the rwandan gorilla project - International Gorilla Conservation

THE
RWANDAN GORILLA PROJECT
A private charitable fund raising of £100,000 to £150,000
I N T E G R A T I N G C O N S E R V A T I O N W I T H COMMUNIT Y DEVELOPMENT A N D
UPMARKET TOURISM
Portrait of a silverback mountain gorilla in the Volcanoes National Park, Rwanda.
Photo: Juan Pablo Moreiras/FFI.
{note: this page to print on reverse of previous page}
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The organisers of this fund raising would like to thank all those who have assisted them
with it and their due diligence into conservation projects in Rwanda, Uganda and
Kenya.
The institutions that have assisted are the American Fund for Charities (notably David
Wicket), the Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund Europe (notably Emmanuel Bugingo, Greg
Cummings, Jillian Miller and Lian Simmons), Duterimbere (notably Bernadette
Mukantabana and Jean Nsengiyumua), Fauna and Flora International (notably Jon
Hutton, Mark Rose and Richard Turner), the International Gorilla Conservation
Programme (notably Stephen Asuma, Maryke Gray, Anecto Kayitare, Dr Annette
Lanjouw, Dr Liz Macfie, Mark Mwine, Helga Rainer and Eugene Rutagarama), the
Kenya Wildlife Service (notably Mwenja Iregi and Joseph Musioko), the Office
Rwandais du Tourisme et des Parcs Nationaux (notably Francois Bizimungu, Claude
Seruhungo and David Sibomana), the Uganda Wildlife Authority (notably Benon
Mugyerwa, James Okonja and Robert Tushabe), Volcanoes Safaris (notably Hillary
Basekya, Freddie Gakuba, Giulia Moman, Praveen Moman, John Mugabwa and
Natasha Muyenzi) and Water Aid (notably Ray Hislop and Brian Little).
The individuals that have assisted are Bill Adams (of the Department of Geography,
Cambridge University), Glenn Bush, Katie Fawcett (of the Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund
International), Phil Franks (of CARE International), Mark Hudson, Tony and Adrianne
Mills, Paul Muhwezi (of the Buhoma Community Rest Camp), Francois Nkinzehwiki
(of Virunga Wildlife Clubs), Jeff Nichols, Dr Julia Powles (of St Catherine’s College,
Oxford), Ruth Powles and Ian Redmond (of the Ape Alliance and GRASP – the Great
Ape Survival Project).
PHOTOGRAPHS
All the photographs in this document were taken by Julian Cooke, Christopher Powles,
Stephen Powles or Diana Roberts while undertaking the due diligence for the project.
LEGAL NOTICES
This fund raising is being conducted on behalf of Fauna and Flora International, a UK
registered charity (number 1011102).
Donations from non UK resident persons and organisations are most welcome but
before donating such donors must contact the organisers of this fund raising, as below,
to make special arrangements.
ENQUIRIES
For all enquiries recipients of this document should contact Christopher Powles, as
below.
Address:
Email:
Telephone:
Mobile:
West House, South Green, Kirtlington, Oxfordshire OX5 3HJ
[email protected]
01869 350978
07958 633281
CONTENTS
Page
Part I
Summary
2
Maps
4
Information on the Project
Introduction
6
Gorillas and their Habitats
6
The Threats to Gorillas
7
“Community Based Conservation”
8
Projects Identified for Funding
9
Implementation
11
Rwanda – Politics and Tourism
12
How to Donate and the Benefits of Donating
13
Due Diligence and Risk Factors
15
Part II
Detailed Project Descriptions and Due Diligence Results
17
Part III
Donor Safaris
27
Part IV
Additional Information:
31
y
y
y
y
y
Biographical Notes
Details of the Tax Reliefs Available
Selected Bibliography
Selected Websites
Detailed Due Diligence and Other Information Available
1
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
Many who go on safari to Africa want to help preserve Africa’s environment and wildlife but
feel the scale of the need is such that there is not much they can do. In response, the Rwandan
Gorilla Project offers these people the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
the opportunity to pool their cash so that together they can make a difference,
a focused conservation programme with a clear and achievable aim,
specific in-the-field projects that have been thoroughly validated on their behalf by a team
led by two investment professionals using business due diligence techniques,
a group of highly capable professionals on the ground to execute the work,
an exclusive safari package to travel out to see their donations in action, and
accountability through ongoing communications and updates.
The due diligence team organising this project are paying all of its expenses which together
with their donations amount to over £15,000. Hence there will be no deductions for any costs
from new donations.
THE CONSERVATION WORK TO BE FUNDED
The project focuses on facilitating the co-existence of human beings and mountain gorillas
around the Virunga volcanoes in northwest Rwanda. Mountain gorillas have been selected as
they are highly endangered. Rwanda has been chosen as it has a critical need and because it is
now emerging as a frontier destination for upmarket tourism. The specific work to be
supported is:
•
•
•
the completion of a buffalo wall to stop crop raiding and thereby reduce park-human
conflict,
alternative income generation to reduce pressure on land use around the park, and
the provision of clean permanent water from the park to provide a real benefit to local
people.
The rationale of the wall is that the eating of crops by buffalo sets local people vehemently
against the park and it will prevent intrusion by livestock and herders. Alternative income
generation, through a honey enterprise, will help reduce local people’s reliance on the land
and hence pressure on the park in a way directly associated with the preservation of the park –
as without the park the bees would have insufficient nectar. The provision of clean
permanent water will remove the need for villagers to enter the park which can spread
disease to the gorillas. Also if the park supplies permanent clean water to local people they
will see this as a very real positive reason for the park’s existence.
DUE DILIGENCE AND PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
The due diligence team is led by Christopher Powles and Julian Cooke. The former is a
venture capitalist and the latter a fund manager. Both are London based but have travelled
extensively in Africa and are very knowledgeable about the continent. They have had the
support of a wide number of individuals, notably Phil Franks who is a highly experienced
senior employee of Care International and Diana Roberts who has a degree in wildlife
management.
2
The International Gorilla Conservation Programme (the IGCP) will implement the work in the
field. It is a long-standing gorilla conservation organisation with a real wealth of local
knowledge and experience. It is a consortium of Fauna and Flora International (FFI), the
African Wildlife Foundation (AWF) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). FFI is the
key UK element. It is based in Cambridge, is 100 years old and has as its Patron Her Majesty
the Queen.
THE BENEFITS OF DONATING
The benefits to donors of participating will be:
•
•
•
•
knowing their money is being put to effective use
exclusive travel arrangements to see their money in action on the ground
accountability through ongoing updates and communication
tax reliefs – available to both UK and US taxpayers
As regards exclusive travel arrangements, many visitors to Africa want to understand much
more about the issues around conservation but this can be difficult to achieve. Therefore those
giving over £1,000 will be offered over a period of two or three days, typically as part of a
longer safari, the opportunity to be taken to see the gorillas with a special representative of the
park or the IGCP, visit the projects being funded, participate in the monitoring of them, see
other programmes in the field and attend a special dinner with local conservation workers.
The highlight of any trip will be the gorilla trek. Gorillas habituated to humans accept visitors
at close quarters without altering their behaviour significantly and those who make the effort to
go and see these magnificent animals typically enjoy an exceptional cross-species experience
that remains with them for the rest of their lives.
The due diligence team travelled with Volcanoes Safaris, a highly experienced firm, and they
are the recommended travel partner. They are in the process of opening a dramatic camp with
panoramic views of the Virunga volcanoes and local lakes – where they will host the dinner.
They have an eco-friendly approach that is also supportive of local people and will be making a
donation to the project for each donor who travels with them. Rwanda itself is a beautiful
country and, now very stable, is widely held to be one of the safest countries in Africa to visit.
The organisers of the fund raising, with the support of the IGCP, will monitor the execution of
the work and provide ongoing updates and communication in the form of a six monthly
newsletter and ad hoc email bulletins for at least two years. These will cover the progress of
the projects and any relevant news from the Rwandan Virungas and the wider region.
HOW TO DONATE
The target donation per individual or small group is £5,000, although the amount to qualify for
the exclusive travel arrangements is only £1,000 per head. Those interested in donating should
consider the tax reliefs available and then complete and return the donation form that
accompanies this document.
As regards tax reliefs, donations to this project can be made tax efficiently by both UK and US
tax payers. In the UK for individuals this includes giving under Gift Aid, share giving and
payroll giving. For details of these and the position for companies, foundations, trusts and US
tax payers, please refer to page 35 in Part IV of this document.
3
MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION OF RWANDA
AND THE VIRUNGAS
4
MAP SHOWING THE VIRUNGA CONSERVATION AREA AND
ITS ENVIRONS
5
PART I
THE RWANDAN GORILLA PROJECT
INTRODUCTION
Going on safari to Africa is a well-trodden path for the more adventurous holiday-maker.
Many return home after a highly rewarding experience wanting to do something to help
preserve Africa’s environment and wildlife and assist its people. However, they often feel the
scale of the conservation need and the challenges posed by Africa’s political, social and
economic problems are such that there is not much they can do that will make a real difference.
In response to the above, the Rwandan Gorilla Project aims to offer those interested in Africa
the opportunity to pool their cash for a specific, well researched programme of conservation
which will not only make a difference but which they can identify with and enjoy visiting, if
they so wish, as part of a trip to see gorillas.
From this fund raising, it is intended to create a circle of individuals with a mutual interest in
conservation who like going on safari and to offer them and their friends a succession of
projects elsewhere in Africa suitable for funding. A strong tourism element will be included in
each so that they will have a range of projects to visit that they are involved in through their
funding. A communications programme will also be provided as well as a social aspect for
donors to meet each other and prominent people in the conservation community.
GORILLAS
AND THEIR
HABITATS
The mountain gorilla (Gorilla beringei beringei) is, in fact, a sub species of gorilla – the largest
of all the great apes (the superfamily of primates to which humans belong). They exist in two
small areas in the western Rift Valley in central Africa – firstly, the Virunga volcanoes that
straddle Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DR Congo) and secondly,
what is still often known as the Bwindi Impenetrable Forest Reserve (a National Park in
Uganda). They are highly endangered; only around 650 of these magnificent animals remain.
Gorillas are not violent unless provoked and the image of them created by films such as King
Kong and many story books is highly inaccurate. Rather they are by nature gentle vegetarians
living in closely knit social groups. Gorillas habituated to humans accept visitors without
appearing to alter their behaviour significantly, typically continuing to sit in a “happy heap”
eating bamboo, grooming each other or simply resting.
The habituation of gorillas offers tourists the unique wildlife experience of being with these
exceptional animals at close quarters. It is typical for visitors to the gorillas to enjoy a crossspecies experience that remains with them for the rest of their lives. Juvenile gorillas (who are
notoriously playful) often bound around in front of tourists – jumping head-over-heels,
swinging through bamboo, play fighting and just being thoroughly juvenile. It must be noted
that direct human contact with a gorilla is not permitted in any circumstances (due to the risk of
human diseases passing to them). However, this casual playfulness of gorillas very close to
humans demonstrates the extent to which humans are accepted by these fully wild animals.
The Virunga conservation area is about 25 miles long and varies in width from 6 to 12 miles.
It is covered by three parks that are ecologically one unit. About 80 square miles lies in DR
6
Congo (Parc National des Virunga), 60 square miles are in Rwanda (Parc National des
Volcans) and the small remaining north eastern portion of 28 square miles is in Uganda
(Mgahinga Gorilla National Park). The Virungas are known for their characteristic profile
formed by a line of six volcanoes – Muhabura, Gahinga, Sabyinyo, Visoke, Karisimbi and
Mikeno. They are now dormant but one to the west, Nyiragongo, in the same geological
formation near Goma came to world attention when it erupted in January 2002. Bwindi is in
Uganda, 30 miles to the north. It is about 130 square miles in size and is an ecologically very
diverse area of dense forest criss-crossed with steep sided valleys and high hill tops.
The taxonomy of the genus Gorilla is open to some debate. It is now generally held to include
two species, the western lowland gorilla (with two sub species) and the eastern gorilla,
comprising the eastern lowland gorilla and the mountain gorilla, the last of these being the
subject of this project. The distribution of the western lowland gorilla is western DR Congo,
through Congo, Gabon and Cameroon all the way to Nigeria. The eastern lowland gorilla is
found in eastern DR Congo. Gorillas are believed to have evolved in the west and spread east,
with the genetic diversity of the western lowland gorilla exceeding that of man across the
globe. The eastern lowland gorilla displays reduced diversity and the mountain gorilla displays
very little, the population originating probably from only a very few individuals who found
their way across inhospitable terrain separating their current range from that of the eastern
lowland gorilla.
The history of the mountain gorilla, as far as Europeans are concerned, began 100 years ago.
In October 1902 the German explorer, Captain Robert von Beringe, discovered them by
shooting two in the Virungas during an expedition to delineate the boundaries of German East
Africa. The area remained virtually unvisited by Europeans until after World War I when
Rwanda became a Belgian protectorate and big game hunters began to visit to “bag a gorilla”.
The hunting ended in 1925, when Carl Akeley of the American Museum of National History
persuaded King Albert of Belgium to protect the gorillas through creating Africa’s first
national park, the Albert National Park, which exists today as the Virunga conservation area.
However, this was not enough and the population continued to decline.
Then, in 1959, George Schaller started his work on mountain gorillas. This was popularised in
his book, “The Year of the Gorilla”. In the late 1960s Dian Fossey built on Schaller’s
pioneering efforts and attracted world wide attention to the plight of the gorillas, notably after
the killing by souvenir hunters in 1977 of Digit, one of her study gorillas, and then as a result
of her own murder in 1985. Her book, “Gorillas in the Mist”, became a best seller and was
made into a successful film, starring Sigourney Weaver. While Dian Fossey was the most high
profile of those who have sought to conserve gorillas, she is only one of many dedicated
campaigners for their survival, most of whom have worked in poor and sometimes dangerous
conditions for little monetary reward.
THE THREATS TO GORILLAS
The population of mountain gorillas is small and very threatened, although it does appear for
now to be stable. This is only due to the tireless efforts of the few dedicated locals and
expatriates referred to above doing their best to counter each threat as it arises. These threats
are varied, the most significant being as below.
a) Poaching. Poaching is an immediate day to day problem. Young gorillas can die in snares
set for bushmeat and adults are killed so that their infants can be taken alive for private
collectors. Six mountain gorillas are reported to have been killed in 2002 and at least three
infants stolen. One, named Mvuyekure, was retrieved. No mountain gorilla has survived
7
for long in captivity and a decision was made to attempt the difficult task of reintroducing
her to the wild. This was not successful and very sadly she died in January 2003.
b) Human encroachment. The parks that the gorillas live in are surrounded by some of the
most populated rural land in Africa, in places with more than 1,000 people per square
mile. Furthermore many refugees from the war are still looking for land on which to make
a living. Much of the land in the parks is suitable for agriculture and, given that over 90%
of the population depends on subsistence agriculture, the threat is obvious. Indeed in
1968, over 20,000 acres of the park in Rwanda was de-gazetted, about 40% of the total,
and turned over to farmland. The situation is compounded by a considerable human need
for wood and water. Over 95% of locals use wood as their primary energy source and the
harvesting of it is widely done in an unsustainable manner, thereby increasing the risk that
the park will be deforested over time. The forest is also a convenient source of water that
in dry periods is in very short supply and this further encourages encroachment.
c) Regional instability. Mountain gorillas live in one of the most unstable parts of the world.
The threats that this gives rise to are from military/paramilitary forces and refugees. In
March 1999 a Ugandan gorilla tourist camp was attacked from DR Congo, with several
visitors being murdered which caused a severe reduction in the parks’ revenues from
tourism. More recently, while Rwanda itself is now very stable, lobbying from the
conservation charities was required for the Rwandan government to make the welcome
decision to stop the construction of a military road through the park which would have had
considerable ecological consequences. During the Rwandan war thousands of refugees
fled into the forests and had to survive by cutting firewood and killing game. Later the
largest refugee camps the world has known were created on the edge of the park in DR
Congo and the refugees understandably supplemented the food and firewood provided by
humanitarian organisations with whatever meat and fuel they could obtain from the forest.
d) Disease. Great apes share more than 96% of their DNA with humans. This makes our
anatomy and physiology so similar that gorillas are vulnerable to many of our diseases.
They have not built up the same immunities as us over the years and as a consequence
humans are potentially a source of disease that could devastate the gorilla population. This
is currently being seen in western DR Congo where the Ebola virus has this year killed
hundreds of the western lowland gorilla. The risk of disease comes from direct contact
with park rangers, tourists (if not appropriately briefed and managed), poachers, wood
cutters and water collectors or indirectly via human waste in all its forms!
Many of the threats to gorillas can best be met by making the gorillas and the parks they live in
of economic benefit to the people living round them, so local people have an incentive for the
park to survive. There is much clear evidence that this approach can be made to work.
“COMMUNITY BASED CONSERVATION”
In the first half of the twentieth century, European colonial powers and settlers were
responsible for the destruction of much of Africa’s natural habitats and wildlife. Over time it
was recognised that unless action was taken, little would remain. In broad terms, the response
was the rise of what has come to be termed “fortress conservation”. Extensive tracts of Africa
were made into protected areas from which indigenous people were typically excluded, despite
the areas often being their ancestral homes. These areas were promoted as “wild unspoilt
Africa” to tourists and policed by heavily armed park rangers. Few, if any, benefits accrued to
local people and, resulting from this, there is a widely held belief among Africans that
8
Europeans care more about animals than people – which it is important to address when
designing conservation policies.
The newer conservation orthodoxy (or narrative) that has become prevalent more recently is
termed “community based conservation”. In simple terms, this maintains that in the long run it
is no good trying to preserve Africa’s unique environments, its extraordinary high densities of
large animals and its stunning biodiversity simply for their own sake and for the benefit of a
few privileged tourists. This, it is held, will be doomed to failure as it does very little to help
the plight of the impoverished people of Africa who will be forced to destroy their wildlife and
natural habitats in their search for survival. This narrative concludes that conservation (and
associated tourism) must be community centred, providing real economic benefits to local
people (thereby actually making them supportive of conservation) and involving them in the
management, decision making and ownership of natural habitats.
Community based conservation ranges from “protected area outreach” to collaborative
management through to community controlled conservation. The first retains the geographical
integrity of parks but seeks to both benefit the local communities (e.g. through park revenue
sharing to non participating local people) and educate them as to the importance of
environmental protection (e.g. for preservation of watersheds). Collaborative management
normally involves the retention of tenure by the state over the area to be conserved but gives
local communities rights over resources within the area and some form of joint management of
those resources. Community controlled conservation has as its chief objective the sustainable
management of natural resources through the ownership or control of resources by the
community. In successful examples, communities benefit directly from the resources (e.g.
profits from tourism facilities or simply use of water) and thus, with this economic incentive,
they then manage the resources on a sustainable long term basis.
Although it is generally considered that much of the old fortress conservation orthodoxy is still
absolutely necessary, the newer counter-narrative of community based conservation is widely
held to be critically important. The reality is that modern conservation policies must draw on
both. Given, however, the importance of promoting the newer community counter-narrative,
the projects identified for this funding programme are community orientated.
PROJECTS IDENTIFIED
FOR
FUNDING
During a programme of extensive due diligence, a wide range of gorilla conservation projects
in both Rwanda and Uganda have been visited. Geographically, it was decided that the focus
should be on Rwanda where there is a critical need. In terms of projects, it was decided that
the focus should be on facilitating the co-existence of gorillas and humans. Hence three
community conservation projects have been selected and a detailed description of each is set
out in Part II of this document. The three projects are:
•
•
•
the completion of a buffalo wall to protect crops and thereby reduce park-human conflict,
alternative income generation to reduce pressure on land use around the park, and
the provision of clean drinking water from the park to provide a real benefit to local people.
Of the three territories that mountain gorillas inhabit, Uganda is by African standards well
supported. DR Congo is inappropriate to consider as it is too insecure for donors to visit. The
third is Rwanda. While still facing significant challenges, Rwanda is emerging from its
troubled past such that it is now at the frontier for up-market tourism. To see Rwandan gorillas
such visitors have previously stayed in comfortable lodgings just over the border in Uganda or
in the capital, Kigali, and travelled to the park on a day visit. However, with confidence in the
9
country growing, Volcanoes Safaris (a leading Ugandan gorilla tourism operator) is now
developing a camp in the vicinity of the park which will open shortly. In addition, another
hotel has opened already this year near to the edge of the park that offers a reasonable standard
of accommodation.
Each of the projects to be supported fit the community conservation objective. The buffalo
wall is an existing, well managed, proven programme that needs funds to complete it and so
make it fully effective. The water project will build on the experience of and lessons learnt
from similar projects in the Ugandan section of the Virungas and at Bwindi. These projects
were identified by the Senior Warden of the park, Francois Bizimungu, who says that buffalo
and water are his two most pressing community orientated problems. The third project that
will provide alternative income based on a honey production is included as similar enterprises
in the region have been highly successful. Other projects examined were resettlement of the
Batwa (the original forest dwellers), an orphanage, a micro-credit programme, sustainable
agricultural training, a tourism project, women’s groups and wildlife education clubs.
The funds raised will be allocated as follows:
£’s
Buffalo wall
Bee keeping enterprise
Provision of clean drinking water
60,000
20,000
70,000
150,000
The buffalo wall and bee keeping enterprise are finite discreet projects with set budgets. The
water project is variable and may be approached in a number of ways. This suits the purposes
of the fund raising as this element of the project will be tailored to fit the final amount of funds
raised – from £20,000 to £70,000. The detail of this is set out in Part II of this document.
Part II of this document sets out the conservation rationale of each project, summarised below.
•
The buffalo wall prevents buffalo leaving the park to raid crops and harm villagers which
can set the local people vehemently against the park, it stops cattle and goats with their
herders entering the park that can spread disease and cause forest degradation and finally it
creates a very clear demarcation line which prevents further encroachment into the forest.
•
The bee keeping enterprise will provide employment and income for local people in a
culturally significant and self sustaining way directly associated with the preservation of
the park (for without the park the bees would have insufficient nectar), it will reduce the
desire of people to enter the forest to harvest honey (often burning trees in the process) and
it will help reduce pressure on the land from local people.
•
The provision of clean drinking water removes a reason for local people to enter the
park, which causes conflict, risks spreading disease to gorillas and is accompanied by
illegal wood cutting, bamboo collection and poaching. It will also radically improve their
lives, especially in the dry season when water shortage is a huge problem, thereby creating
for them a very real positive reason for the park’s existence.
It is anticipated that all the funds raised will be deployed within 12 months.
While these projects are designed to benefit the gorillas, they will of course benefit the whole
park. This is a rich and bio-diverse habitat, comprising afro-montane rainforest in some
limited remaining parts and elsewhere bamboo forests, hagenia woodland, afro-alpine
moorland, grassland and marsh. Living in these diverse areas are over 75 species of mammal,
10
including forest elephant, buffalo, the rare golden monkey, forest hog, bush pig, black fronted
duiker and spotted hyena, plus nocturnal mammals such as tree hyrax and bushbabies. The
bird life is also extremely varied, with about 180 bird species reported to have been recorded,
notably many species endemic to the Albertine Rift such as the Ruwenzori Turaco, Grauer’s
Rush Warbler, Shelly’s Crimsonwing, Handsome Francolin, Strange Weaver, Ruwenzori
Puffback Flycatcher and Archer’s Robin Chat.
IMPLEMENTATION
The fieldwork will be carried out by the International Gorilla Conservation Programme (the
IGCP). It is a key organisation in gorilla conservation, bringing together many very highly
experienced and dedicated people.
The IGCP dates from 1978 when its precursor, the “Mountain Gorilla Project”, started and out
of which it grew in 1989. It is run from Nairobi, Kenya. It is a consortium of three charities –
the African Wildlife Foundation (AWF), Fauna and Flora International (FFI) and the World
Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). FFI is the key UK element. It is based in Cambridge, is 100
years old and has as its Patron Her Majesty the Queen. The IGCP’s activities span all
mountain gorilla territories and in the Virungas it is working with or directly funding the park
authorities, promoting regional co-operation, working at a policy level (with the United
Nations, for example) and supporting communities round the park.
The IGCP’s work in the Virungas fits into a wider overall programme that also includes
scientific research and veterinary care undertaken by other non governmental organisations
(NGOs). The other main NGOs working with gorillas in Rwanda are as below.
• The Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund Europe (DFGFE) – formed out of a volunteer organisation
begun in 1989 as the European arm of the original Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International
that split away in 1996 to mainly pursue community conservation work around the Virungas.
• The Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International (DFGFI) – the renamed Digit Fund formed by
Dian Fossey after the beheading in 1977 of a gorilla named Digit, which operates mainly
inside the park focusing on behavioural research and protection of its study animals.
• The Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project (MGVP) – a project funded by the Morris Animal
Foundation of America which provides veterinary care largely under field conditions for ill
or injured gorillas and which also conducts related research.
The fact that the IGCP is to implement the proposed programme is no reflection on the
important work undertaken by the other organisations. The IGCP is very suited to this
particular programme as it is a key NGO working with the park authorities on the first length
of wall built already and it is working on both the water and honey projects having experience
of similar work elsewhere in the region. It is highly organised, contains many long serving
members of staff and has exceptionally credible and well established consortium members.
Importantly, it also has an impressively long and consistent track record of real and
demonstrable success in the field, implemented by a team of qualified and experienced African
conservation professionals. Biographical notes for the key members of the IGCP involved in
this project and for Francois Bizimungu, Senior Warden of the park, are in Part IV of this
document.
The IGCP’s fund raising budgets for the year to 30th June 2004 for Rwanda directly and for
regional enterprise programmes (covering all three gorilla countries) are about £320,000 and
£115,000 respectively, in addition to funds for the other countries, other regional programmes
11
and the head office. Figures are also available for DFGFE that show they spent £162,000 in
Rwanda and £124,000 of project support and education costs across Rwanda and DR Congo.
Hence the funds raised in this project are a significant additional contribution to the funding
already committed to Rwandan gorillas.
RWANDA - POLITICS
AND
TOURISM
Politics
Rwanda has a long and, by and large, proud history. In the colonial carve up of Africa it was
one of the few countries that broadly retained the territorial integrity of an original African
nation. The origins of the Rwandan people go back very many centuries, during which time a
strong social structure was maintained under the king, known as the Mwami. In the colonial
period, first the Germans and then the Belgians largely left this structure alone and, until
independence was imminent, interfered much less than elsewhere in Africa.
Post independence Rwanda sadly became well known not only for its gorillas but also for a
period of terrible conflict in 1994. This was very widely reported and much has been written
about it; suffice it to say here that in a very short period of only 100 days the country was
devastated by a systematic programme of genocide. This period is receding into the past and
now the Rwandan government under President Paul Kagame is undoubtedly a much more
effective administration. The results of the Rwandans’ efforts to rebuild their country after the
genocide are a strong endorsement of what many believe are the Rwandans’ innate
organisational and economic abilities. This year, in May, there was a peaceful referendum on
the country’s constitution and more recently a presidential election that convincingly returned
Paul Kagame to power, as well as parliamentary elections. These have not dented Rwanda’s
general peace and stability.
The war was driven in large measure by the so-called Hutu/Tutsi composition of Rwanda.
Many believe very strongly that the nomenclature is now being left behind, given that it
reflects historic lifestyles which are increasingly out of place in modern Rwanda. Certainly,
such is the UK government’s belief in Rwanda, this tiny country of only around 8 million
people living in an area less than half the size of Scotland was, for the year to April 2003, the
tenth largest recipient of British aid. Until the war, Rwanda was often described as the
Switzerland of East Africa. While it must be noted that Rwanda still faces significant
challenges and there is a risk that its historic tensions may resurface, it is widely believed to be
on the way to regaining its previous status as a prosperous and successful state. Given this and
the effectiveness of the current administration, Rwanda merits support.
Tourism
Gorilla viewing is the key part of any trip to the Virungas. Having an efficiently run and
comfortable place to stay is also important. However, as of now, there are very limited
permanent facilities located in Rwanda adjacent to the park suitable for the discerning traveller.
It must be noted by any donor that Rwanda represents a new frontier for up-market tourism and
so it is not a destination that can easily support the absolute top end of the market in an
economic way (typified by the “champagne on the open savannah” type holiday).
Nevertheless, it has been proven in remote areas of south-western Uganda that suitable
facilities can be run which the up-market traveller will enjoy and return to. Furthermore
Rwanda benefits over the gorilla areas in Uganda from much shorter communication links and
what are regarded by many to be better gorilla viewing conditions (mainly due to more
12
habituated gorillas). The journey time to a gorilla park from an international airport in Rwanda
is three hours, mainly on good roads, while in Uganda it is one to two days, much of this on
bad roads.
Given the above, it is likely that tourism in Rwanda will grow significantly. In response to
this, the firm regarded by many as the leading gorilla safari firm in Uganda, Volcanoes Safaris,
has acquired a dramatic, secure hill top site set back from the Virungas with panoramic views
of all six volcanoes to the north and west and highly scenic lakes to the south and east. It is
due to accept its first visitors in January 2004 and when finished it will accommodate up to 20
guests. It is both eco-friendly and supportive of local people. In addition, the “Gorilla’s Nest”
has recently opened, a perfectly acceptable new facility near to the park, and furthermore an
experienced up-market Kenya based operator is also proposing to develop a site adjacent to the
park with the assistance of the IGCP.
Other offerings for visitors to the park being developed are viewing of habituated golden
monkeys, volcano/forest walks and bird watching. Elsewhere in Rwanda, tourists can visit the
Akagera and Nyungwe National Parks as well as such places as the well regarded National
Museum in Butare, various genocide memorials and, nearby to the Virungas, the pretty Lake
Kivu – with its beaches, jutting peninsulas and an archipelago of beautiful islands. Akagera is
set at a relatively low altitude in the east of the country along the Tanzanian border. It has an
archetypal African savannah landscape of tangled acacia trees and bush, interspersed with
patches of open grassland and a dozen swamp-fringed lakes. Its scenery is complemented by a
range of game and birds. Nyungwe, in the hills of south-western Rwanda, is the largest area of
montane forest remaining in east and central Africa. It has at least 200 tree species, over 100
species of orchid, colobus monkeys (which move through the canopy in dramatic troops of
several hundred), an estimated 500 chimpanzee, 11 other species of primate and more than 275
bird species.
Elsewhere in the region, Uganda has a series of attractive parks up its western edge north of
Rwanda that offer further great ape tourism as well as lovely hiking and viewing of plains
game. Finally Kenya and Tanzania’s stunning concentrations and variety of game are easily
accessible by short plane flights from Rwanda, as are a variety of attractive Indian Ocean
beach holidays.
HOW TO DONATE
AND
THE BENEFITS
OF
DONATING
How to Donate
Those wishing to donate should consider the tax reliefs available (as below), complete the
donation form that accompanies this document and send the form to the address thereon.
Payment is to be made to FFI, the UK element of the IGCP consortium, who will also deal
with all matters relating to tax reliefs. Points to note are as below.
• The target contribution is £5,000 or more per individual or small group – although any
donation will be gratefully accepted and all donors giving £1,000 or more will be offered
special travel arrangements (see below).
• There will be no deduction from funds raised for any costs other than a very small amount
for those seeking US tax deductibility – see Part IV of this document.
• Christopher and Stephen Powles, Julian Cooke and Diana Roberts, as the organisers of this
project, as well as providing time, have made or will make available approximately £15,500
– a cash donation of £2,000, travel costs of about £12,000 and other costs of about £1,500.
13
• It is very valuable to the project if UK tax paying donors use Gift Aid due to the tax
efficiency of this means of giving.
• Non UK resident donors are most welcome but such donors must contact the organiser of this
fund raising to make certain special arrangements.
Release of the funds by FFI to the IGCP will occur when the organisers of this fund raising
authorize it. This will be following receipt and approval by them of final pre-implementation
documentation, including updated budgets, against which actual implementation will then be
assessed. The agreement to this and other matters (such as progress reporting by the IGCP) is
set out in the Memorandum of Understanding, referred to on page 38 of Part IV of this
document.
Benefits of Donating (including tax reliefs)
The benefits to donors will be:
•
•
•
•
knowing their money is being put to effective use,
exclusive travel arrangements to see their money in action,
accountability through ongoing updates and communication, and
tax reliefs.
As regards exclusive travel arrangements, many visitors to Africa chat at length with their
safari guides and others they meet about the issues around the conservation of the wonderful
places they visit. Often they are interested to understand much more but this is difficult to
achieve. It is therefore the intention of the Rwandan Gorilla Project to provide an opportunity
for donors to learn something about the issues and efforts that go on behind the scenes to
preserve the mountain gorilla.
Thus over a period of two or three days, typically as part of a longer safari, those donors giving
over £1,000 will be offered the chance to be taken to see the gorillas with a senior
representative of the park (such as the community or tourism warden) along with the normal
guides, visit the projects being funded, participate in the monitoring of them, see other
programmes in the field and attend a special dinner. This should provide an extremely
interesting and rewarding extra element to any trip. The dinner will be hosted by Volcanoes
Safaris at their new Rwandan site described earlier. It will be a meeting in the bush of likeminded UK and US high net worth individuals together with locally based people from the
park authorities and the IGCP.
In order not to disrupt the very busy staff of the park authorities and the IGCP, in the two years
following the fund raising, it is intended to provide the two to three day programme, depending
on demand, on up to eight specific occasions that will be notified to donors as part of the
ongoing communication, referred to below. As places on this programme will be limited, it is
the current intention to restrict donors to one place per £1,000 gifted. For legal reasons the cost
of this (and any wider safari) cannot be paid for out of tax qualifying donations and so must be
included in the general cost of the safari. Part III of this document describes the safari
arrangements in more detail.
The organisers of the fund raising, with the support of the IGCP, will provide ongoing updates
and communication in the form of a six monthly newsletter and ad hoc email bulletins for at
least two years. These will cover the progress of the projects and any relevant news from the
Rwandan Virungas and the wider region.
14
As regards tax reliefs, donations to this project can be made tax efficiently by both UK and US
tax payers. In the UK for individuals this includes giving under Gift Aid, share giving and
payroll giving. For details of these and the position for companies, foundations, trusts and US
tax payers, please refer to page 35 in Part IV of this document.
DUE DILIGENCE
AND
RISK FACTORS
A due diligence programme has been conducted into gorilla conservation and tourism, led by
Christopher Powles and Julian Cooke. They are investment professionals from the venture
capital and smaller companies fund management industries in London. Both have extensive
experience of Africa. They have been supported by a number of individuals, notably Phil
Franks and Diana Roberts. Phil Franks co-ordinates for CARE International 30 integrated
conservation and development projects and community based natural resource management
programmes in 18 different countries. He has been in charge of detailed work on the water
project. Diana Roberts has both business experience and degrees in Wildlife Management and
Anthropology and Ecology. In addition, Stephen Powles who is a vet assisted with interviewing
in the field. Further biographical details of each of them can be found in Part IV of this document.
The key documents resulting from their due diligence are listed in Part IV and can be made
available. The due diligence first involved desk and internet based research and meetings with
“gorilla village” people here in the UK. Christopher and Stephen Powles then conducted an
extensive due diligence trip, not only through territories where gorillas live, but also to other
areas in East Africa with their own conservation issues and programmes during the course of
November and December 2002.
During the trip a wide range of gorilla conservation projects was visited. From this the projects
described herein were identified. Julian Cooke and Diana Roberts then visited in May 2003
and undertook ten days of focused due diligence into the specific projects chosen. The results
of this were very positive and Part II of this document sets out the details. The due diligence
also covered the local IGCP people who will be responsible for the day-to-day spending of the
cash in the field, together with the control and management structures above them. This
showed that the IGCP and FFI are entirely credible and that they are totally suitable recipients
for the funds being raised.
Despite the very positive results of the due diligence conducted, projects such as this carry a
high level of risk. The structure of the fund raising, whereby risk is spread on a syndicated
basis, does mitigate it for any one individual but still each donor must note the most significant
of the risks as set out below.
a) Ongoing Management and Governance of Projects. A key finding of the due diligence
programme is that the ongoing success of projects such as those proposed is dependent on
the establishment of effective management and governance regimes to ensure, in particular,
suitable ongoing maintenance. Without this the effectiveness of the expenditure incurred
will be materially reduced. This matter is being addressed carefully in the design of the
projects and will be monitored on an ongoing basis by the IGCP, assisted by donors on their
visits.
b) Population Pressure. In time, the demand for agricultural land, firewood and water may be
such that the park does not survive. This fund raising is designed to help solve this! Also
the economic value of the park, political and military support for it during the war (which
was very strong given the circumstances) and its very survival despite the huge population
resettlement issues after the war indicate that the Rwandans value their park.
15
c) Rwandan Instability. Rwanda has in the past suffered much internal disruption and if this
were to return, elements of this project would be negatively affected, notably donor travel to
Rwanda. Any country in Africa may experience these problems and it is important that
conservation continues regardless. Also the buffalo wall and water project should largely
survive and continue to provide real benefits.
d) Regional Instability. Both DR Congo and Burundi that border Rwanda have experienced
considerable difficulties. This gives rise to a series of risks, notably damage to the Virunga
ecosystem outside Rwanda and armed insurgency into Rwanda. While these risks cannot be
fully mitigated, the current problems in DR Congo requiring a peace keeping force are a
very considerable distance to the north of Rwanda and also the compensating factors noted
in (b) and (c) above do again apply. Furthermore it is difficult to envisage a more damaging
regional crisis than experienced during and after the Rwandan war and the Virunga
ecosystem survived that period largely intact.
e) Corruption. There is some risk that a portion of the money raised is not appropriately used.
However, the due diligence into both the specific work that is to be funded and the IGCP,
which will be handling the funds, indicates that this risk is immaterially small and so can be
disregarded.
f) Risks to Visitors – Security. There is a risk of general lawlessness and incidents like the
1999 murders in Uganda of tourists or the bombings of Israeli and American targets in
Kenya. However it is generally held that Rwanda is, day-to-day, one of the most law
abiding places in Africa. Also the Rwandans realize that, with tourism being their third
biggest source of foreign exchange, they cannot let an incident like the 1999 murders
happen. Hence the level of security for visitors to the parks is very strong. As regards the
incidents in Kenya, Rwanda is an unlikely target for a number of reasons compared to
elsewhere in East Africa and this is reflected in the UK government’s travel advice that in
Rwanda “the threat from international terrorism is low” (the most positive for any of the
East African countries). The official advice is also that up-to-date information should be
sought before travel to the Virungas due to the situation in DR Congo and this is a sensible
precaution.
g) Risks to Visitors – Other. It should be noted that, while security is an issue, the biggest
threats to visitors are in fact from malaria and car accidents. The former is not a problem if
the right drugs are taken in a disciplined manner and as regards the latter it is essential to
ensure that any tour company used has high quality vehicles and drivers (and such a firm
should also be aware of the up-to-date local security position).
h) Risk to Tourism. If a serious security incident were to occur, the knock-on effect could be
severe because the tourism income to the parks could be significantly reduced. In such a
case, the projects funded would continue unaffected but the economics of any up-market
tourism camp would become difficult.
Finally, it should also be noted that the project does have “upside”. If it works, it will then not
only spawn a series of related projects but it will also bring the conservation debate in an
original and engaging way to a number of senior decision makers and opinion formers who
have the influence and ability to make a difference in the wider world.
16
Female mountain gorilla. Photo: Juan Pablo Moreiras/FFI.
PART II
DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS AND
DUE DILIGENCE RESULTS
THE BUFFALO WALL
INTRODUCTION
The buffalo wall is a stone construction built by local people using lava rocks thrown out in
past volcanic eruptions that are readily available in the local fields. It is one metre deep and
1.2 metres tall. Approximately 20km have been completed along the 65km Rwandan park
boundary. Lengths of similar wall have been built in Uganda and to a lesser extent in DR
Congo. It blends well into the landscape and is not an eyesore. Similar walls on a smaller
scale feature in the landscape at the
borders of fields or around homesteads.
Due diligence conducted into the wall
included walking along approximately
8km of it, discussions with the park
wardens, interviews via interpreters
with villagers living near the wall and
elsewhere, discussions with those who
have funded the wall to date, analysis
of documents relating to the wall and a
visit to the older Ugandan section.
THE CONSERVATION NEED
The buffalo wall is designed to fulfil one primary need but in doing so achieves several other
conservation benefits.
The key reason for constructing the wall is to remove a negative impact of the park on local
people by preventing buffalo leaving the park to raid crops and threaten the safety of villagers,
as far as 4km from the park boundary. When this occurs it sets the local people vehemently
against the park as it can have a severe impact on their livelihoods. A regular complaint from
local people is that they are fined if their cattle stray into the park but if the buffalo come on to
their land and destroy their crops they cannot get any compensation.
The other conservation benefits of the wall are as below.
•
It stops cattle, goats and their herders entering the park and so prevents habitat degradation
by livestock and the risk of disease spreading from herders to gorillas.
•
It creates a very clear demarcation line which prevents encroachment by farmers planting
crops every year a little further up the mountains.
•
When the wall is being built the local communities provide the labour and so its
construction brings a measure of temporary income to the local communities that is directly
associated with the park.
17
WHETHER THE WALL PROVIDES A SOLUTION TO THE NEED
The due diligence done shows the wall to be successful. While there is no exact data available,
discussions with local villagers and reports to both park wardens and local authorities confirm
the effectiveness of the wall and its acceptance and appreciation by those in previously affected
areas. Other positive indications are that fields adjacent to the wall previously left fallow are
being cultivated again, gratitude from herdsmen no longer fined if cattle stray into the park, the
planting of bamboo used for construction outside the park (indicating an acceptance that the
plants in the park are off-limits) and the willingness to contribute labour to the construction of
the wall (explained also by the payments made for work done and by the local tradition of
community service). The wall’s success in its secondary purpose of preventing encroachment
appears to be borne out by the park authorities reporting lower levels of such incidents.
The wall can be damaged by elephant (which are rare), by torrents of water as was the case in
one of the sections seen during due diligence and by earth tremors as happened late in 2002.
However, large tremors are infrequent and have not yet been significant even in this volcanic
region and the design of the wall has been modified to incorporate small breaks to provide
resilience (as right). Poor construction
can be a problem, either in rushing work
or using stones that are too small and
this will need some remedial action and
tighter control of future building, both of
which will be focused on in the
remaining sections. Hence maintenance
is vital – this has not to date been
rigorously carried out.
There was
provision in the original consultant’s
report for 15% of the cost of building the
wall to be available for maintenance and
monitoring.
There is also an issue with a few watercourses where buffalo may be able to find a way out of
the park. These, in the section of wall completed, currently have temporary fencing that needs
regular replacing after strong rains. It may be possible to install culverts through which the
water can flow and over which the wall can be built. This will be investigated as the project
proceeds.
No environmental impact assessment is available, as it was not deemed necessary. The main
animal migration route is on the DR Congo side of the Virungas.
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROJECT
The collaborating partners involved in the project are the park authorities, IGCP, DFGFI,
CARE International (CARE) and the local authorities. The actual construction work of the
normal lengths of the wall is undertaken by the local communities (who are paid some cash to
do it and provide some labour in kind). The first part of the wall was funded by IGCP who
provided approximately £5,000 to build 3km and CARE who provided approximately £6,500
to build 3.9km. CARE had already part funded the construction of the Ugandan stretch of the
wall.
After the first part of the Rwandan wall was built the buffalo moved elsewhere which led to
pleas for help, which the Ministry of Agriculture responded to with a proposal to shoot the
buffalo. In response to this, the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Tourism called on a
18
number of groups in January 2003 to contribute to the funding of the further construction of
19km. Some responded but others are unable to do so.
Construction is agreed between the park authorities and local communities, who take
responsibility for operations, albeit with technical support and supervision. The park’s
Community Warden assesses work done weekly and agrees payment which is made on a per
metre basis for the transportation of rocks and/or the building of the wall. No payments can be
made without the agreement of him and four people appointed by each community. There are
no reported incidents of problems with payment or fraud.
There is no exact assessment of detailed technical issues, which are addressed on an ad hoc
basis. The main factor affecting the cost of building a section of the wall and often its quality
is the availability of suitable stones nearby and this was factored into the consultant’s report
which allowed for differing amounts to be paid. The report also assessed whether drainage
was needed. The report did not cover the westernmost district, Mutura, and it is not known
exactly whether conditions there are at all different – but there is no indication that they are, in
terms of topography or culture.
The Community Warden is actively involved in the education of the local population about the
benefits of the wall and the importance of their role in it. This is an important element,
especially in seeking to ensure adequate maintenance. The wall has collapsed in a few short
sections. Some repairs have been done but more are needed. The partners accept that not
enough attention has been paid to this and plan further meetings with local authorities to agree
the way forward, probably using community service and not just expecting those working land
immediately adjacent to the wall to take responsibility. It will not take much time and no
money to repair the wall where necessary.
The wall is monitored by rangers who carry GPS handsets to record locations of any incidents.
Monthly meetings are held with the IGCP. However, a more rigorous monitoring process is
required and will be stipulated as part of the provision of funds. This has been agreed in
principle by the IGCP and need not entail much more than the collating of information from
the park rangers and local communities. This monitoring will also include financial aspects,
including of bank statements for the specific account and minutes of any meetings by
contributors.
It is reported that the wall can be built at the rate of 5km to 6km a month. Construction is a
little easier in the dry season but not materially so; as important are the planting and harvesting
of crops and thus the availability of labour.
There is a strong rationale for completing the wall around the whole park to avoid buffalo
finding a gap and to prevent encroachment, linking it to the adjacent territories’ walls. In
Uganda 9km have been built leaving 6km to do; the wardens there would like to do this as
buffalo have re-appeared, although there are no funds available. The Ugandan section is
shorter and older, being built in 1995, but is reported to be generally effective, apart from the
fact that buffalo are going round the ends of it. A 4km section has been completed in DR
Congo.
FUNDING REQUIRED
The first section of the wall was completed at a cost of FRw1 million per kilometre,
approximately equivalent now to $2,000 or £1,250 (a higher $/£ equivalent at the time). This
amount is budgeted for each future km plus an extra 10% to cover maintenance, monitoring
19
and an element of contingency. If the wall is built for less than expected, then the surplus
funds can go to construction in Uganda or DR Congo or to other projects.
Hence the estimated cost of funding the completion of the wall in the Rwandan sector is
FRw54 million on current budgets and a little under FRw60 million allowing for the cost of
maintenance and a contingency. For this there are funds available or committed from the park,
IGCP, CARE/the local authorities and DFGFI of FRw13.5 million. This leaves a funding
requirement of FRw46 million or $92,000, equivalent to £60,000.
Signboard on the Ugandan section of wall built in 1995
BEE KEEPING AND HONEY CO-OPERATIVE
INTRODUCTION
The IGCP together with the park authorities wish to improve the livelihood of people in the
districts surrounding the park by engaging them in productive work that is profitable, linked to
conservation and reduces the communities’ dependence on land use. In pursuance of this, one
of the key areas identified as a source of income that is conservation related and financially
viable is the promotion and support of a recently formed association of bee keepers.
Bee keeping is an established, local and
culturally significant industry which is an
excellent example of the forest being of
benefit to the local population. Hives are
kept on top of the buffalo wall (as below),
close to it or otherwise along the park
boundary so the bees can collect nectar from
the flowers that are plentiful in the forest.
Honey is then made and sold locally for
eating (together with the larvae), beer
20
production and natural remedies when mixed with herbs. There are also some very limited
sales as a sweetener to the local bread factory and production of candles from beeswax. There
is potentially a wider market to tourists and others for honey marketed as “gorilla honey”.
The due diligence on this project included visits to groups of bee keepers near the park,
discussions with wardens, a visit to a successful similar project in Uganda, discussions with
Mark Mwine (the IGCP officer who runs their Regional Enterprise Programme), the review of
information from Mark and visits to UK bee keepers and bee keeping kit suppliers.
THE CONSERVATION NEED
There are three conservation needs that the funding of bee keeping are designed to fulfil, as
below.
•
The provision of employment and income for local people in a self-sustaining way directly
associated with the preservation of the park (as these bees are a forest bee species and
without the park they would simply not be there) – so that the local people become more
supportive of the park’s ongoing existence.
•
The provision of an alternative source of income so as to reduce the demand for land.
•
The removal of the need for the traditional practice of entering the forests to harvest honey
from natural bee hives or man-made bee hives placed in the trees, so as to remove the risk
of human disease spreading to gorillas, to prevent the burning of trees (to drive away bees
when collecting honey) and to stop associated illegal activities when in the park such as
bamboo collection, wood cutting and poaching.
WHETHER THE PROJECT WILL FULFIL THE NEED AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION
There are a number of ways in which funding can raise
the income of the local honey producers, thereby
fulfilling the project’s goals. Given this, the IGCP and
their partner in this, DFGFE, have started working with
bee keepers in four districts surrounding the park to
increase production and extend the product range
through the measures below.
•
Introducing more modern hives (as right) that have
a better structure than traditional ones (there are
currently 303 modern hives and 3,179 traditional
ones), allowing production of 20kg to 40kg per six
monthly harvest against 6kg to 12kg per harvest,
that at a cost per new hive of FRw13,000
(approximately £15) against FRw3,000 (£4) for an
old hive provides an attractive payback.
•
The training of bee keepers in the manufacture and
use of modern hives (including seeing what others
are doing through exchange visits and study tours)
and equipping them for this.
•
The establishment of a central facility with filtering equipment to improve quality, to
increase production of honey, to allow production of beeswax products (especially soap
and candles), to improve packaging and, if economic, to start the production of royal jelly
and propolis.
21
•
The purchase of land for bee keepers in one district which has many bee hives in the
adjacent forest – in large part due to no land being available to site the hives on.
•
The identification of key partners in the area to work with, notably to assist with improved
marketing particularly to tourists and local establishments (perhaps incorporating the
gorilla name in the product) so that products can be sold in bulk to new markets and not
just in artisanal quantities to local consumers.
Central to this project has been the establishment of an association or co-operative of bee
keepers, the Federation d’affilies Apicoles des Volcans (FAV). Before this, the large numbers
of bee keepers have not worked collectively in any systematic way. Its president is already
chosen, Apolinel Mumyambanza, and the process to register it, started in March 2003, should
already be completed. It has operated collectively from the July 2003 harvest when 7,000kg
were expected to be harvested. It covers 4 districts around the park (the fifth to the west being
in a different province).
Some training activities have begun, with a core of 96 bee keepers from all 4 districts (out of a
total of 1,645) having been trained in the use of beeswax with a view to them returning to their
home areas to train others. DFGFE has provided modern hives to 26 groups in one district and
a site for the central processing facility in a village called Bukamba has been identified.
FUNDING REQUIRED
A detailed budget is currently being drawn up for this project, with assistance from Julian
Cooke who has visited possible equipment providers in the UK (although local suppliers will
be preferred). The final budget will be reviewed carefully prior to any funds being deployed.
The cost of a central facility is currently estimated at £12,500 to £15,000 and the balance of the
funding will assist with replacement of traditional hives with modern ones, small amounts of
land purchase, marketing and training.
There is scope for a structure that incorporates loans to individual bee keepers for the purchase
of hives which can then be repaid with the proceeds of sales much increased by the improved
productivity of the new hives. This would allow the funds to be concentrated on the central
facility, land purchase and marketing.
Hillary Basekya, the founder of
a honey making co-operative
near Queen Elizabeth National
Park, Uganda
22
PROVISION OF WATER
INTRODUCTION
Areas around the Virunga volcanoes in Uganda, Rwanda and DR Congo experience severe
water shortages due to the lack of springs and other surface water sources which is a
consequence of the high porosity of the volcanic soils in this area. Particularly in the dry
season, it is common for women to spend most of the day walking to the nearest water
source (up to 10km round trip) and queuing for water. Of the few surface water sources
that exist, most lie within the boundaries of the national parks in the area. Under certain
circumstances park authorities have allowed people into the protected areas to access
water but the supervision required creates a significant burden for park authorities. On
the other hand refusing access creates conflict with the local communities and
fundamentally contradicts the community conservation ethic that is being promoted by the
national park authorities in the region.
The above is an extract from a detailed “lessons learnt” report on water projects in the Uganda
gorilla parks prepared for the Rwandan Gorilla Project by a team led by Phil Franks of CARE.
It illustrates a severe human need in the area that leads to real conservation issues. Phil is the
co-ordinator within CARE of 30 integrated conservation and development or community based
natural resource management projects and programmes in 18 countries.
The due diligence done, in addition to the above report, has entailed visiting existing water
systems in Rwanda and Uganda plus potential new sources in Rwanda, a visit to the main
municipal supply system on the Rwandan side of the Virungas, discussions with organisations
involved in implementing different existing systems in the area, a meeting with Water Aid and
other experts in the UK, discussions with the park authorities and conversations via interpreters
with the local population.
THE CONSERVATION NEED
There is a clear human need for reliable and clean water. Stories are plentiful of long queues
and even fighting at tap stands and of long walks to collect water. The severity of the shortfall
can be gauged by the significant number and scale of incursions into the park’s forest in search
of water and the incidence of disease, such as scabies, especially among children. In the dry
season up to 100 people at a time will intrude up along water channels into the park in their
search for water.
The above translates into two key conservation needs, as below.
•
The prevention of incursions into the park so as to reduce the possible contagion of gorillas
with human diseases and other damaging activities such as bamboo collection, cutting of
firewood and poaching.
•
The improvement of the perception of the park by its neighbours and the increase in their
acceptance of its continuing existence through creating an appreciation of the park as an
ongoing and vital source of water.
WAYS TO ADDRESS THE NEED AND THE KEY ISSUE OF MAINTENANCE
There are broadly three potential ways of supplying water to areas surrounding the Rwandan
park, as below.
23
•
Pumping water from the local town, Ruhengeri. The advantages of this are the large
potential capacity, the ability to treat water, the potential for financing from local or
overseas governments and agencies and the integrated approach. Its disadvantages are the
uncertain nature of future investment, the long time to implementation and the potential
impact on sources. This approach is outside the scope of this programme due to its cost
and complexity and would not link benefits to people with the park.
•
Gravity flow systems. The advantages here are the ready supply of pure water, reasonable
costs and time to build and, for those projects sourced in the park, a conservation benefit
from the linkage of water provision to the existence of the park. The disadvantages are the
unreliability of supply and
potential impact on the park
environment.
•
Rain water harvesting (as
right).
The advantages are
again cost and immediacy, but
also the lack of impact on the
environment; the disadvantages
are the shortage of rain in the
dry season, the lack of scale
and less linkage of benefit to
people with the park.
For all three a key issue is
maintenance and this points to an
immediate possible option – remedial work on existing projects. These include at least two
gravity flow systems from sources in the park. Remedial work would include the cleaning of
reservoir tanks, the repairing and re-laying of pipes (especially to a deeper level), the repairing
and possible re-location of tap-stands and the provision of tools and training for maintenance.
Education about hygiene can and should be incorporated effectively into any such programme.
However, the issue of ongoing maintenance would have to be properly addressed.
The “lessons learnt” report on gravity fed water provision in Uganda emphasised the
importance of establishing the right governance, management arrangements and cost
structures, in particular when comparing dilapidated older public systems with a newer private
one. The latter, while only recently commissioned, has to date been a success while the former
are largely failing. Points arising included the importance of calculating accurately the number
of people to be served and hence the likely demand, the importance of education and
awareness (including sanitation needs), maintenance (including the role of attendants and the
provision of tools), the difficulty of assessing accurately dry season flows and the conservation
impact (which has positive aspects but also there appears to have been an environmental effect
on a Ugandan swamp which is one of the water sources in the park).
IMPLEMENTATION
At this stage it is intended to maintain flexibility as to the approach to implementing this
project. This is because until the fund raising is complete it will not be known how much
money is available and also because a further key element of due diligence needs to be
completed.
As regards the further due diligence to be conducted, the approach to this project has been first
to examine in detail the experience of the water projects in the Ugandan gorilla parks. This
resulted in the comprehensive “lessons learnt” study mentioned above. A similarly thorough
24
examination has been started of the existing and potential water sources around the Rwandan
park plus an examination of the areas of greatest need. Out of this analysis will come the
various project implementation options. It is anticipated that the timing of this will broadly
coincide with the completion of the fund raising. Then the most appropriate approach to the
provision of water will be selected within the budget available, collectively by the organisers of
the fund raising, the IGCP and the park authorities.
Currently important information that is known is as below.
•
Authorities such as Water Aid stress the fundamental importance of any project being
demand led so that the local community served by it feel it is theirs – as without this they
will not provide maintenance over the long term and the project will fail. This will be
addressed during the final design of the project.
•
Much of the water in the district is supplied from water works on the edge of Ruhengeri.
These were originally established in the 1970s with funding from the World Bank. Only
$50 million of the proposed $70 million was spent. Discussions are ongoing to agree
future allocations. This would most probably include the construction of a large reservoir
tank to which water would be pumped after treatment which could serve districts in the
western area of the park. This could in time transform the nature of water supply in that
area but it is uncertain.
•
Three existing gravity fed supplies have been identified that could be rehabilitated or
extended (the photograph below is part of an existing system in Uganda), as follows:
- Bushokoro – fed by a waterfall and built probably in the late 1950s or early 1960s and
which has suffered from silting up and tap stands being in poor repair,
- Rusununu – a spring situated high in the park with one pipe leading from it that has been
broken resulting in the water
flowing over the ground and
not reaching the village of
Bisate, leaving its inhabitants
to walk 3km up the hill to the
broken pipe, and
- Lyango – a source lying just
inside the park boundary with a
collection
tank
installed
perhaps recently and which is
said to work well but the main
beneficiaries of the supply are
tourism sites and the park
headquarters with marginal
benefit accruing to local
people.
•
DFGFE has extensive experience of rain water harvesting, having installed 17 tanks of 15
to 25 cubic meter in size in three districts since 2000. They are planning 6 to 7 for 2003.
These are intended to help children and many have been placed at schools. DFGFI also
have some experience of rain water collection having installed a tank where their rangers
are accommodated.
If the final project selected includes gravity fed water provision from the park, an
environmental impact assessment will be done.
25
FUNDING
The examination of the existing and potential water sources around the Rwandan park plus an
examination of the areas of greatest need is estimated to cost no more than £3,000. A project
encompassing only the necessary remedial work on the existing projects is estimated to cost
about £15,000. New gravity fed systems are estimated to cost in the order of £50,000. The
largest rainwater harvesting tanks cost approximately £2,000 each. An essential element of the
budget will be an amount to assist in governance by the local community of the project and/or
maintenance if the governing structure or pricing policy is unable to cover it.
Water flowing from an existing gravity fed system, the tank of which is
illustrated on the previous page
26
A silverback feeding on vegetation. Photo: Juan Pablo Moreiras/FFI
PART III
DONOR SAFARIS
Introduction
Donors are encouraged to travel out to Rwanda to see their money in action and to visit the
gorillas. Central to the enjoyment by them of any trip are the programme of activities on offer
and the practical matters involved in gorilla trekking, accommodation, flights and on the
ground transport. This section is designed to address these and other safari points.
Programme of Activities
The programme of activities in or around the Virunga park for any donor will be spread over a
two or three day period, at set times in the year (to be notified in the ongoing newsletters and
emails). The programme can include all or any of the various activities below.
•
Gorilla trekking. Clearly this will be the highlight of any trip. Donors must, however,
appreciate certain issues, most of which arise from that fact that tourism if mis-managed
will harm or even destroy what visitors come to enjoy. These issues are as follows:
- the minimum age for trekkers is 15
- anyone showing any symptoms of any illness will be prevented from trekking due to the
risk of infecting the gorillas
- the time spent with the gorillas is strictly limited to one hour
- the group size when visiting the
gorillas is limited to between 6
and 8, depending on the gorilla
group size
- visitors may not be able to see a
particular group as it is important
to alternate the group visited
- the gorilla group chosen to be
visited may require a full day’s
trek which will always require at
least some physical stamina and
can be in difficult weather
conditions
- there is no guarantee of seeing gorillas as there is always a risk, for example, of their
taking fright before they are reached; but then an alternative day will be offered or the
refund of the cost of the gorilla permit ($250)
•
Visits to projects. Clearly donors will wish to see what their money is going into. They
may be interested in seeing other conservation projects as well. The projects available to
be seen of which donors will receive a guided, informative tour of are likely to be:
- the buffalo wall
- the bee keepers and, when commissioned, their central co-operative building
- the water project or projects, when commissioned
- women’s groups (that are being trained to make handicrafts and curios)
- Batwa support (the original forest dwellers, once referred to as pygmies, now being
assisted to generate alternative livelihoods)
27
- a proposed “Dian Fossey Discovery Centre”, when built, designed to inform visitors and
educate local people
•
Gorilla dinner.
During the
course of the stay, typically on
the last night, a dinner will be
hosted by Volcanoes Safaris (see
right for their Mt Gahinga camp
in Uganda) at their soon-to-be
opened Rwandan camp. To this
dinner, a number of the senior
staff from the park, the IGCP and
other gorilla NGOs will be
invited.
This will normally
include
at
least
Francois
Bizimungu, the Chief Warden, and members of the IGCP team. The intention is for donors
to be able to explore the conservation issues raised during their trip and any relevant wider
issues.
•
Other wildlife and park activities. Other activities that donors can enjoy if they so wish are
likely to include:
- forest walks/treks, including to the site of Dian Fossey’s original Karisoke Centre, her
grave and the graves of several of her study group gorillas (notably Digit)
- viewing of one of two groups of golden monkeys, an attractive and rare primate, if the
current habituation programme is successful (it is programmed to be completed very
soon)
- watching the rich and varied local bird life, for which wardens are currently undergoing
training
- hiking and/or climbing to the peaks of certain of the volcanoes, which is physically
challenging but offers highly rewarding views of the forest and over miles of the African
countryside
•
Assistance with the projects and other activities. As appropriate, it is intended that donors
should assist with the projects, mainly through helping to monitor them but also in other
ways. An example of this could include when a section of the buffalo wall is reported to be
completed a candidate from the next group of visiting donors will be sought to walk along
the section to check various matters and report back. Also if the honey or handicrafts are
produced in large enough quantities of sufficient quality, a donor may be able to assist with
the identification of catalogues or retail outlets in the UK for “gorilla honey” or other
gorilla branded products. Finally, visits have not been made to either Nyungwe or Akagera
(see below) and it would be most helpful if a donor making an early trip could visit them
and report back for the benefit of other donors in the future.
Visitor Group Size and Other Restrictions
Donors will be encouraged to visit the gorillas and see the projects being funded over a period
of two or three days, typically as part of a longer safari. Donors will, however, appreciate that
this must be done in an organised way so as to cause the minimum disruption to the very busy
staff of the park authorities and the IGCP. Also places on this programme will be limited by
the size of a party that can see the gorillas in any one trek. These and other factors mean that
the following restrictions will have to apply:
a) the programme will be only for those giving over £1,000,
28
b) it is the current intention to restrict donors to one place per £1,000 gifted, with the donor
being able to pass these places to relatives or friends (hence those donating, say, £5,000 or
£10,000 will be able to take a party of family and/or friends),
c) the programme will run for two years and, depending on demand, will be on up to eight
specific occasions only,
d) the dates may depend on the availability of gorilla trekking permits (at the peak periods
these can be fully booked up a year in advance), and
e) for legal reasons the cost cannot be paid for out of tax qualifying donations and so must be
included in the general cost of a safari.
Other Safari Activities in the Region
Typically donors will wish to take the opportunity to enjoy a wider safari when visiting the
gorillas. Within Rwanda there are the following options (see Part I for more description):
- the Akagera National Park
- the Nyungwe National Park
- Lake Kivu
- the National Museum in Butare
- various genocide memorials
Within the region there are:
- in Uganda: a series of attractive parks up its
western edge north of Rwanda that offer further
great ape tourism as well as lovely hiking and viewing of plains game
- in Kenya and Tanzania: stunning concentrations and variety of game plus the opportunity to
have an attractive Indian Ocean beach and/or diving holiday
- in the Indian Ocean: islands such as the Seychelles, Zanzibar, the Comoros, Pemba, the
Maldives and the very much larger Madagascar with its own unique fauna and flora
Accommodation, Ground Travel Arrangements and Flights
Donors may choose to travel and stay with whomsoever they choose.
Notwithstanding the above, Volcanoes Safaris will shortly have the only accommodation in
Rwanda within easy reach of the park that is suitable, in the opinion of the organisers of this
fund raising, for the majority of potential donors to stay at. It is spectacularly located with vast
panoramic views. Both the due diligence trips undertaken have been with Volcanoes Safaris,
one of which covered all four of their other camps across Uganda that already operate or are
under construction. In addition, their head office in Kampala and their sub offices in Kigali,
Rwanda, and in London have been visited. The experience gained is of a well-managed
operation run by courteous staff with a thorough knowledge of local conditions, notably
security and safety issues. They have a reputation for properly maintained vehicles and safe
drivers – which was borne out in due diligence. Finally, they have agreed to make a sizeable
donation to the IGCP for every safari booked with them by a donor.
It should be noted that Volcanoes do not attempt to provide the sophisticated “champagne on
the savannah” type experience of certain very top end operators elsewhere in East Africa.
Gorilla tourism is typically more simple and closer to Africa than this; Volcanoes are proud of
the fact that all their staff, other than those based in the UK office, are African; the London
based owner was born in Uganda.
Volcanoes’ camps are sensitively designed (see photographs above of their Mugahinga site and
below of their Sipi Falls site), being made extensively of local materials by local people.
29
Accommodation is usually in separate bandas. The camps, run to be as eco-friendly and cost
aware as practical, do not have running water; the individual showers and loos attached to each
banda being “camp” showers and loos – but perfectly hygienic and all part of the experience of
a stay at the frontier of up-market tourism.
Food is simple but well prepared.
To fly to Rwanda from the UK most travel
with British Airways (via Entebbe or
Nairobi), Kenya Airways (via Nairobi) or
S N Brussels (formerly Sabena, via
Brussels).
Other Relevant Information
•
Climate: temperatures are generally in the comfortable range of 21o C to 30o C in most
places in Rwanda. However, in the mountains it can be much colder, especially at night.
Hot water bottles are provided in some camps but it is important to come prepared with
suitable warm and waterproof clothing.
•
Seasons: the long rains are from March to May and the short rains from October to
November. It can, however, rain at any time of year and often does in the mountains. The
rains can make travelling more difficult but by no means impossible and the views are
clearer. When it rains it normally only does so in bursts. The driest months are July and
August.
•
Health: it is important to take medical advice before travelling, particularly with regard to
malaria. The Medical Advisory Service for Travellers Abroad (MASTA) can be consulted
on 0891 224100.
•
Language: Kinyarwanda is the national language of Rwanda. French remains the most
established language after Kinyarwanda but English is very widely spoken, especially in
the capital and the north of the country (where the gorilla park is located).
30
A young mountain gorilla in the Volcanoes National Park, Rwanda.
Photo: Juan Pablo Moreiras/FFI.
Giant rosette plants, the altitude vegetation of the Virungas in the afro-alpine zone.
Photo: Juan Pablo Moreiras/FFI.
PART IV
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES
THE CONSERVATION TEAM
Francois Bizimungu, Chief Warden, Parc National des Volcans
After his graduation in 1984 with a bachelor’s degree in biological science from Burundi
National University, Francois worked as a biology teacher in Burundi for ten years. After the
genocide in Rwanda in 1994, he returned to Rwanda and begun work directly with ORTPN,
the national parks authority.
On joining ORTPN, Francois spent his first year at the headquarters in Kigali contributing to
the rehabilitation and reconstruction of the office, which had been severely damaged by the
war. He was then transferred to the Akagera National Park as Chief Warden in August 1995.
In January 2000, he was appointed to his current position. Since then he has been ultimately
responsible for all the activities of the park and, together with his conservation colleagues in
DR Congo and Uganda, he has considerably strengthened the regional collaboration between
the three countries. In this time he has built up a close working relationship with the IGCP.
Francois is happily married and has three children. He is widely known in Rwanda, having
been a member of the country’s popular national football team.
Dr Annette Lanjouw, Director, IGCP
Annette has over 17 years’ experience working in the Congo basin, with a particular focus on
DR Congo, Rwanda and Uganda. She started in the Equateur Province of DR Congo in 1985,
studying the behavioural ecology of Pan paniscus, the Bonobo. From this early work in
research, she quickly shifted her focus to conservation of the African great apes, working not
just with the IGCP but also with the Frankfurt Zoological Society, the Wildlife Conservation
Society, the African Wildlife Foundation, Fauna and Flora International and the World Wide
Fund for Nature. Her expertise covers behavioural ecology of primates, eco-tourism, the
training of African professionals in conservation, programme management and co-ordination
and strategic planning. She took her current role in 1999, having joined the IGCP in 1994 as
Regional Co-ordinator.
Annette holds a PhD from the Rijks Universiteit te Utrecht, Netherlands, and a Bachelor of
Science degree in zoology and psychology from Victoria University of Wellington, New
Zealand.
Dr Elizabeth Macfie, DVM, Program Manager, IGCP
Liz has worked for or with the IGCP since 1992, currently serving the role of Program
Manager while Eugene Rutagarama is completing his graduate studies. Other experience with
the IGCP includes being responsible from 1992 to 1998 for the overall management and
provision of technical support to the Uganda Wildlife Authority for a project focusing on ecotourism development in Bwindi Impenetrable and Mgahinga Gorilla National Parks. Prior to
31
that she directed what is now the Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Centre for the Morris Animal
Foundation in Rwanda for three years. Other professional work has been with the California
Department of Fish and Game in the US, the University of California Departments of Range
Science and Institute of Ecology and as an independent consultant.
Liz is a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, having qualified at the University of California with a
specialization in zoology and wildlife medicine and diseases. She also holds a Professional
Certificate in Management of the Open University in the UK.
Eugene Rutagarama, Program Manager, IGCP
Eugene has over 15 years’ experience working in conservation in the Congo basin, culminating
in his current senior position with the IGCP. Prior to this, he worked as IGCP’s Rwanda
Program Officer. He has also held senior positions with the Wildlife Conservation Society in
Rwanda’s Nyungwe Forest Reserve and with the DFGFI’s Karisoke Research Centre, also in
Rwanda. Furthermore he has held the position of Deputy Director of ORTPN following the
war and genocide. In this capacity, he was instrumental in rehabilitating and restructuring the
park department as well as reinitiating gorilla-based tourism.
Eugene’s work in support of the mountain gorillas has been internationally recognized. In
1996, along with the Virunga park staff, he received the 19th John Paul Getty Conservation
Prize in recognition of outstanding contributions in times of conflict. In 2001, he was
individually recognized as Africa recipient of the prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize.
He will shortly complete an MSc in conservation biology in the UK. In addition, he holds a
Bachelor of Biology (Licencie en Biologie) from the University of Burundi, Bujumbura, as
well as numerous technical training certificates in areas of agro-forestry, park management,
leadership and teambuilding.
Mark Mwine, Regional Enterprise Officer, IGCP
Mark has an MBA from Makerere University Business School in Kampala and a Bachelor of
Arts in Social Sciences also from Makerere University. He speaks seven languages, including
Kinyarwanda (Rwanda’s national language), Swahili, English and French. He has authored or
co-authored several publications, including training manuals for water committees in simple
book keeping skills, for community based pump mechanics and for community based pump
caretakers. His thesis was on “The relationship between networks, social capital and
institutional competencies in the performance of Microfinance Institutions in Uganda”.
As regards his career, after a brief early period with the United Nations High Commission for
Refugees and the Ugandan Ministry of Education, Mark worked from 1987 to 1991 in south
west Uganda on water and community based maintenance systems in Mbarara District. Then
until 1994 he was the Purchasing and Logistics Officer at a research organisation in Kampala.
Next, back in western Uganda, he worked as an area project co-ordinator controlling six
districts for the Poverty Alleviation Project until when in 1999 he became the National
Programme Co-ordinator - Micro Finance based at the head office of Action Aid Uganda.
Finally he worked briefly for a Swiss procurement company until in April 2002 when he took
his current position.
Anecto Kayitare, Program Officer Rwanda, IGCP
Anecto Kayitare has worked with the IGCP as Program Officer in Rwanda since November
1999. He is an agronomist by training and has broad expertise in planning and implementation
32
of projects, monitoring and evaluation, participatory evaluations, development of agro-forestry/
socio-economic studies and planning for emergency situations. Before joining the IGCP he
worked for the World Bank, the UNDP, the Government of Burundi, CARE International, as
an independent consultant and has taught courses at the National University of Rwanda.
Anecto holds a degree in Agronomy and graduated with distinction from the University of
Kinsangani (DR Congo). He speaks four languages – Kinyarwanda, Swahili, French and
English.
THE DUE DILIGENCE TEAM
Christopher Powles
Christopher was born into a Kenyan farming family and although he left for the UK aged six is
well acquainted with Africa through travelling, reading zoology at Oxford and via his family
connections. Among these was his and Stephen’s grandfather, “Buster” Powles, who founded
Mount Elgon National Park in Kenya and was its first warden. Christopher has done field
studies into granivorous ants in Kenya and has helped raise money for the Kenya Wildlife
Service. He is a Fellow of both the Royal Geographical Society and the Zoological Society of
London.
As regards his career, this has been in business, most recently as founder and for five years
Managing Director of Pi Capital. Before that he worked in the management buy out and
acquisition finance market at Bank of Scotland and obtained a professional training with what
is now Pricewaterhouse Coopers. He no longer has any involvement with Pi, having sold out
in September 2002. Pi runs what was arguably the UK’s first and, at the time, biggest upmarket venture capital syndicate of high net worth individuals wishing to invest in early stage
unquoted British companies. Christopher was responsible for the investment of in excess of
£30 million in this way and while at Bank of Scotland he was involved in lending directly or in
syndicates approximately £500 million. He now has a number of business interests, including
sitting on the board of the public company, Litho Supplies plc.
Julian Cooke
Julian is an investment manager by profession and a traveller by inclination. He worked at
Touche Remnant and latterly Govett Investments, where he was a director and head of their
UK and global smaller companies operations. At Govett he was responsible for the firm’s first
investments into sub-Saharan Africa, after a due diligence trip in 1994 to South Africa,
Botswana, Zimbabwe, Kenya and Uganda. He acts currently as a consultant on a number of
projects.
Julian took a break from the stock market at the end of 2001 to spend time travelling in Africa
and the Middle East before moving to live in Cape Town for six months. He has visited 26
African countries. In particular, he has been involved in Madagascar since a charity bike
expedition the length of the island in 1992, sitting on the committee of the Anglo-Malagasy
Society and helping to establish a small charity there. Also he has raised money by running
marathons for various charities, including Save The Rhino, and after his Modern History
degree at Oxford he spent a year cycling 12,500 miles in Australia, SE Asia and the Indian subcontinent – which raised £10,000 for Voluntary Service Overseas. He speaks French and is a
Fellow of the Royal Geographical Society.
33
Phil Franks
Since 1999 Phil has been ICD Network Co-ordinator for CARE International. In this role he coordinates 30 integrated conservation and development (ICD) and community based natural
resource management projects and programs in 18 different countries. Part of this involves the
design, planning, monitoring and evaluation of conservation based enterprise programmes that
strengthen the linkage between natural resource conservation and poverty eradication. Previous
roles he has undertaken during an extensive career in conservation and poverty relief include
Project Co-ordinator for a forest management and conservation project for Birdlife International in
Kenya and Project Manager for a development through conservation project with CARE Uganda.
Phil has an MSc in Natural Resource Management from Edinburgh University, an MSc in Crop
Protection from Reading University and an MA in Natural Sciences from Cambridge University.
He speaks French and Swahili, as well as English. He knows the Ugandan gorilla parks from his
time working with Care Uganda (as above).
Diana Roberts
Diana has a deep commitment to sub-Saharan Africa – its environment, people and wildlife –
having been born in Tanzania and lived throughout East Africa until the age of eleven. She
also spent six months living in South Africa at the end of the 1980s, in what was then Eastern
Transvaal, working in tourism. She returns to Africa whenever possible.
Following an earlier career in business management, Diana has more recently gained a First
Class Honours degree in Anthropology with Ecology and a Masters degree in Wildlife
Management from the University of Reading. As a result of her undergraduate and
postgraduate research, she specialises in the call patterns of tree hyrax (Dendrohyrax spp.), a
little understood, though relatively common, group of largely nocturnal mammals occurring in
forests throughout most of sub-Saharan Africa. She recently completed, in association with
other writers, the species profiles for the Eastern Tree Hyrax (Dendrohyrax validus) and the
Western Tree Hyrax (Dendrohyrax dorsalis) for a forthcoming publication, Mammals of
Africa. Diana is also Honorary Manager of the Catalyst Group, a London based dining club,
which provides a forum for high net worth individuals to learn about and become involved in
global social and environmental issues.
Stephen Powles
Stephen devotes much of his spare time to the study of wildlife. His personal involvement
with Africa is much the same as Christopher’s although he has also some experience of
veterinary work in Nairobi, Kenya. Other immediate family members have worked at the
highest level of the Kenyan government, seen active service during the Mau Mau in Kenya,
taught in a remote school in Botswana and, until recently, farmed in Zimbabwe. A sister, Dr
Julia Powles, Director of Studies in Human Sciences at St Catherine’s College, Oxford, is an
increasingly recognised authority on African refugee issues.
As regards his professional life, Stephen qualified at the Royal Veterinary College in London.
He then had a short period of work at a small animal practice in Birmingham before joining a
predominantly large animal practice in central Devon. This has now developed into a mixed
practice of farm animal, small animal and horse work.
34
TAX RELIEFS
UK Private Individual Tax Payers
For UK private individual tax payers the relevant tax reliefs available are through Gift Aid,
payroll giving and share giving. A summary of each is as below.
a) Gift Aid: for every £1,000 given, the project will receive from the Inland Revenue the basic
rate tax on the grossed up amount, equal to an extra £280. In addition, higher rate taxpayers
may reclaim £230 from the Inland Revenue, being the difference between basic rate and
higher rate tax on the gross amount. The only requirement is that in the same financial year
the donor pays as much tax (income and/or capital gains) as will be reclaimed on the
donation.
b) Payroll Giving: those whose employers offer this may make a donation out of their gross
salary. This gives immediate tax relief on the full value of a donation. Thus for higher rate
taxpayers wanting to give £1,000, it will cost them only £600, or £780 for basic rate
taxpayers. As an extra incentive, the Government is adding 10% to every donation made in
this way up to April 2004, so a £1,000 gift becomes £1,100 – almost twice the cost to a
higher rate taxpayer.
c) Share Giving: individuals who give shares (or various other securities) are entitled to full
tax relief on the value of the shares. Also the capital gains tax (CGT) on any uplift in the
value of the shares since bought will not apply. Hence a gift of shares worth £1,000 will
only cost a higher rate taxpayer £600, or £780 for lower rate taxpayers, and the CGT
otherwise payable on the sale of such shares will be washed away. Furthermore the value of
the gift immediately falls out of the donor’s estate for inheritance tax purpose, rather than
taking the normal 7 year period. Finally, it is also tax effective for shares to be sold to the
project at any price down to their original cost. The potential CGT falls away and the
difference between the market value and sale value can be offset against tax.
In addition to the above, legacies and gifts of land and property can be made tax efficiently
(but are unlikely to be relevant). Any potential donor wishing to learn more should visit the
web site of The Giving Campaign (www.givingcampaign.org.uk).
Other UK Donors – Companies and Charitable Trusts
Donations can be received from private UK charitable trusts and companies. In the latter case,
this may be done through Gift Aid to be deductible against taxable profits or via share giving in
a way analogous to that for individuals.
All US Tax Payers
Donors who are United States tax payers (either individuals or corporations) can make tax
deductible donations to support the project through the American Fund for Charities. Such
gifts are US tax-deductible to the extent allowed by US law. US charitable foundations may
also donate via the Fund. The first $15 of any donation will be allocated to the Fund's core
costs. Donations of shares can be accepted by the Fund but will attract a $50 charge. The
Fund will issue the donor with the necessary receipt for their tax returns. (Please note UK
resident US tax payers can proceed with making a donation but US residents should contact the
organiser of the fund raising prior to making any donation.)
35
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Gorillas
Fossey, Dian. Gorillas in the Mist. Hodder & Stoughton, 1983.
Schaller, George. The Year of the Gorilla. University of Chicago Press, 1964.
Weber, William & Vedder, Amy. In the Kingdom of the Gorillas. Simon and Schuster,
2001.
Conservation
Brockington, Dan. Fortress Conservation – The Preservation of the Mkomazi Game Reserve,
Tanzania. James Currey, 2002.
Hulme, David and Murphree, Marshall. African Wildlife & Livelihoods – The Promise &
Performance of Community Conservation. Heinemannn, James Currey, 2001.
Oates, John. Myth and Reality in the Rain Forrest – How Conservation Strategies are Failing
in West Africa. University of California Press, 1999.
Peterson, Dale. Eating Apes. University of California Press, 2003.
Other Natural History
Kingdom, Jonathan. The Kingdom Field Guide to African Mammals. Academic Press, 1997.
Williams, John & Arlott, Norman. Field guide to the Birds of East Africa. Collins, 1980.
Rwanda – General
Halsey Carr, Rosamond. Land of a Thousand Hills. Viking, 1999.
Pottier, Johan. Re-Imaging Rwanda – Conflict, Survival and Disinformation in the Late
Twentieth Century. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Rwanda – Genocide
Gourevitch, Philip. We wish to inform you that tomorrow we will be killed with our families.
Picador, 1998.
Keane, Fergal. Season of Blood: a Rwandan Journey. Penguin, 1996.
Melvern, Linda. A People Betrayed – The Role of the West in Rwanda’s Genocide. Zed,
2000.
Prunier, Gerard. The Rwanda Crisis – History of a Genocide. C. Hurst, 1995.
Other
Briggs, Philip and Booth, Jane. Rwanda – The Bradt Travel Guide. Bradt Travel Guides,
2001.
Mowat, Farley. Woman in the Mists. Futura, 1987.
36
SELECTED WEBSITES
Gorillas
www.4apes.com
www.gorilla.org
www.unipv.it/webbio/
dfprimat.htm
The site of the Ape Alliance, a coalition working for the
conservation and welfare of apes
The site of the Gorilla Foundation/Koko.org that promotes
interspecies communication
A site carrying an extensive number of links to other
primatology sites
Gorilla Conservation Charities
www.awf.org
www.dianfossey.org
www.gorillafund.org
www.fauna-flora.org
www.morrisanimalfoundation.org
www.wwf.org
www.wwf-uk.org
The African Wildlife Foundation’s site
DFGFE’s site
DFGFI’s site
Fauna and Flora International’s site
The Morris Animal Foundation’s site
The World Wide Fund for Nature’s international site
The World Wide Fund for Nature’s UK site
Rwanda
www.rwanda1.com
www.rwanda.net
www.rwandemb.org
The official website of the Republic of Rwanda
A commercial Rwandan website carrying local news
updated daily
The official website of the Embassy of the Republic of
Rwanda in Washington, D.C.
Safaris and Travel
www.fco.gov.uk
www.travel.state.gov/travel_
warnings.html
www.volcanoessafaris.com
The UK government’s site that carries official travel advice
The US government’s site that carries their travel advice
Volcanoes Safaris’ site
Tax Reliefs
www.givingcampaign.org.uk
The Giving Campaign’s site that contains further
information on tax reliefs for charitable giving
37
DETAILED DUE DILIGENCE AND OTHER INFORMATION AVAILABLE
The information that has been gathered during due diligence includes the items below and
these can be made available to any potential donor if they so wish.
a) Detailed Curriculum Vitae for Francois Bizimungu, Julian Cooke, Anecto Kayitare, Dr
Annette Lanjouw, Dr Elizabeth Macfie, Mark Mwine, Christopher Powles, Stephen
Powles, Diana Roberts and Eugene Rutagarama
b) Due Diligence Programme, prepared by Christopher Powles, dated 6th May 2003
c) Due Diligence Report, prepared by Julian Cooke assisted by Diana Roberts, dated June
2003
d) FFI Annual Report and Accounts for the year to 31st December 2001 and, when available,
the Report and Accounts for the year to 31st December 2002
e) IGCP profile document
f) Report of “Some Lessons Learnt from Gravity Water Schemes Associated with National
Parks in South West Uganda”, prepared by Phil Franks, Ben Isabirye, Maryke Gray and
William Kaleega, dated May 2003
g) Volcanoes Safaris Brochure
h) Memorandum of Understanding Between Fauna & Flora International, the International
Gorilla Programme and Christopher Powles, Stephen Powles, Julian Cooke and Diana
Roberts, setting out the basis of the role and responsibilities of each
38