The study examines the development of wildlife conservation policy and practice in Kenya from 1895 to 1975. Started by the colonial state as part of its resource control programme, wildlife conservation in Kenya gradually became an important aspect of the country's economy chiefly because of its significance as the basis of a vibrant tourist industry. The conservation programme was also important to conservationists who viewed Kenya's wildlife as a heritage to humanity. Similarly, local communities, which were affected in various ways by wildlife conservation policies, had their own perceptions of the programme. All this led to the proliferation of groups whose interests were potentially conflicting. Wildlife conservation in Kenya during the period under examination was thus characterised by various struggles between interest groups such as conservationists, the state, and local communities. The struggles centred around such issues as the costs and benefits of conservation and were manifested through anti-conservation activities like the poaching of wild animals by dissatisfied groups. These struggles changed over time in line with social, economic, political, and ecological developments. International events/processes (such as the two world wars, economic booms/depressions, and decolonisation) triggered local processes which influenced conservationism either positively or negatively. Wildlife conservation in Kenya during the period under study was dynamic. The thesis challenges the myth of a monolithic 'colonial' wildlife policy often implied in many studies on the subject. The thesis also lays emphasis on the ecological basis of wildlife conservation while recognising the impact of social, political, and economic developments on the evolution of wildlife conservation policy and practice in Kenya. The country's 'geography' not only provided the foundation for conservation but also influenced the programme over time. Droughts, floods, army worm infestations, and other 'natural' occurrences interacted with social and economic changes, such as population growth and the development of capitalism, to shape conservation policy. The conservation programme was thus influenced by a complex interaction of a variety of factors.

The loss of habitat to agriculture is a worldwide problem for biodiversity conservation. One species that has seemingly been able to adapt to the conversion of forests to farmlands is Mackinder’s eagle owl (Bubo capensis mackinderi), which inhabits highland areas, but little is known of its ecology, especially outside of protected areas. This study examined the impact of agricultural practices and farmer’s attitudes on the foraging and population ecology of the Mackinder’s eagle owl in central Kenya. Owl territories were monitored monthly from June 2004- October 2006 for signs of occupancy, breeding activity, mortality and to collect data on food resources. Nest site characteristics were measured for all known nests. Because previous studies showed an affinity for rodents, small mammals were trapped monthly using mark-recapture methodology. In each territory, the type and amount of farm crops were measured each month and farmers were interviewed about their knowledge and beliefs about owls. Mackinder’s eagle owls in central Kenya lived at extremely high density 0.87 owl pairs/km². This density was high compared to other populations of Mackinder’s eagle owl and to Eurasian eagle owl (Bubo bubo) populations in Europe. Breeding success was 48% over three years and this compared well with other species of eagle owl inhabiting human-disturbed areas. All nests and roosts were located in river valleys, and all successful nest sites were located on cliffs or other inaccessible rocky terrain. Nest sites were located adjacent to farms, which provided for both open hunting and an abundance of prey. Breeding activity was concentrated after the rainy seasons and this was likely linked to prey availability after the rains. Agricultural activities generally had a positive effect on rodent populations. Small mammal trapping results revealed that rodents were over 14 times more abundant in farms than in adjacent grassland habitat. This population of Mackinder’s eagle owl had a very catholic diet and consumed mostly mammalian prey species including hares, giant rats, root rats, grooved-tooth rats and small rodents. Small rodents accounted for almost half of the owls’ diet and when their numbers increased, owls responded by consuming more of them, indicating the importance of farming activities to this population of owls. Other populations of eagle owl inhabiting human-disturbed areas had diet widths positively related to levels of habitat disturbance. This result supported optimal foraging theory that more productive environments have predators with more specialized diets, while patchy environments have generalist predators. The ecology of this population of Mackinder’s eagle owls was heavily influenced by human agricultural activities, which generally had a positive effect on their population. Farming activities changed rapidly both within and between seasons as plots were small and neighbouring farmers planted various crops at different times of the year and this was enhanced by irrigation in some areas. Year-round availability of forage within farms had a positive effect on owl prey species, some of which increased relative to the type and amount of crops found in farms. However, 57% of owl injuries and mortalities that occurred were related either directly or indirectly to human activities. Cultural prejudices against owls remain the biggest threat to this population’s long-term persistence. Farmer education was shown to play a significant role in overcoming negative beliefs about owls. Because Mackinder’s eagle owls are highly adaptable to anthropomorphic landscape changes, largely due to their adaptability as food generalists, they are one of the few top predators remaining in this highly disturbed agricultural system. However, populations within agricultural areas remain especially vulnerable to negative human attitudes towards owls due to their close association with human activities.

Masai Mara, a large nature reserve in south-western Kenya, was created in the midst of semi-arid agropastoralist rangelands to protect wildlife. Wildlife and indigenous people co-existed for many years, usually with limited conflict; but in recent years, the conflict has intensified, mainly due to increasing human population, changing land use patterns, and altered perceptions of wildlife. This study examines the causes and nature of wildlife-human conflict in the Masai rangelands of Kenya, and considers how wildlife conservation and human development needs can best be integrated. / Findings indicate that common conflicts are livestock depredation and crop damage, human deaths or injuries, transmission of diseases, and competition for resources. Land surrounding the reserve can be divided into two distinct topographic and agroclimatic regions. The degree of conflict is spatially varied within the region. Upland ranches have high land use potential, high human and livestock population densities, and more development of agriculture. They experience limited conflict with wildlife. Lowland ranches are more arid, have lower human population density and little agriculture, but have high wildlife and livestock population densities and experience a high degree of conflict. These conflicts vary seasonally, and with distance from the protected area. / Perceptions of wildlife and attitudes towards conservation are related to past experience with wildlife. The degree of loss, effectiveness of damage control, fairness of government compensation, and involvement in wildlife tourism affect the degree of tolerance for wildlife conflict. Various socio-economic factors including level of education, knowledge of conservation priorities, and system of land ownership are related to attitudes towards wildlife. As human activity increases in the region, wildlife is more likely to be displaced. Because most animals are migratory, conflict in the land surrounding the reserve puts the viability of animal population in the protected area in question. / A two-phase program for integrating wildlife conservation with human needs is proposed. The first phase involves designation of the region into four zones: Zone A--the protected area, Zone B--the peripheral area, Zone C--multiple use, and Zone D--agriculture. The second phase of the program is the integration of the wildlife conservation with human interests through: community wildlife-damage-control, compensation for loss, sharing of tourism benefits with local people, conservation education, and local participation in wildlife conservation policy. The program provides a framework within which operational decisions can be made, and serves broader natural resource management and community development objectives in the rangelands.

No description available.