Before highlighting two cases of successful deployment of Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) strategies in the context of the elements deemed critical by Murphree, it seems most beneficial to demonstrate that failure to adhere to one or more of the criteria Murphree outlines can produce a rather devastating impact, even on the best-laid plans for such operations that appear, at first, to have a solid dedication to the bottom-up approach and concern for local resources and the people who depend on them at heart.

One case of the implementation of an CBNRM operation deserves more merit than others as it shows the damage that is done when none of the criteria proposed by Murphree is met. Gwezotshaa Natural Resources Trust is based on “ecotourism, wildlife management, and utilization of veldt products"(Kalahari Conservation Society) through a program that is a joint venture between tourist industry professionals and the villagers who live in Nxacini, where the tourist activities would be most prevalent in what was going to be “cultural village" demonstrating the Nxacini way of life. The project has been underway since 1996, but the organization notes that progress has been very slow and revenue generated in the form of royalties paid by the tourism company are not as high as expected. Furthermore, a serious flood complicated development efforts and resources were spent repairing houses. Eventually the machinery and supplies for the bottling plant were purchased but the plant never took off due to a lack of marketing. In short, this project has been a failure.

While the initial purpose outside of the ecotourism inspired idea was that great development and income would come to the community as a result of tourism and water bottling, there is a lack of evidence in the literature on this project that points to the fact that it was ever truly accepted fully by the community, who were far more worried about constant water supply and quality problems and more pressing issues. The village was rural and while governance was not necessarily a problem, the management was poor as it appears there too many focuses that spanned across their resources (from tourist influxes to water bottling when water was historically a constant source of concern). Furthermore, the benefits did not reflect what was done by any means; the project was started in 1996 and although some complications were situational because of natural disasters and the responses to them (the flood, for instance) a constant effort yielded little in the end and now there are thousands of bottles of water piled up in a new facility because of no marketing.

Even more to its detriment, the project did not have ownership as the unit of production and benefit as the relationship looks to be more as though the tour company and bottling factory saw available opportunities for profit while giving very little back; the water supply existed and was being used by the community already and the environment was the source of a traditional way of life. By violating yet another criteria through this tourism issue and being not as local as possible in terms of ownership, especially with two groups (the tour company and the bottlers) constantly at work with external interests, the operation failed. It was too large in scope, produced too drastic of a change to traditional life with little concern for what problems such rapid changes would cause, and therefore did not produce the end result of a Community-based natural resources management CBNRM effort, which was the voluntary action on the part of the community since they did not see these resources as personally valuable and were thus not as invested in this as they could have been had this been managed differently. This demonstrates that while the above missions were, in many significant ways successful when they adhered to the criteria set forth by Murphree, those they do not risk challenges, or possibly failure.