Water Hyacinth: Why It Will Not Go Away Any Soon in Lake Victoria

A Section of Lake Victoria Heavily Infested With Water Hyacith

The water hyacinth, Eichoirnia Crassippe, was first spotted outside the outside Lake Victoria Basin way back in 1955 along River Sigi in Tanga region of Tanzania and later sighted in River Pangani in 1964.  In the late 1980s, the Tanzanian section of Lake Victoria was invaded by the hyacinth via River Kagera.
Environmentally, water hyacinth is threatening the ecological stability of Lake Victoria, out-competing other species in the vicinity, as well as threatening the aquatic biodiversity. By preventing the growth of phytoplankton, the hyacinth ultimately affects fisheries. Hyacinth is known to deplete oxygen and reduce water quality in fresh waters. The decaying water hyacinth vegetations have reduced the water quality and quantity of potable water, besides increasing water treatment costs. The decaying sediments can also accelerate eutrophication that can subsequently increase water hyacinth itself or enhances algal blooms. Socially, the hyacinth has reduced access to clean water, increased vector-borne diseases, as well as conflict among the community like the one being witnessed at Migingo Island. Water hyacinth also provides breeding grounds for vectors and pests such as mosquitoes known for malaria and human lymphatic filariasis and snails known for bilharzia. The weed has also been linked to cholera as it harbors the causative agent. For instance, Nyanza region in Kenya recorded larger proportion of cholera cases of 38.7% above the 15.3% national average between 1994 and 2008.  Cases of increased attack by the crocodile, poisonous snakes, and other reptiles have also been attributed to hyacinth.  Economically, hyacinth has caused great impacts. The blocked waterways hampered agriculture, fisheries, and even recreation. In the Kenyan section of Lake Victoria section, water hyacinth has decreased the fish catch rates by 45% due to obstructed access to fishing grounds, increased fishing cost, and delayed access to markets.
Due to the ecological, economic, and social impact, different organizations have put measures in place to control the spread of the weed. In Lake Victoria, biological, mechanical, and manual methods have been applied to tame the spread of water hyacinth. As biological method has been used to stop the spread of water hyacinth, mechanical and manual methods have been used to haul up the remaining frail weed biomass. The weevils, Neochetina bruchi and Neochetina eichhorniae, resulted in the collapse of water hyacinth mats in Uganda waters between September and October 1998, and in Kenya and Tanzanian waters in 2000. Mechanized removal through mechanical weed harvesters clears larger areas of weed (6-8ha) in a shorter time. The mechanical harvesting is advantageous as it can alleviate the burden of the weed in a few of hours or days. The physical barriers have also been used to prevent or delay re-infestation like the ones at the Kisumu Pier, the inlet of River Kagera, and at the Nalubaale hydropower generation station near Jinja town. Even though manual removal benefits local by offering employment, it is ineffective due to the slow overall pace of weed removal. The workers are also exposed to crocodiles, snakes and disease vectors.
On the other hand, is water hyacinth both ecologically and economically desirable to some extent? Some riparian communities have used water hyacinth as a resource as it is been used to make livestock feed, produce furniture and handicrafts, bio-fuel, make manure. The hyacinth has also provided the breeding grounds for some indigenous fish species that had been threatened by the introduction of Nile perch into the lake. These indigenous fish uses the hyacinth as hiding ground from the Nile Perch, their main predator. Water hyacinth can be used for biogas and bioethanol production, heavy metal and dye remediation, wastewater treatment, electricity generation, animal feed, medicines, as well as in agriculture and sustainable development. Dairies, sugar factories, tanneries, pulp and paper industries and distillers can use hyacinth to treat wastewater. Water hyacinth can also be used to heavy metals as the ones that were purposely introduced into the lagoon. The biomass can also be used to produce biogas for household uses in villages around the lake region. And can this reduce stress on forests for fuel? However, the application of utilization alone may not be effective as it would offer an incentive to preserve the persistent plant at the expense of the environment and maintain the production systems that may pose even higher economic and social costs. This method may not reduce infestations but instead facilitate its spread to fresh, un-invaded, water bodies. At the moment, the current negative effects of the weed appear to outweigh its benefits. The utilization of hyacinth as cottage industry raw material should not promote its propagation, but rather help to manage its growth.
Despite the enormous efforts to control the water hyacinth, it has not been removed. The hyacinth has demonstrated a high ability of resurgence. Mechanical removal exercise has not been successful due to cyclic re-infestation from adjacent bays of Lake Victoria. As the biological removal is unable to phase out the weeds, the manual removal is ineffective for heavier infestations. Since none of these methods appear to be effective in solving the problem, an integrated control option, the use of two or more of the control methods, have been tried.
Water hyacinth will not go away so long as we are still disposing the nutrient rich pollutant into the lake. The heavy pollution into the lake will proliferate the existing and the dormant water hyacinth to keep covering the lake. The nitrates and phosphate-rich waters that flow into the lake from catchment areas just feed the weed further.  Millions of dollars may be used in controlling the spread, but unless the pollution around the Lake Basin is addressed, all these resources may all be wasted in vain. Between 0.2 and above 1.5 ha of water hyacinth that flows into the lake daily from River Kagera is just an indication of how nutrient rich these waters are. Since one water hyacinth plant can have as many as 5,000 seeds that can stay dormant and viable for around as 20 to 30 years, the resurgence is very easy as they multiply very fast and is capable of covering 50 ha of a water body in just two weeks.
Water hyacinth is not the problem; it is just a symptom of the wider problem; poor watershed management and pollution. The remedy to water hyacinth control is not on the Lake itself, the solution lies in the watershed management and sound pollution control. The focus should be in reducing the nutrient load of water flowing into the lake through proper waste waters treatment. The focus should also be on proper land use practices within the riparian communities to reduce agricultural runoff and heavy use of fertilizers. Through this path, controlling water hyacinth in the lake can become a reality.

Lake Nakuru: Is Its Future Threatened by Plastics?

A Section of Polluted Lake Nakuru

The global prestige of Lake Nakuru is being threatened by excessive pollution that is choking Nakuru town.  Poor solid waste management and increased human activities around the town are threatening one of the country’s top animal sanctuaries. Even though siltation is the greatest risk according to Kenya Wildlife Service, solid waste pollution particularly the non-degradable plastics are draining the life out of the lake.
Lake Nakuru is an internationally renowned tourist site that is a home to wildlife. Having been designated a Ramsar Site in the late 1990s, it was also listed as a marshland of global importance for the supervision of migratory water birds. In 2009, it was also declared an Important Bird Area (IBA). Later in 2011, UNESCO listed Lake Nakuru as world heritage site. Being a home to flamingos, Lake Nakuru also hosts other 450 bird species
In 2015, 20 tons of plastic were collected from the shores of the lake and its adjacent conservation area. As revealed by animal carcasses operated on by veterinary doctors, a high incidence of plastics in their systems is an indication of how herbivores are being killed by these plastics. Most of the plastics are usually washed during heavy rains into the lake and thus draining its life slowly. Kenya Wildlife Service wants Nakuru County government to take drastic actions to stop constant use of plastic bags since a half a ton of plastic is being collected weekly from the park. These plastics are non-biodegradable and are very harmful not only to the aquatic life but also to other herbivores animals found in the park.
Even though the damage caused by plastic bags to nature is astronomical; million of plastics are still being produced daily. Surprisingly, nearly all of the plastics are not recycled and equally large amounts get disposed of in the wrong places. The plastic bags are a poisonous menace to the environment. Unlike plastic bottles that can be subjected to recycling, plastic bags should be banned since they are not economically viable to recycling due to their thickness. Recycling plastic bags are very expensive. This is the reason there are more plastic bags along the street corners and fences, unlike the plastic bottles that are being recycled.
Are plastic bags a sign of environmental wastefulness? It is illogical to produce a single-use bag that will last for several years harming the environment and killing both land and water animals. In addition, our lives are also being threatened by the same plastic bags as they offer good breeding ground for mosquitoes when in our drains.
The use of market-based approach can also offer some solution to plastics bags. The plastics bags offered by shopping malls should introduce a direct charge to make shoppers feel the pinch and reuse the plastic bags. In Scotland, the introduction of a 5-pence charge for each plastic bag taken by a shopper significantly reduced plastic bags littering on the environment. Rwanda and Mauritania are the best examples of how effective banning plastic bags are. Those who think we cannot do without plastic bags in Kenya should take a trip to Rwanda to just sees how good life is without plastic bags. The introduction of charge can encourage consumers to make smart purchasing choices and compel them to carry your own reusable bag. The move may also make consumers become consciously aware to refuse an extra wrapper whenever an item is already wrapped.
The promise by Nakuru County government to enact punitive pollution laws is a good move. They should take into account options such as introducing a charge to plastic bags and even banning them completely. The introduction of charge to plastic bags may not work best given that town is flooded with hawkers who use the plastic bag as their sole wrapping material and controlling them has been a challenge not only on Nakuru but also in other towns around Kenya. Even though banning plastic bags may appear to be a damaging control mechanism to the business community, it is the best control method that addresses the interest of everyone in the environment. Plastic bags only offer short term benefits but long term environmental harm that may last for hundreds of years.