The Tanzanian government is making plans to construct a major commercial highway through Serengeti National Park. The 480 km road would link the Lake Victoria area with eastern Tanzania, bringing, what the government believes will be, essential economic development to the region. The construction of such a highway would link more remote, rural areas to a major road network, allowing transport of people and goods, linking farmers and markets. Sounds pretty good, right? Well, some people don't seem to think so.
The project has met fierce opposition from the tourist industry as well as from environmentalists. Numerous environmental groups oppose the project, not because they feel that progress and development shouldn't take place, but rather because they don't feel that the Serengeti is the best place to do it. See, through this road would allow for a much needed connection between rural communities and commercial centers, at the moment it's serving as a pretty vital ecosystem. The road to be built would bisect the path of the renowned annual "great migration" of wildebeest and zebra, during which millions of animals migrate between the Tanzanian Serengeti and Kenyon Masai Mara in search of fresh water.
Needless to say, a simple memo telling the vast herds of animals that they will need to take a detour from now on probably isn't going to cut it. It also goes without saying that, if this be the case, problems will inevitably result. Possibility number one: there will be parts of the year during which the road will be inoperable for weeks on end due to herds of animals traversing it. And then there's the issue of roadkill in the form of endangered cheetahs (and honestly, I don't think their populations can take even a marginal decrease). Possibility number two: the road cuts the animals off from critical dry season areas. If the latter option comes to fruition, recent calculations show that the wildebeest population, for instance, would likely decline from 1.3 million animals to only 200,000. That's less than a quarter of its current population. Such a decline in numbers could even, according to Andrew Dobson, professor of conservation biology at Princeton, indirectly destroy the region's function as a carbon sink. In fact, even a fifty percent decrease in the wildebeest population would mean less grazing by the animals, increased frequency of fires in the park, and a 180 turn of the ecosystem from carbon sink to a major contributing source of carbon emissions. One could also throw in an inevitable increase in poaching, spread of disease and parasites, as well as the spread of invasive species from the increase in human traffic.
The tourism industry is understandably concerned over the potential loss of thousands of visitors who come to see the great migration. Tourism is Tanzania's biggest source of foreign exchange and a full 50% of Tanzania's tourism dollars comes from Serengeti National Park. Implementation of a highway through the park could lead to the area losing it's status as a world heritage site. The Tanzanian government claims, however, that the road will improve access for tourists.
An alternative southern route has been proposed that would circumvent the park, leave the migration route untouched and would even serve five times as many people as the planned northern road, while fulfilling the same needs for linking regional cities. The alternative route is longer, and therefore a bit more costly, but seems a much better option as it bypasses all of the negative costs associated with the northern road, while increasing the benefits.
Hopefully the Tanzanian government will consider it a viable and worthy front-end investment to build the southern road and leave the zebras alone.
