Wildebeest and livestock grazing in the wet season in the grazing area (Guy Western)

Ecosystem-wide seasonal grazing management in community land (Kenya)

Description

Livestock movements are managed through community governance systems to maintain spatial and temporal heterogeneity of pasture, creating a gradient of quality and quantity of pasture across the landscape. This is achieved through clearly designated seasonal grazing areas for livestock and tight controls on settlement areas, grazing patterns and water points. In addition, at the individual herder level, traditional ecological knowledge plays a strong role in the decisions made to improve livestock production

This technology is applied in the South Rift Valley, Kenya, across a semi-arid landscape, with erratic rainfall averaging 400-600 mm per annum. Water availability is an issue. The perennial Ewaso Ngiro South river flows through the Shompole swamp, a vital drought refuge for livestock and wildlife, before ending up in Lake Natron. The area, roughly 1000 km2, is covered by two group ranches, Olkiramatian and Shompole, which are managed as a single ecological unit. A group ranch is a jointly owned freehold land title given to the customary occupants of communal lands. The total number of occupants of both ranches number roughly 20,000 people, with the majority belonging to the Maasai ethnic group. The ranches have not been subdivided and are not fully sedentary, unlike many other areas of southern Kenya.
There is a long history of co-existence of wildlife and livestock in Maasialand. In Olkiramatian and Shompole seasonal livestock movements and herding practices are formalized by group ranch grazing plans governed by local committees. The wet season grazing areas are termed “livestock rearing zones”. The dry season grazing areas have been retained as “grass banks” for livestock, and since the early 2000s, have been used additionally as wildlife conservancies for ecotourism (see figure below). Livestock rearing occurs to the east of the Ewaso Ngiro river; grass banks and the wildlife conservancy to the west. Grazing committees from both group ranches manage livestock access to certain areas, with the conservancy (grass bank) rested during the wet season of up to six months. When grazing is permitted in the conservancy, as the dry season progresses, temporary settlements are limited to an area called the “buffer zone”. Livestock must then move into the conservancy from the buffer zones to access this late season grazing. The “livestock rearing zone” is permanently settled and grazed year-round. Within each zone there are small “Olopololis” (grass banks of a few hectares), situated near individual settlements and used to maintain higher quality pasture for weak and young animals. This management strategy ensures that the dry season grazing area is rested during the rains, and it helps to maintain consistently higher biomass and taller grass than that of the wet season grazing area. The higher biomass also corresponds to a rainfall gradient running from the Nguruman Escarpment edge in the western extremity of the group ranches to the dry central rift valley floor in the east. The biomass in the dry season area is used by both livestock and wildlife grazers during the late dry season and in droughts. The grass bank is only grazed out during prolonged dry periods. The Maasai employ a strategy of using the shorter milk-producing grasses of the livestock areas during the rains and the coarser grasses in the grass banks for the dry seasons. The shorter wet season pastures have a higher nutrient content and greater digestibility than the grass bank: this is very important for lactating females. The grass is kept short from both grazing by livestock during the growing seasons and due to intrinsic differences caused by shallower soils and lower rainfall in these grazing areas.
Within this broader governance framework and control of grazing areas, individual decision making is also permitted within these controlled areas. This allows herders to manage livestock to improve production in relation to each herd. For example, individuals might split the herd to take advantage of different energy and nutrient requirements of lactating females, bulls, and calves.
This maintenance and exploitation of forage heterogeneity is vital to the productivity and resilience of the landscape, and this heterogeneity exists at multiple scales, with the major differences existing between the grazing areas, but also smaller difference within them. Resource heterogeneity facilitates wildlife-livestock coexistence. This heterogeneity creates a matrix of varying quality and quantity of forage. Wildlife species have different metabolic requirements and diets, and this varied base ensures that a diverse wild ungulate population is maintained year-round. Late season forage boosts the resilience of wildlife during extreme events. This technology requires a governance structure that is both responsive to the changing ecological conditions and able to build consensus and enforce grazing management.

Location

Location: Olkiramatian, Kajiado, Kenya

No. of Technology sites analysed: single site

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 36.14942, -1.86005

Spread of the Technology: evenly spread over an area (approx. 100-1,000 km2)

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation: 2004

Type of introduction

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
Land use

  • Grazing land
    • Semi-nomadic pastoralism
    Animal type: goats, sheep, cattle
Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • soil erosion by water - Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
  • biological degradation - Bc: reduction of vegetation cover, Bh: loss of habitats, Bq: quantity/ biomass decline, Bs: quality and species composition/ diversity decline
SLM group
  • pastoralism and grazing land management
SLM measures
  • management measures - M2: Change of management/ intensity level, M3: Layout according to natural and human environment, M4: Major change in timing of activities

Technical drawing

Technical specifications
The drawing shows the management units used in this seasonally structured grazing management system. The livestock rearing zone, to the east of the Ewaso Nyiro river, is permanently settled and is grazed heavily during the wet season (April - July). During this time herders utilize the short, nutritious grasses in this low biomass area. As forage biomass begins to reduce the community grazing committees meet to discuss the opening of settlements to the west of the Ewaso Nyiro river. This decision is made using traditional ecological knowledge, comparing available forage biomass and the numbers of livestock to previous years and past experiences. Once the grazing has been opened to the west of the river people may settle within the buffer zone. This limits direct access to the higher biomass areas within the conservancy and grass banks, and increases the length of travel for each herd every day, in an effort to preserve forage for longer. Once forage has been depleted in the buffer zones and the periphery of the conservancies, the committees meet and allow access for herders into the conservation areas, which have tall, high biomass, but low-quality grazing. Often access to this area requires considerable distances to be walked by livestock. In recent years, adaptive management systems have led to the settlements within the south of the conservation area to be closed to preserve forage biomass within the swamp and conservation area for a longer period of time; and allow for recovery of partially degraded land.
Author: Peter Tyrrell

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated: per Technology unit (unit: The two group ranches volume, length: Approximately 1000km2)
  • Currency used for cost calculation: USD
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = n.a
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: 4
Most important factors affecting the costs
There are no or little costs to this technology, as it builds off structures of management which are already in place and work organically within the area.
Establishment activities
n.a.
Maintenance activities
  1. Management meetings (Timing/ frequency: Seasonally)

Natural environment

Average annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
Average annual rainfall in mm: 400.0
Highly variable rainfall both spatially and temporally. Annual average rainfall has a 33%CV.
Name of the meteorological station: Lale'enok Resource Centre
Slope
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitude
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Water quality refers to:
Is salinity a problem?
  • Ja
  • Nee

Occurrence of flooding
  • Ja
  • Nee
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
  • Traditional methods of water management through comittees exists in some areas. In other area the creation of Water Resource Users Associations has begun to manage water.
Access to services and infrastructure
health

poor
x
good
education

poor
x
good
technical assistance

poor
x
good
employment (e.g. off-farm)

poor
x
good
markets

poor
x
good
energy

poor
x
good
roads and transport

poor
x
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
x
good
financial services

poor
x
good

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
fodder production
decreased
x
increased


This is in contrast to areas without seasonal grazing management.

fodder quality
decreased
x
increased


This management system works best to preserve lower quality higher biomass fodder. Quality may not increase dramatically, but the creation of short areas of well-fertilized grass near settlements may increase the local quality of fodder during the wet season.

risk of production failure
increased
x
decreased


In comparison to other systems the preservation of late season grazing is crucial in preventing complete losses of livestock during droughts.

Socio-cultural impacts
cultural opportunities (eg spiritual, aesthetic, others)
reduced
x
improved


Management of land in this manner relies on traditional ecological knowledge for both individual and community decision making. This is dependent on cultural values and understanding, and underpins grazing management in Maasai society.

Ecological impacts
vegetation cover
decreased
x
increased


This method increase vegetation cover by maintaining heterogeneity of forage resources across the landscape, and resting pasture seasonally to allow for vegetation regrowth.

biomass/ above ground C
decreased
x
increased


Late season forage available. Recovery and rest allows for greater productivity and rainfall use efficiency.

animal diversity
decreased
x
increased


Maintenance of spatial and temporal heterogeneity of forage resources ensures that wildlife species have access to the variable resources that they require over time.

Off-site impacts

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Benefits compared with maintenance costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

No costs to establish and low direct cost of management actions.

Climate change

Gradual climate change
annual rainfall decrease

not well at all
x
very well
seasonal rainfall decrease

not well at all
x
very well
Season: wet/ rainy season
Climate-related extremes (disasters)
drought

not well at all
x
very well

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 11-50%
  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 11-50%
  • 51-90%
  • 91-100%
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Ja
  • Nee
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)
The management is constantly being adapted based on the prevailing ecological conditions. In 2015, over fifty settlements were closed by the community grazing and group ranch committee within the dry season grazing area to allow for pasture regeneration and to consolidate preservation of the dry season grass bank.

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
  • This technology stems from a community based and is not imposed from a top-down perspective, and tries to create consensus among resource users.
  • Allows individual flexibility within the broader grazing structure so that people can manage livestock within their own objectives.
  • This technology provides forage for livestock into the dry season and drought.
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Management in this way also replicates the methodologies used for land management for thousands of years by pastoral people and helps to generate an enabling environment for the coexistence of wildlife, domestic livestock, and people.
  • Ensures that pasture is rested during the growing season within the dry season grazing areas, so that root mass can be established and to ensure grass seed production.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • Exploitation of the system by elites in charge of management decisions, allowing their livestock to access preferential grazing, which may not represent the needs of all groups. Ensure credible management structures in place; with the new community land act, this should encourage greater equity in decision making.
  • Preventing settlement in areas of traditional occupation by certain households.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • Lack of focus on a production based system and income generation through livestock sales. Create and enabling environment for change, through market improvement and learning exchanges.
  • Lack of resting and recovery of forage in the wet season grazing area. Rotate and rest wet season pasture for a few weeks during the growing period, potentially through grazing in the dry season reserve for a longer period.

References

Compiler
  • Peter Tyrrell
Editors
  • Enoch Mobisa
  • Lance W. Robinson
Reviewer
  • Donia Mühlematter
  • Hanspeter Liniger
  • Rima Mekdaschi Studer
  • Alexandra Gavilano
Date of documentation: Feb. 1, 2018
Last update: Junie 7, 2019
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Links to relevant information which is available online
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International