LAIKIPIA CLASHES

If you follow news, local or international, from the internet, television or the newspapers, you will definitely have heard about the Laikipia situation. To repeat what you have heard, ranches belonging to white people have been vandalized, one rancher was shot dead, another famous one shot but survived, hundreds of cattle belonging to Kenyan pastoralists, commonly referred to as natives, have been shot dead and security has apparently been beefed up. 

So what is wrong? What is ailing Laikipia? 

To answer the above questions will require digging deep into the history of Kenya. It will require asking more questions.

 HISTORY OF RANCHING IN KENYA

First of all, why do ranches exist? Why do we have ranches in Kenya? What role do they play? How did they come to be? Looking into ranching means looking at colonialism. All land in Kenya and Africa at large belonged to Africans before colonialist came and forcefully grabbed it. The British Empire claims that they signed leases with the indigenous people who leased them land at times even for 999years. But how true that is very questionable considering Kenyans by then especially the farmers and pastoralists of the hinterlands spoke neither Kiswahili nor English. And furthermore there has been no proof that the Africans were compensated, instead they relied on working on Europeans’ farms to feed their families and pay the hut taxes that had been imposed on them.

So how does colonialism of then affect Kuki Gallman being shot recently? In 1963, Kenyans expected the government to ensure that land was returned to its rightful owners. The Mau Mau are specifically known to have gone to fight with land as their major grievance. Just to attain independence and Jomo Kenyatta’s government passes a ‘willing buyer willing seller’ law. You have heard his son defending that concept during the 2013 presidential debate. Now, do you expect a Kimani who was in Mt. Kenya or in the Arbedares from 1952 to 1963 to have any money to buy his ancestral land back from the white colonialist? Or do you expect Wanjiku, his wife, who has been tortured in a concentration camp to have saved enough money to buy her family land in 1963? 

And as you can see, that is how politicians ended up owning large tracts of land while up to date, 67% of Kenyans own less than an acre per person. The willing seller willing buyer law saw many colonialists remain owners to thousands of hectares per person since neither the government nor individuals buy land from them. This is how only 30 foreigners in Laikipia County own over half of the county. With Kuki Gallman owning 100, 000acres, Voorspuy who was killed owned 24,000acres, Mugie  ranch have 50,000 acres, Segera ranch 50,000acres etc. 

FROM RANCHES TO CONSERVANCIES

But you have heard that most of these ranches are conservancies. How did that happen? Is there no profitable way of utilizing these ranches? Or are white people naturally drawn to conservation the way Africans are attracted by poaching? How did this shift happen especially after 1963? 

To begin with, Africans have existed side by side with wildlife for thousands of years. That is a fact that no one can dispute. Two, how many Kenyans have you met who adore ivory? Like they have an item in their house made of ivory? Do you think it is coincidental that most of the African cultures do not adore or idolize things made from wildlife parts? To get into this will be to get into a very long story about Africans and their relationship with wildlife. Africans had a holy reverence for their environment. Their cultures perpetuated the belief that God made them protectors of the earth and everything in it. This saw Africans utilize their environment in a very sustainable and conservative manner. One of the tribes in Uganda is a good example of that. They used to hunt only during the dry season. During rains it was taboo to go into the forest and hunt. This ultimately ensured that wildlife never became extinct. 

So what on earth does African culture and conservation have to do with Ol Pejeta Conservancy or even Lewa Conservancy or a dead Voorspuy?

Simple, British colonized Kenya. They found millions of wildlife roaming around (yes you heard that right, Millions). With their colonialism they also brought their hobbies and recreation activities. With the major one being; hunting for fun. Hunting was a sport that was so romanticized in the British reign. It was seen as the ultimate sport or adventure that one could partake in. On the other side though, unlike Africans who farmed, herded and lived with the wildlife, the white colonialists who came to Africa could not live that amicably with animals. What that means is that for a settler to start working on his a thousand acres, he needed people to clear off wildlife first. 

 On tourism, East Africa was the hub of game hunting. So much that in 1909, a £50 hunting license in East Africa Protectorate was established. The money was in the currency of then so right now that is approximately £6161.31 which translates to KSH 820,398. That license entitled you to kill 2 buffaloes, 2 hippos, 1 eland, 22 zebras, 6 oryxes, 4 water-bucks, I greater kudu, 4 lesser kudu, 10 topis, 26 hartebeests, 229 antelopes, 84 colobus monkey and unlimited lions and leopards. Apparently, lion and leopards killed livestock and thus were classified as vermin. Famous hunters in East Africa include Frederick Selous, R.J Cunninghame who led Theodore Roosevelt’s excursion into British East Africa, and the famous “Karamoja” whose real name was w. Bell who was married to Karen Blixen author of out of Africa, among many.

Ironically, most of those game hunters turned to conservationist at the end of their lives. 

Back to Laikipia, what does game hunting as a sport got to do with ranches previously used for livestock rearing now being conservation sites?

The white settlers were business people. They still are. What that means is that you simply follow where money is. Livestock rearing especially on thousands of acres was and still is a very profitable venture. However, we are in 1980s. Kenyans are tired of the oppressive government policies. They are tired of injustices that have been passed on from colonialist to their black rulers. They are starting to ask for a regime change. They want better. On the other hand, Moi’s regime has honed the skill of grabbing land. There are over 200,000 fake title deeds issued between 1963 and 2000 in Kenya. And most of them are not dealing with tens or even hundreds of acres. So stealing of land in large amounts is on a prime while on the other hand the common mwananchi is beginning to ask for what is rightfully theirs. Their land.

So what does this mean for that white settler with 100,000 acres? Simple, it’s either the politician grabber gets to you first or the common mwananchi who needs land for their herd of cattle. In simple terms there is no escape for the white settler in Africa who still owns thousands of acres of land in Africa. Some sell their land. Some are chased away from Africa by the likes of Mugabe who saw it fit that land returns to the indigenous people.

While the brilliant ones in Kenya, simply convert their ranches to wildlife conservation havens. It’s brilliant really! The whole world is waking up to the fact that the environment needs to be protected and conserved. Climate change and global warming impacts are starting to be felt. UNEP has just been formed. Environmental treaties are being ratified left right and center. After decades of killing wildlife in Kenya, the white settler converts into a wildlife conservationist. And not just any wildlife, especially that which has been declared endangered. By who? IUCN- International Union for Conservation for Nature

What again does this have to do with Laikipia? Simple-the international media focused on the way natives were against wildlife poaching and thus attacked ranches used for conserving endangered species. These Africans! This is exactly what the colonial white settler who didn’t go back to their country was counting on. Laikipia pastoralist played right into their hands. The white owner of ranches knew that sooner or later, Kenyans would come asking for their land. Kenyans in this case could be new greedy politicians who are late to the land grabbing party, or the genuine Pokot or Samburu pastoralist who need pasture for their ever growing population of cattle.

  

So how did the white person protect themselves? They took up a cause that the whole world would defend. Wildlife. In case the government or Kenyans appeared, the whole world would condemn Kenya for not caring about wildlife conservation. To even protect themselves further some have gone ahead to enlist the help of UNESCO. Lewa Conservancy after years of trying in vain finally made it to be part of Mt Kenya heritage site. What that means is that not even the laws of Kenya can return that land to its indigenous owners. Kenya would be slapped with sanctions left right and center if they dared try to touch land used for wildlife conservation.

What about money you ask? Tourism. You have been taught that tourism is one of the top income earners of Kenya. This is true. But that only benefits Kenya if the wildlife we are talking about is via KWS or sleeping in hotels owned by Kenya Government. Most of the Laikipia ranches have lodges that some cost as much as KSH 100,000 per night. Tourists fly directly from their countries to those lodges. So where does that “tourism” money go to? The owner of the ranch.  Those claiming that we benefit from foreign exchange from these tourists, is the amount of land under use here directly proportional to that foreign exchange?  

Another way of making money when conserving wildlife is through donor funding. Have you wondered why this conservancy’s are very keen on conserving wildlife in the IUCN Red List? If you are passionate about wildlife, and you have over 50,000 acres to spare, surely, you will keep all sorts of wildlife that can sustainably stay together, right? So why in your right mind would you only choose to keep rhinos or elephants? Simple. It’s where the donor money is.

ROLE OF PUBLICITY

But did we get here? Where we see white people as conservationist and natives,  as poachers or people who care less about the environment? Yet history proves the opposite? Why would the guardian run a headline, “Armed herders invade Kenya’s most important wildlife conservancy”? Why would you as a Kenyan look at the conservation of wildlife as a white man’s job?  

To sustain the new mode of owning land, read conservancy, the white conservationist in Kenya had to make as much noise as possible. And not just any noise. No. Noise portraying the Maasai as a poacher and the white man, whose major sport in the 19^th and early 20^th century was game hunting, as a wildlife savior. To do this, documentaries had to be made, articles had to be written, and the curriculum had to be changed to suit the purpose. So ask any Kenyan child on who kills lions in Kenya, and probability is that they will have watched a documentary on one of the Kenyan television channels showing a native poacher turned into a wildlife conservationist.

  

So what does publicity got to do with Laikipia clashes? Kenya is already hard pressed to solve land injustices. People are scrambling for plots on every breakfast show. Sooner or later the government of Kenya will have to stop ignoring the plight of pastoralist. They will have to deal with the fact that the white conservationist opening up their pastures and water to the pastoralists once in a blue moon is not a solution. And when shove comes to push, they will have to deal with the international media which will by all means say what they know; that Africans are poachers while whites are conservationist. You publicize something for so long, it stops becoming an opinion, it is seen as the truth. 

CURRENT SITUATION 

These ranches are conserving the environment 

That is indisputable. Most of those ranches are well managed; they have water and pasture all year round while soil erosion is controlled. Rarely will you find bare patches of land due to overstocking of animals. While on the other hand, community land used by natives is quite degraded. No one takes responsibility for reducing soil erosion. Desertification is happening faster to community land in arid and semi-arid lands than privately owned lands in the same area. These ranches in question have employed top notch rangeland management techniques. They use the best technology available to protect the wildlife in their jurisdiction which might have been poached if left to poor natives who love poaching or white people who love game hunting. So yes, Laikipia ranches are examples of what conservation looks like. 

But is the current mode of operation sustainable? 

For how long will pastoral communities in Laikipia cry for land? For how long will the government of Kenya ignore them? While bodies such as the NRT come and take more of their land in the name of conservation and providing employment? For how long will KWS keep on getting money for the safe keeping of our wildlife while 70% of wildlife is on the outside of the parks? Is the conservation of our wildlife by dual citizens of Kenya and British nations on behalf of communities who don’t reap the benefits from that conservation sustainable in the long run? Is the shooting of ranchers who most probably have heirs a solution to the land injustices in Laikipia County the answer? Is the incitement of politicians to flush out foreigners from land that is rightfully theirs the solution to a century old feud? Will sending the Kenyan army to protect people who have British fighting for them sustainable? Who will fight for the pastoralist when their herd of cattle is shot by that same army that is supposed to protect Kenyans? And will those who know all the sides of the story keep quiet as a lie is perpetuated by all media houses locally or internationally; herders attack wildlife in Laikipia or something related to that? Will you allow yourself to think beyond what you’ve been taught since young; that Africans especially cultures such as the Maasai encourage poaching? 

THE WAY FORWARD 

 

So what is the way ahead when it comes to Laikipia? What is the lasting solution?

Conservation to be owned and implemented by Africans

It’s that simple. If the interests of these white conservationists are really into wildlife conservation, then let them involve the communities around. No African poaches so that they make or wear items made from ivory. They sell it at throw away prices. This means that if you open up these lands to them, they get a better source of livelihood. Plus community conservation of wildlife is already working in Mount Kenya. If you look anywhere in Kenya where the community has been involved in resource conservation, for sure those resources will be conserved. An example is the Arabuko Sokoke forest in Coast. And where the community has been excluded, practices such as poaching thrive. Why? It’s easy for a charcoal maker to stop going to the forest to burn charcoal and instead embrace butterfly farming in the same forest, than for a Pokot native to help you conserve a Rhino which you are being paid to  conserve by donor agencies and on top of that you even get tourists coming to see that rhino. Wouldn’t it be easier if that Rhino was taken to a KWS manned park and that ranch used by the whole Pokot community for pastoralism?

If those white ranchers are true to their word; that their real aim is to conserve wildlife, then they will do this with the community around in mind. Employing people or educating them or opening up hospitals in their areas is not enough compensation for a people working towards being self employed. Plus those roles are for the government anyway.

The narrative also needs to be changed.

Africans are not poachers by blood the same way white people are not conservationist by heart. And is tourism really as beneficial as we were taught? Is there a better way of doing things? What are your thoughts?

this piece would not have been possible without reading and following Mordecai Ogada and Mbaria wa Mbaria who are the authors of the "THE CONSERVATION LIE" retailing in Kenyan bookshops. 

THE BEGINNING

We will begin with a little social experiment to explain the beginning of what came to be known as the environmental field. Go ask a Kenyan to briefly describe the state of their environment. To make this a little easier, choose someone who has a diploma or a degree or is up-to-date with what goes on in Kenya. Then come back to read the rest of the post. Did they ask you to specify what aspect of the environment you are interested in? Well, that is the exact mindset that existed in the world before 1970. That the air, water, soil, forestry, wildlife and human bodies are separate entities that by no means correlate. They were all governed by different rules as the governments deemed fit. Until the following separate incidents happened and the world started questioning if its mode of operation was favorable to the survival of humans.

Ever heard of a river on fire? Well, there is one river in the world that has been on fire, not once but 13 thirteen times. Thirteen! Cuyahoga River in Cleveland, USA. The most serious fires happened in 1952 and 1969. The Times magazine described Cuyahoga as the river that a “person does not drown but decays”. Well Cuyahoga River has always been among the ten most polluted in the world but don’t you think a river on fire is on the extreme?  And to make matters worse, photos of the 1969 fire do not exist because the local media did not pay much attention to it. For them, that wasn’t much of a newspaper worthy item. The Times magazine had to use photos of the 1952 fire to report the incident.

Photo courtesy of Time Magazine: CUYAHOGA RIVER ON FIRE IN 1952

Ever heard of an author not excited about their book being published? Well, this specific one was not. In fact, she was not only afraid that the book would be criticized but would also be stopped from being further marketed. And to make matters, she was undergoing radiotherapy for cancer at the same time, which made her skeptical as to whether she would survive the scathing that would come with her book being published. While every author is usually sending their newly published books to book reviewers and magazines for a review, she sent hers to the courts and parliament even before the book went out officially. And to ensure authenticity, she called in the acclaimed scientist of then to test and see if her claims were true. Her claims were simple, that DDT, a pesticide that was being heavily used in USA, led to the loss and inevitably the extinction of birds together with other insects. And her fears were true, her publishers were sued while the newspapers that went ahead to review her book were extensively threatened. Some scientist came in even attacking her personally for being physically attractive yet unmarried. The woman who dared go against the grain was Rachel Carson with Silent Spring in 1962.

Photo courtesy of Wikipedia: RACHEL CARSON’S BOOK-SILENT SPRING

It was supposed to be the “Year for Africa”. No, that term was not coined by a pastor or reverend for spiritual reasons. Africans were tired; the wise ones perceived that and came up with that term. And true to the slogan, 17 countries got independence that year. But it was also the beginning of the decade that 50million Africans were hit by the worst drought of that century. Over 100, 000 people lost their lives. Cattle and livestock died in extreme numbers. It came to be known as the Sahelian drought. Most countries have never experienced drought worse than that since then. The year for Africa was the beginning of the arguably the best and the worst decade of most African nations, the decade was 1960s. 

What would you do if your cat started convulsing and doing erratic things? What if the cat actually became mad? And finally jumped into the sea by itself or rather committed suicide? Well, residents of a Japan township decided to call it the “cat dancing disease”. And if you think that was strange to them, think again; crows started falling from the sky, seaweed, which had been around since time in memorial stopped growing, while fish floated dead on the surface of the sea. Before they could get over the shock, they themselves started experiencing strange symptoms. Two girls went to the hospital with the following symptoms, difficulties in walking, in speech and convulsions. The doctors had never seen such strange things. Upon further investigations, it was revealed that 8 people had the exact symptoms. This alerted the government which formed the “Strange Disease Countermeasure Committee” to look into the cause and solution of this disease. At first they thought it was contagious and thus isolated the patients and fumigated their houses. Later, after countless law suits and denial by the government, it came to be known as the Minamata disease. Or simply put, mercury poisoning. The period between discovery of the strange symptoms and the winning of the lawsuit filed against Chisso corp., the company that deposited mercury waste into nearby rivers and the government of Japan was 1956-1972. 

The world was waking up to strange new realities that baffled them. Were they related? And were the various separate solutions being taken to curb these disasters enough? And even before that, what was causing these incidents? Was man turning against his own provider? And what was the assurance that it wouldn’t happen again? Was it possible for developed nations and developing nations to find a common solution to the different environmental disasters they were facing? And assuming a common ground was reached wouldn’t putting restriction on the use of environmental resources affect trade? How would developed nations maintain their economies? And how would developing nations grow theirs?

The whole world acknowledged that there was a problem. But no one wanted to be the rat that put the bell on the cat’s neck.

So what happened next?

TO BE CONTINUED….