Local perceptions on Community Based Wildlife Conservation model, the case of Il Ngwesi Conservancy in Laikipia, Kenya

Statement of the problem/Objectives Wildlife and livestock constitutes the major key resources for pastoral communities in the rangelands of Kenya. 70% of wildlife live outside protected areas, characterized by competition for... [ view full abstract ]

Statement of the problem/Objectives
Wildlife and livestock constitutes the major key resources for pastoral communities in the rangelands of Kenya. 70% of wildlife live outside protected areas, characterized by competition for limited resources. Changing land uses occasioned by increasing human population threatens this coexistence. This has led to establishment of community wildlife conservancies which aim at increasing support for conservation from local communities. As the number of conservancies grow, some have been perceived to be successful while others have failed to endure. This study evaluated the locals’ perceptions on wildlife conservation and conservancy performance which is considered as a success study. The findings are imperative to enhancing sustainability of community conservancies in Kenya.
Methods
Household questionnaires, key informant interviews, focus group discussions and secondary data were used to gather information. Purposive sampling method was used to select the respondents (conservancy members). The data was analyzed using SPSS and Microsoft Excel.
Results
School bursaries was identified as the major benefit gained by communities. Majority were satisfied with the benefit sharing albeit a few disputes over little benefits and inequitable sharing which triggered thoughts of land subdivision. Majority of respondents preferred individual land tenure, acquiring parcels of land elsewhere. Crop cultivation was the preferred land use within individual land. Perceived declining pastures and livestock population were assumed to be as a result of increased wildlife numbers. Irrespective of this, majority viewed wildlife as a benefit but this declined with closeness to the conservancy. Despite livestock being the major livelihood majority of the members did not wish to substitute conservation with livestock grazing. Most respondents preferred to kill any destructive wildlife species rather than following the legal channels.
Conclusion
Community wildlife conservancies remain to be vital in enhancing wildlife conservation in communal lands. This could be jeopardized by interests in individual land ownership. However, wildlife can thrive in pastoral ecosystems and be tolerated if more benefits are realized, equitably shared and communities concerns are addressed with the urgency required.