Selous Game Reserve

The Julius Nyerere Hydropower Project (JNHPP) (previously the Stiegler's Gorge project and subsequently the Rufiji River Hydropower project) is a dam with a large reservoir that has been constructed within the property despite significant concerns expressed by IUCN, UNESCO and the World Heritage Committee over several years regarding its potential impacts on the OUV. In 2018, these concerns resulted in the dam being added as a justification for the inclusion of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger, and in 2021 resulted in the recommendation by IUCN and UNESCO for the property to be removed from the World Heritage List due to the irreversible damage of the dam to the OUV of the property (UNESCO, 2021). The Committee retained the property on the World Heritage List (World Heritage Committee, 2021) and construction of the dam continued, with media reporting its full operationalisation in April 2025 (The Citizen, 2025a). The most recent State Party report to the Committee states that mitigation measures are being implemented (State Party of Tanzania, 2023; 2024; 2025), however the exact impacts of the dam on the OUV remain unclear and it remains of utmost concern that this project has proceeded in spite of the significant concerns expressed. Open source satellite imagery comparing the area before dam construction and following its completion in 2025, shows a significant area of inundation (Google Earth, 2025).

A more detailed overview of the history of concerns includes the following: Due to the project’s enormous scale, location in the heart of the property and the absence of adequate assessment, the World Heritage Committee has consistently been expressing its utmost concern. For example, the 2017 Decision 41 COM 7A.17 noted the project’s “high likelihood of serious and irreversible damage to the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV)” and requested the consideration of alternative options (World Heritage Committee, 2017). In the following 2018 Decision 42 COM 7A.56, the Committee recalled its position that “the construction of dams with large reservoirs within the boundaries of World Heritage properties is incompatible with their World Heritage status” and added the project to the justification for the continued inclusion of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger (World Heritage Committee, 2018). The Committee further urged the State Party to refrain from proceeding with any activities prior to the completion of a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), while also requesting the State Party to invite a Reactive Monitoring mission to the property to review the status of the project among other tasks. In 2019 (Decision 43 COM 7A.16), the World Heritage Committee reiterated its “utmost concern”, recalling the incompatibility of the project with World Heritage status. The Committee also took note of an independent expert review of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the project, which concluded that the EIA fell considerably short of acceptable standards (see Anonymous, 2019a). Noting that logging had started to clear the construction site, the State Party was strongly urged to “immediately halt all activities” due to the likelihood of to “irreversible damage to its OUV”, thereby fulfilling the “conditions for deletion of the property from the World Heritage List” (World Heritage Committee, 2019). The Committee further expressed “utmost concern” that the State Party has started the works on the dam project prior to the completion of an SEA. While the latter was subsequently submitted by the State Party, an independent review (Anonymous, 2019b) of the SEA concluded that the quality of the SEA was likewise inadequate for a project of such scale and complexity. Once more, the Committee strongly urged the State Party to invite a Reactive Monitoring mission, which remains pending to date. The State Party argues that the footprint of the project was very small in relation to the vast size of the property. Such line of reasoning fails to acknowledge that the impacts of the far-reaching modifications of a major river cannot be measured by the surface area of the dam and reservoir. In summary, in a property that has been on the List of World Heritage in Danger for years, construction of a project deemed incompatible with World Heritage status and without adequate assessment of its impacts, while a repeatedly requested mission to the property has not been undertaken, is of significant concern. While the property continues to be a vast and important protected area, its future as a World Heritage property as nominated and in its current configuration requires further consideration and has been requested as part of the pending Reactive Monitoring mission.

Hunting tourism is considered separately below, whereas this section has a focus on non-consumptive nature-based tourism, which occurs in a relatively small part of the northern sector of the property only. A small number of camps and lodges operate in the vast reserve (UNESCO and IUCN, 2008 and 2013). Thereby, the impacts of tourism other than trophy hunting are negligible compared to most African protected areas offering comparable wildlife viewing opportunities. However, almost all of the tourism in the property is concentrated in a relatively small area with the number of lodges increasing and boat traffic on the Rufiji River can be high (IUCN Consultation, 2020). It can be argued that the potential benefits associated with non-consumptive tourism, such as contributions to conservation financing, generation of local jobs and income, as well as visitor education remain underutilized. However, one challenge to promoting tourism would be direct competition with the renowned wildlife viewing destinations elsewhere in Tanzania and East Africa (IUCN, 2017). In this regard, the 2023-2033 Tanzania Elephant Management and Action Plan identifies non-consumptive tourism as a conservation opportunity, stating that despite Tanzania’s significant ecological resources, its full potential for the tourism sector remains largely untapped (MNRT, 2023).

Given the designation of part of the Selous Game Reserve as Nyerere National Park in 2019, and the distinct institutional responsibility and legal stipulations in terms of tourism development in game reserves (TAWA) and national parks (TANAPA), respectively, it is unclear whether there is a strategic and coordinated approach to tourism planning and management for the property as a whole.

The spread of invasive alien plants has been reported to be accelerating, including Giant Sensitive Plant (Mimosa pigra), the invasive weed Lantana camara and the floating aquatic plant, Pistia stratiotes (UNESCO, 2011). Red Water Fern (Azolla filiculoides) has ben reported in the Rufiji River and in several lakes (IUCN, 2017, UNESCO and IUCN, 2013). The most recent Reactive Monitoring report mentions efforts to reduce the risk of invasions posed by road access and vehicles in the Mkuju uranium mine and efforts to train rangers in the detection of invasive alien plants (IUCN, 2017). The construction of the JNHPP and corresponding access infrastructure undoubtedly increases the risk of introducing additional non-native species, including potentially invasive ones. The same holds true for the Kidunda dam project. While the scale of threat is not known, investment in better understanding the risks and options to enhance preparedness is strongly encouraged. The updating of the General Management Plan offers an opportunity to provide further clarity on the pressures from invasive alien species and identify any necessary management measures.

In 2012 the World Heritage Committee, in an "exceptional and unique manner", approved the excision of ca. 40,000 ha from the property to facilitate uranium mining (World Heritage Committee, 2012). In its decision, the Committee regretted "that the State Party did not submit the application as a significant but as a minor boundary modification (...) as stated in Decision 35 COM 8B.46" (see World Heritage Committee, 2011). At the national level, the boundaries of the game reserve remained unchanged. While preparation work and test drilling had been conducted, the project was reported as suspended in 2018 and has been dormant since (State Party of Tanzania, 2018-2023) with the State Party committed to undertaking a new ESIA should the project be considered in future (e.g. State Party of Tanzania, 2023; UNESCO, 2023). However, in 2024 the State Party submitted a revised EMP (dated 2016, updated from 2012) and stated that it would inform the World Heritage Committee when the project commences. The Committee recalled the State Party’s commitment and requested the ESIA to be completed in line with the Guidance and Toolkit for Impact Assessment in a World Heritage Context, which the government “noted for compliance” in 2025 (UNESCO, 2024; State Party of Tanzania, 2024; 2025). Recalling the previously raised concerns about potential impacts of uranium mining on the World Heritage property (summarised in 2020 Outlook assessment), it is concerning that media reports indicate a drilling contract has been awarded and that exploration has commenced (ListCorp, 2024), and that in May 2025 Presidential directives were issued for investors to commence operations (The Citizen, 2025).

Regarding potential impacts, it is also recalled that according to the latest 2017 Reactive Monitoring mission report, operator Mantra-Tanzania Limited tested the feasibility and suitability of so-called in-situ leaching, which fundamentally differs from the originally envisaged open-pit approach (IUCN, 2017; see also UNESCO and IUCN, 2013).

For many decades, the majority of the SGR south of the Rufiji River has been managed for commercial sport hunting, with 44 of a total of 47 management blocks allocated as hunting concessions (United Republic of Tanzania, 2005). While commercial trophy hunting is controversial, it is also a substantial contributor to financing the property’s management. The legally established retention scheme stipulates re-investment of 50 percent of the revenues from tourism and hunting in game reserves in conservation and management (United Republic of Tanzania, 2009). IUCN (2017) reported that more than 70 percent of the revenue of the Tanzania Wildlife Management Authority (TAWA) is derived from trophy hunting in game reserves and game controlled areas, while noting that corresponding revenues are used exclusively for operational expenses. Further benefits of trophy hunting in the property have been suggested, including but not limited to the development of management infrastructure, patrolling of hunting blocks, provision of information on wildlife and human activities (IUCN, 2017, UNESCO and IUCN, 2008). The three most recent reactive monitoring missions coincide in the conclusion that trophy hunting can have a legitimate role provided full transparency, re-investment of revenues in conservation, compliance with sustainable use principles and scientifically sound and independently set quotas and age limits. The authors express some doubts about the compliance with such principles, fuelled for example by a temporary suspension of the retention scheme (IUCN, 2017; UNESCO and IUCN, 2008 and 2013). UNESCO (2018) noted "recent reports of legal hunting concessions being surrendered" raising critical questions in terms of sustainable conservation funding. IUCN (2017) referred to the future and current retention as “unclear” while also noting the risks related to the high degree of reliance on trophy hunting revenues, when the sector is coming under increasing societal scrutiny. Trophy hunting in Tanzania has declined in general in recent years, attributed to external factors (e.g. US ban of lion and elephant imports) and internal governance issues. Trophy hunting is not permitted in national parks in Tanzania so the legal consequences of the creation of a national parks requires clarification but even prior to the formation of the Nyerere National Park in 2019, at least 60% of the hunting areas in the former SGR had reportedly been returned to the government as uneconomic.

Unlike in many parts of the world where habitat conversion and degradation drive species declines, the vast property continues to boast intact habitat for the complete array of large populations of mammals. However, commercial poaching for ivory and rhino horn has been strongly affecting target species in several waves (TEPS, 2013; UNEP et al., 2013). The numbers of the vulnerable African elephant and the critically endangered black rhino dramatically dropped in the 1980s (World Heritage Committee, 2010, Borner and Severre, 1986). The subsequent recovery of elephant numbers in response to massive management efforts demonstrated the resilience of a vast and still largely intact ecosystem (Baldus et al., 2000). However, this encouraging experience has since been overshadowed by a major poaching crisis which initially triggered the inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger (World Heritage Committee, 2014). Thouless et al. (2016) note that Tanzania accounted for the "major share" of a surge in elephant poaching across Africa since 2006. The most recent 2017 Reactive Monitoring mission acknowledged “considerable progress” in terms of responding to the crisis, singling out the establishment of the Tanzania Wildlife Authority (TAWA), active and planned international cooperation, bilateral dialogue with Mozambique on the Selous-Niassa corridor and Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs) surrounding the property (IUCN, 2017). The report, however, also noted that “further progress is required until the property is at a point of recovery that it could be removed from the List of World Heritage in Danger”.

Regarding impacts of poaching on species, a 2018 aerial wildlife census report of the Nyerere-Selous-Mikumi Ecosystem (NSME) was released on the Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute (TAWIRI) website in 2020 (UNESCO, 2019; 2021) and a 2022 aerial census was published in April 2024 (TAWIRI, 2023). The 2022 census reports that most of the large mammal species in the ecosystem have maintained stable populations compared to the 2018 census, attributed to “significant management interventions aimed at curbing poaching and protection of species particularly elephants, buffalos, hippos and wildebeest” (see details of these populations under the current state and trend of values).

The new Tanzania Elephant Management and Action Plan (2023-2033), which aims to address critical aspects such as the illegal utilization of elephants, human-elephant conflict (HEC), habitat loss, and management options for addressing these concerns, includes a summary of actions and strategies implemented to address poaching, such as the strategy to Combat Poaching and the Illegal Wildlife Trade (2014-2019), which is reported to have enabled the country to control elephant poaching and illegal trade in ivory; a National Antipoaching Strategy (2023–2033); and establishment of the National Taskforce Anti-Poaching (NTAP), amongst others. Specifically regarding the Nyerere-Selous-Mikumi ecosystem, it is reported that following severe poaching during 2009 to 2014, efforts to combat poaching have “yielded significant and noteworthy results, leading to a diminished perception of poaching as a substantial threat” (MNRT, 2023). The report highlights that the carcass ratio (ratio of dead to living + dead elephants as a measure of mortality in the system) has dropped significantly from 16% in 2018 to 0.8% in 2022.

Overall, since the last Outlook assessment, various measures are reported to have been established and are being implemented to address poaching, and the threat of ‘high levels of commercial poaching’ therefore appears to have been reduced. However, the 2022 census report also concluded that “while the stable populations of large mammal species and low elephant mortality rates indicate successful conservation efforts, the decline in the puku population and the escalation of human activities within the ecosystem pose ongoing challenges. It is imperative to continue implementing proactive management strategies and conservation measures to safeguard the biodiversity and ecological integrity of the ecosystem.”

It is therefore essential that strategic anti-poaching efforts are implemented in the long-term to ensure the protection of species within the property and the recovery of key species such as elephants, for which the property was included on the LWHID.

The construction of the Kidunda dam project to address water scarcity for Dar es Salaam and surrounding areas, has been under consideration for several years. Concerns about the potential impacts of the project located in the wider setting of the World Heritage property, including inundation of part of the property, have been documented in the latest IUCN Reactive Monitoring mission (IUCN, 2017), as well as regular State of Conservation reports to the World Heritage Committee and related Committee Decisions (see UNESCO, 2008-2024). For example, references to inundation of the property have included 200ha reported in the 2008 ESIA (DAWASA, 2008); 630ha in the 2014 and 2017 ESIAs; and 400-600ha in the 2020 State Party report (see 2020 Outlook assessment). Rustagi (2005) documented ecological and socio-economic values in the area proposed for dam construction and flooding. Stakeholder consultations have also pointed to the project area being an important grassland area for ungulates, which move from northern Selous in the dry season (IUCN Consultation, 2020). In response to repeated requests by the World Heritage Committee, the State Party in 2024 submitted a revised environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA) with a hydrological model (drafted in 2017, updated in 2021), and reported in its latest 2025 state of conservation report that the design had been revised to reduce the inundation area within the property by 58% (from 13.2 km² to 5.6 km²) and that, since the project lies outside the property and the affected zone is a natural floodplain, the project’s inundation impact is deemed minimal (State Party of Tanzania, 2025). However, the remaining flooded reserve land still poses significant ecological concerns, particularly for migratory species and wetland ecosystems, and there are concerns that the ESIA submitted in 2024 does not adequately assess the potential impacts on the OUV of the property, nor does it consider the cumulative effects with other developments such as the JNHPP on the Rufiji River’s hydrology and the property’s ecological resilience. These would need to be appropriately considered before the project is considered for approval (IUCN Consultation, 2025). However, according to media reports, construction of the dam has commenced and was 28% completed in March 2025 (Daily News, 2025).