Selous Game Reserve

The TAZARA railway line, also known as the Uhuru or Tanzam line, has been linking Dar es Salaam with Lusaka in landlocked Zambia since the 1970s. On its route, the line passes through the northern part of SGR in the Morogoro Region. The exact extent of wildlife death as a result of the line is unknown but anecdotal information suggests it does occur (IUCN Consultation, 2020). 
 

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, 2013 and 2008). 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). It also needs to be considered that the zone allocated to non-consumptive tourism is being directly affected by major dam construction on the Rufiji River. According to publicly available media and private sector reports, as well as information provided by the State Party (State Party of the United Republic of Tanzania, 2020 and 2019) site clearance and dam construction is well underway. The implications for tourism are unknown but construction of infrastructure (roads, powerlines) and activities are already impacting on tourism (IUCN Consultation, 2020). It also deserves to be mentioned that a national park appears to have been created within SGR. While the State Party has not submitted conclusive information in this regard, numerous reports in the Tanzanian media suggesting the creation of the national park are in the public domain. The public website of Tanzania National Parks notes the creation of Nyerere National Park with a surface area exceeding 3 m ha in 2019 as "part of what is known as Selous Game Reserve" (TANAPA, 2020). The available information implies that the promotion of tourism is an explicit objective sought with the creation of the national park, and the reservoir from the dam is expected to be opened up for new tourism opportunities. Given the distinct institutional responsibility and distinct legal stipulations in terms of tourism development in game reserves (TAWA) and national parks (TANAPA), respectively, it is unclear what the exact implications of the apparent change of legal status of substantial parts of SGR will be and how coordination will be ensured. The impacts of Covid-19 on international tourism will undoubtedly be a factor in the equation for the foreseeable future, but could not be judged at the time of writing.  The threat is probably low as tourism numbers are likely to remain modest due to ongoing construction of a major infrastructure project, major travel restrictions and anticipated global economic crisis. However, conclusive and confirmed data is missing.

The spread of invasive alien plants is 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 ongoing construction of a major hydropower project and corresponding access infrastructure undoubtedly increases the risk of introducing additional non-native species, including potentially invasive ones. The same holds true for the proposed Kidunda dam project, should the project move from proposal stage to construction. While the scale of threat is not known, investment in better understanding the risks and options to enhance preparedness is strongly encouraged.

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 have been conducted, it appears that low uranium prices have since been rendering active mining uneconomical. While the latest State Party reporting does not make any reference to the status of uranium mining, the previous report noted that mining was "deferred until further notice" (State Party of the United Republic of Tanzania, 2019, see also State Party of the United Republic of Tanzania, 2018). The reverse conclusion is that mining may be activated as a function of (increasing) uranium prices. The main concerns include the exact status of operations, limited in-country institutional and technical capacity considering that there is no previous experience with uranium mining in Tanzania, possibly inadequate baseline studies likely to compromise future monitoring, lack of clarity in terms of extraction methods to be applied and, consequently, a lack of clarity in terms of applicable impact assessments. According to the latest 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). In case so-called in-situ leaching will be seriously considered, the State Party has committed to a "full new environmental and social impact assessment" (State Party of the United Republic of Tanzania, 2019). In light of “several uncertainties” (IUCN, 2017), the project will require the permanent attention of the authorities, including but not limited to the game reserve. The change of status of the mining area to a national park will have implications as mining is not permitted in national parks. 

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 (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 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, fueled for example by a temporary suspension of the retention scheme (IUCN, 2017; UNESCO and IUCN, 2013 and 2008). 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 et al., 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 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 notes 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”. While the 2018 aerial wildlife census results appear to be available to selected stakeholders, the State Party has not submitted it officially to UNESCO, promising to submit them "as soon as they are available" (State Party of the United Republic of Tanzania, 2020). Informed sources point to a marginal increase in elephant numbers that are less than should be expected, increases in zebra, hartebeest and wildebeest, but declines in buffalo numbers (IUCN Consultation, 2020). 

The Julius Nyerere Hydropower project (previously called the Stiegler's Gorge project and subsequently the Rufiji River Hydropower project) has been discussed for many decades. For many years, it has attracted major attention by the World Heritage Committee. Besides, complex downstream impacts in Tanzania’s largest watershed all the way to the important delta raise profound, largely unanswered questions beyond the World Heritage arena (WWF, 2017; Bernacsek, 1980). 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. Decision 41 COM 7A.17 (World Heritage Committee, 2017), for example, noted the project’s “high likelihood of serious and irreversible damage to the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV)” and requested the consideration of alternative options. In the following year, Decision 42 COM 7A.56 (World Heritage Committee, 2018), 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. The Committee further urged the State Party 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 its latest decision on the property (Decision 43 COM 7A.16), the World Heritage Committee (2019) 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. The State Party of the United Republic of Tanzania (2020) recently confirmed its intention to continue construction of what it now refers to as the Julius Nyerere Hydropower Project, while requesting the postponement of the Reactive Monitoring mission “until when all necessary logistics are in place”. 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 by the Committee is ongoing without adequate assessment of its impacts, while a repeatedly requested mission to the site is not being invited. While the property continues to be a vast and important protected area, it is unclear whether it can have a future as a World Heritage property as nominated and in its current configuration.