Embedded Files
Environmentalist Douty Chibamba says "One of the main reasons why Lusaka is now home to annual floods and frequent water shortages is the continued destruction of the city’s environment, particularly the depletion of forests that provide much of its water resources. The city’s major forest reserve is the Lusaka East Forest Reserve, or Local Forest No. 27 (Forest 27 henceforth). Approximately 1,800 hectares in size, Forest 27 provides the residents of Lusaka with all the ecosystem goods and services that nature has bequeathed to humans. More importantly, it provides the regulating services (climate and water regulation – dust, flood, drought control) and supporting services (soil formation, nutrient cycling, and primary production – recharge zone). Both regulating and supporting services are crucial to the communities that depend on the Chalimbana River and the residents in the city of Lusaka in the face of climate change".
So what will the future of the Lower Zambezi National Park be if the Kangaluwi mine goes ahead as scheduled? What is the point of the National Park becoming a Biosphere Reserve if it still accommodates a mine and clearly ignores the negative impacts of the mine? Surely merely mapping or rezoning the mine out of the Biosphere Reserve while it remains exactly in the same position physically in the park is some kind of greenwashing isn't it? Isn't a Biosphere Reserve's top priority to ensure the ecological integrity of the park at the very least remains the same or at best improves? How then does this park's ecological status remain the same or improve if the mine proceeds in the park with the Biosphere Reserve's blessings?
IN DEFENCE OF THE PRESERVATION OF FOREST NO. 27 OF LUSAKA
IN DEFENCE OF THE PRESERVATION OF FOREST NO. 27 OF LUSAKA
Forest no. 27 of Lusaka was established in 1957. Despite being established so many years ago many Zambians had not heard about the forest until the excision or sub-division of portions of it in 2017, 2018 and 2019 (Statutory Instruments (S.I.s) No. 62 of 2017, No, 59 of 2018 and the most recent SI No. 13 of 2019 excises parcels of land under Forest No.27 in Lusaka East). Contrary to popular belief that Forest 27 has been degazetted in its entirety the truth is that a large portion of Forest 27 remains a protected area. Only portions of it have been subdivided for residential and commercial development. The key reason why a lot of people have come to know about it is because of the recent allocation of residential plots in the forest area. When the forest was partially degazetted in 2017 and 2018 very few people and organisations complained. However, the 2019 partial degazettion seems to have caused a huge uproar because of the high profile individuals allegedly linked to the residential plots. The questions that must be asked are: Why are people more worried about who benefits from the plots than the damage that the degazattion will cause to the environment? Where were all these voices of protest in 2017 and 2018? People have every right be critical of the excision of parts of Forest 27, however the criticism should be based valid environmental reasons and not merely scoring political points as currently seems to be case.
This article seeks to present an ecological/environmental basis for lobbying for the reversal of the excision of undeveloped portions and limitation of some already developed portions of Forest 27. The reasons to consider in defence Forest 27 are as follows:
In the 1950s, the powers that be at the time thought it was important to establish forests in Lusaka to offer various environmental benefits. The two key forests established for this purpose where Forest 26 (in Lusaka South) and Forest 27 (in Lusaka East). The key reason why these two forests where established was to protect two recharge zones for the underground water system of Lusaka. Recharge zones are areas where the aquifer layers come in contact with the ground surface. Because aquifers are made up of limestone which is permeable rock they make an excellent entry point for water which percolates through the aquifer to collect underground as underground water. It is this aquifer layer that holds the water table. So when anyone drills a borehole in Lusaka the underground water they tap into is from the said aquifer layer. The reason for establishing forests in these recharge zones was to protect them because they are very sensitive to pollution and degradation. Forests are the perfect protection because they offer interception to rainfall reducing the strength of the raindrops which could cause soil erosion through runoff water. The forests also hold the soil in place which acts as a filter to the water as it infiltrates the soil and eventually percolates through the permeable aquifer rock. These two recharge zones covered by Forest 26 and 27 were and are important because they are among the few major recharge zones within Lusaka District.
It is impossible for the water to seep from the surface of most of Lusaka district because just below the ground surface is an impermeable bedrock. To take a glance of the bedrock one only has to visit areas where it appears on the surface such as Kanyama, Chibolya, Misisi, John Laing, John Howard, Jack, Chalala, Woodlands Extension and Makeni to mention a few (you will note that most of the areas mentioned here are associated with crushed stones harvested from the said bedrock). This impermeable bedrock explains why floods associated with rainfall are common place in the majority of the Lusaka’s compounds in the rain season. A 30 minutes downpour of rain often leads to excessive runoff and water logging because of the inability of the rain water to penetrate beyond the bedrock. This is why forest 26 and 27 are invaluable in as far offering recharge zones for the underground water goes.
The degazetting of Forest 26 to create the Lusaka South Multi facility Economic Zone (MFEZ) has meant the amount of water recharged underground has reduced. Yes the establishing of the Lusaka National Forest from part of Forest 26 is commendable but it does not compensate for the damage done to the rest of Forest 26 through the MFEZ project. In the meantime the population of Lusaka has been increasing at a fast rate and the harvesting of water through boreholes has been on an upward swing. This has resulted in the water table rescinding. A visit to most homes and farms with boreholes in Makeni, Chalala, Woodlands extension reveals that most boreholes run out of water as we head towards the hot dry season.
by Timothy Kamuzu Phiri
Page updated
Report abuse