WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT SERIES

E L E C T R I C

F E N C I N G

P R O J E C T S

1

E L E C T R I C

F E N C I N G

P R O J E C T S

2

These guideline booklets are based on field experience and original research reports which are available from the WWFProgramme Office in Harare. WWF wishes to acknowledge the important contribution made by the Rural DistrictCouncils and their constituent communities in the development of the series.

The Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD) is funding the WWF Resource Management Supportto CAMPFIRE Project which produced this guideline. The work undertaken here is part of a collaborative programmewith the Department of National Parks and Wild Life Management.

Editing, illustration, design and production: Action

© WWF

Published in 1997 by the WWF-World Wide Fund for Nature (formerly World Wildlife Fund) Programme Office,Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe Trust and Safari Club International. Any reproduction in full or in part of this publication mustmention the title and credit the above mentioned publisher as the copyright owner. November 1997. 1986 WWF symbol copyright. WWF Registered Trademark.

INTRODUCTION

Problem animal management and CAMPFIRE....................................................................

CHAPTER 1

Background issues to electric fencing ....................................................................................

CHAPTER 2

Steps in the development of an electric fencing project .....................................................

CHAPTER 3

Electric fencing and problem animals ..................................................................................

CHAPTER 4

Case studies of electric fencing projects ...............................................................................

CHAPTER 5

Conclusions ..............................................................................................................................35

23

21

11

7

5

3

CONTENTS

4

Members of the Masoka Ward Wildlife Committee on a fence inspection visit in Kanyurira ward, Guruve.

Left to right: Gift Chisunga, George Kanederuka, unidentified and Austin Chaukura.

Background to Problem Animal ManagementAnyone who has attended a CAMPFIRE meeting knows thatit isn’t long before someone starts talking about problemanimals. As a result of the CAMPFIRE programme, peoplenow expect rural district councils (RDC's) to help themmanage and benefit from wildlife. This includes making surethat no-one suffers severe crop or livestock losses as a result ofcommunities deciding to manage wild animals in their district.

So RDC's, rather than the Department of National Parks andWild Life Management (DNPWLM), are now expected to takemeasures to reduce or prevent damage caused by problemanimals. Until recently though, rural district councils did nothave enough information about problem animals on which tobase their decisions.

In the past, shooting to scare away or kill was the only form ofcontrol. Often the wrong animal was shot or the problemanimal returned. And killing an animal meant a possible lossof earnings later through for example a safari hunt.

Problem animal management (PAM), or the measures whichmay be taken to reduce the disruption to daily living causedby animals, is not an instant cure. It can however lower theamount of crop raiding and bring higher revenue to acommunity. But it requires rural district councils to make

choices about how they deal with problem animals so that thecosts are minimised while the benefits are maintained.

This booklet and others in the series aim to fill in some of thegaps in our knowledge about managing problem animals. Thismanual should be used in conjunction with or as a supplementto an earlier publication in this series “Problem AnimalReporting”. A problem animal reporting system should be inplace for at least a year before attempting a fencing project.The information they contain is taken from the experiences ofcouncils who are trying to cut crop and livestock losses byintroducing problem animal management in their wards.

Developing a policy on problem animal managementEvery rural district council should implement a problemanimal management policy, monitored by a PAM committee ifnecessary. This policy should come about after consultationand discussion with members of the community so that it isclearly understood and accepted by everyone.

The policy should explain the mix of measures which thedistrict has introduced, the reasons for them and their hopedfor effects. By monitoring the measures introduced for 1-2years, it should be possible for rural district councils toquantify the benefits that have occurred.

5

INTRODUCTION

PROBLEM ANIMAL MANAGEMENT and CAMPFIRE

If control shooting to scare or kill is a part of the measuresintroduced, RDC’s should draw up a problem animal controlcontract with the organisation(s) that will react to problemanimal incidents when requested to do so by the responsiblecouncil wildlife official. The contract should state precisely thechain of responsibility and conditions governing problemanimal control and be available for anyone in the district tosee. A rural district council will need to establish similarprocedures even if it decides to set up its own problem animalcontrol unit.

There is no simple way of getting rid of problem animals suchas elephant. If we did, we would be removing the animalwhich is a community’s most valuable asset. Since 64% of allCAMPFIRE cash is earned from elephants, if there were noelephants in a ward, the potential earnings of the ward wouldbe greatly reduced.

The problems caused by animals raiding crops and killinglivestock can never be completely removed. What a councilpolicy should aim for is to introduce measures which willreduce the problem to a level thought acceptable by thecommunity. Before introducing any form of problem animalmanagement, councils should bear in mind that the benefitsbrought to everyone from these measures should alwaysoutweigh the costs of introducing them.

6

With wise management, problemanimals can be turned into anasset for the community.

Electric fencing, people and animalsElectric fencing is one way of managing problem animals inorder to reduce conflict between people and animals. Otherways may be just as effective. For example, physical barrierssuch as ditches and walls have had limited success but theyare not easy to construct and are very costly. Compensationpayments can be made but are difficult to assess and tend to beunfair and sometimes abused. Control shooting, while widelypracticed in the past, is ineffective in stopping crop raiding.Incidents of crop raiding are too numerous and widespread foranimals to be killed each time. Buffer zones or ‘open spaces’between people and animals can becreated, but only if there issufficient land available and thisis seldom the case in Zimbabwe.

Electric fencing as a practicalsolution is working well in theprivate sector. However, its useunder communal managementhas yet to be fullydemonstrated. Nevertheless,provided the project is wellplanned and coordinated, there is no reason why similarsuccesses should not result.

Why build a fence?To some people fences represent a physical and psychologicalbarrier to their use of resources behind the fence. To othersthey represent a solution to the conflict between people andanimals. Fencing projects must reconcile these differing viewsif they are to be successful. Elephants are too valuable to bedestroyed as crop raiders because their full value cannot berealised when shot as crop raiders.

Although the capital cost of a fencing project is very highcompared to the damage caused by problem animals, fencingprojects should not be judged solely by the success they havein reducing crop raiding. In the long term, they also have animportant role to play in saving human lives and valuableanimals, while maintaining the wildlands upon which theCAMPFIRE programme depends. Yet they must be rigorouslydesigned so as to achieve what they are supposed to achieve.

7

CHAPTER 1

BACKGROUND ISSUES TO ELECTRIC FENCING

Interface situations for electric fencingConflict between people and animals occurs when:

• settlement and agriculture is next to a ‘national park’ or‘safari area’ - as shown in fig. 1.

• settlement is isolated within a communal wildlife area -as shown in fig. 2.

• settlements are expanding and joining together,fragmenting a wildlife habitat - as shown in fig. 3.

Electric fencing is most useful in the first two situations. It may be difficult to gain acceptance or very costly toimplement in the third.

8

Figure 1: When settlement and agriculture is next to a ‘protected area’

Figure 3: Settlements are expanding and joining together, fragmenting a wildlife habitat

Figure 2: Settlement is isolated within a communal wildlife area

National Park

Communal land

BO

UN

DA

RY

What should I do before starting a fencing project?Before you begin a fencing project you should explore whether electric fencing will be a cost effective solution inmanaging problem animals. This means that you need to:

Assess the damage caused by wildlife in your wards,ideally over a period of 2-3 years through a ProblemAnimal Reporting (PAR) system. This will tell you

• which animals cause the damage,• where they cause it and • when it is likely to occur.

All this information is important in order to know if it isappropriate to consider fencing, where to fence and whattype of fence to use.

Examine with the communities, the different ways offencing shown in this booklet and decide which modelbest serves your needs (see pages 12+13).

When the information from 1 and 2 above are to handconduct cost benefit analysis (see chapter 4). This is tosee if the costs outweigh the advantages of building afence. (If you are not confident about doing this,consult an economist).

If the cost benefit result is favourable work out how it will be paid for and maintained. How much eachhousehold will effectively ‘pay’ out of wildlife revenuefor its construction and maintenance is the mostimportant thing to the people.

Try out a pilot electric fence project on a suitable ruralcommunity.

Decide if the pilot project works and learn theassociated problems before going ahead with yourfinal plan.

Setting up a Problem Animal Reporting system is covered in the firstguide of this series.

9

1

5

4

3

2

6

10

Who takes part

Traditional Leaders (chiefs and headmen)

Community members

Ward Wildlife Committee Chairman

Ward Councillor

Vidco Chairman

District Administration Rep.

Wildlife Manager or Coordinator

Natural Resources Representative

Safari Operators

Dept. NPWLM

AGRITEX

NGOs - Zimtrust

- WWF

- CASS

- other

What they should do

Review problem animal reporting

Discuss conflicting interests, ideas and options

Investigate losses from wildlife

List costs of fencing project

List and discuss different fencing schemes (pages 12-13)

What is needed

A good description of problem animalactivity in the district

Statement of objectives and expectations of fence

Nominate/detail planning team

A cost/benefit analysis (pages 25+26)

Box 1: Discussing how electric fencing can meet stakeholders requirements

What is the procedure for getting an electric fence projectimplemented?

STEP 1. RAISING AWARENESS AND DISCUSSINGCOMMUNITY NEEDS

A meeting may be called by the ward wildlife committee todiscuss villagers’ concerns about problem animals. Thismeeting could be organised by the District Wildlife orCAMPFIRE Coordinated-ordinator. Try and make sure a cross-section of the community is present. It is important that everypoint of view is heard and that they are documented.

Discussions at first should explore the idea of a fence as apossible option because fencing may not be the best solutionto the problem. Fencing should be discussed in the context oflanduse planning and zoning.

Discussions may carry on over several meetings whereconflicting personal interests may emerge, as well as a generalpicture of the problems people are having with wild animals.

Some meetings may be dominated by certain individuals whodo not represent the whole community. However, it is veryimportant that the whole community supports any decisionsmade at these meetings and not just a few officials orcommunity members.

Box 1 on page 10 gives an outline of who might be invited tothese meetings, what should be discussed, and the outcomeswhich you should work towards.

The actual roles and responsibilities of the different groupsshould be decided by everyone at the meeting. These decisionscan then be made known to the District Board of Managementthrough the Ward Wildlife Committee.

The different models or ways in which a fence can be arrangedshould be presented and discussed, in order to debate whichtype of fence may be the most suitable. These arrangementsare shown in box 2 on the following two pages.

Finally a cost-benefit analysis should beundertaken before goingon to the planning stagein order to work out ifa fence will be a costeffective solution toproblem animals.(A detailed descriptionof how a cost-benefitanalysis can be carriedout is given inChapter 4 ).

11

CHAPTER 2

STEPS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ELECTRIC FENCE PROJECT

Box

2: D

iffer

ent f

enci

ng s

chem

es to

con

side

r

Mod

el 1

: Irr

igat

ion

sche

me

encl

osur

e D

escr

ipti

on:

Onl

y th

e ir

riga

ted

fiel

ds

are

insi

de

the

fenc

e. A

ll d

wel

lings

are

out

sid

e.Im

por

tan

t poi

nts

: T

his

give

s th

e m

ost

bene

fit c

ompa

red

to

the

cost

s of

oth

er m

odel

s bu

t lea

ves

dw

ellin

gs u

npro

tect

ed fr

om w

ildlif

e. (I

t may

no

t be

poss

ible

whe

re th

ere

is n

ot e

noug

h la

nd o

rw

ater

ava

ilabl

e fo

r ev

ery

farm

er in

this

one

are

a).

Mod

el 2

: Sm

all c

ompl

ete

wild

life

excl

osur

eD

escr

ipti

on:

Her

e th

e fe

nces

, whi

ch m

ay b

e 1-

6km

long

, are

arra

nged

to e

nclo

se th

e d

wel

lings

and

cul

tiva

tion

plot

s of

one

or

a fe

w fa

mili

es. T

hey

may

form

a

grou

p of

link

ed s

mal

l wild

life

excl

osur

es.

Imp

orta

nt p

oin

ts:

Thi

s m

odel

sti

ll ne

eds

to b

e te

sted

sin

ce

com

mun

itie

s ha

ve fe

lt it

will

cos

t too

muc

h co

mpa

red

to th

e be

nefi

ts it

giv

es. I

t dif

fers

from

mod

el 3

,in it

s si

ze. T

his

styl

e of

fenc

e m

ay b

e d

iffi

cult

for

com

mun

itie

s to

ac

cept

but

it h

as s

ome

good

cha

ract

eris

tics

.

Mod

el 3

: Ext

ensi

ve c

ompl

ete

excl

osur

eD

escr

ipti

on:

A fe

nce

peri

met

er o

f 15-

20 k

m is

arr

ange

d to

mak

e an

ex

tens

ive

com

plet

e ex

clos

ure

whi

ch p

lace

s fi

eld

s,gr

azin

g la

nd, m

ost d

wel

lings

, and

pos

sibl

y a

scho

ol, c

linic

and

wat

er s

uppl

y in

sid

e th

e fe

nce.

Im

por

tan

t poi

nts

: M

odel

3 s

chem

es, w

hich

hav

e a

good

cos

t/be

nefi

tra

tio,

app

ear

to h

ave

been

the

mos

t suc

cess

ful

so fa

r. C

omm

unit

ies

are

kept

toge

ther

and

can

see

that

the

fenc

e ke

eps

anim

als

out.

Whi

le th

e fe

nce

is a

cces

sibl

e fo

r m

aint

enan

ce,

long

er fe

nces

are

mor

e d

iffi

cult

to m

aint

ain

and

req

uire

mor

e m

anag

emen

t. M

odel

3

sche

mes

may

als

o re

quir

e so

me

peop

le to

m

ove

in o

rder

to li

ve w

ithi

n th

e fe

nce.

12

Mod

el 4

: Ext

ensi

ve o

pen-

ende

d fe

nce

Des

crip

tion

: A

n ex

tens

ive

and

ope

n-en

ded

fenc

eup

to 3

0km

long

is b

uilt

to d

efle

ct w

ildan

imal

s.T

he fe

nce

is p

lace

d w

here

anim

als

are

alre

ady

rest

rict

ed o

rco

mbi

ned

wit

h a

natu

ral b

arri

er s

uch

asan

esc

arpm

ent o

r a

rive

r.Im

por

tan

t poi

nts

: M

odel

4 s

chem

es w

hich

cut

dow

n on

cap

ital

cos

ts b

y lin

king

wit

h a

natu

ral

barr

ier

have

a v

ery

good

cos

t/be

nefi

t rat

io. H

owev

er s

ettl

emen

ts m

ay s

till

bevu

lner

able

bec

ause

of t

he o

pen

end

s of

the

fenc

e an

d m

ore

prob

lem

ani

mal

repo

rts

have

bee

n re

ceiv

ed in

mod

el 4

pro

ject

s co

mpa

red

to m

odel

3. T

helo

ng fe

nce

need

ed c

an le

ad to

man

agem

ent p

robl

ems

in it

s m

aint

enan

cew

hile

ther

e is

als

o a

risk

of i

sola

ting

ani

mal

s on

the

wro

ng s

ide

afte

r it

isbu

ilt. S

ome

smal

l pro

blem

ani

mal

s m

ay a

lso

rem

ain

in ‘p

ocke

ts ‘o

f bus

hin

sid

e th

e fe

nced

are

a.

Mod

el 5

: Sm

all g

roup

or

indi

vidu

ally

ow

ned

fenc

eD

escr

ipti

on:

A v

ery

sim

ple

fenc

e en

circ

ling

one

or a

few

fiel

ds

and

/or

a fe

who

uses

.Im

por

tan

t poi

nts

:It

is o

wne

d b

y a

very

sm

all g

roup

of p

eopl

e or

a s

ingl

e ho

useh

old

. It

is v

ery

sim

ple

to c

onst

ruct

and

mai

ntai

n. M

uch

less

mai

nten

ance

isre

quir

ed s

o co

sts

are

low

.

Mod

el 6

: Sm

all s

trat

egic

fenc

e or

bar

rier

Des

crip

tion

: Fo

r so

me

spec

ies

wit

h kn

own

or r

estr

icte

d m

ovem

ents

, a

smal

l car

eful

ly p

lace

d fe

nce,

suc

h as

alo

ng a

riv

er fr

ont

gard

en r

aid

ed b

y hi

ppos

, aro

und

a k

raal

to p

rote

ctliv

esto

ck fr

om li

ons,

or

acro

ss a

riv

er b

ed to

sto

pel

epha

nt, c

an b

e bu

ilt.

Imp

orta

nt p

oin

ts:

Thi

s st

yle

of fe

ncin

g is

ver

y su

cces

sful

whe

n d

esig

ned

toke

ep o

ut a

par

ticu

lar

anim

al a

nd s

ited

in th

eco

rrec

t pla

ce. T

his

in tu

rn d

epen

ds

on g

ood

exi

stin

gkn

owle

dge

of t

he a

nim

als

resp

onsi

ble

for

dam

age

and

thei

r d

aily

mov

emen

ts.

13

14

Box 3: Agency members, tasks and expected results of effective planning

Agency membersPlanning Coordinator (NGO or council representative)Ward Wildlife ChairmanWard Councillor Wildlife Manager/CoordinatorFunding representative

Job descriptionReview local knowledge of animal movementSpoor/Dung counts to assess animalsmovements/concentrationsReview aerial surveys for

- distribution-information- density information- major problem animal species

Review resource and socio-economic surveys for- area sizes (wards, vidcos)- population statistics- arable in/out- proportions of occupied/unoccupied land in area

Review activities of people esp. pastoralism vs croppingReview ancestral spirit sitesAcquire aerial photographs for terrain appreciation andplottingAcquire maps (1:50 000 topographical) for terrainappreciation and plottingReview costs/benefit appraisalCheck tender and contract requirements with funding agency

ResultsRough trace lineBudget for - construction

- maintenance Management plan

(human and financial resources,equipment responsibilities)

Post construction monitoring planTender notes

STEP 2: PLANNING THE FENCE

When planning a fence, many agencies and individuals mustwork together. This will ensure that when the fence is erectedit will give the expected results. The members of the planningteam, the tasks they must set between themselves and theoutcomes which must be produced are shown in box 3.Normally this planning process might be organised andchaired by the District Wildlife Coordinator.

Planning a fence involves three related tasks:

TASK 1: Collecting together informationCollecting together information about wild animals and theirmovement in the area together with the people, theirsettlements and land-use. This is normally called a ProblemAnimal Reporting system or PAR and should be establishedwell before a fencing project is undertaken. Usuallyinformation about one whole season is needed to understandwhich animals cause the most serious problems and wherethese problems may occur. This information is needed to makedecisions about the route of the fence and the style of fenceneeded. After reviewing all this information a proposed routefor the fence can be marked on either a map or an aerialphotograph.

TASK 2: Proposing the route of the fenceSetting up a ‘trace’ or rough line marking an approximateroute of the fence. This can be marked using voluntarycommunity labour so that everyone in the community seeswhere the fence will go and have time to consider changes toit. When the trace line has been finally agreed, it should becleared and widened to five metres. Because of the largeamount of work involved, this will take place more efficientlyif paid community labour is used. It also enhances popularsupport for the fence.

These initial tasks are important since they: • still allow for changes in the route to be

made before the fence is erected by acontractor

• encourage participation inclearing the line and anunderstanding of wherethe fence will go

• gain acceptancefor the project

15

16

TASK 3: Who will do the work? Construction and maintenance of the fence

This involves:

Preparing tender notes Tender notes are a very important part of planning and formthe basis of a legal contract if an outside agency builds thefence. Tender notes describe in great detail what is required,where it should go, when it should be built and how it will bepaid for. On completion a fence must be checked against thetender notes to make sure that everything has been donecorrectly. Only then should payment be made. Requirementsof funding agencies should be checked before going further.

Within the tender notes (see Appendix 1 on page 36+37 for aspecimen set of notes prepared for Nenyunga and Madzivazvidocommunity fences) the following information is required:

i) General description of the project and its objectives

ii) Design guidelines or minimum performancespecifications. These make sure that the contractor workswithin the limits you set for him and uses theappropriate quality of materials. Design guidelines areimportant should you wish to make a claim against acontractor if the fence fails after it has been built. Forexample the energisers needed on an electric fence arevery important. To me and you they may all look thesame. But a contractor knows he has the choice ofsupplying cheaper and probably incorrect energisers or

more expensive, and reliable ones. If you specify theenergy and voltage delivery which is required from theenergisers for your fence, the contractor will have tomake sure the correct ones are supplied. The designguidelines or minimum specifications you may wish toinclude in the tender notes are:• height of fence• material the fence posts are made from• energy and voltage delivery• wire thickness and spacing• the distance between corner posts or posts

that take a ‘strain’• dropper interdistance

iii)The fence route given in six figure grid references andmarked on a small scale map

iv) Specifications on materials and construction.Sometimes you may wish to state exactly what acontractor should do. For example many grades of wireare available but the positive (live) wire on an electricfence should be ‘double dipped 2.5mm wire’. Asking thecontractor to specify in detail what is being provided andhow the fence will be erected, allows you to control thequality of the fence.

v) Subcontracting. Subcontracting refers to giving morethan one contractor the responsibility for building thefence. This may mean one contractor erecting the fenceand another one electrifying it. This can cause problems

17

CHECKLIST FOR TENDER NOTES• general project description withobjectives

• route of the fence with map • design guidelines • specifications on materials andconstruction• subcontracting• after construction support

• labour arrangements• training included• payment schedule• inflation clause• overdue clause• arbitration clause

since the contractor electrifying the fence may find it hasnot been built to his liking, resulting in a problem fencefor the community. Sub-contracts should only bepermitted for non-construction items or occasionally forelectrification with the provision that final responsibilityrests with the first or primary contractor so as toreinforce his responsibility.

vi)Labour arrangements. It is likely that communitysupport for a fence will be greater if they are employedin its construction. On the other hand, a contractorprefers to use his own trained labour over which he hascontrol. A compromise is for a combination ofcommunity and contract labour to be specified. In thiscase a clause should be inserted into the contract placingresponsibility for the labour supervision with thecontractor and allowing the contractor the responsibilityof hiring and firing community labour. This will avoid acontractor being able to blame a community should afault in the fence arise.

vii)Training in fence maintenance. The tender should statethat in addition to community workers gaining skills infence construction, the contractor should provide aspecific technical training programme in fault finding,monitoring and maintenance of the fence.

viii)After construction support. An after constructionsupport service should be included to make sure that thefence is well constructed and to allow for a gradual

withdrawal of technical support. A specified percentageof the contract price should be held as the final paymentuntil six months after the fence is completed.

*viii)Payment schedule. A payment schedule should bespecified. An example would be:

30% on award of contract30% on completion of first half of contract

30% on final completion10% at the end of six month ‘after construction support service’

*ix) Inflation clause.

* x) Overdue clause.

*xi) Arbitration clause.* See specific requirements of donors (if applicable).

STEP 3. FUNDING AND TENDERING

There are several options open for communities to raisemoney. It is however very important that funds are raisedinitially from within the community. Options for raisingmoney include:

• self help or financing from wildlife dividends• coordinated-financing by combining RDC money with

donor aid to make a larger grant• soft loans from development banks• joint ventures with hunting or non-hunting partners• revolving funds, for example with the repayments of a

first ‘soft loan’ going to fund the next scheme

The agencies involved, the tasks they must carry out and theresults needed are shown in box 4.

STEP 4. CONSTRUCTION

Construction of the fence should be carried out by a contractorin liaison with the local Wildlife or CAMPFIRE Coordinated-ordinator in the district.

Councils may wish to engage a consultant to evaluate if thefinal construction meets tender specifications. The date of thisevaluation should be fixed for example one week aftercompletion of a particular section or final completion, so thatfaults in construction can be distinguished from inadequatemaintenance. The agencies, tasks and expected resultsinvolved in construction are shown in box 5 (next page).

18

Agencies/Members

District Council Representative

District Administration Rep.

Donor representative

Ward Wildlife Committee Chairman

Joint Venture partner

Planning Coordinator

Results

Letter ofagreement/cheque

Cash deposit

Tender evaluation

Job description

Access funds

Open bank account

Draw up tender notes

Offer public tender

Evaluate tender offers

Box 4: Funding and tendering

STEP 5. MAINTENANCE

Developing a maintenance plan. This is a plan to make sure that the fence will be maintainedby the community. It should include details about dailymaintenance and the tools and components required. Dailymaintenance guards should be recruited from within thecommunity and engaged by the Ward Wildlife Committee in aformal written contract. Although at this stage maintenanceguards may not have been identified, it is important that thecommunity is made aware of this commitment. Preparations,in terms of contract documents, job descriptions andremuneration, should be made by the Ward WildlifeCommittee. The committee will need to decide on thenumbers of guards, selection criteria and procedures, andensure that the guards understand they are accountable to

them for fulfiling their duties. The committee in turn isaccountable to the members of the ward for making sure thatthe fence is maintained and should report to the DistrictWildlife/CAMPFIRE Coordinated-ordinator on the dischargeof its duties.

During the growing season the fence line will need to becleared of grass. This task needs to be formalised in astatement listing those individuals who will undertake thisclearing, who will supervise them, and how often it will bedone. If this process is not formalised, maintenance in the firstseason will probably fail, leading to the eventual failure of thefence.

19

Agencies/Members

Local labour

Contractor

Ward Wildlife Chairman

Results

CIeared fence line

Completed fence

Trained fence guards

Job description

Open trace line

Construct fence

Supervise

Box 5: Construction

The tools and equipment and expected replacement partsnecessary for maintenance should be itemised. Informationabout where they will be obtained, who will obtain them andhow they will be paid for should all be included.

Maintenance of the fence is vital. In the past communities havehad problems maintaining a fence because:

• cash was not given as an incentive for hired members ofthe community to manage the fence

• clearing was not organised to take place regularly alongthe whole length of the fence

• responsibilities were not understood• there was no money to pay fence guards and therefore

they did not have to account to anyone• tools and replacement parts were lacking• there was little technical understanding of the electrical

components

In projects where maintenance was unsupervised, a number ofserious problems have arisen including theft of solar panelsand energisers, failure to clear vegetation touching the fenceresulting in electrical shorting, and a failure to keep recordsabout the fence. A lack of maintenance is the main threat to thewhole concept of using electric fences, making it doublyimportant to have an effective maintenance plan for everyproject.

Suitable fence guards should be identified since their location,occupation and education will influence their efficiency,interest and understanding.

Each guard should receive training in ‘troubleshooting’ fenceproblems by the contractor who can demonstrate to them howto solve the most common problems that are likely to occur.These reports should be regularly forwarded to the wardwildlife committee for examination by the chairman who canthen report on the state of the fence. Supervision of the fenceguards can initially be a part of the ‘after construction supportservice’ (page 17 section viii) provided by the contractor.

20

How effective is an electric fence in reducing crop losses?In most cases birds and insects cause as much loss to crops aswild animals do.

ElephantsElephants are the most serious problem animals but can bedeterred by a good electric fence. However certain individualsmay repeatedly test a fence, resulting in regular breaks butinfrequent penetration into the enclosed area. A 1.9m highfence appears to be successful in keeping elephants out.

BuffaloesBuffaloes can break fences but usually cause little cropdamage. They may ‘blunder’ into a fence but retreat on beingshocked. A buffalo is probably more of a threat to people than to crops.

HipposHippos usually stay close to one site and are easily controlledwith low electric fences. Hippos may however enter a fencedarea at a river crossing.

AntelopesAn antelope such as a kudu may breaka fence in the course of jumping overit. Antelope though are not usually aproblem in crop damage.

Bushpigs, baboons, lions and leopardsElectric fences are not very effectiveagainst bushpigs since they may digunder them. Similarly, small carnivores may dig under, orclimb and squeeze through small gaps even in a fence wherethe wires are closely spaced. Baboons and monkeys can easilyuse trees to climb over the fence. Carnivores do not cause cropdamage and primates can be chased away by watchful peopleduring the day, bushpigs are often responsible for extensivecrop damage, especially at night.

21

CHAPTER 3

ELECTRIC FENCING AND PROBLEM ANIMAL SPECIES

Animals causing damage outside the fence in Tyunga 1991-2

Hippo 9%

Elephant 91%

22

Effect Value Source of data

Benefitsreduced crop raiding PAR data missing therefore calculated calculated

at a fence payback period over the life of the project (10 years)

reduced PAC reaction $14,500 Safari operator

reduced livestock losses $55 500 CASS data

CostsClearing fence line $210 912 Tsholotsho RDC

Fence construction $675 000 ZimTrust

Maintenance 5% or 11% of construction WWF datacost annually

No impactHunting quota unchanged $611 631 DNPWLM

Estimating costs and benefits of an electric fence in Tsholotsho RDC

CASE STUDY 1An electric fence cost-benefit analysis in Tsholotsho Communal Land

BackgroundBefore the start of CAMPFIRE, Tsholotsho was the communalarea in Matabeleland with the highest number of elephant shoton PAC (Problem Animal Control). This represented aconsiderable loss of potential revenue to the communities.Wildlife living in the adjoining National Park particularlyelephant, lion and hyena caused regular disturbance to theinhabitants in the communal lands.

An electric fence was discussed since:• the Rural District Council saw it as a way of creating

a buffer zone for generating wildlife revenue• people saw it as a measure for reducing crop damage

As a result an environmental review of the whole fence andbuffer zone idea was carried out which included a cost-benefitanalysis.

Is a fence financially worthwhile?Estimating costs and benefitsInitially, estimating livestock and crop losses amongst the fourmain affected wards bordering Hwange National Park proveddifficult since no problem animal reporting system was inplace. However, from other data the costs and benefits of anelectric fence shown on the box on page 24 were identified.

Calculating the value of crops that must be savedIn the absence of PAR data the value of crops that needed to besaved from destruction by elephant annually, in order to coverthe costs of the fence over a period of time such as 10 years,was calculated. A ten year payback period over which thefence pays for itself in terms of crops and livestock saved is areasonable one given the materials used in the construction ofthe fence.

To the total costs of the fence which was Z$ 885 912maintenance costs over the 10 year period have been added.These have been worked out at a 5% and 11% level of fencecosts and are shown in the table over the page.

23

CHAPTER 4

CASE STUDIES OF ELECTRIC FENCING PROJECTS

It is now possible to work out the annual amount of crops andlivestock that must be saved in order to pay for the fence.

Knowing the producer price of maize and sorghum per tonallows us to work out how many tonnes of cereal must besaved to make the fence worthwhile. Knowing the averageyield per hectare for the crops in the area meant that it waspossible to see how large an area would have to be affected bycrop raiding.

The implications for the council are that for the fence to beeconomically viable it must save annually the equivalent ofbetween 99 and 138 serious incidents where at least a hectareof mature maize has been completely destroyed or between148 and 193 similar incidents where sorghum was destroyed,depending on the level of council maintenance costs. Largeherbivore pests would never inflict this much damage in onecommunity’s area. (Refer to the case studies on pages 29, 31, 33for indices of costs per household protected).

Obviously these figures will vary depending on the paybackperiod the community requires from the fence, the fencemaintenance costs, the crops grown, their producer price andthe expected yield per hectare. Communities may in factdecide that they need a fence because it also protectsthemselves from dangerous animals.

24

maintenance costs 5% of total 11% of total

value of crops $ 132 886.80 $ 186 041.52

equivalent quantity ofmaize @ $900 per tonne 148 tonnes 206 tonnes

hectarage@ 1.5 tonnes ha 99 ha 138 ha

equivalent quantity of sorghum at $550 per tonne 242 tonnes 338 tonnes

hectarage @ 1.75 tonnes ha 148 ha 193 ha

5% 11%$ $

Annual maintenance (over 10 years) 442 956 974 503.20Total fence costs 885 912 885 912

Total costs over 10 yearpayback period 1 328 868 1 860 415.20

Annual costs 132 886.80 186 041.52

Value and amounts of crops saved each yearneeded for a 10 year ‘payback period’

Do it yourself: Cost-benefit analysis of an electric fence

Task 1: Add together fence clearing and construction costs

Task 2: Decide over how many years the fence should pay foritself. (The payback period)

Task 3: Add to the fence total in (1) the annual maintenance bill of 5% and 11% of total (1) for each year during which thefence must pay for itself.

Task 4:Divide the new total in (3) by the number of years overwhich the fence must pay for itself (the payback period).

Task 5: Compare this annual total with the annual damage causedto crops and livestock by problem animals.

Task 6: If (5) is not possible because PAR data is lacking, find outwhat crops are grown locally and their producer price.

Task 7:Divide the annual total cost of the fence during thepayback period by the producer price to get the amount of damage to crops equivalent to this figure.

Task 8: Divide this tonnage by the average yield per hectare foreach crop to get the area of crops the fence needs to ‘save’to make it viable.

Task 9: Compare this area with estimates of recent annual localdamage to crops.

25

Other points to consider• Donor finance. The costs to a community may also be

lowered considerably if donor finance is made availablefor the initial capital cost. However in this case councilsshould remember that at some stage in the future thefence may have to be refurbished using new parts andthese costs should be built into any calculations.

• Livestock losses. While a similar calculation could bemade for livestock, the effect of a fence on predators andits role in reducing livestock losses is not yet clearlyunderstood. It is even possible that a fence might nothave a beneficial effect.

• Maintenance. Rural District Councils are alsoresponsible for the annual costs of maintaining theelectric fence. Depending on the length of fence thesecosts may reasonably vary between 5% and 11% of thetotal construction cost. Councils would have to pay forthis maintenance out of the revenues generated fromsafari hunting or other CAMPFIRE activities. They needto know if this is financially possible.

• Costs. Comparing fence maintenance costs withrevenue expected from CAMPFIRE activities.

Using the above figures and bearing in mind the annualrevenue generated from CAMPFIRE activities inTsholotsho, a simple cash flow analysis indicates that theRDC would have to retain at least 35% of the grossrevenue in order to meet the maintenance costs of thefence. This may prove unacceptable to the communitywho may wish to use the CAMPFIRE revenue for otherpurposes. Additionally for the Council it means that somuch of the CAMPFIRE management levy of 35% wouldbe used on fence maintenance that there would be littleleft over to pay for other essential council managementactivities.

• Allocating fence costs among wards. Another factorRural District Councils need to take into account is howthe costs of the fence and its maintenance will be splitamongst the different wards. One ‘fair’ way of allocating

maintenance costs which some Districts have used is tosplit the cost amongst the wards according to the lengthof fence in each ward. However since wildlife revenue isgiven to wards according to what they ‘produce’, thiswill result in some wards paying more of their wildliferevenue for maintenance than others.

The figures in the table below show how the costs of anelectric fence would be divided amongst the fouraffected wards in Tsholotsho. The analysis shows that allfour wards could afford to maintain the fence. However,although the fence would cost householders in ward 1the most, it would only use up 26% of the revenue. Theburden in ward 2 is much heavier and here there may belittle money left for householders needs after they havepaid for the fence maintenance.

26

Source of $ Levy only Management Levy + Management

% of gross 15% 35% 50%

Gross amount $ 91 745 $ 210 912 $ 305 815

Maintenance

@ 5% of costs $ 132 886.80 $ 132 886.80 $ 132 886.80

As a % of gross 145% 63% 43%

Maintenance

@ 11% costs $ 186 041.52 $ 186 041.52 $ 186 041.52

As a % of gross 203% 88% 61%

bold figures = costs exceed revenue

Total gross revenue from CAMPFIRE in Tsholotsho = $611 631

This figure has been calculated as 5% of initial construc-tion costs, rising by 10% every year for 10 years, since itis likely that wages for workers in Zimbabwe willincrease by around this annual average during the peri-od. On the other hand, because of fixed quotas and atbest only small increases in wildlife, it means thatincreases in earnings may not be real. That is, increasedearning can only be expected from devaluation of theZimbabwe dollar or perhaps more efficient marketing.

Rural District Councils need to work out carefully wherethe burden of maintaining the fence will fall, bearing inmind the revenue earned by different wards in previousyears and the number of households living in each one.This information should be provided and explained topeople in all the wards in order for everyone tounderstand what the financial impact of building andmaintaining a fence will be, before a decision aboutplanning and constructing a fence is made.

27

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4

Length of fence 49kms 37kms 53kms 13kms

Cost of construction $588 000 $437 000 $629 000 $154 000

Average annual maintenance cost

@5% over payback period * 46 828 34 827 49 887 12 236

Annual revenue 179 462 43 333 129 065 44 983

Maintenance as a % of revenue 26% 80% 39% 27%

Number of households in ward 658 950 895 593

Maintenance cost per

household per year $71 $37 $56 $21

*

28

The Kanyurira (Masoka) Ward environment showing the settlement and wildlife areas

KEY

old tsetse fence

river

track

crops

communitycentre

bush

small gardenfences

electric fence

dwelling

}}Wildlifein area

SETTLEMENT AREA

WILDLIFE AREA

29

CASE STUDY 2.An electric fence in Kanyurira ward, Dande Communal Land, Guruve District

FACTFILEConcept model 3Description of fence encirclingSettlement layout isolated settlementTarget species Elephant, buffaloElephant density 0,4 sq.km in dry seasonFence length 22kmProtected area 25 sq.kmHuman population 120 householdsCrop raiding history 63 incidents in 1988/89Design

wires 5poles woodenheight 1.8melectric 3 in-line positive

Construction formula private donor grantlocal labour only

Completed August 1990Cost per km fencing US$ 500Cost per km protected US$ 440Cost per household protected US$ 91Maintenance i) fence guards paid from

capital grantii) community labour for

annual clearing

Results Since the fence was completed, five elephant crop raids havetaken place; two in 1991 and three in 1992. Other animalspecies, for which the fence was not designed, still move freely.Problems which have arisen include the theft of the batteryleading to an energiser failure, a lack of monitoring when thevoltameter batteries were ‘borrowed’ and a lack of consistentclearing along the fence in 1991 and 1992 until labour for thiswas paid for out of wildlife dividends.

Although the fence has acted for much of the time as a partialphysical barrier only, it has significantly reduced crop raidingand loss of human life. However the challenge to the fence byelephants has been low, possibly because they are used to thetsetse fences where they were shot (in the past) for breakingfences. In the long term there may be more challenges to thefence especially during times where there is an electricityfailure.

30

Negande community fence showing the general environment, community interests and wildlife concentration areas

KEY

Wildlifein area

outsiders moved intofence areariver

trackcrops

Negande community centre

bush

dry season concentration of elephant

dam

dwelling

electric fence

escarpment

road

}}

wet season concentration of elephant

31

CASE STUDY 3. Negande community fence, Omay Communal Land, Kariba District

FACTFILEConcept model 3 & 4Description of fence partially encirclingSettlement layout isolated settlementTarget species Elephant, buffalo,lionElephant density 1,7 sq.km in wet seasonFence length 18kmProtected area 44 sq.kmHuman population 513 householdsCrop raiding history 122 incidents in 1989/90Design

wires 7poles woodenheight 1.8melectric 4 in-line +positive

construction formula NGO grant for construction

part local labourcompleted September 1991cost per km US$ 1185Cost per km protected US$ 484Cost per household protected US$ 41Maintenance no formal strategy

Results During the first season after completion there were 42 cropraids, a reduction of 65% compared to the previous year.Initially the power supply was discontinuous because oftechnical problems and the theft of the solar panel.Maintenance problems arose as a result of the responsibilitiesof those involved in maintenance not being defined orunderstood and fence guard salaries not being paid. Tools andcomponents for maintenance were not properly organised bythe ward wildlife committee and clearing around the fencetook place very late.

Had there been normal rainfall in 1991-2 the fence wouldhave been overcome by grass. Nevertheless the fence waseffective in reducing crop damage, with most crop raidingtaking place around the open end. The closure of this sectionwill decrease crop damage, but may reduce overall costeffectiveness.

32

Wildlifein area

river

foot and mouth control fencecrops

community centrebushdry season concentrationof elephant

dwelling

electric fence

escarpment

}}

wet season concentration ofelephant

North Gokwe community fence showing the people and wildlife distribution

KEY

National Park

main road

road

33

CASE STUDY 4.Nenyunga and Madzivazvido community fences, North Gokwe Communal Land, Gokwe District.

FACTFILEConcept model 3,4 & 5Description of fence partially encirclingSettlement layout mosaicTarget species Elephant, buffaloElephant density 0,5 sq.km in wet seasonFence length 30 kmProtected area 88 sq.kmHuman population 884 householdsCrop raiding history 63 incidents in 1988Design

wires 5poles steelheight 1.8melectric 2 offset +positive

completed May 1992Cost per km US$ 1476Cost per km protected US$ 503Cost per household protected US$ 50construction formula District wildlife revenues

and donor grantlabour i) local and contract

Maintenance fence guards engaged and paid by wards ii) maintenance contract signed between District andwards VIDCO's preparedlists of names for clearance

Results Some movement occurred through the open sections beforethey were closed later.Some settlers did not move voluntarily and were evicted bythe council.

Maintenance problems arose as the fence guards employedlived too far from the fence resulting in irregular coverage. Theconstruction of the fence was poor, resulting in intermittentpower and breakages in the fence.

34

• Fence projects must consider costs and benefits.Most electric fencing projects have been implementedwith little or no financial analysis. This has resulted fromeither a lack of accurate PAR data or good financialrecords on the costs of maintenance.

While a financial analysis can indicate broadly whethera fence is economically justifiable, there may be otherdisadvantages of living close to wildlife perceived by acommunity which are not quantifiable and yet mayjustify its erection.

• Good management of fences is vital.Results from pilot fencing projects show that theirproblems are mainly institutional rather than financial,and have to be dealt with according to the circumstancesin each district. For example organising maintenance.

• Fencing works best where wildlife and people livevery close to each other.Fencing is the best option for enabling largerconcentrations of wildlife to coordinated-exist close tohuman settlement and farming.

• All ‘stakeholders’ in a community must discuss andagree with the fence.During the long period of fence project planning, thebest approach may be to aim for a compromise betweenthe opposing objectives of the parties involved: thewildlife orientated ecological advisors, the politicallymotivated local administrators and the agriculturallyaffected resident farmers.

• Fences are only one part of managing problemanimals.With increasing immigration of new settlers into areas of‘natural vegetation’, conflict between animals, especiallyelephant and people is increasing. This negativeinteraction is taking place on a scale which electricfencing has no hope of containing. Nevertheless in thoseareas where electric fencing is being used as one elementof problem animal management, the results areencouraging. Wet season hunting of problem animals,timely payment of dividends from wildlife, landuseplanning and zoning are examples of other ways ofproblem animal management.

35

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS

App

endi

x O

ne

EXA

MPL

E O

FTE

ND

ER N

OTE

S

MA

DZI

VAZV

IDO

and

CH

IREY

A C

OM

MU

NIT

Y FE

NCE

S

Gen

eral

The

se n

otes

form

the

tech

nica

l bas

is fo

r th

e te

nder

ad

vert

isem

ent d

ated

13t

h Ju

ne 1

992

for

the

cons

truc

tion

and

ele

ctri

fica

tion

of g

ame

fenc

es in

the

abov

e ar

eas

of G

okw

eA

dm

inis

trat

ive

Dis

tric

t. T

hey

prov

ide

inst

ruct

ions

to p

rosp

ecti

ve c

ontr

acto

rs a

nd fo

rmpa

rt o

f a c

ontr

act w

hich

will

be

sign

ed b

y th

e su

cces

sful

con

trac

tor

and

the

clie

nt,

Che

ziya

Gok

we

Dis

tric

t Cou

ncil.

The

fenc

ing

proj

ect i

s fu

nded

join

tly

by C

hezi

ya G

okw

e D

istr

ict C

ounc

il an

d R

io T

into

Zim

babw

e L

td. W

WF

Mul

tisp

ecie

s Pr

ojec

t are

pro

vid

ing

plan

ning

and

tech

nica

lsu

ppor

t for

the

proj

ect a

nd a

ny q

ueri

es r

elat

ing

to te

chni

cal m

atte

rs s

houl

d b

e re

ferr

edto

WW

F.

The

fenc

e is

in th

ree

part

s w

ith

a fo

urth

as

an o

ptio

n to

No

3;1)

Con

stru

ctio

n of

sev

en k

m o

f ele

ctri

c fe

ncin

g as

per

con

trac

t off

er 2

6th

Dec

embe

r19

91 (N

enyu

nga

and

Mad

ziva

zvid

o te

nder

not

es).

Gri

d r

efer

ence

PL

553

644

to60

5661

via

579

657

and

588

652.

2) E

lect

rifi

cati

on o

f exi

stin

g ve

teri

nary

fenc

e, P

L 5

5562

5-55

3644

, 2.3

kms.

3) C

onst

ruct

ion

of e

ight

km

of e

lect

ric

fenc

ing

as p

er 1

abo

ve. F

rom

579

697

to65

0699

.

The

fenc

es: a

re “

open

end

ed g

ame

fenc

es”

to c

ontr

ol o

r m

inim

ize

mov

emen

t of

elep

hant

and

buf

falo

from

uns

ettl

ed a

reas

into

the

adja

cent

set

tlem

ent a

reas

, (se

e m

aps

1728

A4,

C2

seri

es 1

:50

000)

.

Tend

er o

ffer

s sh

ould

incl

ude

proc

urem

ent o

f rel

evan

t mat

eria

ls a

nd e

quip

men

t,tr

ansp

ort t

o an

d o

n si

te, c

onst

ruct

ion

and

ele

ctri

fica

tion

. The

con

trac

tor

is e

xpec

ted

topr

ovid

e pa

rtic

ipat

ory,

on

site

trai

ning

of l

ocal

per

sonn

el d

urin

g co

nstr

ucti

on a

ndsp

ecif

ic tr

aini

ng fo

r se

lect

ed p

erso

nnel

on

com

plet

ion

of th

e fe

nce

wit

h pa

rtic

ular

refe

renc

e to

ele

ctri

cal f

ault

find

ing

and

mai

nten

ance

.

Des

ign

Gui

delin

esT

he s

ecti

on c

onst

ruct

ed fr

om s

crat

ch s

houl

d b

e a

min

imum

of 1

,7 m

eter

s hi

gh a

t the

top

stan

d. O

n a

sing

le p

lane

ther

e sh

ould

be

5 st

rand

s of

whi

ch 2

str

and

s sh

ould

be

posi

tive

. Sta

ndar

ds

shou

ld b

e no

mor

e th

an 1

2 m

apa

rt in

eit

her

stee

l or

woo

d o

rco

mbi

nati

ons

of w

ood

and

ste

el.

Ele

ctri

fica

tion

will

be

wit

h so

lar

mod

ules

and

sho

uld

del

iver

a m

inim

um o

f 6,0

kV

und

er lo

ad a

nd s

tore

d e

nerg

y of

4 jo

ules

min

imum

. Sec

tion

1 w

ill b

e el

ectr

ifie

d fr

omth

e ex

isti

ng fe

nce.

Posi

tive

wir

es s

houl

d b

e “h

ot, d

oubl

e d

ippe

d”

2,4

mm

nom

inal

dia

met

er w

hils

tne

gati

ves

shou

ld b

e no

rmal

hig

h te

nsile

2,2

5mm

nom

inal

dia

met

er.

36

A 5

met

er w

ide

cut l

ine

has

been

mad

e al

ong

whi

ch a

ll tr

ees

and

her

bace

ous

vege

tati

on h

as b

een

clea

red

(exc

lud

ing

tree

s of

15

cms

dia

met

er).

The

re w

ill b

e a

requ

irem

ent f

or o

ne v

ehic

le g

ate

and

6 p

edes

tria

n ga

tes,

the

posi

tion

of

whi

ch w

ill b

e d

ecid

ed o

n si

te.

Spec

ifica

tions

/Qua

lity

Cont

rol:

Mat

eria

lsC

ontr

acto

rs s

houl

d s

tate

the

spec

ific

atio

ns, s

ourc

e of

sup

ply,

ori

gin

and

dim

ensi

ons,

whe

re a

pplic

able

of a

ll m

ater

ials

/eq

uipm

ent

liste

d b

elow

:- w

ire

- ins

ulat

ors

- sta

ndar

ds

- bat

teri

es- d

ropp

ers

(if a

pplic

able

)- e

nerg

izer

s- s

olar

pan

els

Spec

ifica

tions

/Qua

lity

Cont

rol :

Con

stru

ctio

n.C

ontr

acto

rs s

houl

d s

ubm

it d

esig

n d

etai

ls a

nd d

raw

ings

if a

pplic

able

und

er th

efo

llow

ing

head

ings

:- w

ire

tens

ion

(kgs

pul

l), s

paci

ng- c

orne

r an

d s

trai

ning

box

es; d

esig

n an

d s

paci

ng- u

prig

hts,

sta

te d

imen

sion

s, in

terv

al, d

epth

bel

ow s

oil,

conc

rete

mat

eria

ls a

nd m

ix r

atio

(if a

pplic

able

)- i

nsul

ator

s; m

etho

d o

f att

achm

ent;

met

hod

of a

ttac

hmen

t of o

ffse

tbr

acke

ts, s

ampl

e to

be

subm

itte

d.

- met

hod

of j

oini

ng w

ire,

(ten

sion

and

non

-ten

sion

)- r

iver

cro

ssin

gs; d

esig

n- p

osit

ive

wir

e by

-pas

s at

cor

ner

post

s- a

rran

gem

ents

for

mou

ntin

g so

lar

pane

l and

bat

tery

/en

ergi

zer

cabi

net

- lig

hten

ing

div

erte

rs; p

osit

ion

and

des

ign

- ear

th p

egs;

inte

rval

, dep

th a

nd m

ater

ial

- gat

e in

stal

lati

on; d

esig

n

Subc

ontr

acts

Sing

le s

ub-c

ontr

act f

or c

onst

ruct

ion

of th

e fe

nce

may

be

perm

itte

d b

ut th

is d

oes

not

obvi

ate

any

resp

onsi

bilit

y ex

pres

sed

or

impl

ied

for

the

prop

er c

onst

ruct

ion

and

cor

rect

func

tion

or

effi

cien

cy o

f the

fenc

e. C

and

idat

es s

houl

d s

tate

the

nam

e of

the

orga

nisa

tion

, com

pany

or

ind

ivid

ual w

ith

who

m a

sub

-con

trac

t will

be

mad

e an

d th

eca

paci

ty o

f the

sub

-con

trac

tor

to u

nder

take

the

subc

ontr

act.

The

cos

t of t

he s

ub-

cont

ract

sho

uld

be

stat

ed u

nder

a s

ingl

e co

mbi

ned

app

licat

ion.

37

Dat

eC

onst

ruct

ion

is to

beg

in w

ithi

n 2

mon

ths

of-t

he a

war

d o

f the

con

trac

t to

bete

rmin

ated

wit

hin

3 m

onth

s of

the

star

t dat

e. F

ailu

re to

com

plet

e th

e te

nder

will

incu

ra

pena

lty

at a

rat

e of

2%

of t

he v

alue

of t

he c

ontr

act f

or e

ach

wee

k af

ter

the

due

dat

e.

Post

Con

stru

ctio

n Su

ppor

tA

n aw

ard

of t

he c

ontr

act i

nclu

des

a s

ervi

ce, f

or a

per

iod

of 6

mon

ths

afte

r th

eco

mpl

etio

n of

fenc

e d

urin

g w

hich

the

cont

ract

or u

nder

take

s to

rec

tify

tech

nica

ld

efec

ts. A

tech

nica

l def

ect i

s d

efin

ed a

s:-

i) A

def

ect~

not c

ause

d b

y an

y an

imal

or

vege

tati

on to

uchi

ng th

e w

ire(

s), b

utca

used

by

a co

nstr

ucti

on d

efec

t or

faul

t.

ii) A

vol

tage

dec

reas

e of

mor

e th

an 2

0% o

f the

fact

ory

stat

ed o

utpu

t of t

heen

ergi

zer

mea

sure

d a

t the

ene

rgiz

er o

r en

d p

oint

of t

he fe

nce

not c

ause

d b

yfa

ilure

of t

he p

ower

sup

ply

unit

s or

due

to s

hort

cir

cuit

cau

sed

by

anim

als

orve

geta

tion

. Tec

hnic

al d

efec

ts m

ust b

e re

ctif

ied

wit

hin

a re

ason

able

per

iod

of

tim

e or

two

wee

ks a

t the

mos

t aft

er b

eing

not

ifie

d b

y th

e cl

ient

. Con

trac

tors

shou

ld s

tate

thei

r d

omic

ile o

r th

at o

f the

ir a

gent

to b

e re

spon

sibl

e fo

r th

esu

ppor

t ser

vice

and

thei

r in

tend

ed m

etho

d o

f pro

vid

ing

this

ser

vice

.

Labo

urO

ne h

alf o

f the

labo

ur w

ill b

e pr

ovid

ed fr

om lo

cally

em

ploy

ed la

bour

. Quo

tati

ons

shou

ld th

eref

ore

excl

ude

this

cos

t but

incl

ude

the

cost

of t

he b

alan

ce o

f lab

our

and

thei

r su

perv

isor

y an

d s

peci

aliz

ed s

taff

. The

con

trac

tor

will

be

resp

onsi

ble

for

food

and

she

lter

for

all s

taff

. Eng

agem

ent o

f com

mun

ity

labo

ur d

oes

not n

egat

ere

spon

sibi

lity

for

the

good

con

stru

ctio

n of

the

fenc

e an

d s

uper

visi

on th

eref

ore

rem

ains

the

resp

onsi

bilit

y of

the

cont

ract

or. D

etai

ls o

f lab

our

cont

ract

ual

requ

irem

ents

can

be

foun

d in

sta

tuto

ry in

stru

men

t (cu

rren

tly

SI 1

993

16/

85).

Equi

pmen

tA

pplic

ants

sho

uld

sta

te th

e m

echa

nica

l equ

ipm

ent “

vehi

cles

” av

aila

ble

to th

em fo

rco

nstr

ucti

on o

f the

fenc

e.

Tend

ers

Tend

ers

shou

ld b

e of

fere

d a

s a

“Fix

ed o

ffer

” to

acc

ount

for

pric

e in

crea

ses

whi

ch m

ayar

ise

afte

r te

nder

sub

mis

sion

s an

d th

e aw

ard

of t

he c

ontr

act.

Tend

ers

will

be

awar

ded

wit

hin

30 d

ays

of th

e cl

osin

g d

ate.

Not

e: S

ome

fund

ing

agen

cies

suc

h as

USA

ID h

ave

spec

ific

tend

erin

g an

d c

ontr

act

requ

irem

ents

. The

se s

houl

d b

e re

ferr

ed to

ear

ly in

the

proc

ess

of te

nder

ing.

38

Cost

ing

App

lican

ts s

houl

d s

ubm

it th

eir

cost

ing

und

er th

e fo

llow

ing

subh

ead

ings

.

1. T

rans

port

atio

n2.

Mat

eria

ls (i

tem

ized

)3.

Lab

our

4. P

ost C

onst

ruct

ion

supp

ort s

ervi

ce5.

Oth

erTe

rms

of P

aym

ent

30%

of t

otal

cos

t on

sign

atur

e of

con

trac

t. 30

% o

f tot

al c

ost o

n co

mpl

etio

n of

firs

tse

ctio

n on

12.

8 km

incl

udin

g el

ectr

ific

atio

n25

% o

f tot

al c

ost o

n co

mpl

etio

n of

fenc

ing

incl

udin

g el

ectr

ific

atio

n.15

% o

f tot

al c

ost o

n co

mpl

etio

n on

sat

isfa

ctor

y 6

mon

th s

uppo

rt s

ervi

ce p

erio

d.

Not

es:

i)Pa

ymen

t can

onl

y be

eff

ecte

d o

nce

insp

ecti

on o

f the

par

t-fi

nish

ed fe

nce

is

mad

e. T

his

shou

ld n

ot ta

ke p

lace

any

long

er th

an s

even

day

s af

ter

com

plet

ion

or p

art c

ompl

etio

n.ii)

See

abov

e co

mm

ents

rel

atin

g to

spe

cifi

c d

onor

req

uire

men

ts.

Seal

ed te

nder

s m

arke

d “

Gok

we

Fenc

e Te

nder

. Not

to b

e op

ened

“ s

houl

d r

each

;C

hezi

ya G

okw

e D

istr

ict C

ounc

il,

P.B

AG

605

4,

Gok

we.

by n

ot la

ter

than

30t

he Ju

ly 1

992.

39

This booklet is the second in a series of guides on Wildlife Management and examines in detail the different ways in whichelectric fencing projects can be planned and implemented. It provides background information and guidance to RuralDistrict Councils and NGOs and should be read along with the other booklets in this series. These booklets are linked totraining programmes being undertaken by members of the CAMPFIRE Collaborative Group.

Booklets in the Wildlife Management series include:

1. Problem Animal Reporting2. Electric Fencing Projects3. Marketing Wildlife4. Safari Hunting 5. Quota Setting Manual

WWF is a member of the Collaborative Group supporting the CAMPFIRE programme in Zimbabwe and has providedsupport and training to communities in the establishment of wildlife management systems.