Proceedings Laikipia County Wildlife Conservation Strategy

Proceedings
Laikipia County Wildlife Conservation Strategy
Stakeholders Conference
Proceedings
22nd of March 2012, Sportsman’s Arms Hotel, Nanyuki.
DRAFT
List of acronyms
AP
Administrative Police
CFA
Community Forest Association
CG
County Government
FCC
Forest Conservation Committee
KFS
Kenya Forest Service
KPRS
Kenya Police Reserve Status
KWS
Kenya Wildlife Service
LCC
Laikipia County Council
LPP
Laikipia Predator Project
LWF
Laikipia Wildlife Forum
MRC
Mpala Research Centre
NEMA National Environment Management Authority
SFG
Space for Giants
STE
Save The Elephants
WRMA Water Resource Management Authority
WRUA Water Resource Users Associations
2
DRAFT
Contents
1.
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 4
2.
Agenda ...................................................................................................................................... 5
3.
Background & Presentations ...................................................................................................... 6
4.
Group Work: Identify activities, timeline and lead stakeholders ................................................. 9
5.
Next steps & Closure................................................................................................................ 17
3
DRAFT
1. Introduction
The development of the Laikipia County Willdife Conservation Strategy was initiated in 2010 by the
Laikipia Wildlife Forum. It was born from the realisation that species strategies developed at the
national level were difficult to implement practically at the local level by land owners. In addition to
this, it became clear that the species conservation strategy could only be implemented in the
context of broader conservation strategies at the County level. The LWF proposed to lead the
development of such strategy in collaboration with the Kenya Wildlife Service. The purpose was to
understand whether the people of Laikipia want wildlife to play a role in the development of their
County, what they want for this wildlife and how they want to achieve the vision they have to this
wildlife.
The Wildlife Conservation strategy is developed in a participatory way. A steering committee
composed of experts, government, land owners and other stakeholders was established to guide its
evolution. However, the core of what was presented at the stakeholders’ conference is the result of
a very inclusive consultative process, including the views of a cross section of the Laikipia population
(400 people).
The conference is the third step in the development process of the conservation strategy. On the
basis of the consultative process, a Vision, Goal and a set of objectives and targets were established
and presented to the participants of the stakeholder conference. The conference brought together
representatives of a cross section of stakeholders of the Laikipia County and others (including
international NGOs, national administration etc) to:
 Validate the Vision, goals, objectives and targets presented
 Identify a set a priority actions to be carried out and groups of stakeholders to lead these
actions.
It is important to note that the strategy is a living document. Decisions taken at the conference will
then be taken back at the grass roots level for refining.
The Laikipia County Willdife Conservation Strategy is by no means a development strategy for the
Laikipia County. It is hoped however that it will highlight ways in which wildlife is to contribute to the
development of the county and to the well being of Laikipia residents, and thus is taken into
consideration when a County development plan is established.
It is the first time in Kenya that a conservation strategy is developed by land owners, it is hoped that
this process is replicated in other counties.
4
DRAFT
2. Agenda
The conference was split into plenary presentations and group work.
Morning
Activity
Welcome
Speakers
Chair
Mr Kalonzi (DC, Laikipia) Dr Anthony King, LWF
Origin of the Conservation Strategy
Dr Anthony King
Opening
KWS Director
Why the Conservation Strategy Matters
The Conservation Strategy Process
LWF Executive Director
Mr Agrey Maumo
The Conservation Strategy: A Summary
(Vision, Goal & Strategic Objectives)
Group Photo
Dr M. Graham
Group Activity: Guidelines for
developing strategic activities and
defining roles and responsibilities for
implementation.
Dr M. Graham
LWF Executive
Director
Group Work: Break into 5 groups.
Develop strategic activities and identify
roles and responsibilities under each
strategic objective
Facilitators:
-Dr A. King
-Mr Josphat Musyima
-Dr M. Kinnaird
-Njenga Kahiro
-Dr M. Graham
LWF Executive
Director
13.00
Lunch
Afternoon
Key note speaker
Group work
Plenary: Each group presents the
outcome of their discussion to the
entire conference
Wrap up
The Way Forward: Finalising, Launching
& Implementing the Conservation
Strategy & Wrap up
Hon. Nduritu Murithi
Facilitators identify a
spokesperson from
each group
Dr M.Graham, Dr
Anthony King
LWF Executive Director
LWF Executive
Director
LWF Executive
Director
LWF Executive
Director
5
DRAFT
3. Background & Presentations
The morning was dedicated to presentations which aimed to contextualise the conservation
strategy, provide insights in its development and guide the work of the participants.
Mr Kalonzi (District Commissioner, Laikipia) welcomed the participants. The DC reiterated his
support to the conservation strategy development process. For him, the future of Kenya lies in the
conservation of the environment. He emphasised the fact that if the environment does not become
a priority, there is little hope for the country. He called everyone to unite to protect what is left.
Dr Anthony King (previous Executive Director of the LWF, and Board member) provided insights on
the origin of the Laikipia County Wildlife Conservation Strategy. The strategy was born from the will
to support the implementation of national species conservation strategies at the land owner level
where there are no formally designated national protected areas; and determine how wildlife is to
be part of the development strategy of the Laikipia County as a whole.
Dr King, stressed that if wildlife is to persist it will be because people have the will to conserve it in
the context of their livelihood and of the current legislation. The strategy is to reflect what people
want in Laikipia. Laikipia is an exceptional conservation success. For Dr King, this is due to “an
accident” of history and land owners efforts have persisted despite the high costs of hosting wildlife.
It is time that efforts are guided by a strategy.
The conservation strategy is not a development strategy but the hope is that it will be part of a
broader development strategy to be established by the County Government.
Dr Julius Kipng’etich, KWS Director, formally opened the conference and set the context in which the
strategy needs to be grounded. The Director, reminded everyone of the great pressures that are
threatening natural resources in the world and Kenya. By 2030, it is expected that Kenya will harbour
65 Million people, 160 Million by 2100. The way in which resources are managed currently will not
enable them to support such a population.
Vision 2030 sets a vision of a prosperous and competitive Kenya with high quality of life. He raises
the question of how this is possible in the current economic paradigm? This is why there is need for
NEW thinking to emerge. Challenges to come include:
1. Access to water- the importance of progressive laws and support needed for institutions to face
challenges. More collaboration is needed between water institutions and organisations responsible
for the protection of water towers;
2. Access to sufficient food is a priority. There is need to be more creative, use technology to provide
sufficient food to all.
3. Alternative sources of energy have to be found. 70% of the rural population in Kenya uses
firewood or charcoal for fuel. The remaining 2% of forest cover will disappear quickly with the
increased population. It is essential to find alternative sources of energy.
4. Unemployment. Unemployment is the source of a vicious circle of land degradation. The question
is how can wildlife and other biodiversity can contribute to breaking the spiral and provide
6
DRAFT
meaningful employment. Tourism is a labour intensive sector and there is a need to scale it up. The
potential for sustainable nature based enterprises as a source of employment need to be explored
further and as a way to reduce pressure on wild natural resources.
The environment needs huge investments, its benefits are often not recognised enough. In order to
be effective we need to be united. Leadership has to change from promoting individual gain to
working for the whole. We have no choice but live on the Earth, a tiny spec in the cosmos. If we do
not take care of it properly, there are no alternatives.
Given the challenges ahead, radical ideas have to emerge, and be experimented. The conservation
strategy is a way to do this.
Dr Mordecai Ogada , Executive Director of LWF focused on the importance of the strategy. He re
iterated that wildlife conservation is all about people. He warned participant that referring to
conservation in economic terms does not capture the essence of conservation. Conservation is a
principle that needs to be put forward as a principle, society needs to strive to spread the benefits of
conservation. When one refers to billions lost in a forest fire, one misses the services provided by
100s of year old trees.
For him the fact that wildlife has survived in Laikpia, is thanks to the spirit of Laikipia residents. The
conservation success of Laikipia may have been by accident, it needs to be kept going. Laikipia
County Wildlife Strategy is about people wanting to conserve a living system, not a preserved (dead)
one. The strategy is about capturing the dynamism of the system, it is about changing what needs to
be changed and keeping what does not need to change. The challenge for the conservation strategy
will be to expand the conservation benefits and minimise the costs. A key point will be to reduce
human/elephant conflicts; keeping in mind the fact that wildlife is resilient.
For LWF Executive Director, the strategy strives to become a template for other Counties, it is thus
to serve Laikipia as and the country.
Agrey Maumo, senior Warden Laikipia (KWS) presented the development process of the Laikipia
Wildlfie Strategy. He stressed the consultative process which formed the basis of the strategy,
provided definitions of what strategy, visions, goals, objectives and activities are. Mr Maumo
stressed that the conference is not the end of the process, that further work is needed, partnerships
to be established for the strategy to be implemented. A strategy is living thing.
Although a number of people know about the process which is being followed, it was felt by the
organisers that everyone needed to be brought up to speed in order to understand where the
strategy has come from and what is expected from the participants.
Dr Max Graham, Executive Director of Space for Giants, presented a summary of the strategy. He is
the consultant who was in charge of facilitating the development of the strategy. His presentation
took the participants through the vision, gaol, objectives that have emerged from the lengthy
consultation process. He emphasised that the discussions with the 400 stakeholders determined
7
DRAFT
“where the Laikpia people want to go” in relation to wildlife conservation and this was captured in
the vision, goals, objectives and targets of the strategy.
Vision: Laikipia County is recognised by Kenyans and the world as one of Africa’s greatest
conservation success
Goal: By 2030 the people of Laikipia perceive wildlife as a valuable asset and the diversity and
populations of native species have been maintained or increased.
He reiterated that the purpose of the conference was to identify “how to get there” in a set of
activities that will enable Laikipia people to get where they have decided to go.
He emphasised the fact that the strategy is not set in stone that it will evolve with the thinking and
challenges faced. He also stressed that a stable or increased wildlife population can only be
achieved if wildlife is seen as an asset by residents of Laikipia. Although tourism is considered as the
way for wildlife to bring benefits to the County, it is not the panacea. Tourism is fickle and tourism
investments rely highly on political stability. In order to increase the spread of wildlife conservation
benefits, it is essential that the legislative framework establishes enabling mechanisms.
Honorable Mr Ndoritu Murithi, MP, Laikipia West was
encouraged participants to be creative and innovative.
Conservation is not popular politically as, according to him, the
majority of people do not feel part of the conservation
enterprise. Wildlife conservation is equated, in some areas, to
conflicts, especially human/elephant conflict. The costs of wildlife
are perceived as very high in terms of livelihood and human
safety whereas the economic rewards are small.
The MP stresses that fact that there are opportunities however
to expand the reach of benefits. For example in Laikipia West
small holder farmers on marginal lands, often abandoned, are
seeking to come together and try to pull their land together in
order to make it a viable unit. One of the land use explored is
wildlife conservation.
The MP invites the participants to
conference be innovative in order for wildlife benefits to reach the majority. The government also
has responsibilities ensure that the majority of citizens are not excluded from the enterprise.
8
DRAFT
4. Group Work: Identify activities, timeline and lead stakeholders
Groups deliberated all afternoon on the actions to be taken to ensure that objectives are fulfilled
and targets achieved. Results of the group work are summarised below and is the basis of the
strategic activities which will be incorporated in the strategy and taken back to local stakeholders in
Laikipia for final validation/discussion/refining.
Groups were asked to identify activities, timeline and lead actors. Most did not have the time to
complete the work but all have laid the foundation for further refining.
4.1 Strategic Objective 1: Secure and increase space for wildlife
Recommendation 1: The strategy needs to emphasise
that conservation is to be understood in a broad sense.
It is about healthy land for people, wildlife, livestock,
vegetation etc.
Recommendation 2: The group prioritised targets. The
target: by 2030 the Laikipia County Government clearly
recognises wildlife as an important public benefit, is to
be the most important target to achieve. It is about the
County government creating an enabling environment for wildlife to become of public benefit.
TARGET 1.1: BY 2030 THE LAIKIPIA COUNTY GOVERNMENT CLEARLY RECOGNISES WILDLIFE AS AN
IMPORTANT PUBLIC BENEFIT.
Activities
Lead actors
1.1.1. Lobby the county government to harmonise tax regimes in
LWF, KWS
order to create incentives for landowners to create space for
wildlife
1.1.2. Partner with county government to value and support
LWS, KWS, County Government
conservation of habitat & healthy ecosystems and assist the
County Government to lobby for greater support from the national
government to do this.
1.1.3. Carry out a study to identify the best institutional
arrangements to secure space for wildlife according to land tenure
regimes in the local area
1.1.4 Re brand conservation to transform it from being perceived
as a NGO dominated sector to a “productive wildlife sector”.
Strengthen this sector locally and nationally and support the
County government to identify Laikipia as a wildlife producing
County.
TARGET 1.2: BY 2030 THE OWNERS OF THE 3,650KM2 OF EXISTING HABITAT THAT CURRENTLY
SUPPORTS MOST OF LAIKIPIA’S WILDLIFE ARE COMMITTED TO WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AS A
FORM OF LANDUSE.
9
DRAFT
Activities
1.2.1 Community lands: Create /ensure transparency of benefit distribution from wildlife based
activities within communities and to others. Strengthen economic activities on lands currently
secured to keep it as is or expand.
1.2.2. Private lands: Ensure security of land tenure
1.2.3. Strengthen the collaboration between community and private land owners (e.g joint resource
management plans) in addition to existing and expand social development support. These activities
need more support from LWF.
TARGET 1.3: BY 2030 OWNERS OF AT LEAST HALF OF THE 3,196 KM2 OF EXISTING HIGH POTENTIAL
WILDLIFE HABITAT (WHERE WILDLIFE IS CURRENTLY ABSENT OF FOUND IN LOW NUMBERS) ARE
COMMITTED TO WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AS A FORM OF LAND USE.
Activities
1.3.1. Community lands Develop community land use plans (including resource use plans)
1.3.2. Abandoned lands: re-establish security of tenure
TARGET 1.4: BY 2030, WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF STABLE WILDLIFE POPULATIONS, MORE THAN
HALF OF LAIKIPIA’S RESIDENTS VIEW WILDLIFE AS AN ASSET.
Activities
1.4.1. Carry out baseline survey to establish current perception
1.4.2. Education/awareness raising campaigns to reach the wider population in Laikipia about how
wildlife contributes to the whole of the local economy
1.4.3. Mitigate human/wildlife conflict (SO5)
4.2. Strategic Objective 2: Strengthen security for wildlife in Laikipia County
TARGET 2.1: BY 2030 THE PROBLEM OF ILLEGAL KILLING OF WILDLIFE HAS BEEN ELIMINATED
Activities
Leading actor
2.1.1.Lobby government for elimination of illegal firearms in
Laikipia
2.1.2. Establishment of managed KPR units in Laikipia County
KWS, AP, SFG, Landowners
(6)
2.1.3. Lobby government to enable people to own and use
wildlife.
2.1.4. Develop a manual to train law enforcement personnel
KWS prosecutors, lawyers,
to successfully prosecute those involved in wildlife crimes
SFG, LWF
2.1.5. Establish an umbrella for the development of
10
DRAFT
conservancies in abandoned lands
2.1.6. Explore instruments for capturing economic benefits
from wildlife protection (eg REDD)
2.1.7. Carry out education and awareness campaignsharmonise and target messages
2.1.8. Establish systematic monitoring of illegal killing of
wildlife (e.g MIKE) in Laikipia
2.1.9. Lobby nationally and internationally against
consumption of endangered species trophies?
LWF, NEMA, others
MRC, SFG, STE, KWS
4.3. Strategic Objective 3: Maintain and enhance habitats and connectivity to maximize
species diversity, ecosystem services and human well being.
Recommendation 1: Target 7 (there are no significant areas of bare ground by 2030 to be
incorporated in Target 2 (by 2030 appropriate management action has been taken to maintain or
enhance natural habitats that are vulnerable and in decline).
Recommendation 2: Target 2 to be more specific, natural habitat that are vulnerable and in decline
refers to bushed grasslands mosaic areas (riparian areas, wetlands, forests are captured in other
targets).
Recommendation 6: Target 6 (by 2030 populations of wildlife that are vulnerable to local extinction
recover by 10% to be captured in another objective.
TARGET 3.1: BY 2030 THE AREA UNDER UPLAND FOREST HAS INCREASED BY 50%
Activities
3.1.1. Strengthen CFAs to improve governance and
capacity and establish new ones where they are not
established. Capacity needs to be strengthened in
relation to :
 Understanding of the legislation
 Enforcement of the law
 Forest rehabilitation (planned grazing, tree
planting, etc.)
 Awareness on rehabilitation methods
3.1.2. Create a mechanism to make effective linkages
between CFAs and KFS
3.1.3. Mobilise resources to support CFAs:
 lobby for a county-level trust fund
 investigate feasibility of county-wide carbon
project
 Promote more equitable benefit-sharing
agreements KFS/CFAs
3.1.4. Increase uptake of alternative energy sources
 identify champions within CFAs to show best-
Timeline
5 years
Lead actors
LWF and KFS
1 year
FCC, KFS, LWF, CFAs
18 months
KFS, CFAs, county
govt and forest
conservation
stakeholders
3 years
CFAs, LWF
11
DRAFT
practice and promote them in the wider
community
TARGET 3.2: BY 2030 APPROPRIATE MANAGEMENT ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN TO MAINTAIN OR
ENHANCE THE BUSHED GRASSLANDS MOSAIC THAT IS VULNERABLE AND IN DECLINE TO SUSTAIN
WILDLIFE AND HUMAN LIVELIHOODS
Activities
3.2.1. Facilitate the establishment of land use
plans in communal land areas specifying: use
planning
 Settlement
 Grazing
 Natural resource use like charcoal
3.2.2. Promote the consolidation of
smallholdings to create economically and
ecologically viable units for integrated
livestock/wildlife management
 Strengthen and promote Thome as a model
3.2.3. Active habitat management
 Zones protected from browsing damage
 Use tools to improve land health (grazing)
 Control invasive species
3.3.4. Awareness of legislation and enforcement
to control charcoal production
 Reinvigorate Kenya Charcoal Working Group
 Awareness amongst judiciary about
legislation
Timeline
5 years
Lead actors
LWF,
community
conservancies,
NRT
Indicators
5 communal land
use plans
1 year
KWS,
landowners,
LWF, Zeitz
Foundation,
Segera
Landowners,
LWF
 Thome as a
working model
 2 more
consolidated
smallholdings
5 years
Reduce bare land
KFS, LWF,
conservancies,
KCWG, NEMA
TARGET 3.3: BY 2030 THE EWASO NYIRO RIVER AND ITS TRIBUTARIES FLOW YEAR ROUND
Activities
3.3.1. Strengthen WRUAs and encourage employment of effective
management
3.3.2. Scale-up efficient water use systems
 Drip irrigation
 Water storage and harvesting
 Champions with working examples
3.3.3. Support the enforcement of existing legislation
 Lobby NEMA to enforce EMCA
 Pegging of riparian reserves
 Prevent illegal boreholes
3.3.4. Lobby for a county-level legislation promoting water storage
Lead actors
LWF, WRMA, Ministry of
Agriculture, Provincial
Administration
All stakeholders led by LWF
and WRMA
WRMA, WRUAs, LWF
WRMA
12
DRAFT
3.3.5. Actively manage and rehabilitate riparian land to ensure
vegetation cover
3.3.6. Supporting access to funds to implement sub-catchment
management plans
 Common intake
3.3.7. Strengthen linkages between WRMA and Water services
board
WRUAs
TARGET 3.4: BY 2030 MANAGEMENT PLANS ARE IMPLEMENTED FOR EACH OF LAIKIPIA’S
WETLANDS
Action
3.4.1. Wetlands and springs recognised as a national
asset and legislation developed to support their
management
 Re-establish and enforce boundaries
Actors
WRUAs, WRMA, Water Service Boards,
Ministry of Water and Irrigation, Ministry
of Agriculture
TARGET 3.5: BY 2030 WILDLIFE IS ABLE TO MOVE UNHINDERED WITHIN LAIKIPIA AND BETWEEN
LAIKIPIA AND THE ADJACENT ECOSYSTEMS
Activities (incomplete)
3.5.1. Fences – allow free movement of wildlife between ecologically connected areas
3.5.2.Identify important corridors and promote wildlife-tolerant activities in these areas
4.4. Strategic Objective 4: Promote effective collaboration among Ewaso Ecosystem stakeholders
to enable wildlife conservation and management in Laikipia County.
Recommendation 1: Goal needs to include a
cultural aspect of wildlife, asset may be
understood as mainly economic.
Phrasing proposed is: By 2030 the people of
Laikipia perceive wildlife as part of their heritage
and as a valuable asset and the diversity and
populations of native species have been
maintained or increased.
Recommendation 2: timeline to be changed in targets 1 and 4 to 2017.
TARGET 4.1: BY 2017 THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT HAS IN PLACE A CLEAR INTEGRATED LAND USE
PLAN THAT RECOGNISES AND PROTECTS THE NEEDS OF WILDLIFE.
13
DRAFT
Activities
4.1.1. Understand current land use and
potential areas of alternative use, consolidate
this information in maps
4.1.2. Support the creation of dialogue amongst
different sectors of government through the
establishment of a task force
4.1.3. Facilitate the creation of an integrated
land use plan
Timeline
2013
Lead actors
LWF, MRC, CG
throughout
LWF
By 2017
LWF, CG
TARGET 4.2: BY 2030 MEMBERSHIP OF LWF INCREASES TEN FOLDS FROM 2012 LEVELS AND IS
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PEOPLE OF LAIKIPIA.
Activities
Timeline
Lead actor
4.2.1. Increase awareness creation through a
Continuous
LWF
variety of media
4.2.2. Open an office in Laikipia West
LWF
4.2.3. Explore new membership structure
LWF
potential
TARGET 4.3: BY 2017 THE LAIKIPIA COMMUNITY ESTABLISHES A FRAMEWORK TO FOSTER
DEMAND DRIVEN RESEARCH
Activities
Timeline
Lead actor
4.3.1. Identify all previous research publications By 2017
LWF, MRC, AWF,
and establish and annotated bibliography and a
NRT
resource center
4.3.2. Create a central database for Laikipia and 2017
establish a link with members
4.3.3. Create a digital forum/blog for sharing
2015
information
TARGET 4.4: BY 2030 WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT DECISIONS TAKEN IN LAIKIPIA, RECOGNISE
UNCERTAINTY, AND ARE INFORMED BY THE RESULTS OF APPLIED MONITORING AND RESEARCH
Activities
Timeline
Lead actor
4.4.1 Support and encourage sharing of
By 2017
LWF, MRC,
information between researchers, policy
AWF, NRT
makers, land owners, KWS- creation of a
network
4.4.2. Establish natural resources extension
Extension agents
services to disseminate resource findings
recruited by 2017
4.4.3. Refine and implement long term
By 2017
monitoring protocols to monitor changes in the
environment
14
DRAFT
TARGET 5: BY 2030 CONSERVATION ORGANISATIONS OPERATING IN LAIKIPIA COLLABORATE
EFFECTIVELY
Activities
4.5.1. Initiate a Laikipia annual research day
4.5.2. Initiate a Laikipia resource information day
4.5. Strategic Objective 5: Minimise costs of living with Wildlife
TARGET 5.1: BY 2030 RESPONSIBILITY FOR MANAGING THE HARD BOUNDARIES THAT SEPARATE
LAND COMMITTED TO CONSERVATION FROM LAND WHERE WILDLIFE IS NOT TOLERATED IS
CLEARLY DEFINED AND DESIGNATED.
Activities
Lead actors
5.1.1. Create a centralised body to oversee location, design,
KWS, stakeholders, LWF, CG, SFG
management of hard boundaries- Central fencing committee
for example encompassing technical, ecological, socio political
expertise
5.1.2. Support the creation of government funding streams
5.1.3. Creation of community institutions in wildlife intolerant
Committee, CG, SFG
areas of the boundaries- role would be education, maintenance
responsibility, entry points, development of income generating
activities
5.1.4. Lobby/support the enforcement of penalties for fence
LWF, land owners, KWS
breakage (vandalism), working with and sensitise judiciary,
landowners, KWS on law enforcement procedures
TARGET 5.2: BY 2030 PAC IS TIMELY AND EFFECTIVE
Activities
5.2.1. Establishment and training of community scouts
5.2.2. Determine and establish communication protocols for
effective reporting of conflict incidents
5.2.3. Identify local actors/leaders as focal point
5.2.4. Lobby (carry on) for increase in wildlife crime penalties
Lead actors
NGOs, KWS?
KWS, local people, SFG
LWF, Judiciary, police, Wildlife
managers, national government
5.2.5. Sensitise people on conflict prevention
15
DRAFT
TARGET 5.3: BY 2030, WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF STABLE ELEPHANT POPULATION, CROP RAIDING
BY ELEPHANTS IN LAIKIPIA COUNTY REDUCES BY 90% FROM 2012 LEVELS.
Activities
Lead actors
5.3.1. Lobby for increased personnel and equipment on the ground: KWS
increase in KWS outpost (already initiated) and PAC capacity
5.3.2. Identify and implement systems to improve KWS and KWS
community collaboration for rapid response
5.3.3. Build people’s capacity to deter elephants (use research,
education, community based deterrents)
5.3.4. Increase number of community scouts
SFG
5.3.5. Develop reliable channels for communication
SFG
5.3.6. Provide technical support for community ring fences around Laikipia fence committee
discreet farming areas on the basis of recommendations by the
Laikipia Fence Committee (see target 5.1)
5.3.7. Increase elephant habitat by supporting CFAs, development CFAs, KWS, NGOS, SFG, Zeits
of new conservation model, processes for productive use of Foundation
abandoned lands
TARGET 5.4: BY 2030, WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF STABLE PREDATOR NUMBERS, DEPREDATION HAS
BEEN REDUCED BY 90% FROM 2012 LEVELS.
Activities
Lead actors
5.4.1. Lobby for mechanisms to allow areas where predators breed
LWF
to control predator numbers
5.4.2. Community: promote and facilitate the use of predator proof
LPP
bomas with advice from Laikipia Predator Project and Ol Pejeta
Conservancy
5.4.3. Increase wildlife tolerant areas and wildlife numbers so that
predators have enough to eat outside livestock areas; enable
productive use of abandoned lands, stimulate private/community
partnerships for increased tourism, provide incentives for predator
conservation, ensure adequate benefit sharing, create income
generating activities and improve land use on settled areas (e.g.
planned grazing)
5.4.4. Improve herding practices on community lands (more
herders, dogs, soil conservation and land use)
16
DRAFT
5. Next steps & Closure
Dr Mordecai Ogada laid out the next steps for the strategy. It is expected that the strategy will be
compiled in a final draft document by the end of April, and launched in May 2012. He emphasised
the fact that a lot of work will have to be done in the context of new system of government which
represents challenges and opportunities. The Laikipia County Wildlife Conservation Strategy will
enable the Laikipia residents to ensure that conservation is taken into consideration at the County
level. The strategy document will be brought back for validation and discussion in the different areas
of Laikipia.
Dr Anthony King wrapped up and closed the meeting by stressing again that the conference is not
the end of the strategy development. The strategy responds to desires of people of Laikipia to have
wildlife in the County but for it to be part of the future of Laikipia, hard decisions will have to be
taken. Wildlife is not seen as a useful political asset, as for the moment, it is about conflicts, threats,
costs or nothing. Things have to change at the national level for things to change on the ground and
Laikipia residents have to be clear about what they want in order to make and lobby for the
necessary changes.
It is important to understand that wildlife is not a political issue however, using wildlife for politics
risks ending by people and wildlife losing out. Wildlife can be an opportunity for development and
the strategy needs be clear about how to harness this opportunity. In Laikipia, people work together,
and this unique Laikipia identity is reflected in the Laikipia County Wildlife Conservation Strategy.
17
DRAFT
Appendix 1: List of participants
STRATEGIC
NAME
GROUP
4
Johnson Sipitiek
5
Jonathan Rana
5
James Mathenge
4
Ben Wandago
1
Jeremiah Lemiruni
3
J K Kinyua
5
5
3
5
5
2
3
5
5
5
4
2
4
Lydiah Wandiah
Joseph Karonji
Phillip Thimba
John Bosco
Johnson Gichuhi
Dr Max Graham
Salim Edong
Peter Kirwa Saina
Mbuthi P M
Daniel Kinyua
Magdalena W.K
Raphael Mumbiko
Daniel E Krimi
David Wanjohi
Dr. Enosh Osoro
Nyakweba
J Mathenge
Charles Nderitu
Organisation
EMAIL ADDRE/PHYSICAL ADDRESS
African Conservation Centre
African Conservation Centre
Agsrs KWS MCA
P.O.Box 22 Nyeri
AWF Samburu
CCT &LCC
Chair FCC Central
Chairman(Ol
Morani)Tourism&Environment
Committee LCC
Chairman-LCC East
Chairperson HOPE
CLLR Laikipia CC
CLLR Laikipia County Council
Space for Giants
CLLR Laikipia West
P.O.Box 114 Nanyuki
CLLR Laikipia West
CLLR Laikipia West
CLLR Laikipia West
CLLR Laikipia West
CLLR Laikipia West
CLLR LCC
Conservancy Thome Group
Ranch
D/Director WC Ministry
Forestry & Wildlife
DC-Laikipia East
DDO-LCC
TELEPHONE NO.
salimedong@yahoo.com
0729472650
0722597849
18
DRAFT
1
3
5
1
1
3
3
4
5
5
5
4
2
1
1
1
3
3
1
3
3
1
4
5
4
B W Kavu
Celine Achieng'
Belinda Low
J.M Machomba
Patrick Karmushu
Saaya Tema
Patric Leresi
James M. Mwamodenyi
Julius Kipng'etich
Peter Murimi
David Koskey
Magdalene W Kariuki
Patrick Ngugi
Sveva Gallmann
Mordecai Ogada
Jacob Ekoil
John Kinoti
Geoffrey Chege
Mike Watson
Delphine King
Josephat Musyima
Anthony King
Viginia Wahome
Richard Nyabet
Paul Kere
Dr Margaret Kinnaird
Isaac Kinyanjui
Beatrice Lempaira
Deputy Director KWS
EAWLS
Grevy Zebra Trust
HOPE
Il Ngwesi Conservancy
Il Ngwesi Conservancy
Il Ngwesi Conservancy
KFS
KWS Director
KWS
LACOWAS
Laikipia County Council
Laikipia County Times
Laikipia Nature Conservancy
Laikipia Wildlife Forum
LCC
Lewa Wildlife Conservancy
Lewa Wildlife Conservancy
Lewa Wildlife Conservancy
LWF
LWF
LWF BOD
LWF CLO
Makurian Group Ranch
MEMR
MPala Research Centre
N/W Unit LWF
Naibunga Conservancy Trust
20110-00200 Nbi
0720545446
P.O.Box 380 Nanyuki
jmwamngombe@kenyaforestservice.org
laikipiadev@yahoo.com
0721774477
editor@laikipiacountytimes.co.ke
0718609532
john.kinoti@lewa.org
geoffrey.chege@lewa.org
isakinke@yahoo.com
19
DRAFT
4
3
3
4
2
5
1
2
3
1
3
2
5
none
5
5
4
4
4
2
2
5
5
4
2
5
5
4
Staline Kibet
Dominic Maringa
Juliet King
Mike Harrison
Jirma Molu
KWKS Gauthawa
John Weller
Jamie Gaymer
Kimani Kuria
John Elias
Richard Vigne
Martin Mulama
John Ole Tingoi
Catherine Wambani
Hewton Gitonga
Raul O Onyango
CLLR John Elerman
CCL Peter Kirwa Saina
CCL Simon Kanyutu
Patrick Omondi
Mark Jenkins
Gabriel Njenga
Tobias Ochieng'
Festus Ihwagi
Anne Powys
Gilfrid Powys
Aggrey Maumo
David Wanjohi
National Museums of Kenya
Ngare Ndare Forest Trust
Northern Rangelands Trust
NRT
NRT
Ol ARI Nyiro
Ol Jogi
Ol Jogi
Ol Jogi Ltd
Ol Lentille
Ol Pejeta Conservancy
OPC
Oretiti
PAD,KWS
Provincial Administrator
Provincial Administrator
Rumuruti Town Council
Rumuruti Town Council
Rumuruti Town Council
SAD, KWS
Segera
Segera
Space for Giants
STE
Suyian Ranch
Suyian Ranch
SW-KWS
Thome Community
Conservancy
Private Bag Isiolo
0723130019
0722697394
0725149076
20
DRAFT
1
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
Charles Oluchina
Jackson Mbuthia
Daniel Gituku
Agnes Wamuyu
Mary N Mathiani
Moses Marete
Joseph Theuri
Laurence Frank
Jackson N Waweru
The Nature Conservancy
VISION 2050
Vision 2050
Vision 2050
Vision 2050
Vision 2050
Vision 2050 WECA Chairman
Laikipia Predator Project
LCC
gitukuan@yahoo.com
0721792044
0725580639
21