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.