The following section assesses our main results in terms of the growth in fenced areas over time relative to 1) types of protection, 2) administrative boundaries, and 3) other fences.
Fencing relative to land governance
Across the Greater Mara, a general growth in fenced areas can be observed throughout the 00 s but in particular over the last decade (Fig. 1). Based on satellite images, 35,067 ha were fenced in 1985, corresponding to c. 5%. In the following 25 years there was only an insignificant increase in fenced plots. However, from 2010, the number of fences suddenly grew rapidly, and in the following period (2015–2020) the fenced area increased even more radically, in an exponential manner (Fig. 2). For example, in 2015 there was 63,112 ha of fenced land; in 2016 this number rose to c. 75,176 ha, corresponding to a c. 20% annual increase. From 2010 to 2020, the ha fenced area increased by 170%. This corresponds to a roughly four times increase in the area enclosed by fences during the study period (1985–2020).
Conservative estimate of the fenced area of the entire Greater Mara, Kenya (1985–2020) expressed in hectares.
In almost all regions, the number of fences continued to increase in 2019–20 (Fig. 2). The result is a total of 130,277 ha of fenced land in 2020, corresponding to 19% of the Greater Mara.
Hence, there appears to be a building momentum in the expansion of fences in the Greater Mara: those regions that had many fences in 2016 (> 1,000 ha) continue to experience an increase in the area enclosed by fences, with fences spreading almost everywhere in 2020 in particular. Those regions with the fewest fences in 2016 (< 1,000 ha) continue to have relatively few fences.
All types of administrative regions show an increase in fenced land during the study period 1985–2020, with an acceleration in 2010 and a radical expansion since 2014 (Fig. 3).
Conservative estimate of the fenced area of the Greater Mara, categorized in terms of level of formal protection (hectares over time from 1985 to 2020).
In the National Reserve hardly any fences were erected from 1985 to 2020 (less than 0.1% fenced land).
In the conservancies, the fenced areas have been relatively constant, with a small increase from 1% coverage in 1985 to 4% in 2020. Most conservancies had only few fences during the entire study period (1985–2020), including Issaten, Nashulai, Ol Kinyei, Naboisho and Olderkesi. In three conservancies (Siana, Olarro North and Olarro South), no fences were registered until 2018, when fewer than 15 ha fences were detected. Even so, these regions with the least fences in 1985–2010 have experienced an increase after 2010 and in particular after 2014 (Fig. 4A).
Upper: The areal enclosure of fences in all regions of the Greater Mara in hectares (hectares over time from 1985 to 2020). To illustrate the differences in areal enclosure between the four types of protected land, regions of the type have been assigned the same color ranges. Orange: National Reserve; purple: Conservation Area; green: Conservancy; blue: Remaining land. Lower: The five most fenced regions (cf. formally unprotected land) are illustrated to make it easier to read graph (upper).
In the conservation area (Pardamat), changes in the ratio of fenced areas have been more noticeable within the last ten years. It had hardly any fences at all until 2014; then fencing began to increase in an exponential manner from 1,929 ha fenced land in 2016 to 8,842 ha fenced land in 2020, corresponding to an increase of 460% in just four years.
The remaining (formally unprotected) regions in the Greater Mara experienced the most drastic rise in the number of fences in 2010–2020, and the ratio of fenced areas increased from 9% in 1985 to 31% in 2020. The four most fenced regions are discussed below.
The three formally unprotected regions Kimintet (50% of the land is fenced), Kerinkani (77% of the land is fenced) and Lemek (49% of the land is fenced) have distinctly more fenced land than the rest of the Mara throughout the entire study period (Fig. 4B). A fourth region, Ol Kinyei, had hardly any fenced area in 1985–2014, but subsequently fenced land increased exponentially from 3,678 ha in 2015 to 27,283 ha in 2020, corresponding to an 740% increase in fenced land in four years (Fig. 4B). A similar situation was observed for Siana, where less than 1000 ha were fenced in 1985–2015 (< 1%). However, from 2016 to 2020, the amount of fenced land increased from 3 to 12% (Fig. 4B). There are several major urban areas situated in the surrounding unprotected regions (e.g., Sekanani, Nkoilale, Ng’Osuani, Endoinyo Narasha, Aitong, Talek, Lemek) which may explain the historical longevity of the fenced areas here.
Following from the above, there is a clear dependence between the ratio of fences and the formal land governance of a given region. Figure 4A,B shows a remarkable difference in the numbers of fences located within the national reserve, conservancies, conservation areas and remaining land, with the nascent conservancy (Pardamat) and remaining land experiencing the most radical increase since 2010.
Fencing relative to administrative boundaries
Within the conservancies, fences are primarily located near the administrative borders in a buffer zone between conservancies, or between conservancies and remaining land. In 10 out of 16 conservancies, more than 70% of the fences were located within one kilometer of their administrative boundary. In four conservancies, 48–62% of the fences are situated within this buffer zone. In all non-conservancy regions except in Talek, fewer than 30% of the fences were situated within the zone, suggesting a more scattered, ad hoc distribution (Fig. 5).
Percentage of fenced area within one kilometer of every border in 2020 relative to the total fenced area of each region of the Greater Mara. Green bars are conservancy areas, the orange bar is the national reserve, the purple bar is the conservation area, and the blue bars are remaining (formally unprotected) regions. The size of the regions is not taken into account in this figure.
Outside conservancies, the fences reflected a more ad hoc distribution. More than 70% of the fences were scattered across the area in the sense of each fence not necessarily bordering another fence. An exception is Talek, where 60% of the fences were situated within the one-kilometer buffer zone, a possible explanation being that Talek is a small region (3,920 ha), which increases the likelihood of the fences being situated near its boundaries.
Fencing relative to other fences
The new fences cropping up in the Greater Mara appear to grow primarily as extensions or add-ons to existing plot fences. In Maji Moto, for example, nearly all fences were repeatedly expanded for each new mapping session between 1995 and 2020 (Fig. 6) suggesting a much more dynamic or fluid picture than what can be seen from Fig. 1, and that is likely relevant to people, livestock and wildlife on the ground. Prior to 2010, the existing plots were divided into increasingly smaller plots, with the size of the overall fenced area staying the same. In the example below (Fig. 6), several smaller fences appeared around the former plot. In 2018 the plot was subdivided into smaller enclosures, and additional plots were added on to it. And from 2019 to 2020, there were so many fences that it questions whether areas that are nearly or entirely surrounded by fenced areas can even be considered unfenced (see also Fig. 7).
The expansion of fencing around a plot of land in Maji Moto, the Greater Mara, Kenya. (A) 2011, (B) 2015, (C) 2018, (D) 2019, and (E) 2020. Each section is 5.5 × 5.5 km on the ground. Based on ArcMap (vs. 10.6.1).
Pardamat fences collected between late September 2019 and September 2021 using GPS ground-truthing. Enclosed areas were calculated by converting recorded fencelines to polygons within Esri ArcGIS Pro vs. 2.9 software21 allowing for smaller than 2 m gaps. Green lines represent fences that were removed by landowners during the reported period.
In other regions, fences are beginning to fill in open land between enclosed plots situated some distance apart. For example, there are now two rather distinctive fronts of fenced plots on the satellite images: a southern-bound front of c. 40 km stretching across Siana and into the National Park, and a northern-bound front starting west of Talek, running through Nashulai, Siana and Maji Moto for at least 52 km.
Some fences have persisted since 2010, others since as long ago as 1995. For example, south of Olorien just north of the border to Kerinkani, a 32-ha enclosed area was surrounded by a few smaller fences in 2010. In the subsequent decade (2011–2019), this fence expanded its area cover to 75 ha. Another example can be found northwest of Enonkishu Conservancy, where the enclosure of a large meat farm, Mara Beef, can be detected on the maps from 2003. In the Maji Moto region, a fence can be observed as long ago as 1995. Across the following 25 years, this fence changed its size and shape, but the entire area remained enclosed during the study period (1995–2020). These examples suggest that the ongoing efforts to erect, expand and maintain fences have now taken place for more than a generation. And that once a fence is erected, it can be difficult to get rid of it again.
Case study: Pardamat conservation area
Pardamat was formed in 2016 as a mixed-use livestock and wildlife conservation area designed to promote compatibility between traditional husbandry and wildlife-based tourism. Pardamat is comprised of 850 landowners and covers an area of 23,400 ha. Within this region fences spanned 920.6 km in distance including electric (491.6 km (53.4%)), wire (420.6 (45.7%)) or other (8.4 km (0.9%)) with an average fence density of 3.93 km / km2 (Fig. 7). Enclosed fence areas covered 8129 ha (34.7%) of the overall region. When compared to the satellite derived method (8840 ha) we find a relatively small, 8% difference in the areal estimates. During the ground truthing period, 96.4 km of fencing were removed by the conservation area management and are not included in the reported values and are responsible for part of the 8% discrepancy between ground-based and satellite-based images (i.e., the satellite digitization occurred before 60 km of fence were defenced).
Source: Ecology - nature.com
