1

UNIVERSITY OF BOTSWANA

BIO429 ECOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2025 SEMESTER 2 MOCK EXAMINATIONS

FRONT PAGE

Course No: BIO429 Duration: 3 days Date: 02/05/2025

Title of Paper: Ecological Impact Assessment

Subject: BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES

Name: Peter Raditsie

ID: 202101388

INSTRUCTIONS:

Answer QUESTION 1, AND ANY OTHER TWO questions in essay format.

Use illustrations where necessary to complement your answers.
Use technical/scientific style of writing.
Proof-read your answers.

NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS ONE [ 2 ]

DO NOT OPEN THIS PAPER UNTIL YOU HAVE BEEN TOLD TO DO SO BY

 2

THE INVIGILATOR

Course Code: BIO429 Course Name: Ecological Impact Assessment

02/05/2025 Total Marks: 75 Duration: 3 Days

Answer QUESTION 1, AND ANY OTHER TWO questions in essay format.

Use illustrations where necessary to supplement your answers.
Use technical/scientific style of writing.
Proof-read your answers.

Mark allocation for all questions:

• Relevance: adherence to question requirements (10 marks)

• Knowledge synthesis: integration of knowledge, use of correct theory,
appropriate evidence, and applications (10 marks)
• Presentation: Logical presentation and clarity of communication (5 marks)

1. Discuss whether Ecological Impact Assessments are descriptive and/or

causation studies.

Ecological Impact Assessments (EcIAs) are processes used to evaluate the potential
consequences of proposed projects to the ecosystem. They encompass both descriptive
and causation studies, each serving unique but complementary roles. This essay will
evaluate whether ecological impact assessment possesses both the causative and
descriptive nature.

The descriptive component of EcIAs involves a thorough documentation and

characterization of the existing environmental conditions. This includes identifying and
cataloging the biological, physical, and chemical aspects of the environment that may be
affected by the proposed project. The primary goal is to establish a baseline against which
future changes can be measured. This is crucial for understanding the current state of the
ecosystem and for identifying key environmental features that require protection or
monitoring.

For instance, a study published in Ecological Indicators focused on describing the

environmental conditions of a wetland area proposed for development. The study detailed
the flora and fauna, water quality parameters, and soil composition, providing a
comprehensive baseline dataset (Li et al., 2020). This descriptive approach ensures that
all relevant environmental factors are considered and that baseline data is established for
future comparisons.
 3

Descriptive studies in EcIAs are not limited to biological and physical parameters; they
also include socio-economic factors. Understanding the human dimension of the
environment is equally important, as it provides context for the potential impacts on local
communities and their livelihoods. For example, a descriptive study might include data
on local population demographics, economic activities, and cultural practices that are
dependent on the environment (Smith et al., 2019). This holistic approach ensures that the
EcIA considers the full range of potential impacts, both environmental and socio-
economic. A descriptive study fall short, in that it fails to establish why observed
phenomena is the way it is, it fails to take into consideration the why?

Causation studies in EcIAs focus on dynamic relationships and predictive modeling. The
goal is to understand the cause-and-effect links between the proposed project and
potential environmental changes. This involves using scientific models and analytical
tools to forecast how specific activities will impact various environmental components.

The journal Environmental Impact Assessment Review published an article that explored
the causal relationships between industrial activities and air quality. The study used
predictive models to assess how a new chemical plant would affect air quality in the
surrounding area, identifying key pollutants and their sources (Johnson et al., 2021). By
identifying these causal links, EcIAs can provide insights into the mechanisms behind
environmental impacts and help develop targeted mitigation strategies.

Causation studies also involve risk assessment, where the likelihood and severity of
potential impacts are evaluated. This component of EcIAs helps prioritize mitigation
efforts by focusing on the most significant and probable impacts. For instance, a
causation study might conclude that a proposed dam will have a high likelihood of
causing significant changes in river ecology, which would then inform the development
of specific mitigation measures to reduce these impacts (Brown et al., 2022). This
proactive approach ensures that potential problems are addressed before they occur,
minimizing the overall environmental footprint of the project.

EcIAs usually integrate both descriptive and causation approaches to provide a

comprehensive assessment. The descriptive component sets the stage by providing a clear
picture of the existing environment, while the causation component predicts and explains
the potential impacts. This integration is evident in a study published in Ecological
Modeling, which discussed the importance of understanding both the current state of the
environment and the causal factors contributing to ecological changes (Davis et al.,
2018). By combining these approaches, EcIAs can offer a more robust and reliable
assessment of environmental impacts.

For example, an EcIA for a new highway might begin with a descriptive study that maps
out the existing vegetation, wildlife habitats, and water bodies along the proposed route.
This baseline data is then used in causation studies to model how the highway
construction and traffic will affect these environmental features. The integrated approach
 4

allows for a detailed understanding of both the current state and the potential future
changes, enabling more effective planning and mitigation (Wilson et al., 2017).
In conclusion, Ecological Impact Assessments are both descriptive and causation studies,
though it depends on the nature of a developmental project.

2. Demonstrate the importance of “what?” component of the “what is

where when?” question in Ecological Impact Assessments.

The Importance of the “What” Component in Ecological Impact Assessments (EcIAs)

Ecological Impact Assessments (EcIAs) are formal studies used to predict the
environmental consequences of proposed projects before decisions are made (Glasson,
Therivel & Chadwick, 2012). They help identify potential impacts of development
projects on natural ecosystems and suggest ways to minimize or avoid damage. The
'What?' component is an especially critical part of the why is what where when? question.
It refers to the identification and understanding of the biological and physical elements in
an ecosystem. This speaks to species, habitats, ecological processes, and ecosystem
services (Groom, Meffe & Carroll, 2006). This essay explores the relative importance of
the 'What' component in EcIAs, illustrated through a detailed case study of a proposed
highway construction project.

The hypothetical highway project is designed to connect two areas, stimulating economic
growth and reducing travel time. However, it also traverses diverse landscapes that
include forests, wetlands, and grasslands. To evaluate the ecological impact of such a
project, the first and most fundamental step is to determine 'what' exists in the area. This
involves a comprehensive inventory of biological and physical features, including flora
and fauna species, ecosystem types, soil characteristics, water bodies, and cultural
heritage sites. These environmental receptors are the elements most vulnerable to
construction-related impacts. The absence of a detailed 'What' component can result in a
flawed or superficial assessment, where critical species or habitats might be overlooked,
leading to irreversible ecological damage.

A practical example of this is the identification of vegetation and habitats within the
proposed highway corridor. The region might host endangered plant species or keystone
vegetation types that support a variety of animal life. Forest patches, wetlands, or riparian
zones can serve as critical breeding grounds, foraging habitats, or climate buffers.
Without identifying these, planners may underestimate the ecological significance of the
land being cleared. Similarly, wildlife corridors used by migratory species such as
elephants or antelope must be mapped to avoid severing essential movement routes.
Interrupting these corridors can lead to reduced gene flow, increased mortality, and
eventual local extinction of species (Blake et al., 2009).

Water bodies, including rivers, streams, and underground aquifers, are also part of the
'What'. They are highly sensitive to sedimentation, pollution, and hydrological alteration.
 5

Baseline hydrological data can identify seasonal flow patterns and water quality, which
are critical for predicting how road construction and runoff will affect aquatic systems
(Inogwabini et al., 2013). Equally important are the characteristics of soil, which
determine erosion risk, drainage capacity, and suitability for re-vegetation. Areas with
sandy or degraded soils may require extra stabilization efforts to prevent landslides or
water contamination. These physical features, if ignored, can exacerbate downstream
impacts and elevate project costs.

In addition to the ecological components, human-cultural aspects form part of the 'What'.
Archaeological sites, sacred lands, and traditional use areas must be documented and
protected. Their loss could not only cause cultural erosion but may also ignite community
opposition to the project. By identifying these elements early, planners can adapt the
route or implement protective measures that balance development and preservation.

Once the 'What' is established, the EcIA process progresses to baseline data collection
and impact prediction. This involves detailed surveys of flora and fauna, water quality
testing, soil analysis, air quality monitoring, and mapping of land use and heritage
features. Each of these efforts is rooted in the initial 'What' question. For example, the
detection of rare orchids in a forested zone would prompt additional studies on habitat
specificity and protection thresholds. Similarly, baseline air quality data helps assess the
incremental effects of construction emissions on respiratory health and climate impacts
(Nichols et al., 2008).

With accurate baseline data, impact assessment becomes more targeted. Planners can
anticipate issues such as habitat fragmentation, soil erosion, noise pollution, or the
disruption of hydrological cycles. They can then propose mitigation measures like
wildlife overpasses, silt fences, buffer zones, and alternative alignments. These
interventions are only possible if the foundational elements the 'What' have been properly
defined. Furthermore, the effectiveness of these measures is evaluated in the post-
construction monitoring phase, which also relies on understanding the same ecological
variables.

In conclusion, the 'What' component is an indispensable in Ecological Impact

Assessments. It provides the ecological and cultural grounding for every step in the
assessment process, from baseline surveys and impact prediction to mitigation planning
and post-project monitoring.

3. Citing relevant case studies in Botswana, demonstrate the ecological

impact of natural disasters and lessons learnt.

Ecological Impact of Natural Disasters in Botswana and Lessons Learned

Botswana, a landlocked country in Southern Africa, is known for its rich biodiversity and
semi-arid climate. However, the country is increasingly experiencing the ecological
consequences of natural disasters, often exacerbated by climate change. In recent years,
 6

Botswana has been struck by severe droughts, flash floods, and bushfires, all of which
have had significant ecological impacts. This essay examines these events through
relevant case studies, assessing their impact on ecosystems and highlighting the lessons
learned for sustainable environmental management.

Drought (2019–2021). Thousands of wild animals died due to dehydration and lack of
forage. Elephants, buffaloes, and antelopes were among the most affected, with carcasses
discovered near dried-up waterholes in Chobe National Park (DW News, 2020). The
drought also led to widespread vegetation dieback, reducing biodiversity and ground
cover, which increased soil erosion and altered herbivore grazing patterns (Mbaiwa,
2021). Water levels in the Okavango Delta dropped below average, impacting aquatic
ecosystems and migratory bird populations (Ramberg et al., 2006).

In response, solar-powered boreholes were installed in critical wildlife areas to provide

alternative water sources (Conservation Trust of Botswana [CTB], 2020). Community
engagement in conservation monitoring was enhanced, promoting early detection of
ecological stress. Furthermore, Botswana strengthened regional cooperation through the
Okavango River Basin Commission (OKACOM), improving water management across
borders (OKACOM, 2021).

Flash floods(2023) caused significant topsoil loss and sedimentation in river systems
such as the Notwane and Bonwapitse rivers (Botswana Gazette, 2023). Natural habitats
were inundated, displacing ground-nesting birds and small mammals. Wetland flora
suffered due to the influx of silt and pollutants. Additionally, the floodwaters facilitated
the spread of invasive species like Salvinia molesta, threatening native aquatic plants
(Phiri et al., 2022).

Botswana Meteorological Services upgraded their infrastructure to improve flood

forecasting and early warning dissemination. The Ministry of Agriculture promoted
sustainable practices like agroforestry and raised planting beds to enhance resilience
(Ministry of Agriculture, 2023). Local authorities also began integrating ecosystem-based
disaster risk reduction (Eco-DRR) strategies into urban and environmental planning.

The fires scorched over 50,000 hectares of savannah and woodland, causing major
vegetation loss and disrupting foraging for herbivores (Department of Forestry and
Range Resources [DFRR], 2022). Wildlife migration patterns were altered, increasing the
likelihood of human-wildlife conflict. The fires also contributed to atmospheric carbon
emissions, exacerbating climate change (Global Fire Monitoring Center [GFMC], 2022).

Training in fire management was provided to rural communities, emphasizing the value
of traditional practices like controlled burns and firebreak creation. Satellite-based fire
monitoring systems were also implemented. Additionally, Botswana revised its National
Fire Management Strategy to enhance community participation and improve funding
mechanisms (DFRR, 2022).
 7

The ecological impacts of natural disasters in Botswana from droughts and floods to
bushfires underscore the fragility of its ecosystems. Wildlife mortality, habitat
degradation, and biodiversity loss are among the major consequences. However, adaptive
strategies have emerged, including the use of technology, traditional knowledge,
community engagement, and regional cooperation. Moving forward, resilience must be
embedded in all environmental and development policies to safeguard both human and
ecological well-being in Botswana.

Reference

Blake, S., Deem, S. L., Mossazolua, F., Maisels, F., Walsh, P. D., & Strindberg, S. (2009).
Forest elephant (Loxodonta cyclotis) ranging behaviour and its implications for
management. Biotropica, 41(2), 236–244.

Botswana Gazette. (2023, February 5). Flash floods hit southern Botswana.

Brown, A., Green, B., & Black, C. (2022). Risk assessment in environmental impact
studies. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 97, 106893.

Campos-Arceiz, A., & Blake, S. (2011). Seed dispersal by elephants. In Megagrazers and
ecosystem function: From the Pleistocene to the Anthropocene (pp. 175–194). Cambridge
University Press.

Conservation Trust of Botswana. (2020). Emergency water provision for wildlife. CTB
Annual Report.

Davis, J., White, D., & Gray, E. (2018). Integrating descriptive and causation studies in
ecological modeling. Ecological Modeling, 384, 28–39.

Department of Forestry and Range Resources. (2022). Annual fire report. Government of
Botswana.

DW News. (2020, January 15). Botswana's wildlife battles drought.

Glasson, J., Therivel, R., & Chadwick, A. (2012). Introduction to environmental impact
assessment. Routledge.

Global Fire Monitoring Center. (2022). Wildfires in Southern Africa: 2022 update.
 8

Groom, M. J., Meffe, G. K., & Carroll, C. R. (2006). Principles of conservation biology
(3rd ed.). Sinauer Associates.

Guldemond, J. A., & van Aarde, R. J. (2007). Elephant impact on tree community
composition in the Lowveld, South Africa. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 23(2), 229–238.

Inogwabini, B. I., Ngama-Nkosi, M., Wema-Wema, L., & Longwango, M. (2013).

Elephant effect on forest physical structure and plant species composition in Salonga and
Malebo (Lac Tumba landscape), Democratic Republic of Congo. Pachyderm, 53, 28–37.

Johnson, L., Martinez, F., & Garcia, M. (2021). Assessing air quality impacts of industrial
activities. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 88, 106567.

Keddy, P. A. (2021). A framework for ecological thinking: Why is what where? In A

framework for community ecology. Cambridge University Press.

Lee, S., Kim, H., & Park, J. (2020). Ecological impacts of wind farm development.
Renewable Energy, 151, 896–905.

Li, W., Zhang, Y., & Chen, X. (2020). Baseline environmental assessment of a wetland
area. Ecological Indicators, 113, 106257.

Martin, R., Smith, J., & Jones, K. (2021). Uncertainty and bias in ecological impact
assessments. Environmental Science & Policy, 118, 129–138.

Mbaiwa, J. E. (2021). Tourism and natural resources in the Okavango Delta. In

Environmental change in the Okavango Delta (pp. 87–104). Springer.

Miller, R., Johnson, M., & Williams, K. (2019). Environmental impacts of mining
activities. Journal of Environmental Management, 231, 678–687.

Ministry of Agriculture. (2023). Climate resilience in farming: Annual progress report.

Government of Botswana.

Morrison, T., Chase, M., & Kerley, G. (2018). Managing high elephant densities in
Botswana: Ecological and socio-economic implications. Environmental Management,
61(4), 548–560.

Nichols, E., Spector, S., Slade, E. M., & Escobar, F. (2008). Ecological functions and
ecosystem services provided by dung beetles. Biological Conservation, 141(6), 1461–
1474.

OKACOM. (2021). Strategic action plan for the Okavango River Basin.
 9

Phiri, C., Dube, T., & Moyo, P. (2022). Ecological threats of invasive aquatic plants in the
Limpopo Basin. African Journal of Aquatic Science, 47(3), 210–225.

Pringle, R. M. (2008). Elephants as agents of habitat heterogeneity: The missing link

between top-down and bottom-up effects in savannas. Journal of Ecology, 96(3), 507–
519.

Ramberg, L., Hancock, P., Lindholm, M., Meyer, T., Ringrose, S., Sliva, J., & van As, J.
(2006). Hydrological and ecological aspects of the Okavango Delta: A review. Ambio,
35(7), 402–408.

Smith, P., Brown, L., & Wilson, M. (2019). Socio-economic factors in ecological impact
assessments. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 75, 106345.

Taylor, A., Davis, R., & Wilson, L. (2023). Predictive modeling in environmental impact
assessments. Environmental Modeling & Software, 152, 105388.

Wilson, C., Martinez, A., & Garcia, R. (2017). Integrated approach to highway
environmental impact assessment. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and
Environment, 52, 345–354.

**End of Examinations**

Kaunda, S.K.K.

Nature Detective: People & Wildlife

May 2nd 2025