Logging Dividends:  The Maasai,  Politicians and  Timber Extraction in the Mau Forest, 1895-1960.

Philip K. Chemelil Babere Kerata Chacha Waweru Peter

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18535/sshj.v8i05.1050

##plugins.themes.novelty.article.sidebar##

Issue
Vol. 8 No. 05 (2024)
Published
2024-05-14
Keywords:
    Mau Forest, land use, colonial policies, pit sawing, settlement, Maasai
PDF

Abstract

While the Mau Forest Complex is considered a critical water tower area in Kenya, the ecosystem is under increasing threat from irregular and poorly planned settlements, encroachments and illegal logging. Maasai Mau Forest which is part of the larger Mau Forest complex is experiencing pressure of unprecedented levels.  As such, this study presents a comprehensive historical examination of the intricate interplay between the Maasai communities, national politics and timber extraction in the Mau complex in Kenya. Drawing upon a case study analysis of the Maasai section of the Mau Forest, this study delves into the dynamics shaping the relationship between indigenous peoples and the timber industry. Through a combination of qualitative interviews, document analysis, and ethnographic fieldwork, the research explores the complex socio-political, economic, and environmental factors influencing indigenous perspectives on timber extraction.  Key issues identified here are for example nature of land rights and ownership, the impact of resource exploitation on indigenous livelihoods and cultural heritage, power asymmetries in decision-making processes, the role of legal frameworks and regulations in shaping indigenous rights, and the significance of community empowerment and advocacy in resisting unsustainable practices. Additionally, the study examines the influence of corporate interests, government policies, and international interventions on Maasai experiences with timber extraction.  Findings reveal diverse Maasai responses to timber extraction politics, ranging from resistance and activism to negotiation and collaboration with external stakeholders. Moreover, the study underscores the importance of recognizing indigenous knowledge systems, cultural values, and land stewardship practices in promoting sustainable forest management and fostering equitable relationships between indigenous communities and the timber industry.

References

1. Baldyga, T. J. et al. (2007). “Assessing Land Cover Change in Kenya’s Mau Forest Region Using
a. Remotely Sensed Data” African Journal of Ecology 46, 46-54, doi: 10. 1111/j.1365-2028.2007.00806x.
2. Beinart,W. and Lotte, H.(2009). Environment and Empire. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. Beinart.W.(2000). “African History and Environmental History” African Affairs Vol, 99. No 395,
a. Centenary Issue; A Hundred Years of Africa (April 2000) pp 269-302.
4. Berry,S.(1989). “Social Institutions and Access to Resources in Africa”,59(1):41-55,1989.
5. Boone, Catherine.(2012). Land Conflict and Distributive Politics in Kenya. African Studies Review,
a. April 2012. Vol 55, No 1 (April 2012) pp 75-103: Cambridge University Press.
6. KNA/DC/NKU/1/5 Annual Report--Nakuru District 1952.
7. Hutchins, D.E. (1909). Report on Forests of British East Africa. London: H.M. Stationery Office.
8. Klopp, J. “Deforestation and Democratization: Patronage, Politics and Forests in Kenya”
a. Kenya Land Alliuance2011{online}Available at: http//www.kenyaland alliance.or.ke/home/viewed on July 22 2020.
9. Klopp,J. M. and Sang, J.K.(2011) . “Maps, Power, and the Destruction of the Mau Forest in Kenya”:
a. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, winter/ spring.
10. KNA/ DC/NKR/1/7 Annual Report-Narok District 1951.
11. KNA/K/6349/ECO/1750. An Economic Survey of Forestry in Kenya and Recommendations
a. Regarding Forest Commission. Nairobi, The English Press 1951.
12. KNA/NKU/1/6 Annual Report- Nakuru District.1953.

13. Major Oliphant. “The Commercial Possibilities and Development of Forests in British East Africa.

14. McCann,J.M.“The Plow and the Forest: Narratives of Deforestation in Ethiopia, 1840-
a. 1992”.Environmental History Volume 2, Issue2 April 1997, 138-159https://www.wwfkenya.org/-our-work-forest. Retrieved 20/05/2022.
15. Ofcansky, T. (1984) “Kenya Forestry under British Colonial Administration, 1895-1963”, Journal of Forest History, July.
16. Pearl of Portsmouth. (1937). “The Future of Forest Policy for Kenya Report”. Africa”. Colonial
a. Forest Resources Development Department Colonial Office, 1937.
17. Siringi, E.M. (2008). Forest Conflict Amidst National Controversy in Kenya: Lessons of the
a. Mau Forest Complex. Environment and Natural Resource Journal 8(1), pp 43.5.4.
18. Southall. Roger.(2005). “Ndungú Report Summary” Review of African Political Economy, 103
a. (March) pp.142-151.
19. Talbot, L.H. and M.H. Talbot, M.H. (1960). “Land use Survey of Narok District. District
a. Commissioners Office. Narok.
20. Trapnell, C.G. and Langdale,I.(1962). “A Sketch of East African Vegetation (Eight British
a. Commonwealth Forestry Conference”, East Africa.
21. Willis, T.G et al. (1969). Report of the Agricultural Feasibility Study Team. Narok District, Kenya,
a. Report to Government of Canada.

Authors

Philip K. Chemelil
Department of Public Affairs and Environmental Studies Laikipia University Kenya.
Babere Kerata Chacha
Department of Public Affairs and Environmental Studies Laikipia University Kenya.
Waweru Peter
Department of Public Affairs and Environmental Studies Laikipia University Kenya.
[1]
“Logging Dividends:  The Maasai,  Politicians and  Timber Extraction in the Mau Forest, 1895-1960”., Soc. sci. humanities j., vol. 8, no. 05, pp. 3600–3611, May 2024, doi: 10.18535/sshj.v8i05.1050.