To understand more about how the community perceived the concept of the conservancies, I asked community members why they thought the conservancies were formed and what their aim was. Most respondents perceived the conservancy to be set up for income generation, e.g.:
‘The conservancy was only formed for generating money and we joined it without really knowing what its aim was.’
Senior elder, member of OOC, community interview 14
‘It had no other aim other than that the tourism partners could benefit.’
Elder, member of Naboisho Conservancy, community interview 9
‘I think the aim of forming the conservancy is to generate income and as you know there is the county council park and it was said there needs to be introduced other small parks for the community to generate income.’
Group of men, members and non-members, community interview 10
‘The aim of the conservancy is just for tourism so that the landowners can benefit from it, instead of having all that land which is of no use.’
Senior elder, member of Motorogi Conservancy, community interview 29
These comments show that although the conservancy was perceived to be set up for income generation, there was a mixed view of who it was that benefits from conservancies - the tourism investors and/or the landowners. Although most people thought that the conservancies were set up to provide income to both the landowners and the tourism investors, others (such as in the second quote) were more cynical, and believed it to be for the tourism investors to benefit alone. In the third quote, in which these members thought the conservancies were set up to benefit the community, the expectation was that by leasing out their land to the tourism investors, they would receive benefits from tourism, and this would enable the benefits of tourism to spread out further than does the current income from the Reserve. In the fourth quote, this elder viewed the conservancy as providing income to his land which had little use other that tourism. He had recently bought his land in the Motorogi Conservancy, thereby joining the conservancy in the process. By choosing to buy this land, this might explain his interest in becoming a conservancy member, and also why he did not view his land to have much alternative or competing use.
102
Women tended to view the aim of the conservancies more sceptically. Much of this centred around the restrictions that conservancies placed on livestock and livestock grazing. For example:
W1: ‘(the conservancy was set up) just for the purpose of wildlife.’
W2: ’..So that they (the wildlife) can have somewhere where they can be taken care of, so that they don’t mix up with the cows.’
Group of women, husbands are members, community interview 25
‘Their aim is that they want us to sell all our cows.’
Group of women, husbands are members, community interview 15
Since conservancies place restrictions on livestock grazing, these women perceived conservancies as a place for wildlife, but not for cattle. This means a loss of grazing land for cattle, and might explain why in the second quote, these women view the conservancy’s aim was to force people to sell their cows. Many women also said they knew little about the conservancies or their aims because they were little informed about them:
‘We don’t know anything because it was formed abruptly, it was not much discussed about and we were never told. We heard there were meetings, and we heard that the land was given out but we were never informed.’
Group of women, husbands are members, community interview 12
W1: ‘We completely don’t know, we don’t know about the subdivision of land and we don’t know about the conservancy. We’ve just heard that the conservancy was being formed.’
W2: ‘We’ve just heard that this is the conservancy and we don’t know how it was formed.’
W3: ‘We don’t know because we are women and we are not in control. We have just heard that the contract needs to be increased but we don’t know how it will be done... Even when the meetings are held we are not included.’
Group of women, husbands are members, community interview 15
‘Myself, I don’t know, it’s only men who know…about conservancies. I told you before I only know about our cattle, but anything concerning about the land, it’s only men who know.’
One woman, non-member, community interview 16
Since women were not allocated land during group ranch subdivision, very few hold title to land, and thus very few are eligible to become a conservancy member. In fact, less than 1% of
conservancy members are women (KII 14, 18). In most of these cases, women have inherited land from their late husbands. Even though many women have husbands who are conservancy
members, most women said they knew little about conservancies and were unable to give details concerning them. Conservancies were perceived as very much of a land issue, and along the same lines as the subdivision and ownership of land, which is almost entirely in the control of men. Rather, the women were more involved and concerned about cattle, which the conservancies were seen as in opposition to, due to the livestock grazing restrictions. Also, as shown later, few
103
women participated in conservancy meetings (4.6.1). Together, these issues help explain the largely negative views of conservancies given by many women.