In Uganda the need for and justification of population resettlement has risen from a number of aspects related to the country’s economic setting. The existence of agricultural land of high potential but low population densities; settlement on land cleared of tse tse infestation as a mechanism to prevent resurgence of the fly; forced or persuaded movement of people from areas of high population densities

Marquardt, Mark A

English

IDS OpenDocs

( 
SETTLEMENT and RESETTLEMENT 
EXPERIENCE F~OM UGANDA'S 
NATIONAL PARKS, GAME RESc~VES AND FOREST RESERVES 
Mark A. ~arquardt 
Introduction: 
In Uganda the need for and justification of population 
resettlement has risen from a number of aspects related to 
the courtry's economic setting. The e xi stence of 
agricul tural land of high potentia l but low population 
densities; settlement on land clea r ed of ~setse infestation 
as a mec ~anism to prevent resurge ~ce of the fly; forced or 
persuaded movement of people fr om areas o f high populat ion 
dens i t i es; the development of agr ~cu ltural plantati ons 
requ i r i ~; labor a nd outgrower sc f: e "'es; and the settlement 
d is p1a c ~j people resulting fr o~ rece nt civil unrest all have 
bee n fa:~ors in th e resettlement =: various populat ion s i n 
r ece n t r ~stor y ( Illingwo rth 1964 , '-' ISR -1933 ) . 
~ c we : er, when consideri ng the ~rcblem of resettlement 
o ne sh c - 1d also cons i der the spor ~~ n eous uncontrolled 
mov eme r ~ of people to find n~w hc - elands, w ~i ch has bee r arc 
c on t in ~es to be the most common ~e lu tion to rising 
pc puf at- :n de ns ities in the Ugand~ setti ng . 
Qn e resu lt o r th i s spontaneo~~ uncon trolled popul at io n 
mov emer ~ c aused by the grow1ng la r d p ress ure in t r ad i t ~on a , 
a g ricu ·~ ural zones has bee n a n ir : reasing incidence of 
encroac --ent into protected area s ' nat~onal par~s, game 
reserve~, a nd f o rest r eser~es ) . - ~is en croac hment has take r 
--:.rad l -t ic::r.3 l 
r ese r; e a nd merely e /p anded their ~a rm i ng op erati on i nt o t ~e 
/ 
/ 
area of the reserves and secondly by those families who have 
moved their farming .operations from areas of severe land 
shortage into the reserves which were seen t o be unoccupied 
( and apparently available land. A number of factors in 
recent Uganda history have played a significant role in 
allowing this settlement of protec ted areas to t ake place. 
The objective of this paper is to review the current 
situation in Uganda wi th respect to such resettlement in to 
areas sur r ounding and within protected areas as well as to 
p r e sent pol icy options for governments to cone i der relati ve 
to such resettlement . After a brie f summary of 13nd tenure 
concept s a nd a backgro~nd disc ~ ~s~on of the current 
situation in Uganda with respect t he protected •a r e3s, ! wi1 1 
present ~ x amples from three case studies wh1ch i1lus t~ate 
same of the factors related to such resettlement. ~hree 
types of settlement with re~pect to protected area are 
co ns i dered: enclaves withi~ protected areas, encro 3ch ment 
into protected areas, an d resettlement of people into 
protected areas resulting in e x c~s~ons made of l a nd from 
that protected area. Eac h of these t ypes of settlemen t 
offer alternati ve policy strategies f o r governme nts to 
p~rsue wh e n dealing with such resettlement. 
Land Tenure: 
Land tenjre is the inst i tutic~ al ( social, pol"t i cal, and 
eco nomic) arrangements through which in dividuals and 
communities gain access to the productive capabi l iti es of 
the l and. 
2 
~v I 
Land tenure literature often t alks o f a tundle of r 1ght s 
an individual holds in relation to a c cess and uti ~i :3t ~o n cf 
land resources. These rights would include, but are not 
/' restricted to such things as the right to se 1 1 1 and, 
mortgage land, bequeath land, cut trees, bury deaj, 
constru~t homes, etc. This bundle can be broken up, 
red; 'tided, passed on t o ethers and so on. Some w ~ 11 be ~e:d 
t y individuals, some by groups, a ~ d others by po ~ ~tical 
~ P3Ce. N ·J o n e e v e r h o , d s l a n d ~ n 3 : o t a i 1 y e ' : : _.: ~ ~ : ~- w :=. J , 
cthe?-2, a'n:3 t he commun i ty alwe. :.s h :=..e _r;ghts tha :. 
sorr-e degre ~ e n land use with ; n the --.:onte ... t o f these :~~ re::: 
d imensi::ns. 
Thus tf-·;e 1and rig~ts c f the ; n:::l' ·.idua' are 1 · 'TI ~ ted 
these rights which are retained b y the state and t he 
ccmmuriit ; . A person is ab 1 e to ~se 1an:::l tecause 
fer e ~ am~~e. ac:ess to lane is determ ine j by me~ters hip ~~ 
t~e tr i ba~ 
e 
3 
( f'. 1 11 1 1 1 n 1 1 :• , 1 lw : . ' · 1 i ~ Jl, t t . n 1 :t v v '' ' y l ' ' · l • 1 I 1 1 "' , 
la11d ll! · l' rn::~y ht· : . t•t•ll 11:. 'pc·rm;IIH ' IIt ', lll'ld. t' ' llw indi , · idlJ:ll 
<nHi 111! ' Jlll'9C'Ily, '" t•f H llll · l( ' l·ir11it(·d n.durt · , f·lllll 1'1! · 
: chift iny cultiv;ll ir ' ll :., : . lt•ln: r·f tl·lllJlt•, lt'il!.t·d, tll t•• ' lll•Wr· d 
1 '' nd. 
rt · l;ltl · dir ec tly 11 • tlw :.t·n: ·, (· of ~~< ·r urity 1d tr ·llllll' l'\l ' t thr· 
lnnd IH,ld -ing <:-Hld J'Cl~·. : .i blt invpr.tn1cnt. 
Finally, and r•eri1Ctp~ . mos t obviou~ly, l:;nd rightr. h <:iVf' a 
The ust: o f land ir. restricted by some 
dcfinit ion of boundaries. The de gre E with which these 
boundaries are fixed are to a certain extent determined by 
the 1 eve 1 of 1 and pr er.su r e and the need to· indicate where 
one's property rights end and another's begins. This 
spatial question is of obvious concern where areas of 
different la~d use meet, eg. intensive farming areas and the 
unused land (for farming) of conservation areas. 
Individuals never ha ve exclusive rights to land. The 
state at the very least retains the rights of taxation, 
eminent domain, control ever land use, and reversion. The 
state's rights with respect t c conse~vation areas fall under 
those rights of control cf land use and eminent do~ain. The 
e xercise of eminent domain gene~ally implies a recognition 
of claims ·for compensation cf lost land use ~ights. 
Traditiona'1_ly · t :his .cOn1pensation _  could take tne form of 
alternative 16nd, rather than the cash payment of a more 
mark~t oriented soc i ety. 
4 
'y • 
/ 
) 
The 1975 Land Reform Decree vested all land in Uganda in 
the hands of central government. Prior to the decree land 
was held through customary tenure arrangements, freehold 
tenure, and in central Uganda through Maile ownership or 
Mai .lo tenancies. Individuals who wished to formalize their 
land rights did so ·through the acquisition of sta~e 
leasehold rights. The land reform decree has had little 
effect on the vast majority of landholders. In most areas 
of the country, particularly non-mailo areas, customary 
ten ur e relationships continue to exist with 1itt 1 e 
interfere nce by the state o r outs i ders. 
Background to the Current Situation: 
Uganda's ~ation a l par ks, game reserves, and ~~rest 
reser ves ·consist of aver 3 mill~oh acres const it~tin g abc ut 
16% of the total dry 1and area of Uganda. Map 1 shows the 
locat ion of the major parks a nd reserves within Uganda. All 
o f these protected areas have suffered from vary i~ g amounts 
o f encroachment by settlers in recent years. 
National Parks and Game Reser ves 
Wildlife in Uganda is ma naged by the Uganda Nati onal 
~a rks, a parastatal run by a Beard of Trustees, a nd the Game 
Department which manages game reserves, controlled hunting 
areas, and game sanctuaries and falls under the ~; i nistry of 
T cur~sm, Wi1dl {fe, and Antiqu i ties. Considerable wildl"fe 
also e xi sts i n forest rese rves, wh i ch are managed by t he 
Forestry Department wh i ch fal l s under the Ministr y n~ 
Energy, Minerals, and Environment Protection. 
5 
6 
-. 
The National Park Act was passed by the protectorate 
administration in 1952. The two parks estab4ished at that 
time (Queen Jlizabeth and Murchison Falls National Parks ) 
were created out of pre-existing game reserves with 
add i tional territory incorporated into the park lands a~ the 
time of their gazettement. Human population was generally 
absent in the areas encompass i ng those game reserves, havi ng 
bee n depopulated by the protectorate administration in 
effcrts to deal with infestat~on of tsetse fly and resu"~ant 
inc "dence of sleeping s i c knes s (UNEP 1988 ) . 
The area containing La ke ·~buro National Par k li ~ ew i sa 
ha~ been heavily infested with tsetse fly resulting ~n 
au ~ ~i gration of the human po~Jlat ion . That area was fi~3t 
adrr ~ nistered as a control l ed ~unt i ng area and later a ga~e 
reserve before being declared a national par k in 1982 ' ~'lEP 
19 88). 
The abundance of wi ldlife provided Uga nda wi th a ma~cr 
source of income fr om tour ~srr thr ough the 1960's. At ttat 
t i~ e t 6urism was the third 1a-3est source cf fore i g~ 
e xchange earnings after co f&ee and cotton . 
The slaughter of wild1 ;fe whi c~ began durin; A~in's rule 
a n~ continued following the ~n v as ion of Tanzanian forces 
o u2 ~ing the Ami n go vernment a ~ d the l ater i~s ecur i ~ y du -" ng 
t he ensu1 ng years up t o t he ccmin g ~ a power of the oresent 
NP~ government has l eft U ga ~ ja with a frac t~o n cf ~ ~s 
pre ~i ously vast wildlife popu l at ion s. While poaching us in g 
traditional means (bows and arrows, spears, and snares ) 
7 
could be contained, it was this later slaughter with heavy 
guns and automatic weapons which had a devastating affect on 
wildlife populations. The depopulation of wildlife has 
rendered large areas of national parks and game reserves 
void of wildlife, giving the impression of large tracts of 
unused land. 
Forest Reserves 
The forest reserves have suffered a similar fate. 
The establishment of central forest reserves by the 
colonial administration was a result of agreements entered 
into with the rulers of Uganda kin gdoms (Bug anda Agreement 
1900, Toro Agreement 1 900, and Ankole Agreement 1901 ) . All 
lands in.other parts of the protectorate were declared crcwn 
lands and f o rest reserves were gazetted fr om these larjs as 
and when necessary (UNEP 1988). 
Prior to the earl y 1970's f o rest reserves were 
successfully managed, balanci~g economic utilization with 
the conservation of wi ldlife and mainteMarce of biolcgica 1 
di versity. Settleme nt i n forest r e ser ves ~ as perm~ tted 
under the Forest Act ( 1964 ) pr~vided t hat t he appropriate 
permits were obtained and the pe rmit hcl der ad nered to t h e 
conditions of the permit. 
Since the early 1970's forest resc~rces ha ve beer 
rapid rate toth en pri ately held land as 
as wi thin gaze tted forest reserves . This has resulted f rc~ 
a nu mber of causes: unregulated commercial e xploitation a; 
8 
' . 
timber resources; the growing demand for fuel wood not only 
for heating and cooking, but also for small scale 
' 
manufacturing and more recently a growing number of local 
brick kilns; the encroachment of human settlement and 
agriculture into formerly forested areas and forest 
reserves; and, to a limited e xtent, state sponsored forest 
clearing schemes to limit cover for guerrilla activities,. 
The current state of affairs with respect to settlement 
of people into the forest reser ves is a result of a number 
of factors. Populati on pressures in some parts of the 
country, parbicul arl y the sout hwest and recent civil 
disorder i n other areas has led to a movement of settlers 
frcm t hese areas into f ore st reser ves. This movement was 
coupled ~ith governmen t policy in the mid 1970's advocating 
"d ou ble production" and "freedom to settle anywhere" wh i ch 
resulted in a n appearance to perspective settlers o f 
go vernment sanction to settlement in these protected areas . 
The for est department understaffed a nd underfunded much as 
the game departme nt was unable to control ill egal settlement 
and e xploitat i0n of the f orest resources . 
Resettlement 
The destr uctio~ of t he resources th e reserves were 
supposed to protect ( wildlife o r forests) created an 
opportuni t y for the settlement of pe6ple into the re;er ves 
tc "'::..a ke place. Ere roac r:r:1ent b , .. ·-z + + "1 oY""<:::: J ~-.._ .. ,_ , ...,. 1 ._. i nto the ga me 
reser ves ard forest reserv es has been exte~sive. Tr.e act :....-a l 
e ncroa chment of settlement into the Nat ional Pa r ks in rece nt 
9 
years has generally been more limited; what settlement has 
taken P 1 3Ce has often resulted from the expansion of 
settleme ~t enclaves within the par ks or government policies 
which ex=ised park lands and redrew park boundaries. 
CASE STUDIES 
Three case studies present an i llustration cf some of 
the iss~es related to settlement in and around protected 
areas. The objective of these brief descriptions is to 
provi de some insights into the d if ~erent types and causes of 
settleme~t which has occurred in these areas, t he resultant 
i nterac~ ·on between the settlements and the protected areas, 
and t he ·mpl ications of eac h t yp e o f settlement fo r the 
formula~ 'o n of government po li c y acti on . The ~nformation 
presente~ is drawn ent i re l y from pu bl ished reports and is 
used fo~ illustration purposes on l > . 
As - -dicated earlier three ty oes of settlement will be 
presente~: enclaves of settlement e xis t i ng within the 
protecte j area at the t i me the pr ote c ted area was ga:etted; 
encroacr~ent into the protec ted area, e~ther by neighbors tc 
the prc:ected area e x pand~rg into that lan d o r outsiders 
mov in g - ~to t he area; an d resettlement of outside r s intc the 
p r otectej area as a government po l icy . Each situation 
il lust r~~es a different history c & the settlement, different 
impl i ~a : ' _ons f o r interaction with t he pr otected area, and 
present5 ver y differe nt gov ernmen: pol i cy wi t h resoe=t to 
each se~:lement. 
1 0 
\ 
Queen Elizabeth National Park Fishing Villages 
Within Queen Elizabeth National Park are found Lake 
Edward and Lake George connected by the 32km Kpzinga 
Channel. These lakes and the channel contain one of the 
highest fish biomasses to be found in the world. This is 
responsible for a large number of fishing villages to be 
found within the park boundaries. When the park was 
gazetted in 1952 a number of fishing villages were 
incorporated within the overall park boundaries (Map 2). In 
some cases fishing villages were permitted to contin~e to 
exist on park land. In other c3ses the fishing villages 
were purposely e xcluded from the park land, being 
established as village enclaves with~n the park, completely 
surround~d by the park (UNEP 1988, Olivier 1990). 
The original understanding with the villages within park 
lands was that village members were only allowed to fish and 
collect dead wood from the park for fuelwood requirements. 
Livestock was not permitted within the park. As th8 
populations of these vi1lages expa nded the park authorities 
saw a need to clearly demarcate the boundaries of the 
villages. However, there was never any attempt to formalize 
the tenure rights of the people i n these villages. Thus 
they have existed on park land with little security of 
tenure other than the understanding of pre-existing lirid 
ri ghts prior to the gazetting of the park. 
The enclave villages present a somewhat different 
situation as they exist on non-park land. Katwe village, 
1 1 
for example, has had long historical settlement tied to the 
existence of a salt extraction industry and related trade in 
salt from one of the crater lakes within the enclave. 
However, in addition to the salt extraction industry there 
is a large fish landing in the village and a substantial 
fishing industry. 
The fishing industry has in recent years provided a 
major source of income for the people in the area given the 
decline of alternative ec onomic opportunities. While the 
fisheries department has tried to regulate the nu mber of 
f ishing licenses on t he lakes , and t hus in d i rectl y limit the 
nu mber of peop l e util i zing the reso u rce , the relatively high 
returns to fis h ing have led t o a r1se 1 n the number of 
illegal f ishing act iviti es and a growi ng population in t he 
vi l lages. 
This increasing populati on obviously puts greate r 
demands on the resources of the par k . These i nc lude need 
f or fuelwood f or cook i ng and dr yi ng of f i sh , de mands for 
small plots of l and fer culti va tion, inc reased r.umber of 
livestock, in addition t o the need f or basic soc i al se rvic es 
(sc hools, clin ics, etc., which serve as a further incent iv e 
f or others to settle in the area ) . The increasing 
population also brings an increasing l e ve l of poaching of 
wildlife. On the other hand people de s uffer a s a result o f 
the park wi th pre dation of l ivestock a nd attac ks on 
individua ls b y wildlife. 
1 3 
\ 
A number of options are open to the government with 
respect to settlement of this sort within the park 
boundaries. 
If people are to remain in the fishing villages which 
are in the park the following issues must be addressed. 
Alternative sources of fuel wood have to be found to the 
present indiscriminant harvesting of wood from within the 
park. These include the establishment of community forestry 
projects, utilizatio0 of non-wood energy sources, and 
concessionary cu tting of wood fr om with i n the par k from 
areas where s e vere a caci a e ncroachment has occurred as a 
result of the destruct io n of the elephant herd. Mechanisms 
need to be put into place to regul ate the numbers of fishing 
license~ granted and the number of fishing boats on the 
lake. Vil lage boundar ies must be clearly demarcated clearl y 
ind~cating to the villagers as wel l as to th e park 
authorit i es the limits of settlement. Access roads to the 
villages need to be improved to facil i tate movement of fish 
to mar ket (the potential for marketing fresh fish wou l d 
eliminate some fue l wood needs) as well as permit the f low 
of fo od stuffs into th e villages (reducing the need for 
growing vegetables or keep l ng livestock). 
If people are to be removed from the fishing vil lages 
alternative issues must be addressed. The fish i ng indust ry 
i s a major source of income for people in the area and 
revenue for the districts. There is e vi dence that a number 
o f the people fishing in the lake come from great distances, 
fish for a number of years to save money, and then return to 
14 
their home areas. Relocation of the people means finding 
alternative income generating opportunities, wage 
' 
employment, or agricultural land. While many of the 
fishermen may have agricultural land, that land may provide 
subsistence income . at best and probably less, which is why 
people are fishing in the first place. Resettling the 
fishermen on additional agricultural land implies the 
ability to secure that land somewhere. 
~ i bale Forest Corridor and Kib a l e Forest Reser ve 
The Kibale Forest Game Reserve was estab li shed to 
pr ov ide a corridor for wildlife, mainly elephants, moving 
from Queen Elizabeth Par k t o t he Ki bale Forest .Reserve in 
add ition to providing a buffer : on e for t he no rthern part of 
the park (Map 3 ) . The Fores t Reserve itself contains one of 
the higt.est concentrations of primates in th e world. 
Recent research done by MISR / LTC on settleme nt in the 
game a nd forest reserves provides background information 
us~ful f o r this presentat io n . Settlement into the reserve 
was prima ri l y by Ba k iga sett 1 e r s mov in g out of t he severely 
overpopulated present distr i cts of Kabale and Ru kung i r i . 
Th i s settlement began in the late 1950's continuing into the 
ea r ly 1980's. Severe land shortage in the areas of origin, 
plus inheritance rules wh i ch su bdi vid e family land a mong all 
of the sons has ied to a h ig.h level of land fragmentation 
and increasing l y sub-economic plots ( MISR 1988, Drennon 
1990) . 
15 


Settlement and resettlement experience from Uganda’s National parks, game reserves and forest reserves

https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/bitstream/20.500.12413/5498/1/Marquardt-MAK-res.pdf

Settlement and resettlement experience from Uganda’s National parks, game reserves and forest reserves

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

IDS OpenDocs