Clusa-Natural Resource Management

CLUSA-NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

VILLAGER FOREST RESOURCE ASSESSMENT

FROM FIVE AREAS OF CHIULUKIRE LOCAL FOREST, EASTERN PROVINCE, ZAMBIA

Fieldwork: Oct-Nov 1999 Presented back to villages: March 2000

CLUSA Facilitators: Samuel Simute Botany Hangombe Cornelious Nkhata Litea Minyoi Doreen Simoonga

Forestry Department personnel: Enock Muwaya Kapambwe F.M.

Compiled by: Cecilia Polansky 2 CHIULUKIRE LOCAL FOREST VILLAGE FOREST RESOURCES -- CONTENTS

1. BACKGROUND...... 1

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE FOREST AND ITS MANAGEMENT...... 1 TOPOGRAPHY, VEGETATION, SOILS, CLIMATE...... 1 LAND TENURE AND USE RIGHTS...... 2 TRADITIONAL LAND AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION:...... 2 STATE LAND AND RELATIONSHIP WITH THE FOREST DEPARTMENT:...... 2 CURRENT MANAGEMENT...... 3 ORGANIZATION OF VILLAGES INTO GROUPS FOR PURPOSES OF MANAGEMENT AND FACILITATION ...... 3

3. BRIEF SETTLEMENT AND FOREST USE HISTORY OF THE FIVE FOREST VILLAGE GROUPS...... 5

4. TABLES DESCRIBING VILLAGE POPULATION, LITERACY, OCCUPATIONS, LIVESTOCK...... 8 TABLE 1. POPULATIONS, LITERACY, AND MIGRATION OF VILLAGES INTERVIEWED...... 8 AREA...... 8 TABLE 2. ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES OF VILLAGES AROUND CHIULUKIRE FOREST...... 9 TABLE 3. LI VESTOCK CLAIMED BY VILLAGES AROUND CHIULUKIRE FOREST...... 9

5. TABLES DESCRIBING TIMBER, FIREWOOD, CONSTRUCTION, AND CHARCOAL SPECIES, STATUS, AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE FOREST BY VILLAGE AREA...... 10 TABLE 4. SAWTIMBER SPECIES, RANKING, AND STATUS IN CHIULUKIRE...... 11 TABLE 5. CHARCOAL SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE...... 11 TABLE 6. FIREWOOD SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE...... 12 TABLE 7. BUILDING CONSTRUCTION SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE...... 12

6. TABLES DESCRIBING NONWOOD FOREST TREE PRODUCTS. .13 TABLE 8. FRUIT TREE SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE...... 13 TABLE 9. HONEY TREE (BEE FORAGE) SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE...... 14 TABLE 10. FODDER TREE SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE...... 14 TABLE 11. MEDICINE TREE SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE...... 15 TABLE 12. WOODCARVING TREE SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE...... 15

7. TABLES DESCRIBING NONTREE FOREST PRODUCTS...... 16 TABLE 14. WILDLIFE SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE...... 16 TABLE 15. WILDLIFE SPECIES FOUND IN CHIULUKIRE -- NONRANKED...... 16 TABLE 16. CATERPILLAR AND INSECT SPECIES FOUND IN CHIULUKIRE -- NONRANKED...17 TABLE 17. MUSHROOM SPECIES FOUND IN CHIULUKIRE -- NONRANKED...... 17

8. TABLES DESCRIBING NONTIMBER FOREST PRODUCT COLLECTION ...... 18 TABLE 18. FRUIT COLLECTION INFORMATION...... 18 TABLE 19. HONEY COLLECTION INFORMATION...... 19 TABLE 20. BROOM COLLECTION INFORMATION...... 19 TABLE 21. MUSHROOM COLLECTION INFORMATION...... 20 TABLE 22. CATERPILLAR COLLECTION INFORMATION...... 21 TABLE 23. OTHER FOREST PRODUCT COLLECTION INFORMATION:...... 22 4 CLUSA-NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT VILLAGER FOREST RESOURCE ASSESSMENT FROM FIVE AREAS OF CHIULUKIRE LOCAL FOREST, EASTERN PROVINCE, ZAMBIA

Fieldwork: Oct.-Nov. 1999

1. BACKGROUND

This is the summary of five reports composed after two weeks of fieldwork was executed by CLUSA facilitators, village informants, and Forest Department personnel around the Chiulukire Local Forest some 20 kilometers north of Katete. The assessment is a first step in moving toward a jointly-managed forest complete with management plan comprised of input from village populations surrounding or within the forest boundary alongside input from Forest Department and other interested parties. The principle is that if the local populations are able to influence and monitor the activities allowed in the forest, then the management plan will be more likely to succeed in the sense of being respected by all stakeholders. It will also succeed for a longer time frame than could be possible if caretakers of the resource are excluded from the management plan’s formulation.

Specifically, the objectives of the Village Resource Assessment (VRA) are:

 To open up communication with those who are to assist in writing the management plan foreseen for the year 2000, so that resources can be seen through their eyes.  To apply several published and adapted tools for drawing input about forest resources from those who live closest to them, using techniques that are informal rather than technical in nature.  To encourage people (both villagers and Forest Department) to think about the future of the resources and the concept of sustainable management.  To update 20-plus-year-old government-published topographic maps with correct names and spatial arrangements of roads, villages, and streams.  To gauge the level of participation to be expected from different areas around the forest.  To identify which forest resources are most important to each village area.  To obtain some socio-economic information on each village so that certain needs can be identified, taking the place of a full-blown socio-economic study which could be more costly and time-consuming.

In short, information and maps from the VRA will lead to further discussion and formation of specific user groups later in the year 2000 so that a management plan can be drafted.

Information presented in the following sections was summarized from the following sources: - literature pertaining to the forest and Eastern Province - reports from a combination of interviews of different types conducted in the villages in 1999 (see Annex for methods used in each village)

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE FOREST AND ITS MANAGEMENT

TOPOGRAPHY, VEGETATION, SOILS, CLIMATE The forest sits on the so-called plateau of Eastern Province with altitudes 900 to 1,200 meters. The landscape is broken by rocky hills especially in the south, where mostly well- forested moderate slopes lead to the higher summits. The vegetation of the hilliest areas are considered basically miombo woodlands dominated by Brachystegias and Julbernardias among others. The northern part of the forest contains some mopane woodland dominated by Colophospermum on gentler slopes. So-called munga woodland is scattered through the

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 1 1 forest as well, dominated by the species Acacia, Combretum, Lannea, and others. Soils are mainly brown sandy loam with quartz stones and gravel in the topsoil (researched by D. Nkhata).

Rainfall is quoted from different sources to be between 600 and 1000 millimeters, falling mostly between December and March. Coldest months are June and July (15-18 degrees mean temp.); warmest months are September and October (mean temp. 21-26 degrees).

LAND TENURE AND USE RIGHTS (Sections from Nkhata, and Simute page 9) During the colonial era land was divided into Tribal Trust land and Crown land. These are now called Traditional and State land, respectively. The recognition by the traditional chief that control of some lands was being ceded to the Sate happened around 1955 to 1958 depending on the village describing the process, but in some cases the bordering villages did not learn of the Forest Department taking over responsibility for the forest until the 1960s (see Ndelemani report page 16), Kazika page 4, Gaveni page 4, Geleta page 5).

TRADITIONAL LAND AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION: Traditional land, which is outside the forest boundary and covers 96% of the land in Eastern Province, may be occupied according to customary law without a formal right assigned to the land. Such land is controlled by the traditional chief, in this case Chief Mbangombe, whose palace is not far from Katete. (The Paramount Chief of the Chewa tribe, Yawa Undi, has a village just to the south of the forest. Chief Mbangombe is just below Undi in rank, a senior chief.) Individuals can request certificates of title to land, but if the Senior Chief perceives that granting a title will affect his popularity, it will most likely not be accepted. The Chief has a traditional council which advises on governance and other issues affecting the chiefdom.

The Senior Chief’s Village Headmen are his representatives who are authorized to allocate land locally, resolve disputes, and preside over traditional ceremonies. They also have power to grant permission to cut a tree around the village, where normally this act is forbidden and even punished because such trees are supposed to control wind and water erosion. It is taboo to cut trees and collect mushrooms and fruits from a graveyard.

When local villagers are locked up in a dispute, they begin at the lowest level, the Village Headmen, to attempt to resolve it. If this fails, they take it to a local traditional court called Khonde. Again if it fails they go to the Senior Chief’s Palace, and ultimately to the Paramount Chief for ruling. Beyond this, the conflict goes to the government court of law.

STATE LAND AND RELATIONSHIP WITH THE FOREST DEPARTMENT: Land management and control i.e. state land is vested in the President of Zambia. The Commission of Lands has responsibility of controlling the land, which in Eastern Province comprises 280,000 hectares or 4%. The Forest Department as well as Education, Health, Agriculture, Water, the Judiciary, Community Development, and Wildlife Departments all fall under the District Administrator’s supervision. The first five entities mentioned are active in Chiulukire Local Forest.

It was pointed out repeatedly in the VRAs that the relationship between the Forest Department and the villages is bad. The wording goes so far as to say that the two are “enemies, that there has been “perpetual hatred” between the Forest Department and local community, and that the Forest Department officers are viewed as “hurdles” to their normal village life and traditional activities.

At least one village states that they are unaware of any written rights they have to products from the forest, but other villages say they know about a written list of products that are legal for them to collect from the forest for home use only. Apparently when the Chiulukire Hills in the south were designated as protected, no local labour was used nor local villages

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 2 2 consulted on the location and clearing of the boundary lines. The actual boundary location is not clearly known in some places.

CURRENT MANAGEMENT There is no management plan for the local forest and few controls over its use are possible because of transportation and personnel issues in the Forest Department. It is generally known that permits are required for non-home use of timber and other products, yet because of the trouble and expense there is some illicit tree felling within the boundary.

Illegally located villages and fields Some villages have recently been established within the forest boundary, as have agricultural fields both adjacent and not adjacent to villages. Even in 1999, with the entry of CLUSA into the area for agricultural and forest management activities after permission granted through the Chief and the Forest Department, new fields have been cut into otherwise-continuous forest cover. It is not clear how this happened, but rumors came out conversationally in village interviews that some people thought the forest was going to be degazetted, and other people misunderstood the Chief’s admonition to clear no more fields in the forest. Even before these most recent incursions, there have been fields placed inside the boundary in the 1990s simply because no one was there to say it was not allowed. There seems to be more pressure for fertile land on the east side of the forest than the west. The north side, which is heavy into cotton growing, has a good number of tiny villages located within the boundary as well.

Use of fire One of the principal management problems today is that of fire misuse. Many villages noted that in the past the Village Headman was informed by the chief of the period during which fires could be started to clear grass and to hunt: usually May/June in some parts of the forest and October/November in other parts (grazing areas) to allow fresh grass to grow. This system is no longer in place, and fires that are lit during the hottest driest months of August to October, lit mainly by hunters and children hunting mice, cause unnecessary damage to soil and seedlings. It is said also that fires drive more wildlife away now than before. Only fires close to villages or fields are controlled or snuffed with tree branches.

ORGANIZATION OF VILLAGES INTO GROUPS FOR PURPOSES OF MANAGEMENT AND FACILITATION For purposes of being served by CLUSA facilitators and for organization into future resource management areas, each village surveyed (along with its neighbors) is assigned to one of five named groups. their names are:

CHINKHOMBE (Nthambwa-Musonda, Tontholani, and neighbors southwest of Chiulukire) ZINAKA (Ndelemani and neighbors northwest of Chiulukire) MAGOBO (Kazika and neighbors north of Chiulukire) MATUNGA (Gaveni, Kazembe, and neighbors east of Chiulukire) MKAIKA (Agasi, Chipilingo, and neighbors southof Chiulukire)

GOOD VERSUS BAD FOREST Communities were asked what their perceptions of good and bad forests are. They are summarized in the following box.

One of the most striking related comments was made by one village that views forests as “areas for agricultural expansion.”

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 3 3 What is a good forest?

. One which has diverse trees, good soils, and streams with running water, and which is suitable for habitation (Ndelemani)

. One with various types of animals, with bamboos which indicate fertile soil, with big grass and a lot of trees, with good crop yields, and with various species of trees and vegetation (Kazika)

. One with good availability of trees and tall grass which shows the soil is fertile; a good variety of both tree and animal species, giving a wider choice and several options as to what use it can have; soil which is not rocky as it can’t support vegetation favourably; soils that are well-drained; and terrain which is not too steep (Gaveni)

. Forests maintain soil fertility, protect flow of rivers, and provide animal habitat. They provide durable trees that are used to build houses. Undisturbed forests can indicate culturally important burial grounds. Forests are used in the economic sense for hunting, grazing, collection of wood, collection of food, handicraft materials such as for mats and mortars, and utility items such as tool handles and brooms (Geleta)

What is a bad forest?

. One in which the grass does not grow, where soils are clayey, where a lot of phingo and mphalankaya grow, and where there are few trees (Kazika)

. One without a good number of trees and vegetation cover, without availability of wildlife, grass, and fodder, without a good range of fruit trees, but having a lot of thorn trees and shrubs, and poor soil that cannot support a good cover of vegetation (Gaveni)

3. BRIEF SETTLEMENT AND FOREST USE HISTORY OF THE FIVE FOREST VILLAGE GROUPS

CHINKHOMBE: These people originally came from Sandure village in Petauke to Sasare area in Katete District in the 1930s. Due to conflicts there they migrated to the present-day Ndelemani in 1939. In 1943 they settled near the Mponda River, and to the present site in 1970.

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 4 4 The village of Tontholani is relatively new; they came in 1978 from Chiwanga village. The ethnic groups are a mixture of Nsenga and Chewa. They are matrilineal.

Chinkhombe settlers that are inside the gazetted forest boundary came from Cholowa village. They came in 1996 after hearing rumours that the forest was going to be degazetted, according to Nthambwa and Tontholani residents.

The distance they state that they walk to collect firewood varies from 500 meters (Cholowa) to 5 kilometers (Chiwanga).

ZINAKA: Ndelemani first started in 1930. It was followed by the establishment of Chikukula and Mutopa in the 1950s, then Zinaka, Sekani, Kasanka, and Makusi. At the beginning there was a lot of game which was driven out as the number of villages started increasing noticeably in the 1980s. Settlers inside the forest came in 1997 looking for water plus arable land.

Most forest products are collected for sunsistence only. It was noticed that in the 1980s the population of caterpillars dropped as a large part of the forest was sprayed by tsetse fly eradication projects. As for mushrooms, no changes in availability have been noticed so far. The collection of honey and bamboo for baskets has shifted from subsistence to commercial use. At the same time, a decrease in bamboo availability is noted.

The other resource in decline is “choyo” or broom grass, supposedly due to unsustainable harvesting.

The distance that they state they walk to collect firewood varies from 50 meters (Kamkute, inside the forest) to 2 kilometers (Makusi).

MAGOBO: The first to settle here were in Kazika in 1958. After 15 years, Kazika moved to Matunga area to be closer to school and clinic. In 1989 they came back to the original site. The next year, Mlangali village settled inside the forest in Magobo to seek fertile land to alleviate a hunger problem.

Declines in honey are blamed on the opening up of agricultural fields (it is not clear whether it is only that “bee trees” were overcut, or if cotton pesticides added to the decline). Availability of fruits also has declined, and this is blamed on bad harvesting methods which means cutting the tree down for the fruit. Caterpillars are also reported to be in decline. Again, interesting to note that insect-related forest products are all in decline, perhaps related to cotton chemicals.

This is the only area to have mentioned snails among their nontimber forest products. Regeneration and wildlife availability are perceived as poor due to fire management practices, and a decrease in number of tree species (biodiversity) is noted.

Interviewees stated that Agriculture Department has functioned in both pre- and post- colonial times up to now. Clark Cotton came in 1994, then Sable in 1995, then Cotmark in 1996, then Lonrho in 1997, and now CLUSA in 1999. There have been some less formal institutions such as briefcase dealers and women’s clubs organized by the ruling party.

The distance they state that they walk to collect firewood varies from 10 meters (villages inside forest) to 800 meters (Enock).

MATUNGA:

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 5 5 Kazika and Tambala came to this area first in 1929. Later came Katimbila, Gomani, Sunkhu, Nthambwa. Their village agricultural and other activities took place within forest boundaries after they were designated in 1958 because they hadn’t heard about the new administrative arrangement with the Forest Department until 1967. At that time they abandoned their fields and other activities inside the boundaries.

This trend was reversed starting in 1990 when people slowly started opening fields inside the forest again. The reason given for this is population pressures for more farmland, coupled with poor soil fertility on existing fields due to poor farming practices.

The villagers listed the following tree species as overused and for the reasons explained:

Brachystegia longifolia (Mfendaluzi): Good fiber and bark hives Mimusops zeyhheri (Mchencha): Cut down to collect fruits Julbernardia globiflora (Kamphonia) Good firewood Combretum species (Kalama) Good pole quality

The distance that they state they walk to collect firewood varies from 500 meters (Kazembe) to 2 kilometers (Mkokeza).

MKAIKA: This area covers a stretch about 7 kilometers long between Agasi and Chipilingo with Kalima, Geleta, Kawaza, and Kanyatula inbetween. The first to be built was Geleta, with settlers from Munyamadzi looking for more agricultural land in the 1940s. Settlers who broke away from Sumbwi came to Agasi around 1946. Chipilingo was founded in 1957 and Kawaza in 1959 with settlers from Nzamani, Chipata, and Chimtanga, Chadiza called by Chief Mban’gombe. Kanyatula and Kalima splintered from Kawaza and Agasi in 1983 and 1994.

The villagers state that they do not need to go as far as the protected forest (4-5 kilometers away) for cultivation, poles and so on because of locally fertile soils and availability of trees. Nonetheless, they report a decrease in quantity and size of the following:

Timber: mulombe, mubaba, chipepe, mgulilondo (Pterocarpus, Albizia versicolor, Faurea spp. , and Afzekua quanzensis)

Building and construction: musanga, nkula, nsungwi (Pseudolachnostylis maprouneifolia, Afzelia quanzensis?, Oxytenanthera abyssinica, wild bamboo)

The distance that they state they walk to collect firewood varies from 100 to 500 meters.

“ The fact that we asked for information about what the villagers knew was novel for them. They were proud and glad to be given the opportunity to share their knowledge.” - Zinaka report, page 23

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 6 6 Caiphus Phiri – Magpbp

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 7 7 4. TABLES DESCRIBING VILLAGE POPULATION, LITERACY, OCCUPATIONS, LIVESTOCK

Tables 1 through 3 are summaries of information that was collected on a community profile interview sheet at 25 of the approximately 70 villages around the forest. The information is registered by village on CLUSA-produced maps that accompany this report.

The first table summarizes the population represented by the villages that filled out a questionnaire presented by CLUSA facilitators and village resource assistants. The populations given by the villagers themselves do include children, so that a literacy percentage can not be calculated. Migrations are supposed to represent the number of persons leaving or moving into the village each year, while seasonal movement is supposed to indicate the number of persons seeking work elsewhere just for part of the year. Figures with asterisks are subtotals with missing information for that area (for example, a village with some blanks not filled in) for that column.

TABLE 1. POPULATIONS, LITERACY, AND MIGRATION OF VILLAGES INTERVIEWED

AREA Population Households headed by Number literate Migration per (No. of villages) represented year/ seasonal Male Female Males Female s Chinkhombe (7) 1148 202 (78%) 59 (22%) 165 96 6 out/ 2 snl Zinaka (11) 775 178 (86%) 29 (14%) 105 54 1 in;2 out/ 2 snl* Magobo (11) 434 103 (61%) 67 (39%) 47 24 5 in;1out/ 1 snl Matunga (11) 1860 163 (74%) 58 (26%) 74 34 5 in/ 4 snl* Mkaika (6) 637 102 (79%) 27 (21%) 38 16 0 / 2 snl TOTAL (46 vill) 4854 748 240 429 224 11 in; 9 out; 11 snl

On balance, the migration trends are not changing population much around the forest; however, Chinkhombe is susceptible to emigration and Gaveni to immigration. The number of persons seeking seasonal work elsewhere is very low.

Without knowing the total adult population, it is difficult to estimate the percentage of literacy among school-age and older persons. If the total population of 4854 were divided into family units of 2 parents plus 1 grandparent plus 4 children = 7 persons, of which perhaps 4 are old enough to be literate, then we would expect nearly 3000 to be literate. The actual total is 653, which could then indicate a theoretical level of fewer than 25%.

In each area there are close to twice as many males as females qualifying as literate, even in Magobo (Kazika village area) where 39% of the households are stated to be headed by women.

The next table describes various occupations claimed on the village profile sheet. Virtually all the households represented engaged in farming as one occupation, so farming is not mentioned on the list. The information is also portrayed on the accompanying map in symbol form.

8 TABLE 2. ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES OF VILLAGES AROUND CHIULUKIRE FOREST

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS OCCUPATION CHINKHOMBE ZINAKA MAGOBO MATUNGA MKAIKA TOTAL (POPULATION 1148 775 434 1860 637 4854 ) Sawyer 15 37 11 13 7 83 Carpenter 2 13 8 6 9 38 Beekeeper 36 54 71 44 25 230 Broomtrader 2 20 17 32 5 76 Basketwvr 43 36 15 19 10 123 Herbalist 1 5 0 13 2 21 (Distance to 2 to 7 0 to 6 2.8 1.5 to 3 3 to 7 forest bound.) kilometers kilometers kilometers kilometers kilometers Blacksmith 12 38 2 7 7 66 Brewer 16 11 0 38 24 89 Bricklayer 5 3 0 27 1 36 Gardener 0 0 9 28 34 71 Grocer 7 3 0 9 2 21 Handicraft 19 24 0 10 26 79 Potter 1 11 0 16 9 37 Other Radio repair 3 Radio repair 3 Community Bike repair 1 Bike repair 16 worker 1 Health worker 1

It is of interest to focus on those activities that depend on Chiulukire forest cover. Suffice it to say that beekeeping is a big occupation on all sides of the forest but particularly in the west and north (Chinkhombe and Magobo). Sawing, carpentry, and basketweaving are also important in those areas.

Two occupations with further documentation are those of mushroom collectors and broom traders. The market for these are in Katete as well as Chipata; a collection and marketing study was done on these and other nontimber forest products in February 2000.

The following table describes the abundance of livestock recorded on village survey sheets.

TABLE 3. LI VESTOCK CLAIMED BY VILLAGES AROUND CHIULUKIRE FOREST

Head of: CHINKHOMBE ZINAKA MAGOBO MATUNGA MKAIKA TOTALS (Pop. 1148) (Pop. 775) (Pop. 434) (Pop. (Pop. 637) (Pop. 4854) 1860) Goats 2345 1655 539 220 461 5220 Cattle 198 120 133 156 154 761 Pigs 162 69 56 146 143 576

The following were also noted:

9 - Chinkhombe: 50 Guinea fowl and 2 sheep - Zinaka: 7 rabbits - Magobo: 27 Guinea fowl and 30 doves - Matunga: 20 ducks

Chicken populations were not reported consistently from site to site so that information is not available.

Sheep were conspicuously absent in the area; the only reason given in the interview sheets from farmers in Geleta area is that sheep are difficult to buy for rearing purposes.

5. TABLES DESCRIBING TIMBER, FIREWOOD, CONSTRUCTION, AND CHARCOAL SPECIES, STATUS, AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE FOREST BY VILLAGE AREA

The following discussion on “Walk and Talk” and ranking applies to both timber and nontimber products enumerated in the forest area.

Villagers reported on tree uses and importance by interviews conducted inside the forest along walks (the “Walk and Talk” method) and by ranking exercises during which they placed stones beside listed tree species that they considered important to each use. These methods are described in more detail in annex.

The walk and talk delivered information as well as provided an informal way to open communication about forest resource use. The movement of people walking together through fresh air and nature provides a relaxed environment for exchange and draws out ideas that could go undiscovered in a more academic setting.

During the more formal ranking exercises, villagers placed a number of stones beside each tree named as useful for a specific use: the greater the importance of the species to that use, the greater the number of stones placed. Importance was defined by, and broken down into, several criteria that caused one species to be ranked higher than others as it accumulated more total stones rating each criterion.

BASED ON INDIVIDUAL VILLAGE RANKS AND THE NUMBER OF VILLAGES THAT CHOSE THE SPECIES, THE TOP THREE SPECIES IN EACH CATEGORY ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN EACH TABLE THAT FOLLOWS.

The reader will find the following: - The status of many of the highest-ranked timber species is rare or declining. Sometimes the status conflicts from one area to another. - The criteria for quality firewood and quality charcoal are similar (few sparks, little ash and smoke, longlasting), as are the highest-ranked species.

It is worth noting that Pericopsis angolensis appears in all of the wood products tables that follow, that it is ranked among the top three for each use, and that at the same time its status is considered by the villagers to be rare.

10 TABLE 4. SAWTIMBER SPECIES, RANKING, AND STATUS IN CHIULUKIRE (top 3 species highlighted)

SPECIES LOCAL SOURCE OF STATUS RANK CRITERIA USED FOR TOP RANK (No. 1) NAMES INFORMATION Afzelia mgalilondo Tontholani rare 4 of 5 color dk brown, doesn’t split, easy to work quanzensis msambafumo Ntambwa rare 3 of 4 durable, saws well, works easy, doesn’t split Ndelemani ? 3 of 5 strong, beautiful, good nailing Geleta declining - - Albizia versicolor mtanga Ntambwa common 3 of 4 durable, saws well, works easy, doesn’t split mtangatanga Kazika ? 2 of 5 doesn’t crack, resists insects, strong, beautiful Burkea africana kawidzi Ntambwa moderate - - Diospyros munchenchansh- Gaveni rare 2 of 2 durable, available, easily worked, beautiful, straight mespiliformis? umwa, mchenja, muthukuphako Faurea saligna chiyele Geleta ? 3 of 6 works well, is durable, nice finish Faurea speciosa chipepe Tontholani moderate 3 of 5 color dk brown, doesn’t split, easy to work Ntambwa moderate 2 of 4 durable, saws well, works easy, doesn’t split Kazika ? 5 of 5 doesn’t crack, resists insects, strong, beautiful Gaveni rare - soft wood for planks Geleta declining 6 of 6 works well, is durable, nice finish Khaya nyasica mubaba Tontholani rare 5 of 5 color dk brown, doesn’t split, easy to work mubawa Ntambwa rare 4 of 4 durable, saws well, works easy, doesn’t split mbawa Ndelemani ? 4 of 5 strong, beautiful, good nailing Kazika common 4 of 5 doesn’t crack, resists insects, strong, beautiful Geleta declining 2 of 6 works well, is durable, nice finish Kirkia acuminata muzumba Kazika ? 3 of 5 doesn’t crack, resists insects, strong, beautiful Pericopsis mubanga Ntambwa rare 2 of 4 durable, saws well, works easy, doesn’t split angolensis muwanga Ndelemani ? 2 of 5 strong, beautiful, good nailing Kazika ? 1 of 5 doesn’t crack, resists insects, strong, beautiful Geleta ? 2 of 6 works well, is durable, nice finish Pterocarpus mlombe Tontholani rare 1 of 5 color dk brown, doesn’t split, easy to work angolensis mukwa Ntambwa rare 1 of 4 durable, saws well, works easy, doesn’t split Ndelemani ? 1 of 5 strong, beautiful, good nailing Kazika ? 1 of 5 doesn’t crack, resists insects, strong, beautiful Gaveni ? 1 of 2 durable, available, easily worked, beautiful, straight Geleta declining 1 of 6 works well, is durable, nice finish Pterocarpus nkula Ntambwa rare - - chrysothrix Geleta declining - - Sclerocarya msewe Tontholani ? 2 of 5 color dk brown, doesn’t split, easy to work caffra msebe Ntambwa ? 4 of 4 durable, saws well, works easy, doesn’t split Kazika common - - Terminalia gonondo Ndelemani 5 of 5 strong, beautiful, good nailing sericea Kazika rare - - Ntambwa common - - Uapaca kirkiana musuku Geleta ? 4 of 6 works well, is durable, nice finish Uapaca kasokolowe Geleta ? 5 of 6 works well, is durable, nice finish sansibarica

TABLE 5. CHARCOAL SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE (top 3 species highlighted)

SPECIES LOCAL SOURCE OF RANK CRITERIA USED FOR TOP RANK (No. 1) NAMES INFORMATION Albizia harveyi mkalankanga Ntambwa 4 of 6 burns well, no smoke, longlasting Brachystegia mfendaluzi Tontholani 3 of 4 burns well, little ash, no sparks (status: moderate) longifolia mbovu Ndelemani 5 of 5 burns hot, little ash, longlasting Burkea africana kawidzi Ntambwa 2 of 6 burns well, no smoke, longlasting Cassia mleza Tontholani 4 of 4 burns well, little ash, no sparks abbreviata Combretum kangolo Ntambwa 5 of 6 burns well, no smoke, longlasting mechowianum mkute Dalbergia martini phingo Ntambwa 4 of 6 burns well, no smoke, longlasting Julbernardia kamponi Tontholani 1 of 4 burns well, little ash, no sparks globiflora Ntambwa 3 of 6 burns well, no smoke, longlasting Ndelemani 2 of 5 burns hot, little ash, longlasting Julbernardia mtondo Ntambwa 3 of 6 burns well, no smoke, longlasting paniculata Ndelemani 3 of 5 burns hot, little ash, longlasting Pericopsis muwanga Tontholani 2 of 4 burns well, little ash, no sparks (status: rare) angolensis mubanga Ntambwa 1 of 6 burns well, no smoke, longlasting Ndelemani 1 of 5 burns hot, little ash, longlasting Gaveni - (only ranked for fuel/firewood) Pterocarpus mbangozi Ntambwa 3 of 6 burns well, no smoke, longlasting (status: rare) rotundifolia Terminalia ngonondo Ntambwa 6 of 6 burns well, no smoke, longlasting sericea gonondo Ndelemani 4 of 5 burns hot, little ash, longlasting

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 11 11 TABLE 6. FIREWOOD SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE (top 3 species highlighted)

SPECIES LOCAL SOURCE OF RANK CRITERIA USED FOR TOP RANK (No. 1) NAMES INFORMATION Brachystegia mchenga Tontholani 3 of 4 burns well, lot of heat, little ash and smoke, easy to cut boehmii Kazika 4 of 5 common, longlasting; little ash, spark, & [nontoxic] smoke Brachystegia mfendaluzi Tontholani 4 of 4 burns well, lot of heat, little ash and smoke, easy to cut longifolia bovu Ndelemani 6 of 6 longlasting, little ash and smoke (bovu smokes) Geleta 4 of 4 little smoke and ash, strong fire, easy to cut Brachystegia msumbu Ndelemani 3 of 6 longlasting, little ash and smoke manga Geleta 2 of 4 little smoke and ash, strong fire, easy to cut Brachystegia msale Tontholani 3 of 4 burns well, lot of heat, little ash and smoke, easy to cut spiciformis mputi Combretum spp. kalama Kazika 3 of 5 common, longlasting; little ash, spark, & [nontoxic] smoke Julbernardia kamponi Tontholani 2 of 4 burns well, lot of heat, little ash and smoke, easy to cut globiflora Ndelemani 1 of 6 longlasting, little ash and smoke Kazika 1 of 5 common, longlasting; little ash, spark, & [nontoxic] smoke Julbernardia mtondo Ndelemani 5 of 6 longlasting, little ash and smoke paniculata mutondo Gaveni 1 of 3 available, longlasting, little ash, smoke not harsh, heavy Geleta 1 of 4 little smoke and ash, strong fire, easy to cut Lonchocarpus chimpakasa Kazika 5 of 5 common, longlasting; little ash, spark, & [nontoxic] smoke capassa Pericopsis muwanga Tontholani 2 of 4 burns well, lot of heat, little ash and smoke, easy to cut angolensis mubanga Ndelemani 2 of 6 longlasting, little ash and smoke Geleta 3 of 4 little smoke and ash, strong fire, easy to cut Piliostigma msekese Gaveni 3 of 3 available, longlasting, little ash, smoke not harsh, heavy thonningii Pterocarpus mlombe Gaveni 2 of 3 available, longlasting, little ash, smoke not harsh, heavy angolensis mukwa Pterocarpus mbangozi Ndelemani 4 of 6 longlasting, little ash and smoke rotundifolia Kazika 2 of 5 common, longlasting; little ash, spark, & [nontoxic] smoke

TABLE 7. BUILDING CONSTRUCTION SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE (top 3 species highlighted)

SPECIES LOCAL SOURCE OF RANK CRITERIA USED FOR TOP RANK (No. 1) NAMES INFORMATION Boscia msuse Geleta 2 of 5 durable and large pieces (for construction) angustifolia? Diospyros kirkii muchelekete Geleta 4 of 5 durable and large pieces for construction muchenjelekete Faurea saligna chiyele Geleta 3 of 5 durable and straight poles Julbernardia mtondo Gaveni 1 of 2 straight, durable, easy to work, termite-resistant poles paniculata mutondo Parinari mpundu Geleta 2 of 5 durable and straight poles: “splits easily and can be used curatellifolia in place of bamboos” (Know Your Trees p. 276) Pericopsis muwanga Geleta 1 of 5 durable and large pieces (for construction) angolensis mubanga Piliostigma msekese Gaveni 2 of 2 straight, durable, easy to work, termite-resistant poles thonningii Pterocarpus mlombe Geleta 5 of 5 durable and large pieces for construction; status rare angolensis mukwa Pterocarpus nkula Geleta 4 of 5 durable and large pieces for construction; status declining chrysothrix Terminalia ngonondo Geleta 1 of 5 durable and straight poles sericea gonondo Geleta 3 of 5 durable and large pieces (for construction) Uapaca kasokolowe Geleta 1 of 5 durable and straight poles sansibarica

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 12 12 6. TABLES DESCRIBING NONWOOD FOREST TREE PRODUCTS

TABLE 8. FRUIT TREE SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE (top 3 species highlighted)

SPECIES LOCAL SOURCE OF RANK CRITERIA USED FOR TOP RANK (No. 1) NAMES INFORMATION Adansonia mlambe Tontholani 3 of 6 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) digitata baobob Ntambwa 1 of 9 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) mbuyu Geleta - - Annona mpovya Tontholani 2 of 6 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) senegalensis Kazika 2 of 5 available, filling, sweet, medicinal, long season Bridelia mkumbya Ntambwa 3 of 9 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) cathartica ndola Diospyros mchenja Tontholani 1 of 6 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) mespiliformis nchenja Ntambwa 1 of 9 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) Kazika 1 of 5 available, filling, sweet, medicinal, long season taste, satisfaction, used in other dishes Geleta 5 of 9 Flacourtia indica nthudza Tontholani 5 of 6 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) Ntambwa 2 of 9 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) Kazika 2 of 5 available, filling, sweet, medicinal, long season available, accessible, sweet, filling Gaveni 1 of 2 taste, satisfaction, used in other dishes Geleta 4 of 9 Garcinia matatane Ntambwa 4 of 9 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) huillensis Hexalobus mkanda Ntambwa 2 of 9 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) monopetalus nchembele Lannea discolor shaumbu Tontholani 6 of 6 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) Ntambwa 5 of 9 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) Lannea mbyulu Tontholani 4 of 6 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) katangensis mangolobya Ntambwa 5 of 9 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) Kazika 3 of 5 available, filling, sweet, medicinal, long season Parinari mpundu Geleta 2 of 9 taste, satisfaction, used in other dishes curatellifolia Piliostigma msekese Gaveni 2 of 2 available, accessible, sweet, filling thonningii Strychnos meteme Geleta 3 of 9 taste, satisfaction, used in other dishes innocua (or S.occuloides, temya, not eaten, according to Know Your Trees p. 67 S.spinosa nthemya Uapaca kirkiana musuku Geleta 1 of 9 taste, satisfaction, used in other dishes Ximenia nthengeze Tontholani 5 of 6 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) americana nthengele Ntambwa 4 of 9 sweetness and satisfaction (carbohydrate content) Kazika 4 of 5 available, filling, sweet, medicinal, long season

Other fruit species listed: mafo, mbulumbushe, muchisu (Geleta); shaumbu, mbulumbusha, muyandola, makundanchembele, kacele, nkuyu (Kazika); kacele, mlambe, nthongole, shaumbu, matembola, nkandachombole, dzaye, muchonga, maliambou, matowa, chitumbulamalo (Ndelemani).

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 13 13 TABLE 9. HONEY TREE (BEE FORAGE) SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE (top 3 species highlighted)

SPECIES LOCAL SOURCE OF RANK CRITERIA USED FOR TOP RANK (No. 1) NAMES INFORMATION Acacia galpini mkunku Ntambwa 5 of 7 many flowers, big comb Adansonia mlambe Ndelemani 4 of 7 sweetness, flavour digitata baobob Adenia senensis mwanya Tontholani 3 of 7 sweetness, flavour Afzelia msambamafumu Tontholani 2 of 7 sweetness, flavour quanzensis mgalilondo Brachystegia mbovu Tontholani 4 of 7 sweetness, flavour longifolia bovu Ntambwa 2 of 7 many flowers, big comb Ndelemani 3 of 7 sweetness, flavour Combretum kalama Tontholani 1 of 7 sweetness, flavour molle mkalama Ntambwa 3 of 7 many flowers, big comb Ndelemani 3 of 7 sweetness, flavour available, many flowers, no ill health effects Kazika 2 of 5 Dalbergiella mkanganjovu Kazika 3 of 5 available, many flowers, no ill health effects nyasae Diplorynchus mtowa Tontholani 4 of 7 sweetness, flavour condylocarpon mtombozi Ndelemani 5 of 7 sweetness, flavour Julbernardia kamponi Ntambwa 1 of 7 many flowers, big comb globiflora Kazika 1 of 5 available, many flowers, no ill health effects Lannea discolor shaumbu Kazika 2 of 5 available, many flowers, no ill health effects Pseudolachnostylis msolo Tontholani 4 of 7 sweetness, flavour maprouneifolia soyo? Ndelemani 6 of 7 sweetness, flavour Pterocarpus mbangozi Tontholani 1 of 7 sweetness, flavour (RECALL STATUS: RARE) rotundifolia Ndelemani 1 of 7 sweetness, flavour Kazika 1 of 5 available, many flowers, no ill health effects Sterculia africana mlele Ntambwa 3 of 7 many flowers, big comb Terminalia gonondo Ntambwa 4 of 7 many flowers, big comb sericea Ndelemani 2 of 7 sweetness, flavour

TABLE 10. FODDER TREE SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE (top 3 species highlighted)

SPECIES LOCAL SOURCE OF RANK CRITERIA USED FOR TOP RANK (No. 1) NAMES INFORMATION Acacia albida mungwi Kazika 4 of 5 palatable, available, fattening, soft-leafed, sprout quickly mujagwe? palatable mutubetube Galeta 4 of 7 Albizia harveyi? kalumpangal Geleta 1 of 7 palatable mukangala Bauhinia mphondo Kazika 2 of 5 palatable, available, fattening, soft-leafed, sprout quickly petersiana mpondo Diplorynchus mtowa Kazika 1 of 5 palatable, available, fattening, soft-leafed, sprout quickly condylocarpon mtombozi Diplorynchus mtowa Geleta 5 of 7 palatable condylocarpon mtombozi Parinari mpundu Geleta 3 of 7 palatable curatellifolia Piliostigma msekese Kazika 1 of 1 available, accessible, sprouts well, large leaves thonningii Geleta 3 of 7 palatable Pseudolachnostylis msolo Kazika 3 of 5 palatable, available, fattening, soft-leafed, sprout quickly maprouneifolia soyo? Strychnos chizimbili Kazika 4 of 5 palatable, available, fattening, soft-leafed, sprout quickly spinosa mzimbili Swartzia mchelekete Geleta 2 of 7 palatable madagascariensis Ziziphus tukankhande Geleta 5 of 7 palatable abyssinica kankande

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 14 14 TABLE 11. MEDICINE TREE SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE (top 3 species highlighted)

SPECIES LOCAL SOURCE OF * RANK CRITERIA USED FOR TOP RANK (No. 1) NAMES INFORMATION shopopela Geleta 4 of 6 most commonly passed on to other people Acacia changaluci Kazika 3 of 5 heals quickly many illnesses, available, no side effects polyacantha? Albizia amara? knkhalamba Kazika 2 of 5 heals quickly many illnesses, available, no side effects mkalanga Geleta 4 of 6 most commonly passed on to other people Cassia munyoka Geleta 3 of 6 most commonly passed on to other people abbreviata nyoka Dalbergiella mkanganjovu Kazika 4 of 5 heals quickly many illnesses, available, no side effects nyasae Diospyros muthukhupha- Gaveni 3 of 5 accessible, many illnesses, many parts of tree, abundant mespiliformis? ko Flacourtia indica nthudza Gaveni 1 of 5 accessible, many illnesses, many parts of tree, abundant Julbernardia mtondo Gaveni 2 of 5 accessible, many illnesses, many parts of tree, abundant paniculata mutondo Lannea discolor mshaumbu Geleta 3 of 6 most commonly passed on to other people shaumbu Piliostigma msekese Gaveni 1 of 5 accessible, many illnesses, many parts of tree, abundant thonningii Pterocarpus mlombe Kazika 1 of 5 heals quickly many illnesses, available, no side effects angolensis mukwa Gaveni 1 of 5 accessible, many illnesses, many parts of tree, abundant Ziziphus mshabankunzi Geleta 2 of 6 most commonly passed on to other people abyssinica Salix, Ximenia, mutunda Kazika 1 of 5 heals quickly many illnesses, available, no side effects or Brachystegia mtunda Geleta 1 of 6 most commonly passed on to other people taxifolia (tunda)? * Without exception in the VRA reports, it was mentioned that information on medicinal uses of trees was normally paid for, and thus was not so freely given out for the assessment. This may explain the difficulty in finding scientific equivalents for many names of trees given by informants.

TABLE 12. WOODCARVING TREE SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE

SPECIES LOCAL SOURCE OF RANK CRITERIA USED FOR TOP RANK (No. 1) NAMES INFORMATION mtukumpako Geleta 1 of 6 beauty, softness, workability Commiphora mbwabwa Geleta 2 of 6 beauty, softness, workability mollis Faurea saligna chiyele Geleta 5 of 6 beauty, softness, workability Ficus sycomorus mkuyu Geleta 4 of 6 beauty, softness, workability Mopane? mwavi Geleta 1 of 6 beauty, softness, workability Vitex doniana mfinfya Geleta 3 of 6 beauty, softness, workability

TABLE 13. BARKROPE TREE SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE

SPECIES LOCAL SOURCE OF RANK CRITERIA USED FOR TOP RANK (No. 1) NAMES INFORMATION Brachystegia mfendaluzi Geleta 1 of 3 strength, softness, length of strip longifolia Brachystegia “msumbu” – Geleta 2 of 3 strength, softness, length of strip microphylla or probably rather glaucescens mukongolo p.119 Know Your Trees Brachystegia mputi Geleta 3 of 3 strength, softness, length of strip spiciformis

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 15 15 7. TABLES DESCRIBING NONTREE FOREST PRODUCTS

TABLE 14. WILDLIFE SPECIES AND RANKING IN CHIULUKIRE

SPECIES LOCAL SOURCE OF RANK CRITERIA USED FOR TOP RANK (No. 1) NAMES INFORMATION Hare kalulu Kazika 1 of 7 large populations, disease-free, soft meat, easily killed Duiker insa Kazika 2 of 7 Cane rat ncenzi Kazika 3 of 7 minkwenele Kazika 4 of 7 Mouse mbeba Kazika 4 of 7 kafindo Kazika 5 of 7 Rock-rabbit mbila Kazika 6 of 7 kapate Kazika 6 of 7

TABLE 15. WILDLIFE SPECIES FOUND IN CHIULUKIRE -- NONRANKED

SPECIES LOCAL SOURCE OF INFORMATION REMARKS NAMES Hare kalulu Ntambwa, Ndelemani, Kazika, - Ndelemani claims of many species of Geleta wildlife are disputed by some - Gaveni villages gave no lists of animals and birds in forest near them. gololo Ntambwa Mouse mbeba Ntambwa, Ndelemani, Kazika Impala nswala Ntambwa, Ndelemani Waterbuck nankhodzwe Ndelemani Leopard kambuku Ndelemani Antelope Ndelemani Bushbaby kumundi Ndelemani Great galago changa Geleta kanende Ntambwa Gambia rat nchenzi Kazika Baboon nyani (kolwe) Kazika fututu Kazika chitungu Kazika fundwe Geleta kafundo Geleta pate Kazika nsimba Kazika tomfa Kazika Porcupine nungu Ntambwa, Ndelemani Duiker insa Ntambwa, Ndelemani, Kazika Monkeys (vervet) pusi Ntambwa, Ndelemani, Geleta Birds: nsengu Ntambwa lumbe Ntambwa nyapwele Ntambwa, Kazika njiba Ntambwa, Kazika nkombokokombo Kazika kamutande miyepa mpungu nyamucengo sisi timba solo myuweto mgubani Woodpecker mpeta nkhanga gonkomola kataba

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 16 16 TABLE 16. CATERPILLAR AND INSECT SPECIES FOUND IN CHIULUKIRE -- NONRANKED

SPECIES OF LOCAL NAMES SOURCE OF INFORMATION CATERPILLAR viyabweyabwe Kazika “ matando Kazika “ mphalabungu Kazika: now absent due to 1970s tsetse fly spraying. Also found in Geleta. “ kapale Kazika, Ntambwa “ mapala/mapata Kazika, Ndelemani, Geleta, Ntambwa “ masase Kazika, Ndelemani, Geleta, Ntambwa “ nthowa Ndelemani, Ntambwa “ vilungulungo Ndelemani, Geleta, Ntambwa “ vitole Geleta “ ntowa Geleta chididza (grasshopper) Ntambwa INSECT “ nyenje Ntambwa “ mapata Ntambwa “ mzozo Kazika “ chinyanyau “ “ vinyolo “ “ kapuche “ “ fuse “ “ visenda “ “ nkumbu “ “ nbwicibwici “ “ mgegedule “ “ palanzhi “ “ vimphuzi “

TABLE 17. MUSHROOM SPECIES FOUND IN CHIULUKIRE -- NONRANKED

SPECIES SOURCE OF INFORMATION TIME HARVESTED 1 bowa fisi Ntambwa, Kazika Feb 2 bowa kombo Kazika, Geleta Nov 3 chipindi Ntambwa, Ndelemani, Kazika, Gaveni, Geleta Feb-March 4 kachipanda/do Ntambwa, Ndelemani, Kazika, Geleta Feb-March 5 kachombo Ntambwa, Ndelemani Jan-Feb 6 kalabe labe Ntambwa, Ndelemani, Kazika, Gaveni, Geleta Dec-Feb 7 kalimtafu Ndelemani Feb-March 8 kanyondola Ndelemani Dec-Jan 9 katelela Ntambwa 10 kawenze Ntambwa 11 lilimilangombo Ndelemani Feb-March 12 manda Ntambwa, Geleta 13 manyame Ntambwa, Ndelemani, Kazika, Gaveni Feb-March 14 ndelemya (zanje) Ntambwa, Ndelemani, Gaveni, Geleta Dec-Feb 15 ndovuzababa Ndelemani Feb-March 16 ngozi Ntambwa 17 nthimbwa Kazika Feb-March 18 nyonzwe Ntambwa, Ndelemani, Kazika, Geleta Jan/Nov-March

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 17 17 8. TABLES DESCRIBING NONTIMBER FOREST PRODUCT COLLECTION

These tables are meant to give preliminary ideas of the markets, collection units, collectors, and prices of forest products of Chiulukire. Further study will be made of some markets in the next year.

TABLE 18. FRUIT COLLECTION INFORMATION

(Note: availability of fruit throughout the year, but lack of markets.)

N T D D O L N E I T T S I E T T O E D N P C A H K O U S I E E

R M L R S R E A R L E U E M O M I O P P O

F E T C T H N E C P I I S P C A I R I E F R L R E R T V O

R R E K R S A E C R E P H P I R A P

R U M T T

E O N Y S R

U L R O R E M A H E A T Y O Kazika: seve- local con- none Generalized term “fruits” Diospyros Feb-April ral ½ hour 5 kg sumption (local) described as being collected June through October Gaveni: Flacourtia Aug-Jan Ximenia Aug-Jan un- un- just local none none None of these are collected Uapaca Nov-Jan known known consump for selling at market. Annona Nov-Dec Diospyros Sept-Dec Geleta: Hexalobus Jan-Mar Annona Syzygium Everyone in village collects fruit, though not to sell. Strychnos Jul-Sept Hyphenae not not local not given none This table shows the diversity Diospyros of fruits available throughout given given the year. Flacourtia Apr-June Parinari

Uapaca Oct-Nov kirkii nitida Baobob mbulumbushe not given mandakulumw kangele

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 18 18 TABLE 19. HONEY COLLECTION INFORMATION

T S P I P N T S E

I R I E T D C D R N

P T A E O

U R S I L T Y E N R P R E C L

F P E O

E E I T M R O I P T L P

T L N E T A K E E P O U I S C R M Y C

I C E R O R . A R R o T V U M

M O S P N R A O F R K A S E N D R I H L P A O

Ntambwa April-June, 15 kg, k500 per local and CollectedM by men only, and H E

Nov-Dec 40 E 1 hour with cup, with Katete at night. R

S comb comb Can be used as payment for R U

casualE work. O H H

Ndelemani April-June, 20 or 3 hours A dish k500 per Katete 7 collectors in village T R Nov-Dec more or less about 20 cup O E

P litres Kazika May-June ½ hour 20 litres k500 per not listed; Collected by about ¾ of the Nov-Dec 20 a hive per hive 250ml local village households. Gaveni April to not not A bucket not listed not listed Information ad hoc from ladies December listed listed at a well – not sufficient detail Geleta not listed not 5 hours 20 litre used for none; Collected by “a few men” listed bucket barter local

TABLE 20. BROOM COLLECTION INFORMATION (Local name sundwe, or Vellosia equisetoides)

T S P I N P T S E

I R I E T D C D R N

P T A E O

U R S I

E N R P R E C L

F P E O

E E I T M R O I P T L P

T L N E T A K E E P O I U S C R M Y C

I C E R R O . A R R T o V U M M O S P N R O A F R K A S E N D R I H L P A O

Ntambwa not listed not not not listed Sometimes Katete, CollectorsM are reported to be H E

listedE listed 500 each Lusaka, from Matunga. R

S Chipata R U

un- un- un- E

Ndelemani all year O k300 per Katete, Supposedly it is the people H

knownH known known

broom Chipata, from Tambala exploiting this T R Lusaka, market.O E

P Copperb elt Geleta all year un- un- un- not listed unknown Information missing from known known known report.

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 19 19 TABLE 21. MUSHROOM COLLECTION INFORMATION

S N T D D D O L N E I T E I O E T O T I C N P C H A R A U S E E L E M L S P P R E R

L U E T O T M O I P O F E S

H K N E E

P I I P

V R I C R I F R A R R E R T O A

T M P S

H R E K R S E C R E P I P A R P

R U M T T

E O N Y S R U

L R O R E A M H E A T Y

O . o N Ntambwa Dec- 40 4 10 kg k750 per Katete Collected by all members March hours per heap boma of household. person and Great East Rd. Ndeleman i: Dec-Feb At 3 Fill a not listed no local Collected by almost all Feb-Mar ndelemya least Dec-Feb hours winnow- market households. chipindi twice Feb-Mar at ing (implies kalabolabo per Jan-Mar manyame week most basket Katete) Feb-Mar nyonzwe during Dec-Jan kachipando spec- Feb-Mar kanyendela ified Feb-Mar kalimtafu month Feb-Mar lilimilangom. Jan-Feb ndovuzabab. kachombo Kazika: ndelemya Dec abou 2 7.5 kg k500 no local Collected by about ¾ of the Feb-Mar chipindi t 16 hours per kg market village households. kalabelabe Dec bowafisi Feb (implies manyame Feb Katete) nyonzwe Nov-Mar kachipande Feb nthimbwa Feb-Mar bowakombo Nov Gaveni: Information from ladies at a ndelemya late Jan-Mar not not not not listed only well – not very detailed. chipindi mid Jan- late Feb listed listed listed local Facilitator states that the kalabelabe late Dec- only opportunity for women late Mar living far from forest manyame Dec-Mar boundary to use it is “collection of mushroom because it is light to carry.” Geleta: ndelemya Dec-Feb not 6 15 kg local none Form indicates that only chipindi Dec-Feb listed hours consump- listed women are collecting, all kalabelabe Dec-Feb nyonzwe Jan-Feb tion the women of the village. kachipando Dec-Feb wakombo Nov-Feb nanya March manda March

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 20 20 Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 21 21 TABLE 22. CATERPILLAR COLLECTION INFORMATION (Note: consistency in names, collection times and amounts)

T R D N E E T S E I E T P D C

N P C A S O D U S I E L

P L I L N R P R E

L O R E O E I T M H T O I P

E T C Y

T A K E S P L I P S R M I C U R I E R A R R O A R T V

T M O S E H

P R R F K Y R A

E N . R E I H

o P A P F N M T O

E N E R U

C R O R E M U H A O T S O Ndelemani: Up nthowa Nov-Dec to 3 times 6 hrs container none none Collected by nearly masaso Feb-Mar per week of about 5 all households. mapala Jan-Feb litres vilungulungu Feb-Mar Kazika: masose mapala 20 litres none none Collected by ¾ of the viyabweyabwe Dec-Jan 8 5 hs per person households. matondo mphalabungu kapale

Gaveni Dec-Jan un-known un- unknown none none “For relish only”, known according to the ladies at the well Geleta: ntowa Oct-Nov masase Dec-Feb 3 times per 6 about k500 per Katete This is perhaps the mapala Feb-Mar week hours 10 kg cup, area closest to vilungulungu Jan-Mar or for Katete, and it has vitole Feb-Mar mpalabungu Jan-Mar barter found a market.

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 22 22 TABLE 23. OTHER FOREST PRODUCT COLLECTION INFORMATION: BAMBOOS, GRASS, SNAILS

S E N T D D D C O L N E I T A I O T E O T I L N P C A H R P U

E M T L S P R E R

L E U E O T M K O I P O F S

H N E E A P I I P

V I C R M I F R R R E R T O A T

H R E R S E C E P I P R P

R U T T

O N Y S U L O R A M E A Y

. o N BAMBOO no data k3500 per basket, Ntambwa no data no no k100 per cane Katet Used for houses, data data e, granaries, and baskets. no data k2500 -k5000 per local all year basket or chair, Ndelemani 4 bundle k1500 per no Poor regeneration of hours of 10 winnowing basket data natural bamboos noted. GRASS Mlaza is the grass used no data no data no no k1800 per hat no to make baskets and Ndelemani “ “ data data no data data hats, and for house no data construction. Gaveni “ “ “ “ no Facilitator says that mats data are an important element of the economy in the Gaveni area. SNAILS Kazika was the only village area to report snails (nkhono) as part of the wildlife. It is not clear whether they are consumed locally by people, as they are in other parts of Africa.

Chiulukire Vg Forest Resource Assessment page 23 23