Ali Kaka East African Wildlife Society

Wildlife Conservation in East Africa: A Historical Perspective State control No community involvement No benefits and limited or nil compensation for losses

Kenyan Results Limited Tolerance Impatience Anger Hatred Deliberate destruction (25% loss of wildlife, Parks included)

Number of CBTs (CCAs) in Kenya Few of these with steady income Distribution of income, governance – challenging Translation into conservation objectives – not clear Legal framework – not clear

Important Lessons: People living near and with wildlife need to be consulted and involved Involvement and active participation early – crucial Solid stake in tourism – helps appreciate responsibilities

Still challenging: Govt. understanding of concept Habit of not listening or understanding peoples needs More talk with conservationists Incentives for Pvt. sector Governance and legal framework Sense of “ownership” lacking

Wildlife Policy & Legislation: 5 attempts Major external influence Uncertain of hunting & utilisation (Hara kiri syndrome in the industry).Photo tourism too big. Thus used as a threat to discourage gvt. Very low professional capacity in KWS(on other options, except park mgmt and security)

Conclusion (crucial for wildlife): Incentives for community and goodwill Consultations and consistent involvement Sense of ownership Joint oversight:Pvt sect+comm.+conservationsits+Govt. Clear policies on roles and responsibilities Devolve authority and responsibilities No one ideal formula for CBT approach. But PRINCIPLES are crucial and Community MUST be the PRIMARY beneficiary for LONG TERM success of models.

If not: Continued loss of wildlife and habitats (neither guns nor gallows will reverse the decline) No interest in conservation. Other options for land use will prevail Parks as core areas will be more isolated and face extinction

THANK YOU !