A Scientific Position Paper Opposing Further Archaeological Excavation at Gcwihaba Cave, Botswana

Mike Buchanan, Karstologist -2025

Abstract


This paper presents a formal objection to ongoing and proposed archaeological excavations within the Gcwihaba–Koanaka cave complex, Ngamiland, north-western Botswana. The site represents one of Southern Africa’s oldest, most intact karst ecosystems and functions as a critical bat hibernaculum and paleoenvironmental archive. Recent reports by Laurent Bruxelles, Director of the International Research Center SHARE (CNRS/University of the Witwatersrand), confirming the extraction of more than four tons of fossiliferous sediment from the Koanaka Hills after only one week of excavation (Bruxelles, 2025), reveal an alarming disregard for internationally accepted conservation standards. Such activities threaten irreversible ecological, geological and heritage damage and contravene Botswana’s Monuments and Relics Act (2001) as well as the principles of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

1. Introduction

Gcwihaba and the associated Koanaka cave system have long been recognised as areas of exceptional natural and cultural value (Greig et al., 2002; Buchanan, 2010). The 2002 Gcwihaba Cave Management Plan expressly warns against any excavation likely to alter the cave’s microclimate or disturb resident fauna.

Despite these protections, teams associated with the University of the Witwatersrand have recommenced large-scale excavations. On 13 October 2025, Laurent Bruxelles publicly announced:

“After one week of excavation in the Koanaka Hills, together with the team from the Botswana National Museum and with the help of the San community of Xai-Xai, more than four tons of fossiliferous sediment have been extracted. Now, it’s time to start sieving and sorting the bones, while the geological team explores new sites and caves in the area.” (Bruxelles, 2025, LinkedIn post)

The sheer volume of sediment removal within such a short period confirms that destructive excavation is already under way, contrary to both local management prescriptions and international best practice.

2. Ecological and Geological Sensitivity

Gcwihaba lies within the dolomitic Koanaka Group of the Damaran Belt, forming an interconnected karst aquifer possibly extending into Namibia (Buchanan, 2010). Even minor mechanical disruption can change airflow, humidity, and groundwater balance (Williams, 2007).

The cave provides habitat for several Near Threatened bat species—Rhinolophus denti, Nycteris thebaica, Hipposideros commersoni, and possibly Miniopterus schreibersii (Greig et al., 2002; Buchanan, 2010). These populations regulate insect ecosystems and sustain cave nutrient cycles. Disturbance, especially through noise, dust and lighting, can lead to permanent colony abandonment (Tuttle, 2000).

Bruxelles’ report of multi-tonne excavation strongly suggests mechanical digging, transport and sieving, all activities known to raise dust, alter temperature and humidity, and drive bat colonies from roosts (Hamilton-Smith, 2006).

 3. Legal and Ethical Framework

Section 10(2–4) of Botswana’s Monuments and Relics Act (2001) prohibits any non-conservation use or development within one kilometre of a National Monument without explicit ministerial approval. The Act demands that such approval only be granted if the activity is “not incompatible with the preservation of the national monument.”

The ongoing sediment removal, if authorised, conflicts directly with this provision. Moreover, the scale of extraction breaches UNESCO (2010) guidance requiring minimal disturbance to caves nominated for World Heritage status.

Past controversies surrounding Witwatersrand-led cave excavations, including those led by Lee Berger, have highlighted procedural irregularities, insufficient peer oversight, and ethical lapses (Dirks et al., 2015). The present actions in the Koanaka Hills demonstrate a continuing pattern of disregard for environmental integrity and transparency.

4. International Conservation Obligations

The IUCN World Heritage Caves and Karst Study (Hamilton-Smith, 2006) and Karst Management Guidelines (Williams, 2007) define caves as “three-dimensional living systems” whose microclimates can be permanently damaged by minimal disturbance. Excavation without a comprehensive environmental and heritage impact assessment contravenes these standards.

The 2010 UNESCO Natural Heritage Application notes that Gcwihaba and the Koanaka hills contain “the richest cave fossil deposit in Botswana and possibly in Southern Africa,” and that these caves “have been resealed after each research visit to preserve interior air composition.” The current large-scale removal of fossiliferous sediments clearly violates this principle of periodic resealing. Regardless of whether the sample sediments were recovered from the subterranean or terrestrial.

 5. Recommendations

  1. Immediate suspension of all excavations and sediment removal within the Gcwihaba–Koanaka karst system pending a full independent Environmental and Heritage Impact Assessment.
  2. Investigation by the Department of Environmental Affairs into the authorisation process permitting extraction of several tonnes of fossiliferous material.
  3. Reinstatement of the cave’s closed area status under the 2002 Management Plan, with expansion to all connected karst features.
  4. Community representation through the Cgae Cgae Tlhabololo Trust in all research governance structures.
  5. Formation of an independent oversight committee comprising karstologists, chiropterologists and heritage specialists to evaluate all current and future proposals.

6. Conclusion

The removal of tonnes of fossiliferous material from Koanaka Hills in one week demonstrates precisely the kind of destructive intervention the Gcwihaba Management Plan sought to prevent. These caves are fragile living systems, repositories of biodiversity, geology, and human prehistory. Excavation at this scale constitutes environmental vandalism masquerading as science.

The Government of Botswana is urged to halt all such activity, enforce statutory protections, and reaffirm the country’s leadership in ethical, community-based conservation. Preservation, not extraction must remain the guiding principle for Gcwihaba and its sister caves.

 References

Berger, L.R. (2013) Almost Human: The Astonishing Tale of Homo naledi and the Discovery That Changed Our Human Story. National Geographic.


Buchanan, M. (2010) Comments to be Considered in the Management of the Gcwihaba Caves. Ecosurv Environmental Consultants.


Bruxelles, L. (2025) LinkedIn post, 13 October 2025, ‘After one week of excavation in the Koanaka Hills … more than four tons of fossiliferous sediment have been extracted.’ [Online]. Available at: https://www.linkedin.com (Accessed 21 October 2025).


DEA (2007) National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. Gaborone: Government of Botswana.


Dirks, P.H.G.M. et al. (2015) ‘Geological and taphonomic context for the new hominin species Homo naledi from the Dinaledi Chamber, South Africa,’ eLife, 4, pp. 1–37.


Greig, M. et al. (2002) Gcwihaba Cave Management Plan. Gaborone: Ectocon Environmental Consultants.


Hamilton-Smith, E. (2006) A World Perspective on Cave and Karst Protection: Paradox and Problems. IUCN World Heritage Caves and Karst Study.


UNESCO World Heritage Centre (2010) United Nations Natural Heritage Application: Gcwihaba Caves. Paris: UNESCO.


Williams, P. (2007) Karst Management Guidelines, Policies and Actions. New Zealand Geological Survey.


Tuttle, M. (2000) ‘Bat conservation and ecosystem health,’ Bat Conservation International Reports, 22(3), pp. 10–18.

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog