8:09 AM 8A ...

I89

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Wildlife and local people in different parts of the globe have lived together for a long

lime with very few cases ul cuufliet (Goodland 1992). Hutian wilJlile conflict is not

new. But is there a feasible sulution? Incidents uf cenflict have becume mure in recent

years, particulariy in areas that are higihly populated with wild animals., this has been

mainly because of increase in human and livestock population and the change of socio

cconontic and patteris of land use. Wildlife-human conflicts poses a greet challenge to

wilkdlife conserVation and surcs of income of peopl: glnhally and is increasing as

human population becomes more, establishment of intrastructure, climate modifications

and other human and environmental issues expose people and wildhfe in more direct

struggle for limited resources. Furthermore, the coatinued conse.vation measues have

cuutributed to wildlife exteuding lu where peuple live.

In America Bears raidzd garcage cans in the national parks and near wwns in ncrth USA

hence disturbing people henc eausing mayhem in streets. Deer crashed with mcior

vchicles injuring approximately 29,000 pcaple per year and ceused over US$ I billion in

enmpensation (USDA, 2008). In Alherta, Canada, for mare than 10 ycars (1998-2008)

wolves mstigated 2.806 ceaths of comesticated anımals, especially cattle and to a

moderate extent dogs, chickens, goats and turkeys. In Idaho and Montana (LSA), at the

same period, (1998-2008) wolves killed 728 livestock (Musiani e: al., 2003). Australian

farmers have continuously considered kangaroos as pesta destroying crops and

enmpering with sheep. Annually, the Gevermment permits selected numhcr of kangaroos
to he recnerd withant con sidering the animals killec hy peopie iTherin, 2001). People

de aths and injuries, cespite the fact thet they con't occur frequently as compared to

destruction of crops are the most severe results of HWC and are globally considered as

unlearable. A research un the level uf luman deatıs as a result of wild aniuals iu Altica

in late 70s, established that hippupolamus was the main cause of death as compared to the

big five animals (Musiani er a!.. 2003). However, from the year 2000 camivores

especially lions. cheetahs, hyenas und leopards have bzen the main cause of death 10

human due to confict between the people and wildlife.

Maaszi Mara National Reserve is commonly known for its Africa's Greatest Wildlife

Reserve. In Maas ai Mara the confliet has become rampant and a strategic plan needs to

be in place befare it gets out of hand and the National Reserve has no wildlife left. This

papers' focus is nn the Measai Mlar community aurrounding the protrcted areas and the

enflict canscd hy wildlife. There are several rases from conntries arund the glohe

exhibiting the relentlessness ot human-wildlite contlict and propeses z detziled scrutiny

to know the challenges and to back the conservation scenaries cf vulnerabl: and possib.y

thre atened species. World Conservation Union (2003) teported that coullict lake place

when wildlife neLessilies uverlay with the human inhabitants, causing losses lo people

and wild animals, Interuction with wildlife hapcens mutually

rural and urban areas, but

it occurs very frequently in protected areas. where there are more wildlife prompting the

animals to stray into near fields in search of food and or grazing areas.

Oven the yeas, about 30 o be precise, substatial clianges have lppened in the Mazsai

Mara area. In the past, like many pari of Kenya's arid and semi-arid areas, the region was

les pepulated; the main land uses were nemadie pustoralism and land belunged to the

community (Beaumont 1999). The human population is also on the rise and pemane:t
human settlements, agriculture, and livestock production are expanding (Douglas 1998).

Resulting in reduction of land that wEs previously occupied by wildlife end or usad for

pastoralists. Freronchment on the. Maasai Mara national reserve by people living the

Surrounding areas is increasing (1Denglas 1998).

As the contact increases, wildlile despoliation of livestock and ciops, injuries or death of

humans, causing infectivns to domesticated animals and completion of grazing areas and

drinking water incresses. Wildlife has often been seen by the local pecple as belonging to

the goverament: they sez the government alone as being responsible for its care (Berger

1995). The land profile in Maasai Mara trea is very unique. The low ngricultural

potential lands are found in the lowland regien, whil: with high potential are in the

upland zone. The. difference in land potential (a cnnsequence of high rainfall and gned

scils) have inflnenced use of land, livestock, human and wildlite population densities,

and in turn these intluences the types, spatial pattern and the degree of human-wildlife

couflict in this region. It considers how these conflicts vay seasonally factoring in the

distance (rom the protected area, what altituder und opinions the lox al cummunity hulds

towards govermment and conservaricn wildlife programs, and how thee attitudes are

influenced by their 3ocio economic experiences and backgrounds.

Kenya's gros domestic product (GDP) is mostly pegged on tourism and in turn national

parks and reserves are crucial resources from which the country has realized a good sum

of foreign exchange for the last few decades (Okello et al., 2001). Despite the decline in

tourism due to a numher of reasons. Kznye is still cxperiencing numcrcus wildlife

conservation challenges (Jehansson, 20002). Ac:ondting ta (Kameri, 2002), pmrected arras

conservation continues to be the most important general responnsibility of the

Govemment of Kenya. Since KWS inception in 1989, one of its coce mandate is to

provide wildlife education and exteusion services infoming the comunily cn their ole
in wildlife Lonservation suppert. Overall cuntribuing to the mandate of KWS in lerms of

wildlire conservation enhancement, mansgement, and proection, improving KWs's

associations, relationship and recognition with stake holders. KWS so far have

established oducation centers acems cight conservation regions, offering diversificd

educetionel programs to different target groups in the community

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Occune.ices of human wildlife conflict have been rising where teports have been made

On wildlile invaling lumes of lo.als, destruction of crops, livestr's allack and even

killing of peuple. Kenya's prutecled areas contribule lu 70-80% uf all tourists whu com:

for vacation in Kenya However, plan: life has been ruined, wildlife activities interrupted,

toxic waste has increased. and resources in general have been over explcited (Ikiara and

Okech, 2002). Narok County is currently among the human-wildlife cenflict arca in the

enintry where clephants are the most knotty wildlife species. However, Kenya Wildlife

Service (KWS) has implemented a eomprehensive. stritegy with an aim of metncing ITWC

by reinfercing the law, improving wildlife business governan.ce and retaining ecological

veracity. KWS has also associated with cther organisations imerested in eonservation for

instance the Rhine Ark, private companies. govemments and individuals to cordon off

the protected areas through fencing.

Areas surounding MMNR ha ve been experiencing human wildlife contlict year after

vear to show this, 152 :ases of human wildlife coutlict was reported in the yea: 2015 the

cases reported to Keny a wildlife service conumunity department, Narok, were as lollews,

3 (five injuries) caused by hippupolamus, Buffaloes and 3:nake bites,57 cases uf livestock

predation of which 90 (ninety livestock were predkted upon, 58 cases of crop destructicn

by buffaloes. Zebras, and water buck, 112 cases of threats'property damage by buffaloes.

leopards, Lion and snake (specificelly pythen) and Wildlife mertality of 26 (thirty) this
mortelitics werce caused by communitics reteliating hack by killing wildlife whenever

thry get to their ferms, (KWS Narok 2015). With the ahowe statrd problem in

communities surrounding the National Reserve and the efforts put by KWS in combating

the issue with no full success of eradicating the problem, this study the.efore focuses on

the factors that influeuc: humau-wildlife onflict in Lummunities living atvund Maasai

Mara Nalinal Reserve.

1.3 Purpose of the Study

The eim of the study was to find out the factors influcncing human wildlife conflict in

enmmunities surmunding protected arcas, a case of Kenya Wildlife Service.

1.4 Objectives of the Study

The study objectives were:

i) To assess resources competition influence o1 human wildlife conflict in

cnmmunitics living amund Maasai Mara National Reserve

ii) To determine hnman migration settlement influence on human wildlife conflict

in communities living around Maasai Mara National Reserve

iii) To establish extent te wh.ch human invasion to protected areas influcnce

human wildlife conlict ia commmanities living aOLud Maasai Mara Natinial

Reserve.

iv) To detzrmine how Kenya wildlife Service conservation measures influence

human wildlife conflict in communities living around Maasai Mara National

Reserve.

1.5 Research Questions

This wes guided by the tollowing research questions.

i) How does competitionI of rescurces influcnc: human wildlife coaflict in

COLunities living around Maasai Mara National Reserv:?

ii) How does human migraiun settlement influence human wildlife conflic. in

communities living around Maasai Mara National Reserve?

iii) How does human invesion to protzcted areas influence human wildlife conflict in

communitics living tround Maasai Mara National Reserve?