INSTITUTE OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT PLANNING (IRDP) DODOMA

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT

BACHELOR DEGREE IN ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT

DETERMINATION OF HUMAN ACTIVITIES IN THE UPPER CATCHMENT WHICH

AFFECT CONSERVATION OF IHEFU WETLAND: A CASE OF IGAWA,
MABADAGA AND MUUNGANO VILLAGES OF MBARALI DISTRICT.

STUDENT NAME; NDUGAI JOSEPH ISAYA

SUPERVISOR; MR. H. CANUTE

MARCH 2010
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background information
Ihefu wetland is located in the Mbarali district, it is a reservoir that collects water mainly through
the great Ruaha River which stars in the highlands of Mpanga/Kipengere Game Reserve which
stretches from Wanging’ombe (in Njombe) to Ikuwo (in Makete). There are main four rivers,
Mbarali, Mlomboji, Kimani and Ipera rivers which drains northwards and joins to form Great
Ruaha River which then drains into Usangu Wetlands of Ihefu and its associated swamps.

According to (Susan Stolberger 2005) in 1993 - November, Ruaha River stopped flowing for the
first time in living memory. The 1997-1998 - El Ninio during wet season, despite massive flow
of water in the river for over five and a half months, the river still dried up completely in
November 1998. Since 2001’s dry season there was no flow of the Great Ruaha River now for
extended 3 month periods.

Consequently since 1993’ water levels in the Ihefu Wetland have dropped bellow a critical level
and outflow from it have ceased in the dry seasons. The consequent of drying up of the Great
Ruaha River, downstream of Ihefu (in some years for more than 100 days) has had a disastrous
impact on the ecology of the Ruaha National Park and threatened the existence of Ihefu swamps
which are economically, socially and ecologically potential resource.

The average dry season inflows to Ihefu have decreased from approximately 15.0 M3 /s to 4.3 M3
/s (70% decreases). This has led to a reduction in the average minimum dry season area of the
wetland from approximately 160 Km2 to 93 Km2 (40% decrease). All these are significant
indicators that Ihefu Wetland is endangered and that appropriate measures should be taken to
ensure its survival. (Susan Stolberger 2005)

In March 2001, whilst in London at the Rio+10 preparatory meeting the Prime Minister of
Tanzania, together with UK Prime Minister, committed Tanzania to restoring year round flows
in the Great Ruaha River by 2010. However, it is now ten years the river, and the entire
ecosystem, is in an even more critical state. (Susan Stolberger 2005)

Ihefu wetland was located in Usangu Game Reserve, which occupied an area of 4,148 square
kilometres was upgraded from Utengule Swamps Game Controlled Area (USGCA) which was
established in 1953 by colonial government. In 1985 Mbeya Regional Authorities initiated a
move to improve the protection of the area. By 1995 the Utengule Swamps Game Controlled A
proposed by Mbeya Regional Authority to be a Game Reserve. The area was officially gazetted
as Usangu Game Reserve on 24 July, 1998 by Government Notice (GN) number 436A. The
primary objective for the gazettement of Usangu Game Reserve among others was to conserve
areas with great biological diversity especially Ihefu wetland which serves as the water reservoir
and a source of Great Ruaha River. (URT 2000)

In April 2006 government through the Ministry of Natural Resources and tourism in
collaboration with Local Government authority, Wildlife division, police force and Tanzania
National Parks decided to conduct a special operation to displace pastoralist from Ihefu to other
regions.

In 2008, Government made another decision of upgrading the conservation status of Ihefu from
Game Reserve to National Park. Here the Government expected to see more improvement to the
area. Unfortunately in 2009 Ihefu wetland and Mtera dam faced another shortage of water which
resulted into shortage of electricity at the national grid. (Severe E. 2000)

Since the drought of drought 2006, different researchers (including DANIDA, FAO, WWF,
RIPARWIN project, Mark Mwandyoya, Shadrack Mwakalila, Moirana L. and Nahonyo C.L,)
conducted their researches on why Ruaha River and Ihefu reservoir frequently dry with little or
no consideration on the upper catchments.

1.2 Statement of the problem

Drought in Ihefu Wetland and decrease in water levels at Mtera Dam continues despite of all
efforts of Government and NGOs. It has also been observed that the government efforts have
concentrated on the wetland itself but little consideration on the up stream catchments.
The context of conservation of Ihefu Wetland is a bit broader than just considering only the
wetland area by evacuating pastoralists an displacing eight (8) villages from around the area and
promoting conservation status to a National Park from a Game Reserve. Close attention should
also be made on social economic activities along the upper catchments in the whole process of
ensuring that the Great Ruaha River never dries.

1000
900
800
700 Annual
600 Rainfall(mm)
500
400 No. of zero flow
days
300
200
100
0
90 88

93 91

96 94

99 97

02 00

3
00
19 / 19

19 19

19 / 19

19 / 19

20 / 20
/2
/
87
19

If, conservation efforts will focus the upper catchments and put strong emphasis on social
economic activities which results into shortage of water. It is anticipated that National
conservation efforts for Ihefu Ramsar site are going to be more effective and sustainable. This
means that, the Government through the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, NGOs,
Ruaha National Park (which currently is having the full responsibility of protecting Ihefu) and all
interested stakeholders shall be able to allocate their resources from upper catchments, all the
way through the Great Ruaha River to Ihefu wetland. Proper allocation of resources for
conservation will ensure effective and efficient conservation efforts for Ihefu wetland
1.3.0 Research Objectives
1.3.1 General Objective
The main purpose of this study is to determine Human activities in upper catchments which
cause shortage of water in Great Ruaha River and affect conservation of Ihefu reservoir which is
found in Ruaha National Park.

1.3.1 Specific objectives

• To identify social economic activities in the upper catchments which are carried out at the
macro and micro scales with high water demands.
• To determine factor leading to misuse of water resource in the upper catchments and
along the Great Ruaha River.
• To find out what should be done on the upper catchments to ensure continuous flow of
water to Mtera dam and Ihefu wetlands.

1.4 Research questions

The research questions for this study will be:

• Which social economic activities in the upper catchments have high water demands?
• What are the factors leading to misuse of water resource in the upper catchments and
along the Great Ruaha River?
• What should be done on the upper catchments to ensure continuous flow of water to
Ihefu wetlands and Mtera dam?
1.5.0 Sampling Design of Research

1.5.1 Sampling Frame

The target population for this research shall be all stakeholders of Ihefu Wetland and respondents
from villages of Mabadaga Ward of Mbarali District.

1.5.2 Sampling unit

The prime source of data for this study shall be village and Ward leaders, social institutions and
NGOs. According to Kothari, 2000; A sampling unit may be a geographically one or
constructive unit such as house, social unit or individual.

1.5.3 Sample Size

According to the nature of the study sample size to be studied shall be at least 50 respondents,
most of them shall be village environmental committee members, village leaders of each sub
village, members from Local government authority, Ruaha National Park, Mpanga/Kipengere
Game Reserve, NGOs (both local and international) and Ruaha Basin Authority for effective
representation of the population under study.

1.5.4 Sampling Procedure

The sampling unit from which the study will be conducted shall be obtained through both
probability sampling and non probability sampling.

• Probability Sampling

Simple random sampling technique shall be used to get the specific number of the
respondents. This will involve random selection of the respondents from each sub village
in Mabadaga ward.
 • Non Probability Sampling

A Judgmental/purposive sampling technique shall be used to ensure that respondents

such as VEOs, WEOs, NGOs, VNRO, DGO, DFO, CPW, DGRHL, VLEO, VAEO,

MKGR’s project manager, and MKGR’s staffs shall be selected on the basis of their

expertise and position as far as Wetland conservation is concerned.

This shall involve the leaders of the Mabadaga ward (villages and sub villages) the heads
of organizations like NGOs and Community based organization dealing with the
environmental conservation along Ruaha River.

1.5.5 Selection of the respondents

The respondents shall be selected by considering their duration of stay in the villages. For
example, a question which reads ‘’how long have you stayed in this village?’’ shall be asked to
know this. The time of stay to be considered shall be more than three years. Also people under
eighteen (18) shall not be interviewed. Only respondents above 18 to over 60 years will be
interviewed. This is because people with 18 years old are considered as adult and
knowledgeable. They can tell/narrate many issues pertaining to Ihefu Wetland, water sources,
Great Ruaha River, Mpanga/Kipengere Game Reserve, Ruaha National Park and water
conservation. The questionnaire survey shall include general information like household’s
economic aspects, social economic activities, educational level of household members, common
problem of drought along Great Ruaha River, problems caused by drought in their villages,
measures taken by the villagers to overcome the costs incurred and lastly perception of the local
community towards the conservation Ihefu wetland.
4 Data Collection Methods

3.4.1 Primary Data Collection Methods

Primary data for the study were obtained from four main sources: questionnaire survey, focus

group discussion, interviewing key informants and researcher’s observations.

3.4.1.1 Questionnaire Survey

The questionnaire consisted of open-ended and closed questions, and ranking scales. According

to Newell (1993) open questions allow the individuals to respond anyway they wish while the

closed questions can be pre-coded easily and do save time for both the interviewer and the

respondent. A ranking scale is a form of closed question that can be valuable when trying to

ascertain the level of importance of a number of items. A list of choices was provided and the

interviewee was asked to rank them. Respondents were allowed to look at the questionnaire

showing the choices. A sample of the household questionnaire and IGGRs staffs, GRHL staffs

are shown in Appendices 1 and 2 respectively.

3.4.1.2 Focus Group Discussion

Group discussions provide access to a larger body of knowledge of general community

information (Mikkelsen, 1995; Borrini-Feyerabend, 1997). Group discussions are cheaper and

quicker to conduct than individual interviewees with the same number of respondents. However,

they have their own disadvantages that not every one who was invited will attend but if some of
them have shown up, you will have to run the session regardless (Cooksey and Lokuji, 1995).

Mikkelsen (1995) recommends groups of not more than 25 people since they will be difficult to

manage.

Sixteen respondents were invited to participate in focus group discussion for villages. Members

required were:

Village government chairman (1), village executive officer (1), village natural resources

committee chairman (1), village natural resources committee secretary (1), representatives from

village government (2) (one female), representatives from village natural resources committee

(2) (one female), village game scouts (2) , prominent livestock keepers (2), prominent farmers

(2) , livestock extension officer (1), and agriculture extension officer (1).

Group discussions were conducted in a classroom where a blackboard and chalk were available

after seeking permission from school authorities. Questions were written on the blackboard

(Appendix 7), and the chairman who was elected by the participants guided the discussions by

first reading the questions loudly for every member to hear and allowed for contributions through

raising a hand. The group leader’s role also was to make sure that one person does not guide the

discussion, and encouraged ladies to contribute for those who were shy to speak.

The researcher took notes as well as probing questions when judged that the respondent’s

statement was ambiguous. Probing involved a follow up questioning to get a full response, but

the probe was as neutral as possible not to incline the respondent to a particular response

(Cooksey and Lokuji, 1995). The discussion included the problem ranking, institutional ranking
and participatory mapping in order to expose their indigenous technical knowledge (ITK) on the

natural resources available. The information collected was used to supplement the household

questionnaire survey. For the purpose of dialogue, information generation and analysis, the

researcher provided breakfast to participants for an effective participation.

3.4.1.3 Interviewing Key Informants

Interviews were conducted to government officials, conservation institutions and private

companies. This included the Chief Park Warden of the SENAPA, Project Manager of the

IGGRs, the District Game Officers of Serengeti and Bunda and the Director of Grumeti Reserves

hunting company Ltd. Samples of the checklists are shown in Appendices 3, 4, 5 and 6

respectively.

3.4.1.4 Researcher’s Observations

A researcher observation involves recording the various community and household activities,

and wildlife habitats in IGGRs. It was a useful tool for cross checking with the information

obtained from the questionnaire survey.

3.4.2 Secondary Data Collection

Supplementary data for this study were obtained from IGGRs, SENAPA, GRHL, libraries and

government offices. Data accessed was in the form of reports, manuscripts and other documents

found in office files and other collections.

3.5 Data Processing, Analysis and Presentation

3.5.1 Data Processing

Data were processed both manually and by the use of computers which provide tools such as

SPSS (Statistical package for social sciences) version 11.5 and MS-Excel where the exercise

involved editing questionnaires, coding, clearing and verifying the entered data for easy

interpretation.