|
| Period | Status of mangrove forest in Kibele | Status of mangrove forest in Charawe | Reasons for Kibele | Reasons for Charawe | Source |
|
| 1964-1972 | Dense mangrove forest cover, tall mangrove trees species present. Status was very good | Dense mangrove forest cover, tall mangrove trees of species present and status was very good | Demand for mangrove was small, small population size, only men were involved in mangrove activities and conservation management by government officials | Demand for mangrove was small, population size was small, only men were involved in mangrove activities, conservation was under government officials and use of traditional rules | Key informant |
|
| 1990-1995 | Decrease in mangrove forest cover bad status | Decrease in mangrove forest cover at slow rate bad status | Increase in population size, increase in mangrove demand, only men were involved in mangrove harvesting and breaching the government laws | Increase in population size, increase in mangrove demand, only men were involved in mangrove activities, breaching of government laws and neglecting the traditional rules. | Key informant |
|
| 1996-2000 | Decrease in mangrove forest at fast rate hence very bad status | Decrease in mangrove forest cover hence bad status | Introduction of charcoal making, dye production, building poles, firewood, women and youth were involved in mangrove harvesting and use of chain saw | Increase in mangrove demand, women and youth were involved in mangrove harvesting and use of chain saw. | Key informant |
|
| 2000-to date | Good status | Very bad status | Introduction of local community mangrove management committee, replanting of mangrove forest, burnt use of saw machine, burnt charcoal making, availability of creditable livelihood/forest | Rapid increase in population size, lack of alternative creditable livelihood, poor transport network system, community engage in mangrove charcoal making activities. | Present study |
|
