Conservation NGO kicked out of Samburu over ‘vested interests’

The East African

May 14, 2007

Environmentalist and principal promoter and founder of the conservation charity, Save the Elephant Dr Ian Douglas-Hamilton has been kicked out of the Samburu National Reserve.
In a letter announcing the decision, the Samburu County Council has accused Dr Douglas-Hamilton of being part of a campaign blocking the building of new tourist facilities in the reserve.

Specifically, the respected conservationist, who has been ordered to shut the operations of the charity immediately, is accused of publishing reports critical of the new projects on the Internet and in an interview with a daily newspaper.

“By virtue of that, the agreement is now cancelled,” says the letter written on April 30 by the Samburu Acting County Clerk, Daniel L. Leleruk. The Clerk further asks the organisation to leave Samburu in three weeks.”

“You are, therefore, required to clear the site within 21 days from the date of this letter.”

Founded in 1993 by Dr Douglas-Hamilton, who acts as the president and chief executive officer, Save the Elephants pioneered elephant’s behavioural studies in the late 1960s in Lake Manyara National Park in Tanzania. Its trustees include the late Netherlands monarch, Prince Bernard, Professor Fritz Vollrath, Sir Winfred Thesiger, and Felix Appelbe. Others are Saba Douglas-Hamilton, (Dr Douglas-Hamilton’s daughter) and Marlene McCay.

Dr Douglas-Hamilton is an Oxford-University alumni who has studied elephants in a number of countries in Africa since the 1970s.

Apparently, Save the Elephants, which has operated in the Reserve as a charity-cum-research organisations for the past 14 years, had signed an MOU with the council to promote the Samburu National Reserve in its publications.

In the MOU, the organisation had pledged to promote the reserve through the Internet, Kenyan and international media. But now the county council says that by giving the information to the newspaper, Dr Douglas-Hamilton had broken the agreement.

But speaking to The EastAfrican last week, Dr Douglas-Hamilton denied that the information he provided was malicious.

“All I did was to make a presentation on the implications of (new) tourism developments in Samburu during a joint meeting with the National Environment Management Authority.”

The meeting had been called by Ecotourism Society of Kenya, the Kenya Tourist Federation and the African Wildlife Foundation on February 22 for presentation of objections to NEMA’s Director-General over the Authority's approval of several new lodges.

The EastAfrican has obtained a copy of the minutes of the meeting detailing what Dr Douglas-Hamilton had told those present. The bone of contention, it seems, are a number of upcoming tourism facilities — Ukarimu Ltd and Miiba Miingi Ltd — that were okayed by the Samburu County Council and NEMA.

In his presentation, Dr Douglas-Hamilton had stated that the new developments when complete, will add 413 beds bringing the total bed capacity to 751.

“The degradation (of the Reserve) from further developments would not be sustainable,” he said.

In addition, Dr Douglas-Hamilton had said that the sites where the lodges are being developed are already “congested” besides being in places with the highest density of wildlife.

He further said that the new developers have not considered the fact that human population is bound to increase especially within the vicinity of the new lodges.

“There is demographic evidence to show that settlements emerge and grow faster within the vicinity of tourism developments,” he pointed out.

He expressed fear that once such settlements come up, they become no-go-zones for wildlife” hence reducing its habitats.

“I must ask for a fair hearing from the Samburu Reserve Committee to present the whole truth of the matter and request that the expulsion order be revoked” he says in a letter to the Clerk on May 4.

But the Council wants none of this and is claiming that Dr Douglas-Hamilton might, after all, be an interested party in the Reserve’s tourism activities. In a telephone interview with The EastAfrican, Mr Leleruk claimed that by denouncing the new developments, all Dr Douglas-Hamilton has been doing is to protect his tourism business.

“Although Dr Douglas-Hamilton’s main pre-occupation is elephant research, his wife, Olga Douglas-Hamilton, runs the Elephant Watch Safaris which is located in the Samburu National Reserve.”

According to promotional materials posted on the Internet, the camp is situated on the banks of the Ewaso Nyiro River in a site frequented by the jumbos on their way to the river. It is an exclusive, high-cost facility that charges between Ksh21,000 ($300) and Ksh40,600 ($580) per person per night.

Although Dr Douglas-Hamilton admitted that his wife runs the 10-bed tourist camp he denied business considerations were behind his demand for the protection of Samburu’s wilderness.

“Yes, my wife runs the park...it is true but I am a scientist and would never compromise my scientific work for business considerations.”

But this seems to contradict information posted on the Camp’s website, which alludes to the fact that some of the activities of the two outfits are intertwined.

“Save the Elephants (STE) and Elephant Watch Safaris (EWS) sponsored a survey in the area as part of their community projects. As a result of this, STE and EWS have created a fund for education and training opportunities,” he said.

The row between Samburu County Council and Dr Douglas-Hamilton appear to give credence to claims by new investors in the tourism sector that all organisations such as the the Eco-tourism Society of Kenya (ESOK) and the Kenya Tourist Federation (KTF) have been doing is raise legal and procedural hurdles for purposes of preventing new players from venturing into the industry.

Apparently, ESOK, KTF, Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) and Dr Douglas-Hamilton had on February 22 asked NEMA to cancel Environmental Impact Assessment licenses it had issued to Ukarimu Ltd and Miiba Miingi Ltd arguing that the properties would pose irreversible environmental damage to the Reserve.

They had also said that by allocating the sites to the two developers, the county council had disregarded the reserves’ General Management Plan that was prepared in 2004 by the African Wildlife Foundation and which the council had endorsed. Among other provisions, the Plan had ruled out new developments in the Reserve proper and had asked the council to direct them to surrounding group ranches.

But emerging players and those already in the sector but who now wish to venture into new areas, have complained that older players and especially non-governmental have harped on environmental considerations as stipulated in the Environmental Management & Co-ordination Act of 1999 to keep competition out of reserves such as Samburu.

ESOK’s executive officer Judy Kepher-Gona denied this and said the officials of Samburu County Council who sanctioned new developments in the Reserve were driven by other motives and not environmental considerations. “What is happening in Samburu is love for money and short-term gains at the expense of wildlife.

But still, she could not rule out that those spearheading the campaigns against new developments are interested parties.

“You cannot rule out that the people making objections are interested parties? It is not about who is making the objection, what is important is whether the objections are valid,” she said.

Article at the following link:
http://www.nationmedia.com/eastafrican/current/News/News140507.htm

Scramble for Samburu National Reserve

Wangui Maina, Business Daily Africa
May 16, 2007

As tourism grows, there is more demand for bed space and infrastructure but environmentalists are crying foul that this development will come in conflict with the areas ecosytem.

As the number of tourists continue to rise, the quest for bed capacity has increased too and so is the controversy on where to put camping lodges and sites within the parks.

The matter is boiling over.

At the moment the tourism industry is struggling to cope with the bed capacity –especially in some of the pristine environments which had hitherto been unconquered.

At the Samburu and Buffalo Springs National Reserves the number of lodges are set to increase but these developments have however raised some controversy.

Environmentalists and other players in the industry say the recent developments, especially in the Samburu Reserve, are likely interfere with the ecosystem of the reserves and the environments as a whole, leading to the destruction of one of the country’s tourism product.

In 2004 the reserves had approximately 338 beds but following a count this year bed the capacity has more than doubled to about 767 due to the construction of new lodges in the reserves.

The new facilities, Miba Mingi, Ukarimu, Atua Enkop and Sopa Lodge, has drawn controversy as the northern tourist circuit comes under scrutiny.

Atua Enkop and Miba Mingi are constructed on the Samburu National Reserve which has a General Management Plan (GMP) that recommends that no new developments should be carried out in the reserve. The GMP says that these developments should be done on approved community land.

Three years ago at the invitation of Samburu County Council, Africa Wildlife Foundation (AWF) and other partners worked to produce a comprehensive GMP that was approved by the Council.

According to Dr Philip Muruthi, the Director of Conservation at AWF, “the GMP mainly looked at the density of tourist facilities, the population of humans and animals and made recommendations on the conservation of the reserve.”

The plan was drawn up to serve as a guide to the management and development of the Samburu National Reserve. Though it was not intended to offer solutions to all the problems facing the reserve it was to provide a rationalised approach to the use of resources and visitor management, as well as provided a precedent in one of Kenya’s favoured tourism destination.

The plan, which expires in 2009, called for coherent tourism development that aimed at maximising returns from the industry while at the same time ensuring that the natural resource base, upon which the industry depends, will be developed and put in place.

The Samburu National Reserve is expansive and is part of the country’s wilderness attraction, that is blessed with the Ewaso Nyiro River that divides Samburu from the Buffalo Springs Reserve.

One of the emerging issues is that the river is the basis of the both reserved’ eco-system and attraction as it draws a wide range of animals that are the main tourist attraction.

One of the most striking recommendations of the GMP was that there was an over establishment of developments in the reserve and this was to be reviewed with a view of reducing their numbers in order to create a sense of exclusivity. It also recommend the establishment of new facilities on the community land.
But that appears to have been shelved.

AWF is now questioning the development of the two facilities in Samburu: Atua Enkop and Miba Mingi; arguing that their presence raises questions on the sustainability of the tourist product in this reserve, especially since the construction of these facilities is against the GMP.
In a letter to the Samburu County Council, dated October, 3 , 2006, AWF questioned why new developments were being undertaken in the reserve stating “the new tourism facilities are not being approved in accordance with the current GMP.”

But in response to this letter the then Clerk to the Council, James Lerayiarra stated: “the new tourist facilities referred to are temporary facilities which came up due to an increased number of tourist in the region.”

However, on the ground permanent structures have been sited and photographed.

According to Ian Hamilton of Save the Elephant, an NGO that researches on Elephants in Samburu, permanent structures have been erected as opposed to the temporary ones expected.

Hamilton’s main concern is the location of the new developments. An avid researcher on the movement of elephants and their sightings, Hamilton says that elephant can be found along the river and 22 to 26 of the tracked elephants visited each proposed development site for a couple of hours.
“From the studies we have done so far we see these elephants spend a good number of hours in some of the places the developments are taking place,” he says. That means that if the elephants favourite spots are interfered with, they might leave!

Already, the industry, under Kenya Tourism Federation (KTF), the tourism private sector umbrella body, has lodged a formal complaint to National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA).

Following these complaints the Authority sent out inspectors who visited the sites mid February 2007. According to the report submitted following the visit some stop orders were recommended.

The sites visit to Atua Enkop Africa Limited’s facility operating as Elephant Bedroom Camp, according to the NEMA report showed the location of the camp would interfere with animal movement. The report advised that a stop order should be issued because the facility “did not adhere to the GMP as far as zonation is concerned.”

The visit to Miba Mingi revealed that they had not adhered to the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) licence and a stop order was to be issued for violation of the licence awaiting further action by NEMA. The report stated that they had put up permanent structures as opposed to the approved temporary ones allowed in the EIA.

Industry insiders say that to date no stop orders have been issued to the developers.

Robert Cullen, a director of Atua Enkop, told Business Daily they have a valid lease that was signed in 2005 and they applied to Samburu County Council and got a licence in 2006. And in December 2006, they got a signed EIA certificate from NEMA.

According to NEMAs Director of Compliance and Enforcement, Mr. Maurice Mbegera, the Authority approved the EIAs for the developments in the Samburu reserve based on advice from relevant lead agencies and the Country Council.

Cullen insists they have met all NEMA conditions but according to the new inspectors report they haven’t.

NEMA says that before they issued Cullen’s company with a certificate they undertook a full EIA study report, which includes placing advertisement in the local dailies and the Kenya Gazette as required by the Act.

EIA is an examination of the effects of a project on the environment. It identifies both negative and positive impacts of any development activity or project with a goal to ensure that decision on proposed activities are environmentally sustainable.

The EIAs are carried out by NEMA inspectors and certificates of approval are issued out.

NEMAs mandate is to ensure good environmental governance. It was established under section 7 of the Environmental Management and Co-ordination Act (EMCA) in 1999. According to the Act, NEMA in consultation with the relevant lead agencies issues guidelines for the management of national parks and game reserves.
However industry players are questioning NEMA and their issuing of EIAs even in areas where they should not.

According to William Kamunge, Ag. Chief Executive of KTF, there are many irregularities within NEMA where they give approvals to develop in the wrong areas.
According to Mr. Kamunge, a letter was drafted issuing the stop orders however it was never signed to the industries knowledge. “We were told such an order should come for the ministry of environment,” he adds.

“No stop orders have been issued to any of the developments,” Ruth Musembi, NEMA’s Public Relations Manager, told Business Daily. Musembi, however said that following the matters that have been raised the issue of new developments in the reserve is being addressed by the authority in consultation with relevant authorities.

Following these frustrations KTF says it is looking for other avenues, other than the court, to address this issue. In a similar case a few years back the industry took NEMA to court contending the issued EIA certificate to a developer in what was sited as a breeding ground for leopards in Maasai Mara.

The industry argues that the environmental body ignored the advice of its own technical team that visited the area and recommended against any interference with the actual status of the area. NEMA denied this and at the end of it all the court issued a stoppage order last year.

The industry won the case but at a cost of Sh2.7 million. “We cannot afford such a process again, but this case did show NEMA’s loopholes in issuing EIAs,” states Mr. Kamunge. “We are hoping to take this issue to the highest authority possible and have it addressed,” he added.

At the Buffalo Springs and due to the similarity with the Samburu eco-system, recommendations have been made for no further construction. However according to the warden Mohammed Tibi, it does not have a GMP and cannot be held to the Samburu one.

“We are looking at plans of having one, and the Samburu one does not apply to Buffalo Springs,” he says.

Buffalo Springs falls on the opposite side of the Samburu Reserve and falls under the Isiolo County Council.

The main construction taking place in this reserve is the Ukarimu Lodge by SOMAK, the biggest tour operator in the country. According to the report by the NEMA inspectors Ukarimu showed the worst destruction of vegetation as the fences area is part of an important habitat for wildlife. The inspectors also recommended a stop order fro this development.

However according to Joash Olum, head of operations at SOMAK, they have never gotten a stop order. He argues that the reserve lacks enough accommodation and believes the Council knows what it is doing.

Somak are currently building 20 permanent tents and eight villas, construction which began two months ago.

Mr. Olum believes it will be complete by the end of the year.

Both Mr Olum and Mr. Cullen it is all boils to the a question of business competition in the reserves.

SOMAK takes up to 20 people every week during the low session and 50 during high season to the reserve, feeding the other lodges with their clientele.
“What we are building is not even enough for the number of people we take to both reserves, we will still need the established lodges to accommodate demand,” added Mr. Olum.

The old buffalo springs lodge in the reserve is also undergoing refurbishment having changed hands.

Whether it is a question of competition or genuine concerns by environmentalists will have to be addressed soon. As matters stand now, the northern circuit and developments there on are boiling for attention as the low-toned debate comes to the fore.

Article at the following link:
http://bdafrica.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=758&Itemid=3863

I posted these two articles because it is indeed sad news for the Samburu Reserve. As with all areas, too many lodges/camps in an area WILL effect the wildlife and ecology of the area. It will only be a matter of time.

I am also extremely sorry that Dr. Iain Douglas-Hamilton has been chased out of the park. Yes, his wife has a small 5 tent camp there (where I have stayed and which is expensive). That being said, Iain has probably done more for the cause of African elephants in general, and the Samburu elephants in particular, than any other person alive today. Iain is the one who initially learned the technique of identifying individual elephants and passed the knowledge on to other experts. He has been collaring elephants and tracking them for years, learning about their habits and travel routes. He has also been available to anyone in Kenya who needs help doing aerial censuses of the elephants in a given area.

As the first article said,

“You cannot rule out that the people making objections are interested parties? It is not about who is making the objection, what is important is whether the objections are valid,” she said.

The Samburu people don't seem to understand what will happen. The animals will eventually leave the reserve permanently, then tourists will no longer go there and the Samburu will end up even poorer than they are now.

On each of the three times I stayed at Samburu I was quite taken aback by the Uaso Nyiro. It almost seemed like a tidal river. You would see it in the morning flowing strongly and high, and by late afternoon the water level was way down. Now if they are adding another three lodges, the water in that area will be even more precious and hard to get.

I was, I guess mistakenly, under the impression for years that the Samburu people cared more about wildlife than other tribes i.e. Maasai. When one of the big elephant bulls, Hakim, was shot a few years ago the Samburu people were in tears - and it was the Samburu people that went out and found the man who shot the elephant and turned him over to KWS and the police. Now it seems that they are no better than the rest - all of them just trying to make a quick buck and wildlife and the environment be damned.

I was, I guess mistakenly, under the impression for years that the Samburu people cared more about wildlife than other tribes i.e. Maasai. When one of the big elephant bulls, Hakim, was shot a few years ago the Samburu people were in tears - and it was the Samburu people that went out and found the man who shot the elephant and turned him over to KWS and the police. Now it seems that they are no better than the rest - all of them just trying to make a quick buck and wildlife and the environment be damned.

Jan,
don't paint all Sambure with a broasd brush! In my experience with county councils, decision making is kept within the few members of that council, as opposed to seeking the majority vote. I would not be suprised if the council members alone were involved in approving the new developments. The samburu people, i'm quite sure, had little knowledge and no say of the events. Furthermore, we should not judge them on issues such as this. Their perception of wealth is very different from ours. Someone convinces them that they will make more money today if they do this or that and they jump to it. Most of us in their position would react the same. Rural Africans, particularly those that have not been too exposed to western culture and teachings such as the Samvburu, have a very hirearchical (sp?) culture. The "chiefs" decide on everything and the majority are resigend to accepting that decision. In this case, I believe the county council acted as the "chiefs"!

Sad news,

I agree with bwanamich, I doubt the `people´ voted for kicking him out.

The people may not have been the ones that kicked him out, but I'm sure they are well aware of it. All the employees in Elephant Watch Camp are Samburu. I'm sure they would have let their people know what was going on. My guess is that most of the employees in all the camps/lodges are also Samburu. What you are implying then is that tribe members have no way of controlling or expressing their concerns to Council members - is that correct? Can pressure put on a Council by the tribe force a current Council to be ousted? Can wildlife authorities or the government override a decision by a Council? Do the tribe members ever find out what the Council members receive under the table to OK decisions such as this?

Must rush off to work, but hope you'll enlighten me more on Councils and the power they wield so that when I get home from work I can learn more about it.