Maasai Mara – Land Privatization and Wildlife Decline: Can Conservation Pay Its Way?

Thompson, David M.; Serneels, S.; Kaelo, Dickson; Trench, Pippa Chenevix

doi:10.1007/978-0-387-87492-0_3

Cited by 26 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The MMNR is managed by the Narok County Government while the conservancies are each managed by different management companies. The conservancies are formed through a partnership between Maasai landowners and tourism companies, whereby landowners receive a fixed, monthly payment for leasing their land for wildlife based activities on the condition that they do not live on the land, cultivate or develop it (Osano et al., 2013; Thompson, Serneels, Kaelo, & Trench, 2009). However, in some cases, especially on the boundaries of some conservancies, people still reside with their livestock.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Living on the edge: Multiscale habitat selection by cheetahs in a human‐wildlife landscape

Klaassen

Broekhuis

2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals select habitats that will ultimately optimize their fitness through access to favorable resources, such as food, mates, and breeding sites. However, access to these resources may be limited by bottom‐up effects, such as availability, and top‐down effects, such as risk avoidance and competition, including that with humans. Competition between wildlife and people over resources, specifically over space, has played a significant role in the worldwide decrease in large carnivores. The goal of this study was to determine the habitat selection of cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) in a human‐wildlife landscape at multiple spatial scales. Cheetahs are a wide‐ranging, large carnivore, whose significant decline is largely attributed to habitat loss and fragmentation. It is believed that 77% of the global cheetah population ranges outside protected areas, yet little is known about cheetahs’ resource use in areas where they co‐occur with people. The selection, or avoidance, of three anthropogenic variables (human footprint density, distance to main roads and wildlife areas) and five environmental variables (open habitat, semiclosed habitat, edge density, patch density and slope), at multiple spatial scales, was determined by analyzing collar data from six cheetahs. Cheetahs selected variables at different scales; anthropogenic variables were selected at broader scales (720–1440 m) than environmental variables (90–180 m), suggesting that anthropogenic pressures affect habitat selection at a home‐range level, whilst environmental variables influence site‐level habitat selection. Cheetah presence was best explained by human presence, wildlife areas, semiclosed habitat, edge density and slope. Cheetahs showed avoidance for humans and steep slopes and selected for wildlife areas and areas with high proportions of semiclosed habitat and edge density. Understanding a species’ resource requirements, and how these might be affected by humans, is crucial for conservation. Using a multiscale approach, we provide new insights into the habitat selection of a large carnivore living in a human‐wildlife landscape.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Living on the edge: Multiscale habitat selection by cheetahs in a human‐wildlife landscape

Klaassen

Broekhuis

2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They also reported average livestock incomes from pastoral production of 55% of total income. In a set of comparative studies with Maasai pastoralists, Burnsilver (2009), Nkedianye et al (2009) and Thompson et al (2009) found livestock incomes ranging from 37% to 85% of total income. These depended on the level of diversification and market access of the studied groups.…”

Section: Livestock and Its Socio-economic Roles In Developing Countriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The roles of livestock in developing countries

Herrero

Grace

Njuki

et al. 2013

Animal

385

255

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Livestock play a significant role in rural livelihoods and the economies of developing countries. They are providers of income and employment for producers and others working in, sometimes complex, value chains. They are a crucial asset and safety net for the poor, especially for women and pastoralist groups, and they provide an important source of nourishment for billions of rural and urban households. These socio-economic roles and others are increasing in importance as the sector grows because of increasing human populations, incomes and urbanisation rates. To provide these benefits, the sector uses a significant amount of land, water, biomass and other resources and emits a considerable quantity of greenhouse gases. There is concern on how to manage the sector's growth, so that these benefits can be attained at a lower environmental cost. Livestock and environment interactions in developing countries can be both positive and negative. On the one hand, manures from ruminant systems can be a valuable source of nutrients for smallholder crops, whereas in more industrial systems, or where there are large concentrations of animals, they can pollute water sources. On the other hand, ruminant systems in developing countries can be considered relatively resource-use inefficient. Because of the high yield gaps in most of these production systems, increasing the efficiency of the livestock sector through sustainable intensification practices presents a real opportunity where research and development can contribute to provide more sustainable solutions. In order to achieve this, it is necessary that production systems become market-orientated, better regulated in cases, and socially acceptable so that the right mix of incentives exists for the systems to intensify. Managing the required intensification and the shifts to new value chains is also essential to avoid a potential increase in zoonotic, food-borne and other diseases. New diversification options and improved safety nets will also be essential when intensification is not the primary avenue for developing the livestock sector. These processes will need to be supported by agile and effective public and private institutions.

show abstract

“…In the Mara, many group ranches are now subdivided, with individual land parcels allocated to male group ranch members. In many areas, this has been a long and contentious process, fraught with conflict, inequality and land-grabbing (Homewood et al 2004;Mwangi 2007b;Thompson and Homewood 2002;Thompson et al 2009). …”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In 2011, the MMNR management plan estimated that predicted revenues accruing from the MMNR to the then two county councils responsible for its administration totalled more than $41 million annually (NCC and TMCC 2011). However, despite this tourism potential, local communities have not always gained fair or substantial benefit (Norton-Griffiths et al 2008;Thompson et al 2009). Various attempts to distribute tourism revenues to local communities have been beset by problems of mismanagement, unaccountability and inequality (Thompson and Homewood 2002;Thompson et al 2009).…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Trade-offs for climate-resilient pastoral livelihoods in wildlife conservancies in the Mara ecosystem, Kenya

Bedelian

Ogutu

2017

Pastoralism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pastoralists in the wildlife-rich East African rangelands use diversification into conservation and tourism as a strategy to supplement livestock-based livelihoods and to spread risk. Tourism incomes are an important alternative source during drought, when livestock incomes decline. However, tourism may also reduce access to rangeland resources, and an abundant wildlife may destroy crops and injure, kill or transmit disease to livestock or people. This paper investigates the ability of wildlife conservancies in the Mara, Kenya, to act as an alternative for pastoralists that mitigates risks and maintains resilience in a changing climate. It analyses data to examine how conservancies contribute to and integrate with pastoral livelihoods, and to understand how pastoralists are managing their livestock herds in response to conservancies. It finds conservancy payments can provide an important, reliable, all-year-round source of income and prevent households from selling their animals during stress and for cash needs. Conservancies also retain grass banks during the dry season and provide opportunities for pastoralists to access good-quality forage. However, they reduce access to large areas of former grazing land and impose restrictions on livestock mobility. This affects the ability of pastoralists to remain flexible and able to access seasonally variable resources. Conflicts between grazing and conservancies may also heighten during drought times. Furthermore, income from land leases is not more than the contribution of livestock, meaning conservancy land leases create trade-offs for livestock-based livelihoods. Also, income is based on land ownership, which has inequity implications: women and other marginalised groups are left out.

show abstract

Maasai Mara – Land Privatization and Wildlife Decline: Can Conservation Pay Its Way?

Cited by 26 publications

References 17 publications

Living on the edge: Multiscale habitat selection by cheetahs in a human‐wildlife landscape

Living on the edge: Multiscale habitat selection by cheetahs in a human‐wildlife landscape

The roles of livestock in developing countries

Trade-offs for climate-resilient pastoral livelihoods in wildlife conservancies in the Mara ecosystem, Kenya

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About