Common use of KENYA Clause in Contracts

KENYA. In Kenya, the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act (2013) broadly provides for the protection of vulnerable ecosystems along the coastal zone through MPAs managed by KWS. This act focuses on terrestrial wildlife resources, and a specific act for marine living resources may enhance the effectiveness of KWS activities on the coast (Samloilys et al., 2015). In Kenya, (in direct contrast with Tanzania) Marine Reserves are larger, with resident communities, and allow multiple uses, although a zonation system is used including core zones, specified use zones, general use zones, and a buffer zone. Marine Parks are smaller and are no take zones. In the past, the government of Kenya tended to choose coral reefs to gazette as parks because of their aesthetic appeal and rich biodiversity. Later the government introduced marine reserves that were larger than the parks and encompassed neighbouring seagrass beds and mangrove forests. The reserves provide a more balanced ecosystem-based approach to marine conservation and management (Samoilys and Obura, 2011). More recently, a network of community conservation areas (Maina et al., 2011) has been established in and adjacent to the marine reserves. Unlike the parks, the reserves allow carefully managed fishing by local communities. Figure 5 shows the three Kenyan Marine Protected Areas in the proposed TBCA. These are from the north to south: Diani Chale Marine Reserve; Mpunguti Marine Reserve; and Kisite Marine Park. Although Diani-Chale Marine Reserve was proclaimed in 1995, it has not yet served it’s intended function due to difficulties with obtaining community support for the initiative. The proposed TBCA provides the opportunity to revitalise the functioning of this Reserve through direct intervention in awareness raising and the establishment of a management presence in the area. The Kisite Mpunguti MPA was established to enhance biodiversity conservation through a participatory approach; to provide suitable breeding and feeding habitats for marine organisms; and to promote sustainable nature tourism. The area was selected due to it’s pristine coral reefs; scenic setting and beauty; potential for nature tourism, recreation and relaxation; protection of spawning grounds; importance as breeding habitat for birds and coconut crabs; rare combination of terrestrial (islands) and marine life, and it’s potential as a conservation and research centre. Kisite Mpunguti is managed from a Park Headquarters and associated personnel, infrastructure and equipment, situated in Shimoni village. Activities such as patrols are coordinated from here, with a ranger field station located on one of the Mpunguti Islands. This is permanently staffed by rotational personnel who are equipped with a patrol vessel to monitor and patrol the islands and the MPA waters (Kisite Mpunguti MPA Warden, pers. comm.). Kenya has traditionally followed a less people-centred approach to marine conservation than has Tanzania. This has resulted in significant successes in biodiversity conservation with many studies showing the effectiveness of MPAs in protecting biodiversity (eg. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al., 2005; 2007). However, the MPAs are coming under increasing pressure from neighbouring communities suggesting that new approaches may be necessary to enhance the overall conservation effort on the coast. The network of CCAs and active participation of BMUs in the areas between the existing protected areas provide opportunity for closer collaboration in a broader management approach that extends well beyond current MPAs. Figure 14 shows the extent of such community driven conservation areas (CCAs) near the border on the southern coast of Kenya, and in the vicinity of Kisite Mpunguti MPA.