The government has given a green light for the construction of a modern highway linking Arusha and Mara regions through the Serengeti National Park, putting the great wildebeest migration in the park at risk.
The decision ends a three-year-green activists’ protest against the proposed 480km Arusha-Musoma tarmac road, saying it will interfere with the annual migration of some 1.8 million wildlife through the heart of Serengeti.
Isidor Shirima Arusha Regional Commissioner told the The Guardian on Sunday that President Jakaya Kikwete had to intervene by highlighting socio-economic significance of the proposed road for the Tanzania National Parks Authority (TANAPA) to buy the idea.
However, the new highway will cut through the Serengeti across which big herds of wildlife march by the tens of thousands annually. Meanwhile, a traditional elephant migration route would also be divided by it.
It could not be established immediately what made TANAPA accept the routing they fought against for three years or if political instructions came down on them like the proverbial tonne of bricks. But the unusual silence of regular sources within and close to TANAPA speaks volume for itself.
“This issue is no longer in our corridors. The ball is now in the court of TANROADS,” TANAPA Public Relations Manager, Pascal Shelutete said in telephone, hang-up.
Serengeti National Park, which shares the ecosystem with the Maasai Mara Game Reserve in Kenya, has been described as sensitive nature conserved site in Africa and needed an international concern.
Regional Manager for Tanzania Roads Agency (TANROADS) Deusdedit Kakoko has said the cost of the project is $480-million, out of which $260-million would cover the Arusha-Serengeti section and $220-million for Serengeti-Musoma.
According to Kakoko, the real work would begin early 2012, after a feasibility study is completed at the end of this year.
“In January, 2011 TANROADS will mobilise resources for the project as well as floating tenders for consultants, and the real works should be underway by early 2012” Kakoko explained.
The freeway which is projected to be one of the busiest highways in the northern zone will stretch from Mto-wa-Mbu junction on Arusha - Ngorongoro road to Engaruka-Engaresero area, Lake Natron shores, Loliondo, Serengeti’s Kleins Corner en-route to Musoma town.
Proponents of the road reportedly considered the impact of the main highway leading through Mikumi National Park in Tanzania, where a tarmac road runs through the park towards Mbeya, but the sanctuary is limited to smaller numbers of animals crossing the road.
In 2006, USA Today and ABC-TV's Good Morning America, a multi-disciplined panel named the Serengeti sanctuary covering 14,763 sq. km, Site of "The Great Migration" as the Seventh New Wonder of the World.
The annual Great Migration of over 1.8 million wildebeest and 200,000 zebras is one of the most fascinating aspects of life on the Serengeti.
The animals spend most of their time in the Serengeti, 8-9 months a year, because of the availability of ample food resources, attracting most tourists.
Author Bruce Feiler (Walking in the Bible), one of the panelists who selected the Seven New Wonders, notes in USA Today that "the Serengeti is not only a natural wonder that takes your breath away, but it symbolizes years of human endeavor to conserve the natural world."
12 June 2010
Tanzania finalising marine oil spill contingency plan
Government plans are at an advanced stage to implement a National Marine Oil Spill Contingency Plan in a move to curb pollution in Tanzania's territorial waters.
“Coastal environment is under pressure from inhabitants and visitors to the coast, maritime transportation activities in ports and shipping lanes...that’s why we speeding up the plan to protect marine resources,” said Infrastructure Development permanent secretary Omar Chambo at the opening of a workshop on the National Environmentally Sensitive Areas and the National Oil Spill Contingency Plan and the Environmental Policy on the use of dispersants.
The meeting was organized on Wednesday by the Surface and Marine Transport Regulatory Authority (Sumatra) with the objective of protecting coastal and marine areas from pollution, including oil spills and other related hazards.
The meeting was part of a regional project implemented by nine Western India Ocean countries - Tanzania, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Comoros, Sychelles and Reunion, South Africa and Mozambique - which are working together in making their coastal and marine areas safer for marine transport.
The PS described the national oil spill contingency plan, which is in the pipeline, as important tool for responding to oil spill and other marine pollution.
“An important component of the contingency plan is an environmental oil spill sensitivity ranking. This is key tool to the pollution response team in the mitigation of an oil spill or other marine pollution incident,” he said.
In this regard, he added, preparation of an environmental oil spill sensitivity ranking of the coastal areas of Tanzania could be useful in the finalization and implementation of the national marine oil spill contingency plan.
Describing the magnitude of the problem, he said, it is estimated that at any given time there are 50 ships in the major shipping lanes off the coast of Tanzania. Approximately nine oil tankers with capacities ranging from 50,000-250,000 tonnes sail through the shipping lanes daily.
“This coastal tanker traffic mostly passes 250 nautical miles offshore...pollution risks exist from vessel collisions and groundings both in the shipping lanes and port areas,” he said.
However, co-ordinator of the Western India Ocean Maritime Highway Development and Coastal and Marine Contamination Prevention Project (WIOMHP) Raj Prayg said that experts had already been deployed to assist Tanzania in drawing up marine resources protection plan.
The national oil spill contingency plan, according to the co-ordinator, seeks to make highly sensitive marine and coastal resources as a matter of priority. “That’s why we need to prepare an Atlas showing these environmentally sensitive areas. They need to be rated in terms of importance so that we may decide judiciously what to protect for it is practically impossible to protect everything,” he said.
According to the experts, Tanzania's oil spill contingency plan will be finalized at the end of this year and its implementation is expected to start in 2011.
“Coastal environment is under pressure from inhabitants and visitors to the coast, maritime transportation activities in ports and shipping lanes...that’s why we speeding up the plan to protect marine resources,” said Infrastructure Development permanent secretary Omar Chambo at the opening of a workshop on the National Environmentally Sensitive Areas and the National Oil Spill Contingency Plan and the Environmental Policy on the use of dispersants.
The meeting was organized on Wednesday by the Surface and Marine Transport Regulatory Authority (Sumatra) with the objective of protecting coastal and marine areas from pollution, including oil spills and other related hazards.
The meeting was part of a regional project implemented by nine Western India Ocean countries - Tanzania, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Comoros, Sychelles and Reunion, South Africa and Mozambique - which are working together in making their coastal and marine areas safer for marine transport.
The PS described the national oil spill contingency plan, which is in the pipeline, as important tool for responding to oil spill and other marine pollution.
“An important component of the contingency plan is an environmental oil spill sensitivity ranking. This is key tool to the pollution response team in the mitigation of an oil spill or other marine pollution incident,” he said.
In this regard, he added, preparation of an environmental oil spill sensitivity ranking of the coastal areas of Tanzania could be useful in the finalization and implementation of the national marine oil spill contingency plan.
Describing the magnitude of the problem, he said, it is estimated that at any given time there are 50 ships in the major shipping lanes off the coast of Tanzania. Approximately nine oil tankers with capacities ranging from 50,000-250,000 tonnes sail through the shipping lanes daily.
“This coastal tanker traffic mostly passes 250 nautical miles offshore...pollution risks exist from vessel collisions and groundings both in the shipping lanes and port areas,” he said.
However, co-ordinator of the Western India Ocean Maritime Highway Development and Coastal and Marine Contamination Prevention Project (WIOMHP) Raj Prayg said that experts had already been deployed to assist Tanzania in drawing up marine resources protection plan.
The national oil spill contingency plan, according to the co-ordinator, seeks to make highly sensitive marine and coastal resources as a matter of priority. “That’s why we need to prepare an Atlas showing these environmentally sensitive areas. They need to be rated in terms of importance so that we may decide judiciously what to protect for it is practically impossible to protect everything,” he said.
According to the experts, Tanzania's oil spill contingency plan will be finalized at the end of this year and its implementation is expected to start in 2011.
05 June 2010
Nile water rights and rainwater harvesting
SOMEONE somewhere in the not-too-distant past predicted (?) that the next World War’d be a creature of water shortage for domestic, industrial, hydropower generation, agriculture and livestock uses.
[Another ‘Sheikh’ predicted that the next’d be Oil Wars resulting from too little, too expensive oil supplies… But, that’s another story…]
One part of Planet Earth where a Water WW is likely to break out in the foreseeable future is Africa as it relates to River Nile.
But, there’s a preventive to that, which people seem to shun… And the few who raise it have their voices drowned in the sabre-rattling. It’s a fairly simple ‘solution’ and, as one sage once said, it’s the simple solutions that’re routinely trampled underfoot in the mad rush to play the melodramatic.
But, I jump the gun here…
The story today’s about the waters of the River Nile which flow from Lake Victoria and finally into the Mediterranean Sea 4,037 miles (6,600km) away. The Nile’s the world’s longest river, rich in History in ways more than one. It’s today at the centre of controversy that threatens to lead to confrontation of Biblical proportions.
This is as seen in the context of two camps whose interests in the River in terms of Water Rights is becoming more and more divergent and urgent. This is amid the looming global water shortage.
One camp comprises Egypt and The Sudan to the North. Both have been the largest consumers of the Nile Waters from time immemorial. They still are – and plan to so remain well into the future.
The other camp comprises seven upstream countries and one in the peripheral. These are Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Kenya, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Tanzania and, of course, the Democratic Republic of Congo.
[It’s technically erroneous to say Lake Victoria is the ‘source’ of the Nile. Water from catchment areas beyond the lake flows into it – and then flows therefrom via the Nile. But, that’s another story…].
Perhaps with the exception of the DRC, the other countries can be said to have two things in common: they all are situate in the 3-million square-kilometre Nile Basin. That’s about 10% of the continent’s total area.
The other common thread running through them’s they are in ‘Black Africa,’ while the other two downstream are ‘MENA’ (Middle East & North Africa) countries with large Arab populations.
But, no matter…
About 160m souls out of the around 300m combined population have a direct stake in the waters, heavily depending on them for their livelihood. While the population – and, therefore, demand for the Nile waters – is steadily rising, the supply is steadily dwindling!
Estimates have it that the ‘Nile’ population will top the 600m mark 25 years hence. This is alongside expanding industrial and agricultural activities.
At the other end of the spectrum, the equation is unbalanced by the fact that Nile water flows (as measured at the Aswan) have fallen from 110bn cubic metres between 1870 and 1899 to 81.5bn cm during 1954 to 1988.
However, by dint of some (British) colonial quirk in 1929 – and tugenbund-type (brotherhood in times of doubt and insecurity) pact entered into by Egypt and the Sudan in 1954 – the two countries have ‘rights’ to about 94% of the Nile waters, leaving a paltry 6% for the other 7-8 nations upstream!
The crux of the problem today’s that hard-headed Egypt – dragging meek Sudan along by the scruff of its metaphorical neck – seeks to perpetuate the lopsided rights to Eternity, by hook and by crook.
The arrogance of it all’s that Egypt says the upstream countries weren’t even on the world map as distinct entities when the disputed water rights were drawn up. In true Hitlerite fashion, the Egyptians don’t rule out war to ensure their will dominates absolutely!
Nine of the ten riparian states established the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) in 1999 as “a joint programme to develop the river in a co-operative manner,” and justly share its economic benefits.
In due course of time and events, seven upstream countries sought to sign a new accord that’d redistribute the water rights judiciously. But Egypt and Sudan refuse to go along with that, dodging – like the Artful Dodger it is fast becoming – the signing of the relative Cooperative Framework Agreement.
I’ve a simple proposal. If Egypt and the Sudan want to perpetuate the extant water rights, they should undertake to finance two projects which’d ensure sustainable water availability for upstream states.
One: finance durable rainwater harvesting projects for those countries... And, two: finance a project to permanently clear the sudd that obstructs water flow in the White Nile, causing considerable water loss through evaporation.
If the two have been asked of this and pooh-poohed it, then they have no higher moral ground from which to insist on depriving their colleagues upstream their God-given right to duly enjoy the fruits of Mother Nature and Father Time!
[Another ‘Sheikh’ predicted that the next’d be Oil Wars resulting from too little, too expensive oil supplies… But, that’s another story…]
One part of Planet Earth where a Water WW is likely to break out in the foreseeable future is Africa as it relates to River Nile.
But, there’s a preventive to that, which people seem to shun… And the few who raise it have their voices drowned in the sabre-rattling. It’s a fairly simple ‘solution’ and, as one sage once said, it’s the simple solutions that’re routinely trampled underfoot in the mad rush to play the melodramatic.
But, I jump the gun here…
The story today’s about the waters of the River Nile which flow from Lake Victoria and finally into the Mediterranean Sea 4,037 miles (6,600km) away. The Nile’s the world’s longest river, rich in History in ways more than one. It’s today at the centre of controversy that threatens to lead to confrontation of Biblical proportions.
This is as seen in the context of two camps whose interests in the River in terms of Water Rights is becoming more and more divergent and urgent. This is amid the looming global water shortage.
One camp comprises Egypt and The Sudan to the North. Both have been the largest consumers of the Nile Waters from time immemorial. They still are – and plan to so remain well into the future.
The other camp comprises seven upstream countries and one in the peripheral. These are Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Kenya, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Tanzania and, of course, the Democratic Republic of Congo.
[It’s technically erroneous to say Lake Victoria is the ‘source’ of the Nile. Water from catchment areas beyond the lake flows into it – and then flows therefrom via the Nile. But, that’s another story…].
Perhaps with the exception of the DRC, the other countries can be said to have two things in common: they all are situate in the 3-million square-kilometre Nile Basin. That’s about 10% of the continent’s total area.
The other common thread running through them’s they are in ‘Black Africa,’ while the other two downstream are ‘MENA’ (Middle East & North Africa) countries with large Arab populations.
But, no matter…
About 160m souls out of the around 300m combined population have a direct stake in the waters, heavily depending on them for their livelihood. While the population – and, therefore, demand for the Nile waters – is steadily rising, the supply is steadily dwindling!
Estimates have it that the ‘Nile’ population will top the 600m mark 25 years hence. This is alongside expanding industrial and agricultural activities.
At the other end of the spectrum, the equation is unbalanced by the fact that Nile water flows (as measured at the Aswan) have fallen from 110bn cubic metres between 1870 and 1899 to 81.5bn cm during 1954 to 1988.
However, by dint of some (British) colonial quirk in 1929 – and tugenbund-type (brotherhood in times of doubt and insecurity) pact entered into by Egypt and the Sudan in 1954 – the two countries have ‘rights’ to about 94% of the Nile waters, leaving a paltry 6% for the other 7-8 nations upstream!
The crux of the problem today’s that hard-headed Egypt – dragging meek Sudan along by the scruff of its metaphorical neck – seeks to perpetuate the lopsided rights to Eternity, by hook and by crook.
The arrogance of it all’s that Egypt says the upstream countries weren’t even on the world map as distinct entities when the disputed water rights were drawn up. In true Hitlerite fashion, the Egyptians don’t rule out war to ensure their will dominates absolutely!
Nine of the ten riparian states established the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) in 1999 as “a joint programme to develop the river in a co-operative manner,” and justly share its economic benefits.
In due course of time and events, seven upstream countries sought to sign a new accord that’d redistribute the water rights judiciously. But Egypt and Sudan refuse to go along with that, dodging – like the Artful Dodger it is fast becoming – the signing of the relative Cooperative Framework Agreement.
I’ve a simple proposal. If Egypt and the Sudan want to perpetuate the extant water rights, they should undertake to finance two projects which’d ensure sustainable water availability for upstream states.
One: finance durable rainwater harvesting projects for those countries... And, two: finance a project to permanently clear the sudd that obstructs water flow in the White Nile, causing considerable water loss through evaporation.
If the two have been asked of this and pooh-poohed it, then they have no higher moral ground from which to insist on depriving their colleagues upstream their God-given right to duly enjoy the fruits of Mother Nature and Father Time!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)