Saving Kenya’s Forests

Category: Community, Conservation | Date: Feb 23 2009 | By: kenyaforests

If one went into the Baawa part of Kirisia forest in Samburu, on would be tempted to think they are in paradise. Hardly five minutes into the forest, we encountered a herd of elephants (one is barely visible in the photo below). We were told that had we stayed longer into the evening and waited for the herders to leave with their animals, the elephants would have moved closer. We would also have seen buffaloes, and, if we were lucky, leopards. Earlier on a member of the community group we had been meeting with excitedly described the forest as paradise. I could see he had not exaggerated.

But we could see that this paradise might not last.

As we left, hundreds of domestic animals (sheep, goats and cattle) were leaving the forest. The Samburu have traditionally depended on the forest for grazing. But the herds have multiplied and the population has grown exerting a lot of pressure on the forest. The Kenya Forest Service is currently not charging any fee for grazing, unlike in other forests in Kenya, for instance in the Aberdares where communities there have been forced to reduce their cattle and collect grass for zero grazing instead of letting the animals into the forest.

Nevertheless, Baawa seems to be one of the most intact parts of Kirisia forest. In other areas such as Ngari and Tamioi the forest is very degraded. In the 1980’s, a forest fire destroyed large parts of the Kirisia. The area was not closed to grazing and was not allowed to regenerate. There has also been illegal poaching of the African Pencil Cedar, the dominant species in this forest, for charcoal. The KFS reported spending a lot of time and resources to contain the destruction.

Now, communities surrounding this forest have organised themselves and are in the process of forming a CFA to help in management and conservation of the forest. Hopefully this will go some way in keeping this paradise alive.

Liz

No responses yet

Category: charcoal | Date: Feb 16 2009 | By: kenyaforests

We complain about it, we pretend not to use it (while picking our teeth after eating nyama choma cooked with it), we castigate those who burn and sell it, and sympathies with the masses that need it. Charcoal: the outcast in Kenya’s energy family.

But who is the charcoal producer?

In this  post, we re-visit Murefu Barasa’s description of the known four types of producer.

First is the notorious and elusive ‘sneak and snip’ producer who poaches trees from gazetted government forest and other protected areas. When one mentions charcoal, this type of producer if often what a majority visualize in mind. However, our forest cover is less than 2% and so there cannot be many of theseacross the country considering much of the land in Kenya (nearly 80%) is categorized as arid and semiarid (ASAL). These producers are concentrated in districts that border or encompass forest reserves, for example Nakuru, Kakamega, Nyeri, Malindi districts.

Photo: Burnt tree in Maasai Mau, cleared to make way for farms

Second, is the ‘sideline’ producer. Unlike the ‘sneak and snip’, production is done in the ASAL areas and more specifically on large scale privately owned ranches. These producers are often labourers in the ranches and are allowed by the owners to use some of the trees for charcoal as pay for their services or incentives. This is common in Taita Taveta, Trans Mara, Makueni districts. Charcoal is not the primary source of income for these producers but takes up a supplementary role. Under this category also lie the charcoal producers in ASAL areas who make charcoal as a drought coping mechanism for example in Kitui, Turkana, Baringo and West Pokot districts.

Third is the ‘salvage’ producer, similar to the sideline as they both operate in ASAL areas. However, the salvage producer uses trees or shrubs that will otherwise have been discarded as waste. Prior to the booming charcoal production in Narok district, landowners used to burn all the vegetation on their land in readiness for cultivation. This has since changed and now salvage charcoal producers are invited to do the clearance. Production is high with yields of up to 50 bags per run. Another example is Garissa, where the controversial Prosopis shrub has taken over pasture land. While some clear this ‘weed’ freeing up land for their livestock, others use the same for charcoal production with amazing success. Salvage producers also visit areas that have been excised for human settlement and use the felled trees for charcoal and so are often wrongly accused of clearing forests for charcoal and yet the clearance is primarily for human settlement and agriculture, charcoal production being an after thought.

Fourth is the ‘sow and reap’ producer. These are few, and mostly found in the high potential areas for example Bungoma, Lugari, Meru North, Nyando districts. Production is low, often less than five bags per round as they obtain the raw materials from standing stock as opposed to felled trees. Often only branches are used through pruning.

And therefore as we consider further the charcoal debate, we can say that no one can dispute totally banning the ‘sneak and snip’ producer and perhaps we can all agree on strengthening the ‘sideline’ producer and the ‘sow and reap’.

This post is part of an article initially written for the KFWG newsletter after the National Charcoal Survey carried out in 2005.

KFS is in the process of writing, for gazettement, the charcoal rules and regulations. They will give guidance on charcoal production.

One response so far

Category: Conservation, Forest loss | Date: Feb 02 2009 | By: kenyaforests

Kenya is losing the Sandalwood tree (Osyris lanceolata) to illegal harvesting. The harvesting – initially reported in the Chyulu hills - seems to have escalated and has now been reported in Kajiado, Taita, Amboseli and surrounding ranches, Samburu, Koibatek, and Kikuyu Escarpment and many other areas. In most areas it’s being harvested without much control.

Sandalwood is exploited for its essential oils used in perfumery. The heartwood of the trunk, main branches and roots contain an essential oil. The oil blends so well and with many fragrance materials that it has become a common blender-fixative used in countless perfumes.

The problem first existed along the Kenyan-Tanzania border, with most of the exploitation occurring in the Chyulu hills where the tree still grows in abundance compared to the other areas.

The tree grows to a height of 1-6m, but it’s the roots that are most favored. The essential oil concentration is highest in the roots, followed by the trunk. The tree is dioecious (male and female on separate trees) and the female is most preferred as it is said to have a better quality of heartwood.

Under normal conditions young trees grow slowly, only gradually developing a core of heartwood. Uprooting the tree is therefore seriously depleting its numbers. As the tree is also parasitic and regenerates via shoots from exposed roots, this mode of harvesting will undermine regeneration.

It is believed that the tree is being traded in Tanzania. The sharp rise in extraction in Kenya is linked to over exploitation coupled by strict surveillance in Tanzania. The tree is being harvested in Kenya and exported through various undisclosed routes to Tanzania. After value addition (semi processing) the products are re-exported to Indonesia, India, South Africa, France, Germany and eastern Asia countries for the cosmetic and pharmaceutical industry.

A taskforce of government institutions was formed to look into the harvesting and trade of sandalwood. In its preliminary survey report it says that poverty in the areas where this species occur is an underlying factor that might make the fight against the illegal trade difficult to win.

Communities in these areas are living under extreme poverty and are ready to undertake any kind of business to earn a livelihood, even when they are being exploited. For example, communities around Chyulu National Park earn KShs 4 to KShs 7 for every kilo harvested, which the middleman sells at Kshs 80 Per kilo. Successful intervention measures therefore would have to address poverty, and other sources of livelihood.

Propagation of the tree is also being researched at by the Kenya Forestry Research Institute. For now surveillance is being stepped up and appeals have been made to relevant authorities, such as the Kenya Ports Authority, to block the points of exit.

This post first appeared in an issue of KFWG’s Misitu News.

Tags: sandalwood

2 responses so far