Wildlife Conservation In East African Rangelands: Different Approaches with Maasai in & Kenya

Mara Goldman Department of Geography University of Colorado, Boulder Measuring “success”; Comparing “models”

Wildlife Livelihoods Community Sustainability Conservation support

Conservation Population Poverty Support for In the short Easement (ES) trends Reduction project term

Lease Poaching Continuation of Expansion of In the long Payments (ES) trends pastoralism project to term other areas

Community- Acceptance of Security Trust and Internal vs Based new (Tenure, respect external Conservation conservation Property) resources and /Multiple use projects support areas (CBC) Maasai and Wildlife Conservation

Overlap in Space

History of land loss

Politics of resource use and control Case studies in and near Maasailand, Kenya and Tanzania

# Nanyuki # Kisumu

# Nakuru

Western # Nairobi

Serengeti# Mara Musoma Kitengela Amboseli

# # Moshi # Shinyanga Simanjiro / Manyara

Ken ya

Tanzania

# Dodoma N

Park and Game Reserves Lake District Boundary Southern Maasai land

100 0 100 200 Kilometers Said (2007) The Case Studies

Tarangire-Manyara Ecosystem: (1) Tanzanian Land Conservation Trust: Manyara Ranch: to protect a wildlife corridor and ‘promote pastoralism’, TLCT/AWF (10yrs) (2) Simanjiro Conservation Easement: Terrat Simanjiro Plains, Dorobo Fund, WCS (4 yrs) Kitengela Athi-Kapatuei Plains (1) Kitengela Lease Program (10 yrs)

TME or “Maasai Steppe Heartland”

Includes two main areas of conservation concern: Kwakuchinja corridor (MR); Simanjiro Plains (Sim Easement). Manyara Ranch

•Former state-run cattle Ranch •Local claims of ownership and use rights •Threats: increased cultivation in surrounding villages, poaching, charcoal production

“Trust” lands to protect migratory and resident wildlife and “traditional pastoralism”

99 year lease

Tanzanian Land Conservation Trust (TLCT) Score card?

• Secured part of the ‘corridor’, decreased charcoal production, stabilized WL • Limited local employment as scouts and herders • BUT… • Increased local resentment due to grazing restrictions, and lack of respect for traditional knowledge, management and cultural practices: – Increase in ‘illegal’ grazing and harvesting – Increase in lion hunting inside the ranch and regardless of ‘legality’ – Refusal of a new ‘corridor’ protection easement project by same organization (AWF) – Wildlife in village lands – Politics

Simanjiro Plains • Essential grazing area for migratory wildlife from TNP • History of conservation & land politics • Tourism and hunting conflicts • Land conflicts and tenure insecurity • THREATS: increased cultivation, fragmentation, privatization, poaching

Simanjiro Conservation Easement: Terrat Village Lease Project •Village paid to not farm, build and welcome wildlife •Village control over money •Local game scouts hired and trained •Communal tenure •UCRT and Local community members involvement •Long history of trust, communication, benefits •Research linked with Source: TNRF action Scorecard?

• Only 4 years, no wildlife data yet but increased patrolling and local support • Increased support for conservation • Cost effective US $8000 for an area of 9300 ha (+ game scouts) • 2 neighboring villages requested for expansion

• But…sustainable? Soon enough to tell? – Threats: TZ politics and game hunting; further land pressures, climate change, disease (MCF)

Kitengela: Athi- Kaputei Plains

Source: ILRI, see: Reid Robin S., Gichohi H, Said MY, Nkedianye D, Ogutu JO et al. 2008. The upper Kaputiei: dry season refuge gone

Nairobi National Park #Ngong

Ongata Ronga#i

Kiserian # Athi River •Fragmentation # •Privatization •Fences •Loss of land Isinya# •Loss of route to

Konza dispersal area #

# Kajiado

National Park N Road Railway Fenced Property Ecosystem Boundary

10 0 10 20 Kilometers Kitengela Wildlife Conservation Lease Project • Started 2000 by FONAP, continued by The wildlife foundation (TWF) • Private land owners paid 300 Ksh ($4.25 in late 2006) to keep land unfenced and undivided, refrain from poaching, protect vegetation. • IRLI – research, community support – Fencing, community liaison officer – Sharing research results, getting research questions • KILA and local representatives

Trends…

• Expansion: 2000 – 214 acres from 2 participants • 2004 – 118 families in first triangle, moving to the third triangle. • Money used to pay for school fees and help with bad years • Improved attitudes of wildlife conservation • Allows people to hold onto their land • Supports pastoral lifestyles.

BUT… Sustainable? Threats: Price of land, population growth, land pressure, politics ...

(Reid et al,2008; Nkedianye 2003; Nkedianye et al 2009).

Terrat and Kitengela

• Securing Rather than Threatening TENURE SECURITY, and GRAZING ACCESS – increased fragmentation and privatization of land, and increased risk of outside extraction – Both Projects provide a MEANS to control the land for grazing. … keep it in Maasai hands, and available for livestock • Working with Relationship of Trust, Open Communication, and Mutual Respect – Long term relations with tour companies, Research Teams, local CBOs, and Community Members

Can WL conservation Succeed in Pastoral Rangelands?

For BOTH WL and pastoralists? • Financial benefits: for whom and how (i.e. payments vs employment) • Grazing: is land Keeping land open for wildlife and livestock or is limited access to grazing for livestock permitted

• Tenure: Supporting local needs to secure tenure, or extraction, boundary based • Relationship: Open Communication, Trust, and respect • Participation: in research, management, Decision making Thank You!

Communities of Oltukai, Esilalie, Terrat, an Emboret in Tanzania Dorobo Tours, Ujamaa CRT, TNRF (Tanzania) Manyara Ranch and AWF personnel KILA, and residents of greater Kitengela Area and ILRI (KY) David Nkedianye, Robin Reid