Akagera National Park to be re-demarcated

The boundaries of Akagera National Park are set to be re-demarcated following a cabinet approval giving a go ahead for the exercise and fencing the park in the Eastern Province. Cabinet also approved a law that concerns compensation of families of victims who have lost lives or property to straying animals from the National Park.

Tuesday, November 17, 2009
CARRYING OUT EVALUATION: Monique Nsanzabaganwa

The boundaries of Akagera National Park are set to be re-demarcated following a cabinet approval giving a go ahead for the exercise and fencing the park in the Eastern Province.

Cabinet also approved a law that concerns compensation of families of victims who have lost lives or property to straying animals from the National Park.

According to the Minister of Trade and Industry Monique Nsanzabaganwa, the evaluation process of a competent company to put an electric fence around the park is currently underway.

She however could not reveal how much is budgeted for the exercise to fence the park which currently occupies an area of approximately 1085 KM². The move is part of the measures to be put in place to restrain wild animals from attacking human settlements.

"We advertised through an international tender and we received applications of interested firms, currently we are evaluating and identifying the most suitable firm.”

"What I can tell you is that work to secure the park will begin very soon,” Nsanzabaganwa said.

She said that government has set up a special guarantee fund from which people will be compensated on the losses caused by wild game. The fund is under the Ministry of Finance.

However last month while appearing before the parliament, Nsanzabaganwa was put to task by Members of the Lower Chamber of parliament to explain why government had delayed to compensate families who had lost lives and property as a result of attacks from animals of the Akagera National Park.

She revealed that the government was providing only Rwf 200,000 as funeral contribution but MP’s argued that the money was very little.

Ends