




































In ternationa l
Scholars
Journa ls

 

African Journal of Environmental Economics and Management ISSN 2375-0707 Vol. 6 (1), pp. 355-366, 
January, 2018. Available online at www.internationalscholarsjournals.org © International Scholars Journals 

 

Author(s) retain the copyright of this article. 
 
 

Full Length Research Paper 
 

Approach to resolving pollution of river water 
associated with human activities in Tanzania 

 
Bomani Saida Sumari  

 
Institute of Resource Assessment, University of Dar es Salaam, P. O. Box 35097, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. 

E-mail:bomani.sumari@hotmail.com 
 

Accepted 17 March, 2017 
 

Lack of coordination among sectors and institutions is among factors that results in ineffective 
management of natural resources in most basins in east Africa including Tanzania. In many cases, this 
has reported to be the most factor contributing natural resources degradation and conflicts between 
societies. This paper presents findings on different factors affecting the sustainability of the Mara River 
Basin (MRB) and proposes a management framework that will bring about sustainable resources use in 
the basin. The study was limited to the MRB part of Tanzania and multiple approaches were used in 
data collection. The MRB is experiencing a number of management problems including deforestation, 
land degradation and pollution of the river water associated with human activities. Institutional 
framework for natural resource management (NRM) is rather sectoral thus lacking integration and 
sometimes results into conflicting efforts to conserve natural resources. It is evident that some cultural 
attitudes including gender have positive impact on natural resources management such as the 
customary land tenure system. For sustainability of the MRB resources, a well coordination of natural 
resources and livelihoods projects, programs and stakeholders’ participation is a key factor without 
neglecting cultural aspects. Furthermore, different policies need to be considered by linking them 
together to achieve sustainability. 

 
Key words: Mara river basin, natural resources, sustainable, water resource management. 

 
INTRODUCTION 

 
The Mara River (MR) is an international river, shared 
between Kenya and Tanzania and the river is very 
potential in supporting community livelihoods in particular 
through agricultural production (Majule, 2008). Natural 
resources (including water, soils, forest, wildlife, 
macrophytes and others) in most river basins including 
the MR have been managed in unsustainable manner, 
thus leading to their depletion and degradation with nega-
tive impact to community livelihoods (Majule et al., 2009). 
Likewise in other basins, climate change and variability 
coupled with land use change in the basin affects 
agricultural production in a number of ways including 
declining crops and livestock production (Salinger, 1992; 
Frederic, 1997; Majule, 2008; Lema and Majule, 2009; 
Kangalawe and Lyimo, 2010). Main reasons for resource 
depletion have been mentioned to be due to population 
increase, high poverty incidences, lack of coordination in 
managing resources between sectors and also due to 
poor technology and lack of incentives (Kangalawe and 
Lyimo, 2010). Stakeholders in the basin are increasingly 
facing problems with poor water quality and 

 
 
 

 
environmental degradation in particular soil erosion and 
compaction (Reij et al., 1996) leading to declining crop 
productivity and thus limiting efforts to achieving poverty 
alleviation, improving health and food security. In this 
case, economic development and protection goals of the 
natural resources are negatively affected and this 
requires an understating on both social and biophysical 
characteristics of the basin in order to formulate appro-
priate interventions (Salinger, 1992; Yanda et al,. 2005; 
Kangalawe and Lyimo, 2010). Main issues include the 
loss of forest cover in the upper catchments and along 
rivers, unsustainable agricultural expansion and intensifi-
cation (including small scale irrigation), population 
growth, poorly planned water abstraction, pollutions from 
mining, agriculture and inappropriate fishing methods. A 
review indicates that different projects have been initiated 
in the MRB to address socio-economic economic, cultural 
and environmental concerns. For example, the MRB 
Project was developed to serve as a catalytic agent for 
bringing various stakeholders within and outside the 
basin to the discussion table to exchange ideas and 



Bomani     356 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
Figure 1. Location of Mara river basin (Source, IRA cartographic unit). 

 

 

information for planning and implementing shared 
sustainable management and conservation initiatives. It 
has been realized that there is a growing need for 
generating baseline data prior implementing different 
development programs in order to make sure that 
development activities does not really compromise with 
natural ecosystems (Yanda et al., 2007; Majule and 
Kalonga, 2008; Majule et al., 2009).For sustainable 
management and development of re-sources of the MRB, 
there must be political commitments from the govern-
ments of Tanzania and Kenya and sup-port stakeholders’ 
dialogue to develop a shared vision, mission and 
objectives. This means that Tanzania and Kenya needs 
to develop a management framework that will supervise 
the implementation of social economic activities taking 
into account that what ever activity is implemented in the 
upstream part has no significant impacts socially and 
environmentally downstream. For example how do you 
manage agricultural production and livestock keeping in 
the upper catchment to minimize water pollution and 
siltation downstream? This requires a compromise bet-
ween the two countries that share the basin. A baseline 
study on socio economic and cultural aspects on the 
MRB was therefore intended to provide different stake-
holders and scientific community information that can be 
used in the planning of different development activities 
such as mining, expansion of irrigation, sustainable 
livestock keeping and other investments on wildlife 
management. MRB is endowed with a number of natural 
resources which are undergoing degradation due to 

 
 

 

several factors. A coordinated planning in managing such 
resources was therefore revealed to be necessary and 
thus a need for such study. The paper presents facts 
about socio-economic, cultural and environmental 
concerns on the sustainability of the MRB and used such 
information to emphasize a need to developing a well 
coordinated framework for managing natural resources in 
a sustainable way (McDonald and Kay, 1988). This paper 
also provides a comprehensive analysis of best and poor 
practices that enhance sustainable planning of the 
management of the MRB natural resources in particular 
water. This paper also discusses and proposed the 
institutional framework for managing natural resources in 
a sustainable way in MRB and ascertained how socio-
economic activities, cultural aspects contributes to 
resource management. The environmental implications 
associated with resource management and policy 
interventions that could be adopted in other basins have 
also been highlighted for policy implementation. 

 

DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA 

Geographical locations 

 
The MR is an international river, shared between Kenya 
and Tanzania in East Africa. The size of the MRB is 

about 13,750 km
2
, of which about 65% is located in 

Kenya and 35% in Tanzania. The basin is located in the 
northern part of the country and is shared with Kenya on 
the upper stream part (Figure 1). The Mara River drains 



 
 
 

 

its water into Lake Victoria and the basin covers Musoma, 

Tarime and Serengeti districts in Tanzania. 

 

Climate and soils 
 
The Mara region is divided into three major climatic zones 
namely; i) the northern zone which falls within the MRB in 
highland area covering Tarime and part of Serengeti 
districts. This zone receives an average rainfall of 
between 1250 and 2000 mm per year and it has two rainy 
seasons; a short one from September to January, and a 
long rainy season from February to June. This zone 
favors he growth of different annual and permanent crops 
including beans, maize and coffee respectively; ii) the 
central zone which covers much of Musoma district and 
eastern parts of Serengeti districts. The zone receives 
between 900 and 1300 mm of rainfall per year and it 
favors the growth of different crops including rice, maize, 
sorghum and many others; iii) The last zone is lowland 
area which includes much part of the Bunda district that 
does not fall in the MRB.  

The region’s soils have been formed by weathering of 
granite rocks resulting into a wide range of soil types. 
Generally, soils vary from course and light to heavy and 
fine textured soil. Other soil inclusions include light sandy 
loams, grey clays particularly in the valley bottoms and in 
wetlands and black calcareous soils referred to as mbuga 
soils. The later are located in the lower part of the basin 
and are naturally very fertile supporting the growth of 
different crops. 

 

Geology 
 
According to De Pauw (1984), geologically the MRB is a 
flat sheet of dark grey basalt associated with Meta-
volcanic rocks. The rocks belong to pre-cambrian age 
forming a base for the formation of younger rocks. Mara 
region has been classified into three portions on 
geological basis. 
 
1. Northern highland: This occupies the whole of Tarime, 
parts of Serengeti and Musoma and it consists of granite 
granodiorite foliated gneisses and magnetite.  
2. Southern highlands: This occupies the western parts of 
Serengeti and large parts of Bunda district. It consists of 
mainly volcanic rocks of alkaline nature  
3. Central lowland: Mainly in Serengeti and parts of 

Bunda and Musoma. It is of Meta-volcanic nature having 

conglomerates. They also dominate in southern side of 

the Mara River. 
 
Topography and drainage 

 

Mara Region lie between the low granite hills rising at 

about 100 m above the gently sloping foothills, which lead 

down to rather narrow flooded areas of Musoma point, 
and Makoko foothills (URT, 2003). Other parts of 

 
357     Afr. J.  Envir. Econ. Manage. 

 
 

 

the region are the areas in which plateau surface is 
broken up by long narrow hill ranges, which rise above 
rather flat low lands. There are several hills, which are 
within the region’s area including the Ryamakongo hills, 
which rise up to 1259 m.s.l, Kibayo hills 1254 m.a.s.l, and 
Nyabisonga hills. Generally, the topography of the region 
is undulating to rolling with wide valleys and occasional 
steep sided hills and this allows for different livelihood 
systems to interact within and across ecological gradients 
(Majule et al., 2009). The MR is the only perennial river in 
the basin and it forms the major drainage pattern in the 
region with its tributaries flowing to Lake Victoria. Other 
streams flow to the lowlands forming flood plains which 
are potential for livestock grazing as they provides water 
and favors pasture growth for livestock grazing (Figure 2). 
 
 

 
STUDY METHODOLOGY 
 
This study used both secondary and primary data. Secondary data 
collection involved review of existing reports (unpublished, gray and 
published reports) from libraries and documentation centers in 
various institutions in Dar es Salaam and Mara Region. Some 
reports were also made available through Internet search. Secon-
dary information were supplemented by primary data at district level 
whereby small meeting were made with District commissions, 
District Executive Directors, District Planning Officers, District 
Agricultural and Livestock Development Officers, District Natural 
Resource Officers and Community Development officers for 
Musoma, Tarime and Serengeti Districts. 

In this case at total of 18 stakeholders were consulted in total for 
all three Districts. Since the study had to be conducted in a limited 
period of time, the Parti-cipatory Rural Appraisal was employed 
where by a checklist with few key questions was used to collect 
required information. The method’s cornerstone was interactive 
learning, knowledge sharing and assurance of high local people’s 
participation.  

The Participatory Research Approach methods were applied to 
quickly generate additional information through transects walk 
(Chambers, 1992; Kangalawe et al., 2005; Majule and Mwalyosi, 
2005). The interviews with leaders at district level took place in an 
informal way where only some of the questions were predetermined 
and the rest arose during the interview.  

The study also involved visiting of some specific areas for 
physical observation on how natural resources are being managed 
and implications on the ecosystem. Such areas include a number of 
hotspot areas such as a gold mine at Nyamongo, farmlands and 
selected forestry patches in the MR flood plain and villages situated 
nearby. In the village a total of 15 community members attended at 
focus group discussion including a Village Executive Officer (VEO) 
and a village chair person. On the other hand, at the Nyamongo 
mining, a total of 5 people were involved in the discussion including 
company manager, an administrative officer, 2 geologists and a 
waste management expert. The information collected consolidated  
this paper about MRB. Due to the scope of this study, 

data collection was limited to Tanzania part of the MRB. 

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

Socio-economic characteristics 

The findings reported under this section are purely based 



Bomani     358 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
Figure 2. Part of the Degraded Simoni Riverline Forest in Ikongo Area (Photo by Majule, 2008). 

 

 

on review and consultations made between a researcher 

and district leaders and few other stakeholders consulted 

at community level. 
 

 

Administrative issues 

 

It is estimated that about 65% of the MRB is in the 
Kenyan side and 35% in the Tanzanian side. In Tanzania, 
the basin falls under Mara administrative Region which is 
divided into four districts namely Musoma, Tarime, Bunda 
and Serengeti. Bunda is the only district which does not 
fall in the MRB. The MRB has a total of 16 divisions, 97 
wards and 336 villages by the time of this study. 
 

According to the consultations made, currently there is 
no coordination in the planning and management of 
common resources found in the MRB. For example, 
planned activities on water resource use by abstracting 
water from the MR for hydropower development on the 
Kenya side is likely to have large impacts on the ecology 
of the Mara river and consequently on Lake Victoria. This 
or any other development initiatives in the upper part that 
will entail water use from MR are also likely to have 
implications on community livelihoods downstream. 
Under such a situation a cross border integrated planning 
on resources use and management is very important for 
sustainability of the MRB ecosystem and community 
livelihoods. The proposed Amala Weir Water Diversion 
Project and the shelved Ewaso_Ngiro Hydropower 
project will significantly reduce water quantity and 

 
 

 

completely drying of the Mara River under severe 
drought. Implications of this development on the Kenyan 
side would have severely affected the Serengeti eco-
system and the livelihood of the people on the Tanzanian 
side.  

Other initiatives that can be seen as opportunities 
include the involvement of East African Community and 
the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) in particular the Mara River 
Basin Project under NBI. Moreover, there is Lake Victoria 
Basin Water Office at the national level that deals with 
management of water resources in the basin part of 
Tanzania. Figure 4 proposed a best implementation 
framework for sustainability of natural resources in the 
basin.  

Although there are policy frameworks governing 
integrated approach in managing natural resources in the 
basin, it is evident that in practice there is lack of 
coordination in planning and management of natural 
resources in the MRB. A common practice is that each of 
the three districts is fully mandated in the planning and 
management of various natural resources found in their 
respective territories. It is often the case that most of the 
ecological units are cross border resources and are 
managed differently and management plans therefore do 
not complement each other. For examples, the river itself 
and pockets of forests located in Ikongo area are shared 
by more than one district but managed using different 
approaches. Under such situation, it has been found that 
lack of integrated approach in natural resource manage-
ment among the three districts has contributed to the on 
going degradation of natural resources in the basin 



 
 
 

 

ecosystems. Typical examples of problems observed to 

be associated with lack of integration in resource 

management include; 
 

1. The Serengeti District council is currently implementing 
a strict by-law, which restricts large scale charcoal 
burning while the neighboring districts of Tarime and 
Musoma are not implementing such by-law. As a result, 
charcoal business is mushrooming in the Tarime and 
Musoma Districts leading to further forestry degradation. 
2. The remaining part of the Simoni Riverline forest at 
Ikongo area (Figure 2) is only found on the Serengeti side 

while on the Tarime district side has been completely 

cleared and converted into grazing and cultivation. 
 

Integrated planning must be extended to lower admini-
strative units such as wards and villages. For example, 
more than one village located in the Kisaka ward shares 
the Ikongo forest within Serengeti district. Apparently, it is 
Buchanchari and Nyansurumunti villages in only that 
have taken strong initiatives to conserve resources in the 
MRB. The strategy used includes prohibit tree cutting for 
various uses, use of forest for recreation purposes, and 
set of a fine of $10 (Tshs 10,000) for offenders violating 
these by laws. 
 

 

Ethnicity, cultural characteristics 
 

In the MRB, there is diversity of ethnicity that is 
associated with different cultural attitudes with various 
impacts on natural resource management. The dominant 
ethnic groups in the MRB are Wakurya, Wajaluo and 
Wajita (URT, 2003). In Tarime and Serengeti districts, the 
dominant ethnic group is Wakurya. They occupy the 
major fertile land in the districts manly in highlands. 
Wajaluo are also found in parts of Tarime district. Wajita 
are dominant in Musoma district and other small tribes 
such as Wazanaki, Wasuba, Waikizu, Waisenye, 
Waikoma, Wangoreme, Wakwaya, Waluli and Washashi 
also characterize the region’s ethnicity picture. 

Wakurya is a native tribe and has maintained its culture 
over decades and this has strong impact on management 
of land resources. For example, this study revealed that 
land is owned by clans thus it is difficult for the village 
government to plan on how land can be used. On the 
other hand, such land tenure system seems to be 
effective in that they the owners have security over land 
resources and they can therefore manage it appro-
priately. In such a situation it is hard to find deforestation 
taking place by outsiders. They have regulations and 
rules on how land resources can be managed. This 
practice should be seen as an opportunity in natural 
resources management perspectives.  

On the other hand, the clan system has large impact on 

population size in Tarime district. This is because clans 

are confined in defined geographical areas, densely 

 
359     Afr. J.  Envir. Econ. Manage. 

 

 

 

populated and thus restricting movement of people from 
one area to another area occupied by a different clan. 
The only interaction (outlet) is through marriages. Under 
circumstance that the population in a clan is large 
enough, resource degradation is likely to occur. In this 
regard, people are forced to move to the neighboring 
districts such as Serengeti searching for agricultural land 
and pastureland. This is a threat to MRB management.  

Culturally, most ethnic groups in the Mara Region are 
agro-pastoralists and they value the number of livestock 
as a sign of wealth and a symbol of status in the society. 
As a result, large herds of livestock particularly cattle are 
found in the basin. The survival of livestock depends 
largely on Mara River resources particularly water and 
pasture. Excessive livestock keeping is a threat to the 
basin ecosystem.  

In terms of gender, there is also a significant division of 
labor and resource ownership based on gender. For 
example most of the land is owned by male while female 
undertake most of the farming and household activities 
including for example firewood collection. It was also 
noted that most of the fishing, miming, hunting and 
charcoal business, livestock keeping are done by young 
and middle aged male. Male are in most cases the head 
of households but there also very few females who head 
households (less than 5%) and there are those who tends 
to own another female to work for them through “Nyumba 
nyitu” arrangements.  

Within the basin there are pockets of forests on water 
sources, which are used as sacred sites. Such cultural 
believe environmentally friendly because water and forest 
resources are protected. Such areas may also be of 
biodiversity importance similarly to what has been 
reported elsewhere (Yanda et al., 2005; Kangalawe et al., 
2005; Majule and Mwalyosi, 2005). 
 

 

Population characteristics 
 

The 2002 Census report provides population data of 
Mara region (URT, 2003). The region had a total 
population of 1,368,602 people of which 715,153 were 
females and 653,449 males (Table 1). Average 
household size is 5.5 members and the annual average 
population growth 1988-2002 was 2.5% (URT, 2003). 
The 1988 population census placed Mara as the seventh 
most densely populated region after Dar es Salaam, 
Mwanza, Kilimanjaro, Mtwara and Kagera at 43.7 
persons per square kilometer. However when we exclude 
the Serengeti National Park area, the population density 
of Mara region increases to 76 people per square km 
making Mara region the fourth most populated region in 
mainland Tanzania. Due to high population density, 
competition for land between cultivators and herdsmen is 
escalating and deforestation marches on at an alarming 
rate (URT, 2003). Competition for land resources even-
tually contribute to land degradation and consequently 



Bomani     360 
 
 

 
Table 1. Population structure at district level in the MRB.  

 

District 
 Total populations   Growth rates  

 

1967 1978 1988 2002 1967/78 1978/88 1988/2002 
 

 

  
 

Musoma 196,625 263,129 316,632 330,953 2.7 1.8 2.4  
 

Tarime 188,536 253,010 333,888 492,798 2.7 2.8 2.8  
 

Serengeti 158,984 207,688 111,710 176,609 2.4 7.5 3.3  
  

Source: URT (2003). 
 
 

 
Table 2. Major livestock distribution in the Mara river basin.  

 

Type of livestock 
 District  

 

Musoma Serengeti Tarime 
 

 
 

Cattle 272,635 199,533 307,694 
 

Goats 90,606 307,694 150,300 
 

Sheep 40,257 150,300 69,265 
 

Donkey 1,698 432 2,738 
  

Source: URT (2003). 
 
 

 

change the catchment’s hydrology such as infiltration 

characteristics which brings about soils and river bank 

erosion which was observed during field visit during this 
study (Table 4) . 
 

 

Major economic activities 

 

Major economic activities in the Mara region and 
particularly the MRB are agriculture, livestock production, 
fishing, mining and business and trade. Mara region 
communities rely on livestock production and ownership 
predominantly cattle, goats and sheep to fulfill social as 
well as economic needs. Livestock sector is the second 
most important contributor to the region’s economy. It is 
estimated that 51% of total agricultural households in 
Mara region keep cattle and the size of herd per house-
hold ranges from 50 to 1000 cattle. Animals represent a 
bank stock, to be purchased when there is good harvest 
and sold during distress times in order to buy food. Cattle 
and donkeys are widely used for transportation of crops 
and other domestic goods and for ploughing. However, 
over the past decade, the occurrence of erratic rains and 
livestock distress, sales have tremendously reduced the 
quantity of livestock in Mara region to the extent that very 
few households now own cattle. Cattle ownership is more 
widespread in the midlands agro- pastoral communities. 
Table 2 shows livestock population in the three districts.  

Most of the livestock kept in the area is grazed in the 
MRB, particularly in the flood plain during the dry season 
due to water and pasture availability and grazed in the 
uplands during the rainy season. There is no proper land 
allocated for grazing which is one of the major setbacks 

 
 
 

 

in pasture and water management in the basin. 
In Tanzania the agricultural sector contributed 48% of 

the countries Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and about 
65% of the total foreign exchange earnings in 2000 (URT, 
2000). Food crops grown in the region include: cassava, 
maize, sorghum, finger millet, paddy, sweat potatoes and 
beans. Production trend of food crops is shown in Table 

3. Cash crops grown in the basin include: cotton, coffee, 
sunflower, tobacco and groundnuts. Production trend of 
cash crops is shown in Table 3 fluctuating yields are 
probably due to the fluctuation of weather conditions in 
the region.  

Average individual annual income (per Capita GDP) in 
Mara region had improved from US$ 142 in 1995 to US$ 
226 in 2000. Irrigated farming in Mara region is not 
common although it is feasible considering the existence 
of Lake Victoria and Mara River. Currently, individual 
households, growing mainly vegetables, do irrigated 
farming on a very small scale. Fishing provides employ-
ment for people along the lakeshore generating good 
incomes and sustains the fish trade within and outside 
the country. However, fishing contributes little to the 
region’s economy compared to crop production and 
livestock keeping. Trade and industry do not have much 
significant importance to the region’s economy. There is 
no reliable status on the catch volume and income 
generated from fishing in the river. Most of the available 
information refers to the catch volume from the lake. This 
is because fishing in the river is not considered to 
contribute significantly to the economy of the region.  

Mining research conducted in the region has revealed 

that the region is rich in minerals, mainly gold, kaolin, 

limestone and gemstones. Currently, both artisanal and 



 
361      Afr. J.  Envir. Econ. Manage. 

 

 
Table 3. Production of major food crops in Mara region.  

 

 Crop/year 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 Year average  

 Cotton 21852 22846 5580 3003 22433 19095 17559  

 Coffee 1651 2011 2009 4077 2344 36 2585  

 Tobacco 65 75 600 190 N.A N.A 233  

 Sunflower 40 149 68 18 240 100 134  

 Groundnuts 1450 154 848 512 1738 490 960  

 Total 25058 25235 9105 7800 26755 19721 21471  
 

Source: URT (2003). 
 
 

 

large-scale miners are operating in Mara region 
(Buhemba in Musoma and Nyamongo in Tarime districts). 
Artisanal mining is operated in areas around the large-
scale mining at a small scale and is operated illegally. 
Large-scale mining operations are conducted by Afrika 
Mashariki Co. Ltd in Nyamongo and Meremeta Co. Ltd in 
Buhemba. Data on incomes generated by private 
companies from gold were not made accessible. The only 
available data is of early 1990s when gold was pur-
chased by the Bank of Tanzania from small-scale miners. 
 

 

Existing institutional framework for managing natural 

resources 
 
It should be pointed out that MRB is shared between 
Tanzania and Kenya; hence an effective management 
approach should consider the entire basin. Management 
of the Tanzanian part of the basin will not be effective 
because it is the lower end of the river system, since 
mismanagement on the Kenyan side will have 
pronounced effect on the Tanzanian side. Similarly, the 
Tanzanian part of the basin should also be managed in 
an integrated manner.  

The current local government reform has given district 
councils full mandates to plan and implement various 
development activities including management of natural 
resources. Figure 3 illustrates the existing institutional 
framework at district level. The existing framework has 
both strength and weaknesses. Major strength includes 
the coordinated ability the structure has in that all the 
sectoral directives from various ministries converge into 
District Executive Director’s (DED) office. Various 
technical personnel representing key sectors support the 
DED thus ensuring integrated approach in the planning 
process. 

The existing institutional framework (Figure 3) is 
intended to facilitate effective planning and implementa-
tion of various activities on the ground by ensuring that 
there is both top down and bottom up communication. 
However, lack of extension officers for some key sectors 
at the grass-root level is one of the limitations associated 
with this framework. For example, there is no extension 
staff on water resources, land and other natural 

 
 
 

 

resources at the village level. There are some manage-
ment efforts in place such as Serengeti National Park 
though it covers only a segment of the basin. Lake 
Victoria Environment Management Project is another 
regional management initiative. However, this manage-
ment initiative is project oriented in that its activities will 
be implemented within a given time frame. 
 

 

A summary of key issues affecting resource 

management in the MRB 
 
This study has revealed that most of socio-economic 
activities (Table 4) undertaken in the area have a large 
impact on MRB ecosystem. The study identified a 
number of natural resources management practices 
undertaken within the MRB. In general, human activities 
have been identified through consultations to have 
significant implications on natural resource sustainability 
and productivity as indicated in Table 4. This cause 
effects relation enabled a researcher to propose appro-
priate interventions which can also be applied elsewhere 
with similar conditions. 
 

 

Community involvement in resource conservation 

and management 
 
The land tenure system of Kurya ethnic group provides a 
good footing for community involvement in natural 
resources conservation and management. The clan 
regulates management of land resources. In this regard, 
these ethnic groups need to be facilitated by advocating 
for appropriate management approaches. It should also 
be pointed out that the initiative taken to ban charcoal 
making in the district is a lesson to learn and can be 
applied to all the districts. However, a caution is that such 
decisions should be effective only if alternative source of 
energy is given. Also, the initiative of Buchanchari Village 
to conserve the forest at Ikongo area is a testimony that if 
the villagers are coordinated they can come up with 
effective management plan for their own resources.  

There are several initiatives taken by district authorities 

that aim at resource conservation and management. For 



Bomani     362 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
Figure 3. Institutional framework for managing natural resources at district level. 

 

 

Table 4. Key Issues that need solution for sustainable MRB management and development.  
 

Practices 
Responsible actors in 

Established impacts/threats Proposed interventions  

addressing the problem  

   
  

 
-Excessive water 

abstraction from 

the MRB river 
 
 
 

-Deforestation 

along Mara river 

 
 
 

-Cultivation and 

grazing along 

the river bank 
 
 

-Illegal fishing 

practices  
-Use of chemicals  
-Fishing in 

breeding points 

  
-Mining companies  
-Crop irrigators  
-Livestock keepers 
 

 

-Local communities, Local 

governments, NGOs, CBO,  
Forest Departments 
 

 
-Local communities, River - 

Basin Offices, Agricultural - 

Research institutions, Local 

Governments (DALDOs) 
 
 
-Fisheries and Livestock  
-Departments, Fish traders, 
local communities, NGOs,  
CBO 

  
-Water disposal mechanisms is 

questionable  
-Water pollution 
 
 
-This is a threat to environment in 

particular soil erosion, loss of 

carbon and global warming, loss of 

species and diversity 
 
 
-Enhancing river bank erosion and 

river siltation 
 
 

 

-Raises great concern to human 

health and water quality  
-Destroy breeding sites 

 
-Develop Integrated Water Resource 

Management (IWRM) plans  
-Abide to water allocation schemes -

Conservation of water sources 

 
-Provide education to the 

communities on tree conservation  
-Introduce tree planting schemes -

Encourage agroforestry practices 

 
-Develop village land use plans  
-Undertake research on 

appropriate practices  
-Develop by laws on river bank use 
 
 
 
-Establish by laws on illegal fishing  
-Education on better fishing practices 

 
 

-Poor agronomic 
Local communities  

practices  

 
 

 
 

-Illegal wildlife  
hunting in forestry 
patches (Ikongo Local communities, hunters area) 
and Game  
reserves 

  
-Threats to the land and river -Train communities on better  
siltation, soil fertility loss agronomic practices 

 
-Introduce alternative sources of  
income  

-Threats to both large (buffaloes) -Training in wildlife resource  
and small mammals management  

-Involve communities in managing  
wildlife  



       
 

Table 4. Contd.      
 

        
 

  
-Un controlled fire 

-Local communities 
-Loss of species of ecological -Education on impacts of fire 

  
 

  (hunters, cultivators,   
 

  

significance and loss of soil fertility -Establish by laws on fire 
  

 

   livestock keepers)   
 

       
 

  -Small scale gold 
Local communities 

-Threats to water quality, land -Control small scale mining activities   
 

  mining particularly degradation (development of bad by providing appropriate guidelines   
 

  in Mara  lands) and technologies   
 

 
Source: Fieldwork and consultations with stakeholders. 
 
 

 

example, a number of bunds to trap water in the sub-
catchments for irrigation are being constructed in all the 
districts through funding from the central government. 
This effort is a result of the Mara Farmers Initiative 
Project (MaraFIP) concluded in 2002 (URT, 2003) and it 
aimed at enhancing food production, particularly rice as 
food and cash crop using the available water resource. 
Similarly, a number of watering points for livestock and 
dips are being developed in the various districts. Also, 
more watering points and dips are planned for future 
development. Such efforts aim at promoting livestock 
production, as it is the major activity in the basin. 
Furthermore, appropriate distribution of livestock watering 
points and dips is necessary to ensure even distribution 
of livestock, thus reducing effects of degradation in 
concentration areas due to trampling and overgrazing. 
Furthermore, village governments in Tarime and 
Serengeti districts are implementing Wildlife Management 
Areas (WMA) on pilot basis. This is seen to be a 
sustainable way of managing resources in parts of the 
MRB. The economic gains from such program support 
development activities and needs to be sustained. 
 

 

Management of water resources in the MRB 

 

There are three major sources of water in the MRB. 
These include water from the river Mara, water harvested 
in micro catchments draining into the main river water 
systems and borehole systems. Water from the main river 
systems is used for mining activities in Africa Mashariki 
Gold Mine whereby water license permit allowable 

abstraction rate of 4200 m
3
/day, and current average 

daily usage is about 3200 m
3
/day. Out of that, nearly 60% 

is recycled into the production system. This is the only 
large water abstraction activity in the basin. Other uses of 
water from the river include livestock and wildlife, 
domestic use and small-scale irrigation. All these 
activities use small amount of water. Water collected in 
micro-catchments is used for irrigation (Mara bands), 
livestock and domestic use. For example, in Serengeti 
alone there are 2 dams (Iseresere and Nyamandicha) 
constructed by MaraFIP and about 27 Chaco dams 
constructed by different stakeholders.  

The responsibility of water resource management 

 
 
 

 

currently rests under the power of the DED (Figure 3). 
However, the relevant technical personnel will do 
technical undertakings. For example, agricultural experts 
are involved if water is to be used for irrigation while 
livestock experts are involved if water is collected in dams 
for livestock drinking. 

One of the major problems is lack of technology to 
abstract significant amounts of water for various uses. 
For example, watering cans, small furrow canals and 
small powered water pumps are used to draw water from 
the river. Presently, local communities do not realize 
water quality to be a problem. However, there is a 
growing concern from the regional and districts 
authorities that water is being polluted from different 
sources mainly gold mining and fishing by using illegal 
chemicals. With regards to the gold mining, the 
effectiveness of the waste disposal dam has not yet been 
monitored. What is more worrying is the artisan type of 
mining involving the use of mercury in gold extraction 
since the process is undertaken in streams draining into 
the main river system. 
 

 

Impacts of socio -economic activities on the 

hydrology and other resources of MRB 
 
A link between major economic activities and hydrology in 
the MRB is that the landscape characteristics determine 
the hydrology of the river system. On the other hand, 
socio economic activities can modify natural landscape 
characteristics and thus altering the river hydrology. For 
example, land degraded due to intensive crop cultivation 
and overgrazing enhances surface run off, less water 
infiltration, accelerates evaporation in a way reported by 
Scwab et al. (1993). In such a situation the river 
experiences less flow during the dry season, 
deforestation of river- line forest encourages riverbank 
erosion, desiccation of the wetlands, which are important 
habitats for flora and fauna, and wetland degradation also 
reduces buffering and water storage capacity of the 
wetlands. Wetland degradation due to poor farming 
practices has also been reported by Majule and Mwalyosi 
(2005) in the Rufiji River Basin. The impact of socio-
economic activities on the basin hydrology as pointed out 
above is presently visible in the area. For example, high 

363      Afr. J.  Envir. Econ. Manage. 



Bomani     364 
 
 

 
Table 5. Pair wise ranking of different impacts on hydrology and natural resources due to human activities.  

 
Number Impacts identified Total score Rank (Position)  

1 Deforestation and degradation of forest 8 1  

2 Drying of wetlands and other water sources 6 2  

3 Declining of soil fertility 5 3  

4 Siltation of the Mara River 3 4  

5 Pollution of the Mara due to chemicals 2 5  

6 Soil erosion 2 5  

7 Conversion to bad land due to mining 1 6  

8 Soil compaction 1 6  
 

Source: Field pair wise ranking (2008). 
 
 

 

concentration along the river system has contributed to 
the degradation of immediate catchment areas through 
overgrazing and trampling. Such practices could lead to 
severe degradation if measures to control livestock 
movement are not taken. A study conducted by Yanda et 
al. (2005) in the Bahi basin revealed a need for con-
trolling livestock numbers to meet the carrying capacity in 
wetlands and this also apply in the management of MB 
resources. Furthermore, livestock water drinking directly 
to the river system is causing riverbank soil erosion. Culti-
vation very close to the riverbank was also found to be 
common thus enhancing riverbank erosion. On the other 
hand, the ongoing bush fires and deforestation (for 
charcoal, fuel wood and building materials) reduces 
vegetation cover thus impacting the river system 
hydrology as pointed out above.  

A focus group discussion using pair wise ranking 
approach at Ikongo village provided information on how 
different socio economic activities have negatively 
affected the hydrology and other resources in the basin. 
The analysis (Table 5) revealed 8 major impacts on 
hydrology and natural resources of the MRB that is 
associated with social economic activities. Deforestation 
and forest degradation scored the highest and this was 
followed by drying of wetlands and declining of soil 
fertility. Siltation of MR scored fourth and this was 
described to be associated with removal of vegetation 
cover in particular deforestation and cultivation near river 
banks. Siltation is common in most great rivers and has 
also been reported by Majule and Mwalyosi (2005).  

Other impacts reported were pollution of MR water due 
use of agricultural chemicals in particularly fertilizers and 
chemicals for fishing as well as use of chemicals by both 
small and large scale miners. Interventions in addressing 
such problems should be part of the management issues 
for MRB indicated in Figure 4. 
 

 

Proposed framework for sustainable natural 

resources management in the MRB 
 
To ensure that water resource is properly managed at 

 
 
 

 

basin level, the government of Tanzania has developed a 
structure on which river basins under the ministry of water 
has a mandate of managing water resources effectively 
(Figure 4).  

The foundation for the implementation of the new 
guidelines in the water sector in Tanzania is the Water 
Sector Development Plan (WSDP) (URT, 2007) and its 
implementation manual in its updated version of 2007. In 
this case, the development of the program for the three 
elements of the sector is explicitly considered. The 
framework shown in Figure 4 is also applicable in the 
MRB and this also need to be applied to the upper 
catchment areas in Kenya part but should not 
compromise with the existing structure. 
 

 

Policy implications on MRB management 
 

Environmental conservation has to be analyzed in the 
context of the relevant policies governing management of 
natural resources and sustainable livelihoods. Table 5 
presents a summary of key policy issues in terms of 
opportunities and constrains that need to be taken on 
board in addressing legal aspects to the planning for 
conservation of MRB. 
 

 

Conclusions 

 

Agriculture and livestock keeping are the major socio-
economic activities in the basin. It is these activities that 
have adverse impact on the ecosystem. MRB is 
experiencing a number of natural resource management 
problems including deforestation, land degradation and 
pollution of the river water due to mining and illegal 
fishing using poison. The management approaches seem 
to be sectoral, thus lacking integration. Local community 
involvement in natural resources management is also not 
properly co-coordinated and therefore less effective and 
conflicting. It is evident that some cultural attitudes have 
positive impact on natural resources management such 
as the customary land tenure system in the Kurya 



365      Afr. J.  Envir. Econ. Manage. 
 

 
 
 
 

Ministry Responsible for Water 
 

 

National Water Board 
 

 

Regional  
Secretariat 

 
Basin Water Boards 

 
Basin Water Offices 

 
District  
Councils 

 
Catchments Water Committees 

 
Catchments Water Offices 

 

 

Sub-catchments Water 
Legend 

 

Committees 
 

  ppeals 
 

  Delegated Authority 
 

  

WRM Responsibility 
 

Sub-catchments Water Offices 
 

 

 Planning Process  

  
 

  

Representation 
 

Water Users’ Associations 
 

 

 Statutory/Autonomous  Bodies  

  
 

Wat  Users  
  

 

Figure 4. Relationship between Different Institutions in Water Resource Management in 

Tanzania (Source URT, 2007). 
 
 

 

community. Despite of promising efforts both in terms of 
policies and strategies for managing natural resource in 
the MRB, knowledge sharing across basins is still needed 
to manage shared resources in particular water effec-
tively. Other factors including climate change impacts, 
vulnerabilities and adaptation strategies needs to be 
considered and then integrated into the basin 
management framework. 
 

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

 

Author wishes to thank WWF-Tanzania for providing 
financial assistance to undertake this important study. 
Mara Region authority is thanked for allowing this study 
to be conducted in their region that involved discussion 
with various stakeholders on key issues. Districts autho-
rities in particular Musoma, Tarime and Serengeti are 
thanked for availing information in the form of reports, 
spending their time to discuss various issues with study 

 
 
 

 

team during the field visit. Finally, the author wishes to 
thank all village leaders and local communities and 

individuals who participated in the field visit to identify 

various issues. 

 
REFERENCES 
 
Chambers R (1992). Rapid Appraisal: Rapid, relaxed and participatory. 

Discussion Paper No. 311, IDS Publication, University of Sussex, 
Brighton, England. 

De P (1984). Soils, physiography and agro ecological zones of 
Tanzania. A Consultant Report submitted to United Republic of 
Tanzania. 

 
Frederic K (1997). “Water Resource and Climate Change”. Climate 

Issues Brief 3. Resource for Future. Washington DC, USA.  
Kangalawe RM, Lyimo J (2010). Population dynamics, rural livelihoods 

and environmental degradation: some experiences from Tanzania. 
Environment and Sustainable Development. DOI 10.1007/s10668-
010-9235-y.  

Kangalawe RM, Majule AE, Shishira EK (2005). An Analysis of Land 

Use Dynamics and Land Degradation Processes In the Great Rift 
Valley, Central Tanzania: A Case of Iramba District”. Book Published 
by OSSREA. ISBN 1 904855 62 8 



Bomani     366 
 
 

 
Lema MA, Majule AE (2009). Impacts of Climate Change, variability and 

adaptation strategies on Agriculture in semi arid areas of Tanzania: 
The Case of Manyoni District in Singida Regio, Tanzania. Afr. J. 
Environ. Sci. Technol., 3(7): 206-218.  

Majule AE (2008). Climate Change and Variability: Impacts on 
Agriculture and Water Resource and Implications for livelihoods in 
Selected Basins. In T. Pertermann (Ed.) Towards Climate Change 
Adaptation (pp158-174). InWEnt-Internationale Weiterbildung und 
Entwicklung gGmbH Publishing. ISBN: 978-3-939394-28-0.  

Majule AE, Kalonga S (2008). Role of Local Knowledge and Innovations 
in Conserving Forest Biodiversity in Kilombero Wetlands, Tanzania. 
The ICFAI Journal of Environmental Economics. 7(1): 51-68. 

Majule AE, Liwenga ET, Kangalawe RYM , Yanda PZ (2009). Natural 
Resource Contribution to Community Livelihoods. Experience from 
Selected case Studies in Tanzania. Dar es Salaam University Press 
LTD. ISBN: 978-9976-60-486-6).  

Majule AE, Mbonile MJ and Campbell DJ (2009). Ecological Gradients 
as a Framework for Analysis of Land Use Change in East Africa. Afr. 
J. Ecol., (47): 55-61. 

Majule AE, Mwalyosi RBB (2005). “Enhancing Agricultural Productivity 
Through Sustainable Irrigation. A case of Vinyungu Farming System 
in selected Zones of Southern Highland, Tanzania”. In H. Sosovele, 
J. Boesen and F. Maganga (Ed). Social and Environmental Impacts 
of Irrigation Farming in Tanzania: Selected Cases (pp. 108-133). Dar 
es Salaam University Press. ISBN 9976 60 431 9. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 
 
 

 
McDonald AT, Kay D (1988). “Water Resources: Issues and Strategies”.  

Longman Group Ltd., Uk.  
Reij C, Scoones I, Toullmin C (1996). “Sustaining the Soil: Indigenous 

Soil and Water Conservation in Africa”. Earthscan Publications Ltd, 
London. 

Scwab GO, Fangmeir DD, Elliot WJ, Fervent TRK (1993). Soil and 

Water Conservation Engineering”. 4
th

 Edn. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.  
United Republic of Tanzania (URT) (2000). National Poverty Reduction 

Strategy Paper. Vice Presidents Office, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. 
United Republic of Tanzania (URT) (2003). Mara Region Farmers 

Initiative Project (Mara-FIP). Final Project Completion Report. BSF 
Grant No. BG 017 TZ. 

United Republic of Tanzania (URT) (2003). Mara Region Socio-
Economic Profile. Published Jointly Between the National Bureau of 
Statistics and Mara Regional Commissioner. 

 
United Republic of Tanzania (URT) (2007). Water Sector Development 

Plan (WSDP) Final version. Ministry of Water and Irrigation. 
Yanda PZ, Mung’ong’o, C, Majule AE (2007). Integrated Management 

Plan for the Malagarasi-Muyowozi Ramsar site. Final Consultant 
Report submitted to Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourisms, 
Wildlife Division, Tanzania. 



 


