The debate about conserving wetlands has not only taken the angle of environment conservation, but a myriad of other social, political, religious and economic factors in areas where for ages, societies have eked a living as part of the family livelihood.
It is a no brainier that one single act of conserving wetlands, leaving them to regenerate, the effects will improve the ecosystem that has positive benefits on the communities around them.
Different societies, over centuries have looked at wetlands differently; unfortunately, environmental conservation was never top on their priority list. They looked at them as a natural occurrence to exploit as source of water, fish or pasture. Farmland was never a big problem since even the population was small. Consequently, there was no pressure or shortage of arable land to cultivate. Wetlands were seen as mere part of a natural ecosystem whose existence was like any natural feature, namely, a forest, mountain, river etc. No amount of attention was paid to its existence, usage or conservation.
It was after populations expanded, farmland getting small and depleted fertility, that families ventured in virgin areas like forests, wetlands, riverbanks and land reclamation. It has been a steady assault on hitherto redundant resources. Spiritually, different communities looked at swamps and wetlands as spiritual residences of their gods.
In the Eastern Uganda, certain swamps were revered as shrines of their traditional spirits. A quick look at the different names of these swamps or wetlands reveals a spiritual angle. Most are given names that depict respect-laced fear for their gods, names that are intimidating; a case in point is the expansive wetland on Tirinyi road. It is locally called MPOLOGOMA depicting the ferocity of a lion, it has a horde of dos, and don’ts in order not to annoy the spirits. Actually, whenever it flooded, it was a sign that the gods were unhappy with something in society and sacrifices made to appease the gods. This is commonplace in most of our traditional settings all over the country. This applies to mountains, forests, rivers, swamps; they all had a spiritual face.
Economically, the biggest challenge of wetland conservation is how communities that have depended on wetlands for ages will survive after getting out. The pressures on arable land forced people to move to virgin lands. Now they are being compelled to leave them. The question is, are there alternatives to their livelihood? There has been calls for food security but also for income. Rice and wetlands provide the natural answer to this. Rice can be family food but also source of income. Therefore, how can this balance be struck? Wetlands do not need irrigation or fertilizers, upland rice requires more attention than paddies. This will impact on food security and source of income for households. A case in point is the Limoto wetland stretching through the districts of Pallisa, Bududa, Kibuku, which has been a lifeline for hundreds of families for years. Unless alternative means of survival are put in place, we stare famine and food distress in the face.
Scientifically, when wetlands are depleted, they pose a serious danger as a potential carbon bomb. When encroached on, the freshwater landscape emits carbon, trapping heat in the atmosphere, which causes global warming. On the other hand, growing rice paddies produces methane gas, one of the greenhouse gases responsible for global warming. However, even the alternative use of wetlands, like fish farming is not entirely free of adverse effects on sustainable use of wetlands. It interferes with the settings of the ecosystem. Fish ponds displace other species, natural inhabitants of swamps.
Politically, removing people from wetlands has turned out as a political time bomb on both local and national politics. Leaving your source of livelihood is a very emotive decision. Families depend on rice growing, anyone determined to force them out of the swamp is seen as a sworn enemy of the people. This explains the common dictum that “politics is local”. Local politicians will go slow on evicting their electorate if the policy is unpopular. This explains why with the efforts of NEMA it is taking long to achieve the desired effect.
Socially, rice growing is a labour intensive activity, which turns into a social event that brings together families that work in social groups, any attempt to disrupt the status–quo disrupts the social fabric of societies. Social societies hold dear their cultural values and rites.
Comments are closed.