21.01.2015 Views

Download PDF - Anchor Environmental

Download PDF - Anchor Environmental

Download PDF - Anchor Environmental

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Table 6-9. Estimated IUV for wildlife refuge for the wetland and Ramsar site<br />

2005 2006<br />

Wetland 68.5 76.8<br />

Ramsar site 33.4 45.5<br />

An attempt was made to assign indirect use values of wildlife refuge to the different land categories,<br />

based on their importance as wildlife refuge. While most wildlife resources are found in the southern<br />

part of the delta, the normally flooded areas and the panhandle ultimately determine the fate of wildlife<br />

species 8 , and therefore the weight of both areas is relatively high. Each category has been given a<br />

weight of 0.3, indicative of the fact that most wildlife would not survive without these areas. The other<br />

categories are considered to be equally important for wildlife and therefore have been given weights<br />

of 0.1333 each.<br />

Table 6-10. Indirect use value of delta wildlife by land category (Pula million; 2005).<br />

Land category area (km 2 ) Hunting value Eco tourism value total value<br />

1 water-pan handle 1,446 15.4 7.7 23.1<br />

2 normally flooded area 2,152 15.4 7.7 23.1<br />

3 seasonally flooded 2,328 6.8 3.4 10.2<br />

4 occasionally flooded 3,534 6.8 3.4 10.2<br />

5 rarely flooded 19,322 6.8 3.4 10.2<br />

Total 28,782 51.2 25.6 76.8<br />

Table 6-10 clearly shows that the panhandle and the normally flooded areas are most valuable for<br />

wildlife. The growth of the tourism sector is expected to lead to an increase in the indirect use value of<br />

the wetland’s wildlife. Assuming that tourism would be at par with hunting, the value would increase to<br />

P 48.8 million.<br />

6.3.5 Purification of water<br />

The environment has the natural ability to absorb some pollution without a cost to society (e.g. water<br />

treatment costs). Purification of water is therefore an indirect use value.<br />

The study looked primarily at wastewater generated by the domestic sector, businesses and<br />

government and in tourism camps.<br />

The population density in and around the wetland is very low. Most people live in Maun and in a<br />

cluster of villages in the panhandle. There are very few commercial sources of pollution. The use of<br />

pesticides and fertilisers in agriculture is minimal, and no significant industries that could cause<br />

significant pollution appear to occur in the Ramsar site. Villages and the growing number of tourist<br />

camps are probably the main sources of pollution.<br />

In order to value the water purification function, the types and amount of pollution were estimated<br />

together with the value their natural purification.<br />

Pollution sources and types<br />

Most villages have a water reticulation system which offers three forms of access to water: 1.<br />

standpipes in villages; 2. a water connection inside the yard; and 3. a house connection. Water from<br />

standpipes is free of charge, but households are charged for yard and house connections proportional<br />

to the monthly use. Due to rising living standards, private connections in the yard or house are<br />

increasing. According to the National Master Plan for Sanitation and Wastewater, only 26.8% of<br />

domestic water use is linked to waterborne sanitation, and only 10% of that is connected to the<br />

sewage system; ninety percent ends up in septic tanks and soak ways.<br />

7 Personal communication Dr. J. Perkins.<br />

64

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!