Common management There are no PA buffer zone under approved Management plans, There is widespread approaches to habitat management plans district management plans in six district coordination support and capacity conservation. for PA buffer zones, districts (Kitgum, Kaabong, policies and collective amongst the key as a result there lacks Agago, Otuke, Abim and management planning stakeholders - district a coordinated Kotido) incorporating BD processes in place governments, UWA, response to wildlife considerations NEMA, NFA and and habitat others in a conservation in the coordinated approach Kidepo Critical to landscape Landscape management Six district No mechanism is District governments in six Proof of district level District governments governments (Kitgum, presently in place for districts cooperate effectively to commitment to habitat are able to see the Kaabong, Agago, joint management regulate and plan natural conservation and value in a coordinated Otuke, Abim and planning for natural resource use over 227,389 ha of wildlife management approach to joint Kotido) are resource use by local the critical landscape, resulting management of collaborating on shared governments in the in a landscape level coordination natural resources in management issues critical landscape mechanism that enshrines the Kidepo Critical biodiversity conservation by Landscape mandate Component 1: Strengthening Karenga is qualified for Karenga is managed Management and integrity of the Survey report, Political intervention management effectiveness of the Kidepo upgrading to higher PA on a meagre budget, 95,600 ha Karenga community boundary marks, does not interfere with Critical Landscape PA cluster status through there is almost no wildlife management area physical inspection, the process of both consultative process management nor strengthened, leading to its resolutions, minutes of management operational capacity; potential gazettement by end of meetings, annual and improvements and the area is at high risk project to safeguard a crucial quarterly reports, ultimately from poaching and wildlife corridor and dispersal workshop reports gazettement, and the loss of the area communities are wildlife corridor willing to cooperate
Common management approaches to habitat conservation. There are no management plans for PA buffer zones, as a result there lacks a coordinated response to wildlife and habitat conservation in the Kidepo Critical Landscape PA buffer zone under approved district management plans in six districts (Kitgum, Kaabong, Agago, Otuke, Abim and Kotido) incorporating BD considerations Management plans, district coordination policies and collective management planning processes in place There is widespread support and capacity amongst the key stakeholders - district governments, UWA, NEMA, NFA and others in a coordinated approach to landscape management Six district governments (Kitgum, Kaabong, Agago, Otuke, Abim and Kotido) are collaborating on shared management issues No mechanism is presently in place for joint management planning for natural resource use by local governments in the critical landscape District governments in six districts cooperate effectively to regulate and plan natural resource use over 227,389 ha of the critical landscape, resulting in a landscape level coordination mechanism that enshrines biodiversity conservation by mandate Proof of district level commitment to habitat conservation and wildlife management District governments are able to see the value in a coordinated approach to joint management of natural resources in the Kidepo Critical Landscape Component 1: Strengthening management effectiveness of the Kidepo Critical Landscape PA cluster Karenga is qualified for upgrading to higher PA status through consultative process Karenga is managed on a meagre budget, there is almost no management nor operational capacity; the area is at high risk from poaching and the loss of the wildlife corridor Management and integrity of the 95,600 ha Karenga community wildlife management area strengthened, leading to its potential gazettement by end of project to safeguard a crucial wildlife corridor and dispersal area Survey report, boundary marks, physical inspection, resolutions, minutes of meetings, annual and quarterly reports, workshop reports Political intervention does not interfere with the process of both management improvements and ultimately gazettement, and communities are willing to cooperate
12-15-2013%2520%2520CEO%2520Endorsement%2520Request%2520v12Dec12resub%2520cofin%2520corrected%252015Jan13.docx