The Bwindi Impenetrable forest was gazetted a National Park in 1991. Many conflicts between the authority (Uganda National Park or UNP) and local people arose from the fact that the latter now did no longer have legal access to the forest and its resources. To alleviate the tensions, it was proposed that UNP consider allowing people access to areas on the periphery to collect forest products important to their livelihoods.

An influential project in south west Uganda (Development Through Conservation, DTC) by CARE International and the then Impenetrable Forest Conservation Project assisted UNP in the development of what came to be known later as the ‘Multiple Use Program’. This study was commissioned as an important starting point for its design.

The objective of this study was to investigate local communities’ attitudes towards the park, and to identify the most sought after resources from the forest. Also, the availability and abundance of these resources inside proposed zones for resource collection were to be assessed and conservation issues raised.[U1] 

352 Informal interviews were held with households up to 3 hours walk from all around the park’s boundary. Recent aerial photographs (1990) helped in orientation, locating the households and proposed collection zones. In addition, the extent of forest remnants outside the park and the density of habitation in these photographs were compared with those visible on 1954 photographs, to assess where deforestation had taken place and population had increased most. The in-forest assessment of resource availability in proposed collection zones was based on subjective scoring by local users along transects from the border.

An extensive overview of local products and forest resources required to provide or make them is presented in the thesis. The main products are poles, materials for weaving (trays, baskets, grain stores, mats, ropes, stretchers, pot covers), crafts (utensils, hoe handles, beer boats, bee hives, harps and walking sticks), and medicinal plants, but also gum, fuelwood, fruit and bushmeat.

Otherwise, the results of the interviews are given in percentages of people interviewed, as well as in the form of maps, showing the distribution of certain answers (e.g. “What are your fears with regard to the national park?” And “Do you have access to wood outside the park?”. Another series indicates locations where people mentioned a certain forest resource being important to them, as poles, for weaving and craft making, and as medicines. Generally speaking, feelings towards the park were still negative and resentful of lost access. People do not believe there are viable alternatives for the resources they used to get from the forest.

The forest survey along the edges of the forest identified 10 floristic vegetation types and maps show the availability of resources desired by local communities in six so-called abundance scores.