refer to small-scale gardens at the village level.
11) May be approved if dwellings are used in connection with prevailing land use activity.
12) Subject to conditions and approval placed by relevant authorities.
13) May only be approved for small-scale units at the village level.
14) May be permitted for small scale agricultural activities. Requires appropriate studies on protective soil
erosion measures such as contour plaguing, zero tillage etc.
15) May be approved where topological conditions allow appropriate development.
16) Restrictions apply on road types and construction
17) Refers to non-irrigated crop production. Restrictions apply to fertilizer application rates, with strict controls
on the application of pesticides and field operations.
18) Can be approved if stocking level (animals per hectare, guided by the relevant authorities) are consistent
with the area protection objectives at the local level.
19) The land use is normally incompatible, but may be conditionally approved. Require incorporation of
appropriate measures and environmental management practices. Refers mostly to housed establishment,
engaged in commercial, small animal husbandry.
20) Must be connected to deep sewerage, where practical or otherwise to an approved waste disposal system
that meets groundwater quality protection objectives.
21) Subject to approval after Environmental Impact Assessment.
22) Require incorporation of appropriate measures and environmental management practices in meeting
groundwater quality protection objectives.
24) Activity is incompatible in a wellhead protection zone.
25) May be permitted if the proposed use does not alter character of the surrounding area in a manner
substantially limiting, or precluding the use of surrounding properties for the principal uses.
26) May be approved if activity is used in connection with prevailing land use activity.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

220 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.6: Kanye Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
Urban Growth Area:
UGA
Rural Growth Area:
RGA
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
94.0 4.8 This is an area encompassing the existing
extent of Kanye and the area earmarked for
the future growth of the settlement. The future
growth area of Kanye is directed to the south
of Kanye on either side of the B202 Kanye
Mmathethe road. The growth area extends to
the undulating impediments south of Kanye.
9.0 0.5 The zone is earmarked for the growth of
tertiary and smaller settlements. It coincides
with the existing extent of the settlements and
future growth areas.
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
- The areal expansion of Kanye should be guided by the operative
Kanye Development Plan. Expansion beyond the operative
Development Plan boundary should be accommodated within the
designated Urban Growth Area.
- Densification should be the guiding principle in the development of
Kanye.
- Development on the hillside would add to the scenic beauty of
Kanye as well reduce leap-frog development and the associated
costs.
- Development on undulating landscapes should be avoided where
this is likely to result in prohibited costs of providing service
infrastructure.
- Comprehensive measures should be taken to preserve the
environment from physical harm and pollution as a result of urban
uses. In particular, the use of on-site sanitation systems that are
inclined to cause pollution of groundwater resources at Kanye
Dolomite Aquifer should be prohibited.
- The growth of Kanye towards Kanye Dolomite Aquifer should be
managed carefully so as to direct away all urban uses which are
inclined to cause pollution of the aquifer.
- The urban growth area should be directed away from Bathoen
Dam Bird Sanctuary.
- Haphazard settlement development should be avoided.
- Development within this zone should be in terms of settlement
development plans and where this is not feasible detailed layout
plans should be guide development.
- Site specific analyses and investigations should inform
development in the designated growth area.
- Development should be limited to the Development Plan boundary
and densification of development within the growth area should be
achieved before development overspills into the adjacent Rural
Village Area.
- Development in settlements declared as Planning Areas would be
subject to the Town and Country Planning Act, the Development
Control Code and all relevant statutes.
CHAPTER 9

Table 9.6: Kanye Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 221
Rural Growth Area
(cont.)
Agro-Forestry 241.0 12.4 Occurs in the southeastern and eastern part of
the administrative area. The zone is set aside
as a forestry area through permitting livestock
farming and arable agriculture at a small
scale. The area is prone to water erosion.
Afforestation: P-5 323.7 16.7 This is an area with topographic constraints
blended with areas of scenic beauty and
erosion – prone landscapes.
Communal Rangeland
Utilisation (RG-1)
349.6 18.0 This is an area designated for communal
grazing livestock husbandry and veldt
gathering.
- Sound planning principles should seek to prevent the incidence of
land use conflicts with adjoining land uses.
- Non-settlement uses within this zone should not be permitted
within this zone. Existing non-urban uses that fall within the
Growth Area should be phased out gradually.
- The development of Moshaneng should be guided by a
development plan. This should take into account the sensitivity of
the settlement’s location on the promising Moshaneng Dolomite
aquifer.
- Waste disposal and the use of on-site sanitation facilities should
ensure that pollutants are prevented from coming into contact with
the groundwater resources in Moshaneng Dolomite Aquifer.
- Settlement development in the special Development Zone
associated with A2 Trans-Kgalagadi should be in line with the
guidelines for development in this zone.
- No new livestock boreholes should be allocated within the 2km
special Development zone on either side of the A2 to reduce
livestock – vehicular conflicts.
- Only small scale livestock and arable production is recommended.
- Tree – planting should be interspersed with crop cultivation
through wide spacing.
- Minimisation of erosion-risk is achieved through tree planting..
- The removal of vegetation and cultivation of erosion-prone
landscapes should be avoided as these may exacerbate
environmental degradation.
- Livestock grazing on these fragile zones should seek to minimize
depletion of vegetation and the emergence of piospheres.
- Mining and resource extraction should be preceded by
Environmental Impact Assessments Rehabilitation of land should
be undertaken at the expiration of mining activities.
- There is a need to promote subsistence livestock farming in this
area.
- Communal livestock farmers should be encouraged to manage
this zone with a view to conserve natural resources.
- The number of livestock should be kept within the carrying
capacity of the rangeland.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

222 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.6: Kanye Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
Communal Rangeland
Utilisation (RG-1) cont.
Agro-Pastoral (Ap-1) 366.9 18.9 The land is contiguous with communal
rangelands and is characterised with land
suitable for crop production.
General Agricultural
(Ag-2)
Vulnerable
Groundwater Zone–
High Potential
P-1gw
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
100.5 5.2 Two pieces of land are found to the north and
southeastern parts. The zone permits
clustering of arable fields and livestock
farming activities including piggery and poultry
projects.
433.6 22.3 This is the area covered by the promising
Dolomite aquifers of Kanye and Moshaneng.
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
- Dual grazing practices of commercial ranches should be checked.
- Existing compatible land use activities should be maintained with
measures for reducing conflicts adopted..
- Small to medium scale arable agricultural activities should be
accommodated to accord farmers the chance to diversify
production.
- Agricultural clusters should be planned rationally ensuring the
minimisation of land use conflicts.
- The size of farms should be smaller than the NAMPAAD stipulated
minimum sizes to increase access to agricultural plots.
- Land use activities which are inclined to cause pollution of the
aquifer should be prohibited.
- Environmental Impact Assessments should precede the
undertaking of those land use activities which are inclined to cause
pollution of aquifers.
- Investigations should be carried out to determine the effect of
settlement activities at Kanye and existing Moshaneng settlements
on the aquifer.
- A buffer zone should be provided between the settlements and
aquifers to minimize the possibility of pollutants reaching the
aquifers.
CHAPTER 9

240000 270000 300000
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
Jwaneng
PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES
MAOKANE SUB-LAND BOARD
Betesankwe
Mabutsane
Moshupa
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 223
7200000 7230000 7260000
Semane
Mokhomma
Lehoko
Maokane
Tsonyane
Seherelela
Gasita
Sesung
A2
Selokole
0 2.5 5 10 15 20
Client:
Consultants:
N
Legend
Kilometers
Maokane
UTMZone35-DatumCape
Southern District Council
Kanye
Mmathethe
Phitsane Molopo Barolong
Rural Growth Area
Ranches
RG-1 (Communal)
Ap-1 (Agro-Pastoral)
P-1gw
P-5 (Afforestation)
Main (Primary) Road
Secondary Road
Proposed Road
Local/Access Road
Major Track
Proposed Railway
Special Development Zone
Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Scale: 1:425,000 Map 9.10
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

224 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.7: Maokane Sub-Land Board - Matrix of Land Use Compatibility
Land Use Zone
Land Use Activity P-1gw P-5 Ap-1 Ranch Rg-1 RGA
Extensive Crop Production Cp In Cp In Co 25 In
Intensive Crop Production Co 17 Co 14 Pr Co 25 Co 25 Cp 9
Organic Agriculture Pr Co Pr In Co 25 Cp 14
Agro-Forestry Pr Cp Pr Co 25 Co 25 Cp
Livestock Grazing (Intensive) Co 18 In Pr Pr Pr In
Livestock Grazing (Extensive) Cp Co Pr Cp Pr In
Livestock Farming Co 19,20 Co 5 Co Pr Co In
Wildlife farming Co 19,20 In Co Cp Co In
Livestock Ranching In In In Pr In In
Game Ranching In In In Co 25 In In
Wildlife (game) viewing In In In In In In
Community wildlife use In Cp In In In In
Wildlife conservation Co Cp In In In In
Veldt product processing Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp In
Safari hunting In In In In In In
Animal product processing In In Co Cp Co 13 Co
Agricultural product processing major In In In In In Co
Agricultural product processing (local) Co 12 In Co 1 Co 1 Co 1 Cp
Veterinary services Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Stockholding and sale yards Co 20 In Co 2 Co 1,2 Co 1,2 Co 25
Sale and service of machinery use in agric. In In Co 1 In In Co 25
Warehousing Co 20 In In In In Cp 25
Forestry Pr Pr Cp Cp Cp Cp
Natural parks/reserves Cp Pr In In In In
Historic monuments Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Public uses and Structures Co 20 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp
Utility Installation, type A Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Co 4
Utility Installation, type B H1 H1 H1 H1 H1 Co 4
Transport routes Co 21 Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Resources extraction Co 21 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5,12
Mineral exploration Co 21 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 In
Mineral processing In In In Co 5 Co 5 In
Heavy Industry In In In In In Co 21
Light Industry Co 20 In In In In Cp
Cottage Industry Co 20 In In Co 25 Co 25 Cp
Commercial Development Co 20 In In Co 25 Co 25 Cp
Land Use Zone
Land Use Activity P-1gw P-5 Ap-1 Ranch Rg-1 RGA
Farm Dwellings Co 20,6 In Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 In
Group living Facilities Co 20 In Co 7 Co 7 Co 7 Cp
Rural village Co 20,8 In Co 8 Co 8 Co 8 Pr
Low Intensity Urban In In In In In Cp
High Intensity Urban In In In In In Cp
Sport and Recreation Cp Pr In Co 25 Co 25 Cp
Tourism Co 20 Cp In Co 25 Co 25 Cp
Civic and Community Co 20 Co 26 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Cp
Cemetery Co 12 In Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Cp
Waste disposal and processing In Co 21,15 In In In In
Waste water treatment plant In Co 21,15 Co 21 Co 21 Co 21 Co 21,15
Storage of toxic and hazardous substances In In In In In In
Notes:
1) May be permitted if the use is incidental to the overall land use in the area.
2) Only products which are essential for agro-pastoral activities shall be permitted.
3) Refer to uses conducted by or structure owned by the Central Government or local authorities to fulfill
a government function, activity or service for public benefit.
4) Include uses or structures, including transmission lines, used directly in the distribution of utility
services. Type A refers to those utility installations with minor impact on adjacent land uses.
5) Conditions apply to the storage of fuels and chemicals, the depth of excavation with strict guidelines for
rehabilitation.
6) Refers to dwelling located on and used in connection with a farm where agro-pastoral activities provide
income to the family occupying the dwelling.
7) May be conditionally approved if activities associated with proposed group living facilities are of agropastoral
nature.
8) May be approved through the use of the “small village” land use designation. Requires appropriate
planning justification.
12) Subject to conditions and approval placed by relevant authorities.
14) May be permitted for small scale agricultural activities. Requires appropriate studies on protective soil
erosion measures such as contour plaguing, zero tillage etc.
15) May be approved where topological conditions allow appropriate development.
16) Restrictions apply on road types and construction
17) Refers to non-irrigated crop production. Restrictions apply to fertilizer application rates, with strict
controls on the application of pesticides and field operations.
18) Can be approved if stocking level (animals per hectare, guided by the relevant authorities) are
consistent with the area protection objectives at the local level.
20) Must be connected to deep sewerage, where practical or otherwise to an approved waste disposal
system that meets groundwater quality protection objectives.
21) Subject to approval after Environmental Impact Assessment.
22) Require incorporation of appropriate measures and environmental management practices in meeting
groundwater quality protection objectives.
25) May be permitted if the proposed use does not alter character of the surrounding area in a manner
substantially limiting, or precluding the use of surrounding properties for the principal uses.
26) May be approved if activity is used in connection with prevailing land use activity.
CHAPTER 9

Table 9.8: Maokane Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 225
Rural Growth Area:
RGA
Communal Grazing
Area RG-1
25.0 0.5 This is a zone designated for the growth
of tertiary settlements and RADs.
2716.2 58.0 This is the most extensive zone. It is
designated as a communal grazing area.
Agro-Pastoral: AP-1 1057.1 21.7 This is land with a potential for arable
farming but falling within a
predominantly communal area.
- Development of all tertiary settlements should be in terms of
Development Plans. Unplanned development should be avoided
through the preparation of detailed layout plans prior to the preparation
of Development Plans, where necessary.
- Development should be confined within the designated growth area
where economy in land usage would be achieved through densification.
- Unwarranted premature areal expansion onto adjoining communal
grazing and agro-pastoral land should be avoided.
- When a settlement becomes a Declared Planning Area development
should comply with the Town and Country Planning Act.
- Communal livestock grazing shall take precedence over other land uses
in the allocation of rights to use land.
- Where communal grazing is interwoven with arable agricultural
production the conflicting uses should be separated by fencing off fields.
- A borehole spacing rule of 8km shall be applied an. New application for
boreholes spaced less than 8 km apart should be preceded by an
analysis od the state of rangeland resources to establish potential
effects on resources.
- No new livestock watering points should be allocated, the 3km special
Development Zone abutting the A2 highway
- Existing land uses should be accorded respect and retained within the
zone. However, land use activities which are not ancillary to communal
grazing should not be given priority in allocation of land.
- Communal farmers should be encouraged to work together through a
committee that would coordinate and manage farming activities.
Communal utilisation of boreholes is recommended.
- The utilisation of rangeland resources should be closed monitored and
measures taken to avoid environmental degradation such as from
overgrazing.
- Small to medium arable farms to be allocated taking advantage of the
agricultural potential of the land.
- Allocation of boreholes should accord irrigated farming priority in order
to exploit the opportunities for irrigation agriculture.
- Communal grazing and arable farming can be practiced as mixed
activities with separation through fencing.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

226 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.8: Maokane Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
Existing Ranches 858.2 18.3 These are existing commercial ranches
allocated under the TGLP and newly
allocated ranches.
Afforestation: P5 20.2 0.4 The area has topographic limitations,
areas of scenic beauty and is generally
prone to water erosion.
Vulnerable
Groundwater Zone:
P-1gw
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
14.2 0.3 The area coincides with Moshaneng
Dolomite Aquifer.
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
- Ranch utilisation should be undertaken through paddock systems which
facilitate managed grazing.
- Ranches should be fenced to facilitate management of ranches and
rangeland resources.
- Commercial ranchers are encouraged to diversify into other farming
activities such as wildlife farming.
- Vegetation removal and cultivation on erosion-prone areas should be
avoided to reduce environmental degradation.
- Overgrazing should be avoided and in particular the emergence of
degraded areas around boreholes should be guarded against.
- The extraction of resources and minerals should be informed by EIAs.
- Land use which is inclined to cause pollution of the aquifer should be
avoided.
- Settlement activities are discouraged in this area which falls within the
A2 Special Development Zone
CHAPTER 9

100000 150000 200000
B120
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
Kweneng
District
PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES
MABUTSANE SUB-LAND BOARD
Morwamosu
CBNRM
Mabutsane
Moshupa
Æ·T
Maokane
Kanye
R a n c h e s
Mmathethe
Phitsane Molopo Barolong
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 227
7250000 7300000
Kokong
WMA
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
B205
Kutuku
B102
Mabutsane
AI Camp
Khakhea
Kgalagadi
A20
Æ·T
Keng
District
A2
Communal Rangeland
Utlisation
Thankane
Mahotshwane
Sekoma
Khonkhwa
Æ·T
R a n c h e s
Client:
Consultants:
N
Legend
Rural Growth Area
Agro-Industrial Zone
AI Camp
Ranches
Rg-2 (Communal)
P-3wma
P-3wma (500 m buffer)
P-4cbnr
Main (Primary) Road
Secondary Road
Local Road/Track
Special Development Zone
Æ·T Tourism Related Activities
District Boundary
Kilometers
0 5 10 20
UTMZone35-DatumCape
Southern District Council
Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Scale: 1:650,000 Map 9.11
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

228 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.9: Mabutsane Sub-Land Board - Matrix of Land Use Compatibility
Land Use Zone
Land Use Activity P-3wma P-4cbnr Rg-2 RGA Ag-In
Extensive Crop Production In In In In In
Intensive Crop Production Co 9 Co 9 Co 9 Cp 9 In
Organic Agriculture In In In Cp 14 In
Agro-Forestry In Co 9 In Cp In
Livestock Grazing (Intensive) In In Co 18 In In
Livestock Grazing (Extensive) In In Pr In In
Livestock Farming In In Co In In
Wildlife farming Co 1 Cp Co In In
Livestock Ranching In In In In In
Game Ranching Co 1 Co In In In
Wildlife (game) viewing Pr Co Co In In
Community wildlife use Pr Pr Cp In In
Wildlife conservation Pr Pr Co 25 In In
Veldt product processing Cp Pr Cp In In
Safari hunting Cp Cp Co 25 In In
Animal product processing Co 13 Cp Co 13 Co Pr
Agricultural product processing major In In In Co Pr
Agricultural product processing (local) In In Co 1 Cp Cp
Veterinary services Cp Cp Cp Cp Co
Stockholding and sale yards Co 1 Co 1 Co 1,2 Co 25 Pr
Sale and service of machinery use in agric. In In In Co 25 Pr
Warehousing In In In Cp 25 Pr
Forestry Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Natural parks/reserves Cp Cp In In In
Historic monuments Cp Cp Cp Cp Co
Public uses and Structures Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp Cp
Utility Installation, type A Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Co 4 Cp
Utility Installation, type B H1 H1 H1 Co 4 Cp
Transport routes In Co 10 Cp Cp Cp
Resources extraction Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5,12 In
Mineral exploration Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 In In
Mineral processing In In Co 5 In In
Heavy Industry In In In Co 21 Co 21
Light Industry In In In Cp Cp
Cottage Industry In In Co 25 Cp Cp
Commercial Development In Co 26 Cp Cp Cp
Land Use Zone
Land Use Activity P-3wma P-4cbnr Rg-2 RGA Ag-In
Farm Dwellings In Co 11 Co 6 In In
Group living Facilities In In Co 7 Cp In
Rural village Co 8 Co 8 Co 8 Pr In
Low Intensity Urban In In In Cp In
High Intensity Urban In In In Cp In
Sport and Recreation Cp Cp Cp Cp In
Tourism Cp Pr Cp Cp In
Civic and Community In Co 26 Co 3,25 Cp Co 3,25
Cemetery In Co 12 Co 12 Cp In
Waste disposal and processing In Co 12 In In Co 25
Waste water treatment plant In Co 12 Co 21 Co 21,15 Co 25
Storage of toxic and hazardous substances In In In In Co 25
Notes:
1) May be permitted if the use is incidental to the overall land use in the area.
2) Only products which are essential for agro-pastoral activities shall be permitted.
3) Refer to uses conducted by or structure owned by the Central Government or local authorities to fulfill
a government function, activity or service for public benefit.
4) Include uses or structures, including transmission lines, used directly in the distribution of utility
services. Type A refers to those utility installations with minor impact on adjacent land uses.
5) Conditions apply to the storage of fuels and chemicals, the depth of excavation with strict guidelines
for rehabilitation.
7) May be conditionally approved if activities associated with proposed group living facilities are of agropastoral
nature.
8) May be approved through the use of the “small village” land use designation. Requires appropriate
planning justification.
10) May be approved for the provision of access which will not restrict movement of wildlife.
11) May be approved if dwellings are used in connection with prevailing land use activity.
12) Subject to conditions and approval placed by relevant authorities.
16) Restrictions apply on road types and construction
18) Can be approved if stocking level (animals per hectare, guided by the relevant authorities) are
consistent with the area protection objectives at the local level.
20) Must be connected to deep sewerage, where practical or otherwise to an approved waste disposal
system that meets groundwater quality protection objectives.
21) Subject to approval after Environmental Impact Assessment.
22) Require incorporation of appropriate measures and environmental management practices in meeting
groundwater quality protection objectives.
23) Conditions apply to type and location of wastewater disposal systems Alternative wastewater
treatment systems, where approved by the relevant authorities may be accepted with ongoing
maintenance requirements.
24) Activity is incompatible in a wellhead protection zone.
25) May be permitted if the proposed use does not alter character of the surrounding area in a manner
substantially limiting, or precluding the use of surrounding properties for the principal uses.
26) May be approved if activity is used in connection with prevailing land use activity.
CHAPTER 9

Table 9.11: Mabutsane Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 229
Rural Growth Area 29.2 0.3 The zone is earmarked for the growth of
tertiary and smaller settlements.
Existing Ranches 2025.1 21.7 These are existing commercial ranches
allocated under the TGLP and newly
allocated ranches.
Communal Rangeland
Utilisation: Rg -2
4286.1 46.0 The zone lies in an area with variable
rainfall and conditions which are not
favourable to crop production.
- Unplanned development of settlements should be avoided.
- Settlement development should be guided by Development plans or
detailed layout plans where comprehensive development plans have not
been prepared.
- Development of settlements within the A2 highway special development
Zone should be guided by development plans.
- Settlements along the A2 highway namely: Sekoma, Mabutsane and
Morwamosu should develop on one side of the highway and
intersections with the road should be minimized.
- A buffer zone of 100m should be provided between settlements uses
and the highway.
- Buffer zones should be provided between the Community Based Natural
Resource Management area (CBNRM) and the neighbouring settlement
of Morwamosu.
- Comprehensive groundwater protection measures are required around
Mabutsane and Sekoma.
- Ranch utilisation should be undertaken through paddock systems which
facilitate managed grazing.
- Ranches should be fenced to facilitate management of ranches and
rangeland resources.
- Commercial ranchers are encouraged to diversify into other farming
activities such as wildlife farming.
- The area requires guided grazing and rangeland resource utilisation.
- Grazing around boreholes should be controlled to guard against land
degradation and bush encroachment.
- The proliferation (high intensity) of boreholes can be reduced through
communal use of boreholes. This reduces the possibility of the merger
of piospheres and widened land degradation.
- Management of the communal grazing area could be achieved through
the formation of communal grazing committee.
- Over-utilisation of pastures should be avoided.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

230 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.11: Mabutsane Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
Community Based
National Resource
Management: P-4cbnr
Wildlife Management
Area: P-3wma
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
415.8 4.4 These zones set aside for the utilisation
of rangeland resources by the
community for their benefit.
2405.9 26.0 It is a corridor designated to offer
passage for wildlife migration between
the Central Kalahari Game Reserve and
Kgalagadi Transfrontier National Park.
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
- The CBNRM should be fenced off from adjoining land uses.
- Management of the CBNRM should be bestowed upon the community
with assistance from the Government. Non – Governmental
Organisations and other relevant stakeholders.
- Wildlife populations should be built up to make the areas more
economically viable through tourism related activities such as wildlife
viewing and hunting.
- Wildlife watering points should be designated and developed for game
viewing as they are convergence areas for wildlife.
- Detailed management plans for these areas should be developed id the
CBNRM area are to meet the intended objectives.
- Communities adjoining the CBNRMs should be the prime benefiaries of
activities in these areas.
- Land use activities which are likely to conflict with CBNRM activities
should be prohibited.
- A 500 meters buffer zone should be provided between the WMA and
adjoining land use activities..
- Conflicting land use activities should not be permitted within the WMA.
- Detailed studies should be undertaken for the transformation of the
WMA as a tourism base.
- The portion of the A2 highway traversing the WMA should not be fenced
to permit wildlife migration.
- Warning signs should be strategically place at the entrance and within
the area alerting motorists of wildlife crossing.
- Wildlife watering points should be provided within the WMA. These
would attract wildlife and serve as a game viewing points
CHAPTER 9

Table 9.12: Mmathethe Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 231
Rural Growth Area 63.7 2.1 The zone defines the area designated
for the growth of all Tertiary settlements
and smaller. The growth areas provide
the framework for the direction of growth
by Development Plans or detailed
settlement layout plans. The Rural
Growth Area is intended to serve as a
tool for managing growth and minimizing
haphazard displacement of surrounding
agricultural land.
Rural Village Area 89.4 2.9 This is a zone which is contiguous with
Urban Growth Areas, Rural Growth
Areas, and the Restricted Arable
Agricultural zone, communal grazing
and General Agricultural It marks a
transition between settlement growth
areas and the prime arable agricultural
land. The area is set aside as a mixed
farming area for livestock production,
arable farming and poultry farming
Restricted Arable
Agricultural Zone: AG-1
865.4 28.1 The zone provides for arable farming as
the primary land use activity. The zone is
considered a prime arable zone in view
of the fertile soils and favourable climatic
conditions with adequate seasonal
rainfall for rainfed crop production.
- Haphazard settlement development should be avoided.
- Development within this zone should be in terms of settlement
development plans and where this is not feasible detailed layout plans
should be guide development.
- Site specific analyses and investigations should inform development in
the designated growth area.
- Development should be limited to the Development Plan boundary and
densification of development within the growth area should be achieved
before development overspills into adjacent Rural Village area.
- Development in settlements declared as Planning Areas would be
subject to the Town and Country Planning Act, the Development Control
Code and all relevant statutes.
- Sound planning principles should seek to prevent the incidence of land
use conflicts with adjoining land uses.
- Non-settlement uses within this zone should not be permitted within this
zone. Existing non-urban uses that fall within the Growth Area should
be phased out gradually.
- The mixed farming set up calls for the minimisation of land use conflicts
by separating incompatible through buffer zones and/or fencing between
land uses in the zone and adjoining land use zones.
- The size of agricultural plots should be small scale plots allowing
intensive farming practices.
- The allocation of new agricultural plots should be based on planning
guidance to avoid the prevalence of land use conflicts within the zone.
- Existing land use should be respected as they enjoy the existing use
right.
- It is crucial to ensure that land use activities in the Kgoro do not threaten
the highly vulnerable groundwater resources.
- The Land Board, Agricultural Land Use Managers, Physical Planners
and the farmers should bear in mind that this area is earmarked for
transformation to being the breadbasket for the District in addition to
making a significant contribution to the national economy in food
production.
- Allocation of land should prioritize arable agricultural production.
- Farms should be allocated based on a minimum of 150 hectares for
mechanized farming to be undertaken.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

232 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7175000 7210000
Legend
Rural Growth Area
Rural Village Area
Ag-1
AG-2
Sekhutlane Agro-Forestry
Ranches
RG-1b (Communal)
Ap-1 (Agro-Pastoral)
P-1gw
P-5 (Afforestation)
280000 315000 350000
Special Development Zone
Main (Primary) Road
Secondary Road
Local/Access Road
Track
Proposed Railway
District Boundary
Ag-in (Agro-Ind.Zone)
Kilometers
0 2.5 5 10 15
UTMZone35-DatumCape
Metlobo
Tswaaneng
Musi
Segwagwa
Mmathethe
Mokgomane
Sedibeng
B202
Mogoriapitse
Motsentshe
Tswaanyaneng
B101
Gamajalela
Mogwalale
Hebron
Mogojwegojwe
B102
Lorwana
Gathwane
Kgoro
Good Hope
Papatlo
Gopong
Leywana
Marusw
Bethel
Metlojane SOUTHERN DISTRICT Ngwatsau INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN Rakhun
Sheep Farm
PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES
MMATHETHE SUB-LAND BOARD
Logogane
Mabutsane
Moshupa
PhihitshwaneMaokane
Molapowabojang
Digawan
A1
Ramatlabama
Kanye
CHAPTER 9
Client:
Consultants:
Southern District Council
Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
B101
Leporung
B101
Phitshane Molopo
B101
Mmathethe
Phitsane Molopo Barolong
N
Scale: 1:400,000 Map 9.12
Dikhukhung
R.S.A
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD

Table 9.12: Mmathethe Sub-Land Board - Matrix of Land Use Compatibility
Land Use Zone
Land Use Zone
Land Use Activity P-1gw P-5 Ag-1 Ag-2 Ag-Fo Ap-1 Ranch Rg-1b RVA RGA Ag-In Land Use Activity P-1gw P-5 Ag-1 Ag-2 Ag-Fo Ap-1 Ranch Rg-1 RVA RGA Ag-In
Extensive Crop Production Cp In Pr Pr Co 14 Cp In Co 25 In In In Group living Facilities Co 20 In Co 7 Co 7 Co 6,12 Co 7 Co 7 Co 7 Cp Cp In
Intensive Crop Production Co 17 Co 14 Pr Pr Co 14 Pr Co 25 Co 25 Cp 9 Cp 9 In Rural village Co 20,8 In Co 8 Co 8 In Co 8 Co 8 Co 8 Pr Pr In
Organic Agriculture Pr Co Pr Pr Co 14 Pr In Co 25 Cp 14 Cp 14 In Low Intensity Urban In In In In In In In In In Cp In
Agro-Forestry Pr Cp Pr Pr Pr Pr Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp In High Intensity Urban In In In In In In In In In Cp In
Livestock Grazing (Intensive) Co 18 In Cp Cp Cp Pr Pr Pr In In In Sport and Recreation Cp Pr In In Co 12 In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp In
Livestock Grazing (Extensive) Cp Co Cp Cp Cp Pr Cp Pr In In In Tourism Co 20 Cp In In Co 12 In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp In
Livestock Farming Co 19,20 Co 5 Cp Cp Cp Co Pr Co In In In Civic and Community Co 20 Co 26 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Co 25 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Cp Cp Co 3,25
Wildlife farming Co 19,20 In Cp Cp Co 12 Co Cp Co In In In Cemetery Co 12 In Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Cp Cp In
Livestock Ranching In In In In In In Pr In In In In Waste disposal and processing In Co 21,15 In In Co 21 In In In Co 21,15 In Co 25
Game Ranching In In In In In In Co 25 In In In In Waste water treatment plant In Co 21,15 Co 21 Co 21 Co Co 21 Co 21 Co 21 Co 12 Co 21,15 Co 25
Wildlife (game) viewing In In In In Cp In In In In In In Storage of toxic and hazardous substances In In In In Co 5 In In In In In Co 25
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 233
Community wildlife use In Cp In In In In In In In In In
Wildlife conservation Co Cp In In In In In In In In In
Veldt product processing Cp Cp Cp Cp Pr Cp Cp Cp In In In
Safari hunting In In In In In In In In In In In
Animal product processing In In In In Co 13 Co Cp Co 13 Co Co Pr
Agricultural product processing major In In In In Cp In In In Co Co Pr
Agricultural product processing (local) Co 12 In Co 1 Co 1 Cp Co 1 Co 1 Co 1 Cp Cp Cp
Veterinary services Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Co
Stockholding and sale yards Co 20 In Co 2 Co 2 Cp Co 2 Co 1,2 Co 1,2 In Co 25 Pr
Sale and service of machinery use in agric. In In Co 1 Co 1 In Co 1 In In Cp Co 25 Pr
Warehousing Co 20 In In In In In In In Cp Cp 25 Pr
Forestry Pr Pr Cp Cp Pr Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Natural parks/reserves Cp Pr In In Co 18 In In In In In In
Historic monuments Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Co
Public uses and Structures Co 20 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp 3 Co 1,2 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp Cp Cp
Utility Installation, type A Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Co 9 Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Co 4 Cp
Utility Installation, type B H1 H1 H1 H1 Co 9 H1 H1 H1 Co 4 Co 4 Cp
Transport routes Co 21 Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Resources extraction Co 21 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 21 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5,12 Co 5,12 In
Mineral exploration Co 21 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 12 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 In In In
Mineral processing In In In In In In Co 5 Co 5 In In In
Heavy Industry In In In In In In In In In Co 21 Co 21
Light Industry Co 20 In In In In In In In Cp Cp Cp
Cottage Industry Co 20 In In In In In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp Cp
Commercial Development Co 20 In In In Co 21 In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp Cp
Farm Dwellings Co 20,6 In Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 In In
Notes:
1) May be permitted if the use is incidental to the overall land use in the area.
2) Only products which are essential for agro-pastoral activities shall be permitted.
3) Refer to uses conducted by or structure owned by the Central Government or local authorities to fulfill a
government function, activity or service for public benefit.
4) Include uses or structures, including transmission lines, used directly in the distribution of utility services. Type A
refers to those utility installations with minor impact on adjacent land uses.
5) Conditions apply to the storage of fuels and chemicals, the depth of excavation with strict guidelines for
rehabilitation.
6) Refers to dwelling located on and used in connection with a farm where agro-pastoral activities provide income to
the family occupying the dwelling.
7) May be conditionally approved if activities associated with proposed group living facilities are of agro-pastoral
nature.
8) May be approved through the use of the “small village” land use designation. Requires appropriate planning
justification.
9) Refer to small-scale gardens at the village level.
10) May be approved for the provision of access which will not restrict movement of wildlife.
11) May be approved if dwellings are used in connection with prevailing land use activity.
12) Subject to conditions and approval placed by relevant authorities.
13) May only be approved for small-scale units at the village level.
14) May be permitted for small scale agricultural activities. Requires appropriate studies on protective soil erosion
measures such as contour plaguing, zero tillage etc
15) May be approved where topological conditions allow appropriate development.
16) Restrictions apply on road types and construction
17) Refers to non-irrigated crop production. Restrictions apply to fertilizer application rates, with strict controls on the
application of pesticides and field operations.
18) Can be approved if stocking level (animals per hectare, guided by the relevant authorities) are consistent with the
area protection objectives at the local level.
19) The land use is normally incompatible, but may be conditionally approved. Require incorporation of appropriate
measures and environmental management practices. Refers mostly to housed establishment, engaged in
commercial, small animal husbandry.
20) Must be connected to deep sewerage, where practical or otherwise to an approved waste disposal system that
meets groundwater quality protection objectives.
21) Subject to approval after Environmental Impact Assessment.
22) Require incorporation of appropriate measures and environmental management practices in meeting
groundwater quality protection objectives.
23) Conditions apply to type and location of wastewater disposal systems Alternative wastewater treatment systems,
where approved by the relevant authorities may be accepted with ongoing maintenance requirements.
24) Activity is incompatible in a wellhead protection zone.
25) May be permitted if the proposed use does not alter character of the surrounding area in a manner substantially
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

234 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.12: Mmathethe Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
Restricted Arable
Agricultural Zone: AG-1
(cont.)
Agro – Industrial Zone:
Ag-In
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
2.7 0.1 This is one area designated for such use
in Mmathethe It is located along
transportation infrastructure on the edge
of Mmathethe.
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
- The clustering of small farms should be encouraged in order to make
rainfed crop production profitable. Farmers can hold their leases and
cultivate land by mechanized techniques. Alternatively farmers may
form cooperatives, agricultural associations or lease land to larger
entrepreneurs.
- Existing land use activities may be retained in the prime arable land
provided they do not impact negatively on the primary arable land use.
Measures should be put in place to prevent the negative impacts of
other land use activities in order to safeguard arable agricultural
production.
- It is fundamental that crops be adapted to the physical environment (i.e.
climate and soil)
- Farms should be based on planned farm layouts in line with the
recommended minimum plot sizes.
- While the bulk of the land is to be devoted to arable agriculture, there is
a need to retain vegetation communities in order to maintain the
ecosystem functional
- No additional watering boreholes should be allocated in the prime arable
land so as to ensure that the land is not diminished by competing land
use activities.
- The site should be used for the establishment of medium to large
industrial operations. Agro – industrial activities would support the
agricultural production sector through product processing.
- The sites should be considered as part of the adjoining settlement
Development Plans and should therefore be based on rational planning.
- Detailed agro – industrial layouts should be prepared and serviced with
the requisite service infrastructure.
- Industrial plots should be allocated to genuine entrepreneurs in order to
ensure that land is put to good use for the development of the District
- Industrial operations should be such that they do not cause
environmental degradation.
CHAPTER 9
Vulnerable
Groundwater Zone –
High Potential: P-1gw
180.3 5.9 The zone coincides with promising
Kanye Dolomite aquifer north of
Mmathethe and occurs around
Gathwane, Leywana, Digawana and
Kgoro.
- Land use activities which are inclined to cause pollution of the aquifer
should be prohibited.
- Environmental Impact Assessments should precede the undertaking of
those land use activities which are inclined to cause pollution of aquifers

Table 9.12: Mmathethe Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
Vulnerable
Groundwater Zone –
High Potential: P-1gw
(cont.)
- Investigations should be carried out to determine the effect of settlement
activities.
- A buffer zone should be provided between the settlements and aquifers
to minimize the possibility of pollutants reaching the aquifers.
Afforestation: P-5 72.6 2.4 This is an area with topographic
constraints blended with areas of scenic
beauty and erosion – prone landscapes
- The removal of vegetation and cultivation of erosion-prone landscapes
should be avoided as these may exacerbate environmental degradation.
- Livestock grazing on these fragile zones should seek to minimize
depletion of vegetation and the emergence of piospheres.
- Mining and resource extraction should be preceded by Environmental
Impact Assessments rehabilitation of land should be undertaken at the
expiration of mining activities.
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 235
Agro – Forestry 157.8 5.1 Occurs in the northeastern part of the
administrative area. The zone is set
aside as a forestry area through
permitting livestock farming and arable
agriculture at a small scale. The area is
prone to water erosion.
Existing Ranches 195.67 6.4 These are existing commercial ranches
allocated under the TGLP and newly
allocated ranches.
Communal Rangeland
Utilisation Zone: RG-1
623.0 20.3 The zone is designated as a communal
grazing area. Should be closed
monitored and measures taken to avoid
environmental degradation such as
through overgrazing.
- Only small scale livestock and arable production is recommended.
- Tree – planting should be interspersed with crop cultivation through wide
spacing.
- Minimisation of erosion-risk is achieved through tree planting.
- Ranches should be demarcated into paddocks for effective
management of rangeland resources.
- Fencing of ranches would minimize conflicts with adjoining land uses
namely the agro-pastoral zone and communal grazing areas where dual
grazing by commercial ranchers is not recommended.
- Farmers should consider diversification of ranches into wildlife farming
and related activities.
- Communal livestock grazing shall take precedence over other land uses
in the allocation of rights to use land.
- Where communal grazing is interwoven with arable agricultural
production the conflicting uses should be separated by fencing off fields.
- A borehole spacing rule of 8km shall be applied an. New application for
boreholes spaced less than 8 km apart should be preceded by an
analysis od the state of rangeland resources to establish potential
effects on resources.
- Existing land uses should be accorded respect and retained within the
zone. However, land use activities which are not ancillary to communal
grazing should not be given priority in allocation of land.
- Communal utilisation of boreholes is recommended.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

236 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.12: Mmathethe Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
Agro-Pastoral: AP-1 96.7 3.1 This is land with a potential for arable
farming but falling within a
predominantly grazing area.
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
- Small to medium arable farms to be allocated taking advantage of the
agricultural potential of the land.
- Allocation of boreholes should accord irrigated farming priority in order
to exploit the opportunities for irrigation agriculture.
- Communal grazing and arable farming can be practiced as mixed
activities with separation through fencing.
CHAPTER 9

240000 270000 300000
Mabutsane
Moshupa
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES
PITSANE MOLOPO SUB-LAND BOARD
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 237
7170000 7200000
B102
K g a l a g a d i
R . S . A
Lorolwane
Sekhutlane
Mabule
Tshedilamolomo
Marojane
B101
B102
Maokane
Dikhukhung
Kanye
Mmathethe
Phitsane Molopo Barolong
Kilometers
0 2.5 5 10 15
Metlobo
Tswaaneng
Leporung
Phitshane
Molopo
Legend
Rural Growth Area
Urban Growth Area
AG-2 Mmathethe
Ranches
RG-1 (Communal)
Ap-1 (Agro-Pastoral)
P-1gw
Client:
Consultants:
N
B101
Secondary Road
Local/Access Road
Proposed Road
Major Track
Mogoriapitse
District Boundary
Southern District Council
Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Scale: 1:400,000 Mokgomane Map 9.13
Sedibeng
B2
B1
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
T
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

238 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.14: Pitsane Molopo Sub-Land Board - Matrix of Land Use Compatibility
Land Use Zone
Land Use Activity P-1gw Ag-2 Ap-1 Ranch Rg-1 RVA RGA Land Use Activity P-1gw Ag-2 Ap-1 Ranch Rg-1b RVA RGA
Extensive Crop Production Cp Pr Cp In Co 25 In In Group living Facilities Co 20 Co 7 Co 7 Co 7 Co 7 Cp Cp
Intensive Crop Production Co 17 Pr Pr Co 25 Co 25 Cp 9 Cp 9 Rural village Co 20,8 Co 8 Co 8 Co 8 Co 8 Pr Pr
Organic Agriculture Pr Pr Pr In Co 25 Cp 14 Cp 14 Low Intensity Urban In In In In In In Cp
Agro-Forestry Pr Pr Pr Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp High Intensity Urban In In In In In In Cp
Livestock Grazing (Intensive) Co 18 Cp Pr Pr Pr In In Sport and Recreation Cp In In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp
Livestock Grazing (Extensive) Cp Cp Pr Cp Pr In In Tourism Co 20 In In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp
Livestock Farming Co 19,20 Cp Co Pr Co In In Civic and Community Co 20 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Cp Cp
Wildlife farming Co 19,20 Cp Co Cp Co In In Cemetery Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Cp Cp
Livestock Ranching In In In Pr In In In Waste disposal and processing In In In In In Co 21,15 In
Game Ranching In In In Co 25 In In In Waste water treatment plant In Co 21 Co 21 Co 21 Co 21 Co 12 Co 21,15
Wildlife (game) viewing In In In In In In In Storage of toxic and hazardous substances In In In In In In In
Community wildlife use In In In In In In In
Wildlife conservation Co In In In In In In
Veldt product processing Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp In In
Safari hunting In In In In In In In
Animal product processing In In Co Cp Co 13 Co Co
Agricultural product processing major In In In In In Co Co
Agricultural product processing (local) Co 12 Co 1 Co 1 Co 1 Co 1 Cp Cp
Veterinary services Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Stockholding and sale yards Co 20 Co 2 Co 2 Co 1,2 Co 1,2 In Co 25
Sale and service of machinery use in agric. In Co 1 Co 1 In In Cp Co 25
Warehousing Co 20 In In In In Cp Cp 25
Forestry Pr Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Natural parks/reserves Cp In In In In In In
Historic monuments Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Public uses and Structures Co 20 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp Cp
Utility Installation, type A Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Co 4
Utility Installation, type B H1 H1 H1 H1 H1 Co 4 Co 4
Transport routes Co 21 Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
Resources extraction Co 21 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5,12 Co 5,12
Mineral exploration Co 21 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 In In
Mineral processing In In In Co 5 Co 5 In In
Heavy Industry In In In In In In Co 21
Light Industry Co 20 In In In In Cp Cp
Cottage Industry Co 20 In In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp
Commercial Development Co 20 In In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp
Farm Dwellings Co 20,6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 In
Land Use Zone
Notes:
1) May be permitted if the use is incidental to the overall land use in the area.
2) Only products which are essential for agro-pastoral activities shall be permitted.
3) Refer to uses conducted by or structure owned by the Central Government or local authorities to fulfill a
government function, activity or service for public benefit.
4) Include uses or structures, including transmission lines, used directly in the distribution of utility services.
Type A refers to those utility installations with minor impact on adjacent land uses.
5) Conditions apply to the storage of fuels and chemicals, the depth of excavation with strict guidelines for
rehabilitation.
6) Refers to dwelling located on and used in connection with a farm where agro-pastoral activities provide
income to the family occupying the dwelling.
7) May be conditionally approved if activities associated with proposed group living facilities are of agropastoral
nature.
8) May be approved through the use of the “small village” land use designation. Requires appropriate planning
justification.
9) Refer to small-scale gardens at the village level.
11) May be approved if dwellings are used in connection with prevailing land use activity.
12) Subject to conditions and approval placed by relevant authorities.
13) May only be approved for small-scale units at the village level.
16) Restrictions apply on road types and construction
17) Refers to non-irrigated crop production. Restrictions apply to fertilizer application rates, with strict controls
on the application of pesticides and field operations.
18) Can be approved if stocking level (animals per hectare, guided by the relevant authorities) are consistent
with the area protection objectives at the local level.
19) The land use is normally incompatible, but may be conditionally approved. Require incorporation of
appropriate measures and environmental management practices. Refers mostly to housed establishment,
engaged in commercial, small animal husbandry.
20) Must be connected to deep sewerage, where practical or otherwise to an approved waste disposal system
that meets groundwater quality protection objectives.
21) Subject to approval after Environmental Impact Assessment.
22) Require incorporation of appropriate measures and environmental management practices in meeting
groundwater quality protection objectives.
23) Conditions apply to type and location of wastewater disposal systems Alternative wastewater treatment
systems, where approved by the relevant authorities may be accepted with ongoing maintenance
requirements.
24) Activity is incompatible in a wellhead protection zone.
25) May be permitted if the proposed use does not alter character of the surrounding area in a manner
substantially limiting, or precluding the use of surrounding properties for the principal uses.
26) May be approved if activity is used in connection with prevailing land use activity.
CHAPTER 9

Table 9.15: Molopo-Pitsane Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 239
Rural Growth Area 18.5 0.5 The zone is set aside for the growth of
settlements
Existing Ranches 1856.0 54.9 These are existing commercial ranches
allocated under the TGLP and newly
allocated ranches.
Communal Rangeland
Utilisation: RG-1
858.7 25.4 Occurs around Sekhutlane and
Lorolwane and to the east.
Agro –Pastoral: AP-1 313.9 9.3 This is an area with potential for arable
farming and is contiguous with the
communal grazing area.
Vulnerable
Groundwater Zone –
High Potential: P-1gw
- Development of settlements should be in terms of development plans or
detailed layout plans.
- Development Sekhutlane and Lorolwane should be in terms of the Land
Use Plans for these settlements.
- Conflicts should be avoided between settlement growth areas and he
surrounding ranches and agro-pastoral areas.
- Ranches should be demarcated into paddocks for effective
management of rangeland resources.
- Fencing of ranches would minimize conflicts with adjoining land uses
namely the agro-pastoral zone and communal grazing areas.
- Farmers should consider diversification of ranches into wildlife farming
and related activities.
- The extent of communal grazing areas around Sekhutlane and
Lorolwane is limited and constrained by surrounding ranches requiring
therefore that there be effective management of these areas.
- Utilisation of these lands should be limited to existing borehole owners
and residents of Sekhutlane and Lorolwane.
- Dual grazing by commercial ranchers on this land should be controlled.
- Management of grazing resources by the community through a
representative community is recommended.
- Monitoring of rangeland resources should be carried out regularly and
livestock numbers limited to the carrying capacity of the Land.
- Communal grazing is mixed with arable farming.
- Separation of these conflicting land uses is essential.
173.1 5.1 The zones coincide with Molopo aquifer. - Land use activities likely to pollute groundwater resources should be
prohibited.
- Comprehensive measures should be adopted to ensure that settlement
activities in this zone would not result in discharges which would pollute
the aquifer. In particular on-site sanitation facilities should not discharge
waste into the aquifer.
- Investigations should be carried out to determine water quality and stop
potential water pollutant in this zone.
- The discharge of chemicals from arable farming activities should be
avoided.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

240 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.15: Molopo-Pitsane Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
General Agricultural:
AG-2
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
141.4 4.2 The zone permits clustering of arable
fields and livestock farming projects.
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
- Incompatible land use activities should be separated.
- Small farm sizes are recommended for intensive farming.
- Existing land uses should be retained.
CHAPTER 9

240000 270000 300000 330000 360000
K w e n e n g
D i s t r i c t
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 241
7230000 7260000 7290000
Æ·T
Semane
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
PROPOSED LAND USE ZONES
MOSHUPA SUB-LAND BOARD
Mabutsane
Moshupa
Maokane
Kanye
Mmathethe
Phitsane Molopo Barolong
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
Lehoko
Mokhomma
Legend
Jwaneng
Urban Maokane Growth Area
Rural Growth Area
AG-2
Agro-Forestry
Ranches
Sese
Tsonyane
RG-1 (Communal)
Ap-1 (Agro-Pastoral)
P-2gw
P-5 (Afforestation)
Client:
Consultants:
Betesankwe
Special DevelopmentSesung
Zone
Seherelela
Main (Primary) Road
Secondary Road
Local/Access Road
Major Track
Proposed Railway
Kilometers Gasita
Southern District Council
Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
N
Scale: 1:550,000 Map 9.14
Æ·T
District Boundary
Tourism
0 5 10 20
UTMZone35-DatumCape
A2
Selokolela
Segwagwa
Ralekgetho
Lotlhakane
West
Moshaneng
Dinatshana
B202
B202
Moshupa
Kanye
A10
Manyana
Ranaka
Lekgolobotlo
A2
Ntlhantlhe
Magotlhwane
Lotlhakane
B105
Maisane
Molapowabojang
Mogojwegojwe Gopong
Kgomokasitwa
A2
South East
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

242 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.16: Moshupa Sub-Land Board - Matrix of Land Use Compatibility
Land Use Zone
Land Use Zone
Land Use Activity P-2gw P-5 Ag-2 Ag-Fo Ap-1 Ranch Rg-1 RGA UGA Land Use Activity P-2gw P-5 Ag-2 Ag-Fo Ap-1 Ranch Rg-1 RGA UGA
Extensive Crop Production Pr In Pr Co 14 Cp In Co 25 In In Group living Facilities Cp 20 In Co 7 Co 6,12 Co 7 Co 7 Co 7 Cp Cp
Intensive Crop Production Co 17 Co 14 Pr Co 14 Pr Co 25 Co 25 Cp 9 Co 9 Rural village Cp 20 In Co 8 In Co 8 Co 8 Co 8 Pr Pr
Organic Agriculture Cp Co Pr Co 14 Pr In Co 25 Cp 14 Cp 14 Low Intensity Urban Cp 20 In In In In In In Cp Cp
Agro-Forestry Cp Cp Pr Pr Pr Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp High Intensity Urban Co 20 In In In In In In Cp Cp
Livestock Grazing (Intensive) Co 18 In Cp Cp Pr Pr Pr In In Sport and Recreation Cp Pr In Co 12 In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp
Livestock Grazing (Extensive) Pr Co Cp Cp Pr Cp Pr In In Tourism Cp Cp In Co 12 In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp
Livestock Farming Cp 22 Co 5 Cp Cp Co Pr Co In In Civic and Community Cp Co 26 Co 3,25 Co 25 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Co 3,25 Cp Cp
Wildlife farming In In Cp Co 12 Co Cp Co In In Cemetery Cp 12 In Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Co 12 Cp Cp
Livestock Ranching In In In In In Pr In In In Waste disposal and processing In Co 21,15 In Co 21 In In In In In
Game Ranching In In In In In Co 25 In In In Waste water treatment plant Co 23 Co 21,15 Co 21 Co Co 21 Co 21 Co 21 Co 21,15 Co 21,15
Wildlife (game) viewing In In In Cp In In In In In Storage of toxic and hazardous substances Co 21,24 In In Co 5 In In In In In
Community wildlife use In Cp In In In In In In In
Wildlife conservation Co Cp In In In In In In In
Notes:
1) May be permitted if the use is incidental to the overall land use in the area.
Veldt product processing Cp Cp Cp Pr Cp Cp Cp In In 2) Only products which are essential for agro-pastoral activities shall be permitted.
Safari hunting In In In In In In In In In
3) Refer to uses conducted by or structure owned by the Central Government or local authorities to fulfill a
government function, activity or service for public benefit.
Animal product processing Co 21 In In Co 13 Co Cp Co 13 Co Co 21 4) Include uses or structures, including transmission lines, used directly in the distribution of utility services. Type A
Agricultural product processing major Co 20 In In Cp In In In Co Co 21
refers to those utility installations with minor impact on adjacent land uses.
5) Conditions apply to the storage of fuels and chemicals, the depth of excavation with strict guidelines for
Agricultural product processing (local) Cp In Co 1 Cp Co 1 Co 1 Co 1 Cp Co 21
rehabilitation.
Veterinary services Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp
6) Refers to dwelling located on and used in connection with a farm where agro-pastoral activities provide income to
the family occupying the dwelling.
Stockholding and sale yards Cp In Co 2 Cp Co 2 Co 1,2 Co 1,2 Co 25 Cp 7) May be conditionally approved if activities associated with proposed group living facilities are of agro-pastoral
Sale and service of machinery use in agric. Co 20 In Co 1 In Co 1 In In Co 25 Cp
nature.
8) May be approved through the use of the “small village” land use designation. Requires appropriate planning
Warehousing Co 20 In In In In In In Cp 25 Cp
justification.
Forestry Pr Pr Cp Pr Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp 9) Refer to small-scale gardens at the village level.
10) May be approved for the provision of access which will not restrict movement of wildlife.
Natural parks/reserves Cp Pr In Co 18 In In In In In 11) May be approved if dwellings are used in connection with prevailing land use activity.
Historic monuments Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp 12) Subject to conditions and approval placed by relevant authorities.
Public uses and Structures Cp 20 Cp 3 Cp 3 Co 1,2 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp 3 Cp Cp
13) May only be approved for small-scale units at the village level.
14) May be permitted for small scale agricultural activities. Requires appropriate studies on protective soil erosion
Utility Installation, type A Cp Cp 4 Cp 4 Co 9 Cp 4 Cp 4 Cp 4 Co 4 Co 4
measures such as contour plaguing, zero tillage etc
Utility Installation, type B H1 H1 H1 Co 9 15) May be approved where topological conditions allow appropriate development.
H1 H1 H1 Co 4 Co 4
16) Restrictions apply on road types and construction
Transport routes Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp Cp 17) Refers to non-irrigated crop production. Restrictions apply to fertilizer application rates, with strict controls on the
Resources extraction Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 21 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5,12 Co 5,12
application of pesticides and field operations.
18) Can be approved if stocking level (animals per hectare, guided by the relevant authorities) are consistent with the
Mineral exploration Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 Co 12 Co 5 Co 5 Co 5 In In
area protection objectives at the local level.
Mineral processing Co 5 In In In In Co 5 Co 5 In In
19) The land use is normally incompatible, but may be conditionally approved. Require incorporation of appropriate
measures and environmental management practices. Refers mostly to housed establishment, engaged in
Heavy Industry In In In In In In In Co 21 Co 21
commercial, small animal husbandry.
Light Industry Cp 20 In In In In In In Cp Cp
20) Must be connected to deep sewerage, where practical or otherwise to an approved waste disposal system that
meets groundwater quality protection objectives.
Cottage Industry Cp 20 In In In In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp 21) Subject to approval after Environmental Impact Assessment.
Commercial Development Cp 20 In In Co 21 In Co 25 Co 25 Cp Cp
22) Require incorporation of appropriate measures and environmental management practices in meeting
groundwater quality protection objectives.
Farm Dwellings Cp 20 In Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 Co 6 In In 23) Conditions apply to type and location of wastewater disposal systems Alternative wastewater treatment systems,
where approved by the relevant authorities may be accepted with ongoing maintenance requirements.
24) Activity is incompatible in a wellhead protection zone.
25) May be permitted if the proposed use does not alter character of the surrounding area in a manner substantially
limiting, or precluding the use of surrounding properties for the principal uses.
26) May be approved if activity is used in connection with prevailing land use activity.
.
CHAPTER 9

Table 9.17: Moshupa Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 243
Urban Growth Area 45.3 1.2 This is an area encompassing the
existing extent of Moshupa and the area
earmarked for the future growth of the
settlement. The future growth area of
Moshupa is directed to the west on
either side of the A10 road.
Rural Growth Area
(RGA)
35.3 0.9 The zone is earmarked for the growth of
tertiary and smaller settlements. It
coincides with the existing extent of the
settlements and future growth areas.
- The areal expansion of Moshupa should be guided by the operative
Moshupa Development Plan. Expansion beyond the operative
Development Plan boundary should be accommodated within the
designated Urban Growth Area.
- Densification should be the guiding principle in the development of the
settlement.
- Comprehensive measures should be taken to preserve the environment
from physical harm and pollution as a result urban uses. In particular,
the use of on-site sanitation systems that are inclined to cause pollution
of groundwater resources aquifer should be prohibited.
- The growth of the settlement toward vulnerable groundwater resources
should be managed carefully so as to direct away all urban uses which
are inclined to cause pollution of the aquifer.
- Haphazard settlement development should be avoided.
- Development within this zone should be in terms of settlement
development plans and where this is not feasible detailed layout plans
should be guide development.
- Site specific analyses and investigations should inform development in
the designated growth area.
- Development should be limited to the Development Plan boundary and
densification of development within the growth area should be achieved
before development overspills into adjacent Rural Village Area.
- Development in settlements declared as Planning Areas would be
subject to the Town and Country Planning Act, the Development Control
Code and all relevant statutes.
- Sound planning principles should seek to prevent the incidence of land
use conflicts with adjoining land uses.
- Non-settlements uses within this zone should not be permitted within
this zone. Existing non-urban uses that fall within the Growth Area
should be phased out gradually.
- Waste disposal and the use of on-site sanitation facilities should ensure
that pollutants are prevented from coming into contact with the
groundwater resources in Moshaneng Dolomite Aquifer.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

244 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.17: Moshupa Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
Agro – Forestry 938.4.1 23.7 Occurs in the southern and western part
of the administrative area. The zone is
set aside as a forestry area through
permitting livestock farming and arable
agriculture at a small scale. The area is
prone to water erosion.
Afforestation: P5 71.0 2.5 This is an area with topographic
constraints blended with areas of scenic
beauty and erosion – prone landscapes
General Agricultural:
AG2
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
237.3 6.4 The zone permits clustering of arable
fields and livestock farming activities
including piggery and poultry projects.
Agro – Pastoral: Ap-1 443.7 11.9 The land is contiguous with communal
rangelands general agricultural area and
is characterised with land suitable for
crop production.
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
- Only small scale livestock and arable production is recommended.
- Tree – planting should be interspersed with crop cultivation through wide
spacing.
- Minimisation of erosion-risk is achieved through tree planting.
- The removal of vegetation and cultivation of erosion-prone landscapes
should be avoided as these may exacerbate environmental degradation.
- Livestock grazing on these fragile zones should seek to minimize
depletion of vegetation and the emergence of piospheres.
- Mining and resource extraction should be preceded by Environmental
Impact Assessments Rehabilitation of land should be undertaken at the
expiration of mining activities.
- Agricultural cluster should be planned rationally ensuring the
minimisation of land use conflicts.
- The size of farms should be smaller than the NAMPAAD stipulated
minimum sizes to increase access to agricultural plots.
- Small to medium scale arable agriculture activities should be
accommodated to accord farmers the chance to diversify production.
CHAPTER 9

Table 9.17: Moshupa Sub-Land Board Land Use Management Plan
LAND USE ZONES
AREAL
EXTENT IN
KM 2
% OF LAND
BOARD
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF ZONE
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 245
Communal Rangeland
Utilisation:RG-1
85.9 2.3 The zone is designated as a communal
grazing area.
Existing Ranches 719.0 19.4 These are existing commercial ranches
allocated under the TGLP and newly
allocated ranches.
Vulnerable
Groundwater Low
Groundwater: P-2gw
312.7 8.4 The zone lies in the eastern part and has
highly vulnerability to groundwater
pollution.
- Communal livestock grazing shall take precedence over other land uses
in the allocation of rights to use land.
- Where communal grazing is interwoven with arable agricultural
production the conflicting uses should be separated by fencing off fields.
- A borehole spacing rule of 8km shall be applied an. New application for
boreholes spaced less than 8 km apart should be preceded by an
analysis od the state of rangeland resources to establish potential
effects on resources.
- No new livestock watering points should be allocated, the 3km within
special Development Zone abutting the A2 highway
- Existing land uses should be accorded respect and retained within the
zone. However, land use activities which are not ancillary to communal
grazing should not be given priority in allocation of land.
- Communal farmers should be encouraged to work together through a
committee that would coordinate and manage farming activities.
Communal utilisation of boreholes is recommended.
- The utilisation of rangeland resources should be closed monitored and
measures taken to avoid environmental degradation such as through
overgrazing.
- Ranch utilisation should be undertaken through paddock systems which
facilitate managed grazing.
- Ranches should be fenced to facilitate better management of ranches
and rangeland resources..
- Commercial ranchers are encouraged to diversify into other farming
activities such as wildlife farming.
- Land use activities which are inclined to cause groundwater pollution
should be prohibited.
- Care should be taken to ensure that on-site sanitation facilities do not
allow waste to pollute groundwater.
- The land should be devoted to crop production, forestry and grazing
- Erosion by water should be checked.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

CHAPTER 9
9.5 DETAILED LAYOUT PLANS FOR LOROLWANE, SEKHUTLANE AND
MAHOTSWANAE (RADS)
9.5.1 The Report of Survey revealed that the settlements of Lorolwane and Sekhutlane are
surrounded by commercial ranches. The result is that these remote area dweller
settlements are more-or-less nested by commercial ranches. This makes it imperative that
detailed layout plans be prepared to guide the future development growth of these
settlements. More importantly this is bound to make the provision of infrastructure and
community facilities and services cost effective and cost-efficient. Maps 9.15, 9.16 and
9.17 show the detailed layout plans for the settlements of Lorolwane, Sekhutlane and
Mahotshwane respectively.
9.5.2 Table 9.18 shows the land use disposition in the three settlements. The residential plots
provided are conceived as economic units where various activities such as market
gardening, maize farms, animal pens e.t.c can also take place.
Table 9.18: Land Use Disposition
LOROLWANE
Land Use Category No. of Plots Area( Ha) % of Total
Residential 650 78.27 64.5
Civic & Community 6 6.54 5.4
Commercial 3 1.60 1.3
Roads, Open Space & Reserves - 34.85 28.7
SEKHUTLANE
Land Use Category No. of Plots Area( Ha) % of Total
Residential 722 86.93 60.4
Civic & Community 8 8.76 6.1
Commercial 2 2.13 1.5
Roads, Open Space & Reserves - 46.1 32.0
MAHOTSWANE
Land Use Category No. of Plots Area( Ha) % of Total
Residential 510 61.42 65.1
Civic & Community 6 6.34 6.7
Commercial 1 0.74 0.8
Roads, Open Space & Reserves 25.84 27.4
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD & GISPlan (Pty)LYD
246 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

245400 246000 246600 247200
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
LOROLWANE -
DETAILED LAYOUT PLAN
Mabutsane
Moshupa
Maokane
Kanye
7195800 7196400 7197000
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 247
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
Client:
0 50 100 200 300 400
Consultants:
N
Legend
Meters
)
Mmathethe
Phitsane Molopo Barolong
Residential
Civic & Community
Commercial
Open Space
Road Buffer
UTMZone35-DatumCape
Southern District Council
Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Scale: 1:10,000 Map 9.15
Source: GISPlan (Pty)LTD & Environmetrix (PTY)LTD
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

248 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
7164600 7165200 7165800 7166400
252000 252600 253200 253800 254400
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
SEKHUTLANE -
DETAILED LAYOUT PLAN
Mabutsane
Legend
Meters
Moshupa
Maokane
0 75 150 300 450
UTMZone35-DatumCape
Kanye
Mmathethe
Phitsane Molopo Barolong
)
Residential
Civic & Community
Commercial
Open Space
Road Buffer
CHAPTER 9
Client:
Southern District Council
Consultants:
Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
Source: GISPlan (Pty)LTD & Environmetrix (PTY)LTD
N
Scale: 1:12,500 Map 9.17

216600 217200 217800
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED
LAND USE PLAN
MAHOTSHWANE -
DETAILED LAYOUT PLAN
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 249
7296600 7297200 7297800
Source: Environmetrix (Pty)LTD, GISPlan (Pty)LTD
0 50 100 200 300 400
UTM Zone 35 - Datum Cape
Client:
Consultants:
N
Mabutsane
Legend
)
Meters
Moshupa
Maokane
Southern District Council
Kanye
Mmathethe
Phitsane Molopo Barolong
Residential
Civic & Community
Commercial
Open Space
Road Buffer
Environmetrix (Pty) LTD
in association with GISPlan (Pty) LTD
Scale: 1:8,000 Map 9.18
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

CHAPTER 9
9.7 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION, MONITORING AND RESEARCH
9.7.1 It is critical that Southern District Land Use Plan proposals be implemented and that the
implementation and post-implementation phases of the Plan be monitored. The process
requires research by implementers and relevant stakeholders to have an understanding of
the operational aspects of the plan and changing conditions.
IMPLEMENTATION
9.7.2 Implementation means carrying out ‘the actions required to achieve specific goals or
objectives’ of the Plan (Conyers and Hills, 1984). Essentially, implementation of Southern
District Land Use Plan entails the actualization or operationalisation of plan goals and
objectives projected spatially through land use zoning and aspatially as land use
management proposals and guidelines.
9.7.3 The overall responsibility to implement Southern District Land Use Plan rests with the
Ministry of Lands through the Department of Lands, Ngwaketse and Rolong Land Boards
and Southern District Council. As it is a multi-sectoral plan in character, implementation is a
multi-sectoral, multi-disciplinary exercise shared between the various Central Government
Ministries, Departments, Parastatals and the Southern District’s communities.
Implementation requires that specific organisations, through key resource people be
charged with various responsibilities in the translation of plan goals and objectives into
action. Coordination of responsibilities and cooperation among the various role players in
the implementation process is crucial for successful implementation of this Plan.
9.7.4 The land use planner plays the central, coordinating role in plan implementation and bears
the responsibility to mobilise, organise and manage resources required for plan
implementation. The land use planner and all those charged with responsibilities and tasks
should have the following:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
Knowledge of what to do.
Resources required to perform responsibilities.
Ability to assemble, control and manage resources to achieve tasks.
Ability to communicate what is required and control the way others involved in
implementation do their responsibilities.
9.7.5 Full implementation of the Land Use Plan requires time. The realisation of the Plan goals
and objectives will be achieved through the ongoing delivery of Government programs,
policies and initiatives pursuant to relevant legislations, regulations and resource
management guidelines. The budget capacity of the District, the complexity of specific
projects and the need to integrate the Land Use Plan implementation with existing
legislated decision-making processes are key determinants of how many of the
implementation activities are achievable within a particular timeframe. Inevitably therefore,
a phased implementation programme of activities should be synchronized with the National
Development Plan (NDP) and District Development Plan periods.
INTERSECTORAL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
9.7.6 It is imperative that an Intersectoral Management Committee that would be coordinated to
oversee implementation and management of the Plan be set up. The committee should
bring together Central Government Departments, Parastatals, Local Authorities, Non-
Governmental Organisations, the Business Community and the Local Community.
250 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
9.7.7 Composition of the Committee should utilise existing organizational structures and filling in
the gaps in key resource personnel required. Regarding community involvement in the
Management Committee, existing community structures would inform community
representation. The proposed committee profile would have at its disposal, the requisite
skills and knowledge to assure successful implementation, establishment of priority projects
requiring intersectoral liaison and identification of key supporting actions necessary to
support the delivery of priority projects.
CAPACITY BUILDING
9.7.8 There is need for the building of the implementation capacity of the Land Boards and
respective Sub-Land Boards, District Council, various Central Government Departments
and the local community in the implementation of the Land Use Plan proposals. This
relates especially to the hiring of the requisite professional staff to take charge of
implementing the various aspects of the Plan. In recognition of the need for physical
planning and land use management in the District it is imperative that in order to effectively
carry out their mandated responsibilities in land management, Land Boards and Sub-Land
Boards should employ Physical Planners within their establishments.
9.7.9 Local communities’ involvement is the key to successful implementation. It is therefore
imperative that key members of the local community who are involved in implementation be
trained to acquire the relevant skills they require to execute some aspects of the plan.
INTEGRATED LANDU USE PLAN
251

252 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.19: Implementation
GOALS/OBJECTIVES TO BE
ACHIEVED
To conserve and enhance the District’s
land base for the continued production of
food
To increase the productivity and
economic viability of agricultural
holdings.
To reduce land use conflicts between
arable and non-arable agricultural
activities.
A RABLE AGRICULTURE
ACTION REQUIRED
- Develop a long range strategy to conserve
productive arable lands.
- Discourage conversion of designated and
productive arable land into non-arable uses.
- Make land use plans flexible to maintain productive
arable land.
- Allocate economically viable arable plots.
- Facilitate extension of arable fields.
- Encourage non producing farmers to lease land for
productive cultivation.
- Repossess arable land when development period
expires without cultivation
- Direct crop cultivation to fertile soil and favourable
climate.
- Identify crops varieties suitable for the agro-climatic
conditions.
- Provide fertilizers and pesticides to farmers.
- Enable farmers to exploit irrigation opportunities.
- Protect land zoned for arable agriculture through
enforcement of relevant zoning regulations.
- Fence off arable fields and separate from
conflicting land use activities.
- Establish non-arable agricultural activities at
designated zones.
- Protect arable land from encroachment by
settlements livestock grazing e.t.c.
- Establish agro-industrial activities at designated
zones.
RESPONSIBILITY
MoA
DTRP
NLB
RLB
MoA
NLB
RLB
Relevant Government
Departments
Communities
MLH
MoA
DTRP
Farmers
REQUIRED
RESOURCES
Land Use Officers (Agric)
Lands Officers
Physical Planners
Land Use Officers (Agric)
Lands Officers
Physical Planners
Technical Officers
Hydrologists
Public Educator
Land Use Officers (Agric)
Lands Officer
Physical Planners
PROGRAMMING
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
CHAPTER 9

Table 9.19: Implementation (cont.)
G ENERAL RANGELAND
GOALS/OBJECTIVES TO BE
ACHIEVED
ACTION REQUIRED
RESPONSIBILITY
REQUIRED
RESOURCES
PROGRAMMING
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 253
To manage District rangelands in an
integrated, coordinated and participatory
approach with a strong local focus that
includes local stakeholders.
To diversify use of rangelands for the
enhancement of the community’s social
and economic upliftment as well as the
ecological well-being of the District.
To increase rangeland use values in
livestock-dominated areas (ranches and
communal areas)
To improve ecological understanding
and sensitive management of the
District’s rangeland resources.
To detect and monitor rangeland
resource conditions and trends for
rangeland conservation.
- Institute participatory processes recognizing
aspirations of residents in rangeland management.
- Develop locally generated rangeland management
strategies.
- Involve local communities in decisions affecting locals
in rangeland management.
- Involve local communities in rangeland legislation and
development processes.
- Identify alternative and multiple uses of rangelands
through low-impact or non-consumptive resource uses.
- Explore in-depth (village level) investigation of local
rangeland potentials.
- Diversify livestock products.
- Introduce flexibility in land use conditions of ranches to
include wildlife and tourism.
MoA
Communities
MEWT
MoA
Communities
NGO’s
MEWT
MoA
Communities
Rangeland Mangers
Land Use Officers (Agric)
Public Educators
Range Managers
Wildlife Officers
Animal Health Production
Officers
Public Educator
E NVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE RANGELAND MANAGEMENT
- Acquisition by range managers of knowledge on
climate, grazing pressure and invasive bush
encroachment.
- Maintain livestock numbers within carrying capacity of
rangelands.
- Impose realistic limits on borehole distribution.
- Monitor rangeland resources around boreholes in
terms of stock numbers bush encroachment and land
degradation.
- Employ fire management strategies in grazing areas.
- Put in place a permanent monitoring program on niche
grazing resources.
- Utilise satellite (remote sensing) technology in
monitoring rangeland conditions.
MoA
NLB
RLB
MEWT
MoA
DMS (Dept.of
Meteorol. Services)
BRIMP,
MEWT
Range Managers
Public Educators
Land Use Officers (Agric)
Metrologists.
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
Short - Medium
Term (2005/15)
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

254 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.19: Implementation (cont.)
GOALS/OBJECTIVES TO BE
ACHIEVED
To ensure ecological sustainability of the
District’s rangeland resource use values
and effective pastoral management
practices.
To maintain and enhance the District’s
agricultural products industry as a longterm
and sustainable industry.
To maintain communal rangelands as
contiguous grazing areas.
E NVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE RANGELAND MANAGEMENT ( CONT. )
ACTION REQUIRED
- Integrate work of research scientist’s rangeland officers
and local communities in addressing rangeland
problems.
- Physical planning to zone land to accommodate agroindustries.
- Develop agriculture related industries to promote a
viable agricultural resource base.
RESPONSIBILITY
MoA
Relevant
Government
Departments
MEWT
MoA
NLB
RLB
DTRP
Private
Sectors
Communities
C OMMUNAL RANGELAND GRAZING
- Ensure that communal rangelands remain contiguous
without fencing except when necessary.
MoA
Communities
REQUIRED
RESOURCES
MoA
Relevant Governments
Departments
Range Managers
Communities
Physical Planner
Land Use Officers (Agric)
Entrepreneurs
Range Managers
Animal Health and
Production Officers
PROGRAMMING
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
CHAPTER 9
To utilise communal rangelands within
the limits of their sustainable carrying
capacity.
- Monitor production and consumption biomass by
livestock,
- Carry out periodic livestock censuses.
- Maintain livestock population within rangeland carrying
capacity.
MoA
Livestock farmers
Range Managers
Animal Health and
Production Officers
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
To prevent land use conflicts between
communal grazing areas and other land
use activities.
- Separate communal grazing areas from adjoining
conflicting uses through fencing.
- Prohibit incompatible land use activities from
communal grazing areas.
- Fence communal grazing areas from transportation
infrastructure.
MoA
Communities
Land Use Officers (Agric)
Road Engineers
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009

Table 9.19: Implementation (cont.)
C OMMMERCIAL LIVESTOCK FARMING (RANCHING)
GOALS/OBJECTIVES TO BE
ACHIEVED
ACTION REQUIRED
RESPONSIBILITY
REQUIRED
RESOURCES
PROGRAMMING
To resolve problems associated with
dual grazing practices of farmers from
leased ranches.
- Institute control over dual grazing. NLB Animal Health and
Production Officers
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
To reduce ranch-settlement conflicts in
competition for land.
- Limit ranches to 20 km from settlements.
- Direct settlement growth areas away from ranches.
DTRP
NLB
RLB
Physical Planner
Land Board Technical
Officers
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 255
To facilitate profitable utilisation of
ranches.
To improve ranch and livestock
management for efficient and increased
production.
To prevent land use conflicts between
the Wildlife Management Area and other
land use activities.
To coordinate, plan and manage the
WMA as a contiguous landscape with
wildlife utilisation as the primary use.
- Allocation of ranches to ensure allocatees would
engage in commercial farming.
- Permit ranchers to diversify farming.
- Lift restrictions that compromise realization of profits by
ranchers.
- Adapt livestock farming to range resources in space
and time.
- Give range users/managers access to information on
range conditions.
- Train range users on sustainable rangeland
management.
W ILDLIFE
- Prepare a detailed management plan.
- Prohibit incompatible land use activities from WMA.
- Involve communities in resolution of WMA land use
conflicts.
- Provide 500 m wide buffer zone to WMA.
- Develop WMA as a tourist base through wildlife
viewing and hunting.
- Designate wildlife watering points as game viewing
areas.
NLB
RLB
MoA
MoA
DAHP
DWNP
Communities
Consultants
MEWT
DWNP
Local communities
NGO’s
MEWT
Animal Health and
Production Officers
Wildlife Officers
Animal Health and
Production Officers
Public Educator
Wildlife Officers
Public Educator
Wildlife Officers
Tourism
DWA
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

256 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.19: Implementation (cont.)
GOALS/OBJECTIVES TO BE
ACHIEVED
To encourage local participation in the
sustainable utilisation of wildlife
resources in the District.
To protect Bathoen Bird Sanctuary from
encroachment by conflicting land use
activities with a view to promoting
nature conservation.
To provide comprehensive planning
guidance for rational settlement
development.
W ILDLIFE ( CONT.)
ACTION REQUIRED
- Develop community institutions to manage wildlife
resources.
- Encourage a sense of ownership of resources by
communities adjacent to CBNRMs from which they
directly benefit.
- Fence off the bird sanctuary and prevent
encroachment by incompatible uses.
S ETTLEMENTS
- Land Boards and Sub-Land Boards should create
capacity for physical planning and land use
management by employment of Physical Planners.
- Prepare Development Plans for Primary, Secondary
and Tertiary Centres or detailed settlement layout plans
for smaller settlements.
- Contain settlement growth within settlement
boundaries and avoid environmentally sensitive areas
and premature displacement of prime arable land,
-
RESPONSIBILITY
DWNP
Local communities
NGO’s
MEWT
MEWT
DTRP
NLB
RLB
MEWT
REQUIRED
RESOURCES
Wildlife Officers
Wildlife Officers
Physical Planners
Physical Planner
PROGRAMMING
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009
CHAPTER 9
VULNERABLE GROUNDWATER RESOURCES
To protect groundwater resources from
pollution.
- Prohibit pollutive activities and on-site sanitation
systems on promising aquifers.
- Require Environmental Impact Assessments for
potentially pollutive activities on aquifers.
- Define well-head protection zones around sources of
drinking water,
- Direct cemeteries away from aquifers and rivers.
- Monitor pollution-vulnerable groundwater resources
periodically.
DGS
MEWT
NLB
RLB
DTRP
Communities
Physical Planner
Hydro geologists
Water Engineers
Public Educator
Immediate (Short
Term) 2005-2009

MONITORING AND RESEARCH
9.7.10 Monitoring constitutes a crucial element in the implementation of the Southern District Land Use Plan. Monitoring of the Plan entails assessment
of the extent to which the goals and objectives are being achieved through the adopted management strategies. It is based on ongoing research
programmes and through assessment of progress in achievement of objectives using issues and defined measurement indicators. Results from
monitoring should then be used as adaptive management tools indicating where adjustments in strategies, Government and community
programmes, policies and procedures are required for effective realization of stated objectives. Table 9.20 provides guidelines for monitoring the
various aspects of the Land Use Plan.
Table 9.20: Monitoring
LAND USE ISSUE AND INDICATOR RESPONSIBILITY INTERVENTION ( PROACTIVE / RESPONSIVE ) ACTION
A RABLE AGRICULTURE
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 257
Encroachment by settlements
DTRP
NLB
RLB
SDC
- On site investigations by relevant officers.
- Officers to measure extent of encroachment on
the ground in comparison with Plan proposals.
Encroachment by livestock grazing Communities - Continuous management of fields during
cropping and tending of livestock by crop farmers
and livestock farmers.
- Check if grazing and cultivation are separated by
fence.
Allocated arable land never cultivated or
remains follow over long periods.
Haphazard mixing of land use activities with
arable agriculture.
Low productivity, low economic returns and no
strengthening of District as breadbasket
NLB
RLB
Department of
Crop Production
NLB
RLB
MoA
Communities
Department of
Crop Production.
- Surveillance of arable fields and consultation with
owners to determine reasons for non-production
and state implications on tenure.
- On-site checks by relevant officers and reports
from communities affected. Ascertain if land use
activities are permitted within specific land uses
against Land Use Compatibility Matrix.
- Investigate soil fertility, farming practices and
techniques, crop varieties and application of
production enhancing inputs and management.
- Prepare Settlement Development plans for all
settlement categories.
- Development Plan boundaries should coincide
with Water works boundary.
- No development outside Development Plan
boundary.
- Prohibit livestock grazing where it is incompatible.
- Separate fields from grazing areas.
- Consider cases based on merit
- Repossess fields.
- Reallocate fields.
- If mixing of land use uspermitted render advice on
resolving the problems.
- Order discontinuance of incompatible uses.
- Educate farmers on better management practices.
- Advise on more productive farming practices
- Recommend suitable crop varieties.
- Encourage application of fertilizers, pesticides etc.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

258 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.20: Monitoring (cont.)
LAND USE ISSUE AND INDICATOR RESPONSIBILITY INTERVENTION ( PROACTIVE / RESPONSIVE ) ACTION
Non-irrigation of potentially irrigable land Department of
Crop Production
DWA
Adverse climatic conditions
MoA
Department of
Meteorological
Services
Depletion of grazing resources over a wide area
of rangeland.
Piospheres of degraded land and bush
encroachment around boreholes.
Conflicting land and unauthorised use activities
in communal grazing areas.
Livestock within road reserves and loss of
livestock along transportation infrastructure.
Communities
MoA (AHP)
MEWT
MoA
MEWT
NLB
RLB
NLB
RLB
SDC
Department of
Roads
BR
Communities
NLB
RLB
A RABLE AGRICULTURE ( CONT.)
- Establish availability of water for irrigation and
whether water abstraction infrastructure has
been provided.
- Interview farmers on crop production levels over
specific seasons and periods.
- Establish predictability and reliability of weather
conditions and information from Department of
Meteorological Services.
C OMMUNAL LIVESTOCK FARMING
- Undertake rangeland grazing resource survey
over wide areas designated for communal
grazing to determine cause of resource loss.
- Carry out studies on the condition of rangeland
around boreholes noting the extent of range
degradation from boreholes in comparison with
distance further away.
- Map the information and get an overall
perception of range depletion over a wide area.
- Routine surveillance of land use activities and
interviews with communities against Land Use
Plan provisions.
- Surveys, interviews with farmers and research
from relevant sources of public data on livestock
deaths due to accidents.
- Demarcate and allocate fields on fertile soils.
- Drill irrigation boreholes.
- Relate crop farming to weather conditions and
trends.
- Suggest grazing management practices by
communal livestock farmers.
- Limit livestock numbers to the carrying capacity of
land and available biomass.
- Limit the number of livestock around boreholes to
the capacity of the range around boreholes.
- Redistribute livestock across the range to relieve
areas around boreholes of intense pressure.
- Employ measures to deal with weedy growth and
bush encroachment.
- Rehabilitate degraded land through appropriate
reclamation measures.
- Take appropriate action or order discontinuance of
activities.
- Fence off roads and railway lines from communal
rangelands.
CHAPTER 9

Table 9.20: Monitoring (cont.)
LAND USE ISSUE AND INDICATOR RESPONSIBILITY INTERVENTION ( PROACTIVE / RESPONSIVE ) ACTION
C OMMERCIAL LIVESTOCK FARMING
Dual grazing by ranchers.
MoA
NLB
RLB
- Surveillance of rangeland resources and
interviews with farmers.
- Determine effect of dual grazing on carrying
capacity.
- Recommend abolition of dual grazing rights.
- If dual grazing is permissible limit the number of
livestock to carrying capacity and rangeland
resources.
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 259
Conflicts between ranch and adjoining land
uses.
Ranch – settlement conflicts
No grazing management plan
Under-utilised ranches
Conflicts between WMAs and incompatible land
use activities.
Community-Based National Resource
Management Areas are under-utilised and
devoted to incompatible uses
Communities
MoA
NLB
RLB
NLB
RLB
DTRP
SDC
MoA
Ranchers
MoA
NLB
RLB
Ranchers
DWNP
Communities
MEWT
DWNP
Communities
NGOs
NLB
MEWT
- Establish the nature of conflicts and causes
through surveillance and interviews with
communities.
- Determine distance between ranches and
settlements. Compare with Plan stipulations and
against the required buffer.
- Interview ranchers and establish how rangeland
resources are managed in terms of whether
carrying capacity of land is adhered to or how
grazing is managed.
- Undertake inspection of ranches to determine
level of utilisation of ranches and potential
alternative uses. Interview with ranchers
essential.
W ILDLIFE
- Surveillance of uses being undertaken with WMA
and establish if boundaries are fenced as
recommended and buffer requirements satisfied.
- Undertake a surveillance of CBNRMs and
conduct interviews with communities to solicit
views on utilisation levels and value of CBNRMs
to their livelihoods.
- Require that ranches be fenced to separate them
from adjoining land uses.
- Take appropriate action to resolve conflicts
- Settlement growth should be directed away from
settlements with a distance of 20 km in between.
- Carrying capacity of the ranch should be adhered
to.
- Ranch should be divided into paddocks to manage
and conserve grazing resources.
- Suggest optimum utilisation levels of ranches.
- Render advice on diversification of farming
activities on ranchers.
- All non-wildlife or tourism-related land uses should
be prohibited from the WMA.
- Provide a 500 meters buffer zone between WMA
and surrounding land.
- Prepare a detailed management plan for the area.
- Utilise the area for tourism purposes with adjoining
communities as the prime beneficiaries.
- Stock up the CBRNMs with wildlife and establish
wildlife viewing points at watering points.
- Communities must be involved in management
and be given a sense of ownership of the area
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN

260 INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Table 9.20: Monitoring (cont.)
LAND USE ISSUE AND INDICATOR RESPONSIBILITY INTERVENTION ( PROACTIVE / RESPONSIVE ) ACTION
Conflicts between sanctuary and encroachment
activities.
Settlements develop in an unplanned fashion
characterised by land use conflicts
Fertile arable land invaded by settlement
expansion.
Settlement development on environmentally
sensitive areas
Settlement Sprawl
MEWT
SDC
NLB
SDC
DTRP
NLB
RLB
SDC
NLB
RLB
SDC
NLB
RLB
MWET
SDC
NLB
RLB
B IRD SANCTUARY
- Carry out a survey of the area and interview
sanctuary managers to establish the effect and
reason for encroachments and causes of
conflicts..
S ETTLEMENTS
- Undertake surveys, interviews with residents and
identify the resultant problems.
- Undertake the preparation of settlement
development plans in the district.
- Carry out site visits to check displacement of
arable fields.
- Find out if displacement is based on rational
planning guidance or haphazard settlement
growth.
- Carryout onsite assessments of environmental
impacts of development in sensitive
environments and conduct interviews with
affected parties.
- Study the settlement fabric land spatial structure
to determine causes of sprawl and project
findings on a map.
- Clearly demarcate sanctuary boundary and fence
it.
- Prohibit all incompatible uses within the sanctuary.
- Demonstrate the importance of the sanctuary to
the community.
- Development of all settlements should be in terms
of comprehensive settlement development plans
within defined settlement boundaries.
- Existing built-up areas should be rationalised and
upgraded.
- Development plan boundaries should coincide
with the Waterworks boundaries.
- As much as possible direct settlement growth
away from fertile arable land.
- Where arable land is designated for settlement
expansion in terms of Development Plans avoid
premature displacement of arable farming
activities.
- Direct all settlement development away from
sensitive environments
- Where existing settlement constitute a threat to
the environment institute remedial action for risk
minimisation.
- Settlement development should be guided by
development plans avoiding sprawl through
managed compact development.
- Non-physical constraints to settlement
development should be overcome to avoid sprawl.
-
-
-
-
-
CHAPTER 9

Table 9.20: Monitoring (cont.)
LAND USE ISSUE AND INDICATOR RESPONSIBILITY INTERVENTION ( PROACTIVE / RESPONSIVE ) ACTION
VULNERABLE GROUNDWATER RESOURCES
Groundwater resource pollution
DGS
DWA
SDC
NLB
RLB
- Undertake tests to measure and monitor
contamination of groundwater resources. The
Department of Water Affairs should carry out
periodic tests in vulnerable areas and promising
aquifers.
- Environmental Impact Assessments should be
undertaken prior to permitting development likely
to pollute aquifers.
- Prohibit land use activities with a contaminating
recharge effect on aquifers
- Define well-head protection zones to protect
groundwater sources of drinking water.
- Direct settlement growth away from aquifers.
- Cemeteries, on-site sanitation facilities, fertilizers,
pesticides and similar should not be permitted on
aquifers.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN 261

CHAPTER 9
REFERENCE
Arntzen J and Fidzani (1998) Incentives for sustainable National Resource Management
and Economic Diversification in Botswana
Arntzen J etal. Communal Rangelands in Botswana – less Subsistence, More Commerce
and Fewer Beneficiaries
Central Statistics Office (2002). 2001 Population and Housing Census: Population of
Towns, Villages and Associated Location in August 2001, April 2002.
Central Statistics Office (2002). Agriculture Statistics Report 1998. June 2002
Central Statistics Office (2003). Education Statistics 2001 March 2003
Department of Geological Surveys (1196) National Ground Water Pollution Vulnerability
Map(1:1000 000) and Explanatory Notes. Lobatse.
Department of Geological Surveys (1984). The Potential for Quicklime Production in
Botswana. Mineral Report No.7
Department of Geological Surveys (1995). Ground Water Vulnerability Map of Kanye Area.
Report No.7. Lobatse.
Department of Land and Regional Planning (1995) Study of the 15km Zone Either Side of
the Trans-Kalahari.
Department of Sanitation and Waste Management (2001). National Rural Sanitation
Programme: - Planning Workshop Report. Ministry of Local Government.
Department of Town and Regional Planning (1994). Southern District Settlement Strategy
(1991-2011) Southern District Council, Jwaneng Town Council, Ministry of Local
Government Lands and Housing.
Department of Town and Regional Planning (1998). Report on the National Settlement
Policy, Ministry of Local Government, Lands and Housing September 1998.
De Wit P. V and Bekker R.P (1990). Explanatory Note on the Soil Map of the Republic Of
Botswana. AG.BOT/85/011 Field Document 30. Soil Mapping and Advisory Services
Botswana. FAO. UNDP and GOB Gaborone, Botswana.
Ells A.J.E and Rowntree K.M Water Resources in the Savanna Regions of Botswana.
Geoflux (Pty) LTD (2002) State of the Environment Report. National Conservation Strategy
Co-ordination Agency. Ministry of Environment, Wildlife and Tourism. September 2002.
Kaizer E.J, Godschalk D.R and Chaplin F.S (1995). Urban Land Use Planning.
Largestedt E. Jacks. G and Seje F (1994) Nitrate in Ground Water and N.Circulation in
Eastern Botswana Environmental Geology 23:60-64
Lawrence A.R, Mac Donald D.M.J etal (2001) Guidelines for Assessing the Risk to Ground
Water from On-site Sanitation British Geological Survey Commissioned Report CR/01/142
Lewis W.J, Foster S.S.D and Drase B.S (1982). The Risk of Ground Water Pollution by Onsite
Sanitation in Developing Countries. International Reference Centre for Waste Disposal
Report No.01/82. IRC WD/EAWAG, Dubendort Switzerland.
262 DRAFT LAND USE PLAN

SOUTHERN DISTRICT INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
Lewis W.J, Foster S.S.D and Drase B.S (1980). A Detailed Evaluation of the Pollution
Hazard to Village Water Supply Boreholes in the Eastern Botswana Report GS 10/4.
Department of Geological Surveys, Botswana.
Ministry of Lands and Housing. Kweneng District Integrated Land Use Plan.
Ministry of Local Government Lands and Housing and Ministry of Agricultural Development.
The Fencing Components Implementation Procedures and Guidelines.
Mompoloki D.C Fencing of Communal Lands for Ranching in Botswana.
Opelo J.R (2000). Nitrate Pollution in Botswana – A Desk Study, Unpublished Report.
Department of Sanitation and Waste Management. Gaborone.
Republic of Botswana (2003). National Development Plan 9 (2003/04 – 2008/09). Ministry
of Finance. March 2003.
Republic of Botswana (1975). National Policy on Tribal Grazing Land. Government Paper
No 2 of 1975.
Republic of Botswana (1996). State Land Act (Cap.32:01)
Republic of Botswana (1971). Tribal Land Act (Cap32:02)
Republic of Botswana (1984). Tribal Land (Amendment) Act of 1994. No 10 of 1994.
Republic of Botswana (1993). Tribal (Amendment) Act of 1993. No.14 of 1993.
Republic of Botswana (1980) Town and Country Planning Act (Cap32:09)
Republic of Botswana, Land Survey Act (Cap.33:01)
Republic of Botswana. (1990). Land Survey (Amendments) Act, No.7of 1990.
Republic of Botswana (1956). Boreholes Act (Cap.34:05).
Republic of Botswana (1990) Tourism Policy. Government Paper No.2 of 1990.
SMEC (1991). Botswana National Water Master Plan Study. Volume 9. Gaborone.
Southern District Council etal (2003). Southern District Development Plan 6 (2003-2009).
Ministry of Local Government.
Southern District Council etal (1997) Southern District Development Plan 5 (1997-2003).
Ministry of Local Government, Lands and Housing.
South Eastern Region Master Plan (2003-2017)
Tribal Consulting Engineers Ltd (2002). National Master Plan for Agricultural Development.
Final Report Vol 4. Climate, Soil and Water. Ministry of Agriculture.
DRAFT LAND USE PLAN
263