Human-wildlife conflict (HWC) arises when wildlife shares the same physical space with humans. HWC, particularly livestock predation results in great negative impacts both to pastoralist and carnivores. Various approaches including compensation, livestock guarding, translocation of the problematic predator, and predator-proof bomas (PPB) have been used to mitigate such conflicts. We assessed PPB in mitigating human-predator conflict in Loitokitok sub-county by focusing on its effectiveness, most problematic predator, community's perceptions, and comparing the PPB and traditional bomas characteristics. Data were obtained from 90 homesteads in Olgulului, Mbirikani and Kimana/Tikondo group ranches. Correlation and paired t-tests were used to analyze the data. Our findings suggest that the boma sizes correlated with the total number of livestock in the boma (r = 0.386, n = 90, p = 0.000) but not the number of people. Hyena and lion accounted for the highest loss of shoats and cattle, with hyena mostly killing shoats (37%) and lions preying largely on cattle (34%). The most problematic predator was as hyena (68%). We found positive relationships between the most problematic predator and total number of livestock (r = 0.319, n = 90, p = 0.002), and boma circumference (r = 0.295, n = 90, p = 0.005). Livestock predation was high in boma during the wet seasons (April, September, October and December). The erection of PPB reduced livestock predation by 91.11% (n = 45) and time spend guarding livestock at night. We recommend a continuous maintenance of the PPB as a long term solution to livestock loss at night and a close guarding of livestock during the day by adults to reduce day time predations.

No abstract

No abstract

Human –wildlife conflicts (HWC) affect the social-economic aspects of millions of people across the world and is one of the most important challenges facing wildlife conservation. Long-term data collection provides an opportunity to critically understand HWC trends and enable wildlife stakeholders to create evidence-based solutions for co-existence of people and wildlife. We used Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) data for the 2010-2018 period to analyse trends in typology, seasonality and economic costs of HWC in Kajiado and Laikipia Counties in Kenya. A total of 953 HWC reported cases in the two counties were analysed. Wildlife threats to human life, crop damage and livestock predation were the common form of HWC, contributing 65.7% (n=626), 21.7% (n=207), and 7.7% (n=73) respectively. Apart from livestock predation (t=2.431; P=0.028) all other types of HWC did not show any significant differences in the two counties over the nine-year period. Elephants were responsible for the highest conflict cases (79%, n=753) followed by baboons (6.9%, n=66). Elephants contributed to the highest human fatality and injuries (43%, n=10); while snakes and buffalo were second, each contributing to 17% (n=4) of the total cases. Majority of the HWC occurred in the dry season months of July (n=114), January (n=99) and October (n=96). The overall trend indicated increasing HWC cases over the 9 years in both counties. The analysis of economic cost of HWC showed that a total of 64.09 hectares of crops were damaged in 2010-2018, with 70% of the cases reported in Kajiado County. In terms of predation, Kajiado lost livestock worth KES 1,785, 000 (U$ 16,780.53) while Laikipia lost KES 407,000 (U$ 3826.15). This study provides empirical evidence that can be used to develop strategies for mitigating HWC based on types, seasons and conflict species.

It is estimated that more than 2.5 billion people worldwide use biomass for cooking. Burning biomass is one of the major contributors to carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emission-a principle gas in global warming and climate change. One way of cutting down the CO 2 emissions is adaptation of efficient and clean energy technologies. This study examined the efficiency of the energy saving stoves in Amboseli ecosystem by comparing the cooking time, energy use, wood fuel and carbon emissions to the traditional three stone open fire set ups. The result indicates a statistical difference in the time spent cooking on energy stoves and three stone open fire (t = 5.3055; n = 60; p = 0.00117). Energy saving stoves saved 12.7% -33.3% of wood fuel compared to the traditional three stones set ups. Water boiling tests to determine the energy savings, revealed that energy saving stoves saved between 25.74% and 26.16% energy/joule per session in-house and outdoor settings respectively. Based on the two meals prepared per day by each household, the total Carbon Emission Savings for the 1000 local beneficiaries of energy saving stoves varied from 102,200 kg CO 2 (indoor cooking) to 357,700 kg CO 2 (outdoor cooking) per year. It is therefore concluded that energy saving stoves saves time, fuel wood and energy, and reduces carbon emissions. The study findings refute the claims that open fire when carefully operated can be fuel efficient and clean burning to rival energy saving stoves. To improve the performance of the energy saving stoves, it is recommended that a design modification be done to include a chimney to emit excess smoke during indoor cooking; and the stove should be fixed to the floor with mortar to minimise heat loss and breakages.