Threats to Biodiversity and their Implications in Protected and Adjacent Dispersal Areas of Kenya

Abstract

This study identified threats against biodiversity and conservation in Kenya, and their prevalence across protected areas. The susceptibility of protected areas to the threat factors was also assessed.Ten threat factors were identified from information obtained through interviews with protected area officers. The most prevalent threat factors were the bush meat trade, poaching, prevalence of human-wildlife conflicts, human population density and encroachment, and loss of migration corridors and dispersal areas. Most of the protected areas were susceptible to more than half of the threat factors. All marine protected areas,a majority of forested and protected areas popular with tourists were highly susceptible to most of the threat factors. The findings suggest that biodiversity and most of the protected areas in Kenya are currently faced with various threats. Forest ecosystems, marine protected areas and wetlands need urgent and focused conservation strategies to safeguard them and their biodiversity. Tourism is, however, not a major primary threat; paradoxically some of the other threats identified may be a threat to Kenya's tourism industry.

A Field Study in the Status and Threats of Cultivation in Kimana and Ilchalai Swamps in Amboseli Dispersal Area, Kenya

“…Furthermore, this displaces and separates people from critical resources such as swamps. This will increase poverty and environmental degradation given that the majority of these people have no significant education, and rely on these resources for basic livelihood needs [10,13].…”

“…Human encroachment on wildlife dispersal areas is prominent in 70% of protected areas in Kenya [10]. The increase in agriculture has led to severe fragmentation of wildlife dispersal areas and intense humanwildlife conflicts [7,10] and may also be a cause of depressed livelihoods among the Maasai [11].…”

Managers’ perceptions of threats to the protected areas of Kenya: prioritization for effective management

“…The threat categories used (Table 1) were developed in a preliminary study (Okello & Kiringe, 2004) of the perceptions of the same protected area officers. In the present study we requested them to score, independently of each other, the relative severity of each threat, on a scale of 1-5 (1, no threat; 2, mild threat; 3, moderate threat; 4, high threat; 5, severe threat), to the protected areas they served.…”

“…These officers had all served continuously for .5 years. Interviews were conducted over 6 months in 2002, following a preliminary study (Okello & Kiringe, 2004).…”

“…Since then many protected areas have been designated (Sindiga, 1995;Sarkar, 1999) and these areas are important both for their biodiversity and for their support of the country's economy through tourism (Mugabe, 1998;Mugabe et al, 1998;Okello et al, 2001;Kameri, 2002). Conservation remains one of the key national obligations of the Kenya Government Kameri, 2002) but the country's protected areas are facing many threats (Smith, 1999;Johnstone, 2000;Okello & Kiringe, 2004).…”