Serengeti highway?

Source

tldr - There are raw materials in that part of Africa that are needed for cell phone and hybrid car batteries, so they want to build a highway through the Serengeti to transport the materials. Scientists say the highway would disrupt the ecosystem.

People here not only want the highway, said chief Loshipa Sadira, “but we’ve been praying for it for years.”

He rattled off the reasons: cheaper goods; getting to the hospital faster; being better connected to towns; and having a higher chance of someday getting electricity and cellphone service.

However, also this to consider:

Hundreds of thousands of people here depend on tourism for a living. And the Serengeti is like a giant A.T.M. for Tanzania, attracting more than 100,000 visitors each year, producing millions of dollars in park fees and helping drive Tanzania’s billion-dollar safari business, an economic pillar. “If anything bad happens to the Serengeti,” said Charles Ngereza, a Tanzanian tour operator, “we’re finished.”

So... thoughts? Anyone familiar with African ecology, politics, and/or economy?

edited 31st Dec '10 3:10:41 PM by melloncollie

Building a highway in the Serengeti would be a rather gargantuan hammer blow to the ecosystem. I'm not an expert on the subject, but the local ecosystem might collapse entirely.

Serengeti Highway would be a good band though.

^ I'm not so certain. Building a highway is among the lesser things you can do to an ecosystem. By no means will it have a positive effect on the ecology of the area but acting like it's a dagger to the throat of the place is a tad exaggerative no?

Lesser compared to what?

Considering that a little two-lane road wouldn't accomplish the goals of the highway, and one big enough to be useful for transport of raw materials in useful quantities (along with the various amenities that would have to be build along with it, like fuel depots, lodging, and food establishments, it would do serious damage to the migration routes of a lot of animals. And of course, those associated amenities would be built near existing sources of water...

Think the problems the Alaska Pipeline had, and all it really had to deal with was one migratory species — the caribou and one associated predator (wolves). Building a multi-lane highway through the Serengeti is going to screw up all of the herd herbivores, and the predators that follow them.

^^ Burning the whole region and turning it into wheat fields for example. Or building dams along the rivers and flooding much of the region as a result. (Thank you Aswan High Dam for trying to be a marvel in engineering but doing it wrong on the wrong river.)

I'm unsure how highways are built over there, but I imagine that the individuals involved in the construction themselves would be problematic for the ecosystem if they have to scavenge the area for wood, food, and the like. I remember some articles put out by National Geographic and some other publications a while back that said that while rations were generally issued, foraged meat was still a very popular commodity in the mining/logging communities.

Wouldn't trains make a better idea?

A train? In the middle of Africa? Why didn't anyone think of that before

I would think a large paved highway would stop the Great Migration. Imagine this herd◊ trying to get across.

Or the migration would cause mondo traffic problems on the highway. Either way, problems.

The main issue I can think of with a train is that it would have to be a ground train rather than a raised train, on account of being a cargo, rather than a transport train, and elephants are a lot bigger than cows.

So use a bigger cowcatcher! Problem Solved!

What kind of highways are we talking about? Upgrading thier shoddy roads to a two land highway with a reasonable speed limit shouldn't be too much of a problem.

iirc, a 5+ lane highway

As far as I can tell this pretty much won't work, either you drive the traffic in such a way that doesn't kill thousands of animals a year, or you might as well have routed the road around the park.

I mean, there's animals all over the current dirt road, laying right smack in the wheel ruts. You think the trucks will have a chance to avoid them at 70 mph? Or that the animals will have a chance to move?

As for how bad, exactly, it's going to be...probably somewhere on the low end of our expectations, as is usually the case for environmental impact-because there are elements we don't understand fully.

As for the economic impact...seems like trading some short term gain for long term destruction of a natural resource. Natural resources like those use for phones become depleted after a while, and then what? Now you've destroyed your replenishing resource for a temporary boost.

I'd like to research more, but I'm having a hard time finding unbiased sources...can anyone find me a reason they can't just route the damn road around the park, rather than driving it through what's supposed to be a particularly sensitive area of it?

I've seen websites that promote an alternative route, but I haven't been able to find that many unbiased sources either.

This is what developing nations get for not raping their environments before the environmental movement. I'm sorry but your nation is going to remain an undeveloped economic backwater because the developed world wants to keep your native fauna untouched because they feel bad about killing off all of their animals.

This post was thumped by the Stick of Off-Topic Thumping.
Stay on topic, please.

Salad, strawmanning is not going to accomplish anything. Nor is repeatedly going offtopic in OTC.

No, wait. It will accomplish something. It will get you banned on purpose.