1

Table of Contents

Purros Conservancy, Namibia – Edison in his homeland

Wildlife Conservancies

Can Scotland learn from Africa?

Jill Matthews

2011

Winston Churchill Travelling Fellowship Report

2

Table of Contents

1. Preface 2. Introduction to Protected Areas 3. Conservancies in Namibia 4. Conservancies in Kenya 5. En route – Zambia and Tanzania 6. Conservancies – could they work in Scotland 7. Thanks

3

1 Preface

In 2011 I set off on a six month journey through Africa to find out what Scotland could learn from the ‘conservancies’ in Namibia and Kenya. In Africa ‘conservancies’ are areas of land where natural resources are managed sustainably either by local communities or private individuals /companies. There aren’t any conservancies in Scotland so I wanted to find out more about them and consider if we should have them.

My journey was made possible by the award of a Travelling Fellowship from the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust, this funded two months of my journey and I paid the rest.

May was spent volunteering on a wildlife ranch called Kuzikus in Namibia on the edge of the Kalahari. This 10,000ha ranch uses volunteers to count the large mammals (like springbok, oryx and wildebeest) because the manager needs to know how many animals they can harvest sustainably.

June was spent visiting various organisations and community conservancies around Namibia, mainly in the Caprivi strip and in Kunene region. Isaac, a friend from Kenya involved in community conservation, accompanied me on this part of my journey. His company was fantastic and allowed a far greater insight because local people interact with fellow Africans differently to the way they interact with Europeans.

July and August were spent driving from Namibia to Kenya. On the way I visited protected areas in Zambia and Tanzania, but these countries don’t have ‘conservancies’ like those Namibia and Kenya.

September was spent around Lake Naivasha in Kenya visiting conservancies and learning more about local wildlife management initiatives in that part of the Rift Valley.

October was spent in Nanyuki on the slopes of Mt Kenya volunteering for a company called Desert Edge which helps conservancies set up ‘conservation enterprises’ based on indigenous plants. I also spent time with the Northern Rangelands Trust, an organisation supporting community conservancies in Northern Kenya.

at the beginning of November I returned home.

1.1 What is a conservancy?

There is no universal definition of a ‘conservancy’. Conservancies are not the same as protected areas like national parks where wildlife and nature are fully protected; in a ‘conservancy’ natural resources are sustainably managed and used. Wild animals can be hunted in conservancies in Namibia, but in Kenya hunting is not allowed anywhere. Pastoral people can graze their livestock in a conservancy, an activity not generally allowed in national parks. Conservancies are run by communities or private individuals/companies, not by the state like national parks. Conservancies generate most of their income through tourism, with lesser amounts coming from harvesting wild animals and plants.

The conservancy concept has evolved in Africa over the last 30 years and has spread rapidly. Conservancies are regarded as a successful way of involving local communities with wildlife conservation. We don’t have ‘conservancies’ in Scotland (or the UK) so the purpose of my journey was to find out more about them.

1.2 Why were you interested in conservancies?

I became interested in conservancies in 2007 when I was learning about ‘Wildlife Management Areas’ in Tanzania. These areas managed for wildlife by the local community. The idea is that local communities should benefit from the wildlife they live alongside. There are Wildlife Management

4

Areas around the Serengeti National Park but these weren’t working very well. At the time I kept hearing about the success of community run conservancies in Namibia and later I found out that Kenya had conservancies too. I decided to find out more.

My initial research showed that in Namibia communal conservancies had expanded rapidly in the last two decades. By 2010 Etosha National Park was linked to the Skeleton Coast National Park through communal conservancies. Wild animals were no longer stranded in national park ‘islands’, at risk of being shot as soon as they stepped outside the sanctuary, but could move freely from one national park to another through conservancies – this is an astonishing achievement. Equally intriguing was the fact that these conservancies are managed by local communities and their creation has allowed local people to continue living in rural areas rather than migrate to urban areas in search of work.

The success of conservancies interests me, because in my opinion Scotland needs to find new ways to conserve nature in the 21st century. The methods we used in 20th century are not going to be enough, and we need to look for new ways. Scotland has already started testing ways to improve connectivity between sites and ways to involve local communities in ‘landscape scale conservation’. However it is always worthwhile to find out what happens in other countries. Therefore I applied to the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust for a travel grant. The Trust generously awarded me a travelling fellowship to go and find out more about conservancies in Namibia and Kenya.

Eighteen months later I abandoned my job, office, desk and computer and 8-6 routine and set off on a voyage of discovery through Africa in an Isuzu Trooper. After six months of travelling and many adventures I returned to Scotland in November 2011. At the end of the trip I know a huge amount about conservancies and finding the words to articulate the lessons learned concisely and coherently in this report has been a major challenge.

1.3 What did you find out about conservancies during your travels? I found out an enormous amount about conservancies, the people who manage them, the people who support them and the wildlife that lives in them, but to keep this report readable I have tried to focus on a few key points, namely

1. Voluntary. Conservancies have developed voluntarily (non-statutory), local communities have to ‘opt in’ to form a conservancy. They grow from the ‘bottom-up’ and aren’t imposed by the government ‘top down’.

2. Governance & Support. A communal conservancy in Africa is run by a locally elected management committee or board. A private conservancy is usually run by boards too. Conservancies are not managed by government organisations. NGOs are instrumental in helping local communities set up conservancies and providing training and support. The NGOs obtain funds from donors (rarely government) to support activities in conservancies.

3. Benefits for People. The philosophy underpinning communal conservancies is local people should benefit from local wildlife. People benefit in various ways including jobs, new business opportunities, extra income, training and development of new skills. These benefits allow local people to continue to live in rural areas, they don’t have to migrate to towns and cities in search of work.

4. Benefits for Wildlife. Conservancies provide extra space where wildlife can live. Before conservancies were established wildlife was not welcome on pastoral land; wild animals were poached or poisoned. Nowadays wild animals graze alongside domestic livestock inside conservancies and people are more tolerant of the herbivore competition for grass and water and of predators like lions and leopards because they bring tourist dollars.

5. The Future. The future of conservancies is being debated and looks very positive in both Namibia and Kenya. But, it is important to realise that the purpose of a conservancy is not

5

the same as a protected area like a national park. Conservancies do not replace protected areas like national parks, they complement them.

Triple bottom line. The ‘triple bottom line’ is used by sustainability experts to measure success in environmental and social terms as well in as financial terms. The triple bottom line replaces the more conventional business approach where profit alone is used to measure success. Although no standard way to measure the successes of conservancies has been agreed, it is clear that the local people benefit (socially), the wildlife benefits (environmentally) and the best conservancies also make a profit (financially).

1.4 Can Scotland learn from conservancies?

Yes, Scotland can learn from conservancies in Africa. I don’t think we can replicate conservancies in Scotland exactly but we might be able to create something similar. Obviously our wildlife is not as rich and diverse as that remaining in Africa, but tourists love visiting Scotland for its wild beauty.

In many ways some of the large Scottish estates are not unlike the private conservancies in Africa. We don’t have anything equivalent to the communal conservancies but the Scottish government is supportive of local communities buying land.

Private estates in the Highlands tend to have ‘trophy’ hunting for deer or grouse based on Victorian traditions. Perhaps we should learn to manage wild animals sustainably and move towards more sustainable consumption based not just on trophies, but also on meat and other animal products.

We have the Scottish Rural Development Programme. In the past such programmes largely supported farmers to produce food but now they have more flexibility to support other rural dwellers and communities too. The number of people employed in farming the land continues to decrease, so job creation continues to be a big issue in rural communities. Perhaps we should look for opportunities to make greater use of indigenous plants? We use trees for timber and firewood but we don’t use many plants for non-food uses for baskets or cloth, medicinal uses, or health and beauty products, or dyes – although we used to in the past. This multiple use of natural resources requires a much broader based knowledge base than just farming for food, so perhaps we should look again at more collective ownership of land and natural resources and re-discover some lost knowledge and skills.

If somehow we could combine more sustainable use of natural resources, as in African conservancies, then perhaps our wildlife numbers would increase too and our wildlife would no longer be confined to our protected area islands. We must find new ways for the 21st century, so perhaps conservancies should be considered an option for Scotland.

The journey – on the road

6

2 Introduction to Protected Areas

2.1 What is a Protected Area?

‘Protected area’ is a generic term for an area where nature is protected. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature defines a protected area as “A clearly defined geographical space, recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values”.

‘Protected areas are essential for biodiversity conservation. They are the cornerstones of virtually all national and international conservation strategies, set aside to maintain functioning natural ecosystems, to act as refuges for species and to maintain ecological processes that cannot survive in most intensely managed landscapes and seascapes.’1

Most countries, including Scotland, Namibia and Kenya, have a confusing array of protected areas. They have been designated at different times for different purposes - national parks, game reserves, nature reserves, forest reserves, biosphere reserves etc, etc. ‘Conservancy’ is a relatively new kind of protected area which has appeared in the last two decades in Africa.

One of the interesting things about conservancies is that they have grown up ‘voluntarily’ (from the bottom up); they are not imposed by the government (top down) as was the way with most 20th century wildlife designations. This seems counter-intuitive in a world with a rapidly expanding population and increasing pressures on land.

2.2 Protected Areas in Namibia, Kenya and Scotland

Scotland, Namibia and Kenya all have several different types of statutory protected areas for wildlife, (ie areas protected by law) with different rules and regulations that have evolved over a number of years.

Namibia has statutory national parks, game parks, nature parks and recreation areas and various protected forests

Kenya has national parks and national reserves (formerly game reserves) and various protected forests.

Scotland has ‘sites of special scientific interest’ (SSSIs); this is the basic building block with other designations superimposed on top if site qualifies as European importance for birds as ‘special protection area’ (SPA) and/or for European habitats as a ‘special areas of conservation’ (SAC) and/or ‘national nature reserve’ (NNR) and/or various other designations. In Scotland, as in much of Europe, national parks are designated to protect outstanding landscapes as much as wildlife.

2.3 What is a conservancy?

There is no universally agreed definition of a ‘conservancy’, any more than there a universally agreed definition of a ‘national park’. To overcome this, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature has described six categories of protected area, namely

Category Ia: Strict nature reserve

Category Ib: Wilderness

1 Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. Dudley, N. (Editor) (2008).

7

Category II: National Park

Category III: Natural monument or feature

Category IV: Habitat/species management area

Category V: Protected landscape/seascape

Category VI: Protected area with sustainable use of natural resources

Most African National Parks are category II. The primary objective of such areas is ‘to protect natural biodiversity along with its underlying ecological structure and supporting environmental processes, and to promote education and recreation.’ In contrast most national parks in Europe are category V ie protected landscapes.

Most African conservancies are category VI. The primary objective of such areas is ‘to protect natural ecosystems and use natural resources sustainably, when conservation and sustainable use can be mutually beneficial.’

Conservancies are not the same as national parks. In conservancies people live alongside wildlife and harvest natural resources sustainably. In contrast national parks are places primarily places for wildlife to live in not for people to live in. My view is that these two different approaches are complementary, they aren’t alternatives – conservancies should not replace national parks but sit alongside them.

2.4 Governance of protected areas

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature recognises four broad types of governance of protected areas:

A. Governance by government

B. Shared governance

C. Private governance

D. Governance by indigenous peoples and local communities

National parks and game reserves in Africa are generally set up and run by government organisations on land owned by the state – type A.

There are two very distinct types of conservancy;

Communal/community conservancies set up on communal land and managed by local communities. Type D

Private/freehold conservancies set up on private land, usually across several adjacent landholdings, run by private individuals, companies or trusts. Type C.

Conservancies are not managed by the government.

The purpose of my journey was to find out more about communal conservancies, I didn’t set out to learn about private conservancies because I did not know much about them, but I’ve included a few comments about them in this report as I picked up information on my journey.

2.5 Origins/history of conservancies

Conservancies are quite a new type of protected area having appeared in the last couple of decades. Their origins can be traced to the polarised debate, started in the 70s and 80s, about who should be responsible for conserving wildlife. On one hand conservationists fought hard to set aside land where wild animals could live freely in the wild and not be killed; usually such areas were established by law and run by the government. Social scientists, on the other hand, accused conservationists of

8

‘fortress conservation’ - displacing and excluding local people from using ‘their’ land and ‘their natural resources’. The publication ‘Whose Eden? An overview of community approaches to wildlife management’ published by the International Institute for Environment and Development describes these arguments.

The war of words continues between these two extremes to this day, but today there are many projects bridging the gap and involving local people with wildlife conservation. The communal conservancies in Namibia and Kenya are good examples - local communities are allowed to use ‘their’ wildlife and natural resources sustainably. However conservancies do not serve the same purpose as national parks and are not a replacement for them.

2.6 Conservancies - Benefits for People

Communal conservancies - The philosophy behind communal conservancies is that local people should benefit from local wildlife and natural resources. Local people use the natural resources in conservancies sustainably using modern business principles. Benefits include jobs, extra income, new business opportunities, training opportunities, acquisition of new skills, all of which allow people to stay in rural areas rather than migrate to urban areas.

Private conservancies - The purpose of setting up private conservancies (as far as I understand) seems to be founded to business and economics. Private conservancies seem to be formed because they help improve wildlife management and enhance profits (or reduce losses) for the landowners.

More people live on the land and derive benefit in communal conservancies than in private conservancies.

2.7 Conservancies - Benefits for Wildlife

Wild animals benefit because conservancies provide extra space for them to live. Often conservancies are adjacent to national parks or state run protected areas; thus they provide ‘buffer areas’ around state protected areas, others create ‘wildlife corridors’ or ‘stepping stones’ connecting state protected areas. Such land is essential for grazing/browsing animals which have to range widely to find food, especially in drought-prone semi-arid areas. Herds of grazing animals, eg zebra, may have to move considerable distances to find where rains have fallen and grass is growing. Elephants too forage over huge areas so confining them to small protected areas can result in habitat destruction. Outside conservancies, where wildlife has no economic value, wild animals are at much greater risk because local people are far less tolerant of wildlife.

It will always be difficult for man to live alongside some animals and one of the most contentious issues in and around conservancies is ‘human-wildlife conflict’.

2.8 Conservancies - Sustainable use and Triple Bottom line

The triple bottom line is used by sustainability experts. It replaces the single bottom line namely ‘profit’ used in the business world. The triple bottom line measures environmental and social gain as well as financial gain. Communal conservancies are an excellent example of sustainable management of natural resources.

I made no attempt to systematically record or quantify the triple bottom line of the conservancies I visited, but it is obvious that conservancies deliver far more than economic benefit. Socially people benefit from jobs, training in a variety of topics, help and advice on business ventures etc. Environmentally wildlife gains from having space to live and the environment is not man-modified for intensive agriculture, mining or industry.

9

Conservancies may work better where the human population is lower; conservancies in sparsely populated Kunene region seemed to work better than those in the densely populated Caprivi region.

2.9 Conclusion

In conclusion the main points are

Conservancies are a new kind of protected area which emerged in the last quarter of the last century, long after governments around the world had established National Parks and similar protected areas.

Conservancies do not replace protected areas run by the government like National Parks, they sit alongside and complement them. It is a case of national AND local wildlife management initiatives (and/and), not EITHER national parks OR conservancies(either/or).

There are two major types of conservancies - communal conservancies run by local

communities and private conservancies run by private of landowners or a company.

Local communities or private landowners establish conservancies voluntarily; the government does not force conservancies on local people mandatorily.

The IUCN categories overcome the problems with defining protected areas like national

parks and conservancies; in IUCN terms African national parks tend to be category II, whilst

many African conservancies are category VI.

Namibia allows hunting of wild animals (sustainably) in conservancies; Kenya does not allow

wildlife to be hunted anywhere in the country.

Local people can use natural resources sustainably in conservancies whereas people can’t

generally harvest natural resources inside national parks.

Farming and livestock grazing is usually prohibited inside national parks but in conservancies

local people can grow crops and graze livestock but they have let wildlife live there too;

compensation schemes help with human-wildlife conflict inside conservancies.

Conservancies are often on semi-arid grazing land where other land use options are limited.

Often these lands are inhabited by nomadic pastoralists grazing their livestock.

The next section looks at conservancies in Namibia, the following at conservancies in Kenya and the final section at what lessons Scotland can learn from conservancies in Africa.

Pastoral communities - Maasai love their cattle

10

3 Conservancies in Namibia

3.1 Namibia - setting the scene

Politics - The Republic of Namibia became an independent country in 1990; it emerged from South West Africa which was administered by South Africa for many years.

People- Namibia has one of the lowest population densities in the world. The population of 2 million people inhabit a total land area of 823,300 km². Eighty-seven percent of the population is black; about half the population belong to the Ovambo tribe, the rest belong to a variety of tribal and ethnic groups including Kavango, San bushmen, Herero and Himba peoples, Damara and Nama peoples, coloureds and whites.

Economy - The economy is heavily dependent on mining, fishing, and cattle-ranching. Namibia produces only half the grain consumed by its population. Sixty-five percent of food consumed by Namibians is imported. Ninety-four percent of rural households identify agriculture as their main activity, but it makes a minimal contribution to their income. Crop farming contributes no cash income to most households in Namibia.

Habitats - Namibia is the most arid country in sub-Saharan Africa. The land is fragile and land productivity is low. The main habitats types are

dry savanna covers 64% of the country’s land surface,

dry woodlands 20%, and

desert vegetation 16%.

3.2 Who owns the land in Namibia?

Land ownership is a contentious issue in many countries. In 1990 Namibia emerged from a century of colonial rule with a strategy to correct the unequal distribution of land that had deprived indigenous Namibians of rights to land and resources. At Independence, roughly 4,000 white commercial farmers owned Namibia’s 5,000 commercial farms, each averaging 7,200 hectares and primarily dedicated to raising livestock. The remainder of Namibia’s population of 1.5 million people (mostly black) was crowded onto Namibia’s communal land, existing on a mix of subsistence farming, livestock rearing, hunting and gathering, and remittances from abroad.

Today land is held by -

The government/state owns all communal land, holding it in trust for indigenous tribes. The state also owns nature reserves, game parks, military bases, and some urban land.

Ownership/freehold tenure. Forty-four percent of Namibia’s land is privately owned. Prior to Independence in 1990, all commercial farmland in Namibia was held freehold, mostly by white commercial farmers with large livestock farms. Rights to this land have remained freehold, with some black Namibians purchasing farms under subsidized loan programs.

Communal tenure. Thirty-nine percent of Namibia’s land is communal land. Communal land is owned by the state and held in trust for local communities. Traditional authorities and Land Boards administer the communal land, allocating land for residences, agriculture, and other uses recognized by the Minister. Communal land cannot be sold.

Leaseholds. Common law and the Communal Land Reform Act allow for land leases.

11

Conservancies. Conservancies can be established on commercial farms and in communal areas such that owners gain rights to wildlife and tourism activities on that land. Conservancies need clearly defined boundaries, a constitution, defined membership, and demonstrated ability to manage finances. Once established they become a legal entity.

3.3 Protected Areas in Namibia

Namibia has a good network of national parks, game parks as well as recreation areas. These state protected areas are run by the Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET). Their main purpose is to protect biodiversity; wildlife is completely protected inside national parks with no hunting allowed. They cover about 17% of the country.

List of Protected Areas in Namibia and links to descriptions.

This Map of Protected Areas in Namibia shows National Parks and Game Parks, and communal conservancies and private conservancies.

However, more than 88% of Namibia’s wildlife is found outside national parks2. The government owns the wild animals in Namibia. Conservancies provide land where wildlife can live so helping enhance Namibia’s wildlife populations; the government permits regulated hunting and harvesting inside conservancies using quotas.

There are private wildlife reserves too like the NamibRand bordering the Namib-Naukluft National Park. This private nature reserve of 172,200ha was set up by businessmen who bought 13 neighbouring former livestock farms and set about ‘re-wilding’ the farmland and restoring natural habitats. The nature reserve is run as a business.

There are also game /wildlife ranches. I spent a month volunteering at Kuzikus, a former cattle ranch which is now managed for wildlife. The owners have successfully re-established many indigenous grazers and browsers such as springbok, oryx and zebra. Thirty years ago the farm had 300 head of cattle, it now has 3,000 wild animals! That’s ten times as many, this is more efficient because the herbivores graze and browse different plants at different heights. There are no predators though because neighbours kill/poison predators like leopards and hyenas as soon as they stray onto cattle and sheep ranches.

In 2009 the percentage of Namibia’s land area covered by

State protected areas was 16%,

communal conservancies was 16.5%,

2 An Overview of Freehold Conservancies. CANAM. 2010.

Sign celebrating Etosha National Park

Springbok in Etosha National Park

12

community forests another 0.2%, and

freehold conservancies a further 6.1%

conservation management was an objective on private reserves and game farms but their total extent was not known.

Therefore in total conservation management is an objective on over 40% of land in Namibia

3.4 Conservancies in Namibia

Before visiting Namibia I knew about communal conservancies, but I did not realise that there were lots of private freehold conservancies too.

3.4.1 Communal Conservancies

The main purpose of my trip was to find out more about communal conservancies. These have expanded rapidly in the last 20 years. The first 4 were gazetted in 1994; but by the end of 2011 there were 66 communal conservancies, covering 146,267 km² in total, with a further 18 under development. Communal conservancies vary in size; the largest in N#a-Jaqna at 9,120 km², (nb # is the ‘letter/symbol’ used to represent one of the click sounds ), the smallest is Joseph Mbambangandu at only 43 km². On my trip I managed to visit 10 conservancies.

Map of communal conservancies.

Namibia has gained a worldwide reputation for its innovative approaches of linking conservation to poverty alleviation through its communal area conservancy program and pro-poor tourism initiatives. This reputation has been founded on policy adjustments that have devolved rights of wildlife and tourism to many of Namibia’s most marginalized and poorest communities, providing communities with unprecedented incentives to manage and conserve their areas and wildlife. This has resulted in mass recoveries of wildlife populations outside national parks and reduced poaching throughout Namibia. The conservation success in communal lands has also unlocked enormous tourism development opportunities. These are poised to provide substantial employment and livelihood benefits to rural communities.

3.4.2 Private Conservancies

Freehold conservancies are different but I only passed through them while in Namibia, so I can only refer to published information about them in this report.

Individual landowners voluntarily agree to collaborate and work together to manage wildlife and natural resources across their combined land holdings as a freehold conservancy. I did not include

Doro !nwas Conservancy

Purros Conservancy – Himba lady with cattle

13

freehold conservancies in my travel plans because I didn’t realise how extensive they are before I arrived in Namibia. CANAM is the Conservancy Association of Namibia, although open to all its members are freehold conservancies.

The first freehold conservancy was formed in 1992. There are currently 23 in Namibia. The largest is Kalkfeld conservancy, made up of 86 farms and covering nearly 4,500km²; the smallest is Kaoko-Etosha conservancy with 13 farms covering 710km².

Map showing freehold conservancies.

3.5 Conservancies. Voluntary. Bottom-up, not top-down.

One of the things that intrigued me about conservancies is that they are voluntary. Both communal and private conservancies are formed ‘bottom-up’, they are not imposed ‘top-down’ by the government. Both types are both created when self-identified groups of people choose to work together to establish a conservancy. Local communities voluntarily ‘opt in’ to set up a communal conservancy. Private farmers also get together voluntarily to form a freehold conservancy.

The government has set out conditions which communal conservancies must fulfil in order to be officially gazetted as a conservancy, namely

the boundary is clear and agreed with neighbours;

the membership is defined and there is committee to represent members

there is a constitution which guides how the conservancy functions

there is a plan setting out how the benefits will be distributed equitably

there is a land use plan which has to be approved

Local communities do not own the land but the government grants conservancies the rights to sustainably harvest natural resources, including wild animals, on the land. NGOs are instrumental in setting up communal conservancies; they work with communities to ensure conservancies meet the conditions proscribed by government for registration.

The government has established a similar framework for the registration of freehold conservancies. CANAM states that to establish a freehold conservancy the main actions are

determine membership and collect relevant information on members

register the conservancy as a company

set up the constitution

develop a management plan

register with the Ministry of Environment and Tourism

‘The increase in both consumptive and non-consumptive tourism over the past two decades has also supported the formation of freehold conservancies, persuading landowners of both the value of wildlife and the need for development of continuous tracks of land on which to manage the wildlife. Namibia’s eco-tourism industry focuses on conservation interest points. Environmentally and socially aware tourists visit Namibia to experience its unique landscapes, diverse wildlife and rich cultures.

The CANAM definition - “a conservancy is a legally protected area of a group of land-occupiers practising co-operative management based on a sustainable utilisation strategy, promotion of the conservation of natural resources and wildlife, and the desire to reinstate the original biodiversity with the basic goal of sharing resources amongst all members”.

14

Though the national parks and reserves are a focal point, guest farms and hunting farms are increasingly common in commercial areas, offering tourism and hunting experiences, while communal conservancies offer dramatic landscapes and wildlife in less managed habitat for more adventurous eco-tourists. The promotion of eco-tourism though a conservancy management plan is a complement to agriculture across larger area through mixed-use systems’.3

3.6 Conservancies - Governance and support

I met various NGOs which help local communities establish communal conservancies and register them with the government. The NGOs include Integrated Rural Development and Nature Conservation (IRDNC), World Wide Fund for Nature Namibia (WWF Namibia), Namibian Association of CBNRM Support Organisations (NASCO), and Namibian Nature Foundation (NNF).

The NGOs work with local communities to determine the boundary of a communal conservancy and set up the internal governance. Once the conservancy is registered, NGOs continue to support conservancies by providing training and capacity building, help with governance and legal advice, assisting with research into potential new products, processing and markets, and obtaining funds from donors.

Conservancies are governed by a management committee; the committee’s job is to take decisions in the interest of members, manage the income and expenditure and manage the conservancy’s relationship with business partners such as tourism and hunting operators.

NGOs have encountered good and bad governance in the communal conservancies; however they are optimistic that the badly governed ones will improve over time because members exert pressure on leaders when things are not going well. They acknowledge that good leadership is a pre-requisite for success.

Private conservancies obtain help from different sources. Each must develop a constitution setting out how the conservancy will function. Members elect a management committee/Board and chairperson, and create other sub-committees as needed. In most private conservancies members pay a subscription fee per member or per hectare, in 2009 the per member fee ranged from N$350 – N$1200 and the per hectare fee from N$0.02 – N$0.15/ha. Some conservancies also make a charge a utilisation fee for trophy animal taken by hunters eg N$80 for a kudu bull and N$10 for small game, and varying rates for removing animals to reduce stocking rates eg N$20 for a kudu, oryx or hartebeest.

3 The Conservancy Association of Namibia. An Overview of Freehold Conservancies. 2010. Ed Danica Shaw and

Laurie Maker.

Garth Owen-Smith founder of IRDNC presenting

a copy of his book ‘An Arid Eden’ to Isaac.

Isaac with John proud of Torra Conservancy

15

I presume the governance and management of freehold conservancies must be much simpler than communal conservancies because far fewer people are involved. Working with communities is invariably time consuming and demanding because of the multiplicity of interests and views in a community compared with a business.

3.7 Conservancies - Benefits for People

One NGO publication4 states that ‘the success of conservation outside state protected areas depends on the benefits that local people gain from the natural resources being conserved. The benefits need to

substantially outweigh the costs associated with conservation such as living with potentially destructive wildlife and

be competitive with other forms of land use

This makes it economically attractive for communities to set aside land as a communal conservancy for management of natural resources and wildlife conservation.’

Members derive benefit from their communal conservancy in various ways, both individually and collectively as a community. The benefits to people are they can

maintain their traditional pastoral way of life in a modern world

obtain help with human-wildlife conflict both mitigation and compensation

obtain jobs working in tourism, in the conservancy as managers, administrators and game guards, hunting guides

earn extra income by harvesting and selling natural resources such as honey, silk cocoons, aloe, nettles etc. NGOs help local people add value to local products by connecting then with new markets.

they can obtain training. Managing a conservancy is a complex business, so NGOs spend a lot of effort training people in basic business management skills - running meetings, record and book keeping, reporting, public speaking for women as well as wildlife management and monitoring . One NGO officer admitted that community elders were usually better at ‘conflict management’ than they were.

receive a share of the profits from the conservancy

they take a share of the game meat from trophy hunting distributed among communities

The figures from research in 2009 showed

o The most significant benefit to an individual within a conservancy was having a job. Tourism created the most jobs - over 1000 tourism jobs (¾ full-time and ¼ part-time). Local people were employed in many different roles and a few had risen through the ranks into managerial roles in the tourist industry.

o The conservancies themselves were the next biggest employer. Over 400 staff were paid directly by conservancy funds, including game guards and conservancy managers. A further 150 staff were employed with their salaries paid by donors.

o Trophy hunting provided employment for 14 full time and 53 part time staff. o Harvesting of indigenous plant products gave opportunities for community members,

especially women, to earn extra cash to supplement other income. This can include collecting grass for thatching, harvesting tubers of devils claw (a herbal medicine used to relieve pain), collecting Commiphora resin (used in perfumes), collecting seed (distilled for oil) or collecting cocoons from the Gonometa moth (spun into silk).

o Producing crafts for sale to tourists also generated income.

4 Namibia’s Communal Conservancies. A Review of progress and challenges in 2009. NASCO 2010.

16

Some benefits accrue to the community rather than individuals, eg

Some conservancies have decided to invest their profits in community projects like schools, hospitals, projects to combat HIV AIDs, water and sanitation projects or wildlife mitigation measures such as elephant-proof watering holes rather than distribute profits to members.

support from NGOs with everything from setting up and managing a conservancy, business skills, marketing, research on new products, legal assistance for negotiating contracts and many more

The most financially successful conservancies reportedly invest their profits in the stock market! (pers com)

Pride in conservancy – we met some people who were truly proud of ‘their’ conservancy. At Weldersend John banged his fist on his heart and proclaimed how proud he was of Torra conservancy.

Love of wildlife –in Purros conservancy Edison said he regarded the desert elephants like his family – he knew them individually and was really upset if anything happened to them. In Kunene many people had an affinity with wildlife, but not everyone felt the same way especially about elephants in Caprivi.

3.7.1 Conservancies – Disadvantages for people - human-wildlife conflict

The biggest problem of living close to wild animals is ‘human-wildlife conflict’. This includes predators killing livestock, herbivores destroying crops or transmitting disease, and damage to human lives and infrastructure by wild animals. The communal conservancies have a scheme whereby members can apply for compensation for damage caused by wildlife; this has standard rates for losing a goat to a leopard or losing a field of maize to elephants.

These moth cocoons can kill cattle.

They are be collected in the Kalahari

and turned silk.

Seed collected for

extracting oil

Resin from Commiphora ready to

be distilled into perfume essence

Eric and Lucas are employed by Mayuni

Conservancy to run Nambwa campsite

Bwabata National Park

Elephants in Bwabata National Park.

17

There is an ongoing battle between man and elephant, man is constantly trying outwit these intelligent and very large animals. In the densely-populated Caprivi strip, people in the Mayuni conservancy complained to us how they hated elephants and hated the conservancy; but the level of hatred subsided significantly after they were paid their compensation. Sometimes new thinking has provided solutions eg designing an elephant-proof water supply for people and livestock whilst providing elephants with their own water supply, and scaring elephants using a variety of techniques such as charging them with fire, or trying to segregate them using chilli fences, bee fences or electric fences. In Purros we stayed at a campsite where the elephants had learned to disconnect the water pipes to obtain a drink of water rather than walk a short distance to dig a hole in the river- bed. The campsite staff were used to this, they simply located the damage and quickly re-connected the pipes, knowing full well it would happen again.

It is inevitable that there will be human-wildlife conflict whether at the boundary of a National Park or inside a conservancy. This problem cannot be ‘solved’, it will not go away, it is going to continue forever, so people will have to keep inventing new ways of adapting to co-exist with wildlife.

3.8 Conservancies - Benefits for wildlife

Extra space. Conservancies, both communal and private, provide a lot of extra space where wild animals can live; in effective they more than double the amount of land set aside for wildlife in state protected areas in Namibia. It is remarkable that ‘conservation management’ is now an objective on 40% of the land in Namibia. It is inconceivable that the government of any country could ever allocate this amount of state land for wildlife management.

Improved Connectivity. Conservancies have also created buffer zones, stepping zones and corridors between state protected areas. Animals once confined to National Park ‘islands’ can now move freely between protected areas. This is especially beneficial for animals which have to move to find food, especially grazing in arid areas.

Numbers. Reports have been published showing how wildlife numbers have increased in both the communal conservancies and the private conservancies. There is no doubt that the conservancies have been responsible for an increase in wildlife numbers. They have also allowed species like lions to re-colonise parts of NW Namibia they have not occupied for more than a generation. Natural factors such as recovery from drought have also helped.

Density. As we travelled through Namibia, we saw wild animals in conservancies; the animals probably would not be there unless it was a conservancy. However, visually it appeared that the density of wildlife in conservancies was lower than in the state protected areas, but I have no way to verify this observation. The most important test will be if the numbers in conservancies can continue to increase or be maintained for the long term – conservation is long term.

Hunting. Hunting is not generally allowed in state protected areas but in conservancies wild animals can be hunted or cropped in accordance with a quota/permit system agreed with the government. The quota for each conservancy is based on regular monitoring and is set at a level that is sustainable (although this can be tricky). Wildlife/game scouts play a pivotal role in monitoring and helping prevent poaching.

Four types of hunting are allowed

Trophy hunting for tusks or horns, skins

Own-use hunting for traditional authorities, cultural festivals and individual households

Shoot-and-sell hunting – conservancies can sell meat from surplus wildlife stocks outside the conservancy

Live capture and sale to other conservancies and private landowners. (I was very surprised by how much frequently wildlife is moved around in Namibia)

18

Combining livestock grazing with wild animals. In conservancies (unlike most state protected areas) people husband domestic livestock amongst the wild animals. At low (human) densities people can co-exist with wildlife, but as numbers of people increase so do numbers of livestock (cattle, sheep, goats) increasing the competition for grazing, transmission of disease and predation so reducing people’s tolerance of wildlife. Finding ways of people to live alongside wildlife, rather than exterminate it, is a fantastic achievement by conservancies.

Species schemes. Namibia has developed a ground breaking custodianship scheme for managing the endangered black rhinos. The government gives black rhinos to approved conservancies and ranches to look after. Kuzikus, where I volunteered in May 2011, had 10 black rhinos that belonged to the government.

I also came across interesting work on living with cheetahs and hyenas but there is no space to go into detail here.

Harvesting natural plants. Although various plant material is harvested as far as I am aware the government does not have a quota/permit system to prevent over-harvesting and ensure sustainable harvesting for the long term.

3.9 Conservancies - Triple bottom line.

There are no agreed standard measures to record sustainability of conservancies in environmental, social and economic terms. However it seems to me that conservancies, especially communal conservancies, are a win, win, win story.

In my opinion the main environmental successes of conservancies are

the natural environment remains, it is not converted to other land uses such as intensive farming, mining or industry etc

they provide significant extra land for wildlife to live on - together communal and private conservancies occupy 22% of Namibia, adding to the 16% in state protected areas,

wildlife numbers are increasing and the range of some species is also increasing in Namibia bolstered by conservancies

In my opinion the main social successes of conservancies are

nearly quarter of a million people, 20% of the rural population, live in a communal conservancy

providing employment in rural areas where jobs are scarce

women are encouraged by NGOs to participate in conservancy business to improve gender balance

training and capacity building is provided by NGOs on a variety of topics

attitudes to wildlife have changed – tolerance has replaced hostility

The main financial successes of community based natural resource management are

directly and indirectly contributed more than N$ 266 million to the country’s economy.

benefits to rural people – those who live with wildlife – amounted to more than N$42 million.5

economic benefits to communities have increased from less than N$600,000 in 1998 to N$41.9 million (US$ 5.7 million) in 2008, with primary growth coming from the tourism industry

there are 29 formal joint-venture lodges and campsite partnerships within the communal conservancy tourism sector and a further 15 in development

5 Communal conservancies: A Review of progress and challenges in 2009 and 2008. NASCO.

19

joint ventures conservancies providing 856 beds, 789 full-time jobs and over 250 seasonal positions.

the private sector has invested more than N$ 145 million (US$ 19 million) in tourism in communal conservancies since 1998.

more than half the conservancies eared some income in 2009, with 9 conservancies earning more than N$ 0.5m in cash, 13 earning between N$0.1 -0.5m and 12 earning less than N$0.1m

3.10 Conclusion

Conservancies have come a long way in less than twenty years and their future in Namibia seems secure. There are 18 new conservancies under development and NGOs continue to work to consolidate the 66 established conservancies.

People and wildlife benefit from conservancies. The financial success of a conservancy depends mainly on the income that can be generated from tourism and hunting.

There are issues that need to be addressed in future – increasing income, reducing dependence on tourism, equitable sharing of benefits, improving governance, enhancing capacity and ensuring the harvesting of animals and plants is truly sustainable. There are different challenges facing conservancies in the sparsely populated Kunene versus the densely populated Caprivi strip. But for the foreseeable the future conservancies in Namibia look very healthy - this is good for people and good for wildlife.

Zebra at home in Etosha National Park

20

4 Conservancies in Kenya

4.1 Kenya – setting the scene

Politics - Kenya became an independent republic in 1963. The country is 580,000km², more than 7 times the size of Scotland.

People - The population is 40 million made up of 42 tribal groups; 78% of the population is rural.

Economy - In 2008, agriculture makes up 21%, Kenya’s of GDP, industry 14%, and services 65%. A large portion (12%) of the economy is based on tourism.

Habitats – Kenya is very varied with fertile coastal plains, high mountains, the rift valley and vast tracts of arid and semi-arid lands especially in the north.

4.2 Who owns the land in Kenya?

Land and politics have long been entwined in Kenya.6 Currently, the main classifications of land ownership are government, private (freehold) and trust land held by councils for the benefit of a community. The new (2009) National Land Policy designates all land in Kenya as public, private (freehold or leasehold tenure), or community/trust land, which is held, managed and used by a specific community.

Government/state-owned land. Approximately 10% of Kenya’s land is owned by the government including gazetted forests, protected areas and reserves, rivers, and land occupied by government or quasi-government institutions.

Freehold. About 20% of the country is private freehold land held either individually or collectively. Most of the high-value agricultural land has been registered as freehold. Collective freeholds include group ranches established under the Land (Group Representatives) Act in 1968. The Act recognizes customary tenure of pastoralist groups and grants every member of a group an equal, undivided interest in the group ranch.

Trust land. About 70% is trust land. Trust lands derive from the 1915 amendment to the Crown Lands Ordinance of 1902, which converted all native reserve lands to trust lands and (at Independence) vested county councils with the power to hold and alienate land for the benefit of resident communities

In Kenya, as in Namibia, there are communal conservancies on trust land and group ranches and private conservancies on freehold land. The ‘conservancy’ label is used very freely in Kenya; some places appear to have re-branded themselves as conservancies with little change in management.

4.3 Protected Areas in Kenya

About 8% of the Kenya’s land mass is protected area for wildlife conservation. Kenya’s 23 terrestrial national parks are administered by the Kenya Wildlife Service whilst the 28 terrestrial national reserves are administered by districts (currently County Councils). In national parks there is complete protection of natural resources and the only activities allowed are tourism and research. In

6 Land tenure, land use and sustainability in Kenya; towards innovative use of property rights in wildlife

management. Dr Patricia Kameri-Mbote. Working paper to International Environmental Law Research Centre. 2005.

21

national reserves human activities are allowed under specific conditions for instance firewood collection in terrestrial reserves.

It is estimated that more than 70% of the wildlife lives outside the national parks and reserves. This is because most of the protected areas are not fully fenced so wildlife can move in and out of these areas in search of pasture and water during certain periods within the year. When they move out of the protected areas, they interact with people on private and community land causing human wildlife conflict.

As in Namibia the Kenyan government owns the wildlife, but unlike Namibia hunting is banned and has been illegal since 1977.

List of national parks in Kenya

4.4 Conservancies in Kenya

The word ‘conservancy’ is used in several different ways in Kenya, this makes it hard to pin down accurate facts and figures about conservancies. For example the Mara Conservancy is an organisation set up to run the Mara Triangle, part of the Maasai Mara national reserve, on behalf of the Trans Mara Council. The Nakuru Conservancy is effectively a wildlife forum for landowners in the Nakuru-Naivasha area.

4.4.1 Communal Conservancies

There are 17 community conservancies covering an area of more than 5,000km² in Northern Kenya. The Northern Rangelands Trust is a community-led initiative working with community conservancies. Its members represent politically and socially marginalized pastoralist communities, who are predominantly dependent on a livestock-based livelihood system. Its purpose is to develop the capacity and self-sufficiency of community organizations in biodiversity conservation, natural resource management and natural resource based enterprises. This role is similar to that of the organisation Integrated Rural development and Nature Conservation in Namibia.

Map of community conservancies in northern Kenya. Descriptions of community conservancies

4.4.2 Private Conservancies

As in Namibia, private conservancies also play a significant role in wildlife conservation and management of natural resources in Kenya. Some of the large colonial estates have evolved stepwise from the cattle ranches where wildlife was not welcome for most of last century, through wildlife sanctuaries in the later years of the 20th century, to a conservancy having a combination of wildlife with cattle and sustainable management of natural resource in the 21st century.

Lewa Downs for example was a cattle ranch for more than 50 years where wildlife was viewed as unwelcome competition for grazing. For 10 years part became a rhino sanctuary, then in 1995 the Lewa Wildlife Conservancy was registered as a not for profit organisation managing wildlife and cattle in a conservancy.

Ol Pejeta also used to be a cattle ranch. It then became Sweetwaters Game Reserve for wildlife without any cattle, but is now the Ol Pejeta Conservancy where cattle are managed alongside the wildlife.

Gabriel showing a map of the

Northern Rangelands Trust

22

The Delamere estate used to be a large cattle estate too but is now being transformed into the Soysambu Conservancy. “The financial challenges of continuing Soysambu as only a cattle ranch are insurmountable with the pressures on the wildlife in this area due to the escalation in human population and decimation of natural habitat surrounding the area. Soysambu, which plays a major role in the Elmenteita-Nakuru ecosystem, is being transformed into a onservancy to be protected for future generations and to preserve a wildlife corridor from Nakuru to Naivasha. Tourism and enterprise programs are being developed to provide reinvestment in communities and conservation. Massive funding will be needed to help in these efforts along with anti-poaching security, research facilities and wildlife management. There are many serious challenges facing the survival of Soysambu.”

4.5 Conservancies - Voluntary. Bottom-up.

The formation of conservancies in Kenya is voluntary. The government does not exert any pressure on trust/community land or private landowners to establish conservancies.

After I returned home I discovered that the Kenya Wildlife Service had experimented with a scheme similar to a conservancy between 1992 and 2002 but the scheme was discontinued.

The origins of conservancies in Kenya seemed somewhat different to Namibia. After hunting was banned in 1977, private landowners could no longer kill the wild animals that competed with their cattle for grazing and water. Numbers of wild animals increased and the area of land available to them diminished as the human population grew. Private landowners realised that wildlife could make them as much, or more, money than cattle farming. This economic realisation was reinforced by the knowledge that wildlife populations in most of Africa were rapidly declining. Once the conservancy model (wildlife and livestock) was made to work on private land, landowners began to transfer the model to the trust lands/group ranches.

4.6 Conservancies - Governance and support

The Northern Rangelands Trust helps local communities set up and run conservancies. Like their equivalent in Namibia (Integrated Rural Development and Nature Conservation) they will have achieved their aim when they are no longer needed by conservancies.

The governance of community conservancies follows a tried and tested model. Villagers elect representatives to the Board, the Board members select their own chairman and vice chairman, financial officer, tourism officer and chair of the grazing committee (the grazing committee operates in parallel with the Board)

The largest conservancy, Namunyak, is home to 30,000 people and employs 100 security guards plus rangers, drivers etc. There are currently six group ranches included in this conservancy, with Board

Lewa Conservancy (private)

Soysambu Conservancy (private)

23

members being elected from 3x2 group ranches. In 2010 Namunyak had an income of Ksh 13m; the majority coming from the unit with the very profitable Sarara Camp. 40% of the income is retained to cover operating costs, and 60% is returned to the communities to spend on projects they chose themselves.

Namunyak is currently being sub-divided into three separate conservancies - Ngilai, Ndonyio Wasin and Nalowuon - the split separates the 3x2 group ranches. The Northern Rangelands Trust invited me to the meetings where the new Boards were being established for the first two ‘new’ conservancies.

The first meeting was in Ngilai and the elections to the Board went very smoothly and amicably. Unusually the villagers had elected a woman representative, usually women have to be co-opted onto the committee to ensure women are represented.

The second meeting held on the banks of a temporary river in Ndonyio Wasin was very different. The two communities could not agree on the chairman because of one community felt that the chair should alternate, and secondly the same community had sent two people instead of one. These controversies were debated for more than 4 hours by the men, as the river literally dried up. Staff from the Northern Rangelands Trust handled the disputes superbly and resolved the situation to the satisfaction of all. The memory of these two meetings will stay with me forever.

4.7 Conservancies - Benefits for People

There are no published figures in Kenya, but when asked most local people replied that jobs were the biggest benefit from conservancies.

A large number of people are employed in ‘security’ ie as game guards keeping an eye out for poachers and other wildlife problems. Some are also trained as police reservists authorised to carry guns. The radio network is also a key part of managing security in the conservancies.

Many others are employed in tourism, working in lodges and camps or as guides.

The Northern Rangelands Trust also has a trading arm to market the craftwork produced by local women, currently involving 59 women’s groups in 6 conservancies.

In October I volunteered for a company called Desert Edge which delivers the ‘conservation enterprise’ programme for Laikipia Wildlife Forum. The purpose of the programme is to establish an

The only lady elected to the

the Board in Ngilai.

The controversial meeting in Ndonyio Wasin. Debating roles on

the committee as the temporary river dried up

24

ethical plant based trade in Laikipia and Samburu, the programme recently won an award for innovation from USAID. The programme is based on the premise that increasing the value of indigenous plant material through the adoption of ethical trade will provide economic incentives for communities to manage their resources more sustainably. The main activities are

Developing a range of 5-7 selected bio-enterprises

Building capacity of added value chains,

Developing innovative and creative product design

Establishing long term development commercial relationships

Bio-products under development include medicinal/ethno-botanicals, honey, beeswax and apitherapy products, nutraceuticals and body-care products, and essential oil and cold pressed tree seed oils.

During my stay I helped process honey collected by producer groups, helped make nettle tea from nettles collected by women’s groups, attended training courses provided by the bank to producer groups on budget management, worked on trial plots and learned a lot of about how local plants are used locally for medicinal purposes and how this can be turned into a commercial product.

4.7.1 Disadvantages- human-wildlife conflict

Tribal conflict. In northern Kenya I was amazed to learn from staff of the Northern Rangelands Trust that human-wildlife conflict is not the biggest issue they deal with in communal conservancies. Staff spend more time arbitrating between feuding tribal pastoralists (Borana, Maasai, Samburu, Rendille etc) who continue to raid each other’s cattle. Indeed we had to postpone our travel plans through Isiolo for one day because it was unsafe - 6 people were killed in a tribal conflict. However human-wildlife conflict is a major issue.

Lions. Kenya has found novel ways of dealing with conflict with lions. Lions are a big issue in Kenya because of the tradition that moran/warriors have to kill a lion. The Living with Lions organisation has come up with the innovative idea of appointing local Maasai as lion guardians; the lion guardians have been extraordinarily successful at stopping lion killing.

Elephants. The Space for Giants organisation was set up ‘to secure a future for the largest mammals on earth forever, to be enjoyed by humanity forever, by ensuring that they have the space and security to live and move freely in the wild forever’. They advise on different techniques for mitigating human- elephant conflict. Kenya uses elephant-proof fences quite widely to demarcate boundaries, Namibia in contrast was removing fences to allow wild animals free passage.

David bottling honey for supermarkets

Ladies packing nettle tea for supermarkets

25

4.8 Conservancies - Benefits for Wildlife

Extra space and improved connectivity. As in Namibia the creation of conservancies, both communal and private, has provided lots of extra space for wild animals to live in. “Conservancies have also created buffer zones, stepping zones and corridors between state protected areas. Animals once confined to National Park ‘islands’ can now move freely between protected areas. This is especially beneficial for animals which have to move to find food, especially grazing in arid areas. The value of large-scale long-term trend analysis is highlighted in a recent study showing that wildlife on private and community sanctuaries is stable or increasing, in contrast to the declines in protected areas and country-wide. The results of this study and our own findings suggest that parks associated with community and private conservation initiatives do better than parks with no outreach programs. Such evidence points to the need for new policies that combine national, private and community initiatives in order to sustain large free-ranging herbivore populations at an ecosystem and landscape scale.”7

Numbers. Reports have been published showing how wildlife numbers have increased in conservancies. 8

Density. In some conservancies the density of wildlife is high – Laikipia claims a wildlife density second only to Maasai Mara, while in other conservancies wildlife is widely dispersed. Laikipia has diverse and numerous large mammals, including half of Kenya's black rhinos, the second largest population of elephants in Kenya and the globally threatened Grevy's Zebra. But what is perhaps most unusual about the wildlife numbers in Laikipia is that they are stable in the face of a sharp national decline; Laikipia is bucking the trend. The Lakipia Wildlife Forum is concerned about this for two reasons. One, Laikipia has no government designated protected areas. Two, there is no plan for how to ensure this extraordinary wildlife asset can be maintained for future generations in the face of human population growth and land use change. It is for these reasons that the Lakipia Wildlife Forum is developing the Laikipia wildlife conservation strategy.

Hunting. In contrast to Namibia hunting is not allowed in Kenya, it was outlawed in 1977, so Kenya does not have the income from the lucrative trophy hunting trade. Some argue that hunting should be made legal now, but the new Wildlife Bill makes it clear that the policy will not change.

Combining livestock grazing with wild animals. In conservancies (unlike national parks but as in national reserves) pastoralists graze domestic livestock amongst the wild animals. Over-grazing has been a problem for many years all over Laikipia, both on community owned lands and private ranches. It results in increasing bare land and bush across the grasslands or rangelands which threatens the lives of people and livestock. The current solution uses ‘holistic management’ with its two pronged approach of ‘planned grazing’ and ‘bunched grazing’ to tackle the formidable task of bringing life back to bare ground and increasing the health and productivity of the grasslands.

Species schemes. Conservancies like Lewa and Ol Pejeta have intensive programmes to safeguard and breed rhinos, especially black rhinos, whose numbers have been devastated by poaching. Lewa also works to conserve the rare Grevy’s zebra.

Harvesting of natural plants. The Desert Edge bio-trading initiative is exploring the commercial possibilities of a wide range of indigenous species including among others aloe for gels and creams, nettles for tea, seketek as a stimulant, cape chestnut for oils. Interestingly there seemed to be a local market that can be supplied by local producers, a national market in the supermarkets where customers look for a well-labelled and well-packaged product, and lucrative international export

7 Western D, Russell S, Cuthill I (2009) The Status of Wildlife in Protected Areas Compared to Non-Protected Areas of Kenya. PLoS

ONE 4(7): e6140. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0006140 8 Mutu K (2005) Impact of community-based conservation on wildlife biodiversity trends in Kenya. MS thesis, Clarke

University, Worseter, Mass.

26

markets. Reaching the two latter markets requires adding value to the product by processing, packaging and marketing.

Both community and private conservancies clearly benefit wildlife. I suspect that community conservancies benefit more people, ie have a greater social benefit, than the private conservancies. Both are adept at marketing top-end luxury tourist products (but are less concerned about providing affordable campsites for budget travellers like Churchill fellows, so they are difficult for all but the rich to visit)!

4.9 Conservancies - Triple Bottom Line

Conservancies in Kenya brought the same benefits as in Namibia, but no figures have been published to quantify their successes.

Conservancies in Kenya benefit both wildlife and people. They are economically viable, although most private and community conservancies depend on obtaining money from donors to fund special projects.

4.10 Conclusion

The future of conservancies is actively being considered in Kenya. A delegation from Kenya was on a study tour of communal conservancies in Namibia whilst I was in Namibia. Conservancies involve local people and allow them to benefit from the wildlife in their area.

The issues being debated include

whether or not conservancies need to be better enshrined in law

how to diversify the economic base to reduce reliance on top-end tourism

how to share benefits with members more equitably

how to improve governance

the new direction for conservancies given that nothing stands still forever

Conservancies are a very valuable adjunct to, not replacement for, state protected areas like national parks.

Budget training for a honey producer group

27

5 En route – Zambia and Tanzania

I drove from Namibia to Tanzania taking my time and visiting interesting places on the way. The Isuzu Trooper was an unreliable steed and I spent a lot of time in many car workshops too, marvelling at the ability of African mechanics to fix the problems with the car with very limited resources.

5.1 Zambia

Most National Parks in Zambia are run by the Zambian Wildlife Authority. However Kasanka National Park is different, it was the first national park in Zambia under private management. It is a valuable conservation area with diverse flora and fauna including many endangered species and exceptional birdlife. It is run by the Kasanka Trust and is entirely reliant on tourism revenue and charitable funding.

The Kasanka Trust in Zambia is a non-profit charitable institution. The Zambian Trust has responsibility for Park management, community development, and tourism under the terms of the management agreement with the government. Implementation in the Park is through a Park Manager, Community Relations Officer, Projects Coordinator and a team of around 90 locally employed staff.

The Kasanka Trusts in the UK and The Netherlands registered charities, both with a board of trustees. They are primarily concerned with fundraising for activities in Zambia. They also assist with expert advice and procurement of equipment from time to time. All three trusts operate with minimal administrative expenditure, relying on trustees and volunteers giving their time free. With interest and tax incentives, 100% of money raised is spent directly in the field on conservation and community development.

The Kasanka Trust has recently taken on the management of the Lavushi Manda National Park, and is involved with the Bangweulu Wetlands and the Shoebill Camp.

Whilst visiting I learned about the work of the African Parks Trust.

5.2 Tanzania

For me Tanzania is one of the best countries in the world, it is an incredibly beautiful and unpretentious country and home to very sociable people.

Travelling slowly, because the car was falling to pieces, I managed to visit the stunning Ruaha National Park although I spent most of the time in the workshop while the car was fixed. The car and I limped through Mikumi National Park but had to miss the Mkomazi National Park made famous by Tony Fitzjohn who worked for George Adamson and his lions in Kenya.

I spent a few days walking in the Usambara Mountains with Joseph, a local guide, looking at local community projects.

I spent a week on Hartmut and Emma’s Ndoto farm waiting for a new headlight (which never arrived), insurance (never arrived) and the fuel crisis to end (it did end). I am very grateful for their hospitality and enjoyed looking after Katie and Robin during my stay.

I would have been more adventurous if the Trooper had been in better shape!

28

6 Conservancies – could they work in Scotland?

6.1 Scotland – setting the scene

Politics - Scotland regained its own Parliament in 1999, so is a country re-born and open to new ideas.

People – There are 5 million people in Scotland, more than Namibia but far fewer than in Kenya. I think the biggest difference is that Scotland does not have tribes. Many communal conservancies are located on communal lands inhabited by tribes whose traditional way of life is based on nomadic pastoralism, like the Maasai, Samburu, Borana in Kenya and the Himba and Nama in Namibia. Conservancies help these people maintain their traditional ways of life in the modern world.

Economy – Agriculture is an important sector of the Scottish economy. The vast majority of land in Scotland is under agricultural production and the sector is responsible for much of Scotland's food exports.

Habitats – Scotland doesn’t have arid and semi-arid habitats like Namibia and Kenya where communal conservancies prosper. However much upland grazing is on equally poor marginal and impoverished land, it differs in being very wet and cold rather than hot and dry, are these areas suitable for conservancies.

6.2 Who owns Scotland?

For some people the ownership of land is as contentious in Scotland as in any African country. But the issue doesn’t have popular appeal that it has in Africa, perhaps because so few people now live off the land. Scotland, like Namibia and Kenya, is owned by the government, by private individuals including NGOs, and by communities.

Very little land in Scotland is owned by the state, even protected areas are mostly in private ownership.

Very little land in Scotland is communally owned nowadays – most common land has now been ‘privatised’, although a little remains as common grazing land in the crofting counties. However the policy of Scottish government is to encourage communities to own and manage land, and the government supports communities wanting to buy-out private estates. In Africa communal conservancies tend to be established on land where local people have communal rights.

Privately owned. Unlike African countries most of Scotland is now privately owned. The large estates in the Highlands are not dissimilar to the large colonial estates in Namibia and Kenya. In Kenya some large estates have transformed themselves into private conservancies and in Namibia large estates have grouped together to collectively form a private conservancy.

6.3 Protected Areas in Scotland

About 12% of Scotland is legally designated as protected areas for wildlife. The vast majority of this land is in privately owned, some is owned by NGOs and a small proportion is owned by various government bodies.

The first wildlife area to be protected by law was Beinn Eighe National Nature Reserve in 1951. A number of other designations protecting wildlife sites by law have been introduced in the following 60 years under UK, European and international initiatives.

29

Scotland has no statutory protected areas equivalent to the conservancies in Namibia and Kenya. Perhaps the closest match is national park, there are two parks in Scotland, both of which were only set up in the last ten years. Each has 4 policy objectives, two of which mention sustainability conserve and enhance the natural and cultural heritage of the area; promote the sustainable use of the natural resources of the area; promote understanding and enjoyment (including enjoyment in the form of recreation) of the

special qualities of the area; promote the sustainable social and economic development of the area’s communities. However, in Europe national parks are more about conserving landscape whereas in Africa they are more concerned with wildlife conservation.

The government uses a combination of economic incentives (carrots) and penalties (sticks) to make conservation happen on private land. This structure is far more complex to manage than the state simply owning and managing national parks.

6.4 Conservancies in Scotland

There are no communal conservancies in Scotland; indeed there is very little communally managed land nowadays. However the Scottish government encourages and supports communities wanting to buy estates. Communities have already bought the following Isle of Eigg, Isle of Gigha, Assynt, and South Uist. Often rural development is a goal in these places, but their focus is not really based on sustainable use of nature and natural resources.

There are no private conservancies in Scotland either, but some large privately owned estates are vaguely comparable in managing natural resources with tourism are Rothiemurchus estate, Ardtornish estate, Altyre estate , Glen Tanar estate. As far as I know, no estates have joined together to collectively manage the wildlife like the conservancies in Namibia. The closest initiative might be considered to be the Deer Management Groups which discuss management of red deer because they roam widely across of estates. None manage natural environments.

Various NGOs have large landholdings often for a specific purpose including

the John Muir Trust which manages seven properties totalling 24,00ha, their main concern is for wild land

the National Trust for Scotland manages historical buildings and large tracts of land totalling 78,000 ha including 1 world heritage site, 16 islands, 76,000 hectares of countryside, 7 national nature reserves, 26 castles, palaces & country houses, 4 battle sites, 23 wedding venues, 35 gardens, 72 holiday properties, over 50,000 artefacts and 4 birthplaces of famous Scots. There main concerns are culture and heritage.

the Royal Society for Protection of Birds Scotland manages nature reserves mainly for birds and other wildlife.

None of these NGOs focus on the sustainable management of natural resources to benefit wildlife and local people.

6.5 Voluntary. Bottom up.

Conservancies have not evolved naturally in Scotland. Conservancies have evolved in free markets in African countries because they make economic sense as well as social and environmental sense. In Scotland the market is hugely distorted by government grants and subsidies, so the government would need to incentivise the creation of conservancies if it wanted to create them.

30

6.6 Governance and support

The structure of a management committee/board is used in Scotland, as in Africa, on community owned land, private land and NGO properties.

Although NGO offer support and advice to rural communities in Scotland, but financial support is mainly provided by the government rather than donors. The Scotland Rural Development Programme (SRDP) is a programme of economic, environmental and social measures, worth some £1.5 billion, designed to develop rural Scotland over the next few years, to 2013.

6.7 Benefits for People

The language of rural development in Africa - natural resource based management (NRBM), income generating activities (IGAs) and benefit-sharing – is not the language we use in Scotland. It would be good to have NRBM is on the agenda in Scotland.

Nonetheless Scotland has a Rural Development Programme 2007-13 which includes measures to address economic and social goals as well as environmental measures. “It is outcome-focused and primarily aims to deliver a Greener Scotland and to promote a Wealthier and Fairer rural Scotland. It contributes to the Government's Healthier and Smarter objectives and helps to strengthen rural communities. It brings together a wide range of formerly separate support schemes including those covering the farming, forestry and primary processing sectors, rural enterprise and business development, diversification and rural tourism. It includes measures to support and encourage rural communities and delivers the LEADER initiative for local innovation in rural areas.

Rural people benefit from the Scottish Rural Development Programme in ways that are the same and ways that are different to conservancies in Africa. Issues like creation of jobs, training and capacity building, assistance with community projects, help with business ideas and marketing are similar if not the same. The SRDP differs in paying out huge sums to support livestock and to construct farm infrastructure. It also differs in paying for management of some protected areas and biodiversity.

6.8 Benefits for Wildlife

Conservancies in Africa provide extra space for wildlife to live and create corridors connecting protected areas to allow animals like elephants to travel through. Scotland does not have the diversity or density of wildlife that is found in Africa but our protected areas are often islands surrounded by more intensively managed land. There is a desire to increase the linkages between protected areas to enable wildlife to travel more freely through the landscape. Much of our landscape is impoverished semi-natural habitats, made treeless by over-grazing of livestock and deer. Perhaps we need to restore these habitats before the sustainable-use conservancy model would work. This would seem to fit with the current desire for landscape scale conservation which would benefit wildlife.

6.9 The Future.

The array of protected areas we have in Scotland grew from the 20th century imperative to set aside land where wildlife could live. These areas are still needed in the 21st century. However as land use pressures have intensified many protected areas have become isolated islands. In Africa conservancies have evolved to join up their protected areas benefitting both wildlife and local people. We can learn from the African experience. Exactly how to put this into practice requires further discussion about whether this should be bottom up and voluntary or top down led by the state.

31

6.10 Conclusion The purpose of my journey was to find out if Scotland could learn from wildlife conservancies in Namibia and Kenya. The answer is yes. The next stage of this journey is to work out how to put this learning into practice on the ground in Scotland.

32

7 Thanks My fantastic trip through Africa would not have been possible without the help and assistance of many people. I can not list everyone I met during these amazing 6 months, so I would like to extend special thanks to

WCMT – Julia Weston and all the others who help behind the scenes to enable our travels

Isaac Oumaa – my travelling companion in Namibia

IRDNC – Karine Nulimba and family, John Kasaona, Garth Owen-Smith, Madge Jacobson, Nadje Le Roux, Lisse Hensson, Richard and John and his family, Erica Reider.

NNF - Julian Fenessey

WWF Namibia - Richard Diggle, Erica Rieder

Kuzikus – Johanna Reinhard, Renata, Sara Burgy, Berend Rheinhard and the rest of the Rheinhard family.

Conservancies – the many helpful people to spoke to me about life in their conservancies

Desert Edge - Susie Wren, Penina, Maxwell Lumbasi, Nixon Elachi, David, Delphine Malleret-King

NRT- Gabriel Nyausi

Soysambu – Kathryn Combes

Naivasha - Nigel and Sarah Carnelly, Dan Oloo, Betty Akumu, Shiv Kapila, Simon Kiarie, Robert and Gususha

Iringa - Hartmut and Emma Rottcher and Katy and Robin for a wonderful week on their farm.

At home – all the good friends who kept in contact by emailing me on my travels – all your messages helped me on way, David Miller for taking such good care of my house and leaving it spotless for my return.

The many fellow travellers I met on the way - I really enjoyed meeting you all and have happy memories to last a lifetime.

Raising a family – we all need food, water and space to live and raise a family