Mukogodo Division on the Northern edge of the Laikipia Plateau comprises slightly over 1000 sq. km. with an altitudinal range of 1600 - 2000 m A.S.L. Annual rainfall varies between 400 and 600 mm per annum (Berger, 1989). As a result of the varying topography and climatic characteristics, the division supports a wide range of physiognomically different vegetation types (Taiti, 1982). The main economic activity is semi-sedentary pastoralism. Currently, the wood component is dominated by the genera Acacia, Euclea and Acokanthera - while the grass layer is predominantly Themeda, Cynodon, Eragrostis and Pennisetums. These are interspersed with a tree/shrub layer of Dodenea, Solanum, and Ipomoea among others. Admittedly, the ecosystem is fairly complex with no comprehensively described aggregate of fauna and flora. The balance of the wildlife, livestock, vegetation production systems and man's activities is equally complex in a drastically changed ecosystem.

Over time, the human interphases have greatly interfered with the natural course of species succession and differentiation to an extent of negatively shifting the balancing forces within the different production systems in the ecosystem. Briefly, these interphases can be broadly grouped in three time frames. Prior to the 19th century, the Mukogodo Maasai characterised by the different groups i.e. Iloshon, Mukogodo, Ilngwesi, Ilmumonyot, Ildigiri and Illeuwaso coexisted with the vegetation as hunters and gatherers (Herren, 1993), with defined grazing corridors.

Early this century, the European settlers designated the hitherto "productive" rangeland, for beef ranching, locking out the Dorobo "reserves". This process was followed by the new-post independent government "one million-acre scheme project" that opened up the subdivision of the formerly private ranches to small scale farmers in Laikipia. The process has continuously introduced major conflicts in sustainable natural resource use including gums and resins.

An earlier inventory of Mukogodo Forest based on panchromatic photographs 1:25,000, (Blacket, 1994), described estimates of the forested area and standing volumes. This report was inadequate on information on other flora and fauna notwithstanding the rich indigenous knowledge by the locals as later confirmed by other studies (Gachathi and Kariuki, 1996). The usefulness of the forest for dry season grazing and ecotourism biodeversity among other uses was conspicuously omitted.

The fact that gums and resins have been commercially extracted in neighbouring Isiolo District especially since the involvement of SALTLICK, has generated considerable interest in the assessment of the potential for resource availability in Mukogodo by different development practitioners. The importance of Non Wood Forest Products (NWFPs) to sustainable resource use had not been addressed sufficiently. Consequently, various attempts have been made to understand the vegetation trends and more recently the gums and resins resource availability. An earlier attempt by the Kenya Ministry of Culture and Social Services jointly with Laikipia Research Programme (1993) was inadequate in quantifying the amount of resource available within Mukogodo Division.

Subsequent studies by the ASAL - Applied Research Unit jointly with Kenya Forestry Research Institute, World View (K) and the local community participatorily used a holistic approach in attempting to understand the critical links between the flora and the different Non-Wood Forest Products in Mukogodo ecosystem including gums and resins.

A review of the vegetation resources within Mukogodo rangelands was carried out based on the work of Taiti (1982). From this review, the main vegetation types were identified. A participatory reconnaissance survey was undertaken in 1995 (Muchiri and Kariuki, 1996). The survey employed various participatory tools including: transect walks/drives, interactive group/individual discussions, observations, and demonstrations on various preparation methods.

A formal survey was also carried out where the area was clustered into five clusters and eight sub-clusters according to group ranches. The snowball method (Blalock, 1981) was used to lead to key informants. Nineteen key respondents (3 females and 15 males) were interviewed and plants of focus by each respondent identified. Samples of unidentified plants were pressed and later verified at the National Museum herbarium. Further data verification was carried out by a taxonomist during a follow-up study on NWFPs (Gachathi and Kariuki, 1997), where 11 informants classified by the community were involved (Appendix I).

In focusing on gums and resin resources, references were made to the work done by the Department of Social Services (1993) where information on principal production areas was obtained. This was followed by belt transect surveys with the assistance of local people. Within a given area, sampling was based on the belt transect approach (Chikamai and Mbiru, 1995).where 0.4 ha., square plots were established at every sampling point. Data was collected on density by diameter class of the main gum-and resin-producing species, density of associated species, terrain and soil conditions.

Reconnaissance Survey

Indigenous knowledge among the Mukogodo Maasai on natural vegetation was found to be enormous. However, there seem to be gaps in knowledge levels between generations. The reason perhaps is due to diminishing inter-generation interactions as younger generations ascribe to changing lifestyles. The male respondents portrayed a generalised knowledge base with the exception of isolated experts on ethnomedicine while female gender was specific on plants with attributes on food values and sickness in children.

The Mukogodo Maasai have through generations depended on natural flora principally or supplementarily to subsidise either directly or indirectly their livelihood. Flora utility was found to have both material and non materials attributes (Table 1a). A total of 78 plant species with multiple uses were sampled.

Table 1a: Ranked user groups of Mukogodo flora by the Mukogodo Maasai

* Frequency refers to different uses under the 13 classified groups

Source: Field data collection, Mukogodo, (1995).

It is clearly evident that the Mukogodo Maasai appreciate the gum/resin-producing plant species. However, the main use of these products is chewing gum (User Group 4) and fastening arrow heads on arrow shafts (User Group 6). The point of interest is, however, the other priority uses that the same plant species fulfil which gives a pointer to potential conflicts in resource management. A summary of plant species of gums/resins potential is presented in Table 1b.

Table 1b: Plants of potential for gums and gum resins exploitation

* Frequency refers to different uses under the 13 classified user group

Source: Field data 1996-97

Table 1c: Priority plant species in use (frequency) and uses (user groups) in Mukogodo

* Frequency refers to different uses under the 13 classified user groups

Source: Field data collection, Mukogodo, (1995).

An analysis of how the Mukogodo Maasai exploit their vegetation resources shows a consciousness on sustainability. The traditional uses revealed a detailed and delicate network of interaction between the society and the environment. The emphasis on non-extractive uses and particularly on Non Wood Forest Products (NWFP) attest to inbuilt community conservation of natural vegetation. Ten out of 13 user groups are non-extractive in nature (Appendix I). Careful selection on harvesting was shown, among the extractive user groups, fuelwood, construction and crafts. For instance, the exploitation of Psyda arabica for arrow making was mainly from selected branches and twigs while the bush/shrub was left standing.

Resource Inventory (Ground Truthing)

The main species of importance in gums and resins production represented in Mukogodo Division are Acacia senegal and Commiphora species. Generally, the main stands where these species are found are on the outlying fringes of Mukogodo Forest, particularly along the lower glades facing Isiolo District.

Acacia senegal was confirmed to occur in four different clusters towards the more arid northern part of the division bordering Isiolo. Significant densities were found in Sek-Louwai, Ewaso, Tura (Upper and Lower) and Leshesh areas though in the later case, the occurrence is fairly patchy. A characteristic feature of these clusters is rugged terrain with ridges interspersed with Luggas (dry river valleys) and sandy to stony/rocky soils. The dominant vegetation is Acacia/Commiphora bushland.

An analysis of stocking density revealed that the area around Tura has the highest density (overall mean density of 192 sph) and Sek-Louwai the lowest (145 sph). However, there was greater disparity in the density within Tura, probably resulting from the patchy nature of the resource as observed from the value of C.V. The resource was confined mostly on the slopes of ridges and low hills (Table 2a). In Ewaso ( Table 2b and 2c). This implies that there is probably better distribution of the resource in the latter areas and hence overall higher representation. An assessment of the quantity of resource revealed higher representation in the juvenile age class which indicates normal stand dynamics.

Table 2a: Density (sph) of Acacia senegal in Tura (upper and lower), Mukogodo Division

Terrain:      Ridges and low hills
Soils:        Sandy to murram

Mean density = 182 std dev. = 98 C.V. = 54%

Table 2b: Density (sph) of Acacia senegal in Ewaso, Mukogodo Division

Terrain:    Plains and low hills
Soils:      Sandy

Mean density = 160 std. dev. = 43 C.V. = 27%

Table 2c: Density (sph) of Acacia senegal in Sek Louwai, Mukogodo Division

Terrain:    Ridges
Soils:      Sandy to stony

Mean density = 148              std. dev. = 31                  C.V. = 21%

When examining the potential of the area for gum arabic production, one indicator is the abundance of the resource. However, lack of relevant secondary data, i.e., spot images and aerial photographs limited the team’s ability to produce resource maps. As a result, it was not possible to quantify with certainty the amount of resource available. However, observations made during the sampling combined with data analysis revealed that on the overall, the areas of Sek-Louwai and Ewaso have expansive resources which extend into neighbouring Isiolo District. The latter is known for gum production and offers opportunities for ready market of gum arabic. Although the area around Tura recorded high densities, the resource is generally patchy in distribution with relatively low overall amount.

The second and perhaps major factor relates to conditions for gum production. Gum arabic and gum resins are produced when the trees are under stress. In particular, they are produced under conditions of high temperatures (> 30^o C) over a prolonged period. The areas of Ewaso and Sek Louwai are on relatively lower altitude and lee-ward side which experience relatively higher temperatures. Reports of gum production have been reported within the two areas. However, Tura is relatively higher in altitude and generally cooler. These conditions are not favourable for gum production and indeed local people reported little gum production.

Among the resin-producing species, only Commiphora africana was recorded in reasonable quantities. Others include Commiphora schimperi, Acacia seyal and Boswellia species. The principal region was the area around Sek-Louwai. A mean stocking density of 24 sph was recorded but with a generally higher disparity between sampling points. Compared with Acacia senegal, it had higher representation in the mature diameter class (Table 3). In terms of resin production, the species is known to produce copious amounts. There is documented information which attributes the use of resin as plaster for abdominal spasms and against fever. However, not much commercial application has been established for the resin in the country.

Table 3: Density (sph) of Commiphora africana in (Sek-Louwai), Mukogodo Division

Terrain:    Ridges
Soils:      Sandy to stony

Mean density = 24 std. dev. = 17 C.V. = 70%

The way forward

From the foregoing discussion, it is apparent that gums and resins contribute significantly to the livelihood of the pastoral Maasai in Mukogodo Division. Nevertheless, quantities for viable and sustainable commercial exploitation are limited. This shortcoming therefore, poses new scenarios for the future exploitation.

First, exploitation of gums and resins should not just be seen as an end in itself but a means to an end. The gums and resins will therefore, provide opportunities for adding value to the crucial process of range improvement and rehabilitation where the main out put is livestock production. As a tier technology to prioritised user groups, stakeholders should use gums and resins initiative as an entry point to promoting viable projects in the rangelands.

Secondly, mechanisms for cross fertilisation and dialogue between the local expert systems (based on ITK) and external practitioners unfold in the gums and resins initiatives. The interface between the two knowledge paradigms has the potential to harmonise conflicting goals and expectations of key stakeholders.

Thirdly, an understanding of why the neighbouring Isiolo District has an upper edge in exploitation and commercialisation of gums and resins as compared to Mukogodo Maasai requires ground truthing. Are their inherent skills and values embedded among the Borans and Samburu linked to exploitation of gums and resins which the Mukogodo Maasai lack?

Fourthly, attempts to exploit the limited gums and resins resources are also hampered by Socio-cultural dynamics among and between neighbouring communities (i.e. the Maasai visa -a-viz. Samburu and Borans). This therefore calls for affirmative action from the law enforcement agents to settle livestock ownership and pasture management-related conflicts. Once conflicts are resolved, an enabling environment for exploitation and marketing of gums and resins is likely to prevail.

Fifthly, local collectors and dealers in gums and resins are "voiceless" given the non existence of a formal institution to stabilise the market forces. It is therefore imperative that such an institution/organisation is put in place. The initiatives by ITFSP with GTZ (i.e,. formation of Gum Arabic and Resins Association - GARA), which among others is to look into the welfare of stakeholders, is welcome.

---

References

Blacket, H.L. 1994. Kenya Indigenous Forest Conservation Programme. Forest Inventory Report No. 15, Mukogodo.

Berger, P. 1989. Rainfall and Agroclimatology of the Laikipia plateau, Kenya. Geographica Bernesia, Berne,

Blalock, H.M. 1981. Social statistics. Singapore: McGraw - Hill, Second edition.

Chikamai, B.N. and Mbiru, S. 1997. Assessment of gum arabic and gum resin resources in Mukogodo Division, Laikipia district.

Gachathi, F.N. and Kariuki, A.M. 1997. Useful Non-Wood Forest products of Mukogodo forest and adjacent rangelands. (Unpublished).

Herren, U. 1993. "Socio-economic strategies of Pastoral Maasai Households in Mukogodo, Kenya". PhD Thesis. Department of Ethnobotany, University of Berne.

Muchiri, B. and Kariuki, A.M. 1996. A survey of Indigenous food plants of Socio-economic importance in Mukogodo rangelands, Laikipia. (Unpublished).

Republic of Kenya, Min. of Culture and Social Services and LRP. 1982. The vegetation of Laikipia District, Kenya. Laikipia Mount Kenya Papers B-2.

Taiti, S. W. (1992). The vegetation of Laikipia Distrist, Kenya.

 

APPENDIX I LIST OF PLANTS AND THEIR USES FROM THE MUKOGODO MAASAI PERSPECTIVE

 

Plant name Botanical /(Maasai)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

1. Dodonea viscosa (Ilgilai)

x

x

x

x

2. Solanu incanum (Ntulelei)

x

x

3. Synadenum grantii (Olkorbobit)

x

x

4. Cassia dydrimobotria (senetoi)

x

5. Euclea divinorum (Olkingei)

x

x

x

x

6. Melhania verutina (Epupoi)

x

7. Withania somnifera (Leisayet)

x

8. Olea hoschtetteri (Lorondo)

x

x

x

x

9. Acacia nilotica (Olkiroriti)

x

x

x

x

10. Carrisa enduris (Lamuriaki)

x

x

x

x

11. Olea africana (Lorien)

x

x

x

x

x

12. Psyda arabica (Olombai)

x

x

x

13. Ipomoea hildebrantii (Lokitengi)

x

x

x

14. Euphorbia graciliramea Ikangu)

x

15. Croton dichogamus (Olkirndingai)

x

x

x

x

16. (Olkonyil)

x

17. Clerodendrum myricoides (Olmakutukutu)

xx xx

18. (Iltipirikwa)

xx

19. Grewia bicolar (Ill)

x

20. Jasminum sp. (Ilmaneen)

x

21. Euphorbia sp. ( )

x

22. Combretum molle (Olmomoi)

xx

23. Maerua triphylla (Olamarak)

xx x

24. (Ololoi)

xx

x

x

25. Acacia nubica (Ildepe)

xx

x

26. Pyragmanthera discallensis (Ilmeidim kooa)

x

x

27. Ramnus staddos (Olkolakola)

x

x

28. Sansavellia sp (Oldupai)

xx

29. Pappe capensi (Oldonganaiyoi)

x

30. Euphorbia heterochroma (Engeletlit)

x

x

x

31. (Olmenangi)

xx

x

32. Aloe kendogensis (Suguroi)

xx x

x

33. Lantana sp (makirkirienie)

xx

34. Berlena aegyptium (sucha)

x

x

35. (Sukurtut)i

xx

36. Acacia lahai (Oltepesi)

x

x

37. Zanthozyllum challybeam (Oloisuki)

xx

xx

38. Draceana ellenbeckiana (Ndokindongit)

x

x

39. Aerua persika (Ilturilan)

xx

x

40. Croton megalocarpus (Merigwet)

xx

x

x

x

41. Plumbago zylanica (Ngeriatus)

x

42. Ximenia americana (Olomai)

x

x

43. Cordia sinensis (Silapani)

xx x

x

44. Warbugia ugandensis (Sokonoi)

x

45. Strychnos henningsii (ilpirikwa)

x

x

x

46. (Oloilei)

x

47. Acacia mellifera (Olminishoi)

x

x

x

x

48. Albezia zizermaunia (Mugutan)

x

49. (Sumeita)

xx

50. (Olparamunyo)

xx

51. Ozoroa insignus (lukunonoi)

xx

52. Piliostigma thoningii (Bukoi)

x

53. Boswellia hildebraulii (Silalei)

x

x

x

54. Turraea mombasana (Njeni-engasho)

x

55. (Loikordodai)

x

x

56. Senecio stuhmanni (Leleshua)

x

x

x

x

57. Acacia etbaica (Njakwai)

x

x

58. Acacia sp. (Echurai)

x

x

59. Podocarpus gracilior (Olpiripiri)

x

60. Acacia seyal (Olerai)

x

x

x

61. (Olaraiti)

x

x

x

62. Rhoicissus tridentateo (Elkinyeal)

x

63. Acacia shimperi (Murigoi)

x

x

64. Lannea triphylll (Olampirori)

x

65. (Kurpule)

x

66. Gloriosa superba (Saikutari)

x

67. (Olmenjo)

x

68. Eurphorbia kibwenzis (Olpopongi)

x

x

x

69. (Lokoilie)

x

70. Eurphorbia tirucalli (Olpurshuruti)

x

x

71. (Ngobiuta)i

x

72. Pittosporum lanatum (Ingilenyai)

x

73. Lychium shansii (Ngokii)

x

74. Cissus rotundifolia (Ngunee)

x

75. Cucumis dispassence (Naigordodoi)

x

x

x

76. Ficus sycamorus (Oreteti)

x

x

FREQUENCIES

52

5

7

17

6

4

16

18

7

4

2

7

2

 

---

Top

NWFP Home

Forestry Home